Distribution and stable isotopic composition of amino acids from fungal peptaibiotics: assessing the potential for meteoritic contamination

The presence of nonprotein α-dialkyl-amino acids such as α-aminoisobutyric acid (α-AIB) and isovaline (Iva), which are considered to be relatively rare in the terrestrial biosphere, has long been used as an indication of the indigeneity of meteoritic amino acids. However, recent work showing the presence of α-AIB and Iva in peptides produced by a widespread group of filamentous fungi indicates the possibility of a terrestrial biotic source for the α-AIB observed in some meteorites. We measured the amino acid distribution and stable carbon and nitrogen isotopic composition of four α-AIB-containing fungal peptides and compared this data to similar meteoritic measurements. We show that the relatively simple distribution of the C(4) and C(5) amino acids in fungal peptides is distinct from the complex distribution observed in many carbonaceous chondrites. We also identify potentially diagnostic relationships between the stable isotopic compositions of pairs of amino acids from the fungal peptides that may aid in ruling out fungal contamination as a source of meteoritic amino acids.     

Paired overbounding for nonideal LAAS and WAAS error distributions

A significant challenge in fielding space-based and ground-based augmentation systems (SBAS and GBAS) for GPS involves the validation of navigation integrity, which requires the establishment of error bounds for aircraft position. This paper introduces a new approach to validating position-domain integrity by using two-sided envelopes for each ranging source. This paired-bounding approach allows for error distributions of arbitrary form and thus improves on earlier integrity validation approaches restricted to zero-mean, symmetric, and unimodal distributions     

Redefining safety in commercial space: Understanding debates over the safety of private human spaceflight initiatives in the United States

In 2009 President Obama proposed a budget for the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) that canceled the Constellation program and included the development of commercial crew transportation systems into low Earth orbit. This significant move to shift human spaceflight into the private sector sparked political debate, but much of the discourse has focused on impacts to “safety.” Although no one disputes the importance of keeping astronauts safe, strategies for defining safety reveal contrasting visions for the space program and opposing values regarding the privatization of U.S. space exploration. In other words, the debate over commercial control has largely become encoded in arguments over safety. Specifically, proponents of using commercial options for transporting astronauts to the International Space Station (ISS) argue that commercial vehicles would be safe for astronauts, while proponents of NASA control argue that commercial vehicles would be unsafe, or at least not as safe as NASA vehicles. The cost of the spaceflight program, the technical requirements for designing a vehicle, the track record of the launch vehicle, and the experience of the launch provider are all incorporated into what defines safety in human spaceflight. This paper analyzes these contested criteria through conceptual lenses provided by fields of science and technology policy (STP) and science, technology, and society (STS). We ultimately contend that these differences in definition result not merely from ambiguous understandings of safety, but from intentional and strategic choices guided by normative positions on the commercialization of human spaceflight. The debate over safety is better considered a proxy debate for the partisan preferences embedded within the dispute over public or private spaceflight.