Could a Corpse Seed Life on Another Planet?

By William Herkewitz | October 25, 2016 10:40 am
an astronaut drifts through space

(Credit: Shutterstock)

One day, it’s bound to happen. An astronaut dies in space.

Maybe the death occurred en route to Mars. Maybe she was interstellar, on board solo spacecraft. Or maybe the body was thrust out an airlock, a burial at space.

That corpse (or the corpse’s spacecraft) could spend anywhere from decades to millions of years adrift. It would coast listlessly in the void, until the creeping tendrils of gravity eventually pulled it into a final touchdown. Likely this corpse will burn up in a star.

But lets say it lands on a planet. Could our corpse, like a seed on the wind, bring life to a new world?

Microbial Wayfarers

There are roughly two ways you could imagine a human corpse seeding life across the cosmos. Either by delivering living microbes, or — if all those viruses, bacteria, and other germs died in route — sparking the genesis of entirely new life entirely. Both, it seems, are possible.

“If the question is, ‘Are there a set of possible circumstances by which a corpse could deliver microbes to a planet that could survive the space environment?’ well, then I would say the answer is yes,” says Gary King, a microbial biologist at Louisiana State University who studies microbes that survive in extreme environments.

King argues that our bodies are riddled with microbes we already know can survive vast periods of time in stasis; even in cold, dry environments similar to space.

“We’ve pulled microbes out of permafrost, and there we’re talking about organisms surviving around one million years in suspended animation. Especially if the trip is somewhere close, like to Mars, bacterial spores in the human body will survive for sure,” says King. “It’s also possible that other, non-sporing bacteria could survive as well. I’m thinking about microbes like Deinococcus radiodurans, which we know can survive low levels of water and high amounts of ionizing radiation.”

As King sees it, there are three major factors that influence whether or not a corpse could FedEx its microbial life to another planet. The corpse’s container, its storage environment, and its flight time.



Order the first of its kind Pluto globe exclusively from Astronomy magazine.

Learn More 


First, if your corpse has been jettisoned, you’re outta luck. “If you’re imagining a corpse in a spacesuit floating out in space, I can tell you right now that if it’s pulled in by some Planet X’s gravity, any surviving microbes would just incinerate in the atmosphere. The corpse would definitely have to be inside something like a spacecraft to survive, and even then the reentry could be pretty destructive,” says King. As well, the corpse’s spacecraft would have to crack open during or after the landing, if any surviving microbes had any hope of spreading.

Secondly, you have to consider the storage of the corpse. If the corpse is floating inside a spacecraft that’s somehow maintaining an above-freezing temperature—allowing for liquid water—that could be ideal.  “Bacteria also have real limits regarding how quickly they can decay big chunks of organic matter,” says King, “without the presence of animals like worms or beetles helping along the decaying process, the human body could provide fuel for countless generations of bacteria, for many thousands of years.”

But this unlikely environment may not even be necessary. “Interestingly enough, when researchers want to maintain microbial cultures for long periods of time, they basically freeze dry the suckers. You take your culture, freeze it, dehydrate it, and end up with a pellet you can send out to people to re-hydrate and grow. Given that space is kind of the ultimate freeze-dryer. It’s not hard to imagine why the ambient environment might not be so bad to store microorganisms,” he says.

The biggest factor of all might be the corpse’s flight time. “So, travel within the solar system is certainly within the realm of microbial survival, assuming the corpse is traveling at the rate of something like you’re typical satellite,” says King. “But if you want to talk about timescales beyond that, to the millions of years it might take to get to another star system,” like our closest stellar neighbor Proxima Centauri, 4.2 light years away, “then the limiting factor becomes radiation,” says King.

The longer your corpse is floating in space, the more ambient cosmic radiation it’s absorbing. Enough radiation will scramble an organism’s DNA and RNA with mutations, “and unless those mutations can be repaired during the transit, at a rate equal to the mutations you’re accumulating, well then survival becomes questionable,” King says. “When you talk about one-million-plus years with little radiation shielding, then I’d say we’re talking about a very limited possibility of microbial survival. But I won’t say impossible, if you only need one of the vast number of microbes on the human body to survive the trip.”

Bodily Chemistry

Ok, let’s assume our corpse makes the trip, but every last one of its microbial cling-ons perish en route. Perhaps the timescale was simply too vast. Perhaps our corpse had been floating for several billion years, outlasting not just its last, hopelessly irradiated microbe, but Earth itself.

Could our corpse — lifeless but loaded with its amino acids and fats, its proteins and carbohydrates—kick-start an entirely new form of life?

Both Jack Szostak, a Nobel winning geneticist at Harvard Medical School, and Lee Cronin, a chemist who studies the genesis of life at the University of Glasgow, are in agreement. The corpse just might, but the conditions would have to be ideal.

“The molecules released from the decaying astronaut could potentially provide a boost to a new origin [of life] if the environmental conditions were almost perfect for life to begin, but just a few ingredients were missing or present in too low concentrations,” writes Szostak in an email to Astronomy Magazine. In other words, the corpse would be a bit like a match—not the whole bonfire.

Szostak is sure to mention that “if we’re talking about a very simple cell, along the lines of the proto-cells that [arose at] the beginning of life on earth, the astronaut’s molecules” alone would be hopelessly insufficient. In other words, the corpse’s molecules alone couldn’t just recombine to form a living organism.

Why? Szostak argues that there are certain types of molecules, like DNA building blocks called triphosphates, that he thinks are absolutely essential for creating new Earth-like life, and we know these fragile molecules would have chemically decayed in our astronaut given enough time. Instead, such molecules would need to be present on whatever planet the corpse’s ship crash landed on.

Cronin agrees that a human corpse could almost be viewed “as a sort of starter-pack of chemistry to bootstrap the [genesis] of new life,” he says. “But you’d need to consider a few factors.”

“First, how many corpses would you actually need to get onto a planet to make sure you statistically have enough organics to get things moving?” he asks. “Imagine a huge planet with an ocean, if you have just a single corpse that gets dissolved in a second or two and that chemistry gets spread very, very thinly. Well, it’s very difficult to imagine that corpse might help the process along,” he says. Better, Cronin argues, would be multiple corpses. Perhaps something like an entire, doomed crew. One which somehow managed to land somewhere like a shallow pool where when corpses’ would be ejected, the chemistry could stay together.

But it is possible. “And who knows,” says Cronin, who muses that “hypothetically speaking, it’s not impossible to imagine that life on Earth could have started through a similar process.”


This post originally appeared in

CATEGORIZED UNDER: Space & Physics, Top Posts
  • Marcus

    Ha, I’ve been asking that since I was 15, (1985). What would happen if we start sending the dead bodies (and gallons of water) to Mars?

  • Uncle Al

    decades to millions of years adrift Measured 90 rads/year of hard ionizing radiation background plus the occasional solar flare. Add re-entry burn. Do Egyptian mummies contain viable organisms?

    a human corpse could almost be viewed “as a sort of starter-pack of chemistry to bootstrap the [genesis] of new life” If terrestrial life began as a fecal crash landing, Stronger Together!. “Better, Cronin argues, would be multiple corpses.” Ipsi dixit.

    • Codie Petersen

      You either read everything I read, or read everything in general because I see you commenting on the articles often xD

  • ld_elon

    Speaking of time, {the rate of motion}
    Its a funny thing’ that looking opposite in the direction of the galactic center you see the futures and what is to come, and looking towards the galactic center is of what has been before.

    Advanced civilisation away = zone-black
    Modern civilisation @present = zone-grey
    Prehistoric civilisation towards = zone-white
    In the layers of life.

    Of course nature seeds nature…

    Basically ones stating ‘the noobes come from the galactic center’…

    • ld_elon

      Humans are meant to be on the edge, of this galactic center btw…

      • ld_elon

        They want you to forbid you’re importance in this realm…
        Don’t let that happen.

  • OWilson

    Well we know corpses can vote! :)

    • Chris H

      But only for demo’s, they have no free will.

  • Peter

    answer is always YES with some more affect than others. In a water world a corpse can equal a whole new eco-system and life variations and a dry place falls off to next to nothing but extremes and next to nothing chances. Water liquid can hold life with great ease if a simple source of food can be found. SEEDING life that matches and can change conditions to add more life forms can be done with ease when the conditions are right… change takes place and over time whole worlds change due to the simple introduction of life that FITS the conditions to thrive and become base for other life forms (evolved or seeded) and as always…care givers will be needed to balance life on all but few worlds… so learn to balance in life here or be the bad example to the future forever.


    • Ann O’Connor

      Small amounts of human bodies could not do it it has to come together on the planet with the atmosphere and the gravity and everything to be considered for any life to come up on that planet when we move off of this one it’ll be Generations until they adapt to where they end up, any related human life that goes to another planet will not be the human life that we know here it will be forced into change by the environment

  • Codie Petersen

    Unless the astronaut is covered in dormant bacteria that doesn’t require organic material to survive, I don’t think that is a realistic proposition. Unless of course an astronaut dies in orbit around a planet we intend to habitat, in which case… we intend to inhabit it and will be doing far more than dumping accidental dead bodies on it.

    So I don’t think it really matters.


The Crux

A collection of bright and big ideas about timely and important science from a community of experts.

See More


Discover's Newsletter

Sign up to get the latest science news delivered weekly right to your inbox!

Collapse bottom bar