The Mystery of Dark Oxygen: Understanding the Viral Phenomenon

In July of 2024, oxygen was discovered on the ocean floor where no light nor plants were present. After various tests, it seems as though the different minerals located on the floor of the Clarion-Clipperton Zone are acting as a large collection of batteries that are being charged by the electric currents flowing along the ocean floor (Lingam et al., 2024). This immediately sparked numerous tests with the purpose of discovering if life can grow and exist with dark oxygen production (DOP). This research is incredibly important because it may indicate certain conditions in which life may exist on a water or ice planet.

Through research done at Cornell University, we have learned a few things about this phenomenon. The oxygen was collected using a benthic chamber, a chamber which allows on-site measurements of the exchange rates of substances between the ocean floor and the water in and around the chamber (Sweetman et al., 2024) (Figure 1).

Benthic Chamber
Figure 1. Max Planck Institute for Marine Microbiology, V. Carvalho. This shows a benthic chamber in action.

Based on the oxygen measurements, it seems that the potential reason for oxygen to be present without photosynthesis on the ocean floor is the concept of electrophy, which is the process of separating water into its elements (hydrogen and oxygen) through the use of electricity. For the circumstances on the ocean floor where the phenomenon was discovered, it seems there are numerous electric currents going across the ocean floor which could trigger this electrophy. They then charge the elements on the ocean floor (lithium, cobalt, copper, etc.) to essentially create natural batteries (Lingam et al., 2024). The oxygen created from this phenomenon has since been dubbed, dark oxygen due to its creation from a lack of sunlight (Colarossi, 2024).

In terms of what creatures could exist in a domain created from DOP, we know that metazoans (animals) may be able to exist in these conditions if they are in the millimeters of sizes; however if an organism is able to have “internal circulation systems for the distribution of oxygen” (Lingam et al., 2024), then the upper size boundary of these organisms could instead be between approximately 0.1 cm to approximately 10 cm.

There are still many factors to consider during the early stages of this discovery, but if this system proves consistent, the possibility of life on fully water or ice planets increases dramatically. There could be entire systems of creatures living on ocean planets that are entirely unknown to us, but the research of this topic has become threatened by seabed mining companies.

Since there’s a plethora of elements that are used in making batteries on the ocean floor, many seabed mining companies are pushing for the ability to strip mine in these areas and profit off of the abundance of resources.

A quote by the BBC with Professor Murray Roberts, a marine biologist from the University of Edinburgh, states, “There’s already overwhelming evidence that strip mining deep-sea nodule fields will destroy ecosystems we barely understand,” (Gill, 2024). These strip mining endeavors could severely hinder the research being done about DOP by disrupting the habitat in which it is occurring. To prevent this over 800 marine biologists from 44 countries have signed a petition in hopes of halting the strip mining process and allowing more discoveries to occur in this field without interruption (Gill, 2024).

There is still a lot to discover about this process and its impact on the world around us, but the potential of this discovery has incredible implications for our understanding of the creation of life not just on Earth but on other planets as well. We can only look forward to more discoveries like this from the depths of our mysterious oceans.

 

References

Lingam, M., Balbi A., & Tiwari M. (2024, August 13). Dwellers in the Deep: Biological Consequences of Dark Oxygen. Cornell University. https://arxiv.org/pdf/2408.06841

Gill, V. (2024, July 22). Dark oxygen made by deep sea “batteries.” BBC News. https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c728ven2v9eo

Colarossi, J. (2024, August 15). Oxygen produced in the deep sea raises questions about extraterrestrial life on other planets. Boston University. https://www.bu.edu/articles/2024/deep-sea-oxygen-raises-questions-about-extraterrestrial-life/#:~:text=This%20phenomenon%20creates%20enough%20energy,oxygen%20made%20with%20no%20sunlight

NOAA Office of Ocean Exploration and Research (2019). [Deep sea metal lumps of oxides of iron and manganese]. Southeastern U.S. Deep-sea Exploration.

Sweetman, A.K., Smith, A.J., de Jonge, D.S.W. et al. Evidence of dark oxygen production at the abyssal seafloor. Nat. Geosci. 17, 737–739 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41561-024-01480-8

Carvalho, V. [Benthic Chamber]. Max Planck Institute for Marine Microbiology.

Your journey starts here! Let’s talk!

ThemeRex © 2026. All rights reserved.
  Timothy Durham was convicted of rape when a test showed his DNA genotype matched the DNA recovered from the crime scene. Eye witnesses testified that Durham was in a different state at the time of the incident, but he wasn’t exonerated from his 3000 year sentence until follow up DNA analysis showed that the preliminary forensic analysis used in the trial was misinterpreted (Thomas et al.). DNA testing serves an invaluable part in our criminal justice system, but it comes with complications and bias that can lead to wrongful convictions and misinformed juries.  

Background:

Forensic genetics aims to identify the origin of a biological sample. It can be traced back to Karl Landsteiner who discovered human ABO blood groups. With blood groups, suspects could be eliminated based on their blood type. For example, if a suspect had type A blood and there was type B blood left at the scene by the perpetrator, the investigators could rule out the suspect. Unfortunately, the reverse didn’t work. If the suspect and perpetrator both had the same blood type, it can’t be concluded that the suspect was guilty. Blood identifiers evolved into 8 distinct categories which improved the ability to eliminate suspects, but could only conclude that (if the system matched) it might be the perpetrator or this person might be related to the perpetrator (Jobling and Gill). The field evolved in the 1980s with the discovery of Minisatellites, lines of repetitive DNA that don’t encode proteins. Minisatellite patterns in DNA create what we know today as the DNA fingerprint, and it has a much higher accuracy rate than previous methods (Augustyn et al.). Around the same time, a breakthrough for victims of sexual assault was discovered. In the case of assault, bodily fluids of both the victim and the assaulter can get mixed. A process called differential lysis was created which could selectively increase the concentration of sperm in a fluid sample thereby allowing for accurate DNA testing (Jobling and Gill). Forensics evolved to use single-locus probe testing after several years because of its ease of interpretation. It looked at specific minisatellites that had high variability between subjects. This was the first DNA-based method to be used in a criminal investigation. Two murder homicides from several years apart were connected using DNA evidence. The evidence was then used to exonerate an innocent man, and the guilty party was found when he tried to evade mandatory DNA testing for all men in the small town. His guilt was then reinforced when the DNA profiles matched, and he gave a confession (Jobling and Gill). Finding DNA at a crime scene doesn’t guarantee that you’ll find a murderer. There are issues with non-pure samples and limited samples that make DNA work difficult, and accreditation of facilities and new techniques and take time (Jobling and Gill).  

Subjectivity of DNA Interpretation:

In a 2009 publication, the National Academy of Science discusses the possibility for subjective influence in lab based forensics. The interpretation bias happens in complex cases where, for example, there could be a mixture of DNA. A study published in 2011 looked specifically at this issue. A gang rape happened in Georgia, and the mixture in DNA from the case was used to prosecute one suspect after another suspect took a plea bargain to testify against him. With DNA mixtures, there are three possible conclusions: suspect excluded, suspect cannot be excluded, and inconclusive. If the suspect is excluded, it means that there’s little to no possibility that his DNA is part of the sample. If the suspect cannot be excluded, it means that there’s a possibility that his DNA is part of the sample. In the trial, the DNA examiners who knew the context of the case concluded that the suspect being prosecuted could not be excluded. The 2011 study gave the DNA evidence from this case and the DNA profiles of the suspects to 17 forensic examiners. These examiners had no context of the case, and they all worked independently. Of the 17, only 1 came to the same conclusion (suspect cannot be excluded) as the examiners who knew the context of the case. Twelve of the 17 concluded that the suspect who was prosecuted and convicted had no relation to the DNA found in the sample. Not only does this show that subjectivity occurs due to the context of the case, but the 17 examiners came up with different findings based on their past experiences meaning that not all DNA analysis is objective. Some organizations like the Scientific Working Group on DNA Analysis Methods say that quantitative statistical evidence should be presented with every categorical conclusion, but the US doesn’t require this (Dror and Hampikian).

False Positives:

There are two categories that cause wrongful identification in a DNA report: coincidental matches and false positives. Coincidental matches are DNA matches between two unrelated people. The probability of these matches is about 1 to 500,000 for white individuals and about 1 to 350,000 for black individuals. This small probability of coincidental matches makes people feel confident in DNA evidence. False positives, on the other hand, are matches between DNA and test DNA that result from issues in the forensics lab. There have been multiple cases of forensics labs accidentally switching victim and suspected rapist DNA which lead to convictions that were later overturned when the lab realized the error. There are also cases of misreading or misunderstanding a sample. In a case from 1993, a man was convicted of rape because someone interpreted a mixed sample of victim and perpetrator DNA as an individual sample. The conviction was again overturned. To prevent false convictions, retesting DNA is allowed, but it’s not an efficient solution. Many people are pushing for statistical information on the probability of false positives, so that the jurors can make accurate judgements based on DNA evidence (Thomas et al.).  

Conclusion:

DNA analysis is a useful tool for the criminal justice system, but subjectivity can be an issue in forensic testing. To combat wrongful convictions, there are organizations like The Innocence Project who use DNA testing to free the innocent, but reformed forensic testing standards should be put in place to prevent subjectivity and to ensure juries are correctly informed during trials. https://www.innocenceproject.org/    

Citation:

Augustyn , Adam, et al. “DNA Finerprinting.” Encyclopedia Britannica , 26 Apr. 2018, www.britannica.com/science/DNA-fingerprinting#ref153186. Dror, Itiel E., and Greg Hampikian. “Subjectivity and Bias in Forensic DNA Mixture Interpretation.” Science & Justice, vol. 51, no. 4, 2011, pp. 204–208., doi:10.1016/j.scijus.2011.08.004. Jobling, Mark A., and Peter Gill. “Encoded Evidence: DNA in Forensic Analysis.” Nature Reviews: Genetics, vol. 5, no. 10, Oct. 2004, pp. 739–751., doi:10.1038/nrg1455. Thompson, William C, et al. “How the Probability of a False Positive Affects the Value of DNA Evidence.” Journal of Forensic Sciences, vol. 48, no. 1, Jan. 2003, pp. 1–8., doi:10.1520/jfs2001171.