ALBERT

Description: Microgravity Fluids for Biology represents an intersection of biology and fluid physics that present exciting research challenges to the Space Life and Physical Sciences Division. Solving and managing the transport processes and fluid mechanics in physiological and biological systems and processes are essential for future space exploration and colonization of space by humans. Adequate understanding of the underlying fluid physics and transport mechanisms will provide new, necessary insights and technologies for analyzing and designing biological systems critical to NASAs mission. To enable this mission, the fluid physics discipline needs to work to enhance the understanding of the influence of gravity on the scales and types of fluids (i.e., non-Newtonian) important to biology and life sciences. In turn, biomimetic, bio-inspired and synthetic biology applications based on physiology and biology can enrich the fluid mechanics and transport phenomena capabilities of the microgravity fluid physics community.

Description: The geneLAB project is designed to leverage the value of large 'omics' datasets from molecular biology projects conducted on the ISS by making these datasets available, citable, discoverable, interpretable, reusable, and reproducible. geneLAB will create a collaboration space with an integrated set of tools for depositing, accessing, analyzing, and modeling these diverse datasets from spaceflight and related terrestrial studies.

Description: The E. coli AntiMicrobial Satellite(EcAMSat) mission will investigate space microgravity affects on the antibiotic resistance of E. coli, a bacterial pathogen responsible for urinary tract infection in humans and animals. EcAMSat is being developed through a partnership between NASA Ames Research Center and the Stanford University School of Medicine. Scientists believe that the results of this experiment could help design effective countermeasures to protect astronauts health during long duration human space missions.

Description: Early on, bed rest was recognized as a method for inducing many of the physiological changes experienced by spaceflight. Head-down tilt (HDT) bed rest was first introduced as an analog for spaceflight by a Soviet team led by Genin and Kakurin. Their study was performed in 1970 (at -4 degrees) and lasted for 30 days; results were reported in the Russian Journal of Space Biology (Kosmicheskaya Biol. 1972; 6(4): 26-28 & 45-109). The goal was to test physiological countermeasures for cosmonauts who would soon begin month-long missions to the Salyut space station. HDT was chosen to produce a similar sensation of blood flow to the head reported by Soyuz cosmonauts. Over the next decade, other tilt angles were studied and comparisons with spaceflight were made, showing that HDT greater than 4 degrees was superior to horizontal bed rest for modeling acute physiological changes observed in space; but, at higher angles, subjects experienced greater discomfort without clearly improving the physiological comparison to spaceflight. A joint study performed by US and Soviet investigators, in 1979, set the goal of standardization of baseline conditions and chose 6-degrees HDT. This effectively established 6-degree HDT bed rest as the internationally-preferred analog for weightlessness and, since 1990, nearly all further studies have been conducted at 6-degrees HDT. A thorough literature review (1970-2010) revealed 534 primary scientific journal articles which reported results from using HDT as a physiological analog for spaceflight. These studies have ranged from as little as 10 minutes to the longest duration of 370 days. Long-term studies lasting four weeks or more have resulted in over 170 primary research articles. Today, the 6-degree HDT model provides a consistent, thoroughly-tested, ground-based analog for spaceflight and allows the proper scientific controls for rigorous testing of physiological countermeasures; however, all models have their strengths and limits. The 6-degrees HDT model must continue to be scrutinized, re-examined, validated and compared to other analog environments whenever possible. Only by understanding the strengths and limits of this model, will it continue to serve as a critical physiological analog to spaceflight for many more years to come.