Microbial Waste Processing for Space Missions: Protocols, Challenges, and Biotechnological Applications

Abstract

This article provides a comprehensive analysis of microbial-based waste processing technologies for long-duration space missions. Tailored for researchers, scientists, and drug development professionals, it explores the foundational science of microbial behavior in microgravity, details current and emerging methodological applications like anaerobic membrane bioreactors, addresses critical troubleshooting for system optimization, and examines validation frameworks for technology reliability. The synthesis connects waste management with advanced bioprocessing, highlighting its dual role in life support and the production of high-value biomaterials, pharmaceuticals, and biofuels in space, ultimately outlining a path toward sustainable, closed-loop space habitats.

The Science of Microbes in Microgravity: Foundational Principles for Space Bioprocessing

How Microgravity and Low-Shear Environments Alter Microbial Physiology

Microgravity and the associated low-fluid-shear environments present a profound shift in the physical forces acting upon microorganisms. For microbial life that evolved under Earth's gravity, this change represents a significant environmental stimulus to which cells must adapt for survival [1]. Research has demonstrated that these conditions act as a global regulator of microbial gene expression, physiology, and, notably for space missions, pathogenesis [1]. This application note details the specific physiological changes observed in microbes under these conditions and provides standardized protocols for their study, with particular emphasis on implications for microbial waste processing systems in spacecraft and extraterrestrial habitats. Understanding these adaptations is critical for both mitigating risks and harnessing microbial capabilities for sustainable space exploration [2].

Physiological Adaptations to Altered Mechanical Forces

The mechanical forces of gravity and fluid shear are sensed by microbial cells, triggering a process of mechanotransduction that leads to widespread physiological changes. The table below summarizes the key phenotypic alterations observed in bacteria under microgravity and simulated microgravity (SMG).

Table 1: Key Phenotypic Changes in Microorganisms Under Microgravity and Low-Shear Environments

Physiological Trait	Observed Change	Example Organism(s)	Potential Impact on Space Missions
Growth Rate	Increased	Stenotrophomonas maltophilia [3]	Altered bioprocessing efficiency, system clogging
Biofilm Formation	Enhanced	Stenotrophomonas maltophilia [3]	Fouling of waste processing systems, increased corrosion risk
Motility	Increased swimming motility	Stenotrophomonas maltophilia [3]	Improved colonization of surfaces and substrates
Virulence & Pathogenesis	Globally regulated; potential increase	Various conditional pathogens [1] [3]	Astronaut health risk, especially with compromised immunity
Metabolic Activity	Altered carbon source utilization and metabolism	Various bacteria [1] [3]	Variable efficiency in bioregenerative life support and waste processing

These adaptations are not merely academic; they have direct consequences for the closed environments of spacecraft. Enhanced biofilm formation, for instance, can lead to the fouling and failure of critical water recycling and waste processing systems [2]. Conversely, a heightened growth rate and metabolic versatility could be harnessed to improve the efficiency of bioregenerative life support systems (BLSS) that rely on microbes for waste decomposition and nutrient recycling [2].

Experimental Protocols for Simulated Microgravity Research

Ground-based microgravity analogues are essential tools for studying these phenomena. The High-Aspect Ratio Rotating-Wall Vessel (HARV) bioreactor is a widely validated and effective device for creating Low-Shear Modeled Microgravity (LSMMG) conditions [1] [3].

Protocol: Cultivating Bacteria in Simulated Microgravity

Objective: To adapt and culture bacterial strains under low-fluid-shear conditions that simulate microgravity, enabling the study of subsequent physiological and molecular changes.

Materials:

• High-Aspect Ratio Rotating-Wall Vessel (HARV) Bioreactors (e.g., from Synthecon, Inc.)
• Appropriate liquid culture medium (e.g., Luria-Bertani (LB) broth)
• Bacterial strain of interest
• Incubator capable of housing HARV units and maintaining 37°C (or strain-specific temperature)
• Sterile syringes and needles for bubble-free fluid transfer

Procedure:

• Inoculum Preparation: Grow the original bacterial strain (SMO) in a standard shake tube with liquid medium overnight at 37°C. Adjust the culture to an optical density (OD) of 1.0 at 600 nm.
• HARV Inoculation: Dilute the adjusted culture 1:200 in fresh, sterile medium. Carefully inject the diluted suspension into the HARV bioreactor, ensuring all air bubbles are removed via the valves to achieve a bubble-free environment.
• Experimental Setup:
  • SMG Group: Place the HARV in an incubator and rotate on an axis perpendicular to the gravity vector at 25 rpm [3].
  • Control Group (Normal Gravity, NG): Place an identical HARV in the incubator and rotate on an axis parallel to the gravity vector at 25 rpm [3].
• Continuous Cultivation: Incubate both groups at 37°C for 24 hours.
• Sub-culturing: After 24 hours, aseptically remove the bacterial suspension. Dilute it to a turbidity of 1.0 and reinoculate a new, bubble-free HARV filled with fresh medium at a 1:200 ratio.
• Long-Term Adaptation: Repeat this sub-culturing process every 24 hours for 14 days (or other desired duration) to allow for full microbial adaptation to the SMG environment [3].
• Sample Collection: After the adaptation period, collect samples for downstream phenotypic and multi-omic analyses (e.g., growth curves, biofilm assays, transcriptomics).

Protocol: Assessing Biofilm Formation

Objective: To quantify the enhanced biofilm formation capability of bacteria adapted to SMG.

Materials:

• SMG-adapted and NG control cultures
• Sterile 96-well flat-bottom polystyrene microtiter plates
• Fresh culture medium
• Phosphate-Buffered Saline (PBS), pH 7.4
• Crystal Violet stain (0.1% w/v)
• Acetic acid (30% v/v)
• Microplate reader

Procedure:

• Inoculation: Dilute the SMG and NG bacterial cultures to a standardized density (e.g., 10^6 CFU/ml) in fresh medium. Add 200 µl of each suspension to individual wells of the microtiter plate. Include wells with sterile medium as a negative control.
• Incubation: Incub the plate statically for 24-48 hours at the appropriate temperature.
• Staining: Gently remove the planktonic (non-adherent) cells by inverting and tapping the plate. Wash the adherent cells twice with 200 µl of PBS to remove loosely attached bacteria.
• Fixation and Staining: Fix the biofilms by air-drying the plate for 45 minutes. Add 200 µl of 0.1% crystal violet to each well and stain for 15 minutes.
• Washing: Gently rinse the plate under running tap water to remove excess stain. Air-dry the plate completely.
• Elution: Add 200 µl of 30% acetic acid to each well to solubilize the crystal violet bound to the biofilm. Incubate for 15 minutes with gentle shaking.
• Quantification: Transfer 125 µl of the eluted dye from each well to a new microtiter plate. Measure the optical density at 550 nm using a plate reader. The higher the OD550, the greater the biofilm biomass [3].

Visualization of Experimental Workflow and Cellular Mechanisms

The following diagrams, generated with Graphviz using the specified color palette, illustrate the core experimental workflow and the subsequent cellular changes.

Diagram 1: Experimental workflow for SMG adaptation using HARV bioreactors.

Diagram 2: Proposed mechanism from microgravity sensing to physiological changes.

The Scientist's Toolkit: Key Research Reagent Solutions

Table 2: Essential Materials and Reagents for Microgravity Simulation Studies

Item	Function/Application	Example/Specification
HARV Bioreactors	Generating Low-Shear Modeled Microgravity (LSMMG) conditions for ground-based research.	Synthecon, Inc.; Rotation speed typically 25 rpm [3].
Luria-Bertani (LB) Broth	Standard culture medium for growing Gram-negative bacteria like E. coli and S. maltophilia.	Contains tryptone, yeast extract, and sodium chloride.
Crystal Violet	A histological stain used to quantify total biofilm biomass in microtiter plate assays.	0.1% (w/v) aqueous solution [3].
RNAprotect / RNA Later	Reagent for immediate stabilization and protection of RNA in bacterial samples for transcriptomics.	Prevents degradation for accurate gene expression analysis.
SAMS Accelerometers	Monitoring g-jitter (oscillatory accelerations) in spaceflight experiments to account for non-gravity effects.	Space Accelerometer Measurement System on the ISS [4].
Binary Colloidal Alloy Test (BCAT)	Apparatus on the ISS for long-duration studies of colloidal and suspension aggregation, including microbial flocs.	Used for image-based monitoring of particle dynamics [4].

Application in Space Mission Waste Processing

The physiological changes in microbes under microgravity have profound implications for designing and operating waste processing systems on long-duration missions. The enhanced biofilm formation poses a significant threat, potentially leading to biofouling and clogging in tubing and bioreactors designed for waste breakdown [2]. This risk must be mitigated through material selection and system design that minimizes biofilm-friendly niches.

Conversely, the increased growth rate and metabolic versatility of some microbes can be leveraged within Bioregenerative Life Support Systems (BLSS) [2]. In these systems, microorganisms are essential for decomposing solid waste, purifying water through constructed wetlands, and revitalizing the atmosphere. Understanding how to optimize their function in microgravity is key to achieving the self-sufficiency required for missions to Mars and beyond. Furthermore, introducing specific nitrogen-fixing bacteria into regolith can improve soil fertility for plant-based agriculture in extraterrestrial habitats, closing the loop on nutrient cycles [2].

Microbial mechanotransduction, the process by which microbial cells convert mechanical stimuli into biochemical signals, represents a critical frontier in the development of advanced life support systems for long-duration space missions. Within the context of space-based waste processing protocols, understanding these mechanisms is paramount for designing bioregenerative systems that can maintain microbial communities essential for waste conversion and resource recovery. In the microgravity environment of space, the physical forces that microbes experience differ fundamentally from those on Earth, potentially altering their metabolic behavior, biofilm formation, and waste processing efficiency [1] [5]. The absence of gravitational loading and associated fluid shear forces in spaceflight creates a unique low-shear mechanical environment that regulates microbial gene expression, physiology, and community interactions [1]. This has direct implications for the reliability of waste processing systems planned for lunar and Martian missions, where resupply from Earth will be impractical [6].

Research indicates that microorganisms possess sophisticated structural analogs to eukaryotic mechanosensing systems, including cytoskeletal elements and mechanosensitive channels that may enable perception of mechanical forces [5]. Despite the historical assumption that microbes below 10 micrometers cannot perceive gravitational forces, substantial evidence now demonstrates that bacteria such as Salmonella enterica and Pseudomonas aeruginosa alter their gene expression and virulence in response to microgravity and low-shear environments [1] [5]. For space missions, harnessing or counteracting these mechanotransduction pathways could optimize microbial performance in waste processing bioreactors, ensuring efficient conversion of human waste into edible biomass, recycled water, and breathable air [6] [7].

Mechanistic Framework of Microbial Mechanosensing

Fundamental Principles of Microbial Mechanotransduction

Microbial mechanotransduction follows a sequential pathway wherein external mechanical forces are sensed by specialized structures, converted into intracellular biochemical signals, and ultimately manifest as changes in gene expression and cellular function. This process enables microbes to adapt to the mechanical properties of their environment, including those encountered in spaceflight and waste processing systems [5]. In prokaryotes, this mechanical sensing capability is mediated through structures functionally analogous to eukaryotic mechanosensors, including membrane-embedded mechanosensitive channels, cytoskeletal elements, and membrane adhesion complexes [5]. The proposed microbial mechanotransduction pathway involves force reception through these mechanosensors, signal transduction through biochemical cascades, and ultimately transcriptional reprogramming that affects microbial behavior relevant to waste processing systems [5].

Proposed Microbial Mechanotransduction Pathway

The diagram below illustrates the hypothesized mechanotransduction pathway in prokaryotes, from initial force perception to genetic regulation:

This mechanotransduction model provides a framework for understanding how the mechanical forces in space environments may influence microbial functions critical to waste processing systems. The molecular chaperone and global regulator Hfq has been identified as a key player in the bacterial response to low-shear environments, though its precise mechanism remains under investigation [5]. Additionally, alterations in DNA supercoiling and nucleoid architecture in response to mechanical stress may serve as a fundamental regulatory mechanism connecting physical force perception to changes in gene expression relevant to waste processing efficiency [5].

Experimental Protocols for Investigating Microbial Mechanotransduction

Microfluidic Pipette Aspiration for Single-Cell Mechanics

Protocol Objective: To quantify the mechanical properties of individual microbial cells exposed to space-relevant conditions, including microgravity and low-shear environments.

Background: This protocol adapts single-cell mechanical measurement techniques previously used for human osteoblasts in spaceflight experiments [8]. Characterizing microbial stiffness changes in response to space conditions provides insights into how mechanotransduction pathways may be altered, potentially affecting waste processing efficiency.

Materials and Reagents:

• Polydimethylsiloxane (PDMS)-based microfluidic devices with trapping cup structures
• Microbial cultures (e.g., Methylococcus capsulatus, Halomonas desiderata, Thermus aquaticus)
• Suitable growth media for target microorganisms
• Phosphate Buffer Saline (PBS)
• TrypLE or similar enzyme solution for cell dissociation
• Vybrant DiO or similar fluorescent cell membrane labels
• Syringe pumps with precise flow control
• Vibration motors for cell resuspension
• Bubble traps to prevent air introduction
• Temperature control system (4°C for solutions, 34°C for mesophilic cultures)

Procedure:

• Culture Preparation: Grow microbial cultures to mid-log phase in appropriate media. For methanotrophic bacteria like Methylococcus capsulatus, maintain with methane as carbon source.
• Cell Labeling: Incubate cells with Vybrant DiO according to manufacturer specifications to enable fluorescence imaging.
• Device Priming: Load microfluidic device with PBS, ensuring all channels are filled and bubble-free using integrated bubble traps.
• Cell Loading: Introduce cell suspension into microfluidic device at constant pressure (0.2 psi recommended initial pressure) to capture individual cells in trapping cups via hydrodynamic trapping.
• Mechanical Testing: Apply incremental pressure increases (0.1 psi steps from 0.2 to 2.0 psi) while monitoring cell deformation.
• Image Acquisition: Capture brightfield and fluorescence images at each pressure increment using automated imaging systems.
• Data Analysis: Measure protrusion length of cells into micropipette channels at each pressure. Calculate cell stiffness based on deformation response to applied pressure.

Application Note: This protocol was successfully deployed to the International Space Station for human osteoblast studies [8] and can be adapted for microbial investigations. In microgravity, slightly elongated protrusions were observed in human cells, indicating cellular softening [8], which may correlate with mechanotransduction alterations in microbes.

Spheroid Culture Under Pressure Manipulation

Protocol Objective: To investigate microbial community responses to compressive forces in microgravity, simulating conditions in waste processing bioreactors.

Background: Microbial aggregates and biofilms in waste processing systems experience varying mechanical pressures. This protocol examines how these pressures influence mechanotransduction pathways in space conditions.

Materials and Reagents:

• Collagen gel or similar extracellular matrix substitute
• Pressure-controlled culture chambers compatible with spaceflight hardware
• Microbial culture of interest
• Appropriate growth media
• Fixation reagents (e.g., paraformaldehyde)
• Immunostaining reagents for target proteins (e.g., anti-F-actin, pSMAD, YAP/TAZ)
• Fluorescence microscopy imaging capabilities

Procedure:

• Spheroid Formation: Mix microbial cells with collagen gel solution to create uniform suspensions.
• Chamber Loading: Transfer cell-collagen mixture into pressure-controlled chambers, ensuring even distribution.
• Culture Conditions: Maintain samples at appropriate temperature with nutrient supply.
• Pressure Application: Expose experimental groups to defined compressive pressures (e.g., 10-50 mmHg) while maintaining controls at ambient pressure.
• Microgravity Exposure: Process samples in both spaceflight and ground control conditions.
• Sample Fixation: Terminate experiments at designated time points with appropriate fixatives.
• Immunostaining: Process samples for filamentous actin (F-actin) and mechanotransduction-related proteins (YAP, pSMAD1/5/9).
• Image Analysis: Quantify fluorescence intensity and localization patterns to assess mechanotransduction pathway activity.

Application Note: Research on human osteoblasts in microgravity demonstrated that pressure application can restore YAP expression and signaling [8], suggesting mechanical countermeasures may optimize microbial function in waste processing systems.

Quantitative Analysis of Microbial Responses to Mechanical Forces

Microbial Phenotypic Changes in Spaceflight Conditions

Table 1: Documented Microbial Responses to Spaceflight and Analog Environments

Microbial Species	Experimental Condition	Key Phenotypic Changes	Implications for Waste Processing
Salmonella enterica	Spaceflight & Clinorotation	Increased virulence, Altered gene expression	Potential pathogen risk in closed systems
Pseudomonas aeruginosa	Spaceflight & Clinorotation	Hfq-dependent transcriptomic changes	Altered metabolic output
Escherichia coli	Clinostat (Low-Shear)	Altered microcin B17 production	Changes in microbial competition
Methylococcus capsulatus	Ground-based Bioreactors	52% protein, 36% fat content	High-value biomass from waste
Halomonas desiderata	High pH (11) Conditions	15% protein, 7% fat content	Alkaline-tolerant waste processing
Thermus aquaticus	High Temperature (158°F)	61% protein, 16% fat content	Thermophilic waste conversion

Performance Metrics for Space-Based Waste Processing Systems

Table 2: Efficiency Metrics of Microbial Waste Processing Under Different Conditions

Process Parameter	Ground Performance	Microgravity Performance	Optimization Strategy
Solid Waste Reduction	49-59% in 13 hours [7]	Not fully characterized	Pressure application to enhance efficiency
Protein Production Yield	52% (M. capsulatus) [7]	Requires verification	Mechanical stimulation to boost yield
Pathogen Control	Effective at high pH/heat [7]	Altered virulence potential [1]	Optimize mechanical environment
Process Stability	Robust to load variations [7]	Unknown fluid dynamics effects	Real-time mechanical monitoring
Biomass Nutritional Value	High protein/fat content [7]	Potential alterations	Mechanotransduction pathway manipulation

Research Reagent Solutions for Mechanotransduction Studies

Table 3: Essential Research Tools for Microbial Mechanotransduction Investigations

Research Tool	Function	Application Example
Microfluidic Pipette Aspiration Chips	Measures single-cell mechanical properties	Quantifying microbial stiffness changes in microgravity [8]
Pressure-Controlled Culture Chambers	Applies compressive forces to cell cultures	Studying pressure effects on microbial signaling in space [8]
Clinostats / Random Positioning Machines	Simulates microgravity on Earth	Ground-based studies of low-shear effects on microbes [5]
Mechanosensitive Channel Modulators	Activates or inhibits mechanosensitive channels	Probing specific mechanotransduction pathways [5]
Fixed-Film Bioreactor Systems	Provides high-surface-area bacterial growth	Waste processing with microbial communities [7]
Hfq Mutant Strains	Alters global regulation of stress responses	Investigating mechanosignaling mechanisms [5]

Application to Space Mission Waste Processing Protocols

Integration with Bioregenerative Life Support Systems

The investigation of microbial mechanotransduction provides critical insights for optimizing waste processing in advanced Bioregenerative Life Support Systems (BLSS) required for long-duration lunar and Martian missions. Microbial communities play vital roles in BLSS through higher plant cultivation support, water treatment, solid waste bioconversion, and atmosphere revitalization [6]. Understanding how space mechanical environments affect these microbial functions enables the design of more robust and efficient systems. Research from the International Space Station has demonstrated that microgravity significantly alters cellular mechanotransduction pathways, as evidenced by reduced filamentous actin levels and YAP expression in human osteoblasts [8]. Similar mechanisms likely affect microbial performance in waste processing systems, potentially altering metabolic efficiency, biofilm formation, and community dynamics.

Experimental work has demonstrated the feasibility of using microbial reactors to rapidly break down solid and liquid waste while producing edible biomass [7]. These systems employ anaerobic digestion processes where microbes convert waste into methane, which subsequently supports the growth of methylotrophic bacteria with high nutritional value (52% protein, 36% fats) [7]. The mechanical environment within these reactors – particularly fluid shear forces, pressure distributions, and mixing dynamics – likely influences microbial efficiency through mechanotransduction pathways. By applying controlled mechanical stimuli based on mechanotransduction principles, it may be possible to optimize these systems for space conditions where resupply is impractical [6].

Experimental Workflow for Space-Based Mechanotransduction Studies

The diagram below outlines an integrated experimental approach for investigating microbial mechanotransduction in space-relevant conditions:

This integrated approach enables researchers to connect fundamental mechanotransduction mechanisms with practical applications in space-based waste processing systems. By understanding how mechanical forces in space alter microbial function at the molecular level, mission planners can design more reliable waste processing systems that maintain efficiency throughout long-duration missions. Furthermore, this knowledge may enable the development of mechanical countermeasures that optimize microbial performance despite the challenging mechanical environment of spaceflight.

This document outlines the critical differences in fluid dynamics and mass transfer processes between terrestrial and microgravity environments, with a specific focus on implications for microbial waste processing protocols in space missions. The absence of buoyancy-driven convection and sedimentation in microgravity fundamentally alters system behavior, requiring revised experimental approaches and system designs for mission success.

Fundamental Physics in Microgravity

In microgravity, the dominant physical forces governing fluid behavior and mass transfer change dramatically.

Dominant Forces and Phenomena

• Absence of Buoyancy: Without a gravitational field, density gradients do not drive convective flows. This shifts the primary transport mechanism from convection to diffusion, which can be several orders of magnitude slower [9].
• Surface Tension Dominance: In the absence of gravity, surface forces become the primary driver for fluid behavior. This can lead to uncontrolled fluid spreading if not properly managed in systems like bioreactors [10].
• Electrohydrodynamic (EHD) Effects: The application of electric fields can introduce controlled body forces, providing a mechanism to induce fluid motion and enhance mixing or phase separation where gravity is unavailable [11].

Quantitative Comparison of Key Parameters

Table 1: Comparison of Dominant Forces and Transport Mechanisms

Parameter	Terrestrial Conditions	Microgravity Conditions	Impact on Mass Transfer
Primary Flow Driver	Buoyancy (natural convection)	Diffusion, Marangoni effect, applied fields (EHD)	Convective transfer is suppressed; mixing is limited
Bubble/Drop Detachment	Governed by buoyancy	Governed by Marangoni flows and electrostatic forces	Altered interfacial area for gas-liquid mass transfer
Sedimentation	Significant	Negligible	Suspended particles (cells, biomass) remain in suspension
Interfacial Stability	Gravity stabilizes stratification	Capillary forces dominate	Fluid interfaces are more susceptible to disturbances

Experimental Protocols for Simulated and Real Microgravity

Protocol: Operating a Random Positioning Machine (RPM) for Terrestrial Simulation

An RPM simulates microgravity by continuously randomizing the direction of the gravity vector, time-averaging its net effect on a sample to near zero, a condition known as time-averaged Simulated Microgravity (taSMG) [10].

2.1.1 Key Materials

• Random Positioning Machine: A two-axis clinostat capable of independent random rotation.
• Scalable Accelerometer Measurement Device: For validating acceleration profiles at sample locations [10].
• Appropriate Sample Vessels: Small, symmetric containers to minimize centrifugal effects.

2.1.2 Procedure

• Sample Positioning: Center the sample precisely at the intersection of the RPM's two axes of rotation. Even small offsets generate permanent centrifugal forces that cannot be averaged [10].
• Motion Programming: Set the RPM to operate with random changes in angular velocity and direction to avoid periodic effects that could stimulate biological samples [10].
• Validation Measurement (Critical): Place the accelerometer at the sample location and run the RPM. Analyze the data to ensure:
  • The moving average of the gravitational vector approaches zero over the desired timeframe.
  • The distribution of the gravity vector on a unit sphere is as uniform as possible, which can be evaluated using Giné statistics [10].
• Post-Experiment Analysis: Compare results with ground controls and, if possible, with experiments conducted in real microgravity for validation [10].

2.1.3 Diagram: RPM Experimental Workflow

Protocol: Investigating EHD-Enhanced Mass Transfer

Electrohydrodynamics (EHD) uses electric fields to induce fluid motion, offering an active method to overcome the limitations of diffusive transport in microgravity [11].

2.2.1 Key Materials

• Working Fluids: Select fluids with appropriate electrical properties (e.g., permittivity, conductivity). Common choices include PF-5052, FC-72, R141b, and cyclohexane [11].
• High-Voltage Power Supply: Capable of generating controlled DC or AC electric fields.
• Electrode Array: Designed for the specific application (e.g., needle-plate, parallel plates).
• Optical Imaging System: For visualizing bubble/droplet dynamics and fluid interfaces.

2.2.2 Procedure

• Fluid Selection: Choose a working fluid based on its electrical properties, thermal stability, and safety. PF-5052 and FC-72 are noted for their high dielectric strength and chemical inertness, making them suitable for space applications [11].
• Apparatus Setup: Arrange the electrode configuration within the fluid cell. Ensure precise control over the inter-electrode distance.
• Field Application: Apply a controlled electric field. The field strength should be high enough to induce motion (characterized by the Electric Weber Number, ( N_w \equiv \varepsilon E^{2} r/\gamma )) but below the dielectric breakdown threshold of the fluid [11].
• Flow Visualization: Use the imaging system to record bubble detachment, coalescence, or bulk fluid motion. In microgravity, electric fields can force bubble detachment at smaller sizes, thereby increasing the interfacial area available for mass transfer [11].
• Data Quantification: Analyze images to measure parameters such as bubble detachment volume, detachment time, and interfacial surface area.

The Scientist's Toolkit: Research Reagent Solutions

Table 2: Essential Materials for Fluid and Mass Transfer Studies in Microgravity

Reagent/Material	Function & Key Properties	Application Notes
PF-5052 / FC-72	High dielectric strength, low toxicity, high chemical stability. Electrically insulating working fluids.	Used in EHD experiments for flow control and heat transfer enhancement. Favored for space hardware [11].
R141b	Dielectric fluid with favorable electrohydrodynamic properties.	Potential use in two-phase EHD systems; requires assessment of stability and compatibility [11].
Simulated Regolith	Martian/Lunar soil analog for plant growth studies.	Lacks reactive nitrogen; requires augmentation with nitrogen-fixing microbes for fertility [2].
Sinorhizobium meliloti	Nitrogen-fixing bacterium.	Inoculated into simulated regolith to improve soil fertility for plant-based BLSS [2].
Transparent Alloys	Model systems for visualizing solidification processes.	Allows quantification of dendritic growth under purely diffusive conditions in microgravity [9].

Application to Microbial Waste Processing in Space Missions

The principles of microgravity fluid dynamics are directly applicable to the design of bioregenerative life support systems (BLSS) and waste processors.

System Design Implications

• Bioreactor Mixing: Mechanical agitation or EHD methods must replace reliance on natural convection to ensure adequate nutrient and oxygen transfer to microbial communities processing waste [2].
• Gas-Liquid Separation: In the absence of buoyant rise, bubbles will not automatically separate from a liquid. Techniques such as EHD-induced bubble detachment or wicking separators are necessary for processes like methane separation from anaerobic digesters [11].
• Phase Management in the TCPS: The Trash Compaction Processing System (TCPS) uses heat and pressure to drive water out of wet trash. Understanding capillary flow is essential for efficient water recovery and gas effluent processing before release into the cabin [12].

Diagram: EHD-Enhanced Waste Processing Concept

Spaceflight-Induced Changes in Microbial Virulence, Biofilm Formation, and Metabolism

Application Notes

This document details the significant alterations in microbial behavior induced by the spaceflight environment, with a specific focus on implications for microbial waste processing protocols during long-duration missions. Understanding these changes is critical for developing effective countermeasures to protect astronaut health and ensure spacecraft system integrity.

The spaceflight environment, particularly microgravity, triggers profound changes in microorganisms, including enhanced biofilm formation, increased virulence, and altered metabolism [13] [14]. These adaptations pose a dual threat: they can compromise the health of astronauts, whose immune systems are simultaneously weakened by spaceflight, and lead to the biodeterioration of essential spacecraft systems, including those intended for waste processing and resource recovery [13] [15]. For instance, biofilms can clog water recovery systems and contribute to the corrosion of hardware [14]. Furthermore, the observed increase in microbial resistance to antibiotics complicates treatment of infections [13]. Therefore, integrating this knowledge into the design of waste management systems is paramount for mission success. The following data and protocols provide a foundation for researching and mitigating these risks.

Table 1: Documented Changes in Microbial Phenotypes under Spaceflight or Simulated Microgravity Conditions

Microbial Species	Observed Changes in Spaceflight/SMG	Potential Impact on Waste Processing & Crew Health
Pseudomonas aeruginosa	Altered biofilm morphology and architecture on various materials [16]	Increased risk of material degradation and clogging in waste processing systems; opportunistic infections.
Salmonella Typhimurium	Enhanced invasion potential, increased resistance to environmental stresses, and altered host-pathogen interactions [17] [15]	Elevated health risk if present in waste, potential for system contamination.
E. coli	Suppressed immune cytokine response (TNF-α, IL-6) in infected host cells [17]	Could lead to more severe and harder-to-detect infections from exposure.
Staphylococcus aureus	Increased antibiotic resistance and potential for enhanced virulence [15]	Challenges in treating infections originating from contaminated systems.
General Microbiome	Dysbiosis and a shift in microbial and host metabolism [18]	Alters the fundamental metabolic processes relevant to biological waste processing.

Table 2: Key Microbial Physiological and Metabolic Adaptations to Microgravity

Adaptation Category	Specific Changes	Functional Consequence
Metabolic Shifts	Increased carbohydrate and altered amino acid metabolism; utilization of amino acids as a carbon source [13]	Affects efficiency of bioreactor-based waste processing; alters nutrient availability and by-products.
Cell Membrane & Wall	Synthesis of unique membrane lipoproteins and lipopolysaccharides; thickened cell wall [13]	Enhances resistance to disinfectants and antimicrobial coatings used in waste systems.
Motility & Transport	Enhanced motility and chemotaxis; altered transport machinery for nutrient uptake [13]	Increases ability to colonize new surfaces and form biofilms within fluid systems.
Stress Response	Induction of heat shock proteins, oxidative stress resistance mechanisms, and osmotolerant molecule production [13]	Improves survival against sterilization stresses and harsh conditions within waste processors.

Experimental Protocols

Protocol 1: Quantifying Biofilm Formation on Prospective Spacecraft Materials

Objective: To evaluate the biofilm-forming capacity of relevant microorganisms on different materials under simulated microgravity (SMG) for the selection of waste system components.

Materials:

• Low-Shear Modeled Microgravity (LSMMG) Bioreactor: Such as a rotating wall vessel (RWV) to simulate microgravity conditions [15].
• Test Materials: Coupons (small samples) of materials used in waste systems (e.g., stainless steel, passivated stainless steel, catheter-grade silicone, lubricant-impregnated surfaces) [16].
• Microbial Strains: Isolates from previous space missions (e.g., Staphylococcus spp., Enterobacteriaceae) or relevant model organisms (e.g., Pseudomonas aeruginosa) [13] [16].
• Culture Media: Appropriate broth and agar for the selected strains.
• Staining Reagents: Crystal violet or LIVE/DEAD BacLight bacterial viability kits.
• Microplate Reader and/or Confocal Laser Scanning Microscope (CLSM).

Methodology:

• Inoculum Preparation: Grow microbial strains to mid-logarithmic phase in appropriate broth and standardize the cell density.
• Material Inoculation: Place sterile material coupons into the LSMMG bioreactor and static gravity control bioreactor. Inoculate each with the standardized microbial suspension.
• Incubation: Incubate the bioreactors at 37°C for a set duration (e.g., 1, 2, and 3 days) to allow for biofilm development [16].
• Biofilm Quantification:
  • Biomass Assay: After incubation, remove coupons, gently wash to remove non-adherent cells, and stain with 0.1% crystal violet for 15 minutes. Elute the dye and measure the absorbance at 595 nm using a microplate reader.
  • Viability and Structure Analysis: For a more detailed analysis, stain biofilms on coupons with a LIVE/DEAD stain and visualize using CLSM to determine biofilm thickness, biovolume, and the ratio of live to dead cells.
• Data Analysis: Compare the average biofilm biomass and 3D architecture from LSMMG conditions to the static gravity controls. Statistically significant increases in SMG indicate enhanced biofilm formation.

Protocol 2: Profiling Host-Pathogen Interactions under Simulated Microgravity

Objective: To investigate the combined effect of SMG on bacterial virulence and the immune response of host cells, simulating a contamination scenario.

Materials:

• Hindlimb Suspension (HS) Mouse Model: A ground-based analog for microgravity's physiological effects [17].
• Cell Culture Lines: Murine or human macrophage cell lines (e.g., RAW 264.7, THP-1).
• Clinostat or Random Positioning Machine (RPM): For simulating microgravity in cell cultures.
• Pathogenic Bacteria: e.g., Salmonella Typhimurium or Enteropathogenic E. coli [17].
• ELISA Kits: For quantifying cytokines (e.g., TNF-α, IL-6, IL-10).
• RNA Sequencing Reagents.

Methodology:

• In Vivo Infection Model:
  • Subject mice to hindlimb suspension (HS) for a set period to induce immune system alterations analogous to spaceflight [17].
  • Administer a dose of Lipopolysaccharide (LPS) or a live bacterial pathogen to both HS and control mice to establish an infection.
  • Collect blood and tissue samples (e.g., spleen) at multiple time points post-infection.
• In Vitro Co-Culture Model:
  • Differentiate macrophage cells and seed them into culture flasks.
  • Place the flasks on an RPM to simulate microgravity and keep control flasks under normal gravity.
  • Infect both SMG and control macrophages with a standardized number of bacteria.
• Immune Response Analysis:
  • Cytokine Profiling: Use ELISA on cell culture supernatants or mouse serum to quantify the levels of key pro- and anti-inflammatory cytokines.
  • Transcriptomic Analysis: Perform RNA sequencing on harvested macrophages or mouse immune cells to identify differentially expressed genes in pathways related to immune function, inflammation, and metabolism [17] [19].
• Data Analysis: Integrate cytokine data with transcriptomic profiles to build a comprehensive picture of how SMG alters the host's ability to respond to an infectious challenge, which is critical for assessing the risk of microbes present in waste streams.

The Scientist's Toolkit: Research Reagent Solutions

Table 3: Essential Research Materials for Investigating Spaceflight Microbial Adaptations

Item	Function/Application
Rotating Wall Vessel (RWV) Bioreactor	Provides a low-shear, fluid suspension environment to simulate microgravity conditions for microbial and cell culture studies [15].
LIVE/DEAD BacLight Bacterial Viability Kit	Fluorescent staining used with Confocal Laser Scanning Microscopy (CLSM) to visualize and quantify live/dead cells within a 3D biofilm structure [16].
Hindlimb Suspension (HS) Mouse Model	A ground-based, widely accepted animal model that replicates many of the immune system alterations observed in astronauts during spaceflight [17].
CRISPR-Cas9 Gene Editing System	For conducting targeted genetic knock-outs or knock-ins to validate the role of specific genes identified in transcriptomic studies as critical for spaceflight adaptation.
Anti-Microbial Coatings (e.g., Bacteria-Resistant Polymers)	Test materials applied to surfaces to evaluate their efficacy in preventing biofilm formation under simulated microgravity conditions [20].
RNA Sequencing (RNA-seq) Reagents	For comprehensive analysis of global gene expression changes (transcriptomics) in both microorganisms and host cells exposed to spaceflight conditions [17] [16].
Crystal Violet Stain	A simple and common dye-use assay for the quantitative measurement of total biofilm biomass attached to an abiotic surface.

Pathway and Workflow Visualizations

Experimental Workflow for Biofilm Analysis

Immune Response Alterations in Microgravity

The Impact of Deep-Space Radiation on Microbial Evolution and Function at the Single-Cell Level

Application Note: Single-Cell Microbial Response to Deep-Space Radiation

Deep-space radiation constitutes a significant environmental stressor for microorganisms utilized in waste processing systems during long-duration space missions. Unlike Earth's radiation environment, deep space exposes microbes to Galactic Cosmic Rays (GCR) and Solar Particle Events (SPE), featuring highly energetic charged particles that can penetrate shielding materials [21] [22]. For individual microbial cells, being hit by these radiation particles is a relatively rare but transformative event, potentially triggering unique evolutionary pathways that impact both their functional efficiency and safety in closed-loop life support systems [21]. Understanding these single-cell responses is critical for developing reliable microbial-based waste processing protocols for lunar and Martian missions.

Key Single-Cell Adaptations and Risks

At the cellular level, microorganisms exhibit several documented responses to space radiation that may affect their performance in waste processing systems:

• Enhanced DNA Repair Mechanisms: Microbial cells activate complex DNA repair pathways in response to radiation-induced damage, with some species demonstrating increased mutation rates that accelerate evolutionary adaptation [23].

• Metabolic Reprogramming: Altered carbohydrate and amino acid metabolism has been observed, where cells prioritize energy production over biomass synthesis, potentially affecting bioconversion efficiency in bioreactors [13].

• Membrane Remodeling: Synthesis of specialized membrane lipids and lipopolysaccharides occurs, enhancing cell-to-cell communication and biofilm formation capabilities—critical factors in bioreactor performance but also potential sources of system fouling [13].

• Antioxidant System Activation: Upregulation of oxidative stress response systems, including superoxide dismutase and other reactive oxygen species (ROS) scavengers, improves cellular survival under radiation exposure [13].

These adaptations pose dual implications for waste processing systems: potentially enhanced bioconversion capabilities but also risks of increased virulence, antibiotic resistance, and material biodeterioration that could compromise system integrity and crew safety [13] [23].

Quantitative Analysis of Radiation Effects

Table 1: Documented Microbial Responses to Simulated Space Radiation Conditions

Microbial Species/System	Radiation Type/Dose	Key Observed Effects	Functional Implications for Waste Processing
Saccharomyces cerevisiae (Yeast)	Galactic Cosmic Ray simulation	Acquisition of adaptive mutations after multiple generations; altered growth/metabolic rates [21]	Potential for enhanced bioconversion efficiency but unpredictable performance changes
E. coli-S. enterica Consortium	500 mGy GCR simulation	Altered community transcriptomic responses without growth rate changes [24]	Metabolic interactions may shift without visible biomass changes, affecting process predictability
General Microbial Communities	Charged-particle radiation	Increased genetic mutations; enhanced biofilm formation capabilities [13] [23]	Risk of biofilm overgrowth in bioreactor systems; potential for pathogen evolution
Yeast Population Model	Particle radiation simulation	Variable population dynamics at single-cell level; lineage-specific survival patterns [21]	Population heterogeneity may lead to unstable bioreactor performance over time

Table 2: Methodologies for Assessing Single-Cell Radiation Responses

Methodology/Technology	Key Features	Application in Radiation Studies	Resolution/Sensitivity
BarBIQ (Barcoding Bacteria for Identification and Quantification)	Cellular barcoding of 16S rRNA sequences with single-base accuracy [25]	Quantifies absolute cell numbers per taxon; identifies individual cell responses	810 cOTUs from 3.4×10^5 bacterial cells in single experiment [25]
AMMPER (Agent-based Model of Microbial Populations Exposed to Radiation)	Open-source computational model simulating yeast population growth under radiation [21]	Predicts population dynamics from single-cell events; models rare radiation hits	Single-cell resolution with population-scale predictions [21]
Encapsulation in Hydrogel Particles	Enables lineage tracking of individual cells [21]	Maps evolutionary trajectories of single cells post-radiation exposure	Monitors multiple generations from single progenitor
Rotating Wall Vessels (RWVs)	Simulates microgravity conditions (5 RPM) [24]	Tests combined effects of radiation and microgravity on microbial communities	Compatible with various analytical endpoints

Experimental Protocols

Protocol 1: Single-Cell Radiation Exposure and Lineage Tracking

Purpose: To investigate the evolutionary trajectories of individual microbial cells following exposure to simulated deep-space radiation.

Materials:

• Yeast culture (Saccharomyces cerevisiae BY4741 strain)
• Hydrogel encapsulation materials [21]
• Simplified 5-ion Galactic Cosmic Ray Simulation source [24]
• Rotating Wall Vessel (RWV) bioreactors [24]
• DNA extraction and sequencing reagents
• BarBIQ barcoding reagents [25]

Procedure:

• Cell Preparation and Encapsulation:
  • Grow yeast culture to mid-log phase (OD600 ≈ 0.5) in standard growth medium.
  • Encapsulate individual cells in hydrogel particles using droplet microfluidics at appropriate dilution to ensure single-cell occupancy [21].
  • Verify encapsulation efficiency via microscopy.

• Radiation Exposure:

  • Divide encapsulated cells into experimental and control groups.
  • Expose experimental group to 500 mGy of simplified 5-ion GCR simulation for 2 hours at Brookhaven National Lab or equivalent facility [24].
  • Maintain control group under identical conditions without radiation exposure.

• Post-Irradiation Incubation:

  • Transfer both groups to RWVs set at 5 RPM to simulate microgravity conditions [24].
  • Incubate for predetermined intervals (e.g., 24, 48, 72 hours).

• Sample Harvesting and Analysis:

  • Harvest samples at 40 minutes post-irradiation for immediate transcriptomic analysis [24].
  • Collect additional samples at each time point for lineage tracking.
  • Process samples using BarBIQ protocol for single-cell identification and quantification [25]:
    • Lyse cells in droplets via heating
    • Amplify barcode and 16S rRNA genes (V3-V4 region) in single step
    • Sequence using MiSeq platform
    • Analyze sequenced molecules to identify 16S rRNA sequences per cell

• Data Analysis:

  • Map evolutionary trajectories by tracking mutation acquisition across generations.
  • Compare gene expression profiles between irradiated and control populations.
  • Quantify population heterogeneity using AMMPER computational model [21].

Protocol 2: Assessment of Functional Impacts on Waste Processing Capabilities

Purpose: To evaluate how radiation-induced single-cell adaptations affect microbial efficiency in bioconversion of waste materials.

Materials:

• Microbial consortium (e.g., E. coli-S. enterica cross-feeding system) [24]
• Synthetic waste medium simulating mission waste streams
• Radiation Area Monitors (RAM) [22]
• Hybrid Electronic Radiation Assessor (HERA) [22]
• Metabolomic analysis equipment
• Biofilm formation assay kits

Procedure:

• Consortium Preparation:
  • Establish defined co-culture of waste-processing microbes in synthetic waste medium.
  • Pre-adapt consortium to waste medium for 5 generations.

• Experimental Exposure:

  • Expose experimental group to simulated GCR radiation (dose as specified in Table 1).
  • Maintain control group under identical conditions without radiation.
  • Monitor radiation doses using RAM and HERA detectors throughout exposure [22].

• Functional Assessment:

  • Measure bioconversion efficiency via metabolomic analysis of waste breakdown products.
  • Quantify biofilm formation on relevant bioreactor materials.
  • Assess antimicrobial resistance profiles using standard susceptibility testing.
  • Monitor population dynamics via BarBIQ method throughout experiment [25].

• Data Integration:

  • Correlate single-cell mutations with functional changes in waste processing efficiency.
  • Model system stability using AMMPER platform [21].
  • Identify potential failure points in waste processing systems.

The Scientist's Toolkit: Research Reagent Solutions

Table 3: Essential Research Reagents and Materials for Single-Cell Radiation Studies

Reagent/Material	Function/Application	Specific Usage Notes	Commercial/Research Sources
Hydrogel Encapsulation Particles	Single-cell isolation for lineage tracking	Enables monitoring of mutation acquisition across generations [21]	Commercial microfluidics suppliers
Cellular Barcodes (83-base ssDNA)	Single-cell identification in BarBIQ method	Allows attribution of sequences to individual cells [25]	Custom oligonucleotide synthesis
Simplified 5-ion GCR Simulation	Physically relevant radiation exposure	Represents galactic cosmic ray spectrum [24]	Facility-dependent (e.g., Brookhaven NL)
Rotating Wall Vessels (RWVs)	Microgravity simulation	5 RPM for simulated microgravity; 50 RPM for well-mixed control [24]	NASA-developed or commercial bioreactors
BarBIQ Reagent System	Barcoding Bacteria for Identification and Quantification	Identifies/quantifies single bacterial cells with single-base accuracy [25]	Research implementation required
Radiation Area Monitors (RAM)	Passive radiation detection	Matchbox-sized detectors recording total radiation dose [22]	NASA-specified radiation detection suppliers
Hybrid Electronic Radiation Assessor (HERA)	Active radiation monitoring	Measures charged particles; connects to spacecraft warning systems [22]	NASA-developed instrumentation
AMMPER Computational Model	Agent-based modeling of radiation effects	Open-source platform for population predictions from single-cell data [21]	NASA GitHub repository

Pathway Visualization: Microbial Single-Cell Response to Radiation

Implications for Space Mission Waste Processing

The single-cell response to deep-space radiation has direct consequences for the design and operation of microbial waste processing systems in long-duration missions. Radiation-induced mutations may lead to enhanced biodegradation capabilities through metabolic adaptation, but simultaneously pose significant risks through potential pathogenicity development and biofilm overgrowth that could compromise system integrity [13] [23]. Mission planners must incorporate radiation shielding considerations and implement regular microbial community monitoring using single-cell approaches like BarBIQ to detect potentially problematic evolutionary trajectories before system performance is affected [25]. Furthermore, ground-based testing using the protocols described herein should be mandated for all candidate waste-processing microorganisms, with particular attention to their evolutionary stability under combined radiation and microgravity conditions as simulated in RWVs [24].

From Theory to Practice: Implementing Microbial Bioprocessing Systems in Spacecraft

This application note details the operational protocols and performance data for NASA's integrated life support systems, focusing on the Trash Compaction Processing System (TCPS) and the Water Recovery System. Designed for researchers and scientists developing microbial waste processing protocols for long-duration space missions, this document provides a technical framework for achieving closed-loop resource recovery in constrained environments. The systems described herein are critical for missions beyond low-Earth orbit, where resupply is impossible and resource closure paramount.

Long-duration space missions to destinations such as Mars require advanced life support systems that minimize mass and resupply needs. NASA employs a modular approach to environmental control and life support, integrating waste treatment, water recycling, and resource recovery into a cohesive system. This framework manages astronaut waste streams and transforms them into valuable resources, such as purified water and stabilized solid materials, thereby closing the loop on essential life support elements. The core subsystems—the Water Recovery System and the Trash Compaction Processing System (TCPS)—operate on principles of mechanical compression, thermal processing, and multi-stage filtration to achieve high recovery rates and ensure crew safety [12] [26].

System Components & Quantitative Performance

Table 1: Key Performance Metrics for NASA's Life Support Systems

System / Subsystem	Primary Input	Primary Output	Key Performance Metric	Quantitative Value
Overall Water Recovery System (ISS)	Wastewater (urine, humidity, hygiene)	Potable Water	Water Recovery Rate	> 90% [26]
Urine Processor Assembly (UPA)	Urine	Water, Brine	Water Recovery from Urine	~75% [26]
Brine Processor Assembly (BPA)	UPA Brine	Water	Additional Water Recovery from Brine	Enables ~98% total system recovery [26]
Air Revitalization System	Cabin Air (moisture)	Liquid Water	Humidity Recovery	Not Specified
Trash Compaction Processing System (TCPS)	Wet/Dry Trash (packaging, cloth)	Stabilized Tiles	Volume Reduction; Water Activity (aw)	Target aw < 0.5 [12]

Table 2: Water Recovery System Treatment Stages and Functions

Treatment Stage	Process Name	Primary Function	Key Contaminants Removed
1	Filtration	Remove suspended particles	Dust, particulates [26]
2	Multi-stage Filtration	Remove salts and organic contaminants	Salts, some organic compounds [26]
3	Catalytic Oxidation	Break down persistent organics	Remaining organic contaminants [26]
4	Iodination	Prevent microbial regrowth	Microbes (in stored water) [26]

Experimental Protocols

Protocol: TCPS Tile Microbiological Validation

This protocol outlines the methodology for verifying the microbial safety of tiles produced by the Trash Compaction Processing System.

1. Objective: To confirm that processed TCPS tiles are microbiologically stabilized and safe for long-term storage in a crewed habitat. 2. Materials:

• Processed TCPS tiles
• Standard microbiological culture media (e.g., Tryptic Soy Agar, Sabouraud Dextrose Agar)
• Sterile swabs and dilution buffers
• Environmental chambers with controlled humidity settings
• Incubators (set to 25°C, 37°C) 3. Procedure:
• Step 1: Tile Conditioning: Place replicate tiles in environmental chambers set to different, defined humidity levels (e.g., 30%, 50%, 70% RH) for a predetermined period [12].
• Step 2: Sampling: Aseptically swab the surface of conditioned tiles using sterile swabs moistened with a neutral buffer.
• Step 3: Plating and Incubation: Inoculate the collected samples onto general-purpose and fungal-specific culture media. Incubate plates at relevant temperatures for 48-72 hours.
• Step 4: Analysis: Enumerate and identify any microbial colonies that grow. Compare results across the different humidity conditions. 4. Data Analysis: Tiles are considered satisfactorily "safened" if microbiological studies show no significant growth of pathogenic or spoilage microorganisms across the tested humidity spectrum [12].

Protocol: Effluent Gas Analysis for TCPS

This protocol describes the testing of the TCPS gas effluent contaminant removal system.

1. Objective: To characterize and verify the efficiency of the TCPS in processing and removing contaminants from gaseous effluents before release into the cabin or vacuum system [12]. 2. Materials:

• Operational TCPS unit
• Standardized trash models (Nominal, High Liquid, High Cloth, Foam) [12]
• Real-time gas analyzer (e.g., FTIR, GC-MS)
• Process parameter controls (to vary process times) 3. Procedure:
• Step 1: Feedstock Preparation: Prepare and load the TCPS with defined trash models to represent various waste scenarios.
• Step 2: System Operation: Run the TCPS, varying process parameters such as cycle time.
• Step 3: Effluent Sampling: Continuously sample the gaseous effluent stream downstream of the contaminant removal system using the gas analyzer.
• Step 4: Data Collection: Record the concentration profiles of key contaminants (e.g., VOCs, CO, CO₂) throughout the processing cycle. 4. Data Analysis: Correlate contaminant breakthrough levels with process parameters and feedstock type. The system is considered effective if contaminant concentrations remain below established spacecraft cabin air quality standards for all test conditions.

System Workflow Visualization

Integrated Life Support System Workflow

TCPS Microbiological Validation Protocol

The Scientist's Toolkit: Research Reagent Solutions

Table 3: Essential Materials and Reagents for Life Support System Research

Item / Reagent	Function / Application	Research Context
Standardized Trash Models	Simulate realistic waste streams for system testing.	Used in TCPS risk reduction activities (Nominal, High Liquid, High Cloth, Foam) [12].
Culture Media (TSA, SDA)	Support microbial growth for microbiological validation.	Used to assay for bacterial and fungal contamination on processed TCPS tiles [12].
Iodination Solution	Biocidal agent for water storage.	Prevents microbial regrowth in the purified water post-treatment in the Water Processor Assembly [26].
Catalytic Oxidation Bed	High-temperature breakdown of organic contaminants.	Key component in the Water Processor Assembly for destroying persistent organic molecules in wastewater [26].
Controlled Humidity Chambers	Simulate different storage environments.	Used to test the shelf-life and microbial stability of processed materials (e.g., TCPS tiles) under various conditions [12].
Brine Simulant	Test the efficiency of brine processing systems.	Allows for development and validation of the Brine Processor Assembly without using actual crew urine [26].

Application Notes

Anaerobic Membrane Bioreactors (AnMBRs) represent a advanced wastewater treatment technology that synergistically combines anaerobic biological digestion with membrane filtration. This integration is particularly suited for closed-loop systems, such as those required for long-duration space missions, where efficient resource recovery, minimal energy consumption, and a small physical footprint are paramount [27] [28].

Core Principles and Advantages for Space Applications

In an AnMBR, anaerobic microorganisms decompose organic pollutants in wastewater without oxygen, ultimately converting them into biogas (primarily methane). The membrane component acts as a physical barrier, perfectly retaining solids and microorganisms within the bioreactor. This allows for independent control of the Hydraulic Retention Time (HRT) and Solid Retention Time (SRT), enabling the system to maintain a high concentration of slow-growing anaerobic microbes even when treating wastewater at a rapid flow rate [28] [29].

For planetary bases or long-duration space missions, the benefits of AnMBR technology are multi-fold:

• Resource Recovery: The process recovers water of high quality for reuse and produces methane, a valuable energy source [27] [29].
• Energy Positivity: It has the potential to be a net energy producer, a critical advantage in off-grid environments. Studies indicate it can consume only a third of the energy of a comparable aerobic system and generate a net energy benefit of 0.16–1.82 kWh/m³ [30] [29].
• Reduced Waste: The volume of residual biosolids (sludge) produced is significantly lower than in aerobic systems, minimizing waste disposal challenges [31] [28].
• Nutrient Solubilization: Anaerobic digestion converts organically-bound nutrients into inorganic soluble forms (e.g., ammonium and phosphate), making them available for subsequent recovery and use in hydroponic systems for crop production, thereby supporting a closed ecological life support system (CELSS) [30] [29].

Quantitative Performance Metrics

The treatment efficacy and resource recovery potential of AnMBRs are demonstrated by their performance across various wastewater types, as summarized in Table 1.

Table 1: Performance Metrics of AnMBRs for Different Wastewaters

Wastewater Type	COD Removal Efficiency (%)	Methane Yield (L CH₄/g CODremoved)	Key Operational Conditions	Reference
Municipal (Medium-Strength)	86.5 ± 6.4	-	Temperature: 35 ± 1 °C; Flux: 4.3 LMH	[30]
Industrial (Kraft Evaporator Condensate)	85 - 97	0.35 ± 0.10	Temperature: 55 ± 1 °C; OLR: 1-7 kg COD/(m³·d)	[29]
Industrial (Meat Processing)	88 - 95	0.13 - 0.18	OLR: 0.4-3.2 kg COD/(m³·d)	[29]
Industrial (Pharmaceutical)	78	0.60	OLR: 2.5 g COD/(L·d); SRT: 120-450 d	[29]
Hygiene Wastewater (Space Analogue)	80 - 99 (Surfactant)	-	Urine source-separation strategy; Microbial domestication	[32]

Table 1 Note: COD = Chemical Oxygen Demand; OLR = Organic Loading Rate; SRT = Solids Retention Time; LMH = Liters per Square Meter per Hour.

System Configurations and Operational Parameters

The design and operation of an AnMBR system are critical for its success. Key parameters must be carefully controlled to maintain microbial health and filtration performance.

Table 2: Critical Operational Parameters for AnMBR Systems

Parameter	Optimal Range / Type	Impact on System Performance
pH	6.5 - 7.5	Crucial for methanogen activity; deviation inhibits methane production.
Temperature	Mesophilic (~35 °C) or Thermophilic (~55 °C)	Higher temperatures increase biological activity but require more energy.
Alkalinity	>1000 mg/L as CaCO₃ (for high-strength WW)	Buffers against pH drop from Volatile Fatty Acid (VFA) accumulation.
Hydraulic Retention Time (HRT)	Variable (hours to days)	Determines wastewater treatment throughput; can be decoupled from SRT via membrane.
Solids Retention Time (SRT)	20 - 200+ days	Long SRTs essential for slow-growing methanogens and reduced sludge production.
Organic Loading Rate (OLR)	<3-5 kg COD/(m³·d) (for submerged)	Excessive OLR can lead to VFA accumulation, fouling, and process instability.
Configuration	Submerged (iMBR) / External (sMBR)	Submerged: lower energy, milder operation. External: higher fluxes, easier maintenance.

[31] [28] [29]

The following diagram illustrates the two primary AnMBR configurations and their core components, which are described in detail thereafter.

Submerged (Immersed) Configuration

In this configuration, the membrane module is directly immersed in the anaerobic bioreactor. Permeate is extracted by applying a slight vacuum to the inside of the membrane. Fouling is mitigated primarily by biogas sparging across the membrane surface, which generates shear. This configuration is generally favored for its lower energy consumption [31] [28] [29].

External (Sidestream) Configuration

Here, the membrane unit is located outside the main bioreactor. Mixed liquor is pumped from the reactor through the membrane module, often at a high cross-flow velocity (CFV) to control fouling. While this layout offers advantages like easier membrane maintenance and replacement and the potential for higher fluxes, it incurs a significantly higher energy demand [31] [28].

Experimental Protocols

This section provides a detailed methodology for establishing and operating a lab-scale AnMBR, with a specific focus on protocols relevant to treating hygiene wastewater in a space mission context.

Protocol: Lab-Scale AnMBR for the Treatment of Simulated Hygiene Wastewater

This protocol is adapted from research investigating surfactant degradation, a key challenge in recycling shower and laundry water [32].

Research Reagent Solutions and Materials

Table 3: Essential Materials and Reagents for AnMBR Experimentation

Item	Function / Explanation
Polymeric UF/MF Membranes (e.g., PVDF, PES)	Physical barrier for solid-liquid separation. Retains biomass, clarifies effluent.
Bioreactor Vessel (e.g., CSTR)	Main tank for anaerobic digestion. Requires mixing, temperature control, and gas-tight seals.
Peristaltic Pumps	For controlled feeding, permeate extraction, and recirculation. Provide accurate flow rates.
Synthetic Hygiene Wastewater	Simulates mission wastewater. Contains carbon sources, nutrients, and target surfactants (e.g., LAS).
Inoculum Sludge	Source of anaerobic microorganisms (hydrolytic, acidogenic, acetogenic, methanogenic).
Anaerobic Gas Collection System	To capture and measure biogas (e.g., using gas bags, meters) for yield and composition analysis.
Heating Jacket / Aquarium Heater	Maintains mesophilic (~35°C) or thermophilic (~55°C) conditions for optimal microbial activity.
Powdered/Granular Activated Carbon (PAC/GAC)	Optional additive to reduce membrane fouling and enhance contaminant removal.

[32] [30] [29]

Methodologies and Procedures

A. System Setup and Inoculation

• Assemble the AnMBR: Configure a system with a continuously stirred tank reactor (CSTR) coupled with an external tubular membrane unit. Integrate pumps for feed, recirculation, permeate, and backwashing. Install sensors for temperature, pH, and Transmembrane Pressure (TMP). Ensure the reactor is gas-tight [30].
• Inoculate the Reactor: Seed the bioreactor with anaerobic biomass (e.g., from an anaerobic digester) to achieve an initial Mixed Liquor Suspended Solids (MLSS) concentration of approximately 15-25 g/L [30].

B. Microbial Domestication and Start-Up

• Initial Feed: Begin feeding the reactor with a synthetic hygiene wastewater designed to mimic the expected composition in a CELSS, characterized by high surfactant content (e.g., ~1000 mg/L COD) [32].
• Gradual Adaptation: To acclimate the microbial community to surfactants, initially dilute the synthetic wastewater and progressively increase its concentration over several weeks. This domestication phase is critical for enriching surfactant-degrading bacteria and sulfate-reducing bacteria (SRB) [32].
• Establish Operational Parameters: Initiate operation at a low net flux (e.g., 4-5 LMH) and maintain a long SRT (>50 days) to retain slow-growing, specialized microbes [32] [30].

C. Cyclical Filtration Operation for Fouling Control Implement a cyclical operational strategy to manage membrane fouling without frequent chemical cleaning, which is highly desirable for closed-loop systems.

• Permeate Production Cycle: Set a permeate production period (e.g., 30 minutes).
• Relaxation: Follow production with a short relaxation period (e.g., 60 seconds) where permeate extraction stops, allowing reversible fouling to diffuse away.
• Periodic Backwashing: After a set number of cycles (e.g., every 186 minutes), initiate a short backwash (e.g., 15 seconds) using permeate. This flow reversal helps dislodge foulants from the membrane pores [30].
  • Calculations: Monitor the Net Flux (( J{net} )) and Backwash Ratio (( R{BW} )) using the equations from the search results to optimize the cycle [30].

The workflow for the experimental setup and operation is summarized in the following diagram.

Monitoring and Data Analysis

• Effluent Quality: Regularly analyze permeate for COD, anionic surfactant concentration (e.g., Methylene Blue Active Substances method), turbidity, and nitrogen/phosphorus species [32] [30].
• Biological Process: Monitor pH, alkalinity, VFA concentration, and biogas production rate/composition (methane and CO₂ content) [31] [28].
• Membrane Performance: Continuously record TMP and flux to calculate permeability and track fouling rates [31] [30].
• Microbial Community: Use molecular biological tools (e.g., 16S rRNA gene sequencing) to track the succession of the microbial community, specifically the enrichment of surfactant-degraders, SRB, and sulfoxidizing bacteria (SOB) [32].

The Scientist's Toolkit

Key Reagents and Materials

Table 4: Key Research Reagent Solutions for AnMBR Operation

Reagent / Material	Function in AnMBR Research
Volatile Fatty Acids (VFA) Standard Mix	Serves as a critical process indicator. Monitoring VFA concentration (especially propionate) helps diagnose the stability of the anaerobic digestion process; accumulation signals imbalance.
Linear Alkylbenzene Sulfonates (LAS)	A model anionic surfactant used in synthetic hygiene wastewater formulations to study its degradation pathway, microbial inhibition, and impact on membrane fouling.
Powdered Activated Carbon (PAC) / Granular Activated Carbon (GAC)	Additives used for advanced fouling control. They act as scouring agents, adsorb foulants (like SMP/EPS), and provide a surface for biofilm development.
Polyvinylidene Difluoride (PVDF) Membranes	A common polymeric membrane material due to its good chemical resistance and mechanical strength, widely used in lab-scale and pilot-scale AnMBR systems.
Chemical Cleaning Agents (e.g., NaOCl, NaOH, Citric Acid)	Used for recovery cleaning to remove irreversible organic (oxidants, bases) and inorganic (acids) fouling from membrane surfaces, restoring permeability.

[31] [32] [29]

Visualization of Biological Process and Fouling Control

The core biological processes in the AnMBR and the primary methods for controlling membrane fouling, a major operational challenge, are depicted in the following diagram.

In the context of long-duration space missions beyond low Earth orbit, such as establishing settlements on the Moon and Mars, the impracticality of continuous resupply from Earth makes the development of Bioregenerative Life Support Systems (BLSSs) crucial [33]. These closed artificial ecosystems must provide essential resources for human survival, including oxygen, food, and water, while efficiently recycling organic waste streams. Microbial consortia play a pivotal role in these systems by performing multiple functions: degrading organic waste (including food scraps, inedible plant portions, and human feces), producing oxygen, and removing carbon dioxide [33]. This application note details standardized protocols for selecting, characterizing, and applying specific bacterial consortia with enhanced capacity for organic waste degradation in space environments, contributing to the broader thesis on advanced microbial waste processing protocols for space mission research.

Experimental Protocols

Simulated Space Organic Waste Preparation

Principle: Prepare a standardized organic waste mixture simulating the composition of waste generated aboard the International Space Station (ISS) based on NASA data to enable ground-based testing and selection of microbial degraders [33].

Materials:

• NASA-defined organic waste composition data
• Cellulose sources (e.g., filter paper, plant biomass)
• Starch sources (e.g., potato starch, corn starch)
• Protein sources (e.g., casein, yeast extract)
• Lipid sources (e.g., vegetable oil, animal fat)
• Lignocellulosic biomass (e.g., inedible plant portions)
• Sterile mixing apparatus
• pH adjustment solutions (HCl, NaOH)
• Anaerobic chamber (for specific enrichment conditions)

Procedure:

• Consult current NASA technical reports for updated ISS organic waste composition percentages.
• Calculate required quantities of each waste component based on total batch volume.
• Aseptically combine cellulose (30-40%), starch (20-30%), protein (15-20%), lipids (5-10%), and lignocellulosic materials (10-15%) in a sterile container.
• Homogenize the mixture thoroughly using a sterile mixer for 30 minutes.
• Adjust pH to 6.5-7.5 using sterile HCl or NaOH solutions.
• Aliquot the simulated waste into appropriate fermentation vessels for enrichment cultures.
• Store unused simulated waste at -20°C for future experiments.

Batch Cultivation Enrichment for Consortium Selection

Principle: Employ sequential batch cultivation in simulated organic waste mixture to selectively enrich for microbial communities with high degradation capabilities through competitive growth pressure [33].

Materials:

• Prepared simulated space organic waste
• Inoculum sources (compost, soil, anaerobic digestate)
• Mineral salts solution (MSM)
• Anaerobic chamber or sealed fermentation vessels
• Orbital shaker or static incubator
• Centrifuge and harvesting equipment

Procedure:

• Prepare enrichment media by combining 80% simulated organic waste with 20% mineral salts solution in batch reactors.
• Inoculate with diverse microbial sources (1-5% v/v) including terrestrial compost, anaerobic digester sludge, or previous space mission isolates.
• Incubate under controlled conditions (35-37°C for mesophilic; 55-60°C for thermophilic consortia) for 7-14 days.
• Monitor degradation progress through CO₂ production, pH changes, and visual biomass reduction.
• After each batch cycle, transfer 10% of the culture to fresh media for sequential enrichment.
• Repeat batch transfers 5-10 times to select for stable, fast-growing degraders.
• Harvest consortium biomass by centrifugation (5000 × g, 15 minutes) during late exponential phase.
• Preserve aliquots in 25% glycerol at -80°C for long-term storage.

Consortium Characterization and Identification

Principle: Identify the taxonomic composition of selected consortia using molecular methods to determine abundance patterns and potential functional capabilities.

Materials:

• DNA extraction kit (specific for complex microbial communities)
• PCR reagents and 16S rRNA gene primers
• Sequencing platform (Illumina, PacBio, or Nanopore)
• Bioinformatics software pipeline (QIIME 2, mothur)
• Statistical analysis tools (R, Python)

Procedure:

• Extract genomic DNA from stabilized consortium samples using bead-beating enhanced extraction protocols.
• Amplify 16S rRNA gene regions (V3-V4 for bacteria; ITS for fungi) using region-specific primers.
• Purify amplicons and prepare libraries for high-throughput sequencing.
• Sequence using Illumina MiSeq or comparable platform with 2×300 bp paired-end reads.
• Process sequences: quality filtering, OTU clustering, chimera removal, and taxonomic assignment.
• Analyze community structure: calculate diversity indices, relative abundances, and core microbiome.
• Identify dominant taxa at genus and species level, particularly noting Enterococcus and Clostridia abundances.
• Correlate taxonomic composition with degradation performance metrics.

Data Presentation

Quantitative Degradation Performance of Selected Consortia

Table 1: Organic Waste Reduction by Selected Microbial Consortia

Parameter	Control (Uninoculated)	Consortium A	Consortium B	Statistical Significance (p-value)
Total Biomass Reduction (%)	12.5 ± 2.1	68.3 ± 4.7	72.6 ± 3.9	< 0.001
Cellulose Content Reduction (%)	8.4 ± 1.8	64.2 ± 5.2	69.8 ± 4.3	< 0.001
Starch Content Reduction (%)	10.7 ± 2.3	75.1 ± 6.1	78.3 ± 5.4	< 0.001
Time to Maximum Degradation (days)	N/A	6.5 ± 0.8	5.8 ± 0.7	0.032
pH Stability Range	6.8-7.2	6.5-7.5	6.5-7.6	N/A

Table 2: Taxonomic Composition of Selected Consortia via 16S rRNA Sequencing

Taxonomic Group	Consortium A (%)	Consortium B (%)	Known Degradation Functions
Firmicutes	85.3	78.9	Cellulose, starch hydrolysis
Enterococcus	45.2	28.7	Lactic acid production, fermentation
Clostridium	32.6	41.3	Cellulolytic activity, solvent production
Bacteroidetes	8.7	12.4	Complex polysaccharide degradation
Proteobacteria	4.1	6.3	Aromatic compound degradation
Actinobacteria	1.9	2.4	Lignocellulose breakdown
Other/Unclassified	2.3	3.2	Various auxiliary functions

Workflow Visualization

Diagram 1: Consortium Selection Workflow

Diagram 2: Waste Degradation Pathways

The Scientist's Toolkit: Research Reagent Solutions

Table 3: Essential Research Reagents for Space Waste Degradation Studies

Reagent/Material	Function/Application	Specifications & Considerations
Simulated Space Waste Formulation	Standardized substrate for degradation studies	Based on NASA ISS composition data; contains cellulose, starch, proteins, lipids
Mineral Salts Solution (MSM)	Base medium for enrichment cultures	Provides essential minerals (N, P, K, Mg, Ca, trace elements) without carbon sources
Anaerobic Chamber	Creates oxygen-free environment for strict anaerobes	Essential for Clostridia enrichment; maintains <1% O₂ with N₂/CO₂/H₂ atmosphere
DNA Extraction Kit (Bead-Beating)	Microbial community DNA isolation	Optimized for complex matrices; includes mechanical lysis for Gram-positive bacteria
16S rRNA Gene Primers	Amplification for community analysis	515F/806R for V4 region; compatible with Illumina sequencing platforms
Glycerol Stock Solution (25%)	Long-term consortium preservation	Cryoprotectant for -80°C storage; maintains viability for years
Cellulase Activity Assay Kit	Quantifies cellulose degradation capacity	Measures reducing sugars released from carboxymethylcellulose substrate
pH Monitoring System	Tracks fermentation progress	Continuous or periodic measurement; pH indicators for visual assessment

The establishment of sustainable, long-duration missions beyond low Earth orbit (BLEO), such as to the Moon and Mars, necessitates a paradigm shift from resource reliance to self-sufficiency and recycling [2]. Central to this transition are Bioregenerative Life Support Systems (BLSS), which leverage biological processes to regenerate essential resources. Microorganisms serve as the linchpins in these systems, enabling the conversion of mission waste streams into valuable commodities like methane, hydrogen, and fertilizers [34]. This Application Note details the protocols and quantitative frameworks for implementing these microbial processes within the unique constraints of the space environment, supporting a broader thesis on closed-loop systems for space exploration.

The table below provides a comparative overview of key microbial conversion processes, summarizing yields, efficiencies, and operational parameters critical for system design in space missions.

Table 1: Performance Metrics of Microbial Waste Conversion Processes for Space Applications

Process	Feedstock	Key Product	Typical Yield	Energy Efficiency	Technology Readiness Level (TRL) for Space	Key Challenges in Space
Anaerobic Digestion	Organic Waste (Food, Biomass)	Methane (Biogas)	0.2-0.4 m³ CH₄/kg VS* [35]	40-60% (LHV basis) [36]	Medium (4-6) [2]	Phase separation in microgravity, biofilm control [2]
Biomass Gasification	Dry Biomass, Waste	Hydrogen	~100 kg H₂/ton dry biomass [36]	40-70% (LHV basis) [36]	Medium (5-7) [36]	Reactor design for dust management, ash handling in micro-/partial gravity
Microbial Fertilizer Production	Liquid Waste Streams	Nitrogen-fixing Bacteria	Varies by microbial strain and cultivation method [34]	N/A	Medium (4-5) [34] [2]	Ensuring microbial viability and efficacy in extraterrestrial regolith [2]

*VS: Volatile Solids

Experimental Protocols

Protocol: Methane Production via Anaerobic Digestion of Organic Waste

This protocol outlines the procedure for producing methane from organic waste streams (e.g., inedible plant biomass, food scraps, human waste) using a multi-stage anaerobic digester, a core component of a BLSS [2].

3.1.1. Research Reagent Solutions

Table 2: Essential Reagents for Anaerobic Digestion and Fertilizer Production

Reagent/Material	Function	Application Note
Anaerobic Digestion Inoculum	Provides microbial consortia for hydrolysis, acidogenesis, acetogenesis, and methanogenesis.	Source from terrestrial wastewater treatment plants; pre-adapt to space-relevant waste streams [35].
Nutrient Buffer (e.g., Phosphate Buffer)	Maintains pH (6.5-7.5) for optimal methanogen activity.	Critical for stable operation as pH can drop during acidogenic phases [35].
Trace Element Solution	Supplies Co, Ni, Mo, Se essential for microbial enzyme function.	Enhances methanogenic activity and process stability in closed-loop systems [35].
Simulated Lunar/Martian Regolith	Solid growth medium for testing biofertilizer efficacy.	Used in plant growth modules to assess microbial amendment performance [2].
Nitrogen-Fixing Bacterial Strains (e.g., Sinorhizobium meliloti)	Converts atmospheric N₂ to ammonia, fertilizing plants.	Inoculant for leguminous plants in space farming; crucial for nitrogen-poor regolith [2].

3.1.2. Methodology

• Step 1: Waste Pre-processing. Comminute solid organic waste to ≤ 2 mm particles to increase surface area for microbial attack. Mix with liquid waste stream to achieve a substrate-to-inoculum ratio of 0.5-1.0 on a volatile solids basis.
• Step 2: Reactor Inoculation and Operation. Transfer the waste mixture to a stirred, temperature-controlled bioreactor. Flush the headspace with N₂ to ensure anaerobic conditions. Maintain thermophilic conditions (55°C) for faster conversion rates. Continuously mix at low shear to avoid microbial damage while preventing stratification, a key challenge in microgravity.
• Step 3: Biogas Collection and Analysis. Connect the reactor headspace to a gas collection bag. Monitor gas volume and composition daily using a gas chromatograph equipped with a thermal conductivity detector (TCD). Methane content should exceed 50% at steady state [35].
• Step 4: Digestate Processing. Upon completion, the residual digestate is a nutrient-rich slurry. It should be centrifuged or filtered. The liquid fraction can be used as a fertilizer in plant growth systems, while the solid fraction can be composted or recycled [34].

Protocol: Hydrogen Production via Biomass Gasification

This protocol describes the thermochemical conversion of dry, lignocellulosic waste (e.g., plant stalks, packaging) into hydrogen-rich syngas, which can be integrated with microbial processes [36].

3.2.1. Methodology

• Step 1: Feedstock Preparation. Dry biomass to moisture content <15% to maximize energy efficiency. Pelletize or briquette the feedstock to ensure consistent flow and handling, which is critical for automation in space.
• Step 2: Gasification Reactor Setup. Utilize a fluidized bed gasifier for its high efficiency and uniform temperature distribution. The gasifying agent is critical; using oxygen (potentially sourced from electrolysis) produces a higher quality syngas than air [36].
• Step 3: Syngas Conditioning and Hydrogen Separation. The raw syngas exits the reactor at high temperature (700-900°C). Pass it through a series of units: a cyclone for particulate removal, a water-gas shift reactor to increase H₂ concentration (CO + H₂O → CO₂ + H₂), and a pressure swing adsorption (PSA) unit to separate and purify the hydrogen to >99% purity [36].
• Step 4: Integration with Life Support. The CO₂ captured during the process can be directed to plant growth chambers to enhance photosynthesis, closing the carbon loop [2].

Protocol: Production of Microbial Biofertilizers from Waste Streams

This protocol focuses on cultivating plant growth-promoting microorganisms (PGPM) using liquid waste streams, which can then be used to enhance crop growth in extraterrestrial agriculture [34] [35].

3.2.1. Methodology

• Step 1: Liquid Waste Stream Conditioning. Collect and sterilize liquid waste (e.g., urine, greywater, digested effluent) via autoclaving or filtration. Supplement with a minimal carbon source (e.g., glycerol) and trace elements to create an optimal growth medium.
• Step 2: Microbial Inoculation and Fermentation. Inoculate the sterilized medium with selected PGPM strains, such as nitrogen-fixing Sinorhizobium meliloti or phosphate-solubilizing Bacillus subtilis. Incubate in a stirred-tank bioreactor at 28-30°C with vigorous aeration for 24-48 hours [34].
• Step 3: Biomass Harvesting and Formulation. Harvest cells via centrifugation. The resulting biomass can be formulated into a powder using a carrier material like clay or peat, or maintained as a liquid concentrate. This product is a potent biofertilizer [34].
• Step 4: Application and Efficacy Testing. Inoculate seeds or apply directly to the rhizosphere of plants grown in simulated lunar/Martian regolith. Monitor plant growth parameters (biomass, chlorophyll content) and soil nutrient levels (especially NH₄⁺ and NO₃⁻) to confirm fertilizer efficacy [2].

System Integration and Space-Specific Challenges

The individual processes described must be integrated into a robust BLSS. A key challenge is microbial behavior in altered gravity, as microgravity can enhance biofilm formation, alter microbial metabolism, and potentially increase virulence and resistance to stressors [37]. This necessitates careful monitoring and containment.

Table 3: Mitigation Strategies for Space-Specific Bioprocessing Challenges

Challenge	Impact on Process	Proposed Mitigation Strategy
Microgravity	Impaired phase separation (gas/liquid/solid), altered microbial physiology, unpredictable biofilm growth [37].	Use of membrane reactors, centrifugal bioreactors, and surface coatings to control biofilms.
Resource Limitation	Limited capacity for large, single-purpose reactors.	Design of multi-functional, compact reactors; leveraging in situ resource utilization (ISRU) [2].
Radiation	Potential damage to microbial cultures and genetic instability.	Shielding, and selection of radiation-resistant microbial strains.

The following diagram illustrates how these processes can be integrated within a closed-loop habitat, connecting waste streams to resource production for agriculture and life support.

The integration of waste processing with the production of high-value commodities like biofuels and pharmaceuticals presents a transformative opportunity for long-duration space missions. This paradigm shifts the view of waste from a disposal problem to a valuable resource, enhancing sustainability and self-sufficiency. On Earth, microbial valorization of waste streams is an established research field; in the confined environment of a spacecraft or planetary habitat, it becomes a critical life support function. This document details protocols and application notes for the microbial conversion of space-generated waste into potential biofuels and pharmaceutical precursors, providing a concrete research framework within the broader context of developing closed-loop systems for space exploration.

Waste Stream Composition and Pre-Processing

Characterizing the Space Mission Waste Stream

Effective bioprocessing begins with a thorough understanding of the feedstock. Waste on long-duration missions will be a complex mixture of organic and inorganic materials. Table 1 summarizes the typical composition of organic waste relevant to bioprocessing, derived from municipal solid waste (MSW) studies as a terrestrial analog for space mission waste [38].

Table 1: Compositional Analysis of a Model Organic Municipal Solid Waste Fiber (Terrestrial Analog)

Component	Composition (% Dry Mass)	Notes / Relevance
Cellulose	38%	Primary source of glucose for fermentation.
Lignin	16%	Recalcitrant polymer; potential source of aromatics.
Hemicellulose	4%	Source of pentose sugars (e.g., xylose).
Ash	15%	Inorganic content; may contain metals.
Extractables (Water)	9%	Soluble compounds, potential nutrients/inhibitors.
Extractables (Ethanol)	8%	Lipids, resins, and other non-polar compounds.
Protein	3%	Potential nitrogen source.
Oil	2%	Potential feedstock for oleochemical production.
Total Metals	~0.6% (w/v)	Potential microbial inhibitors that require monitoring [38].

For space-specific contexts, the waste stream will also include:

• Human waste: Feces and urine.
• Inedible plant material: From plant growth systems used for air revitalization and food production [39].
• Packaging materials and other assorted trash.

The Trash Compaction Processing System (TCPS), developed by NASA, demonstrates a viable pre-processing method for such heterogeneous waste. The TCPS uses pressure and heat to remove water, reducing volume and water activity (to <0.5) to sanitize the waste and produce stable, manageable tiles [12]. These tiles can be subsequently milled into a powder for further biological processing.

Hydrolysis of Lignocellulosic Fractions

The polysaccharides in waste (cellulose and hemicellulose) are not directly fermentable by most microbes and require hydrolysis into monomeric sugars.

Protocol: Enzymatic Hydrolysis of Pre-Treated Waste Fiber

• Feedstock Preparation: Mill autoclaved or TCPS-processed waste into a fine powder (<2 mm particle size) to increase surface area.
• Slurry Formation: Suspend the powdered waste in a suitable buffer (e.g., citrate buffer, pH 4.5-5.0) at a solid loading of 5-15% (w/v).
• Enzyme Cocktail Addition: Add a commercial cellulase and hemicellulase enzyme cocktail. A typical loading is 10-20 Filter Paper Units (FPU) per gram of dry substrate.
• Hydrolysis Incubation: Incubate the mixture with continuous agitation (150-200 rpm) at 50°C for 48-72 hours.
• Hydrolysate Recovery: Centrifuge the slurry (10,000 × g, 15 min) to separate the solid residue (primarily lignin and ash) from the liquid hydrolysate.
• Hydrolysate Analysis: Filter-sterilize (0.2 µm filter) the hydrolysate and analyze for sugar content (e.g., via HPLC) and potential inhibitors (e.g., levulinic acid, metals). The resulting hydrolysate is rich in glucose and xylose but is often deficient in nitrogen and phosphate, requiring supplementation for subsequent fermentations [38].

Microbial Conversion to Biofuels and Platform Chemicals

Screening for robust microorganisms is crucial for successful fermentation of waste hydrolysates, which can be nutrient-deficient and contain inhibitors.

Screening Robust Microbial Catalysts

Protocol: Substrate-Oriented Shake-Flask Screening

• Strain Selection: Select diverse biotechnologically relevant microorganisms (e.g., Zymomonas mobilis, Saccharomyces cerevisiae, Rhodococcus opacus, Clostridium saccharoperbutylacetonicum, Escherichia coli engineered strains) [38] [40].
• Medium Formulation: Use the sterilized waste hydrolysate as the base medium. Supplement with 1% (w/v) yeast extract and other necessary nutrients (e.g., phosphate) to alleviate nutrient limitation.
• Inoculation and Cultivation: Inoculate 50 mL of supplemented hydrolysate in a 250 mL baffled flask with a standardized inoculum (e.g., 1% v/v of an overnight culture). Incubate at the optimal temperature for each strain with agitation (200 rpm) for 24-96 hours.
• Monitoring and Analysis: Monitor microbial growth (optical density at 600 nm) and product formation over time. At the endpoint, analyze the fermentation broth for biofuel/product concentration using HPLC or GC-MS.

Table 2 summarizes the performance of exemplary microbial candidates grown on municipal solid waste hydrolysate, demonstrating the feasibility of this approach [38].

Table 2: Performance of Selected Microorganisms on Municipal Solid Waste Hydrolysate

Microorganism	Primary Product	Theoretical Yield Achieved	Estimated Product per Tonne of Organic Waste	Key Traits
Zymomonas mobilis	Ethanol	69%	136 kg	High ethanol tolerance and specific production rate.
Saccharomyces cerevisiae	Ethanol	70%	139 kg	Robust industrial workhorse; Crabtree-positive [40].
Rhodococcus opacus	Triacylglycerol (TAG)	72%	91 kg	Accumulates lipids; TAG can be converted to biodiesel.
Clostridium saccharoperbutylacetonicum	n-Butanol	(See Protocol 3.2)	-	ABE (Acetone-Butanol-Ethanol) fermentation pathway [40].

Protocol for n-Butanol Production via ABE Fermentation

n-Butanol is a superior biofuel to ethanol due to its higher energy density and lower hygroscopicity [40].

• Pre-culture: Grow Clostridium saccharoperbutylacetonicum anaerobically in a reinforced clostridial medium (RCM) at 35°C for 24 hours.
• Fermentation Medium: Use supplemented waste hydrolysate as the fermentation medium. Ensure strict anaerobic conditions by sparging the medium with nitrogen gas.
• Inoculation and Fermentation: Inoculate the bioreactor (5-10% v/v inoculum). Maintain temperature at 35°C and pH at 5.0-5.5. Do not agitate, as Clostridium species are motile.
• Two-Stage Process: The fermentation occurs in two phases:
  • Acidogenic Phase (First ~24h): The culture grows and produces acetic and butyric acids, causing a drop in pH.
  • Solventogenic Phase (After ~24h): The culture re-assimilates the acids to produce solvents (acetone, butanol, ethanol).
• Product Recovery: Monitor the process for 48-72 hours. Butanol can be recovered from the fermentation broth using techniques like gas stripping or pervaporation to mitigate its cytotoxicity [40].

Protocol for Pharmaceutical Intermediate Production

Microbial fermentation can also be directed toward producing precursors for pharmaceuticals. Lipid-producing bacteria, such as Rhodococcus opacus, can generate triacylglycerols (TAGs) that serve as precursors for bioactive lipids or specialty chemicals.

• Strain and Cultivation: Inoculate R. opacus into a nitrogen-limited, waste hydrolysate-based medium. Nitrogen limitation triggers TAG accumulation [38].
• Fermentation: Incubate culture at 30°C with vigorous agitation (200 rpm) for 5-7 days.
• Harvest and Extraction: Harvest cells by centrifugation. Lyse the cells (e.g., by bead beating or sonication) and extract lipids using an organic solvent like a chloroform-methanol mixture (2:1 v/v).
• Analysis: Analyze the extracted lipids via thin-layer chromatography (TLC) or GC-MS to determine TAG content and fatty acid profile.

The Scientist's Toolkit: Research Reagent Solutions

Table 3: Essential Materials and Reagents for Waste Bioprocessing Research

Reagent / Material	Function / Application	Example / Note
Cellulase/Hemicellulase Cocktail	Enzymatic hydrolysis of cellulose/hemicellulose in waste to fermentable sugars.	Commercial blends from Trichoderma reesei are common. Dosage: 10-20 FPU/g biomass.
Yeast Extract	Provides nitrogen, vitamins, and minerals to nutrient-deficient waste hydrolysate.	Typical supplementation: 0.5-1% (w/v) [38].
Citrate Buffer (pH 4.5-5.0)	Maintains optimal pH for enzymatic hydrolysis.	Critical for cellulase enzyme activity.
Zymomonas mobilis NRRL B-14023	Highly efficient ethanologen with high sugar uptake and ethanol tolerance.	Can achieve ~70% theoretical ethanol yield from waste hydrolysate [38].
Rhodococcus opacus PD630	Oleaginous bacterium for production of triacylglycerols (TAGs).	Grows on mixed sugars; TAGs are precursors for biodiesel and specialty chemicals.
Clostridium saccharoperbutylacetonicum N1-4	Producer of n-butanol via the ABE fermentation pathway.	Requires strict anaerobic conditions and process control [40].
Chloroform-Methanol Mixture	Lipid extraction from microbial biomass for analysis of TAGs.	Standard 2:1 (v/v) ratio for Folch extraction.
Anaerobic Chamber	Provides oxygen-free environment for cultivating obligate anaerobes (e.g., Clostridia).	Essential for butanol production studies.

Integrated System Workflow and Metabolic Pathways

The complete workflow from waste to products involves sequential steps of physical, enzymatic, and microbial processing. The following diagram illustrates this integrated logic and the key metabolic pathways involved.

Diagram 1: Integrated workflow for the conversion of mission waste into biofuels and bioproducts, showing key processing stages and microbial pathways.

Optimizing System Performance and Mitigating Risks in the Space Environment

Closed environmental systems, such as those on the International Space Station (ISS) and those planned for long-duration Lunar and Martian missions, are unique microbial habitats. Characterized by continuous human occupancy, limited exchange with the external environment, and exposure to microgravity, these environments create selective pressures that shape a distinct microbiome [41]. These conditions can facilitate the persistence and potential proliferation of microorganisms, including risk group 2 pathogens and strains with enhanced antimicrobial resistance (AMR) or virulence profiles [42]. Effective monitoring and mitigation protocols are therefore critical for ensuring crew safety and mission success. This document outlines application notes and detailed protocols for researchers to monitor, analyze, and mitigate pathogenic risks within closed microbial ecosystems designed for waste processing and other life support functions.

Pathogen Monitoring and Characterization

Rigorous, continuous microbiological monitoring is the cornerstone of managing pathogenic risks in a closed ecosystem.

Intact Cell Metagenomic Analysis

The following protocol is adapted from methods used to successfully characterize the intact microbiome of ISS environmental surfaces [42].

• Objective: To characterize the viable and potentially active microbial community, including its AMR and virulence gene profiles, while excluding DNA from dead cells.
• Materials:
  • Sterile polyester swabs
  • Sample collection tubes
  • Propidium monoazide (PMA)
  • Phosphate-Buffered Saline (PBS)
  • Dark incubation setup
  • Blue LED photolysis device
  • DNA extraction kit (e.g., DNeasy PowerSoil Pro Kit)
  • Equipment for shotgun metagenomic sequencing
• Procedure:
  • Sample Collection: Swab predefined environmental surfaces (e.g., waste processing unit interfaces, fluid lines, habitat walls). For liquid samples from waste processors, collect a 50-100 mL aliquot.
  • PMA Treatment:
    • Resuspend swab samples in 5 mL of PBS.
    • Add PMA to the sample to a final concentration of 50 µM.
    • Incubate in the dark for 10 minutes with occasional mixing.
    • Expose the sample to a blue LED light source for 15 minutes to photo-lyse the PMA and cross-link DNA in membrane-compromised (dead) cells.
  • Nucleic Acid Extraction: Extract genomic DNA from the PMA-treated sample using a commercial kit, following the manufacturer's instructions.
  • Shotgun Metagenomic Sequencing: Prepare libraries from the extracted DNA and sequence using a platform such as Illumina. Do not use Whole Genome Amplification (WGA) to prevent bias [42].
  • Bioinformatic Analysis:
    • Assemble sequencing reads and bin contigs.
    • Perform taxonomic classification using tools like Kraken2 or MetaPhlAn.
    • Annotate AMR genes using the Comprehensive Antibiotic Resistance Database (CARD) and virulence factors using the Virulence Factor Database (VFDB).

Table 1: Persistent Pathogens and AMR Profiles Identified on the ISS

Microorganism	Risk Group	Persistence Note	Detected AMR/Virulence Factors
Klebsiella pneumoniae	2	Persisted in one location across three flight missions [42]	β-lactam resistance, multidrug-resistance efflux pumps [42]
Acinetobacter baumannii	2	Persisted among all three flights sampled [42]	Cobalt-zinc-cadmium resistance [42]
Staphylococcus aureus	2	Persisted among all three flights sampled [42]	Not specified in search results
Salmonella enterica	2	Persisted among all three flights sampled [42]	Not specified in search results
Aspergillus lentulus	2	Persisted among all three flights sampled [42]	Not specified in search results

Microbial Community Succession Tracking

Monitoring microbial succession helps identify the accumulation of potential pathogens over time.

• Objective: To track temporal changes in the microbial community structure and the abundance of specific pathogens.
• Procedure:
  • Time-Series Sampling: Collect samples from identical locations at regular intervals (e.g., weekly or monthly).
  • Metagenomic Analysis: Perform PMA-treated metagenomic sequencing as described in Section 2.1 for each time point.
  • Data Analysis: Compare the relative abundance of microbial taxa and AMR genes across time points using statistical ordination methods (e.g., PCoA) and differential abundance analysis to identify significant shifts.

Mitigation Strategies and Bioprocess Design

Mitigation involves both controlling existing pathogens and designing processes that minimize their impact.

Integration of Effective Microorganisms (EM) for Waste Processing

The use of defined microbial consortia can improve waste treatment efficiency and suppress pathogens.

• Objective: To utilize EM technology for sustainable, on-site wastewater treatment, reducing pathogen load and improving water quality.
• Protocol (Based on terrestrial applications with relevance to closed systems) [43]:
  • EM Inoculum: A defined consortium of beneficial, non-pathogenic microorganisms (e.g., specific strains of lactic acid bacteria, yeasts, and photosynthetic bacteria).
  • Application:
    • Introduce the EM inoculum into the wastewater treatment bioreactor at a specified dosage (e.g., 1:1000 dilution of stock EM solution).
    • Maintain a hydraulic retention time (HRT) of 105 days, as demonstrated in effective studies [43].
    • Continuously monitor physicochemical parameters.
• Expected Outcomes: After 105 days of application, the protocol achieved the following results in a test system [43]:
  • >99% reduction in total plate count and fecal coliform.
  • Non-detectable E. coli in the final effluent.
  • Reduction of BOD, TSS, and Total Phosphorus to levels within WHO-suggested limits.

Table 2: Key Research Reagent Solutions for Pathogen Monitoring and Control

Reagent / Material	Function / Application	Example/Note
Propidium Monoazide (PMA)	Viability marker; selectively penetrates dead cells and cross-links DNA, preventing its amplification in downstream molecular assays [42].	Critical for differentiating between intact/viable and dead microbial populations in metagenomic studies.
Effective Microorganisms (EM) Consortium	A mixed culture of beneficial microbes used in bioremediation to outcompete pathogens and improve organic waste degradation [43].	Typically includes lactic acid bacteria, yeasts, and photosynthetic bacteria.
Shotgun Metagenomic Sequencing Kits	For comprehensive, non-targeted analysis of all genetic material in a sample, allowing for taxonomic, AMR, and virulence profiling [42].	Preferred over amplicon sequencing for functional gene analysis.
Simulated Regolith/Soil	A terrestrial analog for Lunar or Martian soil, used in plant-growth and ISRU experiments to study pathogen behavior and biocontrol in relevant substrates [6].	Must be inoculated with nitrogen-fixing bacteria to support plant growth.
Nitrogen-Fixing Bacterial Inoculum	Used to condition sterile regolith for plant cultivation within a BLSS, enhancing soil fertility and reducing the need for external inputs [6].	e.g., Sinorhizobium meliloti for clover.

Biosorption for Heavy Metal and Contaminant Removal

Microbial biomass can be employed to detoxify process streams.

• Objective: To use microbial biomass as a biosorbent for removing hazardous elements, such as nickel, from ash waste or other process streams.
• Protocol (Adapted from ash waste treatment research) [44]:
  • Biosorbent Preparation: Use a consortium of non-living Chlorella sp. algae and pellets of the filamentous fungus Aspergillus niger.
  • Sorption Process:
    • Mix the solid waste substrate (particle size <0.63 mm) with the microbial biosorbent.
    • Add a liquid medium (e.g., 30-50 mL distilled water).
    • Agitate on a shaker at 170 rpm for 48 hours at 25°C.
  • Analysis: Determine the heavy metal content in the substrate before and after treatment using Inductively Coupled Plasma Optical Emission Spectrometry (ICP-OES). Analyze functional groups involved in sorption via Fourier-Transform Infrared (FTIR) spectroscopy.
• Expected Outcome: This specific consortium achieved a 46.28% removal efficiency of nickel under optimal conditions [44]. FTIR analysis confirmed the involvement of hydroxyl, carbonyl, carboxyl, and amide groups in the biosorption process.

Integrated Pathogen Risk Management Workflow

The following diagram illustrates the logical workflow for an integrated pathogen risk management system within a closed ecosystem, incorporating the protocols described above.

Managing pathogenic risks in a closed microbial ecosystem requires a proactive and integrated strategy that combines advanced molecular monitoring with robust bioprocess engineering. The protocols outlined here—for tracking intact microbial communities, leveraging beneficial consortia for waste processing, and employing biosorption for decontamination—provide a foundational toolkit for researchers. As mission architectures evolve towards greater self-sufficiency on the Moon and Mars, integrating these microbiological safety measures into the design of bioregenerative life support and waste processing systems will be paramount to protecting crew health and ensuring mission resilience [41] [45].

Combating Biofilm Clogging in Life Support System Hardware

Biofilms, structured communities of microorganisms encased in an extracellular polymeric substance, represent a significant threat to the integrity and functionality of life support systems in spaceflight [46]. The microgravity environment of space can alter microbial behavior, potentially enhancing biofilm formation, structural complexity, and resistance to antimicrobial agents [14]. These biofilms can cause fouling and corrosion in critical hardware, including water recycling systems, air revitalization systems, and thermal control systems, posing substantial risks to both equipment longevity and crew health during long-duration missions [47]. As missions extend beyond low Earth orbit to the Moon and Mars, where resupply and emergency interventions become impractical, developing robust protocols to combat biofilm clogging becomes paramount for mission success [6] [46]. This document outlines current research, quantitative findings, and standardized experimental protocols to address this challenge.

Quantitative Analysis of Biofilm Control Strategies

Research has yielded quantitative data on the efficacy of various biofilm control strategies. The following tables summarize key performance metrics for antimicrobial coatings and physical intervention methods.

Table 1: Efficacy of Anti-Microbial Coatings and Materials

Coating/Material Type	Reported Efficacy	Application Context	Notes
Anti-Microbial Polymers [20]	Reduced biofilm formation in microgravity	General equipment surfaces	Potential for use on long-duration missions to protect human health and prevent equipment corrosion.
Laser-Patterned Copper [47]	Increased resistance to biofilm formation	Hardware surfaces	Studied by ESA for inherent material resistance in the BIOFILMS experiment.
Silver-Based Disinfectants [48]	Under evaluation	Water system disinfection	Investigated for effectiveness against polymicrobial biofilms on stainless steel.

Table 2: Performance of Physical and Non-Chemical Biofilm Control Methods

Method	Key Metric	Experimental Context	Advantages
Germicidal Ultraviolet Light (UV-C) [49]	Inhibits biofilm growth by breaking bacterial DNA	Water systems; tested on ISS	Reduces need for chemical disinfectants; effective against disinfectant-resistant biofilms.
Trash Compaction Processing (TCPS) [12]	Reduces water activity in trash to <0.5	Solid waste processing	Safens wet trash for storage, eliminating a potential biofilm habitat.

Experimental Protocols for Biofilm Research and Control

Protocol: Evaluating Anti-Microbial Coatings in Microgravity

This protocol is adapted from the "Bacteria Resistant Polymers in Space" investigation [20].

• Objective: To assess the effectiveness of polymer materials in preventing or reducing biofilm formation on various surfaces under microgravity conditions.
• Materials:
  • Test Coupons: Surfaces (e.g., stainless steel, polymers) coated with candidate anti-microbial materials.
  • Microbial Strains: Relevant biofilm-forming bacteria (e.g., Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Ralstonia pickettii).
  • Growth Media: Appropriate liquid nutrient media.
  • Fixatives (e.g., glutaraldehyde) for sample preservation.
  • Hardware: Sealed incubation containers (e.g., BioCells, PHABs) compatible with spaceflight.
• Method:
  • Inoculation: In a Life Science Glovebox, astronauts introduce a standardized microbial suspension into hardware containing the test coupons and nutrient media.
  • Incubation: Secure the hardware in a temperature-controlled incubator for a predetermined period (e.g., 3-21 days) to allow for biofilm growth.
  • Preservation: At the end of the incubation, crew members inject fixatives into the sample wells to halt biological activity.
  • Return and Analysis: Samples are returned to Earth for post-flight analysis. Evaluation methods include:
    • Biomass Quantification: Using crystal violet staining or optical density measurements.
    • Viable Cell Counts: By plating and colony-forming unit (CFU) enumeration.
    • Microscopy: Confocal laser scanning microscopy to analyze biofilm 3D structure.
• Application: This protocol helps determine the most durable and effective coatings for protecting mission-critical hardware from biofouling.

Protocol: Ultraviolet-C (UV-C) Light Biofilm Inhibition

This protocol is based on the Germicidal Ultraviolet Light Biofilm Inhibition (GULBI) experiment [49].

• Objective: To determine the impact of UV-C light, delivered via side-emitting optical fibers, on the amount and structure of biofilm growth in microgravity.
• Materials:
  • UV-C Source: Light-emitting diodes (LEDs).
  • Delivery System: Thin, flexible, side-emitting optical fibers.
  • Biofilm Reactor: Custom BioCells or similar hardware containing liquid nutrient media, bacteria (Pseudomonas aeruginosa), and metal surfaces.
  • Plate Habitat (PHAB): A container to house the BioCells during operation.
• Method:
  • Setup: Astronauts remove a PHAB from storage and place it in the Life Science Glovebox.
  • Activation: The PHAB is connected to the control box, which powers the LED light sources. BioCells are exposed to continuous, intermittent, or no UV-C light (as experimental controls).
  • Incubation & Monitoring: The system incubates for set durations (e.g., up to 21 days), with samples extracted at multiple time points (e.g., days 3, 9, 15, 21).
  • Termination and Fixation: Crew members collect bacterial samples and inject fixatives for stable storage until return to Earth.
  • Ground Analysis:
    • Molecular Analysis: Use quantitative PCR (qPCR) to measure population levels in multi-species biofilms.
    • Structural Analysis: Examine biofilm architecture using microscopy to compare Earth and microgravity structures.
• Application: This protocol validates a non-chemical method for controlling biofilms in moist environments, such as water processing systems, reducing dependence on shipped disinfectants.

The Scientist's Toolkit: Research Reagent Solutions

Table 3: Essential Reagents and Materials for Spaceflight Biofilm Research

Reagent/Material	Function	Example Use Case
Side-Emitting Optical Fibers [49]	Delivers germicidal UV-C light to surfaces to inhibit biofilm growth.	GULBI experiment for disinfecting water system components.
Silver-Based Biocides [48]	A chemical disinfectant used to control microbial growth in water systems.	Evaluation against polymicrobial biofilms in the "Bacterial Adhesion and Corrosion" investigation.
Sealed BioCells / PHABs [49]	Provides a self-contained, safe environment for growing and fixing biofilms in microgravity.	Standardized hardware for numerous ISS experiments, including coating and UV testing.
Genetic Fixatives	Preserves the RNA/DNA and physical structure of biofilms at a specific point in time for post-flight omics analysis.	Enables transcriptomic (RNA-Seq) studies to understand gene expression in microgravity [14].

Biofilm Formation and Quorum Sensing Pathway in Microgravity

The following diagram illustrates the enhanced biofilm formation process and quorum sensing pathway under microgravity conditions, which contributes to increased resilience and antimicrobial resistance.

Experimental Workflow for On-Orbit Biofilm Investigation

This workflow outlines the generalized process for conducting a biofilm control experiment aboard the International Space Station, from setup to data analysis.

Managing human waste, including urine, feces, and food waste, is a critical challenge for long-duration space missions. The success of Bioregenerative Life Support Systems (BLSS) hinges on robust protocols that can adapt to the significant variability inherent in these waste streams. This variability is influenced by diet, water intake, physical exertion, and environmental conditions [50]. Microbial processing technologies offer a promising solution by converting these wastes into valuable resources such as clean water, nutrients for plant growth, and even bioenergy, thereby closing the loop in life support systems and enhancing mission resilience and sustainability [45] [51]. The following sections provide detailed quantitative characterizations of waste streams, experimental protocols for their processing, and visualization of the underlying biological pathways.

Quantitative Characterization of Primary Waste Streams

Effective system design requires a foundational understanding of the expected quantity and composition of waste inputs. The following tables summarize key quantitative data on fecal and urine production, which are essential for sizing waste processing reactors and designing resource recovery systems.

Table 1: Physical Characteristics and Generation Rates of Human Excreta

Parameter	Feces	Urine
Median Wet Mass Production	128 g/cap/day [50]	1.42 L/cap/day [50]
Median Dry Mass Production	29 g/cap/day [50]	59 g/cap/day [50]
Water Content	74.6% [50]	Not Applicable
Typical Frequency	1.20 defecations/24 hr [50]	5-7 urinations/24 hr (estimated)
Primary Variability Factors	Fiber intake (2x difference between low/high-income countries) [50]	Physical exertion, environmental conditions, water/salt/protein intake [50]

Table 2: Key Chemical Composition of Human Excreta

Parameter	Feces	Urine
pH	6.64 (median) [50]	6.2 (median) [50]
Key Elements Excretion	Varies with diet [50]	Nitrogen (10.98 g/cap/day), Phosphorus, Potassium [50]
Predominant Organic Constituents	Bacterial biomass (25–54% of dry solids), undigested carbohydrate, fiber, protein, fat [50]	Urea (>50% of total organic solids) [50]
Noted Micropollutants	Not specified in research	Pharmaceuticals (e.g., antibiotics, antivirals, hormones) [52]

Experimental Protocols for Waste Processing

This section outlines detailed methodologies for establishing and monitoring anaerobic digestion systems, which are a core technology for stabilizing mixed waste streams and recovering resources.

Protocol 1: Setup and Operation of a Simulated On-Site Sanitation System

Application: This protocol is adapted from studies simulating self-flushing, container-based toilets for disaster relief or long-term encampments, providing a model for closed-loop space systems [53].

Materials:

• Reactor Vessel: 2 L HDPE jar with tubing for effluent removal [53].
• Waste Feedstock:
  • Feces: 4 g, stored at 4°C and used within one week. Plant debris and soil grit should be removed [53].
  • Synthetic Urine: Prepared with urea (16.2 g/L), NaCl (6.2 g/L), KCl (4.7 g/L), NaH₂PO₄ (3.9 g/L), Na₂SO₄ (2.8 g/L), and NH₄Cl (1.8 g/L) dissolved in demineralized water, pH adjusted to 6. Store at 4°C for up to one month [53].
  • Toilet Paper: 0.1 g of commercial-grade product [53].
• Mixing Mechanism: Fabricated plunger for mixed conditions [53].

Procedure:

• System Initialization: Fill the reactor vessel with tap water. Introduce 15 mL of feces macerated in a small volume of tap water as a starter feed. Allow the system to stabilize for one week [53].
• Waste Introduction: Twice weekly, add 4 g of feces, 30 mL of synthetic urine, and 0.1 g of toilet paper to the reactor [53].
• Mixing Regime: Following each waste introduction, if simulating a mixed system, pump the plunging mechanism 40-60 times to homogenize the reactor contents. For unmixed (stratified) conditions, do not agitate the contents [53].
• Effluent Sampling: Regularly sample the supernatant layer (from 1.5–5 cm depth) for water quality monitoring [53].
• System Monitoring: Operate the system for the desired duration (e.g., >240 days to observe long-term effects like odor shift from sulfide to ammonia) [53].

Protocol 2: Monitoring Digester Performance and Pathogen Reduction

Application: Monitor the efficiency of the anaerobic digestion process and assess the safety of the treated effluent.

Materials:

• Water Quality Meter: For measuring pH and Electrical Conductivity (EC) [53].
• Spectrophotometer: (e.g., HACH DR3900) with reagent vials for COD, Total Ammoniacal Nitrogen (TAN), Nitrite-N, Nitrate-N, and Total Phosphorus [53].
• Filtration Setup: Glass filters (1.2 µm and 0.7 µm) [53].
• Total Organic Carbon (TOC) Analyzer: (e.g., Shimadzu TOC-L) [53].
• Microbial Assay Kits: IDEXX Colilert-18, Colisure, and HPC for Quanti-Tray for enumeration of E. coli, total coliforms, and heterotrophs [53].

Procedure:

• In-situ Physicochemical Measurements: Every other week, measure pH and EC directly in the supernatant layer of the digester [53].
• Supernatant Sampling and Analysis: On a monthly basis, collect supernatant samples.
  • Solids Analysis: Determine Total Suspended Solids (TSS) and Total Dissolved Solids (TDS) gravimetrically using 1.2 µm filters [53].
  • Organic Load and Nutrients: Analyze filtrate for COD, TAN, NO₂⁻, NO₃⁻, and Pₜₒₜ using spectrophotometric methods [53].
  • Dissolved Organic Carbon: Filter sample through a 0.7 µm syringe filter and analyze with the TOC analyzer [53].
• Pathogen and Microbe Monitoring: Periodically collect settled sludge from the bottom of the digester. Perform serial dilutions as needed and use IDEXX kits to quantify E. coli, total coliforms, and total heterotrophs [53].

Signaling Pathways and System Workflows

The following diagrams illustrate the core microbial processes involved in waste degradation and the experimental workflow for system optimization.

Diagram 1: Microbial degradation pathway of complex organic waste in anaerobic digestion. The process involves four key stages ultimately producing biogas, recoverable organic acids, and stabilized nutrients [54].

Diagram 2: Iterative workflow for developing and optimizing waste processing protocols for space missions. The process is adaptable based on mission class constraints and waste stream variability [53] [45].

The Scientist's Toolkit: Research Reagent Solutions

Table 3: Essential Research Reagents and Materials for Waste Processing Experiments

Item	Function/Application	Example/Composition
Synthetic Urine	Provides a stable, replicable substitute for human urine in controlled experiments [53].	Urea, NaCl, KCl, NaH₂PO₄, Na₂SO₄, NH₄Cl in demineralized water, pH adjusted to 6 [53].
Anaerobic Inoculum	Introduces a consortium of microorganisms required to initiate anaerobic digestion.	Sludge from biogas plants or anaerobic digesters treating food waste or sewage [53] [54].
Spectrophotometry Kits	Enable precise, quantitative analysis of key water quality parameters from small samples.	HACH Test 'n Tube vials for COD, Total Ammoniacal Nitrogen (TAN), Nitrate, Nitrite, and Total Phosphorus [53].
Microbial Enumeration Kits	Allow for simple, standardized quantification of indicator and pathogenic microorganisms.	IDEXX Colilert-18 (for E. coli) and Colisure (for total coliforms) with Quanti-Tray/2000 [53].
Cation Exchange Membrane	Serves as a proton-selective barrier in bioelectrochemical systems (e.g., Microbial Fuel Cells).	Ultrex CMI7000 membrane [52].
Plant Growth-Promoting Bacteria (PGPB)	Used to biofertilize regolith simulants amended with composted waste, enhancing plant growth.	Consortia including Azotobacter chroococcum, Priestia megaterium, Methylobacterium populi, Kosakonia pseudosacchari [55].

Challenges in Long-Term Stability of Microbial Consortia and API Degradation

For long-duration space missions, the development of robust Bioregenerative Life Support Systems (BLSS) is paramount. These systems are closed artificial ecosystems designed to provide oxygen, food, and water through in-situ recycling of resources, making missions beyond low Earth orbit feasible without continuous resupply from Earth [33]. Microorganisms are intended to play a crucial role in these systems by degrading organic waste, such as food scraps, inedible plant parts, and human waste [33]. However, two significant scientific challenges threaten the efficacy and reliability of these systems: maintaining the long-term stability of synthetic microbial consortia and preventing the degradation of Active Pharmaceutical Ingredients (APIs). This document details these challenges within the context of microbial waste processing protocols, providing application notes and experimental protocols for researchers and scientists.

Challenge 1: Long-Term Stability of Microbial Consortia

Synthetic microbial consortia, which are collections of multiple engineered microbial strains living in a shared ecosystem, offer significant advantages for BLSS. They allow for a division of labor, separating complex metabolic tasks among different strains, which can increase the overall efficiency and robustness of the waste degradation process [56]. Nevertheless, ensuring these consortia remain stable over time is a major hurdle.

The Problem of Competitive Exclusion

A primary obstacle is competitive exclusion. Without specific engineering to enforce coexistence, even minor differences in the innate growth rates of consortium members will lead to the faster-growing strain outcompeting the others, resulting in the eventual collapse of the consortium and the failure of its designed function [56]. Furthermore, many applications require not just coexistence but the maintenance of specific population ratios to optimize metabolic output [56].

A Mechanism for Stability: Mutualistic Auxotrophy

One promising strategy for maintaining stability uses mutualistic auxotrophy. This involves engineering strains that are mutually dependent on each other for essential nutrients through a process of cross-feeding [56].

• Experimental Validation: A foundational experiment demonstrated this using two auxotrophic E. coli strains: ΔargC (unable to synthesize arginine) and ΔmetA (unable to synthesize methionine). The ΔargC strain was engineered to overproduce methionine, while the ΔmetA strain overproduced arginine. When co-cultured, each strain cross-fed the other the metabolite it was missing, creating a obligate mutualism that forced stable coexistence [56].
• Robustness and Tunability: This system demonstrated remarkable robustness, converging to a stable population ratio of approximately 3:1 (ΔmetA:ΔargC) within 24 hours, regardless of extreme initial inoculation ratios (from 1:99 to 99:1) [56]. Moreover, the population ratio was tunable. By exogenously supplementing the growth medium with varying concentrations of arginine or methionine, researchers could precisely modulate the growth rates of the respective strains, thereby shifting the steady-state consortium ratio as desired [56].

Table 1: Key Quantitative Data from Microbial Consortia Stability Studies

Parameter	Value / Finding	Experimental Context
Steady-State Ratio	~3:1 (ΔmetA:ΔargC)	Co-culture of mutualistic E. coli auxotrophs in continuous turbidostat [56].
Time to Steady-State	Within 24 hours	Co-culture of mutualistic E. coli auxotrophs [56].
Inoculation Robustness	Stable final ratio from 1:99 to 99:1 initial inoculations	Co-culture of mutualistic E. coli auxotrophs [56].
Organic Waste Reduction	Significant reduction (p < 0.05) in mass, cellulose, and starch	Inoculation of selected bacterial consortia into simulated ISS organic waste [33].
Dominant Taxa in Waste-Degrading Consortia	High abundance of Enterococcus and Clostridia	Consortia selected for efficient degradation of space mission waste [33].

Experimental Protocol: Maintaining Tunable Stability in Mutualistic Consortia

Objective: To establish and maintain a stable, tunable two-strain microbial consortium based on mutual auxotrophy in a continuous culture system.

Materials:

• Microbial Strains: Mutually auxotrophic strains (e.g., E. coli ΔargC and ΔmetA from the Keio collection).
• Growth Media: Minimal media (e.g., M9), with and without supplementation of the target metabolites (e.g., L-arginine, L-methionine).
• Equipment: Continuous culture turbidostat, spectrophotometer (for OD600 measurement), plate reader, sterile culture plates.

Methodology:

• Pre-culture and Inoculation:
  • Grow each auxotrophic strain in monoculture in minimal media supplemented with the required metabolite.
  • Harvest cells and adjust to the same optical density (OD600).
  • Inoculate the co-culture into the turbidostat at varying initial ratios (e.g., 1:99, 50:50, 99:1) to test robustness.
• Continuous Cultivation:
  • Maintain the co-culture in a turbidostat set to a constant OD600. The system should automatically add fresh minimal media to maintain the setpoint OD, with excess culture volume flowing to waste.
• Monitoring and Ratio Determination:
  • Periodically collect culture samples.
  • Serially dilute samples and plate on both rich media and selective minimal media to differentiate and count the colony-forming units (CFUs) of each strain.
  • Calculate the relative abundance of each strain over time.
• Tuning the Population Ratio:
  • Once a steady state is reached, introduce fresh minimal media supplemented with varying concentrations of one of the cross-fed metabolites (e.g., 0-100 µM arginine).
  • Continue monitoring the relative abundances as described in step 3. The strain whose growth is limited by the supplemented metabolite should increase its proportion in the consortium.

Challenge 2: Active Pharmaceutical Ingredient (API) Degradation

The stability of pharmaceuticals is a critical concern for crew health on long-duration missions. Medications are susceptible to chemical degradation, leading to a loss of potency of the Active Pharmaceutical Ingredient (API) and the potential formation of harmful impurities [57].

Evidence of Spaceflight-Induced Degradation

A 2023 meta-analysis of six spaceflight drug stability studies revealed that medications stored on the International Space Station (ISS) for up to 2.4 years exhibit a small but significant increase in the rate of API loss compared to terrestrial controls [57]. While the average potency loss was within 10% of ground controls, the analysis confirmed a statistically significant ~1.5-fold increase in the degradation rate in space [57]. This increased degradation rate raises the risk of product failure over the multi-year timeframe of a Mars mission.

The Critical Role of Repackaging

The most significant factor contributing to drug instability, both on Earth and in space, appears to be non-protective repackaging [57]. To save mass and volume, medications are often removed from their original, protective manufacturer's packaging and repackaged in simpler containers. This can expose them to detrimental environmental factors such as humidity, oxygen, and mechanical stress, accelerating degradation.

Table 2: Summary of Spaceflight Drug Stability Evidence

Analysis Parameter	Finding	Implication for Long-Duration Missions
Overall Potency Change	Remained within 10% of terrestrial controls	Suggests many drugs may remain effective in LEO for ~2 years [57].
Degradation Rate	~1.5-fold increase in spaceflight	Increased risk of failure beyond current mission durations [57].
Primary Risk Factor	Non-protective drug repackaging	Highlights a terrestrial process that must be improved for exploration [57].
Research Gap	Limited data on effects of deep-space radiation	The higher radiation environment beyond LEO is an unknown variable [57].
Sample Medications Studied	Acetaminophen, Ibuprofen, Levofloxacin, Sertraline, etc.	Includes common analgesics, antibiotics, and antidepressants [57].

Experimental Protocol: Quantifying API Degradation Under Simulated Space Conditions

Objective: To determine the degradation kinetics of a specific API under environmental stresses relevant to spaceflight, particularly in repackaged formats.

Materials:

• Pharmaceuticals: Drug products of interest.
• Packaging: Original manufacturer's packaging and proposed repackaging materials (e.g., laminated foil bags, plastic blister packs).
• Stability Chambers: Environmental chambers capable of controlling temperature, humidity, and light exposure.
• Analytical Instrumentation: High-Performance Liquid Chromatography (HPLC) or UPLC-MS/MS systems with validated stability-indicating methods.

Methodology:

• Sample Preparation:
  • Obtain drug products from a single manufacturing lot.
  • Repackage a subset of samples according to proposed flight protocols.
  • Keep control samples in the original, unopened packaging.
• Stress Storage:
  • Place samples (repackaged and original) in stability chambers under various stress conditions:
    • Long-term: 25°C ± 2°C / 60% ± 5% RH (standard conditions).
    • Intermediate: 30°C ± 2°C / 65% ± 5% RH.
    • Accelerated: 40°C ± 2°C / 75% ± 5% RH.
  • Include samples for radiation exposure testing if feasible.
• Sampling and Analysis:
  • Withdraw samples at predetermined time points (e.g., 0, 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24 months).
  • For each time point, analyze a minimum of three independent replicates.
  • Using HPLC/UPLC-MS, quantify the remaining percentage of the API and identify any degradation impurities.
• Data Analysis:
  • Plot the percentage of remaining API against time for each storage condition and packaging type.
  • Determine the degradation rate constant (k) for each scenario.
  • Compare the degradation rates between repackaged and originally packaged drugs to quantify the impact of repackaging.

The Scientist's Toolkit: Research Reagent Solutions

Table 3: Essential Research Materials for Microbial Consortia and API Stability Research

Reagent / Material	Function / Application	Example / Specification
Auxotrophic Microbial Strains	Core components for building mutually dependent consortia; allow for division of labor.	Keio collection E. coli strains (e.g., ΔargC, ΔmetA) with whole-gene chromosomal deletions [56].
Defined Minimal Media	Supports growth of engineered consortia without external nutrient sources; enables precise control of cross-fed metabolites.	M9 minimal salts medium, with and without supplementation of specific amino acids or nutrients [56].
Continuous Culture Bioreactor	Maintains microbial populations in exponential growth phase for extended periods; essential for studying long-term consortium stability.	Turbidostat system with automated OD monitoring and media dilution [56].
Stability-Indicating Assay	Accurately quantifies the concentration of an Active Pharmaceutical Ingredient (API) in the presence of its degradation products.	Validated High-Performance Liquid Chromatography (HPLC) or UPLC-MS/MS methods [57].
Controlled Stability Chambers	Simulate long-term storage conditions and accelerate degradation studies by controlling environmental stressors.	Environmental chambers capable of controlling temperature (±2°C) and relative humidity (±5% RH) [57].

Strategies for Scaling and Automation for Missions to the Moon and Mars

For extended human presence on the Moon and Mars, sustainable waste management systems are critical for mission success. Microbial bioprocessing represents a promising approach for converting mission waste into valuable resources, thereby reducing reliance on Earth-based resupply and enabling greater self-sufficiency. This protocol outlines scalable, automated systems for microbial waste processing tailored to the distinct constraints of lunar and martian missions, framed within a staged implementation strategy aligned with mission architecture development [45]. The integration of these bioregenerative life support systems (BLSS) is fundamental to long-term mission viability, as they generate essential resources for human survival through biological processes, including higher plant cultivation, water treatment, solid waste bioconversion, and atmosphere revitalization [2].

Mission-Class Specific Implementation Framework

The applicability and design of microbial waste processing systems vary significantly based on mission duration, resource availability, and logistical constraints. The following mission classification informs the appropriate technological implementation strategy [45]:

Table 1: Mission Classification and Microbial Processing Implementation

Mission Class	Destination & Logistics	Primary Resources	Implementation Focus	Key Challenges
Class 1	Moon, stable logistics	Cargo-derived feedstocks	Technology demonstration & validation	System automation in low-gravity; operational testing
Class 2	Moon, disrupted logistics	Cargo + limited in situ resources	Limited loop-closure & waste stream utilization	Hyper-efficient use of stored supplies; waste processing
Class 3	Mars, rudimentary logistics	Significant in situ resource utilization	Integrated biomanufacturing & waste recycling	Remote operation; maximized self-sufficiency
Class 4	Mars, established presence	Extensive in situ resources	Fully sustainable, closed-loop ecosystems	Complete resource independence; long-term stability

The following diagram illustrates the progressive integration of biological systems across these mission classes:

Quantitative Scaling Parameters for Microbial Systems

Effective scaling of microbial waste processing systems requires careful consideration of both biological and mission-specific parameters. The following table summarizes key quantitative factors that influence system design across different mission classes:

Table 2: Key Scaling Parameters for Space-Based Microbial Waste Processing Systems

Parameter	Class 1 Target	Class 3 Target	Measurement Method
Processing Capacity	40% waste stream	>90% waste stream	Mass balance tracking
System Autonomy	30 days	>300 days	Operational duration without intervention
Power Consumption	<500 W	<2 kW	Direct monitoring & efficiency calculations
Crew Time Requirement	<2 hr/day	<0.5 hr/day	Task time logging
Volume/Mass Efficiency	50 L/person	<20 L/person	System dimensions & mass tracking
Process Water Requirement	5 L/day	<1 L/day (recycled)	Flow meters & consumption logs
Oxygen Production	Not applicable	>50% of crew requirement	Gas chromatography
Food Production Contribution	Not applicable	>30% of calorie requirement	Caloric yield analysis

Experimental Protocol: Microbial Plastic Upcycling in Space

This protocol details the methodology for microbial transformation of polyethylene terephthalate (PET) plastic waste into high-value compounds, based on the MicroPET experiment conducted aboard the International Space Station [58].

Materials and Equipment

• Engineered Microbial Strain: Pseudomonas putida KT2440 strain AW165
• Plastic Substrate: Post-consumer PET plastic waste
• Bioreactor System: Modular Open Biological Platform (MOBP) with autonomous operation capability
• Enzymes: PET-hydrolyzing enzymes (e.g., FAST-PETase)
• Culture Media: Minimal salts medium with micronutrients
• Sterilization Equipment: Autoclavable bags or in-line sterilizers
• Monitoring Sensors: pH, dissolved oxygen, temperature, optical density
• Sample Preservation: RNA/DNA stabilization buffers, freezing capability (-80°C preferred)

Procedure

Pre-flight Preparation and System Integration

• Microbial Culture Preparation:

  • Inoculate P. putida from frozen glycerol stock into 5 mL LB medium
  • Incubate at 30°C with shaking (200 rpm) for 24 hours
  • Subculture into minimal media with 0.5% glucose for adaptation
  • Harvest at mid-log phase (OD600 ≈ 0.6) by centrifugation at 4,000 × g for 10 minutes
  • Resuspend in cryoprotectant medium at target cell density (OD600 ≈ 10.0)

• Plastic Preparation:

  • Grind PET plastic to 1-2 mm particle size
  • Surface sterilize using 70% ethanol followed by UV exposure (30 minutes per side)
  • Load 1.0 g sterilized PET into reaction chamber A of the bioreactor

• Enzyme Solution Preparation:

  • Prepare PET-hydrolyzing enzyme solution in appropriate buffer (e.g., phosphate buffer, pH 7.0)
  • Filter sterilize (0.22 μm pore size) into sterile cryovials
  • Load into reaction chamber B of the bioreactor

• System Assembly and Integration:

  • Integrate culture chambers, waste reservoirs, and monitoring systems within MOBP housing
  • Implement triple containment for microbial cultures to prevent contamination of spacecraft environment
  • Conduct ground control experiment with identical parameters

In-flight Operation and Monitoring

• Activation and Initiation:

  • Activate bioreactor system by establishing electrical power and data connections
  • Initiate temperature control system (maintain at 30°C ± 0.5°C)
  • Combine enzyme solution with PET plastic in primary degradation chamber
  • Incubate for 72 hours with gentle agitation (50 rpm)

• Microbial Processing Phase:

  • Transfer PET hydrolysate to microbial cultivation chamber
  • Inoculate with prepared P. putida culture to initial OD600 of 0.1
  • Maintain aerobic conditions with dissolved oxygen >30% saturation
  • Monitor growth kinetics via optical density measurements every 6 hours

• Product Formation and Monitoring:

  • Continue cultivation for 120 hours or until stationary phase is reached
  • Sample culture broth at 24-hour intervals for off-line analysis
  • Preserve samples in DNA/RNA stabilization buffer for post-flight analysis
  • Monitor β-ketoadipic acid (BKA) production in-line via pH shift correlation

• System Shutdown and Preservation:

  • Terminate experiment at predetermined time point or when growth plateau confirmed
  • Preserve final culture samples with cryoprotectant if freezing capability available
  • Deactivate power and secure system for return transport

The following workflow summarizes the key experimental processes:

Data Collection and Analysis

• Molecular Analysis:

  • Extract genomic DNA from preserved samples using commercial kits
  • Perform 16S rRNA sequencing to confirm culture purity
  • Conduct transcriptomic analysis to assess gene expression changes in microgravity

• Product Quantification:

  • Analyze BKA production via high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC)
  • Compare yields between space and ground control experiments
  • Calculate conversion efficiency from PET to BKA

• Performance Metrics:

  • Determine specific growth rates in microgravity versus ground controls
  • Assess plastic degradation efficiency via mass loss measurements
  • Calculate process mass intensity for resource utilization assessment

The Scientist's Toolkit: Essential Research Reagents and Materials

Table 3: Key Research Reagent Solutions for Space-Based Microbial Waste Processing

Reagent/Material	Function	Application Example	Storage Requirements
Engineered Pseudomonas putida	Plastic upcycling chassis	Conversion of PET monomers to β-ketoadipic acid	-80°C with cryoprotectant
PET-Hydrolyzing Enzymes	Depolymerization of plastic waste	Initial breakdown of PET to soluble monomers	4°C in stabilizing buffer
Minimal Salts Medium	Defined growth medium	Cultivation without complex nutrients	Room temperature (powder)
RNA/DNA Stabilization Buffers	Molecular preservation	Transcriptomic analysis post-experiment	Room temperature
Rapid DNA Extraction Kits	Genetic material isolation	Microbial identification and purity confirmation	Room temperature
Cryoprotectant Solutions	Cell viability preservation	Long-term culture storage	4°C
Sterilization Indicators	Process validation	Verification of sterile conditions	Room temperature

Automation Architecture for Scalable Microbial Processing

Implementing automated, scalable systems is essential for operational efficiency in resource-limited space environments. The Modular Open Biological Platform (MOBP) provides a foundational architecture for these systems [58].

System Requirements

• Autonomous Operation: Capable of 30+ days unsupervised function
• Multi-parameter Monitoring: Real-time tracking of temperature, pH, dissolved oxygen, optical density
• Modular Design: Interchangeable reaction chambers for different process types
• Fail-safe Mechanisms: Automatic shutdown in case of system breach or parameter excursion
• Data Logging: Comprehensive process data collection with downlink capability

Implementation Considerations for Deep Space Missions

• Resource Integration:

  • Interface with life support systems for oxygen supply and carbon dioxide removal
  • Utilize waste streams from other mission operations as feedstocks
  • Implement water recycling within biological processes to minimize consumption

• Contingency Planning:

  • Design for redundant systems to mitigate single-point failures
  • Incorporate manual override capabilities for crew intervention
  • Plan for system sterilization and decontamination protocols

• Scaling Strategies:

  • Implement modular expansion capability for increased processing demands
  • Design for maintenance with minimal crew time investment
  • Incorporate adaptive control algorithms for optimizing process parameters

Microbial waste processing represents a critical technology for sustainable space exploration. The staged implementation framework presented here allows for incremental technology development and validation, from initial technology demonstration in Class 1 lunar missions to fully integrated, self-sustaining systems for Class 4 Mars missions. Future development should focus on increasing process efficiency, expanding the range of convertible waste streams, and enhancing system autonomy and reliability. As mission duration and distance from Earth increase, the operational benefits of specialized, sustainable biomanufacturing processes will become increasingly essential to mission success [45]. The continued advancement of these systems will not only enable long-duration space exploration but may also yield valuable technologies for creating a more circular bioeconomy on Earth.

Validating, Modeling, and Comparing Terrestrial vs. Space-Based Bioprocesses

The integration of Quality by Design (QbD) and Process Analytical Technology (PAT) provides a robust framework for developing and validating reliable bioprocessing systems for space missions. This paper outlines practical protocols for applying these pharmaceutical quality systems to microbial-based waste processing in space, with a focus on model validation, real-time monitoring, and system control to ensure process reliability in closed-loop environments.

Quality by Design (QbD) is defined as "a systematic approach to development that begins with predefined objectives and emphasizes product and process understanding and process control, based on sound science and quality risk management" [59]. In space bioprocessing, this translates to designing systems with predefined objectives for waste conversion efficiency, resource recovery rates, and operational stability. Process Analytical Technology (PAT) complements QbD by providing the tools for "real-time monitoring and control of manufacturing through timely measurements of critical quality and performance attributes" [60]. For long-duration space missions, these approaches are essential for developing self-sustaining, closed-loop systems that minimize resupply requirements and maximize resource efficiency.

Space bioprocessing presents unique challenges including microgravity effects on fluid dynamics and microbial behavior, radiation-induced genetic mutations, and stringent mass, volume, and power constraints [61] [13]. Microbial systems for waste processing must function reliably in these conditions while producing consistent outputs, whether converting waste to nutrients, recycling water, or producing biopolymers for in-situ resource utilization.

Defining Critical Parameters for Space Bioprocessing Systems

Quality Target Product Profile (QTPP) for Microbial Waste Processing

The QTPP defines the ideal characteristics of the bioprocess outputs. For space missions, this extends beyond traditional pharmaceutical applications to encompass life support system functions.

Table 1: QTPP for Space-Based Microbial Waste Processing Systems

Attribute	Target	Rationale
Conversion Efficiency	>95% substrate utilization	Maximizes resource recovery from limited waste streams
Oxygen Production Rate	0.5-1.2 L O₂/L culture/hour	Supports crew respiratory requirements in sealed environments
Biomass Production	Consistent yield coefficient (Yx/s ≥ 0.4)	Ensures reliable production of edible biomass or bioresources
System Stability	<5% performance deviation over 6 months	Reduces need for maintenance and intervention
Contamination Control	Maintain axenic cultures or stable consortia	Prevents system failure due to microbial contamination

Critical Quality Attributes (CQAs) and Critical Process Parameters (CPPs)

CQAs are physical, chemical, biological, or microbiological properties that must be within appropriate limits to ensure the QTPP is met [60]. For space bioprocessing, CQAs include gas exchange rates, nutrient composition in output streams, and microbial viability. CPPs are process parameters whose variability affects CQAs and therefore must be monitored or controlled to ensure the process produces the desired quality [62].

Table 2: CQAs and CPPs for Space Bioprocessing

Critical Quality Attributes (CQAs)	Associated CPPs	Control Strategy
Dissolved Oxygen Concentration	Agitation rate, gas flow rate, pressure	PAT with feedback control to mixing system
Nutrient Metabolite Profile	Feed rate, dilution rate, pH	Automated sampling with HPLC or spectroscopy
Biomass Density & Viability	Temperature, nutrient concentration	In-line optical density and capacitance probes
Product Titer (e.g., proteins, metabolites)	Induction parameters, harvest timing	At-line analytics with model-predictive control
Microbial Community Composition	Sterilization protocols, inoculation procedures	Regular sequencing and qPCR monitoring

PAT Implementation Framework for Space Missions

PAT Tool Categories and Space Applications

PAT encompasses a range of analytical technologies positioned at different points in the process stream [60]. The implementation strategy must consider mass, power, and volume constraints of space systems while maintaining analytical robustness.

Table 3: PAT Tools for Space Bioprocessing Applications

Technology	Measurement Principle	Space Application	Implementation
Dielectric Spectroscopy	Capacitance measurement of intact cells	Biomass viability monitoring	In-line probe in bioreactor
Near-Infrared (NIR) Spectroscopy	Molecular overtone and combination vibrations	Nutrient and metabolite concentration	Flow cell with fiber optic interface
Raman Spectroscopy	Inelastic light scattering	Product qualification and contaminant detection	Non-contact probe requiring minimal hardware
Bio-sensors	Biological recognition elements	Specific molecular targets (e.g., toxins)	Disposable cartridges for rapid testing
Multi-angle Light Scattering (MALS)	Light scattering at multiple angles	Macromolecular aggregation	At-line purification monitoring

Integrated PAT Workflow for Space Bioprocessing

The following diagram illustrates the PAT implementation workflow for a space-based bioprocessing system, integrating monitoring, control, and validation components:

Experimental Protocol: QbD-Based Model Validation for Space Bioprocessing

Protocol: Design Space Characterization for Microbial Waste Processing

Objective: Establish the design space for a spacecraft-based microbial system converting waste CO₂ to oxygen and biomass.

Materials and Equipment:

• Miniaturized bioreactor system (100-500 mL working volume)
• PAT tools: In-line dissolved oxygen probe, optical density sensor, off-gas analyzer
• Environmental chamber (simulating space cabin atmosphere)
• Analytics: HPLC for metabolite analysis, microscope for cell morphology

Procedure:

• Define Factor Ranges: Based on prior knowledge, set ranges for CPPs: temperature (25-37°C), pH (6.5-7.5), CO₂ concentration (0.5-5%), light intensity (for photosynthetic organisms, 100-500 μmol/m²/s).
• Experimental Design: Implement a Central Composite Design (CCD) with 5 center points to model linear, quadratic, and interaction effects.
• Microgravity Simulation: Conduct parallel experiments in simulated microgravity using clinostats or random positioning machines.
• Data Collection: Monitor CQAs in real-time using PAT tools: biomass density (optical density at 600 nm), oxygen evolution rate (electrode), metabolite profiles (daily sampling).
• Model Development: Use partial least squares (PLS) regression to build models correlating CPPs to CQAs.
• Design Space Verification: Confirm model predictions by running verification batches at edge-of-failure conditions.
• Control Strategy Definition: Establish normal operating ranges and proven acceptable ranges for each CPP.

Data Analysis:

• Calculate model robustness using Q² values from cross-validation
• Determine design space boundaries using probability-based methods
• Establish control strategy based on risk assessment of CPPs

Protocol: PAT Implementation for Real-Time Process Control

Objective: Implement a PAT framework for continuous monitoring and control of a space bioprocessing system.

Materials:

• Bioreactor with integrated PAT tools
• Data acquisition and analysis system
• Automated control actuators (pumps, valves, heaters)

Procedure:

• Sensor Calibration: Calibrate all PAT tools against reference standards before integration.
• System Integration: Connect PAT tools to data analysis platform with appropriate sampling frequency (e.g., every 30 seconds for oxygen, 5 minutes for OD).
• Multivariate Data Analysis: Develop PLS models correlating spectral data (NIR/Raman) to critical quality attributes.
• Control Algorithm Setup: Program feedback control loops for key parameters:
  • Dissolved oxygen: Cascade control of agitation and gas flow
  • pH: Proportional control of acid/base addition
  • Nutrient concentration: Predictive control of feed rates based on models
• System Testing: Challenge the control system with deliberate perturbations to verify robustness.
• Documentation: Record all setpoints, control parameters, and system responses.

The Scientist's Toolkit: Essential Research Reagents and Materials

Table 4: Research Reagent Solutions for Space Bioprocessing Development

Reagent/Material	Function	Space-Specific Considerations
Stabilized Microbial Strains	Bioprocess chassis	Radiation-resistant, genetically stable variants with documented safety
Lyophilized Culture Media	Nutrient source	Low mass, long shelf-life, minimal water requirements for reconstitution
Portable qPCR Kits	Microbial identification	Minimal power requirements, stability at ambient temperature
Multi-analyte Sensor Arrays	Process monitoring	Miniaturized designs, radiation-hardened electronics
Surface-Enhanced Raman Substrates	Signal amplification	Reusable platforms for detection of multiple analytes
Affinity Purification Resins	Product recovery	Compatible with microgravity fluid handling systems
Stabilized Enzyme Preparations	Biocatalysis	Thermostable variants for waste processing applications

Application to Space Mission Architecture

Integration with Mission Life Support Systems

Space bioprocessing systems must interface with broader spacecraft infrastructure. The following diagram illustrates how a QbD/PAT-controlled bioprocess integrates with spacecraft systems:

Validation in Space-Relevant Environments

Model validation for space applications requires testing in relevant environments. Equivalent System Mass (ESM) analysis provides a quantitative framework for comparing technology options [61]. For a Mars surface mission with 600-day duration, bioprocessing systems can be evaluated using ESM with factors for mass, volume, power, cooling, and crew time. Recent studies indicate ESM values of 357-522 kg eq. for different bioprocessing designs [61].

Validation protocols should include:

• Microgravity Testing: Parabolic flights or ISS experiments to verify fluid handling and mass transfer
• Radiation Tolerance: Assessment of microbial performance under simulated space radiation
• Closed-Loop Integration: Testing interface compatibility with other life support systems
• Failure Mode Testing: Verification of system response to potential failures

The application of QbD and PAT principles to space bioprocessing provides a systematic framework for developing reliable, efficient systems essential for long-duration space missions. By defining critical quality attributes, establishing design spaces, implementing real-time monitoring, and validating models in space-relevant conditions, researchers can create robust bioprocessing systems that maximize resource recovery while minimizing mass, volume, and crew time requirements. The protocols outlined here provide a foundation for advancing space bioprocessing from experimental concepts to mission-critical systems supporting human exploration beyond Earth orbit.

Anaerobic digestion (AD) is a microbial process that converts organic waste into biogas and other valuable by-products. This Application Note provides a comparative efficiency analysis of AD systems in two distinct environments: terrestrial and space-based applications. The content is structured for researchers and scientists, framing AD within microbial waste processing protocols for long-duration space missions. It includes quantitative data summaries, detailed experimental protocols, and visual workflows to support research replication and development.

Performance Data and Comparative Analysis

The operational goals and constraints of space-based and terrestrial AD systems result in significant differences in their design and performance metrics. The following table summarizes a comparative analysis of key parameters.

Table 1: Comparative Analysis of Terrestrial and Space-Based AD Systems

Parameter	Terrestrial AD Systems	Space-Based AD Systems	Notes & Context
Primary Objective	Renewable energy (biogas) production, waste management, biofertilizer [63] [64]	Waste volume reduction, water recovery, safening (pathogen inactivation), material production for shielding or food [12] [6] [7]	Space systems prioritize crew safety and resource closure.
Typical Feedstock	Organic Fraction of Municipal Solid Waste (OFMSW), sewage sludge, agricultural waste, manure [65] [64] [66]	Mixed spacecraft trash (food packaging, wipes, clothing), concentrated human waste [12] [7]	Space feedstock is highly heterogeneous and includes synthetic materials.
Key Product	Biogas (CH₄, CO₂), digestate (biofertilizer) [63] [64]	Stabilized solid tiles (for storage/jettison), recovered water, microbial biomass for food [12] [7]	Terrestrial systems focus on energy; space systems focus on mass reduction and recycling.
Biogas/Methane Yield	116.6 - 137.1 m³/ton for source-segregated biowaste [65]	Methane produced is a potential by-product for microbial protein cultivation [7]	Space systems may not always harvest biogas, using it as an intermediate.
Pathogen Control	Managed through process stability, temperature, and retention time [66]	Active safening via high heat (>150°F), alkaline conditions (pH 11), or process design [7]	Space systems require extreme measures to ensure crew safety in a closed environment.
Process Temperature	Mesophilic (30-40°C) or Thermophilic (50-60°C) [67]	Thermophilic (54°C) and higher (up to 70°C) for pathogen control [12] [7]	Higher temperatures in space systems directly support the "safening" objective.
Hydraulic Retention Time (HRT)	Several days to ~40 days [67]	~13 hours for solid reduction; 35-40 days for full digestion [12] [7]	Ultra-fast solid reduction is a unique requirement for space logistics.
Dry Matter Content	Wet (<15% DM) or Dry (15-40% DM) digestion [67]	Maintained at 30-35% dry matter [12]	Space systems often use dry digestion for easier handling and storage.
Technology Readiness Level (TRL)	9 (Fully commercial) [64] [66]	5-7 (Flight demonstration units; lab-scale validation) [12] [45]	Terrestrial AD is a mature technology; space AD is in the demonstration phase.

Experimental Protocols

Protocol: Laboratory-Scale Determination of Methanogenic Potential

This protocol is adapted from terrestrial research [65] and is foundational for characterizing any organic feedstock, including those intended for space missions.

3.1.1. Objective: To determine the biochemical methane potential (BMP) of a solid organic waste substrate under controlled thermophilic conditions.

3.1.2. Research Reagent Solutions & Essential Materials

Table 2: Key Research Reagents and Materials

Item	Function/Explanation
Dreschel Scrubbers (0.5 dm³)	Batch reactors for the anaerobic digestion process.
Water Bath	Provides precise temperature control (e.g., 54°C for thermophilic conditions).
Inoculum	Adapted anaerobic sludge provides the necessary microbial consortium.
Sodium Hydroxide (3M Solution)	Scrubs CO₂ and H₂S from biogas, allowing for pure CH₄ volume measurement [65].
Barrier Fluid & Measuring Cylinder	A liquid-displacement system for accurate measurement of purified methane volume.
pH & Alkalinity Monitoring Kits	Essential for tracking process stability and preventing acidification.

3.1.3. Methodology:

• Substrate Preparation: The test substrate (e.g., source-segregated kitchen waste) is homogenized and characterized for dry matter (DM) and volatile solids (VS) content.
• Reactor Setup: Load Dreschel scrubbers with a predetermined inoculum-to-substrate ratio (e.g., based on VS). Maintain a control reactor with only inoculum to account for its background methane production.
• Gas Scrubbing: Connect the reactor's gas outlet to an intermediate scrubber filled with 3M sodium hydroxide to remove CO₂ and H₂S.
• Methane Measurement: Direct the purified gas stream to a calibrated measuring cylinder filled with barrier fluid. Record the displaced fluid volume at regular intervals as a direct measure of methane production.
• Data Collection & Calculation: Continue measurements until gas production ceases. Subtract the methane volume produced by the inoculum control from the test reactors. Express the final result as m³ CH₄ per ton of substrate fresh mass [65].

Protocol: Space-Based Solid Waste Processing and Safening

This protocol outlines the process for the Trash Compaction Processing System (TCPS), a core technology for space missions [12].

3.2.1. Objective: To reduce the volume, safen, and form spacecraft trash into stable tiles for storage, jettison, or potential reuse as radiation shielding.

3.2.2. Research Reagent Solutions & Essential Materials

• Plastic Melt Compactor: Core hardware that applies heat and pressure.
• Gas Effluent Contaminant Removal System: Treats and cleans gaseous by-products before cabin release [12].
• ISS Vacuum Exhaust System: Provides an alternative venting path for processed gases.

3.2.3. Methodology:

• Waste Loading: Separate wet and dry trash bags are loaded into the processing unit.
• Thermo-Mechanical Processing: Apply heat and pressure to the waste. This action melts plastic components and drives water out of the wet trash.
• Water Recovery & Effluent Processing: The recovered water vapor and gas effluents are passed through a contaminant removal system. The cleaned gas can be released to the cabin or overboard via the vacuum system.
• Tile Formation & Safening: The remaining solid material is compacted into square tiles. The combination of heat and low water activity (target <0.5) ensures the tiles are microbiologically stabilized ("safened") for long-term storage [12].

Visualization of Workflows

The following diagrams illustrate the logical workflows and system comparisons for the described protocols and mission architectures.

AD Pathway Comparison

Space Mission Biomanufacturing Logic

Discussion and Research Implications

The comparative analysis reveals that terrestrial AD is a mature, product-oriented technology, whereas space-based AD is an emerging, process-oriented technology where waste stabilization and integration into closed-loop systems are paramount [12] [45]. The extreme measures for pathogen control in space systems, such as high-heat and alkaline environments, highlight the non-negotiable requirement for crew safety [7].

For space mission planners, the choice of waste processing technology is deeply intertwined with mission architecture. Short-duration lunar missions with stable logistics (Class 1) may prioritize volume reduction systems like the TCPS [12], while long-duration Mars missions with rudimentary logistics (Class 3) will necessitate more advanced bioregenerative systems that integrate AD for microbial protein production and comprehensive resource recovery [7] [45]. Future research should focus on bridging the technology gap by adapting high-rate terrestrial AD reactor designs for space environments and further developing the use of methanotrophic bacteria to convert recovered methane into nutritional biomass.

Assessing the Viability of In-Situ Resource Utilization (ISRU) for Mission Sustainability

For long-duration space missions, the sustainable management of crew waste and the utilization of local resources are critical for mission viability. In-Situ Resource Utilization (ISRU) involves the collection, processing, and use of materials found on celestial bodies to reduce reliance on Earth-based supplies [68] [69]. Integrated with this, microbial bioprocessing presents a transformative approach for converting mission waste into valuable products, such as water, oxygen, and materials, supporting a closed-loop life support system [70] [71]. These Application Notes provide a structured framework of quantitative data, standardized protocols, and resource classification to support research and development in this interdisciplinary field.

Effective ISRU and waste processing planning requires a precise understanding of resource inputs and waste outputs. The following tables summarize key quantitative data for mission modeling.

Table 1: Estimated Daily Crew Consumables and Waste Production per Crew Member [72]

Parameter	Estimated Quantity (kg/day)	Notes
Water	4.19	For drinking, hygiene, and other uses.
Oxygen	0.93	For crew respiration.
Solid Waste	Variable	Includes packaging, food scraps, and other refuse.

Table 2: Annual Waste Generation and Recycling Efficiencies [70]

Parameter	Value / Efficiency	Context / Technology
Annual Waste for 4 Crew	~2500 kg	Aboard the International Space Station (ISS).
Water Recycling	Enhanced efficiency	Achieved through rigorous filtration and purification.
Oxygen Recycling	Enhanced efficiency	Part of closed-loop life support architecture.
Plasma Arc Technology	Significant volume reduction	Challenge: High energy consumption.

Table 3: Comparative Analysis of Lunar Water Extraction Methods [73]

Extraction Method	Operational Principle	Key Differentiators
Thermal (In Situ)	Applies heat (solar/electrical) directly to surface regolith to sublime ice.	Low mechanical complexity; uses domes/reflectors.
Thermal (Excavated)	Excavates and relocates regolith to a dedicated heated containment unit.	Higher system complexity; uses augers/conveyors.
Mechanical	Physical separation of ice from regolith.	--
Convection-Assisted	Uses a carrier gas to enhance vapor removal.	--
Ionisation	Employs ionising energy to release volatiles.	--

Microbial Waste Processing Protocols

The application of engineered microorganisms for waste upcycling and resource production is a cornerstone of advanced ISRU. The following protocol details an experiment flight-tested aboard the ISS.

Application Note: Biological Upcycling of Polyethylene Terephthalate (PET) aboard the ISS

This protocol outlines the methodology for using the Modular Open Biological Platform (MOBP) to enzymatically depolymerize PET and convert it into a high-value chemical, β-ketoadipic acid (βKA), a precursor for performance-advantaged nylon [71].

1. Objective To demonstrate the end-to-end biological upcycling of PET plastic waste into βKA under microgravity conditions, validating a key biologically-enabled ISRU process.

2. Experimental Workflow

The diagram below illustrates the multi-step workflow for the biological plastics upcycling experiment.

3. Materials and Equipment

• Modular Open Biological Platform (MOBP): An autonomous, modular bioreactor system for programmable liquid transfer and cultivation [71].
• Lyophilized Cell Powder: Engineered Pseudomonas putida KT2440, stored desiccated for stability during launch and integration.
• Enzyme Solution: Engineered enzymes for PET depolymerization.
• Luer-lock Bioprocessing Bags: Medical-grade, sterile bags (e.g., Saint Gobain FEP) for liquid containment (3-30 mL capacity).
• Fixed-volume Solenoid Pumps: (e.g., Lee Company LPM series) for precise, automated liquid handling.
• Revival Chip: A custom 3D-printed chip (e.g., Formlabs BioMed Clear) with a curved internal channel for efficient cell revival.

4. Step-by-Step Procedure

A. Payload Integration and Pre-flight 1. Load Biological Materials: Aseptically load lyophilized cell powder into the revival chip and seal. Load enzyme solutions and growth media into their respective Luer-lock bags. 2. Integrate with MOBP: Connect all fluidic bags, pumps, and the revival chip within the MOBP according to the system schematic. Sterilize fluid paths with 70% (v/v) ethanol flush. 3. Ground Testing: Conduct full functional test of all MOBP systems, including liquid transfers and sensor readings, under simulated mission profiles.

B. In-orbit Experiment Execution 1. Autonomous System Activation: Upon power-up on the ISS, the MOBP executes its pre-programmed protocol. 2. Cell Revival: A rotary diaphragm pump transfers 20 mL of growth media through the revival chip, rehydrating the lyophilized cells and transferring them to the main cultivation chamber (Chamber B) [71]. 3. Enzymatic Reaction (Module A): Solenoid pumps transfer the enzyme and buffer solutions to a reaction chamber to initiate PET depolymerization. 4. Microbial Cultivation and Upcycling (Module B): - The MOBP monitors microbial growth via integrated sensors (e.g., optical density). - Upon reaching a target growth phase, the system automatically transfers the TPA solution from Module A to Chamber B. - The engineered P. putida converts TPA to βKA. 5. Sample Preservation: At user-defined timepoints, the MOBP transfers culture samples to sealed collection bags for post-mission terrestrial analysis.

C. Post-flight Analysis 1. Recovery of Samples: Retrieve fixed and preserved samples from the MOBP collection bags. 2. Product Quantification: Use analytical techniques such as High-Performance Liquid Chromatography (HPLC) or Mass Spectrometry to quantify βKA yields and assess process efficiency.

The Scientist's Toolkit: Key Research Reagent Solutions

Table 4: Essential Materials for Space-Based Microbial ISRU Research

Item	Function / Application	Example / Specification
Modular Open Biological Platform (MOBP)	Autonomous cultivation & sample processing; core hardware for space biology.	Includes solenoid pumps, Luer-lock fluidics, integrated sensors [71].
Luer-lock Bioprocessing Bags	Sterile, flexible containment for liquids & cultures; enables modular fluidics.	Saint Gobain FEP bags; 3-30 mL capacity; pre-sterilized [71].
Engineered Microorganisms	Biocatalysts for converting waste streams (e.g., plastic, organic waste) into target products.	Pseudomonas putida KT2440 engineered for terephthalate (TPA) conversion [71].
Specialized Enzymes	For pretreatment & depolymerization of complex waste polymers (e.g., plastics, biomass).	Engineered PET-depolymerizing enzymes [71].
Lunar or Martian Regolith Simulants	Ground-truth testing of ISRU technologies in chemically & physically relevant soils.	--
Icy Regolith Simulants	Testing water-ice extraction technologies in a controlled laboratory setting.	Prepared per study-specific concentration & fidelity requirements [73].

ISRU Technology Classification and Integration Framework

A systematic approach to classifying ISRU technologies is vital for comparative analysis and mission architecture planning. The following diagram and table outline the primary technological pathways.

Table 5: ISRU Technology Pathways and Mission Applications

Resource	Technology	Target Products	Mission Application
Lunar Water Ice	Thermal Extraction: Heating regolith to sublime ice for capture [73].	H₂O, H₂, O₂	Propellant, drinking water, breathable air, radiation shielding [68] [69].
Martian Atmosphere (CO₂)	MOXIE (Oxygen ISRU Experiment): Solid oxide electrolysis of CO₂ [68].	O₂	Rocket oxidizer, crew respiration [68].
Mission Waste Streams	Microbial Bioreactors: Engineered microbes convert waste to products [70] [71].	H₂O, O₂, CH₄, βKA	Closed-loop life support, in-situ manufacturing of materials and pharmaceuticals [70] [71].
Mission Waste Streams	Plasma Gasification: High-temperature volume reduction & gasification [70].	Syngas, H₂O	Waste management, recovery of water and gases [70].

The Role of Computational Modeling (e.g., AMMPER) in Predicting System Performance

Computational modeling has become an indispensable tool for advancing the sustainability of long-duration space missions, particularly in managing microbial processes within closed-loop life support systems. As missions extend farther from Earth with larger crews, the volume of waste generated increases significantly, creating complex challenges for storage, crew health, and spacecraft integrity [70]. These systems require predictive tools to understand how microbial communities will behave under the unique stressors of the space environment. Agent-based models like the Agent-based Model for Microbial Populations Exposed to Radiation (AMMPER) provide a powerful framework for simulating biological processes at the single-cell level, translating this data to population-level outcomes that inform mission planning and system design [74]. Originally developed in 2021, AMMPER is a Python-based model that incorporates radiation track data from NASA's RITRACKS software to simulate the growth, damage, and death of microorganisms in three-dimensional space [74]. This capability is particularly valuable for optimizing emerging bioregenerative life support systems (BLSS) that leverage microbes for waste bioconversion, air revitalization, and resource recovery—key technologies that will enable self-sufficiency during lunar and Martian missions [6].

Table 1: Waste Generation and Microbial Growth Parameters in Space Environments

Parameter	Value	Context & Conditions	Source / Mission
Annual Waste Generation	>2,500 kg	Total for a crew of 4 astronauts	International Space Station (ISS) [70]
Fungal Concentration (Baseline)	4.4 × 10⁶ spore equivalents/mg	In ISS dust with no RH exposure	ISS Vacuum Bag Samples [75]
Fungal Concentration (Peak)	2.1 × 10¹⁰ spore equivalents/mg	In ISS dust after 2 weeks at 100% RH	ISS Vacuum Bag Samples [75]
Critical Relative Humidity	>80% ERH	Threshold for fungal growth activation in dust	Time-of-Wetness Framework [75]
Operational RH Range	25% - 75%	NASA's current guidelines for ISS	ISS Operational Guidelines [75]

Table 2: Comparison of Advanced Waste Processing Technologies for Space Missions

Technology	Key Function	Advantages	Challenges
AI-Driven Sorting Systems	Autonomous classification and sorting of waste	Enhances resource recovery efficiency; reduces crew workload	Integration complexity with existing systems [70]
Microbial Bioreactors	Bioconversion of organic waste into reusable resources (e.g., water, methane)	Supports closed-loop systems; can be enhanced with genetically engineered strains	Potential microbial risks; requires sterilization [70] [6]
Plasma Gasification	High-temperature thermal reduction of waste	Significantly reduces waste volume	High energy consumption [70]
In-Situ Resource Utilization (ISRU)	Use of local materials (e.g., regolith) with microbes to improve soil fertility	Reduces reliance on Earth resupply; supports food production	Absence of reactive nitrogen in regolith requires nitrogen-fixing bacteria [6]

Experimental Protocols for Ground and Space-Based Research

Protocol: Modeling Microbial Growth in Spacecraft Dust Using the Time-of-Wetness Framework

Objective: To predict fungal growth and community composition changes in dust from spacecraft environments under varying moisture conditions, simulating potential system failures or condensation events [75].

Materials and Reagents:

• Dust samples from spacecraft vacuum bags (e.g., from HEPA filter cleaning)
• Sterilized glass incubation chambers (3.8 L)
• Sodium chloride (NaCl) and magnesium chloride (MgCl₂) solutions
• Deionized (DI) water
• Aqualab Dew Point Water Activity Meter
• Onset HOBO Data logger
• Sterile aluminum foil and plastic dishes
• Quantitative Polymerase Chain Reaction (qPCR) equipment
• Illumina MiSeq sequencer [75]

Procedure:

• Sample Collection: Obtain dust from vacuum bags used in weekly housekeeping activities to clean protective screen covers for HEPA filters within the space station's air ventilation system [75].
• Sample Preparation: Portion out approximately 25 mg of unsieved dust onto sterile aluminum foil placed on a plastic dish. Use triplicate samples for each experimental condition [75].
• Constant RH Incubation:
  • Prepare salt solutions and DI water in separate glass chambers to achieve target Equilibrium Relative Humidity (ERH) conditions: 50%, 60%, 70%, 80%, 85%, 90%, and 100%.
  • Verify the water activity (a_w) of salt solutions using a dew point water activity meter.
  • Place sample dishes into each chamber, ensuring each contains ~50 mL of solution or DI water and a data logger to monitor ERH and temperature.
  • Incubate all chambers at 25°C for 2 weeks [75].
• Time-of-Wetness Incubation:
  • To simulate fluctuating conditions, incubate samples at elevated (85% ERH) or saturated (100% ERH) conditions, cycling them back to 50% ERH for periods of 6, 12, 18, and 24 hours over a 21-day period.
  • Calculate the relative growth rate (R/k) at days 5, 10, 14, and 21 [75].
• Post-Incubation Analysis:
  • Use qPCR for the quantification of total bacterial and fungal loads.
  • Utilize Illumina MiSeq sequencing to determine changes in microbial community composition (alpha and beta diversity) for each ERH and time-of-wetness condition.
  • For a subset of samples, use scanning electron microscopy to visualize microbial growth directly on the dust particles [75].

Protocol: Simulating Microbial Population Dynamics with AMMPER

Objective: To incorporate radiation track data and simulate the growth, damage, and death of microbial cells (e.g., yeast) in a 3D space, predicting population-level outcomes from single-cell events [74].

Materials and Software:

• AMMPER software (open-source package from NASA's GitHub repository)
• RITRACKS radiation track data (NASA software)
• Python programming environment
• Computational resources to run agent-based simulations [74]

Procedure:

• Environment Setup: Install the AMMPER package from NASA's GitHub repository and ensure all Python dependencies are met [74].
• Input Data Integration: Import radiation track data generated by NASA's RITRACKS software into AMMPER. This data defines the spatial and energetic distribution of ionizing radiation events within the simulation environment [74].
• Parameter Configuration:
  • Define the initial 3D coordinates and properties of the microbial agents (e.g., cell type, metabolic state).
  • Set simulation parameters for growth rates, damage repair mechanisms, and death thresholds based on empirical data.
  • Configure the simulation to track metabolic activity, for instance, by implementing modules that simulate the dynamics of redox dyes like alamarBlue [74].
• Simulation Execution: Run the agent-based model to track the interactions of individual microbial cells with radiation tracks and with each other over simulated time.
• Data Output and Analysis: Analyze simulation outputs, which include population growth curves, spatial distribution maps of cells, and metrics of metabolic activity. Compare these predictions with ground-truth empirical data from ground studies or spaceflight experiments to validate the model [74].

Research Reagent Solutions for Space Microbiology

Table 3: Essential Research Reagents and Materials for Space Microbiology Experiments

Reagent / Material	Function	Application Example
alamarBlue	A color-changing redox dye used to track metabolic activity in microbial cultures.	Monitoring metabolic activity in ground studies for model validation in AMMPER [74].
CELOC Hypo-allergenic Filter Bags	Collection and containment of dust from space station environments.	Obtaining dust samples from ISS HEPA filter coverings for microbial analysis [75].
Sodium Chloride (NaCl) / Magnesium Chloride (MgCl₂)	Used to create specific salt solutions for controlling equilibrium relative humidity (ERH) in incubation chambers.	Simulating varying moisture conditions in ground-based studies on ISS dust [75].
Sinorhizobium meliloti	A nitrogen-fixing bacterium.	Inoculating clover plants to enhance soil fertility in simulated Martian regolith [6].
qPCR Reagents & Illumina MiSeq Kits	For quantitative DNA analysis and high-throughput sequencing of microbial communities.	Quantifying and characterizing changes in bacterial and fungal communities in response to environmental stressors [75].

System Workflows and Logical Diagrams

AMMPER Simulation Workflow

Microbial Response to Moisture Protocol

Waste Processing Technology Integration

Benchmarking Different Microbial Technologies for Specific Mission Profiles

The success of long-duration space missions beyond low Earth orbit is inherently tied to the development of robust, efficient, and self-sustaining life support systems. Central to this challenge is the effective management of organic waste and the in-situ production of critical resources, a role for which microbial technologies are uniquely suited. The closed environment of a spacecraft or extraterrestrial habitat necessitates a circular economy where waste streams are not merely discarded but viewed as feedstocks for microbial bioprocesses [76] [2]. These processes can transform waste into valuable products including bioenergy, nutrient-rich biomass for food, bioplastics, and pharmaceuticals, thereby reducing reliance on Earth-based resupply and enhancing mission resilience [45] [77].

However, not all microbial technologies are equally applicable to every mission type. Their utility is constrained by mission-specific parameters such as duration, distance from Earth (which dictates resupply feasibility), crew size, and availability of in-situ resources [45]. This application note provides a structured benchmarking framework for selecting and deploying microbial technologies across distinct space mission profiles. It synthesizes current research to present standardized protocols, comparative performance data, and essential analytical toolkits, enabling researchers and mission planners to make informed decisions for integrating microbiology into sustainable space exploration.

Mission Profile Classification and Technology Selection

The applicability of a microbial bioprocess is fundamentally dictated by the mission architecture, particularly the balance between cargo delivery, in-situ resource utilization (ISRU), and the degree of loop-closure (LC) required. The following mission classification, adapted from current literature, provides a scaffold for technology benchmarking [45].

Table 1: Space Mission Classification and Corresponding Microbial Technology Focus

Mission Class	Description & Logistics	Primary Technology Focus	Key Waste Feedstocks	Critical Outputs
Class 1: Moon, Stable Logistics	Short-duration missions with reliable Earth resupply (e.g., Artemis-like).	Technology Demonstration & System Validation. Focus on low-risk, small-scale bioreactors for concept proving.	Packaged mission waste (limited).	Data on system operation in microgravity; precursor molecules.
Class 2: Moon, Disrupted Logistics	Advanced lunar operations with risk of supply chain disruption.	Loop-Closure (LC) & Hyper-Efficiency. Systems designed to derivatize packaging and process waste streams.	In-situ waste streams (grey water, food waste, packaging).	Simple cellular foods; recycled water and nutrients; bio-based materials.
Class 3: Mars, Rudimentary Logistics	Mars missions with minimal resupply but greater in-situ resource availability.	Integrated ISRU & LC. Scalable systems utilizing Martian regolith, atmosphere, and waste.	Local regolith, atmospheric CO₂, mission waste.	Nutritional food; essential therapeutics; multi-purpose materials.
Class 4: Mars, Sustainable Settlement	Long-term, self-sufficient Martian habitat.	Fully Circular Bioeconomy. Advanced, multi-stage microbial ecosystems for complete sustainability.	All available organic and inorganic streams.	Diverse food, pharmaceuticals, complex polymers, ecosystem services.

Benchmarking Microbial Technologies for Waste Processing

Benchmarking requires a clear comparison of the performance metrics of different microbial systems against the requirements of each mission class. The following technologies have been identified as high-potential candidates for space-based waste processing and valorization.

Table 2: Benchmarking of Microbial Technologies for Waste Processing in Space

Technology / Organism	Process & Feedstock	Key Outputs & Yield Data	Optimal Mission Class	Advantages	Limitations
Anaerobic Digestion Consortia	Mixed communities for complex organic waste breakdown.	Biogas (CH₄, CO₂); nutrient slurry.	Class 2, 3, 4	Handles complex, mixed waste streams.	Slow process; requires downstream sterilization.
Methylococcus capsulatus	Aerobic fermentation of methane (from anaerobic digestion) [77].	52% protein, 36% fat biomass [77].	Class 3, 4	High-quality single-cell protein for food.	Requires sterile methane feed; multi-stage process.
Fusarium oxysporum	Decomposition of lignocellulosic waste (e.g., paper, plant matter) [76].	Bioethanol (2.47 g/L, yield 0.84 g/g) [76].	Class 2, 3, 4	Can degrade complex plant matter; produces fuel.	Known plant pathogen; requires containment.
Halomonas desiderata	Alkaline fermentation of organic waste [77].	High-protein, high-lipid biomass.	Class 2, 3, 4	High pH suppresses pathogen contamination.	Requires environmental control.
Thermus aquaticus	Thermophilic fermentation of organic waste [77].	High-protein, high-lipid biomass.	Class 2, 3, 4	High temperature suppresses pathogen contamination.	High energy input for heating.
Nitrogen-Fixing Bacteria (e.g., Sinorhizobium meliloti)	Use of N₂ from cabin air or regolith to fertilize plant-growth systems [2].	Reactive nitrogen (NO₃⁻, NH₄⁺) for soil fertility.	Class 3, 4	Enables agriculture in regolith; reduces fertilizer mass.	Requires co-cultivation with plants or specific bioreactor conditions.

Detailed Experimental Protocols

To ensure the reproducibility of these microbial processes in space-analog and flight environments, the following standardized protocols are provided.

Protocol A: Culture-Independent Microbial Monitoring of Surfaces

Application: In-flight monitoring of microbial burden on spacecraft surfaces to assess crew health risks and diagnose contamination events in real-time, without the need for sample return to Earth [78].

Workflow Diagram: Surface Monitoring via Swab-to-Sequencer

Step-by-Step Procedure:

• Sample Collection:

  • Aseptically remove a sterile swab (e.g., Texwipe) from its packaging.
  • Moisten the swab tip with sterile, nuclease-free molecular grade water.
  • Swab a defined 100 cm² surface area for 60 seconds using a rolling and rotating motion. Include a negative control (swab wetted but not touched to surface).
  • Break the swab tip off directly into a PCR tube containing 200 µL of QuickExtract DNA Extraction Solution [78].

• DNA Extraction:

  • Place the tube in a miniPCR thermal cycler.
  • Run the extraction protocol: 65°C for 15 minutes, followed by 98°C for 2 minutes [78].
  • Briefly centrifuge the tube to collect condensation.

• DNA Purification (Bead-Based Cleanup):

  • Transfer the extracted DNA to a clean tube.
  • Add a 1X volume of Agencourt AMPure XP beads, mix thoroughly, and incubate.
  • Place on a magnet to separate beads from supernatant. Discard supernatant.
  • Wash beads twice with a modified washing buffer (5% PEG with 1.25 M NaCl).
  • Air-dry beads and elute DNA in 25 µL of sterile nuclease-free water [78].

• 16S rRNA Gene Amplification:

  • Prepare a PCR mix containing:
    • 20 µL of purified DNA.
    • ONT 16S barcoded primers (e.g., 27F/1492R).
    • LongAmp Taq 2X Master Mix.
  • Run in miniPCR with the following protocol:
    • Initial Denaturation: 95°C for 3 minutes.
    • 30 Cycles: 95°C for 20s, 55°C for 30s, 65°C for 2 minutes.
    • Final Extension: 65°C for 5 minutes [78].

• Amplicon Purification:

  • Use a 0.6X volume of AMPure XP beads for cleanup to select for the ~1500 bp amplicon.
  • Repeat the magnetic separation and washing steps as in Step 3.
  • Elute the final amplicon in 10 µL of 10 mM Tris-HCl pH 8.0 with 50 mM NaCl [78].

• Library Preparation & Sequencing:

  • Prime and wash a MinION flow cell according to manufacturer specifications.
  • Combine the purified 16S amplicons with 1 µL of Rapid Adaptor and 4 µL of Adaptor Storage Buffer. Incubate at room temperature for 5 minutes.
  • Add the library to Sequencing Buffer and load onto the flow cell.
  • Initiate sequencing on the MinKNOW software for up to 48 hours [78].

Protocol B: Two-Stage Waste Processing for Protein Biomass Production

Application: Conversion of solid organic waste into edible, high-protein microbial biomass for food, suitable for missions with limited resupply (Class 2-4) [77].

Workflow Diagram: Waste to Biomass Conversion

Step-by-Step Procedure:

• Stage 1: Anaerobic Digestion of Waste

  • Reactor Setup: Load a mixed consortium of anaerobic bacteria and archaea into a sealed, stirred-tank bioreactor.
  • Feedstock Preparation: Homogenize solid organic waste (food scraps, faeces, plant trimmings) with water to create a slurry. Load into the reactor.
  • Process Conditions: Maintain anoxic conditions at mesophilic temperatures (~35-40°C). Continuously mix.
  • Output Monitoring: Monitor biogas production (typically 60-70% CH₄, 30-40% CO₂). The process is complete when gas production significantly declines [77].

• Stage 2: Aerobic Fermentation with Methylococcus capsulatus

  • Biogas Sterilization: Pass the generated biogas through a 0.2 µm filter or a heat sterilization unit to ensure aseptic conditions for the next stage.
  • Inoculum Preparation: Cultivate Methylococcus capsulatus in a sterile mineral medium.
  • Fermentation: Transfer the sterile methane gas and the inoculum to a second, aerated bioreactor. Maintain conditions optimal for M. capsulatus (e.g., 45°C, pH 6.8-7.2, sufficient O₂).
  • Harvesting: Once growth reaches stationary phase (monitored by optical density), harvest biomass via continuous centrifugation or tangential flow filtration.
  • Post-Processing: The resulting paste can be dried (lyophilization or spray-drying) to produce a stable, edible protein powder [77].

The Scientist's Toolkit: Key Research Reagent Solutions

The successful implementation of the above protocols relies on a core set of reagents and instruments, especially adapted for the space environment.

Table 3: Essential Research Reagents and Tools for Space Microbiology

Item	Function / Application	Example / Specification
QuickExtract DNA Extraction Solution	Rapid, single-tube DNA extraction from swabs and complex samples for in-situ analysis.	Lucigen Cooperation [78].
Agencourt AMPure XP Beads	Solid-phase reversible immobilization (SPRI) for DNA purification and size selection; compatible with microgravity.	Beckman Coulter Genomics; used at 0.6X-1X ratios [78].
LongAmp Taq 2X Master Mix	Robust PCR amplification of long targets, such as the full-length 16S rRNA gene (~1500 bp).	New England Biolabs (NEB) [78].
ONT 16S Barcoded Primers	Targeted amplification and multiplexed sequencing of the 16S rRNA gene on the MinION platform.	Oxford Nanopore Technologies (e.g., SQK-RAB204) [78].
miniPCR Thermal Cycler	Portable, low-power PCR machine validated for operations on the International Space Station.	miniPCR bio [78].
MinION Sequencer	Portable, real-time, long-read sequencing device for microbial identification and metagenomics.	Oxford Nanopore Technologies [78].
Simulated Martian/Lunar Regolith	Terrestrial analog soil for ground-based experiments on ISRU and plant-microbe interactions.	Must meet specific mineralogical and chemical composition standards [2].
Specialized Microbial Strains	Engineered or wild-type strains for specific biomanufacturing (e.g., Methylococcus capsulatus, Sinorhizobium meliloti).	Sourced from culture collections (e.g., ATCC); requires viability and purity verification [2] [77].

The systematic benchmarking of microbial technologies against defined mission profiles provides a critical roadmap for the development of sustainable life support systems for deep space exploration. As this document illustrates, technology selection is not one-size-fits-all but must be accretive, with systems proven in the context of less demanding missions (e.g., Class 1 Lunar) before deployment on more autonomous ones (e.g., Class 3 Mars). The provided protocols for microbial monitoring and waste valorization, supported by the essential toolkit of reagents and instruments, offer a tangible starting point for ground-based research and technology readiness level (TRL) advancement. Future work must focus on the integration of these discrete processes into a seamless, automated, and resilient bioregenerative life support system, ultimately enabling humanity to venture deeper into the solar system.

Conclusion

Microbial waste processing is evolving from a simple waste management task into a cornerstone technology for regenerative life support and in-space biomanufacturing. The successful implementation of these systems hinges on a deep understanding of microbial behavior in space, the deployment of robust technologies like Anaerobic Membrane Bioreactors, and rigorous validation against mission-critical parameters. Future advancements will depend on interdisciplinary research integrating microbiology, engineering, and data science to create adaptive, self-regulating systems. For the biomedical field, this progress not only ensures crew health on long-duration missions but also opens avenues for producing pharmaceuticals and biomaterials in space, leveraging microgravity for breakthroughs with profound implications for terrestrial medicine and environmental sustainability.

References

• 1. Microbial Responses to Microgravity and Other Low-Shear ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC419922/]
• 2. Microbial applications for sustainable space exploration ... [https://www.nature.com/articles/s41526-023-00285-0]
• 3. Effects of Simulated Microgravity on the Physiology ... [https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/microbiology/articles/10.3389/fmicb.2021.701265/full]
• 4. Long-term microgravity experiments reveal a new ... [https://www.nature.com/articles/s41526-025-00523-7]
• 5. Mechanotransduction in Prokaryotes: A Possible Mechanism ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7825584/]
• 6. Microbial applications for sustainable space exploration ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10284894/]
• 7. Microbes may help astronauts transform human waste into ... [https://www.psu.edu/news/research/story/microbes-may-help-astronauts-transform-human-waste-food]
• 8. Cellular mechanotransduction of human osteoblasts in ... [https://www.nature.com/articles/s41526-024-00386-4]
• 9. Benchmark microgravity experiments and computations for ... [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1359645425002411]
• 10. Qualitative and Quantitative Metrics for Evaluating the ... [https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12217-025-10185-5]
• 11. Selection of working fluids for electrohydrodynamic experiments in... [https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00231-011-0871-z]
• 12. The Trash Compaction Processing System (TCPS) [https://www.nasa.gov/ames/space-biosciences/bioengineering-branch/the-trash-compaction-processing-system/]
• 13. Microbial contamination and pharmaceutical stability in ... [https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/space-technologies/articles/10.3389/frspt.2025.1553854/full]
• 14. Microbial resilience in space: Biofilms, risks and strategies ... [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S221455242500063X]
• 15. Impact of space flight on bacterial virulence and antibiotic ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4524529/]
• 16. Characterization of Biofilm Formation, Growth, and Gene ... [https://catalog.data.gov/dataset/characterization-of-biofilm-formation-growth-and-gene-expression-on-different-materials-an]
• 17. Simulated Microgravity affects immune reaction to infection ... [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S2214552425001130]
• 18. Reproducible changes in gut microbiome reveal a shift in ... [https://catalog.data.gov/dataset/reproducible-changes-in-gut-microbiome-reveal-a-shift-in-microbial-and-host-metabolism-dur]
• 19. Spaceflight exposome/microgravity effects on the ... [https://www.nature.com/articles/s41526-025-00487-8]
• 20. Station Science Top News: Feb. 27, 2025 [https://www.nasa.gov/missions/station/station-science-top-news-feb-27-2025/]
• 21. Gravitational Effects and Radiobiology of Microbes in Space - NASA [https://www.nasa.gov/ames/space-biosciences/gravitational-effects-and-radiobiology-of-microbes-in-space/]
• 22. Artemis I Space Radiation Research to Help Moon, Mars ... [https://www.nasa.gov/general/artemis-i-space-radiation-research-to-help-moon-mars-explorers/]
• 23. Space Biology Research Supports Understanding the ... [https://astrobiology.com/2025/04/space-biology-research-supports-understanding-the-hazards-of-human-spaceflight.html]
• 24. Differential Gene Expression in A Cross-Feeding Two-Species Model Microbial Community Under Simulated Microgravity and Deep-Space Radiation - NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS) [https://ntrs.nasa.gov/citations/20230016227]
• 25. High-throughput identification and quantification of single ... [https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-022-28426-1]
• 26. Water recycling is paramount for space missions [https://www.theinvadingsea.com/2025/09/07/water-recycling-international-space-station-wastewater-nasa-florida-international-university/]
• 27. An overview of anaerobic membrane bioreactors [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S2213343723022212]
• 28. Anaerobic Membrane Bioreactors for Municipal Wastewater ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8703433/]
• 29. Anaerobic Membrane Bioreactors (AnMBRs) for ... [https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/16/6/2829]
• 30. Assessment of an Anaerobic Membrane Bioreactor ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8226899/]
• 31. Anaerobic membrane bioreactor (AnMBR) process control [https://www.thembrsite.com/features/anaerobic-membrane-bioreactor-anmbr-process-control-1]
• 32. Anaerobic membrane bioreactor for hygiene wastewater ... [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0960852423009458]
• 33. Selection and characterization of bacterial consortia for the ... [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2214552425000665]
• 34. Sustainable agriculture: leveraging microorganisms for a ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11364797/]
• 35. microbial pathways for sustainable food production [https://pubs.rsc.org/en/content/articlehtml/2025/fb/d5fb00287g]
• 36. Biomass gasification for hydrogen production [https://www.ieabioenergy.com/blog/publications/biomass-gasification-for-hydrogen-production/]
• 37. Impact of microgravity on space microbes and application ... [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0094576525004941]
• 38. Robust microorganisms for biofuel and chemical production from municipal solid waste | Microbial Cell Factories | Full Text [https://microbialcellfactories.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12934-020-01325-0]
• 39. Evaluating the feasibility of biological waste processing for ... [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/11541774/]
• 40. Microbial pathways for advanced biofuel production - PMC [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9162456/]
• 41. Microorganisms in Confined Habitats: Microbial Monitoring ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5061736/]
• 42. Succession and persistence of microbial ... - Microbiome [https://microbiomejournal.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s40168-018-0585-2]
• 43. Sustainable and effective microorganisms method for ... [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1944398624004521]
• 44. Experimental Treatment of Hazardous Ash Waste by ... [https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/microbiology/articles/10.3389/fmicb.2021.792987/full]
• 45. Microbial biomanufacturing for space-exploration—what to ... [https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-023-37910-1]
• 46. Potential biofilm control strategies for extended spaceflight ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7798464/]
• 47. Mitigation and use of biofilms in space for the benefit ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9843197/]
• 48. Polymicrobial Biofilm Growth and Control during ... [https://science.nasa.gov/biological-physical/investigations/bacterial-adhesion/]
• 49. Stopping slime on Earth and in space - Full Circle [https://fullcircle.asu.edu/research/stopping-slime-on-earth-and-in-space/]
• 50. The Characterization of Feces and Urine: A Review of the Literature to Inform Advanced Treatment Technology - PMC [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4500995/]
• 51. Microbial products for space nutrition [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0167779923003438]
• 52. Probing the degradation of pharmaceuticals in urine using MFC and studying their removal efficiency by UPLC-MS/MS - PMC [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8264381/]
• 53. Effect of modified waste introduction methods over short-term and long-term use of onsite sanitation systems | Scientific Reports [https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-023-35110-x]
• 54. Anaerobic Digestion of Food Waste and Its Microbial ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9367938/]
• 55. From earth to space: how bacterial consortia and green ... [https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00374-025-01923-3]
• 56. Long-term homeostasis in microbial consortia via ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12480931/]
• 57. The effect of long-term spaceflight on drug potency and ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10163248/]
• 58. Inside the Mission to Send Trash-Transforming Bacteria Into ... [https://seed.com/cultured/sending-trash-transforming-bacteria-into-space/?srsltid=AfmBOorU-rCij3JSRwThAt1MOk1VoLOurv2Puxr4nQVaz-RkMqcdAlbf]
• 59. QbD/PAT for bioprocessing: moving from theory to ... [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S2211339814000549]
• 60. Current PAT Landscape in the Downstream Processing of ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12120361/]
• 61. Theoretical design of a space bioprocessing system to ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10505218/]
• 62. QbD and PAT in Upstream and Downstream Processing [https://www.biopharminternational.com/view/qbd-and-pat-upstream-and-downstream-processing]
• 63. Anaerobic digestion as a sustainable technology for ... [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0013935123010903]
• 64. A comprehensive study on anaerobic digestion of organic ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11630644/]
• 65. The Assessment of Anaerobic Digestion Performance and ... [https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/18/18/4876]
• 66. Anaerobic Digestion as a Core Technology in Addressing the ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10702437/]
• 67. Optimizing grassland anaerobic digestion: a dual ... [https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10668-025-06946-2]
• 68. Overview: In-Situ Resource Utilization [https://www.nasa.gov/overview-in-situ-resource-utilization/]
• 69. In Situ Resource Utilization: The Future of Human ... [https://spaceresourcetech.com/blogs/articles/in-situ-resource-utilization-the-future-of-human-settlements-in-space?srsltid=AfmBOooodMMEOF_VFJMpGbURlAz9THtK3ooKaMbcK9dfIoyILAMeNQ-4]
• 70. AI-Driven Waste Management in Innovating Space ... [https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/17/9/4088]
• 71. Development and flight-testing of modular autonomous ... [https://www.nature.com/articles/s41526-025-00463-2]
• 72. Exploration life support technology challenges for the Crew ... [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0273117709006814]
• 73. A review of lunar water extraction technologies [https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s44461-025-00005-4]
• 74. AMMPER: a user-friendly agent-based model that ... [https://ntrs.nasa.gov/citations/20230016450]
• 75. Predicting how varying moisture conditions impact the ... [https://microbiomejournal.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s40168-024-01864-3]
• 76. Microbial Technologies in Waste Management, Energy ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10196283/]
• 77. Highlighted Articles - Life Sciences in Space Research [https://www.sciencedirect.com/journal/life-sciences-in-space-research/about/highlighted-articles/microbial-processing-could-astronauts-transform-waste-into-f]
• 78. Real-Time Culture-Independent Microbial Profiling ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7830261/]