She was an absolute delight! Where did the NASA scientists go wrong? "Fall in love with your hypothesis, and then try to kill it."
For those who don't know what I'm talking about, Redfield sort of led the charge against NASA's claim of finding a bacterium that can grow on arsenic instead of phosphorus. Here's the post that started it all:
Arsenic-associated bacteria (NASA's claims)
You can read the full report of her results in her new Science paper, which was just published an hour ago:
Reaves et al. 2012. Absence of Detectable Arsenate in DNA from Arsenate-Grown GFAJ-1 Cells. Science 10.1126/science.1219861
You might also be interested in a paper that comes to similar conclusions:
Erb et al. 2012. GFAJ-1 Is an Arsenate-Resistant, Phosphate-Dependent Organism. Science DOI: 10.1126/science.1218455
Feedback? Email me at toddcharleswood [at] gmail [dot] com.