<p>Having checked the older rovers, the highest resolution microscope on Mars is in the SHERLOC (Scanning Habitable Environments with Raman &amp; Luminescence for Organics &amp; Chemicals) instrument.  The main purpose of this instrument is the use of a laser to analyse rocks, looking for organic compounds.  But it also has a macro camera (The Autofocus and Context Imager) for close-up inspection of what the laser was sampling.</p>
<p>The Autofocus and Context Imager has a resolution of 10.1 micrometers.  By comparison most Earth bacteria are one to two micrometers, and the proposed &quot;bacteria&quot; in Martian meteorites were much smaller.  There is also WATSON (Wide Angle Topographic Sensor for Operations and eNgineering) also has a camera. It is a colour camera with a resolution of about 15 micrometers.</p>
<p>It is no longer functional, but the Phoenix lander had an atomic force microscope. This works by scanning a silicone tip over a surface and measuring the force between the sample and the tip. It had a resolution of 0.1 micrometres, but it's not a visual light microscope and it would not be great for detecting microbes.</p>
<p>But &quot;detecting microbes&quot; is not done with a microscope.  It is the chemical analysis of rocks that may provide evidence of ancient life. Thats what the &quot;Raman &amp; Luminescence&quot; is all about.</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2022-06-24T05:00:35.670Z
What about the potentially existing microbes? Why they are so sure there are no existing microbes? Why they only look for ancient life and not for potential present life?
Joe Jobs
CC BY-SA 4.0
2022-06-24T12:56:07.923Z
@JoeJobs That's a great question and you can consider posting it as a new one.
uhoh
CC BY-SA 4.0
2022-04-23T20:08:23.727Z
The [Phoenix lander](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phoenix_(spacecraft)#Atomic_force_microscope) had an atomic force microscope on it, with a resolution of 0.1 micrometers.  However, as you say, it would not be great for detecting microbes.
IronEagle
CC BY-SA 4.0
2022-04-23T20:18:27.363Z
@IronEagle thanks, I've incorporated that.
James K
CC BY-SA 4.0
2022-04-21T21:52:17.200Z
2022-04-23T20:18:08.427Z
2022-04-23T20:18:08.427Z
James K
<p>From all the missions sent to the surface of Mars, do any of them have a microscope? If yes, then which one has the most powerful microscope? Is it capable of detecting microbes?</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2022-04-21T20:34:01.700Z
different but related (and potentially helpful here) in Space SE: [Microscopes in space?](https://space.stackexchange.com/q/25784/12102) and [Why is there no microscope on the Mars 2020 rover?](https://space.stackexchange.com/q/39525/12102) and [Is there, or has there ever been anything remotely like an electron microscope in space?](https://space.stackexchange.com/q/30388/12102) and [What is MAHLI's theoretical or expected best optical resolution? How was it defined? Was it verified on Mars?](https://space.stackexchange.com/q/55137/12102)
uhoh
CC BY-SA 4.0
2022-04-22T03:36:30.993Z
cyanobacteria, sulphur bacteria, oxygen respiration: All life needs to transform one chemical into another to produce energy... Cyanobacteria used to be the main form on our planet when there was no oxygen. Sulphar based bacteria work in deep ponds, where it smells of old eggs. That's easier to detect chemically than using microscopes. All bacteria also need water that sometimes becomes liquid. Currently liquid water on mars is nearly zero: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_on_Mars
bandybabboon
<mars><life>
Most powerful microscope on Mars?
Joe Jobs
# Most powerful microscope on Mars?

(Asked by: username_0 on 2022-04-21)

From all the missions sent to the surface of Mars, do any of them have a microscope? If yes, then which one has the most powerful microscope? Is it capable of detecting microbes?

**Tags:** mars, life
> **Comments:**
> **username_1**: different but related (and potentially helpful here) in Space SE: [Microscopes in space?](https://space.stackexchange.com/q/25784/12102) and [Why is there no microscope on the Mars 2020 rover?](https://space.stackexchange.com/q/39525/12102) and [Is there, or has there ever been anything remotely like an electron microscope in space?](https://space.stackexchange.com/q/30388/12102) and [What is MAHLI's theoretical or expected best optical resolution? How was it defined? Was it verified on Mars?](https://space.stackexchange.com/q/55137/12102)  
> **username_2**: cyanobacteria, sulphur bacteria, oxygen respiration: All life needs to transform one chemical into another to produce energy... Cyanobacteria used to be the main form on our planet when there was no oxygen. Sulphar based bacteria work in deep ponds, where it smells of old eggs. That's easier to detect chemically than using microscopes. All bacteria also need water that sometimes becomes liquid. Currently liquid water on mars is nearly zero: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_on_Mars  

---

## 1 answers

### Answer by username_3 on 2022-04-21. Score: 6

Having checked the older rovers, the highest resolution microscope on Mars is in the SHERLOC (Scanning Habitable Environments with Raman & Luminescence for Organics & Chemicals) instrument. The main purpose of this instrument is the use of a laser to analyse rocks, looking for organic compounds. But it also has a macro camera (The Autofocus and Context Imager) for close-up inspection of what the laser was sampling.

The Autofocus and Context Imager has a resolution of 10.1 micrometers. By comparison most Earth bacteria are one to two micrometers, and the proposed "bacteria" in Martian meteorites were much smaller. There is also WATSON (Wide Angle Topographic Sensor for Operations and eNgineering) also has a camera. It is a colour camera with a resolution of about 15 micrometers.

It is no longer functional, but the Phoenix lander had an atomic force microscope. This works by scanning a silicone tip over a surface and measuring the force between the sample and the tip. It had a resolution of 0.1 micrometres, but it's not a visual light microscope and it would not be great for detecting microbes.

But "detecting microbes" is not done with a microscope. It is the chemical analysis of rocks that may provide evidence of ancient life. Thats what the "Raman & Luminescence" is all about.

> **Comments:**
> **username_4**: The [Phoenix lander](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phoenix_(spacecraft)#Atomic_force_microscope) had an atomic force microscope on it, with a resolution of 0.1 micrometers.  However, as you say, it would not be great for detecting microbes.  
> **username_3**: @IronEagle thanks, I've incorporated that.  
> **username_0**: What about the potentially existing microbes? Why they are so sure there are no existing microbes? Why they only look for ancient life and not for potential present life?  
> **username_1**: @JoeJobs That's a great question and you can consider posting it as a new one.  

---

