The search for life beyond Earth has largely converged on one observational strategy: look for atmospheric chemicals in exoplanet spectra that are difficult to produce without biology. On Earth, the coexistence of oxygen (strongly oxidizing) and methane (strongly reducing) in the atmosphere is maintained only by continuous biological production; left alone, the two gases react and the methane disappears within a few thousand years. No known purely geological process produces both simultaneously in the proportions observed. Oxygen alone is more ambiguous — photolysis of water vapor can produce oxygen without life in some planetary environments — but the O2/O3/CH4 combination, especially alongside nitrous oxide (N2O) and certain chlorofluorocarbons, constitutes a compelling biosignature that would be difficult to fake abiotically.

The James Webb Space Telescope has the sensitivity to detect some biosignature molecules in the atmospheres of nearby rocky exoplanets — but only under favorable conditions, and the measurement requires many tens of transit observations stacked to build up signal. In 2023, JWST detected carbon dioxide in the atmosphere of TRAPPIST-1c, a rocky exoplanet in the habitable zone of a red dwarf star 40 light-years from Earth — the first detection of any atmospheric molecule in a rocky exoplanet's atmosphere. In 2025, the JWST team reported a tentative detection of dimethyl sulfide (DMS) in the atmosphere of K2-18b, a sub-Neptune orbiting in the habitable zone of a red dwarf. DMS on Earth is produced primarily by marine phytoplankton; the detection was statistically significant but not confirmed to the threshold required for a discovery claim.

The false positive problem

The central challenge in biosignature science is not detection but interpretation. A chemical that is a reliable biosignature on Earth may have abiotic production pathways on worlds with different chemistry, different stellar environments, or different geological histories. Oxygen is the classic example: photosynthetic organisms produce it so prolifically that its presence at Earth's concentration is considered nearly unambiguous biological evidence — but on a planet orbiting very close to a UV-bright star, runaway photolysis of water vapor can build up oxygen atmospheres without biology. Methane on a planet with active volcanism and mantle outgassing may be geological rather than biological. The context matters as much as the detection.

This has driven the development of "agnostic biosignature" frameworks — approaches that look for thermodynamic disequilibrium or molecular complexity without presupposing which specific molecules life produces. The logic is that life, wherever it operates, must do chemical work and leave chemical entropy gradients behind; detecting a departure from the abiotic equilibrium chemistry expected for a given stellar and geological environment is evidence of something active, even if not definitively biological. JWST is not sensitive enough to conduct this kind of broad spectral census on most rocky exoplanet targets; the proposed Habitable Worlds Observatory (HWO), a large ultraviolet-optical-infrared space telescope on NASA's Decadal Survey roadmap for the 2040s, is designed to do so — directly imaging Earth-sized planets in the habitable zones of nearby stars and characterizing their atmospheres in detail.

The practical limits of JWST biosignature detection are important to understand. The telescope was not specifically designed for this application — it was optimized for infrared astronomy broadly — and detecting molecules in a rocky planet atmosphere requires tens of transits stacked, each transit providing a brief window (a few hours) during which the planet's atmosphere is backlit by its star. For the TRAPPIST-1 system, 39 light-years away, the transit depth due to atmospheric absorption is roughly 50 to 100 parts per million — at the edge of JWST's sensitivity for individual transits. Statistical confidence builds with more transits, but the required observing time is significant, and JWST's total mission lifetime limits how many targets it can characterize to this depth.

The broader scientific community has debated whether JWST detections of biosignature gases in rocky planet atmospheres would constitute convincing evidence of life or require independent confirmation before a consensus claim could be made. The prevailing view — reflected in a 2023 Royal Society paper and statements from multiple astrobiology research groups — is that a single JWST detection of a biosignature gas would be scientifically interesting but not sufficient for a discovery announcement, given the known false positive pathways and the difficulty of ruling them out with JWST's spectral resolution alone. What JWST can do is narrow down the candidate planets and identify which ones deserve the intensive follow-up that only a future direct-imaging mission could provide.

Sources