The water abundance in Jupiter’s equatorial zone

By Cheng Li, A. Ingersoll, S. Bolton, S. Levin, M. Janssen, S. Atreya, Jonathan I. Lunine, P. Steffes, Shannon T. Brown, T. Guillot and 13 more. Nature Astronomy, 2020

132 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Oxygen is the most common element after hydrogen and helium in Jupiter’s atmosphere, and may have been the primary condensable (as water ice) in the protoplanetary disk. Prior to the Juno mission, in situ measurements of Jupiter’s water abundance were obtained from the Galileo probe, which dropped into a meteorologically anomalous site. The findings of the Galileo probe were inconclusive because the concentration of water was still increasing when the probe ceased sending data. Here we report on the water abundance in the equatorial region (0 to 4 degrees north latitude), based on data taken at 1.25 to 22 GHz from the Juno microwave radiometer, probing pressures of approximately 0.7 to 30 bar. Because Juno discovered the deep atmosphere to be surprisingly variable as a function of latitude, it remains to confirm whether the equatorial abundance represents Jupiter’s global water abundance. The water abundance at the equatorial region is inferred to be $$2.5_{ - 1.6}^{ + 2.2} \times 10^3$$ 2 . 5 − 1.6 + 2.2 × 1 0 3 ppm, or $$2.7_{ - 1.7}^{ + 2.4}$$ 2 . 7 − 1.7 + 2.4 times the elemental ratio of protosolar oxygen to hydrogen (1 σ uncertainties). If this reflects the global water abundance, the result suggests that the planetesimals that formed Jupiter were unlikely to have been water-rich clathrate hydrates. Juno’s microwave radiometer data could measure the water concentration in the deep atmosphere of Jupiter (0.7 to 30 bar) at the equator: $$2.7^{+2.4}_{-1.7}$$ 2 . 7 − 1.7 + 2.4 times the solar O/H abundance, with a thermal vertical structure compatible with a moist adiabat.

Subfields: Astronomy and Astrophysics, Instrumentation

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/738afc7b40aad126aebf41ba416bd0068f0e8dea

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Astronomy and Astrophysics

  1. E. Bergin
  2. K. Oberg
  3. N. Madhusudhan
  4. R. Garrod
  5. E. Dishoeck
  6. P. Caselli
  7. Cecilia Ceccarelli
  8. S. Glover

In Instrumentation

  1. K. Oberg
  2. E. Bergin
  3. N. Madhusudhan
  4. P. Myers

Citations in the corpus