Loading…

Latitudinal variability in Jupiter’s tropospheric disequilibrium species: GeH4, AsH3 and PH3

•Degeneracies with cloud parameters complicate retrievals of gaseous species.•Apparent belt-zone variability in GeH4 can be explained by the deep cloud structure.•AsH3 and PH3 show an enhancement at high latitudes, but GeH4 does not. Jupiter’s tropospheric composition is studied using high-resolutio...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Icarus (New York, N.Y. 1962) N.Y. 1962), 2017-06, Vol.289, p.254-269
Main Authors: Giles, R.S., Fletcher, L.N., Irwin, P.G.J.
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:•Degeneracies with cloud parameters complicate retrievals of gaseous species.•Apparent belt-zone variability in GeH4 can be explained by the deep cloud structure.•AsH3 and PH3 show an enhancement at high latitudes, but GeH4 does not. Jupiter’s tropospheric composition is studied using high-resolution, spatially-resolved 5-µm observations from the CRIRES instrument at the Very Large Telescope. The high resolving power (R = 96,000) allows us to spectrally resolve the line shapes of individual molecular species in Jupiter’s troposphere and, by aligning the slit north-south along Jupiter’s central meridian, we are able to search for any latitudinal variability. Despite the high spectral resolution, we find that there are significant degeneracies between the cloud structure and aerosol scattering properties that complicate the retrievals of tropospheric gaseous abundances and limit conclusions on any belt-zone variability. However, we do find evidence for variability between the equatorial regions of the planet and the polar regions. Arsine (AsH3) and phosphine (PH3) both show an enhancement at high latitudes, while the abundance of germane (GeH4) remains approximately constant. These observations contrast with the theoretical predictions from Wang et al. (2016) and we discuss the possible explanations for this difference.
ISSN:0019-1035
1090-2643
DOI:10.1016/j.icarus.2016.10.023