4.7 Article

FORMATION CONDITIONS OF ENCELADUS AND ORIGIN OF ITS METHANE RESERVOIR

Journal

ASTROPHYSICAL JOURNAL LETTERS
Volume 701, Issue 1, Pages L39-L42

Publisher

IOP PUBLISHING LTD
DOI: 10.1088/0004-637X/701/1/L39

Keywords

planets and satellites: formation; planets and satellites: individual (Enceladus)

Funding

  1. Cassini project

Ask authors/readers for more resources

We describe a formation scenario of Enceladus constrained by the deuterium-to-hydrogen ratio (D/H) in the gas plumes as measured by the Cassini Ion and Neutral Mass Spectrometer. We propose that, similarly to Titan, Enceladus formed from icy planetesimals that were partly devolatilized during their migration within the Kronian subnebula. In our scenario, at least primordial Ar, CO, and N-2 were devolatilized from planetesimals during their drift within the subnebula, due to the increasing temperature and pressure conditions of the gas phase. The origin of methane is still uncertain since it might have been either trapped in the planetesimals of Enceladus during their formation in the solar nebula or produced via serpentinization reactions in the satellite's interior. If the methane of Enceladus originates from the solar nebula, then its D/H ratio should range between similar to 4.7 x 10(-5) and 1.5 x 10(-4). Moreover, Xe/H2O and Kr/H2O ratios are predicted to be equal to similar to 7 x 10(-7) and 7 x 10(-6), respectively, in the satellite's interior. On the other hand, if the methane of Enceladus results from serpentinization reactions, then its D/H ratio should range between similar to 2.1 x 10(-4) and 4.5 x 10(-4). In this case, Kr/H2O should not exceed similar to 10(-10) and Xe/H2O should range between similar to 1 x 10(-7) and 7 x 10(-7) in the satellite's interior. Future spacecraft missions, such as Titan Saturn System Mission, will have the capability to provide new insight into the origin of Enceladus by testing these observational predictions.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available