4.5 Article

Study of phyllosilicates and carbonates from the Capri Chasma region of Valles Marineris on Mars based on Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter-Compact Reconnaissance Imaging Spectrometer for Mars (MRO-CRISM) observations

期刊

ICARUS
卷 250, 期 -, 页码 7-17

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.icarus.2014.11.018

关键词

Mars; Mineralogy; Geological processes

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Spectral reflectance data from the MRO-CRISM (Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter-Compact Reconnaissance Imaging Spectrometer for Mars) of Capri Chasma, a large canyon within Valles Marineris on Mars, have been studied. Results of this analysis reveal the presence of minerals, such as, phyllosilicates (illite, smectite (montmorillonite)) and carbonates (ankerite and manganocalcite). These minerals hint of the aqueous history of Noachian time on Mars. Phyllosilicates are products of chemical weathering of igneous rocks, whereas carbonates could have formed from local aqueous alteration of olivine and other igneous minerals. Four different locations within the Capri Chasma region were studied for spectral reflectance based mineral detection. The study area also shows the spectral signatures of iron-bearing minerals, e.g. olivine with carbonate, indicating partial weathering of parent rocks primarily rich in ferrous mineral. The present study shows that the minerals of Capri Chasma are characterized by the presence of prominent spectral absorption features at 2.31 mu m, 2.33 mu m, 2.22 mu m, 2.48 mu m and 2.52 mu m wavelength regions, indicating the existence of hydrous minerals, i.e., carbonates and phyllosilicates. The occurrence of carbonates and phyllosilicates in the study area suggests the presence of alkaline environment during the period of their formation. Results of the study are important to understand the formation processes of these mineral assemblages on Mars, which may help in understanding the evolutionary history of the planet. (C) 2014 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据