Monitoring of the evolution of H 2 O vapor in the stratosphere of Jupiter over an 18-yr period with the Odin space telescope
Context. The comet Shoemaker-Levy 9 impacted Jupiter in July 1994, leaving its stratosphere with several new species, with water vapor (H 2 O) among them. Aims. With the aid of a photochemical model, H 2 O can be used as a dynamical tracer in the Jovian stratosphere. In this paper, we aim to constra...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Astronomy and astrophysics (Berlin) 2020-09, Vol.641, p.A140 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
Zusammenfassung: | Context.
The comet Shoemaker-Levy 9 impacted Jupiter in July 1994, leaving its stratosphere with several new species, with water vapor (H
2
O) among them.
Aims.
With the aid of a photochemical model, H
2
O can be used as a dynamical tracer in the Jovian stratosphere. In this paper, we aim to constrain the vertical eddy diffusion (
K
zz
) at levels where H
2
O is present.
Methods.
We monitored the H
2
O disk-averaged emission at 556.936 GHz with the space telescope between 2002 and 2019, covering nearly two decades. We analyzed the data with a combination of 1D photochemical and radiative transfer models to constrain the vertical eddy diffusion in the stratosphere of Jupiter.
Results. Odin
observations show us that the emission of H
2
O has an almost linear decrease of about 40% between 2002 and 2019. We can only reproduce our time series if we increase the magnitude of
K
zz
in the pressure range where H
2
O diffuses downward from 2002 to 2019, that is, from ~0.2 mbar to ~5 mbar. However, this modified
K
zz
is incompatible with hydrocarbon observations. We find that even if an allowance is made for the initially large abundances of H
2
O and CO at the impact latitudes, the photochemical conversion of H
2
O to CO
2
is not sufficient to explain the progressive decline of the H
2
O line emission, which is suggestive of additional loss mechanisms.
Conclusions.
The
K
zz
we derived from the
Odin
observations of H
2
O can only be viewed as an upper limit in the ~0.2 mbar to ~5 mbar pressure range. The incompatibility between the interpretations made from H
2
O and hydrocarbon observations probably results from 1D modeling limitations. Meridional variability of H
2
O, most probably at auroral latitudes, would need to be assessed and compared with that of hydrocarbons to quantify the role of auroral chemistry in the temporal evolution of the H
2
O abundance since the SL9 impacts. Modeling the temporal evolution of SL9 species with a 2D model would naturally be the next step in this area of study. |
---|---|
ISSN: | 0004-6361 1432-0746 1432-0746 |
DOI: | 10.1051/0004-6361/202038188 |