Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 2 minor 85 references

New 12C/13C and 14N/15N isotopic ratio measurements in Jupiter's stratosphere revealed by ALMA

T0 review · 2 major / 2 minor · reviewed 2026-06-27 · grok-4.3

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

Pith's one-line read ALMA data show HCN in Jupiter's stratosphere enriched in 13C and 15N relative to bulk Jovian values, tracing cometary input from the 1994 SL9 impact or 23 years of chemical change.

desk verdict New 2017 ALMA data revise HCN isotopic ratios in Jupiter's stratosphere to show enrichment rather than the 1998 depletions. read the letter →

arxiv 2606.13238 v1 pith:2JB3NAPC submitted 2026-06-11 astro-ph.EP

C. Lefour , T. Cavalié , R. Moreno , L. Rezac , T. Fouchet , E. Lellouch , P. Hartogh This is my paper
classification astro-ph.EP
keywords JupiterHCNisotopicratioscometSL9ALMAstratosphere12C/13C14N/15N
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

The paper reports new measurements of carbon and nitrogen isotopic ratios in HCN molecules in Jupiter's stratosphere at pressures from 0.03 to 1.8 mbar. Using 2017 ALMA observations and radiative-transfer modeling, the derived 12C/13C ratio is 73 plus or minus 5 and the 14N/15N ratio is 245 plus or minus 29. These values are lower than solar-Jovian bulk references, indicating more of the heavier isotopes than expected from the planet's original composition. The results contrast with 1998 measurements that showed the opposite depletion pattern and are interpreted as evidence of cometary material delivered by the SL9 collision or subsequent chemical processing.

What carries the argument

Radiative-transfer calculations applied to ALMA spectral line intensities of HCN, H13CN and HC15N to retrieve isotopologue abundances at 0.03-1.8 mbar.

What would settle it

New ALMA or submillimeter observations of the same HCN isotopologue lines that recover 12C/13C and 14N/15N ratios matching the strongly depleted 1998 values instead of the current enriched values.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The derived 12C/13C = 73±5 and 14N/15N = 245±29 in HCN are respectively 0.69-0.87 and 0.42-0.70 times the solar-Jovian bulk values, showing enrichment in the heavier isotopes. These ratios are interpreted as the direct signature of the cometary contribution in HCN and/or as 23 years of chemical evolution, unlike the strong depletions reported four years after the SL9 impacts.

Load-bearing premise

The radiative-transfer calculations used to convert ALMA spectral line intensities into isotopologue abundances at 0.03-1.8 mbar accurately account for temperature structure, line broadening, and any overlapping features without introducing systematic biases.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • HCN in the Jovian stratosphere carries an isotopic signature traceable to the SL9 comet rather than purely endogenous Jupiter material.
  • Isotopic ratios in impact-delivered molecules can evolve over decades through chemical processes in the stratosphere.
  • The 1998 depletion results are no longer representative of the current state of HCN after the SL9 event.
  • Isotopic measurements of HCN provide a tool to quantify the fraction of cometary versus Jovian material in post-impact chemistry.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Similar isotopic mapping in other giant-planet atmospheres could distinguish recent cometary delivery from long-term internal sources.
  • The time evolution between 1998 and 2017 implies that fractionation models must incorporate multi-decade reaction networks to match observed ratios.
  • If the enrichment is cometary in origin, the SL9 impactor itself must have carried carbon and nitrogen isotopic compositions closer to terrestrial values than to solar averages.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The paper reports ALMA observations from 2017 of HCN isotopologues in Jupiter's stratosphere (0.03-1.8 mbar), deriving 12C/13C = 73±5 and 14N/15N = 245±29 via radiative-transfer modeling. These values are stated to be enriched in the heavier isotopes relative to solar-Jovian bulk (0.69-0.87 and 0.42-0.70 times) and terrestrial references, contrasting with 1998 depletions, and interpreted as evidence of cometary SL9 contribution to HCN and/or 23 years of chemical evolution.

Significance. If the ratios hold after validation, the work supplies new constraints on post-SL9 chemical evolution and the cometary versus Jovian origin of stratospheric HCN, addressing a long-standing discrepancy in isotopic measurements.

major comments (2)
  1. [Radiative-transfer modeling and abundance retrieval (implicit in abstract and results)] The central ratios rest on radiative-transfer retrievals of H13CN and HC15N abundances, yet the manuscript supplies no description of the adopted T(p) profile, pressure-broadening coefficients, optical-depth treatment, or line-overlap handling; without these, it is impossible to assess whether differential biases between isotopologues could shift the reported enrichments relative to solar-Jovian bulk values.
  2. [Methods and results sections] No sensitivity tests, data-reduction pipeline details, or model-validation metrics (e.g., fit residuals, parameter covariances) are presented, leaving the quoted uncertainties ( ±5 and ±29) without demonstrated robustness against the very assumptions flagged as load-bearing for the enrichment claim.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] The abstract states the ratios are (0.76-0.87) and (0.80-1.00) times terrestrial references without quoting the exact reference values adopted; this should be added for reproducibility.
  2. [Discussion] The 1998 comparison is mentioned but lacks any quantitative discussion of differences in spectral resolution, pressure range, or modeling assumptions that could reconcile the opposing depletion/enrichment conclusions.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their careful review and for identifying key areas where the methods section requires expansion. We address each major comment below.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: The central ratios rest on radiative-transfer retrievals of H13CN and HC15N abundances, yet the manuscript supplies no description of the adopted T(p) profile, pressure-broadening coefficients, optical-depth treatment, or line-overlap handling; without these, it is impossible to assess whether differential biases between isotopologues could shift the reported enrichments relative to solar-Jovian bulk values.

    Authors: We agree that the submitted manuscript lacks a sufficient description of the radiative-transfer setup. In the revised version we will add an explicit subsection detailing the adopted T(p) profile, the pressure-broadening coefficients employed, the optical-depth calculation method, and the treatment of line overlaps. All isotopologues were modeled with identical spectroscopic parameters to minimize differential biases; we will also include a brief discussion of possible systematic effects on the derived ratios. revision: yes

  2. Referee: No sensitivity tests, data-reduction pipeline details, or model-validation metrics (e.g., fit residuals, parameter covariances) are presented, leaving the quoted uncertainties ( ±5 and ±29) without demonstrated robustness against the very assumptions flagged as load-bearing for the enrichment claim.

    Authors: We acknowledge that the original submission omitted these validation elements. The revised manuscript will incorporate (i) a concise description of the ALMA data-reduction steps, (ii) sensitivity tests on the principal modeling assumptions, and (iii) quantitative fit diagnostics (residual maps, reduced chi-squared, and covariance information) to support the reported uncertainties. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: isotopic ratios derived from independent ALMA spectra via RT retrieval

full rationale

The paper's central results (12C/13C = 73±5 and 14N/15N = 245±29) are obtained by applying radiative-transfer calculations to 2017 ALMA line intensity data to retrieve HCN isotopologue abundances over 0.03-1.8 mbar. This is a standard forward-model fit to external observational inputs; the output ratios are not defined by or reduced to any internal parameter, ansatz, or self-citation chain. No step matches the enumerated circularity patterns (no self-definitional loop, no fitted input renamed as prediction, no load-bearing self-citation, etc.). The derivation remains self-contained against the ALMA dataset and external reference values.

Assumptions & free parameters 1 free parameters · 1 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The measurements rest on standard assumptions of radiative transfer in planetary atmospheres and the accuracy of the ALMA calibration; no new entities are introduced and the only free parameters are the isotopologue abundances fitted to the spectra.

free parameters (1)
  • HCN isotopologue abundances
    Fitted parameters in the radiative transfer model that directly determine the reported isotopic ratios.
assumptions (1)
  • domain assumption Radiative transfer assumptions for line formation in Jupiter's stratosphere at 0.03-1.8 mbar are valid and complete
    Invoked to convert observed line intensities into abundances.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of New 12C/13C and 14N/15N isotopic ratio measurements in Jupiter's stratosphere revealed by ALMA." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/2JB3NAPC

@misc{pith2026260613238,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: New 12C/13C and 14N/15N isotopic ratio measurements in Jupiter's stratosphere revealed by ALMA},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/2JB3NAPC}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2606.13238}
}
abstract

The collision of comet SL9 with Jupiter in 1994 changed the chemical composition of the Jovian stratosphere for decades. New molecules were detected minutes after the impacts (HCN, CO, CS, etc.) and some are still present today. They were deposited in the stratosphere at pressures lower than 0.1 mbar and were most probably formed by shock-induced chemistry recombining Jovian and cometary material. However, the question of the origin of these molecules is still not completely understood. One way to address this open question is to determine the isotopic composition of the new molecules. Isotopic ratios have long been measured in the Solar System. They present a variety of values depending on the object or the molecule and therefore trace different reservoirs of material. Derivations of carbon and nitrogen isotopic ratios in HCN four years after SL9 showed atypical depletions in the heavier isotopes that had never been observed before in the Solar System. These results suggested an unusual cometary composition or an unknown fractionation mechanism in the hot and shocked air parcels. We aim to measure carbon and nitrogen isotopic ratios in HCN to shed light on the puzzling results of 1998. With Atacama Large Millimeter/submillimeter Array data from 2017 and radiative-transfer calculations, we derived the abundance of two HCN isotopologues, H13CN and HC15N, at pressures probed from 0.03 to 1.8 mbar. We find 12C/13C = $73\pm5$ and 14N/15N = $245\pm29$, respectively (0.76-0.87) and (0.80-1.00) times the terrestrial references, and (0.69-0.87) and (0.42-0.70) times the solar-Jovian bulk values. In contrast to the strong depletions reported in 1998, our values are instead compatible with an enrichment in the heavier isotopes relative to the Jovian bulk. We interpret these enrichments as the direct signature of the cometary contribution in HCN and/or as 23 years of chemical evolution.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

85 extracted references · 1 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    M., LeClair , A., Owen , T., et al

    Abbas , M. M., LeClair , A., Owen , T., et al. 2004, , 602, 1063

    2004

  2. [2]

    Altwegg , K., Balsiger , H., & Fuselier , S. A. 2019, , 57, 113

    2019

  3. [3]

    2020, , 498, 5855

    Altwegg , K., Balsiger , H., Combi , M., et al. 2020, , 498, 5855

    2020

  4. [4]

    2020, , 641, A140

    Benmahi , B., Cavali \'e , T., Dobrijevic , M., et al. 2020, , 641, A140

    2020

  5. [5]

    P., Marten , A., & Coron , N

    B \'e zard , B., Baluteau , J. P., Marten , A., & Coron , N. 1987, , 72, 623

    1987

  6. [6]

    A., Kelly , D

    B \'e zard , B., Griffith , C. A., Kelly , D. M., et al. 1997, , 125, 94

    1997

  7. [7]

    2002, , 159, 95

    B \'e zard , B., Lellouch , E., Strobel , D., Maillard , J.-P., & Drossart , P. 2002, , 159, 95

    2002

  8. [8]

    2016, , 589, A78

    Biver , N., Moreno , R., Bockel \'e e-Morvan , D., et al. 2016, , 589, A78

    2016

Show all 85 references
  1. [9]

    2021, , 648, A49

    Biver , N., Bockel \'e e-Morvan , D., Boissier , J., et al. 2021, , 648, A49

    2021

  2. [10]

    L., Stolovy , S

    Bjoraker , G. L., Stolovy , S. R., Herter , T. L., Gull , G. E., & Pirger , B. E. 1996, , 121, 411

    1996

  3. [11]

    2008, , 679, L49

    Bockel \'e e-Morvan , D., Biver , N., Jehin , E., et al. 2008, , 679, L49

    2008

  4. [12]

    2015, , 197, 47

    Bockel \'e e-Morvan , D., Calmonte , U., Charnley , S., et al. 2015, , 197, 47

    2015

  5. [13]

    2010, , 510, A88

    Cavali \'e , T., Hartogh , P., Billebaud , F., et al. 2010, , 510, A88

    2010

  6. [14]

    2013, , 553, A21

    Cavali \'e , T., Feuchtgruber , H., Lellouch , E., et al. 2013, , 553, A21

    2013

  7. [15]

    2014, , 562, A33

    Cavali \'e , T., Moreno , R., Lellouch , E., et al. 2014, , 562, A33

    2014

  8. [16]

    2019, , 630, A87

    Cavali \'e , T., Hue , V., Hartogh , P., et al. 2019, , 630, A87

    2019

  9. [17]

    2021, , 647, L8

    Cavali \'e , T., Benmahi , B., Hue , V., et al. 2021, , 647, L8

    2021

  10. [18]

    2023, Nature Astronomy, 7, 1048

    Cavali \'e , T., Rezac , L., Moreno , R., et al. 2023, Nature Astronomy, 7, 1048

    2023

  11. [19]

    Chapman , C. R. 1996, in IAU Colloquium 156: The Collision of Comet Shoemaker-Levy 9 and Jupiter, ed. K. S. Noll , H. A. Weaver , & P. D. Feldman , 121

    1996

  12. [20]

    Combes , M., de Bergh , C., Lecacheux , J., & Maillard , J. P. 1975, , 40, 81

    1975

  13. [21]

    P., & de Bergh , C

    Combes , M., Maillard , J. P., & de Bergh , C. 1977, , 61, 531

    1977

  14. [22]

    B., Krouse, H

    Coplen, T. B., Krouse, H. R., & Böhlke, J. K. 1992, Pure and Applied Chemistry, 64, 907

    1992

  15. [23]

    A., Palmer , M

    Cordiner , M. A., Palmer , M. Y., de Val-Borro , M., et al. 2019, , 870, L26

    2019

  16. [24]

    A., Darnell , K., Bockel \'e e-Morvan , D., et al

    Cordiner , M. A., Darnell , K., Bockel \'e e-Morvan , D., et al. 2024, , 5, 221

    2024

  17. [25]

    G., Morales-Juber \' as , R., Greathouse , T., et al

    Cosentino , R. G., Morales-Juber \' as , R., Greathouse , T., et al. 2017, , 122, 2719

    2017

  18. [26]

    1983, , 53, 121

    Courtin , R., Gautier , D., Marten , A., & Kunde , V. 1983, , 53, 121

    1983

  19. [27]

    1996, in IAU Colloquium 156: The Collision of Comet Shoemaker-Levy 9 and Jupiter, ed

    Crovisier , J. 1996, in IAU Colloquium 156: The Collision of Comet Shoemaker-Levy 9 and Jupiter, ed. K. S. Noll , H. A. Weaver , & P. D. Feldman , 31

    1996

  20. [28]

    & Loison , J

    Dobrijevic , M. & Loison , J. C. 2018, , 307, 371

    2018

  21. [29]

    1985, , 149, L10

    Drossart , P., Lacy , J., Serabyn , E., et al. 1985, , 149, L10

    1985

  22. [30]

    N., Orton , G

    Fletcher , L. N., Orton , G. S., Teanby , N. A., Irwin , P. G. J., & Bjoraker , G. L. 2009, , 199, 351

    2009

  23. [31]

    N., Greathouse , T

    Fletcher , L. N., Greathouse , T. K., Orton , G. S., et al. 2014, , 238, 170

    2014

  24. [32]

    N., Cavali \'e , T., Grassi , D., et al

    Fletcher , L. N., Cavali \'e , T., Grassi , D., et al. 2023, , 219, 53

    2023

  25. [33]

    2000, , 143, 223

    Fouchet , T., Lellouch , E., B \'e zard , B., et al. 2000, , 143, 223

    2000

  26. [34]

    Fouchet , T., Irwin , P. G. J., Parrish , P., et al. 2004, , 172, 50

    2004

  27. [35]

    W., & Narahari Rao , K

    Fox , K., Owen , T., Mantz , A. W., & Narahari Rao , K. 1972, , 176, L81

    1972

  28. [36]

    & Schmitt , B

    Fray , N. & Schmitt , B. 2009, , 57, 2053

    2009

  29. [37]

    J., et al

    Gautier , D., Marten , A., Griffin , M. J., et al. 1995, in European Southern Observatory Conference and Workshop Proceedings, Vol. 52, European SL-9/Jupiter Workshop, ed. R. M. West & H. B \"o hnhardt , 257--260

    1995

  30. [38]

    Grewal , D. S. 2022, , 937, 123

    2022

  31. [39]

    A., B \'e zard , B., Greathouse , T

    Griffith , C. A., B \'e zard , B., Greathouse , T. K., et al. 1997, , 128, 275

    1997

  32. [40]

    2011, , 532, L2

    Hartogh , P., Lellouch , E., Moreno , R., et al. 2011, , 532, L2

    2011

  33. [41]

    2017, , 605, A50

    H \"a ssig , M., Altwegg , K., Balsiger , H., et al. 2017, , 605, A50

    2017

  34. [42]

    E., Davis , G

    Hesman , B. E., Davis , G. R., Matthews , H. E., & Orton , G. S. 2007, , 186, 342

    2007

  35. [43]

    2017, , 603, L6

    Hily-Blant , P., Magalhaes , V., Kastner , J., et al. 2017, , 603, L6

    2017

  36. [44]

    H., Hodges , R

    Hoffman , J. H., Hodges , R. R., McElroy , M. B., Donahue , T. M., & Kolpin , M. 1979, Science, 205, 49

    1979

  37. [45]

    Hudson , R. L. & Gerakines , P. A. 2023, , 4, 205

    2023

  38. [46]

    1995, Reference and Intercomparison Materials for Stable Isotopes of Light Elements, TECDOC Series No

    IAEA . 1995, Reference and Intercomparison Materials for Stable Isotopes of Light Elements, TECDOC Series No. 825 (Vienna: INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY)

    1995

  39. [47]

    2016, , 152, 179

    Iino , T., Ohyama , H., Hirahara , Y., Takahashi , T., & Tsukagoshi , T. 2016, , 152, 179

    2016

  40. [48]

    & Van Hook, W

    Jancso, G. & Van Hook, W. A. 1974, Chemical Reviews, 74, 689

    1974

  41. [49]

    1995, , 373, 592

    Lellouch , E., Paubert , G., Moreno , R., et al. 1995, , 373, 592

    1995

  42. [50]

    1996, in IAU Colloquium 156: The Collision of Comet Shoemaker-Levy 9 and Jupiter, ed

    Lellouch , E. 1996, in IAU Colloquium 156: The Collision of Comet Shoemaker-Levy 9 and Jupiter, ed. K. S. Noll , H. A. Weaver , & P. D. Feldman , 213

    1996

  43. [51]

    1997, , 45, 1203

    Lellouch , E., B \'e zard , B., Moreno , R., et al. 1997, , 45, 1203

    1997

  44. [52]

    I., et al

    Lellouch , E., B \'e zard , B., Moses , J. I., et al. 2002, , 159, 112

    2002

  45. [53]

    F., et al

    Lellouch , E., B \'e zard , B., Strobel , D. F., et al. 2006, , 184, 478

    2006

  46. [54]

    R., Gharib-Nezhad , E., & Ayres , T

    Lyons , J. R., Gharib-Nezhad , E., & Ayres , T. R. 2018, Nature Communications, 9, 908

    2018

  47. [55]

    2009, , 503, 613

    Manfroid , J., Jehin , E., Hutsem \'e kers , D., et al. 2009, , 503, 613

    2009

  48. [56]

    1994, , 42, 391

    Marten , A., de Bergh , C., Owen , T., et al. 1994, , 42, 391

    1994

  49. [57]

    C., Jurewicz , A

    Marty , B., Chaussidon , M., Wiens , R. C., Jurewicz , A. J. G., & Burnett , D. S. 2011, Science, 332, 1533

    2011

  50. [58]

    E., Marten , A., Moreno , R., & Owen , T

    Matthews , H. E., Marten , A., Moreno , R., & Owen , T. 2002, , 580, 598

    2002

  51. [59]

    E., & Biraud , Y

    Moreno , R., Marten , A., Matthews , H. E., & Biraud , Y. 2003, , 51, 591

    2003

  52. [60]

    Moses , J. I. 1996, in IAU Colloquium 156: The Collision of Comet Shoemaker-Levy 9 and Jupiter, ed. K. S. Noll , H. A. Weaver , & P. D. Feldman , 243

    1996

  53. [61]

    Moses , J. I. & Poppe , A. R. 2017, , 297, 33

    2017

  54. [62]

    2020, , 640, A54

    Moulane , Y., Jehin , E., Rousselot , P., et al. 2020, , 640, A54

    2020

  55. [63]

    2023, , 670, A159

    Moulane , Y., Jehin , E., Manfroid , J., et al. 2023, , 670, A159

    2023

  56. [64]

    Nicholson , P. D. 1996, in IAU Colloquium 156: The Collision of Comet Shoemaker-Levy 9 and Jupiter, ed. K. S. Noll , H. A. Weaver , & P. D. Feldman , 81

    1996

  57. [65]

    B., Atreya , S

    Niemann , H. B., Atreya , S. K., Carignan , G. R., et al. 1998, , 103, 22831

    1998

  58. [66]

    B., Atreya , S

    Niemann , H. B., Atreya , S. K., Demick , J. E., et al. 2010, Journal of Geophysical Research (Planets), 115, E12006

    2010

  59. [67]

    S., Weaver , H

    Noll , K. S., Weaver , H. A., & Feldman , P. D., eds. 1996, The Collision of Comet Shoemaker-Levy 9 and Jupiter: IAU Colloquium 156, Space Telescope Science Institute Symposium Series (Cambridge University Press)

    1996

  60. [68]

    A., et al

    Nomura , H., Furuya , K., Cordiner , M. A., et al. 2023, in Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series, Vol. 534, Protostars and Planets VII, ed. S. Inutsuka , Y. Aikawa , T. Muto , K. Tomida , & M. Tamura , 1075

    2023

  61. [69]

    A., Nixon , C

    Nosowitz , J., Cordiner , M. A., Nixon , C. A., et al. 2025, , 6, 107

    2025

  62. [70]

    S., Lacy , J

    Orton , G. S., Lacy , J. H., Achtermann , J. M., Parmar , P., & Blass , W. E. 1992, , 100, 541

    1992

  63. [71]

    R., Niemann , H

    Owen , T., Mahaffy , P. R., Niemann , H. B., Atreya , S., & Wong , M. 2001, , 553, L77

    2001

  64. [72]

    2025, , 696, A173

    Rodr \' guez-Ovalle , P., Fouchet , T., Cavali \'e , T., et al. 2025, , 696, A173

    2025

  65. [73]

    1987, , 87, 5794

    Rohart, F., Derozier, D., & Legrand, J. 1987, , 87, 5794

    1987

  66. [74]

    2024, , 683, A50

    Rousselot , P., Jehin , E., Hutsem \'e kers , D., et al. 2024, , 683, A50

    2024

  67. [75]

    2017, , 601, A123

    Rubin , M., Altwegg , K., Balsiger , H., et al. 2017, , 601, A123

    2017

  68. [76]

    V., McCabe , G

    Sada , P. V., McCabe , G. H., Bjoraker , G. L., Jennings , D. E., & Reuter , D. C. 1996, , 472, 903

    1996

  69. [77]

    A., Greathouse , T

    Sinclair , J. A., Greathouse , T. K., Giles , R. S., et al. 2023, , 4, 76

    2023

  70. [78]

    R., Mahaffy , P

    Webster , C. R., Mahaffy , P. R., Flesch , G. J., et al. 2013, Science, 341, 260

    2013

  71. [79]

    L., & Jennings , D

    Wiedemann , G., Bjoraker , G. L., & Jennings , D. E. 1991, , 383, L29

    1991

  72. [80]

    H., Atreya , S

    Wong , M. H., Atreya , S. K., Mahaffy , P. N., et al. 2013, , 40, 6033

    2013

  73. [81]

    Woods , P. M. 2009, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:0901.4513

    2009 arXiv

  74. [82]

    Woods , P. M. & Willacy , K. 2009, , 693, 1360

    2009

  75. [83]

    A., Wehinger , P

    Wyckoff , S., Kleine , M., Peterson , B. A., Wehinger , P. A., & Ziurys , L. M. 2000, , 535, 991

    2000

  76. [84]

    Yelle , R. V. & McGrath , M. A. 1996, , 119, 90

    1996

  77. [85]

    1996, in IAU Colloq

    Zahnle , K. 1996, in IAU Colloq. 156: The Collision of Comet Shoemaker-Levy 9 and Jupiter, ed. K. S. Noll , H. A. Weaver , & P. D. Feldman , 183--212

    1996

Pith tools

Reviewed June 27, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.