2018
DOI: 10.1038/s41550-018-0557-2
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The formation of Jupiter by hybrid pebble–planetesimal accretion

Abstract: The standard model for giant planet formation is based on the accretion of solids by a growing planetary embryo, followed by rapid gas accretion once the planet exceeds a socalled critical mass 1 . The dominant size of the accreted solids (cm-size particles named pebbles or km to hundred km-size bodies named planetesimals) is, however, unknown 1,2 . Recently, high-precision measurements of isotopes in meteorites provided evidence for the existence of two reservoirs in the early Solar System 3 . These reservoir… Show more

Help me understand this report
View preprint versions

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

5
148
4
2

Year Published

2018
2018
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

3
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 128 publications
(159 citation statements)
references
References 37 publications
5
148
4
2
Order By: Relevance
“…If, however, the main growth of rocky planets may proceed from the accumulation of small particles, such as pebbles, then the deviation between 26 Al-rich and 26 Al-poor systems may become less clear, and the composition of the accreting pebbles needs to be taken into account. Therefore, in future work, models of water delivery and planet growth need to synchronize the timing of earliest planetesimal formation (Drażkowska & Dullemond 2018), the mutual influence of collisions (Lichtenberg et al 2018) and 26 Al dehydration, the potential growth by pebble accretion (Johansen et al 2015;Schiller et al 2018;Alibert et al 2018), and the partitioning of volatile species between the interior and atmosphere of growing protoplanets (Ikoma et al 2018) in order to further constrain the perspectives for rocky exoplanet evolution (Kite & Ford 2018).…”
Section: Main Textmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…If, however, the main growth of rocky planets may proceed from the accumulation of small particles, such as pebbles, then the deviation between 26 Al-rich and 26 Al-poor systems may become less clear, and the composition of the accreting pebbles needs to be taken into account. Therefore, in future work, models of water delivery and planet growth need to synchronize the timing of earliest planetesimal formation (Drażkowska & Dullemond 2018), the mutual influence of collisions (Lichtenberg et al 2018) and 26 Al dehydration, the potential growth by pebble accretion (Johansen et al 2015;Schiller et al 2018;Alibert et al 2018), and the partitioning of volatile species between the interior and atmosphere of growing protoplanets (Ikoma et al 2018) in order to further constrain the perspectives for rocky exoplanet evolution (Kite & Ford 2018).…”
Section: Main Textmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This is often called the NC reservoir as compared to the carbonaceous chondrite (CC) reservoir, defined by CC. The two reservoirs are also referred to as solar system dichotomy and may have been separated by the early formation of Jupiter (Olsen et al 2016;Kruijer et al 2017;Alibert et al 2018) or a ringed structure in the protoplanetary disc (Brasser and Mojzsis 2020). The CI chondrites fall on the extension of the trend of the NC material together with the Earth as the closest body to the NC reservoir (Fig.…”
Section: Evidence From the Dichotomymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…It is possible that the composition of infalling material also changed with time and/or thermal processing 30,31,55 . Complete homogenisation between the inner and outer Solar System is blocked by the formation of Jupiter's core 55,56 , which leads to two compositionally slightly different reservoirs.…”
Section: Figure 3 | Cartoon Illustrating Dust Formation and Evolutionmentioning
confidence: 99%