Venus global radar reflectivity and correlations with elevation

Abstract

The global distribution of the reflectivity of the surface of Venus as determined by the Pioneer Venus orbital radar instrument has been analyzed in a geological context and statistically correlated with elevation. In addition, a comparison between the reflectivity and rms slope (roughness) correlations with elevation permits radar-geologic topographic zones to be identified. The radar reflectivity p at normal incidence and at a wavelength of 17 cm (1.76 GHz) is a rfiodel-dependent measure of the bulk dielectric constant • of surfaces dominated by dry rocks and soils and depends on surface material properties such as porosity and conductivity. Only the quasi-specular component of the radar echo was used in determining the reflectivity values analyzed in this study, and for very rough surfaces the absolute magnitude of p may be underestimated by 10-15%. Empirically derived relationships between p, to, and bulk density 7 are used to interpret geologically the p distribution. The global mean p of 0.13 is significantly greater than the average lunar and typical martian values of •0.07, suggesting the absence of a continuous soil mantle on Venus. The p distribution is well described by a two-stage Gaussian distribution with modes at 0.11 and 0.14. The close proximity of these modes suggests that there is no fundamental dichotomy of surfaces on Venus insofar as their p properties, in contrast with roughness. Less than 15% of Venus has p values low enough to indicate a major soft component on the surface. Approximately 27% of the surface is dominated by low-porosity materials such as bedrock, and less than 15% is enriched in high dielectrics. The rest of the surface (43%) is most simply envisioned as partially mantied bedrock, perhaps an extension of the types of terrain viewed by the Venera 10 and 13 landers. The most plausible model for the highest p (and thus highest •,-) materials requires enrichment in Ti and Fe (e.g., minerals such as futile, ilmenite, and magnetite). High-titanium basalts such as those found on the moon would produce the required enrichment, as would pyrites. Since surface geochemical measurements demonstrate that there are basalts in the Venusian plains, a model in which high-titanium basalts are exposed at the highest elevations (Maxwell, Theia, Aria, Ovda) is favored. Possible weathering of ilmenite in such basalts to produce futile could explain the high-•c materials in less elevated regions. When correlated with elevation, p exhibits a complex nonmonotonic trend in which both decreases and increases are observed. A major decrease in p of ---0.02 km -• in the upper plains contrasts with the almost 1 ø rms km-• increase in surface roughness over the same interval and may be an expression of increased soil production, perhaps due to enhanced breakdown of silicates into carbonates in the lower highlands. Alternately, the decrease could be due to increased centimeter scale toughening, perhaps caused by the increase in regional slope in the highlands. A major increase in p (0.05 km-•) in the midd...

Mainbelt Asteroids: Results of Arecibo and Goldstone Radar Observations of 37 Objects during 1980–1995

“…For relevant rocks and minerals, it is reasonable to treat R as a function of near-surface bulk density d bulk , so we will infer d bulk from R using the empirical relationship presented by Garvin et al (1985):…”

Radar Observations of Asteroid 2100 Ra-Shalom

“…Without any constraints other than the relatively large µ C , we adopt a range of gains, 1 ≤ g ≤ 1.5, and propagate the uncertainties, obtaining 0.03 ≤ R ≤ 0.23. An empirical relationship between the bulk density, d (g cm −3 ), and Fresnel reflectivity of geologic material is (Garvin et al 1985) …”

Diffuse scattering of radar on the surface of Venus: Origin and implications for the distribution of soils

“…Examination of a corrected reflectivity data set (Ford and Pettengill, 1984) suggests that low reflectivity regions in the original PV data should be interpreted as being due to approximately PV wavelength-scale (17 cm) roughness. Previously, low reflectivity regions were thought to reflect the presence of a significant component of porous materials such as soil Garvin et al, 1985). We also note a high degree of correspondence between low values of reflectivity and a morphologic unit mapped from Venera 15/16 data (Barsukov et al, 1986;Basilevsky et al, 1986) and called tessera.…”

“…Garvin et al (1985) defined three subdivisions in reflectivity: (1) p < 0.1 and y < 2.0 g cme3, corresponding to surfaces dominated by highly porous materials; (2) 0.1 < p < 0.2 and 2.1 < y < 3.1, indicating a surface dominated by low porosity materials such as typical igneous, sedimentary, or metamorphic rocks, (3) p > 0.2 and y > 3.1, corresponding to surfaces enriched in some high dielectric phase (e.g. Fe or Ti oxides).…”