Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-jr42d Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-17T22:45:49.230Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Cometary dust in Antarctic micrometeorites

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  30 January 2013

Naoya Imae*
Affiliation:
Antarctic Meteorite Research Center, National Institute of Polar Research, 10-3, Midori-cho, Tachikawa, Tokyo 190-8518, Japan email: imae@nipr.ac.jp
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Cometary nuclei consist of aggregates of interstellar dust particles less than ~1 μm in diameter and can produce rocky dust particles as a result of the sublimation of ice as comets enter the inner solar system. Samples of fine-grained particles known as chondritic porous interplanetary dust particles (CP-IDPs), possibly from comets, have been collected from the Earth's stratosphere. Owing to their fine-grained texture, these particles were previously thought to be condensates formed directly from interstellar gas. However, coarse-grained chondrule-like objects have recently been observed in samples from comet 81P/Wild 2. The chondrule-like objects are chemically distinct from chondrules in meteoritic chondrites, possessing higher MnO contents (0.5 wt%) in olivine and low-Ca pyroxene. In this study, we analyzed AMM samples by secondary electron microscopy and backscattered electron images for textural observations and compositional analysis. We identified thirteen AMMs with characteristics similar to those of the 81P/Wild 2 samples, and believe that recognition of these similarities necessitates reassessment of the existing models of chondrule formation.

Type
Contributed Papers
Copyright
Copyright © International Astronomical Union 2013

References

Bradley, J. P. 2003, in: Davis, A. M. (ed), Treatise on Geochemistry, vol. 1 (Elsevier), pp. 689711Google Scholar
Brownlee, D., et al. 2006, Science 314, 1711Google Scholar
Carlson, W. D. 1988, Am. Min. 73, 232Google Scholar
Greenberg, J. M. & Hage, J. 1990, Ap. J. 361, 260Google Scholar
Greenberg, J. M. 1998, A & A, 330, 375Google Scholar
Hewins, R. H. 1996, in: Hewins, R. H., Jones, R. H. & Scott, E. R. D. (eds), Chondrules and the Protoplanetary Disk (Cambridge), pp. 39Google Scholar
Iwata, N. & Imae, N. 2002, Ant. Met. Res. 15, 25Google Scholar
Klöck, W., Thomas, K. L., McKay, D. S., & Palme, H. 1989, Nature 339, 126Google Scholar
Liffman, K. & Brown, M. J. I. 1996, in: Hewins, R. H., Jones, R. H. & Scott, E. R. D. (eds), Chondrules and the Protoplanetary Disk (Cambridge), pp. 285302Google Scholar
Love, S. G. & Brownlee, D. E. 1993, Science, 262, 550Google Scholar
Nakamura, T., Noguchi, T., Tsuchiyama, A., Ushikubo, T., Kita, N. T., Valley, J. W., Zolensky, M. E., Kakazu, Y., Sakamoto, K., Mashio, E., Uesugi, K., & Nakano, T. 2008, Science 321, 1664Google Scholar
Nakamoto, T., Hayashi, M. R., Kita, N. T., & Tachibana, S. 2005, in: Krot, A. N., Scott, E. R. D. & Reipurth, B. (eds), Chondrites and the Protoplanetary Disk, ASP Conference Series, vol. 341, pp. 883892Google Scholar
Ohi, S., Miyake, A., Shimobayashi, N., Yashimma, M., & Kitamura, M. 2008, Am. Min. 93, 1682Google Scholar
Scott, E. R. D. & Krot, A. N. 2005, in: Krot, A. N., Scott, E. R. D. & Reipurth, B. (eds), Chondrites and the Protoplanetary Disk, ASP Conference Series, vol. 341, pp. 1553Google Scholar
Shu, F., Shang, H., & Lee, T. 1996, Science 271, 1545Google Scholar
Taylor, S., Lever, J. H., & Harvey, R. P. 1998, Nature 392, 899Google Scholar
Yamamoto, T. 1985, A & A, 142, 31Google Scholar