Paper detail

The atmospheric chemistry of the warm Neptune GJ 3470b: influence of metallicity and temperature on the CH4/CO ratio

Current observation techniques are able to probe the atmosphere of some giant exoplanets and get some clues about their atmospheric composition. However, the chemical compositions derived from observations are not fully understood, as for instance in the case of the CH4/CO abundance ratio, which is often inferred different from what has been predicted by chemical models. Recently, the warm Neptune GJ3470b has been discovered and because of its close distance from us and high transit depth, it is a very promising candidate for follow up characterisation of its atmosphere. We study the atmospheric composition of GJ3470b in order to compare with the current observations of this planet, to prepare the future ones, but also as a typical case study to understand the chemical composition of warm (sub-)Neptunes. The metallicity of such atmospheres is totally uncertain, and vary probably to values up to 100x solar. We explore the space of unknown parameters to predict the range of possible atmospheric compositions. Within the parameter space explored we find that in most cases methane is the major carbon-bearing species. We however find that in some cases, typically for high metallicities with a sufficiently high temperature the CH4/CO abundance ratio can become lower than unity, as suggested by some multiwavelength photometric observations of other warm (sub-)Neptunes, such as GJ1214b and GJ436b. As for the emission spectrum of GJ3470b, brightness temperatures at infrared wavelengths may vary between 400 and 800K depending on the thermal profile and metallicity. Combined with a hot temperature profile, a substantial enrichment in heavy elements by a factor of 100 with respect to the solar composition can shift the carbon balance in favour of carbon monoxide at the expense of CH4. Nevertheless, current observations of this planet do not allow yet to determine which model is more accurate.

preprint2013arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access5 authors1 topic

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.