Mass anomalies on Ganymede

Abstract: Radio Doppler data, generated with NASA''s Galileo spacecraft during its second encounter with Jupiter''s moon Ganymede, are used to infer the locations and magnitudes of mass anomalies on Ganymede. We construct models for both surface and buried anomalies. With only one flyby and no global coverage, a solution for mass anomalies cannot be uniquely determined. However, we are able to constrain acceptable solutions for mass anomalies to four broad regions—a near polar region and three that are roughly equatorial. If the mass anomalies are constrained to lie at the surface, the centers of the regions are located near the coordinates (77° N, 333° W), (36° N, 0° W), (33° N, 130° W), and (7° N, 194° W). If the mass anomalies are located at the deep ice–rock interface 800 km below the surface, the regions'' centers are approximately (65° N, 17° W), (32° N, 30° W), (37° N, 175° W), and (15° N, 211° W). For both models, the regions are up to a few thousand kilometers across. The magnitude of mass anomalies on the surface is on the order of 1017 kg. Mass anomalies at the ice–rock interface are on average no more than an order of magnitude larger (1018 kg). There are two positive and two negative mass anomalies in both the surface and ice–rock interface models. One of the positive mass anomalies at the surface is associated with Galileo Regio. The other positive surface mass anomaly is located at high northern latitudes with no obvious geological association. Negative surface mass anomalies lie near Uruk Sulcus and between Perrine Regio and Barnard Regio near Sicyan Sulcus and Phrygia Sulcus. The locations of the ice–rock interface mass anomalies lie approximately radially below the surface anomalies. Positive mass anomalies at the surface could be associated with the silicate-rich ice or accumulated silicate layers of the dark regions. Negative mass anomalies at the surface could be associated with the relatively clean, low-lying ice of sulci. Alternatively, Ganymede''s mass anomalies could be associated with the topography or other mass concentrations at the deep ice–rock interface. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]