Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 83 references

Different arrival times of CM and CI-like bodies from the outer Solar System to the asteroid belt

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-06 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

Pith's one-line read The parent bodies of CM chondrites formed near Saturn and were implanted in the asteroid belt during Saturn's growth, while CI parent bodies came from beyond Uranus and arrived later during the outward migration of Uranus and Neptune.

desk verdict The two-epoch implantation idea is a real step forward, but the specific CM-from-Saturn assignment rests on a fitted pressure bump that still lacks a solid physical mechanism. read the letter →

arxiv 2507.22649 v1 pith:X5MVJNYR submitted 2025-07-30 astro-ph.EP

Sarah E. Anderson , Pierre Vernazza , Miroslav Brož This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.EP
keywords solarsystemformationasteroidbeltCMchondritesCIplanetesimalimplantationgaspressurebumpgiantplanetmigrationchondrule
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

The paper tries to establish a two-epoch, two-source origin for the two most abundant carbonaceous chondrite classes in the asteroid belt. It claims that CM parent bodies formed near Saturn and were captured while Saturn was still growing, in front of the gas gap opened by Jupiter, whereas CI parent bodies formed beyond Uranus and were captured only later, during the outward migration of Uranus and Neptune, at a time when the gas was largely gone. If correct, the belt's primitive meteorite classes are not relics of one formation event; they are snapshots of different stages of gas-disk evolution, and the CM/CI dichotomy becomes a chronological statement. The result also ties the delivery of water to the terrestrial planets specifically to CM-like bodies.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing mechanism is aerodynamic-drag implantation: 100-km planetesimals scattered by the growing giant planets lose energy to the gas and become trapped in the main belt, and their final semimajor-axis distribution mirrors the gas surface-density profile $\Sigma_g(r)$ rather than their birth locations. A pressure bump in the gas acts as a planetesimal trap; the paper's decisive control is a synthetic Gaussian bump near 2.8-3.0 au, which is the only tested profile that reproduces the observed Gaussian distribution of CM-like bodies. The two epochs are separated by gas dispersal: CM-like bodies arrive while gas remains, CI-like bodies after it is depleted, giving the asymmetric CI and P-type distribution.

What would settle it

Compute the gas pressure profile of a disk with Jupiter near 5.4 au and Saturn growing at its gap edge, including the water ice line at 3-4 Myr after CAIs; if no pressure maximum persists near 2.8-3.0 au over Saturn's growth period, the proposed CM trapping mechanism fails. Alternatively, isotopic or formation-age data showing that CM parent bodies accreted beyond about 10 au would falsify the Saturn provenance.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

CM chondrite parent bodies formed in the Saturn region (inside roughly 10 au) and were implanted into the asteroid belt during Saturn's growth, while CI chondrite parent bodies formed in the trans-Uranian disk and were implanted later, during the outward migration of Uranus and Neptune. The gas surface-density profile of the protoplanetary disk, not the formation location, determines where aerodynamically dragged planetesimals end up in the belt; the CM distribution therefore records the gas profile and a pressure bump near 2.8-3.0 au at the time of Saturn's growth, and the CI distribution records a post-gas-dispersal capture event shared with comet-like P-type bodies. The paper further concludes that chondrule formation occurred mostly inside about 10 au and that only CM-like bodies contributed significantly to the water budget of the terrestrial planets.

Load-bearing premise

The simulations place a synthetic pressure bump in the gas at 2.7-3.0 au whenever they want to match the CM distribution, so the whole Saturn-provenance and early CM-epoch story depends on such a bump having really existed there at 3-4 Myr after CAIs.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The Gaussian radial distribution of CM-like asteroids is a fossil of the gas-pressure structure near Jupiter's gap at the epoch of Saturn's growth, so the present belt preserves a picture of Jupiter's gap location at that time.
  • CI-like and comet-like P-type bodies share a single late implantation event, which explains their similar asymmetric distributions and the observed 1.1:1 CI/CM ratio.
  • Chondrule formation took place mostly inside about 10 au, with chondrule abundance decreasing outward, a constraint that future chondrule-formation models must reproduce.
  • CM-like bodies, not CI-like bodies, were the main exogenous water source for Earth and the other terrestrial planets, with enough water mass to supply several Earth oceans.
  • A post-implantation excitation event, plausibly Jupiter's jump from 5.4 to 5.2 au, is required to reconcile the damped eccentricities and inclinations in the simulations with the excited orbits observed today.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • If this two-epoch picture holds, the carbonaceous chondrite inventory of the asteroid belt becomes a stratigraphic record of the gas disk's evolution, letting future work use meteorite classes to calibrate when Jupiter's gap formed and when Saturn reached its final mass.
  • The pressure-bump requirement predicts a specific disk property at 3-4 Myr after CAIs; a high-resolution hydrodynamical model of the inner edge of Jupiter's gap and the water ice line at that epoch is a direct, testable check that the paper does not perform.
  • The water-delivery result implies that Earth's D/H and noble-gas signatures should be matched most closely by CM-like material; returned samples from CM-like asteroids would test this prediction against data from already sampled CI-like asteroids.
  • A corollary for exoplanetary systems: belts or planetesimal disks around stars with different giant-planet growth and migration timing should show different ratios of early- to late-implanted primitive body types.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. This paper uses N-body simulations (REBOUND, 20,000 test particles per run, five-planet model) to study the implantation of outer Solar System planetesimals into the asteroid belt under different gas disk profiles, planetary growth timescales, viscosity values, and planetary configurations. The authors report that the gas surface density profile, rather than the source region, controls the semimajor-axis distribution of aerodynamically implanted bodies. Comparing the simulated distributions with observed CM, CI/IDP, and P-type asteroid distributions, they argue that CM parent bodies were implanted during Saturn's growth at a pressure bump near 2.8 au and originate from the Saturn formation region, whereas CI and comet-like bodies were implanted later, after gas dispersal, during the outward migration of Uranus and Neptune. The paper further concludes that chondrule formation occurred mostly inside 10 au and that CM-like bodies were the main exogenous water source for the terrestrial planets.

Significance. If the central scenario is correct, it would connect specific meteorite classes to distinct epochs of gas-disk evolution, providing a unifying dynamical context for the CM/CI dichotomy, the CI-P-type link, and the delivery of water to Earth. The simulation suite is substantial and reproducible in method (open-source REBOUND, multiple gas profiles, 24 runs, KS tests), and the demonstration that the gas profile governs the implanted radial distribution is a falsifiable result with independent observational support from the distinct CM and CI/P-type distributions. However, the CM provenance and epoch claims rest on a synthetic pressure bump introduced to match the CM distribution, and the late gas-free implantation of CI bodies is inferred from mass-budget arguments rather than simulated. These load-bearing points require additional support before the central claims can be accepted.

major comments (3)
  1. [Overall/Results, Methods: Gas profiles, Fig. 7] The claim that CM parent bodies originate from the Saturn region and were implanted during Saturn's growth depends entirely on a synthetic Gaussian pressure bump at 2.7-3.0 au that is inserted because it produces the best KS match to the observed CM distribution. This is a fitted input, so the agreement is partly self-confirming. The two proposed physical origins are not established: the paper itself notes that the water ice line had retreated to the terrestrial region by the 3-4 Myr CM formation epoch, and no calculation demonstrates that the inner edge of Jupiter's gap, with Jupiter fixed at 5.4 au, h=0.05, and alpha=2e-3, would produce a bump near 2.8 au. Since Fig. 2 establishes that the gas profile controls the final radial distribution, the observed CM distribution can constrain the gas profile but cannot, by itself, constrain the source region. The Saturn-provenance claim needs either a physical model for the 2.8 au bump at the relevant epoch or an independent dynamical argument that the implanted bodies came predominantly from inside 10 au.
  2. [Fig. 6 and 'Arguments against implantation of CI-like bodies'] The assignment of CI-like bodies to a late, gas-free implantation is not simulated in this paper. The mass-budget argument against gas-phase CI implantation is plausible, and the similarity of CI and P-type distributions is suggestive, but the conclusion that CI and comet-like bodies were implanted at the same time during the outward migration of Uranus and Neptune relies on literature efficiencies (e.g., the 4e-6 value from Vokrouhlicky et al.) rather than on a model run performed here. This distinction matters because the paper's central 'different arrival times' claim requires both the CM epoch and the CI epoch to be independently established. The authors should either run a gas-free implantation simulation with a realistic trans-Neptunian disk or clearly label the late CI arrival as an inference from prior work, not a result of the present simulations.
  3. [Table 1 and the paragraph beginning 'In the absence of giant planet migration'] The statement that 'the vast majority (>90%, see Tab. 1)' of implanted bodies originate from the Saturn region is not representative of the full simulation suite: Table 1 lists 'Implanted by Saturn' percentages between 55% and 93%, and for the wide configuration with tau_growth=1e5 yr the text states that a little over half of implanted objects originate from beyond 10 au. The Saturn-provenance conclusion therefore depends on suppressing ice-giant migration, while the paper simultaneously invokes migration as a key driver for the CI/CM ratio and for implantation from the outer disk. This tension should be addressed explicitly, and the provenance claim should be presented with the range of outcomes across Table 1 rather than as a universal result.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Fig. 1 caption] P-type asteroids are counted with D>30 km while CM and CI/IDP bodies are counted with D>100 km; this threshold mismatch could bias the KS compatibility test between CI/IDP and P-type distributions, and the paper does not report p-values or a sensitivity analysis.
  2. [Methods, Eq. (4)] The inclination damping term is written as ai = -vz/ti k, which is dimensionally odd and likely missing a factor; please check the vector notation against the Cresswell & Nelson prescription.
  3. [Table 1] The column header 'Implanted by Saturn (%)' is ambiguous: it could mean the fraction of implanted bodies originating inside 10 au, or the implantation efficiency from that region. Please define the quantity explicitly.
  4. [Fig. 5 caption] The caption states 'The exact shape of this gap is not very important,' but the paper later argues that the location and shape of a pressure bump near 2.8 au are critical for reproducing the CM distribution; this apparent contradiction should be reconciled.
  5. [Results, pressure-bump sensitivity] The Gaussian bump simulations use sigma=0.2 or 0.4 au without a systematic sensitivity study; reporting how the KS statistic varies with sigma would help quantify how strongly the CM distribution constrains the bump width.

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged · score 5.0 of 10

The 2.8 au pressure bump is a fitted input whose match to the CM distribution is built into the simulations; the different-arrival-time inference retains independent support, so circularity is partial.

  1. fitted input called prediction [Main text, 'Using a Kolmogorov-Smirnov (KS) test' paragraph (after Fig. 5, before Fig. 6); see also Fig. 7 caption.]
    "Among our simulations based on synthetic gas profiles, the best-fitting simulation is the one where we forced the gas profile to include a Gaussian pressure bump at a heliocentric distance of 2.7, 2.8, or alternatively 3.0 au. This would seem to indicate that there was a pressure bump of some kind acting as a planetesimal trap in the vicinity of ~2.8 au during the CM implantation period, i.e., Saturn's growth period."

    The Gaussian bump's location and shape are fitted parameters: the authors 'forced the gas profile to include a Gaussian pressure bump' and selected 2.7-3.0 au because that run best matched the observed CM semimajor-axis distribution in a KS test. The paper's own simulations show that the final implanted-body distribution mirrors the gas profile ('the gas disk profile entirely governs the radial distribution of bodies implanted by aerodynamic drag' and 'bodies formed around Saturn will end up with the same radial distribution as those that originate around Neptune'). Therefore a bump placed at 2.8 au produces, by construction, an implanted-body peak near 2.8 au.

full rationale

The paper's central different-arrival-time inference is not, by itself, circular: it is a conditional dynamical argument (same gas profile at a given time leads to the same implanted radial distribution; observed CM and CI distributions are very different, so they cannot have been implanted under the same gas profile) and it is anchored to externally dated formation intervals (CM ~3-4 Myr, CI/comet-like >4-5 Myr) plus the observed CI/P-type similarity. The main circularity is narrower but real: the 2.8-3.0 au Gaussian pressure bump is a fitted input, chosen because it best reproduces the CM semimajor-axis distribution under a KS test; because the simulations show that implanted bodies trace the gas profile, the successful fit merely reflects the imposed bump and cannot independently demonstrate that such a bump existed or that CM implantation occurred during Saturn's growth. The CM-Saturn source assignment also rests on the model's source-efficiency partition rather than on the observed CM distribution, so it is a model inference rather than a pure tautology. Overall: significant fitted-input circularity in one load-bearing premise, but the different-time conclusion has independent support, giving a partial rather than total circularity.

Assumptions & free parameters 7 free parameters · 7 assumptions · 1 invented entities

The conclusions rest on assumed giant-planet initial conditions, the adopted spectral-to-meteorite mapping, and disk prescriptions from the literature. The most adjustable input is the fitted pressure bump. The late gas-free implantation of CI-like bodies uses a cited efficiency rather than a simulation in this paper.

free parameters (7)
  • Pressure bump location = 2.8-3.0 au (Gaussian peak; sigma 0.2-0.4 au)
    Synthetic Gaussian pressure bumps inserted at 2.7, 2.8, 3.0, and 3.2 au; the 2.8 and 3.0 au cases best reproduce the observed CM semimajor-axis distribution in KS tests, so the location is effectively fitted to the data it later explains.
  • Gas surface density normalization at 1 au = 300 g/cm^2 canonical; also 30, 200, 400 tested
    Chosen from literature rather than fitted to CM or CI data, but it affects implantation efficiencies and migration rates.
  • Disk aspect ratio h = 0.05
    Fixed from the Cresswell and Nelson prescription; not fitted, but shapes gas density and drag.
  • Planetesimal radius = 100 km
    Represents 100-km-sized planetesimals; drag efficiency and implantation rates depend on this choice.
  • Planetary growth timescale tau_growth = 1e5, 5e5, 1e6 yr (varied)
    Parameter scan rather than a fit to target data; choices affect migration and implantation timing.
  • Viscosity alpha = 1e-4 to 2e-3
    Varied across simulations; influences gas profile evolution and migration prescription.
  • Planetesimal disk metallicity for mass estimates = 0.01-0.02
    Used to estimate available solid mass between Saturn and Uranus; the resulting roughly 1 Earth mass lower limit feeds the water delivery calculation.
assumptions (7)
  • domain assumption Jupiter had already opened a gap in the gas disk and sat at 5.4 au while Saturn grew at the gap edge, 7.3 au.
    Initial conditions in the Methods section, 'Giant planet dynamics and growth', place Jupiter at 5.4 au with a Gaussian gap; the CM implantation scenario starts from this state.
  • domain assumption A fifth ice giant existed and was later ejected from the solar system.
    Needed to stabilize the planetary configuration in the wide and tight resonance chains, following Nesvorny and Deienno.
  • domain assumption The observed spectral classes of main-belt asteroids correspond to meteorite groups (CM-like to CM, CI/IDP-like to CI).
    Basis for comparing simulations to observations; taken from references [16-20].
  • domain assumption Gas-free implantation efficiency of trans-Neptunian planetesimals into the asteroid belt is about 4e-6.
    Adopted from Vokrouhlicky et al. 2016 to solve the CI over-implantation problem; not derived in this paper.
  • domain assumption Uranus and Neptune formed late, 4-6 Myr after CAIs, and later migrated outward.
    Used to date CI and comet-like implantation; cited from references [40,41,44,45].
  • domain assumption The terrestrial planets can be neglected in the outer-planet implantation simulations.
    Explicitly stated in the Methods; their gravitational influence was omitted to save computation time.
  • domain assumption The radial distribution of bodies implanted by gas drag is governed by the gas profile, independent of source region.
    This is the central dynamical result of the simulations and the logical bridge to the different-time conclusion.
invented entities (1)
  • Synthetic Gaussian pressure bump at 2.8-3.0 au
    purpose: Reproduce the observed CM semimajor-axis distribution and infer a planetesimal trap (water ice line or Jupiter gap inner edge) during Saturn's growth.
    The bump is inserted ad hoc and its location is scanned to match the CM data; the paper offers no independent observational or theoretical handle on this bump beyond the distribution it is fit to.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Different arrival times of CM and CI-like bodies from the outer Solar System to the asteroid belt." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/X5MVJNYR

@misc{pith2026250722649,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Different arrival times of CM and CI-like bodies from the outer Solar System to the asteroid belt},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/X5MVJNYR}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2507.22649}
}
read the original abstract

Understanding the provenance of CI and CM chondrites, the most primitive materials in our meteorite collections, is critical for shedding light on the Solar System's early evolution and contextualizing findings from recent sample return missions. Here we show that the parent bodies of CM chondrites originate from the Saturn formation region, whereas those of CI chondrites originate essentially from the primordial trans-Uranian disk. Using Nbody simulations to investigate the effect of giant planet growth and inward Type-I migration, along with the current observed distribution of CM, CI, and comet-like P types bodies in the asteroid belt, we demonstrate that CI- and CM-like bodies must have been implanted at different times in the belt. In contrast, CI and comet-like bodies were implanted at the same time. These different implantation periods are imposed by the fact that the gas disk profile entirely governs the radial distribution of bodies implanted by aerodynamic drag in the asteroid belt. A preferred location coincides with the inner edge of a gap opened by Jupiter. Saturn's growth likely drove the migration of CM-like bodies. In contrast, CI and comet-like bodies were transported at a later stage during the outward migration of Uranus and Neptune, driven by remaining planetesimals. Since CM chondrites are chondrule-rich, it follows that chondrule formation occurred mostly inward of the ice giants formation zone (under 10 au). A byproduct of our simulations is that only CM-like, not CI-like, bodies contributed to the water budget of the telluric planets.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

83 extracted references · 79 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Morbidelli, H

    A. Morbidelli, H. F. Levison, K. Tsiganis, and R. Gomes. Chaotic capture of Jupiter’s Trojan asteroids in the early Solar System. Nature, 435(7041):462–465, May 2005

    2005

  2. [2]

    Bottke, David Nesvorn´ y, Robert E

    William F. Bottke, David Nesvorn´ y, Robert E. Grimm, Alessandro Morbidelli, and David P. O’Brien. Iron meteorites as remnants of planetesimals formed in the terrestrial planet region. Nature, 439(7078):821–824, February 2006

    2006

  3. [3]

    Levison, William F

    Harold F. Levison, William F. Bottke, Matthieu Gounelle, Alessandro Morbidelli, David Nesvorn´ y, and Kleomenis Tsiganis. Contamination of the asteroid belt by primordial trans-Neptunian objects. Nature, 460(7253):364–366, July 2009

    2009

  4. [4]

    Walsh, Alessandro Morbidelli, Sean N

    Kevin J. Walsh, Alessandro Morbidelli, Sean N. Raymond, David P. O’Brien, and Avi M. Mandell. A low mass for Mars from Jupiter’s early gas-driven migration. Nature, 475(7355):206–209, July 2011

    work page 2011

  5. [5]

    Raymond and Andre Izidoro

    Sean N. Raymond and Andre Izidoro. Origin of water in the inner Solar System: Planetesimals scattered inward during Jupiter and Saturn’s rapid gas accretion. Icarus, 297:134–148, November 2017

    work page 2017

  6. [6]

    Thomas, Francesca E

    Micha¨ el Marsset, Pierre Vernazza, Miroslav Broˇ z, Cristina A. Thomas, Francesca E. DeMeo, Brian Burt, Richard P. Binzel, Vishnu Reddy, Allison McGraw, Chrysa Avdellidou, Benoit Carry, Stephen M. Slivan, and David Pol- ishook. The Massalia asteroid family as the origin of ordinary L chondrites. Nature, submit., page arXiv:2403.08548, March 2024

    arXiv 2024

  7. [7]

    Young asteroid families as the primary source of meteorites

    M. Broˇ z, P. Vernazza, M. Marsset, F. E. DeMeo, R. P. Binzel, D. Vokrouhlick´ y, and D. Nesvorn´ y. Young asteroid families as the primary source of meteorites. Nature, submit., page arXiv:2403.08552, March 2024

    work page Pith review arXiv 2024

  8. [8]

    Evidence for slow migration of neptune from the inclination distribution of kuiper belt objects

    David Nesvorn´ y. Evidence for slow migration of neptune from the inclination distribution of kuiper belt objects. The Astronomical Journal, 150(3):73, aug 2015

    work page 2015

Show all 83 references
  1. [9]

    Gomes, and David Nesvorn´ y

    Rogerio Deienno, Alessandro Morbidelli, Rodney S. Gomes, and David Nesvorn´ y. Constraining the Giant Planets’ Initial Configuration from Their Evolution: Implications for the Timing of the Planetary Instability. Astron. J., 153(4):153, April 2017

    2017

  2. [10]

    F. E. DeMeo and B. Carry. The taxonomic distribution of asteroids from multi- filter all-sky photometric surveys. Icarus, 226(1):723–741, September 2013

    2013

  3. [11]

    Paul H. Warren. Stable-isotopic anomalies and the accretionary assemblage of the Earth and Mars: A subordinate role for carbonaceous chondrites. Earth and Planetary Science Letters, 311(1):93–100, November 2011

    2011

  4. [12]

    Brennecka, Mario Fischer- G¨ odde, Thomas S

    Gerrit Budde, Christoph Burkhardt, Gregory A. Brennecka, Mario Fischer- G¨ odde, Thomas S. Kruijer, and Thorsten Kleine. Molybdenum isotopic evidence for the origin of chondrules and a distinct genetic heritage of carbonaceous and non-carbonaceous meteorites. Earth and Planeta...

    2016

  5. [13]

    Kruijer, Christoph Burkhardt, Gerrit Budde, and Thorsten Kleine

    Thomas S. Kruijer, Christoph Burkhardt, Gerrit Budde, and Thorsten Kleine. Age of jupiter inferred from the distinct genetics and formation times of mete- orites. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 114(26):6712–6716, 2017. 21

    2017

  6. [14]

    Timo Hopp, Nicolas Dauphas, Yoshinari Abe, J´ erˆ ome Al´ eon, Conel M. O’D. Alexander, Sachiko Amari, Yuri Amelin, Ken ichi Bajo, Martin Bizzarro, Audrey Bouvier, Richard W. Carlson, Marc Chaussidon, Byeon-Gak Choi, Andrew M. Davis, Tommaso Di Rocco, Wataru Fujiya, Ryota Fuka...

    2022

  7. [16]

    Vernazza, M

    P. Vernazza, M. Marsset, P. Beck, R. P. Binzel, M. Birlan, E. A. Cloutis, F. E. DeMeo, C. Dumas, and T. Hiroi. Compositional Homogeneity of CM Parent Bodies. Astron. J., 152(3):54, September 2016

    2016

  8. [17]

    DeMeo, Brian J

    Francesca E. DeMeo, Brian J. Burt, Micha¨ el Marsset, David Polishook, Thomas H. Burbine, Beno ˆ ıt Carry, Richard P. Binzel, Pierre Vernazza, Vishnu Reddy, Michelle Tang, Cristina A. Thomas, Andrew S. Rivkin, Nicholas A. Moskovitz, Stephen M. Slivan, and Schelte J. Bus. Conne...

    2022

  9. [18]

    Greenwood, Makoto Kimura, Naoya Imae, Kentaro Uesugi, Aiko Nakato, Kasumi Yogata, Hayato Yuzawa, Yu Kodama, Akira Tsuchiyama, Masahiro Yasutake, Ross Findlay, Ian A

    Motoo Ito, Naotaka Tomioka, Masayuki Uesugi, Akira Yamaguchi, Naoki Shi- rai, Takuji Ohigashi, Ming-Chang Liu, Richard C. Greenwood, Makoto Kimura, Naoya Imae, Kentaro Uesugi, Aiko Nakato, Kasumi Yogata, Hayato Yuzawa, Yu Kodama, Akira Tsuchiyama, Masahiro Yasutake, Ross Findl...

    2022

  10. [19]

    Miura, Hajime Yano, Trevor R

    Toru Yada, Masanao Abe, Tatsuaki Okada, Aiko Nakato, Kasumi Yogata, Akiko Miyazaki, Kentaro Hatakeda, Kazuya Kumagai, Masahiro Nishimura, Yuya Hitomi, Hiromichi Soejima, Miwa Yoshitake, Ayako Iwamae, Shizuho Furuya, Masayuki Uesugi, Yuzuru Karouji, Tomohiro Usui, Tasuku Hayash...

    2021

  11. [20]

    Young, Yoshi- nari Abe, J´ erˆ ome Al´ eon, Conel M

    Tetsuya Yokoyama, Kazuhide Nagashima, Izumi Nakai, Edward D. Young, Yoshi- nari Abe, J´ erˆ ome Al´ eon, Conel M. O’D. Alexander, Sachiko Amari, Yuri Amelin, Ken ichi Bajo, Martin Bizzarro, Audrey Bouvier, Richard W. Carlson, Marc Chaussidon, Byeon-Gak Choi, Nicolas Dauphas, A...

    2023

  12. [21]

    Vernazza, M

    P. Vernazza, M. Marsset, P. Beck, R. P. Binzel, M. Birlan, R. Brunetto, F. E. Demeo, Z. Djouadi, C. Dumas, S. Merouane, O. Mousis, and B. Zanda. Inter- planetary Dust Particles as Samples of Icy Asteroids. Astrophys. J., 806(2):204, June 2015

    2015

  13. [22]

    Vernazza, M

    P. Vernazza, M. Ferrais, L. Jorda, J. Hanuˇ s, B. Carry, M. Marsset, M. Broˇ z, R. Fetick, M. Viikinkoski, F. Marchis, F. Vachier, A. Drouard, T. Fusco, M. Bir- lan, E. Podlewska-Gaca, N. Rambaux, M. Neveu, P. Bartczak, G. Dudzi´ nski, E. Jehin, P. Beck, J. Berthier, J. Castil...

    2021

  14. [23]

    Rein and S

    H. Rein and S. F. Liu. REBOUND: an open-source multi-purpose N-body code for collisional dynamics. Astron. Astrophys., 537:A128, January 2012

    2012

  15. [24]

    Cresswell and R

    P. Cresswell and R. P. Nelson. Three-dimensional simulations of multiple pro- toplanets embedded in a protostellar disc. Astron. Astrophys., 482(2):677–690, May 2008

    2008

  16. [25]

    Desch, Anusha Kalyaan, and Conel M

    Steven J. Desch, Anusha Kalyaan, and Conel M. O’D. Alexander. The effect of jupiter’s formation on the distribution of refractory elements and inclusions in meteorites. The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series, 238(1):11, sep 2018

    2018

  17. [26]

    Raymond and Andre Izidoro

    Sean N. Raymond and Andre Izidoro. The empty primordial asteroid belt. Science Advances, 3(9):e1701138, 2017

    2017

  18. [27]

    William R. Ward. Protoplanet Migration by Nebula Tides. Icarus, 126(2):261– 281, April 1997

    1997

  19. [28]

    Raymond, Franck Hersant, and Arnaud Pierens

    Andr´ e Izidoro, Alessandro Morbidelli, Sean N. Raymond, Franck Hersant, and Arnaud Pierens. Accretion of Uranus and Neptune from inward-migrating plan- etary embryos blocked by Jupiter and Saturn. Astron. Astrophys., 582:A99, October 2015

    2015

  20. [29]

    Evolution of the reservoirs of volatiles in the protosolar nebula

    Schneeberger, Antoine, Mousis, Olivier, Aguichine, Artyom, and Lunine, Jonathan I. Evolution of the reservoirs of volatiles in the protosolar nebula. Astron. Astrophys., 670:A28, 2023

    2023

  21. [30]

    Raymond, Rogerio Deienno, Bertram Bitsch, and Andrea Isella

    Andre Izidoro, Rajdeep Dasgupta, Sean N. Raymond, Rogerio Deienno, Bertram Bitsch, and Andrea Isella. Planetesimal rings as the cause of the Solar System’s planetary architecture. Nature Astronomy, 6:357–366, March 2022

    2022

  22. [31]

    IDP-like Asteroids Formed Later than 5 Myr After Ca-Al-rich Inclusions

    Marc Neveu and Pierre Vernazza. IDP-like Asteroids Formed Later than 5 Myr After Ca-Al-rich Inclusions. Astrophys. J., 875(1):30, April 2019

    2019

  23. [32]

    Artyom Aguichine, Olivier Mousis, and Jonathan I. Lunine. The Possible Formation of Jupiter from Supersolar Gas. Planet. Sci. J., 3(6):141, June 2022

    2022

  24. [33]

    Isotopic trichotomy of main belt asteroids from implantation of outer solar system planetesimals

    David Nesvorn´ y, Nicolas Dauphas, David Vokrouhlick´ y, Rogerio Deienno, and Timo Hopp. Isotopic trichotomy of main belt asteroids from implantation of outer solar system planetesimals. Earth and Planetary Science Letters, 626:118521, January 2024

    2024

  25. [35]

    Meteorites

    Robert Hutchison. Meteorites. 2004

    2004

  26. [36]

    Brunetto, C

    R. Brunetto, C. Lantz, Y. Fukuda, A. Al´ eon-Toppani, T. Nakamura, Z. Dionnet, D. Baklouti, F. Borondics, Z. Djouadi, S. Rubino, K. Amano, M. Matsumoto, Y. Fujioka, T. Morita, M. Kukuiri, E. Kagawa, M. Matsuoka, R. Milliken, H. Yurimoto, T. Noguchi, R. Okazaki, H. Yabuta, H. N...

    2023

  27. [37]

    B. J. R. Davidsson, H. Sierks, C. G¨ uttler, F. Marzari, M. Pajola, H. Rickman, M. F. A’Hearn, A. T. Auger, M. R. El-Maarry, S. Fornasier, P. J. Guti´ errez, H. U. Keller, M. Massironi, C. Snodgrass, J. B. Vincent, C. Barbieri, P. L. Lamy, 25 R. Rodrigo, D. Koschny, M. A. Baru...

    2016

  28. [38]

    C. J. Bierson and F. Nimmo. Using the density of Kuiper Belt Objects to constrain their composition and formation history. Icarus, 326:10–17, July 2019

    2019

  29. [39]

    Composition of Solar System Small Bodies, page 269–297

    Pierre Vernazza and Pierre Beck. Composition of Solar System Small Bodies, page 269–297. Cambridge Planetary Science. Cambridge University Press, 2017

    2017

  30. [40]

    Dodson-Robinson and Peter Bodenheimer

    Sarah E. Dodson-Robinson and Peter Bodenheimer. The formation of Uranus and Neptune in solid-rich feeding zones: Connecting chemistry and dynamics. Icarus, 207(1):491–498, May 2010

    2010

  31. [41]

    The Formation of Uranus and Neptune: Challenges and Implications for Intermediate-mass Exoplanets

    Ravit Helled and Peter Bodenheimer. The Formation of Uranus and Neptune: Challenges and Implications for Intermediate-mass Exoplanets. Astrophys. J., 789(1):69, July 2014

    2014

  32. [42]

    Baguet, A

    D. Baguet, A. Morbidelli, and J. M. Petit. Positions of the secular resonances in the primordial Kuiper Belt disk. Icarus, 334:99–109, December 2019

    2019

  33. [43]

    Bottke, and David Nesvorn´ y

    David Vokrouhlick´ y, William F. Bottke, and David Nesvorn´ y. Capture of Trans- Neptunian Planetesimals in the Main Asteroid Belt.Astron. J., 152(2):39, August 2016

    2016

  34. [44]

    Tsiganis, R

    K. Tsiganis, R. Gomes, A. Morbidelli, and H. F. Levison. Origin of the orbital architecture of the giant planets of the Solar System. Nature, 435:459–461, May 2005

    2005

  35. [45]

    Gomes, H

    R. Gomes, H. F. Levison, K. Tsiganis, and A. Morbidelli. Origin of the cat- aclysmic Late Heavy Bombardment period of the terrestrial planets. Nature, 435(7041):466–469, May 2005

    2005

  36. [46]

    Raymond and David Nesvorn´ y

    Sean N. Raymond and David Nesvorn´ y. Origin and Dynamical Evolution of the Asteroid Belt. In Vesta and Ceres. Insights from the Dawn Mission for the Origin of the Solar System, page 227. 2022

    2022

  37. [47]

    Levison, and Kleomenis Tsiganis

    Alessandro Morbidelli, Ramon Brasser, Rodney Gomes, Harold F. Levison, and Kleomenis Tsiganis. Evidence from the asteroid belt for a violent past evolution of jupiter’s orbit. The Astronomical Journal, 140(5):1391, oct 2010

    2010

  38. [48]

    H. C. Bates, A. J. King, K. S. Shirley, E. Bonsall, C. Schr¨ oder, F. Wombacher, T. Fockenberg, R. J. Curtis, and N. E. Bowles. The bulk mineralogy, ele- mental composition, and water content of the Winchcombe CM chondrite fall. Meteorit. Planet. Sci., 59(5):1006–1028, May 2024

    2024

  39. [49]

    Peslier, Maria Sch¨ onb¨ achler, Henner Busemann, and Shun-Ichiro Karato

    Anne H. Peslier, Maria Sch¨ onb¨ achler, Henner Busemann, and Shun-Ichiro Karato. Water in the Earth’s Interior: Distribution and Origin. Space Sci. Rev., 212(1- 2):743–810, October 2017

    2017

  40. [50]

    Isotopic Variations in Meteoric Waters

    Harmon Craig. Isotopic Variations in Meteoric Waters. Science, 133(3465):1702– 1703, May 1961

    1961

  41. [51]

    Morbidelli, J

    A. Morbidelli, J. Chambers, J. I. Lunine, J. M. Petit, F. Robert, G. B. Valsecchi, and K. E. Cyr. Source regions and time scales for the delivery of water to Earth. 26 Meteorit. Planet. Sci., 35(6):1309–1320, November 2000

    2000

  42. [52]

    Separating gas-giant and ice- giant planets by halting pebble accretion

    Lambrechts, M., Johansen, A., and Morbidelli, A. Separating gas-giant and ice- giant planets by halting pebble accretion. Astron. Astrophys., 572:A35, 2014

    2014

  43. [53]

    D. N. C. Lin and John Papaloizou. On the Tidal Interaction between Pro- toplanets and the Protoplanetary Disk. III. Orbital Migration of Protoplanets. Astrophys. J., 309:846, October 1986

    1986

  44. [54]

    Man Hoi Lee and S. J. Peale. Dynamics and Origin of the 2:1 Orbital Resonances of the GJ 876 Planets. Astrophys. J., 567(1):596–609, March 2002

    2002

  45. [55]

    Crida and B

    A. Crida and B. Bitsch. Runaway gas accretion and gap opening versus type i migration. Icarus, 285:145–154, 2017

    2017

  46. [56]

    J. F. Gonzalez, G. Laibe, S. T. Maddison, C. Pinte, and F. M´ enard. The accu- mulation and trapping of grains at planet gaps: Effects of grain growth and fragmentation. Planet. Space Sci., 116:48–56, October 2015

    2015

  47. [57]

    Ormel, and Shigeru Ida

    Hiroshi Kobayashi, Chris W. Ormel, and Shigeru Ida. Rapid formation of saturn after jupiter completion. The Astrophysical Journal, 756(1):70, aug 2012

    2012

  48. [58]

    Ronnet, O

    T. Ronnet, O. Mousis, P. Vernazza, J. I. Lunine, and A. Crida. Saturn’s Forma- tion and Early Evolution at the Origin of Jupiter’s Massive Moons. Astron. J., 155(5):224, May 2018

    2018

  49. [59]

    Meech and S

    K. Meech and S. N. Raymond. Origin of Earth’s Water: Sources and Constraints. In Victoria S. Meadows, Giada N. Arney, Britney E. Schmidt, and David J. Des Marais, editors, Planetary Astrobiology, page 325. 2020

    2020

  50. [60]

    Pollack, Olenka Hubickyj, Peter Bodenheimer, Jack J

    James B. Pollack, Olenka Hubickyj, Peter Bodenheimer, Jack J. Lissauer, Morris Podolak, and Yuval Greenzweig. Formation of the Giant Planets by Concurrent Accretion of Solids and Gas. Icarus, 124(1):62–85, November 1996

    1996

  51. [61]

    Planet heating prevents inward migration of planetary cores

    Pablo Ben ´ ıtez-Llambay, Fr´ ed´ eric Masset, Gloria Koenigsberger, and Judit Szul´ agyi. Planet heating prevents inward migration of planetary cores. Nature, 520(7545):63–65, April 2015

    2015

  52. [62]

    Fendyke and Richard P

    Stephen M. Fendyke and Richard P. Nelson. On the corotation torque for low- mass eccentric planets. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc., 437(1):96–107, January 2014

    2014

  53. [63]

    Henrik Eklund and Fr´ ed´ eric S. Masset. Evolution of eccentricity and inclina- tion of hot protoplanets embedded in radiative discs. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc., 469(1):206–217, July 2017

    2017

  54. [64]

    Chrenko, M

    O. Chrenko, M. Broˇ z, and M. Lambrechts. Eccentricity excitation and merging of planetary embryos heated by pebble accretion. Astron. Astrophys., 606:A114, October 2017

    2017

  55. [65]

    Masset, and F

    Sonia Cornejo, Fr´ ed´ eric S. Masset, and F. J. S´ anchez-Salcedo. On the interaction of pebble accreting embryos with the gaseous disc: importance of thermal forces. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc., 523(1):936–953, July 2023

    2023

  56. [66]

    S. J. Paardekooper, C. Baruteau, A. Crida, and W. Kley. A torque formula for non-isothermal type I planetary migration - I. Unsaturated horseshoe drag. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc., 401(3):1950–1964, January 2010

    1950

  57. [67]

    S. J. Paardekooper, C. Baruteau, and W. Kley. A torque formula for non-isothermal Type I planetary migration - II. Effects of diffusion. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc., 410(1):293–303, January 2011. 27

    2011

  58. [68]

    R. S. Gomes. The origin of the Kuiper Belt high-inclination population. Icarus, 161:404–418, February 2003

    2003

  59. [69]

    H. F. Levison, A. Morbidelli, C. Vanlaerhoven, R. Gomes, and K. Tsiganis. Origin of the structure of the Kuiper belt during a dynamical instability in the orbits of Uranus and Neptune. Icarus, 196:258–273, July 2008

    2008

  60. [70]

    N. A. Kaib and T. Quinn. The formation of the Oort cloud in open cluster environments. Icarus, 197:221–238, September 2008

    2008

  61. [71]

    Pebble accretion at the origin of water in europa

    Thomas Ronnet, Olivier Mousis, and Pierre Vernazza. Pebble accretion at the origin of water in europa. The Astrophysical Journal, 845(2):92, aug 2017

    2017

  62. [72]

    Perets and Ruth A

    Hagai B. Perets and Ruth A. Murray-Clay. Wind-shearing in gaseous protoplan- etary disks and the evolution of binary planetesimals. The Astrophysical Journal, 733(1):56, may 2011

    2011

  63. [73]

    Tristan Guillot, Shigeru Ida, and Chris W. Ormel. On the filtering and processing of dust by planetesimals. I. Derivation of collision probabilities for non-drifting planetesimals. Astron. Astrophys., 572:A72, December 2014

    2014

  64. [74]

    Supulver and D.N.C

    Kimberley D. Supulver and D.N.C. Lin. Formation of icy planetesimals in a turbulent solar nebula. Icarus, 146(2):525–540, 2000

    2000

  65. [75]

    Nelson, John C

    Richard P. Nelson, John C. B. Papaloizou, Fr´ ed´ eric Masset, and Willy Kley. The migration and growth of protoplanets in protostellar discs. Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 318(1):18–36, 10 2000

    2000

  66. [76]

    The structure of protoplanetary discs around evolving young stars

    Bertram Bitsch, Anders Johansen, Michiel Lambrechts, and Alessandro Mor- bidelli. The structure of protoplanetary discs around evolving young stars. Astron. Astrophys., 575:A28, March 2015

    2015

  67. [77]

    Orbital migration and mass accretion of protoplanets in three-dimensional global computations with nested grids

    Gennaro D’Angelo, Willy Kley, and Thomas Henning. Orbital migration and mass accretion of protoplanets in three-dimensional global computations with nested grids. The Astrophysical Journal, 586(1):540, mar 2003

    2003

  68. [78]

    Growth of asteroids, planetary embryos, and kuiper belt objects by chondrule accretion

    Anders Johansen, Mordecai-Mark Mac Low, Pedro Lacerda, and Martin Bizzarro. Growth of asteroids, planetary embryos, and kuiper belt objects by chondrule accretion. Science Advances, 1(3):e1500109, 2015

    2015

  69. [79]

    N. I. Shakura and R. A. Sunyaev. Black holes in binary systems. Observational appearance. Astron. Astrophys., 24:337–355, January 1973

    1973

  70. [80]

    Accretion and the Evolution of T Tauri Disks

    Lee Hartmann, Nuria Calvet, Erik Gullbring, and Paola D’Alessio. Accretion and the Evolution of T Tauri Disks. Astrophys. J., 495(1):385–400, March 1998

    1998

  71. [81]

    The dynamics of jupiter and saturn in the gaseous protoplanetary disk

    Alessandro Morbidelli and Aur´ elien Crida. The dynamics of jupiter and saturn in the gaseous protoplanetary disk. Icarus, 191(1):158–171, 2007

    2007

  72. [82]

    von Steiger and T

    R. von Steiger and T. H. Zurbuchen. Solar Metallicity Derived from in situ Solar Wind Composition. Astrophys. J., 816(1):13, January 2016

    2016

  73. [83]

    Dynamical Evolution of the Early Solar System

    David Nesvorn´ y. Dynamical Evolution of the Early Solar System. Annu. Rev. Astron. Astrophys., 56:137–174, September 2018

    2018

  74. [84]

    E. V. Pitjeva and N. P. Pitjev. Masses of the Main Asteroid Belt and the Kuiper Belt from the Motions of Planets and Spacecraft.Astronomy Letters, 44(8-9):554– 566, August 2018

    2018

  75. [85]

    Bottke, and David Nesvorn´ y

    David Vokrouhlick´ y, William F. Bottke, and David Nesvorn´ y. Capture of Trans- Neptunian Planetesimals in the Main Asteroid Belt.Astron. J., 152(2):39, August 2016. 28

    2016

Pith tools

Reviewed August 6, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.