New Issue: Science’s Impossible Questions. Read Now

Magma Oceans Covered Early Asteroids

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


During their formation, many planetary bodies in our solar system melted significantly, allowing denser materials to sink to their centers in a process known as differentiation. But how widespread this process was when it came to another class of early solar system body, asteroids, remains unclear. New findings published in the latest issue of the journal Nature suggest that for at least two of our solar system's major asteroids, melting was dramatic.

By measuring the types and amounts of different isotopes present in a range of meteorites, Richard C. Greenwood of Open University in Milton Keynes, U.K. and his colleagues reconstructed their histories. The studied samples were formed from their parent asteroids--the 530-kilometer wide Vesta and a second unnamed asteroid--more than four billion years ago. The researchers determined that all the meteorites from Vesta exhibit the same ratio of oxygen isotopes, as did the meteorites from the second source. The find suggests that both asteroids experienced widespread melting with more than 50 percent of each object becoming liquid.

In the magma oceans, other elements in the asteroids would have separated out according to mass, the researchers report. The resulting layered composition of such an asteroid could have contributed to the uneven distribution of elements among the planets, they say, if developing protoplanets crashed into the asteroid once it had cooled. In this scenario, the elements abundant in the crust would be transferred to one planet and those present in its core would end up on another. According to the report, Earth's high magnesium to silicon ratio is one anomalous feature that could be explained under these circumstances.

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe