Jupiter’s atmosphere is rotating differentially, with zones and belts rotating at speeds that differ by up to 100 metres per second. Whether this is also true of the gas giant’s interior has been unknown1,2, limiting our ability to probe the structure and composition of the planet3,4. The discovery by the Juno spacecraft that Jupiter’s gravity field is north–south asymmetric5 and the determination of its non-zero odd gravitational harmonics J3, J5, J7 and J9 demonstrates that the observed zonal cloud flow must persist to a depth of about 3,000 kilometres from the cloud tops6. Here we report an analysis of Jupiter’s even gravitational harmonics J4, J6, J8 and J10 as observed by Juno5 and compared to the predictions of interior models. We find that the deep interior of the planet rotates nearly as a rigid body, with differential rotation decreasing by at least an order of magnitude compared to the atmosphere. Moreover, we find that the atmospheric zonal flow extends to more than 2,000 kilometres and to less than 3,500 kilometres, making it fully consistent with the constraints obtained independently from the odd gravitational harmonics. This depth corresponds to the point at which the electric conductivity becomes large and magnetic drag should suppress differential rotation7. Given that electric conductivity is dependent on planetary mass, we expect the outer, differentially rotating region to be at least three times deeper in Saturn and to be shallower in massive giant planets and brown dwarfs.

  • Subscribe to Nature for full access:



Additional access options:

Already a subscriber?  Log in  now or  Register  for online access.


  1. 1.

    A simple model of convection in the Jovian atmosphere. Icarus 29, 255–260 (1976)

  2. 2.

    & Jovian atmospheric dynamics: an update after Galileo and Cassini. Rep. Prog. Phys. 68, 1935–1996 (2005)

  3. 3.

    Effects of differential rotation on the gravitational figures of Jupiter and Saturn. Icarus 52, 509–515 (1982)

  4. 4.

    , & New constraints on the composition of Jupiter from Galileo measurements and interior models. Icarus 130, 534–539 (1997)

  5. 5.

    et al. Measurement of Jupiter’s asymmetric gravity field. Nature 555, (2018)

  6. 6.

    et al. Jupiter’s atmospheric jet streams extend thousands of kilometres deep. Nature 555, (2018)

  7. 7.

    & Zonal flow magnetic field interaction in the semi-conducting region of giant planets. Icarus 296, 59–72 (2017)

  8. 8.

    The interiors of giant planets: models and outstanding questions. Annu. Rev. Earth Planet. Sci. 33, 493–530 (2005)

  9. 9.

    Gravitational signature of Jupiter’s deep zonal flows. Icarus 137, 357–359 (1999)

  10. 10.

    et al. The effect of differential rotation on Jupiter’s low-degree even gravity moments. Geophys. Res. Lett. 44, 5960–5968 (2017)

  11. 11.

    , & Jupiter internal structure: the effect of different equations of state. Astron. Astrophys. 596, A114 (2016)

  12. 12.

    et al. Comparing Jupiter interior structure models to Juno gravity measurements and the role of an expanded core. Geophys. Res. Lett. 44, 4649–4659 (2017)

  13. 13.

    & Ab initio equation of state for hydrogen-helium mixtures with recalibration of the giant-planet mass-radius relation. Astrophys. J. 774, 148 (2013)

  14. 14.

    et al. Ab initio equations of state for hydrogen (H-REOS.3) and helium (He-REOS.3) and their implications for the interior of brown dwarfs. Astrophys. J. Suppl. Ser. 215, 21 (2014)

  15. 15.

    Concentric Maclaurin spheroid models of rotating liquid planets. Astrophys. J. 768, 43 (2013)

  16. 16.

    & Differential rotation in Jupiter: a comparison of methods. Icarus 267, 315–322 (2016)

  17. 17.

    & Physics Of Planetary Interiors (Astronomy and Astrophysics Series, Pachart, 1978)

  18. 18.

    Low- and high-order gravitational harmonics of rigidly rotating Jupiter. Astron. Astrophys. 606, A139 (2017)

  19. 19.

    , , , & Atmospheric confinement of jet streams on Uranus and Neptune. Nature 497, 344–347 (2013)

  20. 20.

    . et al. in Jupiter. The Planet, Satellites And Magnetosphere (eds ., . & ) Cambridge Planetary Science Vol. 1, 105–128 (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2004)

  21. 21.

    et al. Ab initio simulations for material properties along the Jupiter adiabat. Astrophys. J. Suppl. Ser. 202, 5 (2012)

  22. 22.

    , , , & Interaction between eddies and mean flow in Jupiter’s atmosphere: analysis of Cassini imaging data. Icarus 185, 430–442 (2006)

  23. 23.

    & Formation of jets and equatorial superrotation on Jupiter. J. Atmos. Sci. 66, 579–601 (2009)

  24. 24.

    , & Constraints on deep-seated zonal winds inside Jupiter and Saturn. Icarus 196, 653–664 (2008)

  25. 25.

    in Planets and Satellites (eds & ) Treatise in Geophysics Vol. 10.06, 195–237 (Elsevier, 2015)

  26. 26.

    & Atmospheric circulation and tides of “51 Pegasus b-like” planets. Astron. Astrophys. 385, 166–180 (2002)

  27. 27.

    & CEPAM: a code for modeling the interiors of giant planets. Astron. Astrophys. 109, 109–123 (1995)

  28. 28.

    , , & The evolution and internal structure of Jupiter and Saturn with compositional gradients. Astrophys. J. 829, 118 (2016)

  29. 29.

    , , & Hydrogen-helium demixing from first principles: from diamond anvil cells to planetary interiors. Phys. Rev. B 87, 174105 (2013)

  30. 30.

    & The dynamics and helium distribution in hydrogen-helium fluid planets. Astrophys. J. Suppl. Ser. 35, 239–261 (1977)

  31. 31.

    , , & An exploration of double diffusive convection in Jupiter as a result of hydrogen-helium phase separation. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 447, 3422–3441 (2015)

  32. 32.

    , & Bayesian evolution models for Jupiter with helium rain and double-diffusive convection. Astrophys. J. 832, 113 (2016)

  33. 33.

    Cosmochemistry and structure of the giant planets and their satellites. Icarus 62, 4–15 (1985)

  34. 34.

    & The fuzziness of giant planets’ cores. Astrophys. J. 840, L4 (2017)

  35. 35.

    & A preliminary Jupiter model. Astrophys. J. 820, 80 (2016)

  36. 36.

    , & An equation of state for low-mass stars and giant planets. Astrophys. J. Suppl. Ser. 99, 713–741 (1995)

  37. 37.

    & Shock compression of deuterium and the interiors of Jupiter and Saturn. Astrophys. J. 609, 1170–1180 (2004)

  38. 38.

    & A new vision of giant planet interiors: impact of double diffusive convection. Astron. Astrophys. 540, A20 (2012)

  39. 39.

    The atmosphere of Neptune—an analysis of radio occultation data acquired with Voyager 2. Astron. J. 103, 967–982 (1992)

  40. 40.

    A comparison of the interiors of Jupiter and Saturn. Planet. Space Sci. 47, 1183–1200 (1999)

  41. 41.

    et al. Thermal structure of Jupiter’s atmosphere near the edge of a 5-micron hot spot in the north equatorial belt. J. Geophys. Res. 103, 22857–22889 (1998)

  42. 42.

    & Determining the initial helium abundance of the Sun. Astrophys. J. 719, 865–872 (2010)

  43. 43.

    , & Helium in Jupiter’s atmosphere: results from the Galileo probe helium interferometer experiment. J. Geophys. Res. 103, 22815–22829 (1998)

Download references


This research was carried out at the Observatoire de la Côte d’Azur under the sponsorship of the Centre National d’Etudes Spatiales; at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology, under a contract with NASA; by the Southwest Research Institute under contract with NASA; and at the Weizmann Institute of Science under contract with the Israeli Space Agency. Computations were performed on the ‘Mesocentre SIGAMM’ machine, hosted by the Observatoire de la Côte d’Azur.

Author information


  1. Université Côte d’Azur, OCA, Lagrange CNRS, 06304 Nice, France

    • T. Guillot
    • , Y. Miguel
    •  & A. Biekman
  2. Leiden Observatory, University of Leiden, Niels Bohrweg 2, 2333CA Leiden, The Netherlands

    • Y. Miguel
  3. University of California, Berkeley, California 94720, USA

    • B. Militzer
    •  & S. M. Wahl
  4. Lunar and Planetary Laboratory, University of Arizona, Tucson, Arizona 85721, USA

    • W. B. Hubbard
  5. Weizmann Institute of Science, Rehovot 76100, Israel

    • Y. Kaspi
    •  & E. Galanti
  6. California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, California 91125, USA

    • H. Cao
    •  & D. J. Stevenson
  7. Department of Earth and Planetary Sciences, Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02138, USA

    • H. Cao
  8. University of Zurich, 8057 Zurich, Switzerland

    • R. Helled
  9. Sapienza Università di Roma, 00184 Rome, Italy

    • L. Iess
    •  & D. Durante
  10. Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, California 91109, USA

    • W. M. Folkner
    • , M. Parisi
    •  & S. M. Levin
  11. Cornell University, Ithaca, New York 14853, USA

    • J. I. Lunine
  12. LESIA, Observatoire de Paris, PSL Research University, CNRS, Sorbonne Universités, UPMC Université Paris 06, Université Paris Diderot, Sorbonne Paris Cité, 92195 Meudon, France

    • D. R. Reese
  13. NASA/GSFC, Greenbelt, Maryland, USA

    • J. E. P. Connerney
  14. Southwest Research Institute, San Antonio, Texas, USA

    • S. J. Bolton


  1. Search for T. Guillot in:

  2. Search for Y. Miguel in:

  3. Search for B. Militzer in:

  4. Search for W. B. Hubbard in:

  5. Search for Y. Kaspi in:

  6. Search for E. Galanti in:

  7. Search for H. Cao in:

  8. Search for R. Helled in:

  9. Search for S. M. Wahl in:

  10. Search for L. Iess in:

  11. Search for W. M. Folkner in:

  12. Search for D. J. Stevenson in:

  13. Search for J. I. Lunine in:

  14. Search for D. R. Reese in:

  15. Search for A. Biekman in:

  16. Search for M. Parisi in:

  17. Search for D. Durante in:

  18. Search for J. E. P. Connerney in:

  19. Search for S. M. Levin in:

  20. Search for S. J. Bolton in:


T.G., Y.M. and B.M. ran interior models of Jupiter and carried out the analysis. W.B.H. and A.B. compared gravitational harmonics obtained by different methods. E.G. and Y.K. calculated the offset introduced by differential rotation. H.C., R.H., D.J.S. and J.I.L. provided theoretical support. S.M.W. provided additional interior models of Jupiter. D.R.R. provided a routine to calculate high-order gravitational harmonics efficiently. W.M.F., M.P. and D.D. carried out the analysis of the Juno gravity data. J.E.P.C., S.M.L. and S.J.B. supervised the planning, execution and definition of the Juno gravity experiment.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing financial interests.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to T. Guillot.

Reviewer Information Nature thanks J. Fortney and N. Nettelmann for their contribution to the peer review of this work.

Publisher's note: Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Extended data

About this article

Publication history






Rights and permissions

To obtain permission to re-use content from this article visit RightsLink.


By submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms and Community Guidelines. If you find something abusive or that does not comply with our terms or guidelines please flag it as inappropriate.