The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Predictions of oxygen isotope ratios in stars and of oxygen-rich interstellar grains in meteorites
Open accessAbstract
We carried out detailed, self-consistent calculations for stars from 1 to 9 solar mass over a wide range of metallicities, following the evolution and nucleosynthesis from the pre-main sequence to the asymptotic giant branch (AGB), in order to provide a self-consistent grid for evaluating stellar oxygen isotopic variations. These were calculated for first and second dredge-up, and for some masses also for third dredge-up and 'hot bottom' convective envelope burning on the AGB. We demonstrate that 0-16/0-17 in red giant envelopes is primarily a function of the star's mass, while 0-16/0-18 is primarily a function of the initial composition. Uncertainties in the 0-17-destruction rate have no effect on the 0-16/0-17 ratio for stars from 1 to 2.5 solar mass, but do affect the ratios for higher masses: the stellar 0-16/0-17 observations are consistent with the Landre et al. (1990) rates using f = 0.2 for 0-17(p,gamma) F-18 and -17(p. alpha) N-14, and with the Caughlan & Fowler (1988) rates using f approximately equals 1. The stellar 0-16/0-18 observations require f approximately equals 0 in the Caughlan & Fowler 0-18(p, alpha) N-15 rate. First dredge-up has the largest effect on the oxygen isotope ratios, decreasing 0-16/0-17 significantly from the initial value and increasing 0-16/0-18 slightly. Second and third dredge-up have only minor effects for solar metallicity stars. The absence of very low observed 0-16/0-18 ratios is consistent with a major increase in the 0-18(alpha, gamma) Ne-22 rate over the Caughlan & Fowler (1988) value. Hot bottom burning in stars above about 5 solar mass can cause a huge increase in 0-16/0-18 to approximately greater than 106, and possibly a significant decrease in 0-16/0-17; these are accompanied by a huge increase in Li-7 and a value of C-12/C-13 approximately = 3. The oxygen isotope ratios in the Al203 grains (Orgueil grain B, the Murchison 83-5 grain, and the new Bishunpur B39 grain) can be accounted for if they originated in stars that did NOT have the same initial 0-16/0-18 ratio. Thus one cannot assume uniform isotope ratios, even for stars of nearly solar composition. The grains 0-16/0-17 ratios, together with the Mg-26 excesses that indicate grain formation in a Al-26-rich environment, indicate that the Orgueil grain B and Murchison 83-5 grain originated in stars of roughly 1.5 solar mass, during third dredge-up on the AGB. the new Bishunpur B39 grain originated in a star of either 2 or of 4-7 solar mass.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Spectroscopic data, where available, seem to agree reasonably well with the first dredge-up predictions.
“Spectroscopic data, where available, seem to agree reasonably well with the FDU predictions”
From The Dawes Review 2: Nucleosynthesis and Stellar Yields of Low- and Intermediate-Mass Single Stars (2014) · cites this paper as Boothroyd, Sackmann, & Wasserburg 1994
Citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
The Dawes Review 2: Nucleosynthesis and Stellar Yields of Low- and Intermediate-Mass Single Stars
Karakas, A. I., & Lattanzio, J. C. (2014) · Publications of the Astronomical Society of Australia · doi:10.1017/pasa.2014.21 · Cited by 735
“More sophisticated calculations within a similar paradigm are provided by Boothroyd et al. (1994), Boothroyd et al. (1995), Wasserburg et al. (1995), Langer & Hoffman (1995), Sackmann & Boothroyd (1999), Nollett et al. (2003), Denissenkov & Tout (2000), Denissenkov et al. (2006), and Palmerini et…”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialON THE NEED FOR DEEP-MIXING IN ASYMPTOTIC GIANT BRANCH STARS OF LOW MASS
Busso, M., Palmerini, S., Maiorca, E., Cristallo, S., Straniero, O., Abia, C., Gallino, R., & Cognata, M. L. (2010) · The Astrophysical Journal · doi:10.1088/2041-8205/717/1/l47 · Cited by 69
Metadata
- Authors
- Boothroyd, A. I., Sackmann, I.-J., & Wasserburg, G. J.
- Affiliations
- University of Toronto (CA)
- California Institute of Technology (US)
- ORCID
- Wasserburg, G. J.
- Venue
- The Astrophysical Journal
- Publisher
- American Astronomical Society
- Published
- 1994-07
- Volume
- 430
- Pages
- L77
- ISSN
- 0004-637X (ISSN-L)
- 1538-4357
- OpenAlex
- W2139039945
- Cited by
- 98
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 3 · 2019: 3 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 2 · 2012: 1
- FWCI
- 7.36
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- The Astrophysical Journal (publishedVersion)
- CaltechAUTHORS (California Institute of Technology) (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- National Science Foundation (8817296)
- Canadian Institute for Theoretical Astrophysics
- Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Astronomy and Astrophysics › Stellar, planetary, and galactic studies
- Physical Sciences › Earth and Planetary Sciences › Space and Planetary Science › Astro and Planetary Science
- Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Astronomy and Astrophysics › Astrophysics and Star Formation Studies
- Keywords
- oxygen isotope ratios, stellar nucleosynthesis, asymptotic giant branch, dredge-up, hot bottom burning, interstellar dust grains, meteorites, Orgueil meteorite, lithium-7, oxygen-18, stellar evolution, metallicity, stellar mass, isotope fractionation
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review