Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 191

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

New Debris Disks around Nearby Main‐Sequence Stars: Impact on the Direct Detection of Planets

Open access
Beichman, C. A., Bryden, G., Stapelfeldt, K. R., Gautier, T. N., Grogan, K., Shao, M., Velusamy, T., Lawler, S. M., Blaylock, M., Rieke, G. H., Lunine, J. I., Fischer, D. A., Marcy, G. W., Greaves, J. S., Wyatt, M. C., Holland, W. S., Dent, W. R. F.·2006·The Astrophysical Journal

Abstract

Using the MIPS instrument on Spitzer , we have searched for infrared excesses around a sample of 82 stars, mostly F, G, and K main-sequence field stars, along with a small number of nearby M stars. These stars were selected for their suitability for future observations by a variety of planet-finding techniques. These observations provide information on the asteroidal and cometary material orbiting these stars, data that can be correlated with any planets that may eventually be found. We have found significant excess 70 μm emission toward 12 stars. Combined with an earlier study, we find an overall 70 μm excess detection rate of 13% ± 3% for mature cool stars. Unlike the trend for planets to be found preferentially toward stars with high metallicity, the incidence of debris disks is uncorrelated with metallicity. By newly identifying four of these stars as having weak 24 μm excesses (fluxes ~10% above the stellar photosphere), we confirm a trend found in earlier studies wherein a weak 24 μm excess is associated with a strong 70 μm excess. Interestingly, we find no evidence for debris disks around 23 stars cooler than K1, a result that is bolstered by a lack of excess around any of the 38 K1-M6 stars in two companion surveys. One motivation for this study is the fact that strong zodiacal emission can make it hard or impossible to detect planets directly with future observatories such as the Terrestrial Planet Finder ( TPF ). The observations reported here exclude a few stars with very high levels of emission, >1000 times the emission of our zodiacal cloud, from direct planet searches. For the remainder of the sample, we set relatively high limits on dust emission from asteroid belt counterparts.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1086/508449

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 2 references

Cited by

See all 191

Metadata

Authors
Beichman, C. A., Bryden, G., Stapelfeldt, K. R., Gautier, T. N., Grogan, K., Shao, M., Velusamy, T., Lawler, S. M., Blaylock, M., Rieke, G. H., Lunine, J. I., Fischer, D. A., Marcy, G. W., Greaves, J. S., Wyatt, M. C., Holland, W. S., & Dent, W. R. F.
Venue
The Astrophysical Journal
Published
2006-12
Volume
652
Issue
2
Pages
1674-1693
ISSN
  • 0004-637X (ISSN-L)
  • 1538-4357
OpenAlex
W2084353026
Cited by
191
References
2
FWCI
9.26
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: New Debris Disks around Nearby Main‐Sequence Stars: Impact on the Direct Detection of Planets. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1086/508449
The paper
Beichman, C. A., Bryden, G., Stapelfeldt, K. R., Gautier, T. N., Grogan, K., Shao, M., Velusamy, T., Lawler, S. M., Blaylock, M., Rieke, G. H., Lunine, J. I., Fischer, D. A., Marcy, G. W., Greaves, J. S., Wyatt, M. C., Holland, W. S., & Dent, W. R. F. (2006). New Debris Disks around Nearby Main‐Sequence Stars: Impact on the Direct Detection of Planets. The Astrophysical Journal. https://doi.org/10.1086/508449

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.