Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 1,299

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

First results from the IllustrisTNG simulations: a tale of two elements – chemical evolution of magnesium and europium

Open access
Naiman, Jill P, Pillepich, Annalisa, Springel, Volker, Ramirez-Ruiz, Enrico, Torrey, Paul, Vogelsberger, Mark, Pakmor, Rüdiger, Nelson, Dylan, Marinacci, Federico, Hernquist, Lars, Weinberger, Rainer, Genel, Shy·2018·Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society

Abstract

The distribution of elements in galaxies provides a wealth of information about their production sites and their subsequent mixing into the interstellar medium. Here we investigate the elemental distributions of stars in the IllustrisTNG simulations. We analyse the abundance ratios of magnesium and europium in Milky Way-like galaxies from the TNG100 simulation (stellar masses log (M⋆/M⊙) ∼ 9.7–11.2). Comparison of observed magnesium and europium for individual stars in the Milky Way with the stellar abundances in our more than 850 Milky Way-like galaxies provides stringent constraints on our chemical evolutionary methods. Here, we use the magnesium-to-iron ratio as a proxy for the effects of our SNII (core-collapse supernovae) and SNIa (Type Ia supernovae) metal return prescription and as a comparison to a variety of galactic observations. The europium-to-iron ratio tracks the rare ejecta from neutron star–neutron star mergers, the assumed primary site of europium production in our models, and is a sensitive probe of the effects of metal diffusion within the gas in our simulations. We find that europium abundances in Milky Way-like galaxies show no correlation with assembly history, present-day galactic properties, and average galactic stellar population age. We reproduce the europium-to-iron spread at low metallicities observed in the Milky Way, and find it is sensitive to gas properties during redshifts z ≈ 2–4. We show that while the overall normalization of [Eu/Fe] is susceptible to resolution and post-processing assumptions, the relatively large spread of [Eu/Fe] at low [Fe/H] when compared to that at high [Fe/H] is quite robust.

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 · 10.1093/mnras/sty618

Cites

3 of 3 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 3 references

Cited by

See all 1,299

Metadata

Authors
Naiman, J. P., Pillepich, A., Springel, V., Ramirez-Ruiz, E., Torrey, P., Vogelsberger, M., Pakmor, R., Nelson, D., Marinacci, F., Hernquist, L., Weinberger, R., & Genel, S.
Venue
Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society
Published
2018-03-08
Volume
477
Issue
1
Pages
1206-1224
ISSN
  • 0035-8711 (ISSN-L)
  • 1365-2966
OpenAlex
W2735531560
Cited by
1,299
References
3
FWCI
51.50
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: First results from the IllustrisTNG simulations: a tale of two elements – chemical evolution of magnesium and europium. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/mnras/sty618
The paper
Naiman, J. P., Pillepich, A., Springel, V., Ramirez-Ruiz, E., Torrey, P., Vogelsberger, M., Pakmor, R., Nelson, D., Marinacci, F., Hernquist, L., Weinberger, R., & Genel, S. (2018). First results from the IllustrisTNG simulations: a tale of two elements – chemical evolution of magnesium and europium. Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society. https://doi.org/10.1093/mnras/sty618

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.