Modelling self-pollution of globular clusters from asymptotic giant branch stars: Self-pollution of globular clusters from AGB stars
Open accessAbstract
A self-consistent model of the chemical evolution of the globular cluster NGC 6752 is presented to test a popular theory that observed abundance anomalies are due to ‘internal pollution’ from intermediate-mass asymptotic giant branch stars. We simulated the chemical evolution of the intracluster medium under the assumption that the products of Type II supernovae are completely expelled from the globular cluster, whereas the material ejected from stars with m≲ 7 M⊙ is retained, due to their weak stellar winds. By tracing the chemical evolution of the intracluster gas we have tested an internal pollution scenario, in which the Na- and Al-enhanced ejecta from intermediate-mass stars is either accreted on to the surfaces of other stars, or goes toward forming new stars. The observed spread in Na and Al was reproduced, but not the O–Na and Mg–Al anticorrelations. In particular, neither O nor Mg are sufficiently depleted to account for the observations. We predict that the Mg content of Na-rich cluster stars should be overwhelmingly dominated by the 25,26Mg isotopes, whereas the latest data show only a mild 26Mg enhancement and no correlation with 25Mg. Furthermore, stars bearing the imprint of intermediate-mass stellar ejecta are predicted to be strongly enhanced in both C and N, in conflict with the empirical data. We show that the NGC 6752 data are not matched by a model incorporating detailed nucleosynthetic yields from asymptotic giant branch stars. Although these stars do show the hot hydrogen burning that seems to be required to explain the observations, this is accompanied by helium burning, producing primary C, N, Mg and Na (via hot-bottom burning) which do not match the observations. Based on current theories of intermediate-mass stellar nucleosynthesis, we conclude that these stars are not responsible for most of the observed globular cluster abundance anomalies.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
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?
Intermediate-mass AGB stars of low metallicity contribute to the chemical evolution of 25Mg and 26Mg.
“Fenner et al. (2004) performed a similar study for magnesium, highlighting the contribution from intermediate-mass AGB stars of low metallicity to the chemical evolution of 25 Mg and 26 Mg.”
From The Dawes Review 2: Nucleosynthesis and Stellar Yields of Low- and Intermediate-Mass Single Stars (2014) · cites this paper as Fenner et al. 2004
H burning in AGB stars or massive stars struggles to explain the observed Mg isotopic ratios and unchanging 25Mg abundances without resorting to variations in reaction rates.
“H burning in AGB stars or massive stars, regardless of the stellar evolution code used, struggles to explain these isotopic ratios and unchanging 25 Mg abundances without resorting to variations in reaction rates”
From The Dawes Review 2: Nucleosynthesis and Stellar Yields of Low- and Intermediate-Mass Single Stars (2014) · cites this paper as Fenner et al. 2004
Cites
Mg isotopic ratios in giant stars of the globular cluster NGC 6752
Yong, D., Grundahl, F., Lambert, D. L., Nissen, P. E., & Shetrone, M. D. (2003) · Astronomy & Astrophysics · doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20030296 · Cited by 149 · cited 7× · see citing works
“The circles rep- resent measurements of stars at the tip of the red giant branch in NGC 6752 by Yong et al. (2003).”
Influential
Flagged first, then by 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 · see citing works
Self-citationC and N Abundances in Stars at the Base of the Red Giant Branch in M15
Cohen, J. G., Briley, M. M., & Stetson, P. B. (2005) · The Astronomical Journal · doi:10.1086/431974 · Cited by 82 · see citing works
- Authors
- Fenner, Y., Campbell, S., Karakas, A. I., Lattanzio, J. C., & Gibson, B. K.
- Affiliations
- Swinburne University of Technology (AU)
- Monash University (AU)
- ORCID
- Lattanzio, J. C.
- Venue
- Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2004-08-23
- Volume
- 353
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 789-795
- ISSN
- 0035-8711 (ISSN-L)
- 1365-2966
- OpenAlex
- W1561188646
- Cited by
- 132
- References
- 1
- Citations by year
- 2023: 1 · 2022: 2 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 7 · 2014: 9 · 2013: 9 · 2012: 7
- FWCI
- 9.05
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society (publishedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
- CERN Document Server (European Organization for Nuclear Research) (submittedVersion)
- CLOK (University of Central Lancashire) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- Saint Mary's University Institutional Repository (Saint Mary's University) (submittedVersion)
- ANU Open Research (Australian National University) (submittedVersion)
- Swinburne figshare (Swinburne University of Technology) (submittedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Astronomy and Astrophysics › Stellar, planetary, and galactic studies
- Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Astronomy and Astrophysics › Galaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena
- Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Astronomy and Astrophysics › Astrophysics and Star Formation Studies
- Keywords
- NGC 6752, globular clusters, asymptotic giant branch stars, intermediate-mass stars, chemical evolution, intracluster medium, Type II supernovae, stellar ejecta, nucleosynthetic yields, hot bottom burning
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