4.7 Article

The radial profile of dust grain size in the protoplanetary disc of DS Tau

Journal

MONTHLY NOTICES OF THE ROYAL ASTRONOMICAL SOCIETY
Volume 518, Issue 4, Pages 6092-6101

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/mnras/stac3534

Keywords

radiative transfer; circumstellar matter; protoplanetary discs

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The grain size in the DS Tau protoplanetary disc decreases with radius, in line with theories of dust evolution. At the interface region between the gap and the ring, the grain size profile shows a discontinuity, with its amplitude dependent on the dust model adopted in the radiative transfer analysis.
How do dust grains in protoplanetary discs o v ercome rapid radial drift and grow from micron size particles to planets is not well understood. The key is to search for evidence of dust accumulation and growth as a function of radius in the disc. We investigate the radial profile of grain size in the DS Tau disc by fitting multiband ALMA observations with self-consistent radiative transfer models. The best-fit grain sizes range from centimeters in the inner disc down to similar to 30 mu m in the outer regions. Such an inside-out decreasing tendency is consistent with theories of dust evolution. Based on the best-fit model, we find that dust of similar to 2 Jupiter masses has been depleted within the gap. By taking the gas-to-dust mass ratio into account, the lost mass is enough to form the 3.5 Jupiter mass planet inferred by literature hydrodynamic simulations. Moreo v er, our modelling also indicates that at the interface region between the gap and the ring, the grain size profile shows a discontinuity, with its amplitude dependent on the dust model adopted in the radiative transfer analysis. Future multiwavelength observations at higher angular resolutions are required to better constrain the grain size and its variation in the vicinity of disc substructures.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available