4.6 Article

A DIFFERENTIAL CHEMICAL ELEMENT ANALYSIS OF THE METAL-POOR GLOBULAR CLUSTER NGC 6397

Journal

ASTRONOMICAL JOURNAL
Volume 142, Issue 2, Pages -

Publisher

IOP PUBLISHING LTD
DOI: 10.1088/0004-6256/142/2/63

Keywords

globular clusters: individual (NGC 6397); stars: abundances; stars: atmospheres; stars: individual (Arcturus, Hip 66815)

Funding

  1. NASA
  2. Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft [Ko 4161/1]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

We present chemical abundances in three red giants and two turnoff (TO) stars in the metal-poor Galactic globular cluster (GC) NGC 6397 based on spectroscopy obtained with the Magellan Inamori Kyocera Echelle high-resolution spectrograph on the Magellan 6.5 m Clay telescope. Our results are based on a line-by-line differential abundance analysis relative to the well-studied red giant Arcturus and the Galactic halo field star Hip 66815. At a mean of -2.10 +/- 0.02 (stat.) +/-0.07 (sys.), the differential iron abundance is in good agreement with other studies in the literature based on gf-values. As in previous differential works we find a distinct departure from ionization equilibrium in that the abundances of Fe I and Fe II differ by similar to 0.1 dex, with opposite signs for the red giant branch (RGB) and TO stars. The alpha-element ratios are enhanced to 0.4 (RGB) and 0.3 dex (TO), respectively, and we also confirm strong variations in the O, Na, and Al/Fe abundance ratios. Accordingly, the light-element abundance patterns in one of the red giants can be attributed to pollution by an early generation of massive Type II supernovae. TO and RGB abundances are not significantly different, with the possible exception of Mg and Ti, which are, however, amplified by the patterns in one TO star additionally belonging to this early generation of GC stars. We discuss interrelations of these light elements as a function of the GC metallicity.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available