4.7 Article

Dust mass-loss rates from asymptotic giant branch stars in the Fornax and Sagittarius dwarf spheroidal galaxies

Journal

MONTHLY NOTICES OF THE ROYAL ASTRONOMICAL SOCIETY
Volume 383, Issue 1, Pages 399-410

Publisher

WILEY-BLACKWELL
DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2007.12561.x

Keywords

circumstellar matter; infrared : stars

Funding

  1. Science and Technology Facilities Council [PP/D000955/1] Funding Source: researchfish
  2. STFC [PP/D000955/1] Funding Source: UKRI

Ask authors/readers for more resources

To study the effect of metallicity on the mass-loss rate of asymptotic giant branch (AGB) stars, we have conducted mid-infrared photometric measurements of such stars in the Sagittarius and Fornax dwarf spheroidal galaxies with the 10-mu m camera VISIR at the Very Large Telescope. We derive mass-loss rates for 29 AGB stars in Sgr dSph and two in Fornax. The dust mass-loss rates are estimated from the K - [9] and K - [11] colours. Radiative transfer models are used to check the consistency of the method. Published IRAS and Spitzer data confirm that the same tight correlation between K - [12] colour and dust mass- loss rates is observed for AGB stars from galaxies with different metallicities, i. e., the Galaxy, the Large Magellanic Clouds and the Small Magellanic Clouds. The derived dust mass-loss rates are in the range 5 x 10(-10) to 3 x 10(-8)M(circle dot) yr(-1) for the observed AGB stars in Sgr dSph and around 5 x 10(-9)M(circle dot) yr(-1) for those in Fornax; while values obtained with the two different methods are of the same order of magnitude. The mass-loss rates for these stars are higher than the nuclear burning rates, so they will terminate their AGB phase by the depletion of their stellar mantles before their core can grow significantly. Some observed stars have lower mass- loss rates than the minimum value predicted by theoretical models.

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