4.7 Article

Evolution and nucleosynthesis of helium-rich asymptotic giant branch models

期刊

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/mnras/stv1489

关键词

nuclear reactions, nucleosynthesis, abundances; stars: AGB and post-AGB; stars: evolution; stars: interiors

资金

  1. Australian Research Council Future Fellowship [FT110100475]
  2. Sofja Kovalevskaja Award from the Alexander von Humboldt Foundation
  3. Australian Government

向作者/读者索取更多资源

There is now strong evidence that some stars have been born with He mass fractions as high as Y approximate to 0.40 (e.g. in omega Centauri). However, the advanced evolution, chemical yields, and final fates of He-rich stars are largely unexplored. We investigate the consequences of He-enhancement on the evolution and nucleosynthesis of intermediate-mass asymptotic giant branch (AGB) models of 3, 4, 5, and 6 M-circle dot with a metallicity of Z = 0.0006 ([Fe/H] approximate to -1.4). We compare models with He-enhanced compositions (Y = 0.30, 0.35, 0.40) to those with primordial-He (Y = 0.24). We find that the minimum initial mass for C burning and super-AGB stars with CO(Ne) or ONe cores decreases from above our highest mass of 6 to similar to 4-5M(circle dot) with Y = 0.40. We also model the production of trans-Fe elements via the slow neutron-capture process (s-process). He-enhancement substantially reduces the third dredge-up efficiency and the stellar yields of s-process elements (e.g. 90 per cent less Ba for 6 M-circle dot, Y = 0.40). An exception occurs for 3 M-circle dot, where the near-doubling in the number of thermal pulses with Y = 0.40 leads to similar to 50 per cent higher yields of Ba-peak elements and Pb if the C-13 neutron source is included. However, the thinner intershell and increased temperatures at the base of the convective envelope with Y = 0.40 probably inhibit the C-13 neutron source at this mass. Future chemical evolution models with our yields might explain the evolution of s-process elements among He-rich stars in omega Centauri.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据