4.6 Article

The VLT-FLAMES survey of massive stars: evolution of surface N abundances and effective temperature scales in the Galaxy and Magellanic Clouds

期刊

ASTRONOMY & ASTROPHYSICS
卷 471, 期 2, 页码 625-U131

出版社

EDP SCIENCES S A
DOI: 10.1051/0004-6361:20077838

关键词

stars : atmospheres; stars : early-type; galaxies : abundances; stars : fundamental parameters; stars : evolution

资金

  1. STFC [PP/C506805/1, PP/D508212/1] Funding Source: UKRI
  2. Science and Technology Facilities Council [PP/C506805/1, PP/D508212/1] Funding Source: researchfish

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We present an analysis of high resolution VLT-FLAMES spectra of 61 B-type stars with relatively narrow-lined spectra located in 4 fields centered on the Milky Way clusters; NGC 3293 and NGC 4755 and the Large and Small Magellanic cloud clusters; NGC 2004 and NGC 330. For each object a quantitative analysis was carried out using the non-LTE model atmosphere code TLUSTY; resulting in the determination of their atmospheric parameters and photospheric abundances of the dominant metal species (C, N, O, Mg, Si, Fe). The results are discussed in relation to our earlier work on 3 younger clusters in these galaxies; NGC 6611, N11 and NGC 346 paying particular attention to the nitrogen abundances which are an important probe of the role of rotation in the evolution of stars. This work along with that of the younger clusters provides a consistent dataset of abundances and atmospheric parameters for over 100 B-type stars in the three galaxies. We provide effective temperature scales for B-type dwarfs in all three galaxies and for giants and supergiants in the SMC and LMC. In each galaxy a dependence on luminosity is found between the three classes with the unevolved dwarf objects having significantly higher effective temperatures. A metallicity dependence is present between the SMC and Galactic dwarf objects, and whilst the LMC stars are only slightly cooler than the SMC stars, they are significantly hotter than their Galactic counterparts.

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

4.6
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