4.6 Article

WATER DEUTERIUM FRACTIONATION IN THE INNER REGIONS OF TWO SOLAR-TYPE PROTOSTARS

期刊

ASTROPHYSICAL JOURNAL LETTERS
卷 768, 期 2, 页码 -

出版社

IOP PUBLISHING LTD
DOI: 10.1088/2041-8205/768/2/L29

关键词

astrochemistry; ISM: abundances; ISM: individual objects (NGC 1333-IRAS2A, NGC 1333-IRAS4A); ISM: molecules; stars: formation

资金

  1. INSU/CNRS (France)
  2. MPG (Germany)
  3. IGN (Spain)
  4. l Agence Nationale pour la Recherche (ANR), France (project FORCOMS) [ANR-08-BLAN-0225]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The [HDO]/[H2O] ratio is a crucial parameter for probing the history of water formation. So far, it has been measured for only three solar-type protostars and yielded different results, possibly pointing to a substantially different history in their formation. In the present work, we report new interferometric observations of the HDO 4(2,2)-4(2,3) line for two solar-type protostars, IRAS2A and IRAS4A, located in the NGC 1333 region. In both sources, the detected HDO emission originates from a central compact unresolved region. A comparison with previously published interferometric observations of the (H2O)-O-18 3(1,3)-2(2,0) line shows that the HDO and H2O lines mostly come from the same region. A non-LTE large velocity gradient analysis of the HDO and (H2O)-O-18 line emissions, combined with published observations, provides an [HDO]/[H2O] ratio of 0.3%-8% in IRAS2A and 0.5%-3% in IRAS4A. First, the water fractionation is lower than that of other molecules such as formaldehyde and methanol in the same sources. Second, it is similar to that measured in the solar-type protostar prototype, IRAS16293-2422, and, surprisingly enough, larger than that measured in NGC 1333 IRAS4B. The comparison of the measured values toward IRAS2A and IRAS4A with the predictions of our gas-grain model GRAINOBLE gives similar conclusions to those for IRAS 16293, arguing that these protostars share a similar chemical history, although they are located in different clouds.

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