Paper detail

A genuine Large Magellanic Cloud age gap star cluster

We confirm the existence of a second Large Magellanic Cloud (LMC) star cluster, KMHK 1592, with an age that falls in the middle of the so-called LMC star cluster age gap, a long period of time (~ 4 - 11 Gyr) where no star cluster had been uncovered, except ESO121-SC03. The age (8.0+-0.5 Gyr) and the metallicity ([Fe/H]=-1.0+-0.2 dex) of KMHK1592 were derived from the fit of theoretical isochrones to the intrinsic star cluster colour-magnitude diagram sequences, which were unveiled using a robust star-by-star membership probability procedure. Because of the relative low brightness of the star cluster, deep GEMINI GMOS images were used. We discuss the pros and cons of three glimpsed scenarios that could explain the presence of both LMC age gap star clusters in the outskirts of the LMC, namely: in-situ star cluster formation, capture from the Small Magellanic Cloud, or accretion of a small dwarf galaxy.

preprint2022arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.