Paper detail

A possible signature of terrestrial planet formation in the chemical composition of solar analogs

Recent studies have shown that the elemental abundances in the Sun are anomalous when compared to most (about 85%) nearby solar twin stars. Compared to its twins, the Sun exhibits a deficiency of refractory elements (those with condensation temperatures Tc>900K) relative to volatiles (Tc<900K). This finding is speculated to be a signature of the planet formation that occurred more efficiently around the Sun compared with the majority of solar twins. Furthermore, within this scenario, it seems more likely that the abundance patterns found are specifically related to the formation of terrestrial planets. In this work we analyze abundance results from six large independent stellar abundance surveys to determine whether they confirm or reject this observational finding. We show that the elemental abundances derived for solar analogs in these six studies are consistent with the Tc trend suggested as a planet formation signature. The same conclusion is reached when those results are averaged heterogeneously. We also investigate the dependency of the abundances with first ionization potential (FIP), which correlates well with Tc. A trend with FIP would suggest a different origin for the abundance patterns found, but we show that the correlation with Tc is statistically more significant. We encourage similar investigations of metal-rich solar analogs and late F-type dwarf stars, for which the hypothesis of a planet formation signature in the elemental abundances makes very specific predictions. Finally, we examine a recent paper that claims that the abundance patterns of two stars hosting super-Earth like planets contradict the planet formation signature hypothesis. Instead, we find that the chemical compositions of these two stars are fully compatible with our hypothesis.

preprint2010arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access5 authors2 topics

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 map preview

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.