Paper detail

Analysis of chemical abundances in planetary nebulae with [WC] central stars. II. Chemical abundances and the abundance discrepancy factor

(Abridged) We present the abundance analysis of 12 PNe ionized by [WC]-type stars and wels obtained from high-resolution spectrophotometric data. Our main aims are to determine the chemical composition of the PNe and to study the behaviour of the abundance discrepancy problem (ADF) in this type of planetary nebulae. The detection of a large number of optical recombination lines (ORLs) and collisionally excited lines (CELs) from different ions were presented previously. Most of the ORLs were reported for the first time in these PNe. Ionic abundances were derived from the available CELs and ORLs, using previously determined physical conditions. Based on these two sets of ionic abundances, we derived the total chemical abundances in the nebulae using suitable ICFs (when available). In spite of the [WC] nature of the central stars, moderate ADF(O^++), in the range from 1.2 to 4, were found for all the objects. We found that when the quality of the spectra is high enough the ORLs O^++/H^+ abundance ratios obtained from different multiplets excited mainly by recombination are very similar. Possible dependence of ADFs with some nebular characteristics were analysed, finding no correlation. Abundances derived from CELs were corrected by determining the t^2 parameter. O abundances for PNe, derived from ORLs, are in general larger than the solar abundance. We derived the C/O ratio from ORLs and N/O and alpha-element/O ratios from CELs and found that these PNe are, in average, N-and C-richer than the average of large PN samples. About half of our sample is C-rich (C/O>1). The alpha-elements grow in lockstep with O abundance. Comparing the N/O and C /O ratios with those derived from stellar evolution models, we estimate that about half of our PNe have progenitors with initial masses > 4 M_sun. No correlation was found between the stellar [WC]-type and the nebular abundances.

preprint2013arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access6 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.