Paper detail

Barium Isotopic Composition of Mainstream Silicon Carbides from Murchison: Constraints for s-Process Nucleosynthesis in AGB Stars

We present barium, carbon, and silicon isotopic compositions of 38 acid-cleaned presolar SiC grains from Murchison. Comparison with previous data shows that acid washing is highly effective in removing barium contamination. Strong depletions in $δ$($^{138}$Ba/$^{136}$Ba) values are found, down to $-$400 permil, which can only be modeled with a flatter $^{13}$C profile within the $^{13}$C pocket than is normally used. The dependence of $δ$($^{138}$Ba/$^{136}$Ba) predictions on the distribution of $^{13}$C within the pocket in AGB models allows us to probe the $^{13}$C profile within the $^{13}$C pocket and the pocket mass in asymptotic giant branch (AGB) stars. In addition, we provide constraints on the $^{22}$Ne$(α,n)^{25}$Mg rate in the stellar temperature regime relevant to AGB stars, based on $δ$($^{134}$Ba/$^{136}$Ba) values of mainstream grains. We found two nominally mainstream grains with strongly negative $δ$($^{134}$Ba/$^{136}$Ba) values that cannot be explained by any of the current AGB model calculations. Instead, such negative values are consistent with the intermediate neutron capture process ($i$-process), which is activated by the Very Late Thermal Pulse (VLTP) during the post-AGB phase and characterized by a neutron density much higher than the $s$-process. These two grains may have condensed around post-AGB stars. Finally, we report abundances of two $p$-process isotopes, $^{130}$Ba and $^{132}$Ba, in single SiC grains. These isotopes are destroyed in the $s$-process in AGB stars. By comparing their abundances with respect to that of $^{135}$Ba, we conclude that there is no measurable decay of $^{135}$Cs ($t_{1/2}$= 2.3 Ma) to $^{135}$Ba in individual SiC grains, indicating condensation of barium, but not cesium into SiC grains before $^{135}$Cs decayed.

preprint2014arXivOpen 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.

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.