Paper detail

Chemical Evolution on the Scale of Clusters of Galaxies: A Conundrum?

The metal content of clusters of galaxies and its relation to their stellar content is revisited making use of a cluster sample for which all four basic parameters are homogeneously measured within consistent radii, namely core-excised mass-weighted metallicity plus total, stellar and ICM masses. For clusters of total mass $M_{500} >$ $\sim 10^{14}$ $M_{\odot}$ nice agreement is found between their iron content and what expected from empirical supernova yields. For the same clusters, there also appears to be at least as much iron in the intracluster medium (ICM) as there is still locked into stars (i.e., the ICM/stars metal share is about unity). However, for more massive clusters the stellar mass fraction appears to drop substantially without being accompanied by a drop in the ICM metallicity, thus generating a major tension with the nucleosynthesis expectation and inflating the metal share to extremely high values (up to $\sim 6$). Various possible solutions of this conundrum are discussed, but are all considered either astrophysically implausible, or lacking an independent observational support. For this reason we still entertain the possibility that even some of the best cluster data may be faulty, though we are not able to identify any obvious bias. Finally, based on the stellar mass-metallicity relation for local galaxies we estimate the contribution of galaxies to the ICM enrichment as a function of their mass, concluding that even the most massive galaxies must have lost a major fraction of the metals they have produced.

preprint2014arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access2 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.