Paper detail

CO and HCN isotopologue ratios in the outflows of AGB stars

Isotopologue line intensity ratios of circumstellar molecules have been widely used to trace the photospheric elemental isotopic ratios of evolved stars. However, depending on the molecular species and the physical conditions of the environment, the circumstellar isotopologue ratio may deviate considerably from the stellar atmospheric value. In this paper, we aim to examine how the CO and HCN abundance ratios vary radially due to chemical reactions in the outflows of AGB stars and the effect of excitation and optical depth on the resulting line intensity ratios. We find that the circumstellar 12CO/13CO can deviate from its atmospheric value by up to 25-94% and 6-60% for C- and O-type CSEs, respectively. We show that variations of the intensity of the ISRF and the gas kinetic temperature can significantly influence the CO isotopologue ratio in the outer CSEs. On the contrary, the H12CN/H13CN ratio is stable for all tested mass-loss rates. The RT modeling shows that the integrated line intensity ratio of CO of different rotational transitions varies significantly for stars with intermediate mass-loss rates due to combined chemical and excitation effects. In contrast, the excitation conditions for the both HCN isotopologues are the same. We demonstrate the importance of using the isotopologue abundance profiles from chemical models as inputs to RT models in the interpretation of isotopologue observations. Previous studies of CO isotopologue ratios are based on multi-transition data for individual sources and it is difficult to estimate the errors in the reported values due to assumptions that are not entirely correct according to this study. If anything, previous studies may have overestimated the circumstellar 12CO/13CO abundance ratio. The use of the HCN as a tracer of C isotope ratios is affected by fewer complicating problems, provided one accounts corrections for high optical depths.

preprint2020arXivOpen 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.