Paper detail

Evolution and CNO yields of Z=10^-5 stars and possible effects on CEMP production

Our main goals are to get a deeper insight into the evolution and final fates of intermediate-mass, extremely metal-poor (EMP) stars. We also aim to investigate their C, N, and O yields. Using the Monash University Stellar Evolution code we computed and analysed the evolution of stars of metallicity Z = 10^-5 and masses between 4 and 9 M_sun, from their main sequence until the late thermally pulsing (super) asymptotic giant branch, TP-(S)AGB phase. Our model stars experience a strong C, N, and O envelope enrichment either due to the second dredge-up, the dredge-out phenomenon, or the third dredge-up early during the TP-(S)AGB phase. Their late evolution is therefore similar to that of higher metallicity objects. When using a standard prescription for the mass loss rates during the TP-(S)AGB phase, the computed stars lose most of their envelopes before their cores reach the Chandrasekhar mass, so our standard models do not predict the occurrence of SNI1/2 for Z = 10^-5 stars. However, we find that the reduction of only one order of magnitude in the mass-loss rates, which are particularly uncertain at this metallicity, would prevent the complete ejection of the envelope, allowing the stars to either explode as an SNI1/2 or become an electron-capture SN. Our calculations stop due to an instability near the base of the convective envelope that hampers further convergence and leaves remnant envelope masses between 0.25 M_sun for our 4 M_sun model and 1.5 M_sun for our 9 M_sun model. We present two sets of C, N, and O yields derived from our full calculations and computed under two different assumptions, namely, that the instability causes a practically instant loss of the remnant envelope or that the stars recover and proceed with further thermal pulses. Our results have implications for the early chemical evolution of the Universe.

preprint2013arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access8 authors1 topic

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.