Paper detail

Evolved stars and the origin of abundance trends in planet hosts

Tentative evidence that the properties of evolved stars with planets may be different from what we know for MS hosts has been recently reported. We aim to test whether evolved stars with planets show any chemical peculiarity that could be related to the planet formation process. We determine in a consistent way the metallicity and individual abundances of a large sample of evolved (subgiants and red giants) and MS stars with and without known planetary companions. No differences in the <[X/Fe]> vs. condensation temperature (Tc) slopes are found between the samples of planet and non-planet hosts when all elements are considered. However, if the analysis is restricted to only refractory elements, differences in the Tc-slopes between stars with and without known planets are found. This result is found to be dependent on the stellar evolutionary stage, as it holds for MS and subgiant stars, while there seem to be no difference between planet and non-planet hosts among the sample of giants. A search for correlations between the Tc-slope and the stellar properties reveals significant correlations with the stellar mass and the stellar age. The data also suggest that differences in terms of mass and age between MS planet and non-planet hosts may be present. Our results are well explained by radial mixing in the Galaxy. The sample of giant contains stars more massive and younger than their MS counterparts. This leads to a sample of stars possibly less contaminated by stars not born in the solar neighbourhood, leading to no chemical differences between planet and non planet hosts. The sample of MS stars may contain more stars from the outer disc (specially the non-planet host sample) which might led to the differences observed in the chemical trends.

preprint2016arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access2 authors3 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.