Paper detail

Explaining the chemical trajectories of accreted and in-situ halo stars of the Milky Way

The Milky Way underwent its last significant merger ten billion years ago, when the Gaia-Enceladus-Sausage (GES) was accreted. Accreted GES stars and progenitor stars born prior to the merger make up the bulk of the inner halo. Even though these two main populations of halo stars have similar $durations$ of star formation prior to their merger, they differ in [$α$/Fe]-[Fe/H] space, with the GES population bending to lower [$α$/Fe] at a relatively low value of [Fe/H]. We use cosmological simulations of a 'Milky Way' to argue that the different tracks of the halo stars through the [$α$/Fe]-[Fe/H] plane are due to a difference in their star formation history and efficiency, with the lower mass GES having its low and constant star formation regulated by feedback whilst the higher mass main progenitor has a higher star formation rate prior to the merger. The lower star formation efficiency of GES leads to lower gas pollution levels, pushing [$α$/Fe]-[Fe/H] tracks to the left. In addition, the increasing star formation rate maintains a higher relative contribution of Type~II SNe to Type~Ia SNe for the main progenitor population that formed during the same time period, thus maintaining a relatively high [$α$/Fe]. Thus the different positions of the downturns in the [$α$/Fe]-[Fe/H] plane for the GES stars are not reflective of different star formation durations, but instead reflect different star formation efficiencies. We argue that cosmological simulations match a wide range of independent observations, breaking degeneracies that exist in simpler models.

preprint2020arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access5 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.