Paper detail

Gaia-ESO Survey: Detailed elemental abundances in red giants of the peculiar globular cluster NGC 1851

Context. NGC 1851 is one of several globular clusters for which multiple stellar populations of the subgiant branch have been clearly identified and a difference in metallicity detected. A crucial piece of information on the formation history of this cluster can be provided by the sum of A(C+N+O) abundances. However, these values have lacked a general consensus thus far. The separation of the subgiant branch can be based on age and/or A(C+N+O) abundance differences. Aims. Our main aim was to determine carbon, nitrogen, and oxygen abundances for evolved giants in the globular cluster NGC1851 in order to check whether or not the double populations of stars are coeval. Methods. High-resolution spectra, observed with the FLAMES-UVES spectrograph on the ESO VLT telescope, were analysed using a differential model atmosphere method. Results. We provide abundances of up to 29 chemical elements for a sample of 45 giants in NGC 1851. The investigated stars can be separated into two populations with a difference of 0.07 dex in the mean metallicity, 0.3 dex in the mean C/N, and 0.35 dex in the mean s-process dominated element-to-iron abundance ratios [s/Fe]. No significant difference was determined in the mean values of A(C+N+O) as well as in abundance to iron ratios of carbon, alpha- and iron-peak-elements, and of europium. Conclusions. As the averaged A(C+N+O) values between the two populations do not differ, additional evidence is given that NGC 1851 is composed of two clusters, the metal-rich cluster being by about 0.6 Gyr older than the metal-poor one. A global overview of NGC 1851 properties and the detailed abundances of chemical elements favour its formation in a dwarf spheroidal galaxy that was accreted by the Milky Way.

preprint2021arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access27 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.

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.