Paper detail

Impact of Newly Measured Nuclear Reaction Rates on $^{26}$Al Ejected Yields from Massive Stars

Over the last three years, the rates of all the main nuclear reactions involving the destruction and production of $^{26}$Al in stars ($^{26}$Al(n, p)$^{26}$Mg, $^{26}$Al(n, $α$)$^{23}$Na, $^{26}$Al(p, $γ$)$^{27}$Si and $^{25}$Mg(p, $γ$)$^{26}$Al) have been re-evaluated thanks to new high-precision experimental measurements of their cross sections at energies of astrophysical interest, considerably reducing the uncertainties in the nuclear physics affecting their nucleosynthesis. We computed the nucleosynthetic yields ejected by the explosion of a high-mass star (20 Msun, Z = 0.0134) using the FRANEC stellar code, considering two explosion energies, 1.2 10$^{51}$ erg and 3 10$^{51}$ erg. We quantify the change in the ejected amount of $^{26}$Al and other key species that is predicted when the new rate selection is adopted instead of the reaction rates from the STARLIB nuclear library. Additionally, the ratio of our ejected yields of 26Al to those of 14 other short-lived radionuclides (36Cl, 41Ca, 53Mn, 60Fe, 92Nb, 97Tc, 98Tc, 107Pd, 126Sn, 129I, 36Cs, 146Sm, 182Hf, 205Pb) are compared to early solar system isotopic ratios, inferred from meteorite measurements. The total ejected 26Al yields vary by a factor of ~3 when adopting the new rates or the STARLIB rates. Additionally, the new nuclear reaction rates also impact the predicted abundances of short-lived radionuclides in the early solar system relative to $^{26}$Al. However, it is not possible to reproduce all the short-lived radionuclide isotopic ratios with our massive star model alone, unless a second stellar source could be invoked, which must have been active in polluting the pristine solar nebula at a similar time of a core-collapse supernova.

preprint2026arXivOpen 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.