Paper detail

Is the metallicity of their hosts a good measure of the metallicity of Type Ia supernovae?

The efficient use of Type Ia supernovae (SNIa) for cosmological studies requires knowledge of any parameter that can affect their luminosity in either systematic or statistical ways. Observational samples of SNIa commonly use the metallicity of the host galaxy, Z_host, as an estimator of the supernova progenitor metallicity, Z_Ia, that is one of the primary factors affecting SNIa magnitude. Here, we present a theoretical study of the relationship between Z_Ia and Z_host. We follow the chemical evolution of homogeneous galaxy models together with the evolution of the supernova rates in order to evaluate the metallicity distribution function, MDF(Delta Z), i.e. the probability that the logarithm of the metallicity of a SNIa exploding now differs in less than Delta Z from that of its host. We analyse several model galaxies aimed to represent from active to passive galaxies, including dwarf galaxies prone to experience supernova driven outflows. We analyse the sensitivity of the MDF to uncertain ingredients: IMF, star-formation law, stellar lifetime, stellar yields, and SNIa delay-time distribution. There is a remarkable degree of agreement between the mean Z_Ia in a galaxy and its Z_host when they both are measured as the CNO abundance, especially if the DTD peaks at small time delays, while the average Fe abundance of host and SNIa may differ up to 0.4-0.6 dex in passive galaxies. The dispersion of Z_Ia in active galaxy models is quite small, meaning that Z_host is a quite good estimator of the supernova metallicity. Passive galaxies present a larger dispersion, which is more pronounced in low mass galaxies. We discuss the use of different metallicity indicators: Fe vs. O, and gas-phase metallicity vs. stellar metallicity. The results of the application of our formalism to a galactic catalogue (VESPA) are roughly consistent with our theoretical estimates. (abridged)

preprint2011arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access2 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.