Paper detail

[Mg/Fe] ratios in the solar neighbourhood: stellar yields and chemical evolution scenarios

Context. The [Mg/Fe] abundance ratios are a fundamental fossil signature to trace the chemical evolution of the disc. Despite of the huge observational and theoretical effort, discrepancies between models and data are still present and several explanations have been put forward to explain the [$α$/Fe] bimodality. Aims. In this work, we take advantage of a new AMBRE:HARPS dataset, which provides new and more precise [Mg/Fe] estimations, as well as reliable stellar ages for a subsample of stars, to study the evolution of the solar neighbourhood. Methods. The above data are compared with detailed chemical evolution models for the Milky Way, exploring the most used prescriptions for stellar yields and different formation scenarios for the Galactic disc, i.e. the delayed two-infall and the parallel model, also including prescriptions for stellar radial migration. Results. We see that most of the stellar yields struggle to reproduce the observed trend of the data and that semi-empirical yields are still the best to describe the [Mg/Fe] evolution in the thick and thin discs. In particular, most of the yields still predict a steeper decrease of the [Mg/Fe] ratio at high metallicity than what is shown by the data. The bulk of the data are well reproduced by the parallel and two-infall scenarios, but both scenarios have problems in explaining the most metal-rich and metal-poor tails of the low-$α$ data. These tails can be explained in light of radial migration from inner and outer disc regions, respectively. Conclusions. Despite of the evidence of stellar migration, it is difficult to estimate the actual contribution of stars from other parts of the disc to the solar vicinity. However, the comparison between data and models suggests that peculiar histories of star formation, such as that of the two-infall model, are still needed to reproduce the observed distribution of stars.

preprint2022arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access4 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.