Paper detail

Observation of HCN hyperfine line anomalies towards low- and high-mass star-forming cores

HCN is becoming a popular choice of molecule for studying star formation in both low- and high-mass regions and for other astrophysical sources from comets to high-redshift galaxies. However, a major and often overlooked difficulty with HCN is that it can exhibit non-local thermodynamic equilibrium (non-LTE) behaviour in its hyperfine line structure. Individual hyperfine lines can be strongly boosted or suppressed. In low-mass star-forming cloud observations, this could possibly lead to large errors in the calculation of opacity and excitation temperature, while in massive star-forming clouds, where the hyperfine lines are blended due to turbulent broadening, errors will arise in infall measurements that are based on the separation of the peaks in a self-absorbed profile. The underlying line shape cannot be known for certain if hyperfine anomalies are present. We present a first observational investigation of these anomalies across a range of conditions and transitions by carrying out a survey of low-mass starless cores (in Taurus & Ophiuchus) and high-mass protostellar objects (in the G333 giant molecular cloud) using hydrogen cyanide (HCN) J=1-0 and J=3-2 emission lines. We quantify the degree of anomaly in these two rotational levels by considering ratios of individual hyperfine lines compared to LTE values. We find that all the cores observed show some degree of anomaly while many of the lines are severely anomalous. We conclude that HCN hyperfine anomalies are common in both lines in both low-mass and high-mass protostellar objects, and we discuss the differing hypotheses for the generation of the anomalies. In light of the results, we favour a line overlap effect for the origins of the anomalies. We discuss the implications for the use of HCN as a dynamical tracer and suggest in particular that the J=1-0, F=0-1 hyperfine line should be avoided in quantitative calculations.

preprint2013arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access6 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.

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.