Paper detail

Problems for the WELS classification of planetary nebulae central stars: Self-consistent nebular modelling of four candidates

We present integral field unit (IFU) spectroscopy and self-consistent photoionisation modelling for a sample of four southern Galactic planetary nebulae (PNe) with supposed weak emission-line (WEL) central stars. The Wide Field Spectrograph (WiFeS) on the ANU 2.3 m telescope has been used to provide IFU spectroscopy for NGC 3211, NGC 5979, My 60, and M 4-2 covering the spectral range of 3400-7000Å. All objects are high excitation non-Type I PNe, with strong He II emission, strong [Ne V] emission, and weak low-excitation lines. They all appear to be predominantly optically-thin nebulae excited by central stars with $T_{\rm eff} > 10^5$K. Three PNe of the sample have central stars which have been previously classified as weak emission-line stars (WELS), and the fourth also shows the characteristic recombination lines of a WELS. However, the spatially-resolved spectroscopy shows that rather than arising in the central star, the C IV and N III recombination line emission is distributed in the nebula, and in some cases concentrated in discrete nebular knots. This may suggest that the WELS classification is spurious, and that, rather, these lines arise from (possibly chemically enriched) pockets of nebular gas. Indeed, from careful background subtraction we were able to identify three of the sample as being hydrogen rich O(H)-Type. We have constructed fully self-consistent photoionization models for each object. This allows us to independently determine the chemical abundances in the nebulae, to provide new model-dependent distance estimates, and to place the central stars on the H-R diagram. All four PNe have similar initial mass ($1.5 < M/M_{\odot} <2.0$) and are at a similar evolutionary stage.

preprint2016arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

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 graph slice

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.