Paper detail

Spectroscopic analysis of the two subgiant branches of the globular cluster NGC1851

NGC1851 possibly shows a spread in [Fe/H], but the relation between this spread and the division in the SGB is unknown. We obtained blue (3950-4600 A) intermediate resolution (R~8,000) spectra for 47 stars on the bright and 30 on the faint SGB of NGC 1851 (b-SGB and f-SGB, respectively). The determination of the atmospheric parameters to extremely high internal accuracy leads to small errors when comparing different stars in the cluster. We found that the b-SGB is slightly more metal-poor than the f-SGB, with [Fe/H]=-1.227+/-0.009 and [Fe/H]=-1.162+/- 0.012, respectively. This implies that the f-SGB is only slightly older by ~0.6 Gyr than the b-SGB if the total CNO abundance is constant. There are more C-normal stars in the b-SGB than in the f-SGB. This is consistent with what is found for HB stars, if b-SGB are the progenitors of red HB stars, and f-SGB those of blue HB ones. The abundances of the n-capture elements Sr and Ba have a bimodal distribution, reflecting the separation between f-SGB (Sr and Ba-rich) and b-SGB stars (Sr and Ba-poor). In both groups, there is a clear correlation between [Sr/Fe] and [Ba/Fe], suggesting that there is a real spread in the abundances of n-capture elements. There is some correlation between C and Ba abundances, while the same correlation for Sr is much more dubious. We identified six C-rich stars, which have a moderate overabundance of Sr and Ba and rather low N abundances. This group of stars might be the progenitors of these on the anomalous RGB in the (v, v-y) diagram. These results are discussed within different scenarios for the formation of NGC1851. It is possible that the two populations originated in different regions of an inhomogeneous parent object. However, the striking similarity with M22 calls for a similar evolution for these two clusters. Deriving reliable CNO abundances for the two sequences would be crucial.

preprint2012arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access8 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.