Paper detail

Stellar mass-loss, rotation and the chemical enrichment of early type galaxies

We present a comparison between the [Ca,C,N/Fe]-mass relations observed in local spheroids and the results of a chemical evolution model which already successfully reproduces the [Mg/Fe]-mass and the [Fe/H]-mass relations in these systems. We find that the [Ca/Fe]-mass relation is naturally explained by such a model without any additional assumption. In particular, the observed under-abundance of Ca with respect to Mg can be attributed to the different contributions from supernovae Type Ia and supernovae Type II to the nucleosynthesis of these two elements. For C and N, we consider new stellar yields that take into account stellar mass loss and rotation. These yields have been shown to successfully reproduce the C and N abundances in Milky Way metal-poor stars. The use of these new stellar yields produces a good agreement between the chemical evolution model predictions and the integrated stellar population observations for C. In the case of N, the inclusion of fast rotators and stellar mass-loss nucleosynthesis prescriptions improves our predictions for the slope of the [N/Fe] vs. sigma relation, but a zero point discrepancy of 0.3 dex remains. This work demonstrates that current stellar yields are unable to simultaneously reproduce the large mean stellar [<N/Fe>] ratios inferred from integrated spectra of elliptical galaxies and the low N abundance measured in the gas of high redshift spheroids from absorption lines. However, it seems reasonable to suggest that there may be uncertainties in either the inferred stellar or gas-phase N abundances at the level of 0.3 dex. (abriged)

preprint2009arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access4 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.