Paper detail

Stellar substructures in the solar neighbourhood. III. Kinematic group 2 in the Geneva-Copenhagen survey

From correlations between orbital parameters, several new coherent groups of stars were recently identified in the Galactic disc and suggested to correspond to remnants of disrupted satellites. To reconstruct their origin at least three main observational parameters - kinematics, chemical composition and age - must be known. We determine detailed elemental abundances in stars belonging to the so-called Group 2 of the Geneva-Copenhagen Survey and compare the chemical composition with Galactic thin- and thick-disc stars, as well as with the Arcturus and AF06 streams. The aim is to search for chemical signatures that might give information about the formation history of this kinematic group of stars. High-resolution spectra were obtained with the FIES spectrograph at the Nordic Optical Telescope, La Palma, and were analysed with a differential model atmosphere method. Comparison stars were observed and analysed with the same method. The average value of [Fe/H] for the 32 stars of Group 2 is -0.42 +- 0.10 dex. The investigated group consists mainly of two 8- and 12-Gyr-old stellar populations. Abundances of oxygen, alpha-elements, and r-process-dominated elements are higher than in Galactic thin-disc dwarfs. This elemental abundance pattern has similar characteristics as that of the Galactic thick-disc. The similarity in chemical composition of stars in Group 2 with that in stars of the thick-disc might suggest that their formation histories are linked. The chemical composition together with the kinematic properties and ages of stars in the investigated stars provides evidence of their common origin and possible relation to an ancient merging event. A gas-rich satellite merger scenario is proposed as the most likely origin. Groups 2 and 3 of the Geneva-Copenhagen Survey might have originated in the same merging event.

preprint2014arXivOpen 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.