Paper detail

Stellar substructures in the solar neighbourhood IV. Kinematic Group 1 in the Geneva-Copenhagen survey

We determine detailed elemental abundances in stars belonging to the so-called Group 1 of the Geneva-Copenhagen survey (GCS) and compare the chemical composition with the Galactic thin- and thick-disc stars, with the GCS Group 2 and Group 3 stars, as well as with several kinematic streams of similar metallicities. 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 Fibre-fed Echelle Spectrograph (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 37 stars of Group 1 is -0.20 +- 0.14 dex. Investigated Group 1 stars can be separated into three age subgroups. Along with the main 8- and 12-Gyr-old populations, a subgroup of stars younger than 5 Gyr can be separated as well. 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 to that of the Galactic thick disc and differs slightly from those in Hercules, Arcturus, and AF06 stellar streams. The similar chemical composition of stars in Group 1, as well as in Group 2 and 3, with that in stars of the thick disc might suggest that their formation histories are linked. The chemical composition pattern together with the kinematic properties and ages of stars in the investigated GCS groups provide 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.

preprint2015arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access5 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.