Paper detail

The Aquarius Co-Moving Group is Not a Disrupted Classical Globular Cluster

We present a detailed analysis of high-resolution, high S/N spectra for 5 Aquarius stream stars observed with the MIKE spectrograph on the Magellan Clay telescope. Our sample represents one third of the 15 known members in the stream. We find the stream is not mono-metallic: the metallicity ranges from [Fe/H] = -0.63 to -1.58. No anti-correlation in Na-O abundances is present, and we find a strong positive Mg-Al relationship, similar to that observed in the thick disk. We find no evidence that the stream is a result of a disrupted classical globular cluster, contrary to a previously published claim. High [(Na, Ni, alpha)/Fe] and low [Ba/Y] abundance ratios in the stream suggests it is not a tidal tail from a disrupted dwarf galaxy, either. The stream is chemically indistinguishable from Milky Way field stars with the exception of one candidate, C222531-145437. From its position, velocity, and detailed chemical abundances, C222531-145437 is likely a star that was tidally disrupted from omega-Centauri. We propose the Aquarius stream is Galactic in origin, and could be the result from a disk-satellite perturbation in the Milky Way thick disk on the order of a few Gyr ago: derived orbits, UVW velocities, and angular momenta of the Aquarius members offer qualitative support for our hypothesis. Assuming C222531-145437 is a tidally disrupted member of omega-Centauri, this system is the most likely disk perturber. In the absence of compelling chemical and/or dynamical evidence that the Aquarius stream is the tidal tail of a disrupted satellite, we advocate the "Aquarius group" as a more appropriate description. Like the Canis Major over-density, as well as the Hercules and Monoceros groups, the Aquarius group joins the list of kinematically-identified substructures that are not actually accreted material: they are simply part of the rich complexity of the Milky Way structure.

preprint2014arXivOpen 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.

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.