Paper detail

The double sub-giant branch of NGC 6656 (M22): a chemical characterization

We present an abundance analysis of 101 subgiant branch (SGB) stars in the globular cluster M22. Using low resolution FLAMES/GIRAFFE spectra we have determined abundances of the neutron-capture strontium and barium and the light element carbon. With these data we explore relationships between the observed SGB photometric split in this cluster and two stellar groups characterized by different contents of iron, slow neutron-capture process (s-process) elements, and the alpha element calcium, that we previously discovered in M22's red-giant stars. We show that the SGB stars correlate in chemical composition and color-magnitude diagram position: the stars with higher metallicity and relative s-process abundances define a fainter SGB, while stars with lower metallicity and s-process content reside on a relatively brighter SGB. This result has implications for the relative ages of the two stellar groups of M22. In particular, it is inconsistent with a large spread in ages of the two SGBs. By accounting for the chemical content of the two stellar groups, isochrone fitting of the double SGB suggests that their ages are not different by more than 300 Myr.

preprint2012arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access17 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.

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.