Paper detail

The Effect of Different Type Ia Supernova Progenitors on Galactic Chemical Evolution

Our aim is to show how different hypotheses about Type Ia supernova progenitors can affect Galactic chemical evolution. We include different Type Ia SN progenitor models, identified by their distribution of time delays, in a very detailed chemical evolution model for the Milky Way which follows the evolution of several chemical species. We test the single degenerate and the double degenerate models for supernova Ia progenitors, as well as other more empirical models based on differences in the time delay distributions. We find that assuming the single degenerate or the double degenerate scenario produces negligible differences in the predicted [O/Fe] vs. [Fe/H] relation. On the other hand, assuming a percentage of prompt (exploding in the first 100 Myr) Type Ia supernovae of 50%, or that the maximum Type Ia rate is reached after 3-4 Gyr from the beginning of star formation, as suggested by several authors, produces more noticeable effects on the [O/Fe] trend. However, given the spread still existing in the observational data no model can be firmly excluded on the basis of only the [O/Fe] ratios. On the other hand, when the predictions of the different models are compared with the G-dwarf metallicity distribution, the scenarios with very few prompt Type Ia supernovae can be excluded. Models including the single degenerate or double degenerate scenario with a percentage of 10-13% of prompt Type Ia supernovae produce results in very good agreement with the observations. A fraction of prompt Type Ia supernovae larger than 30% worsens the agreement with observations and the same occurs if no prompt Type Ia supernovae are allowed. In particular, two empirical models for the Type Ia SN progenitors can be excluded: the one without prompt Type Ia supernovae and the one assuming delay time distribution going like t^{-0.5}.

preprint2009arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access4 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.