Paper detail

The effects of thermohaline mixing on low-metallicity asymptotic giant branch stars

We examine the effects of thermohaline mixing on the composition of the envelopes of low-metallicity asymptotic giant branch (AGB) stars. We have evolved models of 1, 1.5 and 2 solar masses from the pre-main sequence to the end of the thermally pulsing asymptotic giant branch with thermohaline mixing applied throughout the simulations. In agreement with other authors, we find that thermohaline mixing substantially reduces the abundance of helium-3 on the upper part of the red giant branch in our lowest mass model. However, the small amount of helium-3 that remains is enough to drive thermohaline mixing on the AGB. We find that thermohaline mixing is most efficient in the early thermal pulses and its efficiency drops from pulse to pulse. Nitrogen is not substantially affected by the process, but we do see substantial changes in carbon-13. The carbon-12 to carbon-13 ratio is substantially lowered during the early thermal pulses but the efficacy of the process is seen to diminish rapidly. As the process stops after a few pulses, the carbon-12 to carbon-13 ratio is still able to reach values of 10^3-10^4, which is inconsistent with the values measured in carbon-enhanced metal-poor stars. We also note a surprising increase in the lithium-7 abundance, with log epsilon(Li-7) reaching values of over 2.5 in the 1.5 solar mass model. It is thus possible to get stars which are both C- and Li-rich at the same time. We compare our models to measurements of carbon and lithium in carbon-enhanced metal-poor stars which have not yet reached the giant branch. These models can simultaneously reproduced the observed C and Li abundances of carbon-enhanced metal-poor turn-off stars that are Li-rich, but the observed nitrogen abundances still cannot be matched.

preprint2009arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access1 author1 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.