Paper detail

The metallicity signature of evolved stars with planets

We determine in a homogeneous way the metallicity and individual abundances of a large sample of evolved stars, with and without known planetary companions. Our methodology is based on the analysis of high-resolution echelle spectra. The metallicity distributions show that giant stars hosting planets are not preferentially metal-rich having similar abundance patterns to giant stars without known planetary companions. We have found, however, a very strong relation between the metallicity distribution and the stellar mass within this sample. We show that the less massive giant stars with planets (M < 1.5 Msun) are not metal rich, but, the metallicity of the sample of massive (M > 1.5 Msun), young (age < 2 Gyr) giant stars with planets is higher than that of a similar sample of stars without planets. Regarding other chemical elements, giant stars with and without planets in the mass domain M < 1.5 Msun show similar abundance patterns. However, planet and non-planet hosts with masses M > 1.5 Msun show differences in the abundances of some elements, specially Na, Co, and Ni. In addition, we find the sample of subgiant stars with planets to be metal rich showing similar metallicities to main-sequence planet hosts. The fact that giant planet hosts in the mass domain M < 1.5 Msun do not show metal-enrichment is difficult to explain. Given that these stars have similar stellar parameters to subgiants and main-sequence planet hosts, the lack of the metal-rich signature in low-mass giants could be explained if originated from a pollution scenario in the main sequence that gets erased as the star become fully convective. However, there is no physical reason why it should play a role for giants with masses M < 1.5 Msun but is not observed for giants with M > 1.5 Msun.

preprint2013arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access3 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.