Paper detail

The O3N2 and N2 abundance indicators revisited: improved calibrations based on CALIFA and Te-based literature data

The use of IFS is since recently allowing to measure the emission line fluxes of an increasingly large number of star-forming galaxies both locally and at high redshift. The main goal of this study is to review the most widely used empirical oxygen calibrations, O3N2 and N2, by using new direct abundance measurements. We pay special attention to the expected uncertainty of these calibrations as a function of the index value or abundance derived and the presence of possible systematic offsets. This is possible thanks to the analysis of the most ambitious compilation of Te-based HII regions to date. This new dataset compiles the Te-based abundances of 603 HII regions extracted from the literature but also includes new measurements from the CALIFA survey. Besides providing new and improved empirical calibrations for the gas abundance, we also present here a comparison between our revisited calibrations with a total of 3423 additional CALIFA HII complexes with abundances derived using the ONS calibration by Pilyugin et al. (2010). The combined analysis of Te-based and ONS abundances allows us to derive their most accurate calibration to date for both the O3N2 and N2 single-ratio indicators, in terms of all statistical significance, quality and coverage of the space of parameters. In particular, we infer that these indicators show shallower abundance dependencies and statistically-significant offsets compared to those of Pettini and Pagel (2004), Nagao et al. (2006) and Pérez-Montero and Contini (2009). The O3N2 and N2 indicators can be empirically applied to derive oxygen abundances calibrations from either direct abundance determinations with random errors of 0.18 and 0.16, respectively, or from indirect ones (but based on a large amount of data) reaching an average precision of 0.08 and 0.09 dex (random) and 0.02 and 0.08 dex (systematic; compared to the direct estimations),respectively.

preprint2013arXivOpen 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.