Paper detail

The VLT-FLAMES Tarantula Survey XXXII. Low-luminosity late O-type stars -- classification, main physical parameters, and silicon abundances

Analysis of late O-type stars observed in the Large Magellanic Cloud (LMC) by the VLT-FLAMES Tarantula Survey (VFTS) revealed a discrepancy between the physical properties estimated from model-atmosphere analysis and those expected from their morphological classifications. Here we revisit the analysis of 32 of these puzzling objects using new hydrogen-helium-silicon FASTWIND models and a different fitting approach to re-evaluate their physical properties. Our new analysis confirms that these stars indeed have properties that are typical of late O-type dwarfs. We also present the first estimates of silicon abundances for O-type stars in the 30 Dor clusters NGC 2060 and NGC 2070, with a weighted mean abundance for our sample of 7.05 +/- 0.03. Our values are about 0.20 dex lower than those previously derived for B-type stars in the LMC clusters N 11 and NGC 2004 using TLUSTY models. Various possibilities (e.g. differences in the analysis methods, effects of microturbulence, and real differences between stars in different clusters) were considered to account for these results. We also used our grid of FASTWIND models to reassess the impact of using the Galactic classification criteria for late O-type stars in the LMC by scrutinising their sensitivity to different stellar properties. At the cool edge of the O star regime the HeII 4686/HeI 4713 ratio used to assign luminosity class for Galactic stars can mimic giants or bright giants in the LMC, even for objects with high gravities (log_g > 4.0 dex). We argue that this line ratio is not a reliable luminosity diagnostic for late O-type stars in the LMC, and that the SiIV 4989/HeI4026 ratio is more robust for these types.

preprint2020arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access9 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.