0709.3177/ms.tex
1: %                                                                 aa.dem
2: % AA vers. 6.1, LaTeX class for Astronomy & Astrophysics
3: % demonstration file
4: %                                                 (c) Springer-Verlag HD
5: %                                                revised by EDP Sciences
6: %-----------------------------------------------------------------------
7: %
8: %\documentclass[referee]{aa} % for a referee version
9: %\documentclass[onecolumn]{aa} % for a paper on 1 column
10: \documentclass[longauth]{aa} % for the lon lists of affiliations
11: %\documentclass[rnote]{aa} % for the research notes
12: %\documentclass[letter]{aa} % for the letters
13: %
14: %\documentclass{aa}
15: %
16: \usepackage{graphicx}
17: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
18: \usepackage{color}
19: \usepackage{txfonts}
20: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
21: %
22: %
23: %+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
24: %                       abbreviations
25: %+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
26: \newcommand{\dydz}{$\Delta Y / \Delta Z\;$}
27: \newcommand{\kms}{$\,km\,s^{-1}$}
28: \newcommand{\lsun}{log$L/L_{\odot}\,$}
29: \newcommand{\msun}{$M_{\odot}\,$}
30: 
31: \begin{document}
32: 
33: \title{RR Lyrae stars in Galactic globular clusters. VI. The Period-Amplitude relation.}
34: 
35: \author{G. Bono \inst{1,2}, F. Caputo \inst{1}, M. Di Criscienzo \inst{1,3}}
36: 
37: \authorrunning{Bono et al.}
38: 
39: \offprints{G. Bono\\ \email{bono@mporzio.astro.it} }
40: 
41: \institute {INAF-Osservatorio Astronomico di Roma, Via Frascati 33,
42: 00040 Monte Porzio Catone, Italy {\tt bono@mporzio.astro.it}, 
43: {\tt caputo@mporzio.astro.it}, {\tt dicriscienzo@mporzio.astro.it}\\
44: \and European Southern Observatory, Karl-Schwarzschild-Str. 2,
45: D-85748 Garching bei Munchen, Germany\\
46: \and INAF-Osservatorio Astronomico di Capodimonte, Via Moiariello 16,
47: 80131 Napoli, Italy
48:  }
49: 
50: 
51: 
52: \date{Received, accepted}
53: 
54: 
55: 
56: \abstract
57:   % context heading (optional)
58: {}
59:   % aims heading (mandatory)
60: {This work uses nonlinear convective models of RR Lyrae stars and 
61: evolutionary predictions of low-mass helium burning stellar structures to  
62: constrain the properties of cluster and field RR Lyrae variables. In particular, 
63: we address two problems: is the Period-Amplitude ($PA_V$) plane of fundamental 
64: (RR$_{ab}$) variables a good diagnostic for the metal abundance?  
65: Is the $M_V$(RR)-[Fe/H] relation of field and cluster variables linear over 
66: the whole metal abundance range of [Fe/H]$\sim -$2.5 to $\sim$ 0?
67: }
68: % methods heading (mandatory)
69: {We perform a detailed comparison between theory and observations for 
70: fundamental RR Lyrae variables in the solar neighborhood and in both 
71: Oosterhoff type I (OoI) and type II (OoII) Galactic globular clusters.  
72: }
73: % results heading (mandatory)
74: {We show that the distribution of cluster RR$_{ab}$ variables in the 
75: $PA_V$ plane depends not only on the metal abundance, but also on the 
76: cluster Horizontal Branch (HB) morphology. We find that on average the 
77: observed pulsation parameter $k_{puls}$, connecting the period to the visual 
78: amplitude, increases when moving from metal-poor to metal-rich GGCs.  
79: However, this parameter shows marginal changes among OoI clusters 
80: with intermediate to red HB types and iron abundances $-1.8\le$[Fe/H]$\le-1.1$, 
81: whereas its value decreases in OoII clusters with the bluer HB morphology,  
82: although these clusters are also the less metal-poor ones of the group. 
83: Moreover, at [Fe/H]=$-1.7\pm$0.1 the OoI clusters present redder 
84: HB types and larger $\langle k_{puls}\rangle$ values than the OoII clusters.
85: The RR$_{ab}$ variables in $\omega$~Cen and in the solar neighborhood 
86: further support the evidence that the spread in [Fe/H], at fixed $k_{puls}$, 
87: is of the order of $\pm$0.5 dex. Using the results of synthetic HB simulations, 
88: we show that the $PA_V$ plane  can provide accurate cluster distance estimates. 
89: We find that the RR$_{ab}$ variables in OoI and in OoII clusters with very blue 
90: HB types obey a well-defined 
91: $M_V$(RR)-$k_{puls}$ relation, while those in OoII clusters with moderately 
92: blue HB types present a zero-point that is $\sim 0.05$ mag brighter. Regarding 
93: field variables, we show that with [Fe/H]$\ge -$1.0 a unique $M_V$(RR)-$k_{puls}$ 
94: relation can be adopted, independently of the color distribution of the parent HB 
95: star population.}
96: % conclusions heading (optional)
97: {
98: Current findings suggest that the $PA_V$ distribution  does 
99: not seem to be a robust diagnostic for the metal abundance of RR$_{ab}$ variables.
100: However, the same observables can be used to estimate the absolute magnitude of 
101: globular cluster and field RR$_{ab}$ variables. Eventually, we show that over 
102: the  metallicity range $-2.4\le[Fe/H]\le 0.0$ the $M_V$(RR)-[Fe/H] relation is 
103: not linear but has a parabolic behavior.
104: }
105: 
106: \keywords{globular clusters -- stars: evolution -- stars: horizontal branch --
107: stars: oscillations -- stars: variables: RR Lyr}
108: 
109: 
110: 
111: \maketitle
112: %
113: %________________________________________________________________
114: 
115: 
116: 
117: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
118: \section{Introduction}
119: 
120: It has been far-back recognized that the properties of RR Lyrae
121: variables provide firm constraints to investigate several important
122: aspects of stellar evolution and cosmology. The calibration of the
123: absolute visual magnitude $M_V$(RR) as a function of the
124: iron-to-hydrogen content [Fe/H] is generally used for distance
125: determinations in the Local Group and the RR Lyrae-based distances 
126: provide an independent test for the Cepheid distance scale in nearby
127: galaxies (Magellanic Clouds, M31, dwarf spheroidal galaxies) and for
128: the calibration of secondary distance indicators such as the
129: globular cluster luminosity function in more distant galaxies (see
130: e.g. Di Criscienzo et al. 2006, and references therein). Moreover,
131: the distance of RR Lyrae stars observed in globular clusters is a
132: fundamental step to determine the absolute magnitude of the cluster
133: main-sequence turn-off, which is the classical "clock" to estimate
134: the age of these ancient stellar systems.
135: 
136: Together with this traditional role for distance determinations, since 
137: the pioneering investigation by Preston (1959) it has also been suggested 
138: that the location of fundamental mode variables (RR$_{ab}$)
139: in the Period-Amplitude ($PA_V$) plane, i.e., in the so-called Bailey diagram, 
140: depends on the metal abundance. Among the more recent papers, 
141: we mention Alcock et al. (2000) who used the visual amplitude
142: of RR$_{ab}$ stars in the globular clusters M15 ([Fe/H]=$-$2.1),
143: M3 ([Fe/H]=$-$1.6) and M5 ([Fe/H]=$-$1.4) to get the 
144: calibration
145: 
146: $$[Fe/H]_A=-2.60-8.85\log P_{ab}-1.33A_V\eqno(1)$$
147: 
148: \noindent and Sandage (2004) who determined 
149: 
150: $$[Fe/H]_S=-2.15-7.99\log P_{ab}-1.45A_V\eqno(2)$$
151: 
152: \noindent from field variables with spectroscopic [Fe/H] measurements. Although these 
153: Period-Metallicity-Amplitude relations 
154: present a large intrinsic indeterminacy of $\sim$ 0.35 dex, they were 
155: used by Alcock et al. (2000) to estimate a median metal content 
156: of [Fe/H]$\sim -$1.6 for a huge
157: sample of RR$_{ab}$ stars in the bar of the Large Magellanic Cloud
158: (LMC), by Brown et al. (2004) to derive a mean metallicity of
159: [Fe/H]=$-1.8\pm$0.3 for the 29 RR$_{ab}$ variables they identified
160: in a halo field of M31, and by Kinemuchi et al. (2006) to study 
161: the properties of RR Lyrae stars in the solar neighborhood. 
162: 
163: The suggested dependence of the Bailey diagram on the metal
164: abundance accounts for the observational evidence that  RR$_{ab}$
165: stars in Oosterhoff type II globular clusters tend to have, for a
166: given amplitude, longer periods than those in Oosterhoff type I
167: clusters. Let us recall that according to the average period 
168: $\langle P_{ab}\rangle$ of their $ab$-type variables, the globular
169: clusters are conventionally classified into two Oosterhoff
170: groups: the former group (Oosterhoff type I: OoI) includes
171: metal-intermediate clusters with $\langle P_{ab}\rangle\sim$ 0.55
172: days, while the latter (Oosterhoff type II: OoII) includes
173: metal-poor clusters with $\langle P_{ab}\rangle\sim$ 0.65 days.
174: However, one cannot neglect that OoII
175: clusters show bluer horizontal branch (HB) star distributions than
176: OoI clusters. Therefore the $PA_V$ diagram, as already suggested
177: by Clement \& Shelton (1999), migth not depend on the metal
178: abundance but on the evolutionary status of RR Lyrae stars.
179: 
180: From a theoretical point of view, it is widely accepted that the
181: pulsation period $P$ is physically governed by the von Ritter relation
182: $P\rho^{1/2}=Q$ ($\rho$ is the stellar density and $Q$ the pulsation
183: constant) which yields that the pulsation period is a function of the
184: pulsator mass $M$, luminosity $L$, and effective temperature $T_e$.
185: On this ground, since the earlier linear and adiabatic pulsation models,
186: the $P=f(M,L,T_e)$ relation, the so-called van Albada \& Baker
187: (1971, 1973) relation, has been at the basis of several
188: investigations focussed on the estimate of RR Lyrae mass and
189: luminosity. However, accurate predictions concerning the
190: luminosity and the radial velocity variations along the pulsation cycle,
191: and their dependence on the pulsator structural parameters, become
192: available only with the modern nonlinear, convective approach
193: (Stellingwerf 1984).
194: 
195: The purpose of the present investigation is to use the updated
196: and detailed sets of nonlinear, convective models for fundamental (F)
197: pulsators computed by our group (see Marconi
198: et al. 2003 [Paper II]; Di Criscienzo, Marconi \& Caputo 2004 [Paper
199: III], and references therein) to investigate the $PA_V$ relation for
200: RR$_{ab}$ variables. The theoretical scenario is
201: discussed in Section 2, while Section 3 deals with the comparison 
202: with observations. The role of the Period-Amplitude diagram in the distance 
203: estimate of RR$_{ab}$ variables is presented in Section 4 and 
204: the conclusions close the paper.
205: 
206: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
207: \section{The physical meaning of the $PA_V$ relation}
208: 
209: The pulsation models used in the present paper have been computed
210: with the nonlinear convective, hydrodynamical code which has already
211: been described in previous investigations (see Paper II, Paper
212: III, and references therein) and it will not be further discussed.
213: We only wish to mention that the grid of models covers a wide range
214: in stellar mass, luminosity, and chemical composition (see Table 1)
215: and that the bolometric light curves of the models have been
216: transformed into the observational plane by adopting the bolometric
217: corrections and color-temperature transformations provided by
218: Castelli et al. (1997a,b). This approach allows us to derive
219: light-curve amplitudes $A_i$ and mean absolute magnitudes, either
220: intensity-weighted $\langle M_i\rangle$ or magnitude-weighted
221: $(M_i)$, for the various photometric bands.
222: 
223: \begin{table}
224: \begin{center}
225: \caption{Main parameters of the pulsation models used in this paper.} \label{PLCM}
226: \begin{tabular}{lccl}
227: \hline \hline
228: $Y$  &    $Z$ & $M$/\msun & \lsun\\
229: \hline
230: 0.24&    0.0001&  0.80&    1.72, 1.81, 1.91\\
231:     &          &  0.75&    1.61, 1.72, 1.81\\
232:     &          &  0.70&    1.72\\
233:     &          &  0.65&    1.61\\
234: 0.24&    0.0004&  0.70&    1.61, 1.72, 1.81\\
235: 0.24&    0.001 &  0.75&    1.71\\
236:     &           &  0.65&   1.51, 1.61, 1.72\\
237: 0.255&   0.006 &  0.58&    1.55, 1.65, 1.75\\
238: \hline
239: \end{tabular}
240: \end{center}
241: \end{table}
242: 
243: 
244: The entire set of models pulsating in the fundamental mode shows a
245: linear correlation between the bolometric amplitude and the
246: pulsation period (logarithmic scale) in the sense that the
247: amplitude decreases from short to
248: long periods, at fixed mass and luminosity. 
249: Moreover, we found that the luminosity amplitude, at
250: fixed period, increases as the stellar luminosity increases or as
251: the stellar mass decreases, but to a lesser extent (see Fig. 3 in
252: Paper II). In this context, it is worth mentioning that the pulsation limit cycle
253: stability is also governed by the efficiency of convection as flux
254: carrier in the stellar envelope, and in turn on the value of the
255: mixing-length parameter $l/H_p$ adopted to close the system of
256: convective and hydrodynamical equations. Note that the depth of the
257: convective region increases when moving from higher to lower effective
258: temperatures and that convection is the physical mechanism that
259: quenches pulsation instability. As a consequence, the RR Lyrae
260: models at constant stellar mass and luminosity show that an
261: increase in the mixing-length parameter from $l/H_p$=1.5 to 2.0
262: causes a systematic decrease ($\sim 100$ K) in the effective
263: temperature of the first overtone blue edge (FOBE) and the simultaneous increase
264: in the effective temperature of both the blue edge (FBE, $\sim$ 100 K)
265: and the red edge (FRE, $\sim$ 300 K) of fundamental pulsation. 
266: As a whole, the increase in the
267: efficiency of the convective transport causes a narrowing of the width
268: in temperature of the instability strip. 
269: On the other hand, the amplitude of fundamental pulsators reaches its maximum value
270: close to the FBE and attains vanishing values close to the FRE. This yields 
271: that different assumptions concerning the mixing-length parameter
272: affect the region of the instability strip where fundamental pulsators
273: are pulsationally unstable, and in turn both the zero-point and the
274: slope of the predicted Period-Amplitude relation.
275: 
276: Using the intensity-averaged
277: $\langle M_V\rangle$ magnitudes of fundamental pulsators with 
278: $Z$=0.0001-0.006, we find that the correlation
279: between pulsation period, visual amplitude, magnitude, and mass (in solar units) 
280: is given by
281: $$\log P_{ab}=0.136-0.189A_V-0.385\langle M_V\rangle-0.30\log M\eqno(3)$$
282: for $l/H_p$=1.5, and
283: $$\log P_{ab}=0.027-0.142A_V-0.385\langle M_V\rangle-0.35\log M\eqno(4)$$
284: for $l/H_p$=2.0, where the rms dispersion of the fit 
285: is 0.025 dex. For the sake of the following discussion, let us emphasize that in these 
286: relations the pulsator mass and luminosity are free parameters. 
287: 
288: According to these relations, the RR$_{ab}$ distribution in the $PA_V$
289: diagram is described by the {\it pulsation} parameter 
290: 
291: $$k(1.5)_{puls}=0.136-\log P_{ab}-0.189A_V$$
292: or
293: $$k(2.0)_{puls}=0.027-\log P_{ab}-0.142A_V,$$
294: 
295: \noindent which in turn depends on the pulsator {\it evolutionary}
296: properties as 
297: 
298: $$k(1.5)_{ev}=0.385\langle M_V\rangle+0.30\log M$$
299: and
300: $$k(2.0)_{ev}=0.385\langle M_V\rangle+0.35\log M$$
301: 
302: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
303: 
304: \begin{figure}
305: \begin{center}
306: \includegraphics[width=8cm]{PAFig1.ps}
307: \caption{From bottom to top: the average mass $M$(RR) in solar units,
308: the absolute visual magnitude $M_V$(RR), and the evolutionary parameter
309: $k(1.5)_{ev}$ as a function of the HB type. Current predictions rely on a
310: set of SHB simulations discussed in Paper IV.}
311: \end{center}
312: \end{figure}
313: 
314: At variance with the pulsational parameters 
315: $k(1.5)_{puls}$ and $k(2.0)_{puls}$, the values of the evolutionary  
316: ones $k(1.5)_{ev}$ and
317: $k(2.0)_{ev}$ cannot be directly estimated
318: from observations. However, all the synthetic horizontal branches (SHB)
319: simulations (see, e.g., Demarque et al. 2000; Catelan et al. 2004;
320: Cassisi et al. 2004, [Paper IV]) agree in suggesting that, for a fixed metallicity,
321: the average mass of HB stars in the RR Lyrae region decreases when
322: moving from red to blue HB morphologies, whereas the average
323: luminosity presents an opposite trend. Furthermore, for a
324: fixed HB morphology, an increase in the metal content causes a
325: decrease in the same intrinsic parameters. 
326: 
327: \begin{table*}
328: \begin{center}
329: \caption{Selected results of SHB simulations with $Z\le$ 0.006. For each metal content $Z$
330: and mean mass of HB stars $M$(HB),
331: we list the predicted mean values of the
332: HB type and of the RR Lyrae mass, absolute magnitude and $k_{ev}$ parameters,
333: together with the rms dispersion about the mean. The masses are in solar units.}\label{PLCM}
334: \begin{tabular}{lccccc}
335: \hline \hline
336: $M$(HB) &$\langle$HB$\rangle$&$\langle M$(RR)$\rangle$ & $\langle M_V$(RR)$\rangle$ &   $\langle k(1.5)_{ev}\rangle$            &   $\langle k(2.0)_{ev}\rangle$            \\
337: \hline
338: \multicolumn{6}{c}{$Z$=0.0001, $Y$=0.23}\\
339: 0.68    &   +0.96$\pm$0.01    &   0.70$\pm$0.02 &   0.35$\pm$0.02 &   0.088$\pm$0.012 &   0.080$\pm$0.012 \\
340: 0.70    &   +0.90$\pm$0.02    &   0.71$\pm$0.03 &   0.38$\pm$0.01 &   0.101$\pm$0.006 &   0.094$\pm$0.006 \\
341: 0.72    &   +0.83$\pm$0.02    &   0.73$\pm$0.03 &   0.41$\pm$0.01 &   0.115$\pm$0.004 &   0.108$\pm$0.006 \\
342: 0.74    &   +0.74$\pm$0.02    &   0.75$\pm$0.03 &   0.42$\pm$0.01 &   0.125$\pm$0.002 &   0.119$\pm$0.002 \\
343: 0.76    &   +0.62$\pm$0.03    &   0.77$\pm$0.03 &   0.44$\pm$0.01 &   0.134$\pm$0.002 &   0.128$\pm$0.002 \\
344: 0.78    &   +0.43$\pm$0.03    &   0.79$\pm$0.03 &   0.45$\pm$0.01 &   0.143$\pm$0.002 &   0.138$\pm$0.002 \\
345: 0.80    &   +0.15$\pm$0.01    &   0.81$\pm$0.03 &   0.46$\pm$0.01 &   0.149$\pm$0.002 &   0.144$\pm$0.002 \\
346: 0.82    &   $-$0.09$\pm$0.02  &0.82$\pm$0.02  &     0.46$\pm$0.01 &   0.152$\pm$0.002 &   0.148$\pm$0.002 \\
347: 0.84    &   $-$0.19$\pm$0.02  &0.84$\pm$0.02    &   0.46$\pm$0.01 &   0.152$\pm$0.002 &   0.148$\pm$0.002 \\
348: \multicolumn{6}{c}{$Z$=0.0003, $Y$=0.23}\\
349: 
350: 0.64    &   +0.97$\pm$0.01  &   0.66$\pm$0.02 &   0.36$\pm$0.04 &   0.084$\pm$0.030 &   0.075$\pm$0.030 \\
351: 0.66    &   +0.91$\pm$0.01  &   0.68$\pm$0.02 &   0.44$\pm$0.02 &   0.117$\pm$0.008 &   0.109$\pm$0.008 \\
352: 0.68    &   +0.78$\pm$0.01  &   0.70$\pm$0.02 &   0.49$\pm$0.01 &   0.142$\pm$0.004 &   0.134$\pm$0.004 \\
353: 0.70    &   +0.52$\pm$0.02  &   0.71$\pm$0.02 &   0.53$\pm$0.01 &   0.161$\pm$0.002 &   0.154$\pm$0.002 \\
354: 0.72    &   +0.11$\pm$0.03  &   0.73$\pm$0.02 &   0.55$\pm$0.01 &   0.170$\pm$0.002 &   0.163$\pm$0.002 \\
355: 0.74    &   $-$0.29$\pm$0.03  &0.74$\pm$0.02    &   0.56$\pm$0.01 &   0.174$\pm$0.002 &   0.168$\pm$0.002 \\
356: 0.76    &   $-$0.60$\pm$0.02  &0.75$\pm$0.02    &   0.56$\pm$0.01 &   0.176$\pm$0.002 &   0.170$\pm$0.002 \\
357: 0.78    &   $-$0.82$\pm$0.01  &0.76$\pm$0.02    &   0.55$\pm$0.01 &   0.176$\pm$0.002 &   0.170$\pm$0.002 \\
358: \multicolumn{6}{c}{$Z$=0.0006, $Y$=0.23}\\
359: 0.62    &   +0.97$\pm$0.01  &   0.65$\pm$0.02 &   0.37$\pm$0.03 &   0.087$\pm$0.026 &   0.078$\pm$0.026 \\
360: 0.64    &   +0.89$\pm$0.01  &   0.66$\pm$0.02 &   0.48$\pm$0.02 &   0.131$\pm$0.012 &   0.122$\pm$0.012 \\
361: 0.66    &   +0.70$\pm$0.02  &   0.68$\pm$0.02 &   0.53$\pm$0.01 &   0.155$\pm$0.006 &   0.147$\pm$0.006 \\
362: 0.68    &   +0.28$\pm$0.03  &   0.69$\pm$0.02 &   0.57$\pm$0.01 &   0.170$\pm$0.002 &   0.162$\pm$0.002 \\
363: 0.70    &   $-$0.24$\pm$0.02  &0.70$\pm$0.02    &   0.58$\pm$0.01 &   0.176$\pm$0.002 &   0.168$\pm$0.002 \\
364: 0.72    &   $-$0.69$\pm$0.02  &0.70$\pm$0.02    &   0.59$\pm$0.01 &   0.180$\pm$0.002 &   0.172$\pm$0.002 \\
365: 0.74    &   $-$0.91$\pm$0.01  &0.71$\pm$0.02    &   0.59$\pm$0.01 &   0.182$\pm$0.002 &   0.174$\pm$0.002 \\
366: 0.76    &   $-$0.98$\pm$0.01  &0.72$\pm$0.02    &   0.59$\pm$0.01 &   0.183$\pm$0.002 &   0.176$\pm$0.002 \\
367: \multicolumn{6}{c}{$Z$=0.001, $Y$=0.23}\\
368: 0.60    &   +0.98$\pm$0.01    &   0.64$\pm$0.01 &   0.41$\pm$0.06 &   0.099   $\pm$0.040  &   0.089$\pm$0.040 \\
369: 0.62    &   +0.89$\pm$0.01    &   0.65$\pm$0.01 &   0.51$\pm$0.03 &   0.141   $\pm$0.018  &   0.132$\pm$0.018 \\
370: 0.64    &   +0.64$\pm$0.02    &   0.66$\pm$0.01 &   0.58$\pm$0.02 &   0.170   $\pm$0.008  &   0.161$\pm$0.008 \\
371: 0.66    &   +0.11$\pm$0.02    &   0.67$\pm$0.01 &   0.61$\pm$0.01 &   0.181   $\pm$0.002  &   0.172$\pm$0.002 \\
372: 0.68    &   $-$0.44$\pm$0.03  &0.67$\pm$0.01    &   0.62$\pm$0.01 &   0.188   $\pm$0.002  &   0.180$\pm$0.002 \\
373: 0.70    &   $-$0.80$\pm$0.02  &0.68$\pm$0.01    &   0.63$\pm$0.01 &   0.192   $\pm$0.002  &   0.184$\pm$0.002 \\
374: 0.72    &   $-$0.96$\pm$0.01  &0.68$\pm$0.01    &   0.63$\pm$0.01 &   0.194   $\pm$0.002  &   0.186$\pm$0.002 \\
375: \multicolumn{6}{c}{$Z$=0.003, $Y$=0.23}\\
376: 0.56    &   +0.97$\pm$0.01    &   0.60$\pm$0.01 &   0.56$\pm$0.07 &   0.149   $\pm$0.040  &   0.138$\pm$0.040 \\
377: 0.58    &   +0.84$\pm$0.02    &   0.61$\pm$0.01 &   0.68$\pm$0.03 &   0.198   $\pm$0.020  &   0.187$\pm$0.020 \\
378: 0.60    &   +0.40$\pm$0.03    &   0.61$\pm$0.01 &   0.73$\pm$0.01 &   0.218   $\pm$0.004  &   0.208$\pm$0.004 \\
379: 0.62    &   $-$0.25$\pm$0.03  &0.62$\pm$0.01    &   0.76$\pm$0.01 &   0.227   $\pm$0.004  &   0.217$\pm$0.004 \\
380: 0.64    &   $-$0.77$\pm$0.02  &0.62$\pm$0.01    &   0.77$\pm$0.01 &   0.234   $\pm$0.006  &   0.223$\pm$0.006 \\
381: 0.66    &   $-$0.97$\pm$0.01  &0.62$\pm$0.01    &   0.78$\pm$0.01 &   0.236   $\pm$0.008  &   0.226$\pm$0.008 \\
382: \multicolumn{6}{c}{$Z$=0.006, $Y$=0.245}\\
383: 0.54    &   +0.97$\pm$0.01    &   0.58$\pm$0.01 &   0.63$\pm$0.10 &   0.172   $\pm$0.070  &   0.160   $\pm$0.070  \\
384: 0.56    &   +0.79$\pm$0.02    &   0.58$\pm$0.01 &   0.80$\pm$0.03 &   0.237   $\pm$0.012  &   0.226   $\pm$0.012  \\
385: 0.58    &   +0.29$\pm$0.03    &   0.59$\pm$0.01 &   0.84$\pm$0.01 &   0.254   $\pm$0.008  &   0.243   $\pm$0.008  \\
386: 0.60    &   $-$0.42$\pm$0.02  &0.59$\pm$0.01    &   0.86$\pm$0.01 &   0.261   $\pm$0.004  &   0.250   $\pm$0.004  \\
387: 0.62    &   $-$0.86$\pm$0.01  &0.59$\pm$0.01    &   0.88$\pm$0.01 &   0.270   $\pm$0.006  &   0.258   $\pm$0.006  \\
388: 0.64    &   $-$0.98$\pm$0.01  &0.59$\pm$0.01    &   0.88$\pm$0.03 &   0.270   $\pm$0.032  &   0.259   $\pm$0.032  \\
389: \hline
390: \end{tabular}
391: \end{center}
392: \end{table*}
393: 
394: 
395: 
396: Using the SHBs computed in Paper IV for various chemical compositions, 
397: we show in Table 2 some selected predictions based on SHB simulations 
398: in which the number of predicted RR Lyrae stars approaches $\sim$ 2\% of 
399: the global HB star population. For each assumed chemical composition 
400: and mean mass\footnote{The SHBs have been computed by assuming a gaussian
401: random distribution of HB masses centered on $M$(HB) and with a standard
402: deviation $\sigma\sim0.02M_{\odot}$.} $M(HB)$
403: of HB stars, we give the average HB type\footnote{This parameter is 
404: the ratio (B$-$R)/(B+V+R) among the
405: numbers of HB stars to the blue (B), within (V) and to the red (R)
406: of the RR Lyrae instability strip (Lee 1990).} and 
407: the predicted mean values of the
408: RR Lyrae mass, absolute magnitude, and $k_{ev}$ parameter,
409: together with the rms dispersion about the mean. Note that these 
410: mean values are derived by averaging the results of 10
411: different simulations. 
412: 
413: Data listed in Table 2 (see also Fig. 1) disclose four substantial points:
414: \begin{enumerate}
415: \item the mass range of the predicted RR Lyrae decreases with increasing 
416: metal content, when moving from very blue to very red HB type distributions; 
417: \item the $k_{ev}$ parameter, at fixed metallicity, attains rather constant 
418: values from red to moderately blue HB morphology (i.e., for HB type ranging 
419: from $\sim -$0.9 to $\sim$ +0.5), whereas it significantly decreases for 
420: the bluer populations;
421: \item the $k_{ev}$ parameter, at constant HB type, increases when moving 
422: from low to high metal abundances. However, for HB$\ge$ +0.9 the metallicity 
423: effect tends to vanish;
424: \item the size of this metallicity effect varies with the metallicity range. 
425: In particular, for HB type $\sim$ 0 we get $\Delta k(1.5)_{ev}\sim$ 0.03
426: for $0.0001 \le Z \le 0.001$ and $\Delta k(1.5)_{ev}\sim$ 0.08
427: for $0.001 \le Z \le 0.006$.
428: \end{enumerate}
429: 
430: In summary, the constraints on $k_{ev}$ provided by the evolutionary 
431: predictions suggest that the $PA_V$ distribution of RR$_{ab}$ stars in
432: globular clusters depends {\it both on the cluster metal abundance 
433: and on the HB morphology}.
434: 
435: 
436: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
437: 
438: \section{Observed $PA_V$ diagrams}
439: \subsection{Galactic globular clusters}
440: 
441: \begin{table}
442: \begin{center}
443: \caption{Selected parameters for Galactic globular clusters:
444: HB type, average period of $ab$-type RR Lyrae stars and
445: iron-to-hydrogen content [Fe/H]$_K$ according to the
446: Kraft \& Ivans (2003) metallicity scale. For $\omega$~Cen,
447: we list the average [Fe/H]$_R$ value from Rey et al. (2000) data.}\label{PLCM}
448: \begin{tabular}{lccc}
449: \hline \hline
450: Name &   HB  &    $\langle$log$P_{ab}\rangle$ &   [Fe/H]$_K$  \\
451: \hline\\
452: \multicolumn{4}{c}{Oosterhoff type II}\\
453: N4590~(M68)   &   +0.44    &   $-$0.201    &   $-$2.43    \\
454: N6426         &   +0.58    &   $-$0.153    &   $-$2.43    \\
455: N7078~(M15)   &   +0.67    &   $-$0.189    &   $-$2.42    \\
456: N5053         &   +0.52    &   $-$0.174    &   $-$2.41    \\
457: N6341~(M92)   &   +0.91    &   $-$0.195    &   $-$2.38    \\
458: N5466         &   +0.58    &   $-$0.172    &   $-$2.22   \\
459: N5024~(M53)   &   +0.81    &   $-$0.189    &   $-$2.02    \\
460: N6809~(M55)   &   +0.87    &   $-$0.181    &   $-$1.85    \\
461: N6333~(M9)    &   +0.87    &   $-$0.203    &   $-$1.79   \\
462: N7089~(M2)    &   +0.96    &   $-$0.168    &   $-$1.56    \\
463: \hline\\
464: \multicolumn{4}{c}{Oosterhoff type I}\\
465: N4147       &   +0.55      &   $-$0.282    &   $-$1.79    \\
466: I4499      &   +0.11      &   $-$0.238    &   $-$1.60     \\
467: N6934       &   +0.25      &   $-$0.252    &   $-$1.59    \\
468: N3201       &   +0.08      &   $-$0.252    &   $-$1.56    \\
469: N5272~(M3)  &   +0.08      &   $-$0.257    &   $-$1.50   \\
470: N7006       &   $-$0.28    &   $-$0.246    &   $-$1.48    \\
471: N6715~(M54) &   +0.75      &   $-$0.237    &   $-$1.47    \\
472: N6981~(M72) &   +0.14      &   $-$0.256    &   $-$1.42    \\
473: N6229       &   +0.24      &   $-$0.270    &   $-$1.41  \\
474: N6864~(M75) &   $-$0.07    &   $-$0.231    &   $-$1.29    \\
475: N5904~(M5)  &   +0.31      &   $-$0.263    &   $-$1.26    \\
476: N1851       &   $-$0.36    &   $-$0.241    &   $-$1.19    \\
477: N6121~(M4)  &   $-$0.06    &   $-$0.275    &   $-$1.15    \\
478: N6362       &   $-$0.58    &   $-$0.265    &   $-$1.15    \\
479: N6723       &   $-$0.08    &   $-$0.262    &   $-$1.11    \\
480: N6171~(M107)&   $-$0.73    &   $-$0.272    &   $-$1.10   \\
481: \hline\\
482: \multicolumn{4}{c}{Peculiar clusters}\\
483: N5139~($\omega$~Cen) &+0.92&   $-$0.189    &   $-$1.62 \\
484: N6441               &$-$0.73&   $-$0.132   &   $-$0.85  \\
485: \hline
486: \end{tabular}
487: \end{center}
488: \end{table}
489: 
490: \begin{table}
491: \begin{center}
492: \caption{Mean $k(1.5)_{puls}$ and $k(2.0)_{puls}$ values for RR$_{ab}$ stars in Galactic
493: globular clusters.} \label{PLCM}
494: \begin{tabular}{lcccc}
495: \hline \hline
496: Name& HB & [Fe/H]$_K$ & $\langle k(1.5)_{puls}\rangle$ & $\langle k(2.0)_{puls}\rangle$\\
497: \hline\\
498: \multicolumn{5}{c}{Oosterhoff type II}\\
499: N4590   &   +0.44   &   $-$2.43 &  0.181$\pm$0.026 &   0.118$\pm$0.024 \\
500: N6426   &   +0.58   &   $-$2.43 &  0.131$\pm$0.018 &   0.068$\pm$0.017 \\
501: N7078   &   +0.67   &   $-$2.42 &  0.184$\pm$0.030 &   0.118$\pm$0.030 \\
502: N5053   &   +0.52   &   $-$2.41 &  0.163$\pm$0.045 &   0.095$\pm$0.036 \\
503: N6341   &   +0.91   &   $-$2.38 &  0.144$\pm$0.026 &   0.089$\pm$0.021 \\
504: N5466   &   +0.58   &   $-$2.22 &  0.116$\pm$0.041 &   0.063$\pm$0.031 \\
505: N5024   &   +0.81   &   $-$2.02 &  0.137$\pm$0.029 &   0.080$\pm$0.029 \\
506: N6809   &   +0.87   &   $-$1.85 &  0.132$\pm$0.024 &   0.077$\pm$0.018 \\
507: N6333   &   +0.87   &   $-$1.79 &  0.130$\pm$0.017 &   0.080$\pm$0.016 \\
508: N7089   &   +0.96   &   $-$1.56 &  0.132$\pm$0.031 &   0.073$\pm$0.033 \\
509: \hline\\
510: \multicolumn{5}{c}{Oosterhoff type I}\\
511: N4147   &   +0.55   &   $-$1.79 &  0.215$\pm$0.021 &   0.164$\pm$0.025 \\
512: I4499   &   +0.11   &   $-$1.60  &  0.209$\pm$0.036 &   0.149$\pm$0.033 \\
513: N6934   &   +0.25   &   $-$1.59 &  0.219$\pm$0.037 &   0.160$\pm$0.031 \\
514: N3201   &   +0.08   &   $-$1.56 &  0.211$\pm$0.042 &   0.154$\pm$0.034 \\
515: N5272   &   +0.08   &   $-$1.50  &  0.194$\pm$0.032 &   0.142$\pm$0.027 \\
516: N7006   &   $-$0.28 &   $-$1.48 &  0.222$\pm$0.027 &   0.160$\pm$0.023 \\
517: N6715   &   +0.75   &   $-$1.47 &  0.220$\pm$0.037 &   0.157$\pm$0.032 \\
518: N6981   &   +0.14   &   $-$1.42 &  0.244$\pm$0.035 &   0.180$\pm$0.033 \\
519: N6229   &   +0.24   &   $-$1.41 &  0.219$\pm$0.024 &   0.164$\pm$0.019 \\
520: N6864   &   $-$0.07 &   $-$1.29 &  0.201$\pm$0.059 &   0.141$\pm$0.055 \\
521: N5904   &   +0.31   &   $-$1.26 &  0.211$\pm$0.049 &   0.156$\pm$0.048 \\
522: N1851   &   $-$0.36 &   $-$1.19 &  0.198$\pm$0.040 &   0.141$\pm$0.035 \\
523: N6121   &   $-$0.06 &   $-$1.15 &  0.184$\pm$0.030 &   0.142$\pm$0.034 \\
524: N6362   &   $-$0.58 &   $-$1.15 &  0.218$\pm$0.030 &   0.162$\pm$0.029 \\
525: N6723   &   $-$0.08 &   $-$1.11 &  0.210$\pm$0.049 &   0.155$\pm$0.042 \\
526: N6171   &   $-$0.73 &   $-$1.10  &  0.239$\pm$0.043 &   0.179$\pm$0.041 \\
527: \hline\\
528: \multicolumn{5}{c}{Peculiar clusters}\\
529: N5139   &   +0.92   &   $-$1.62 &   0.150$\pm$0.043 &   0.092$\pm$0.052 \\
530: N6441   &  $-$0.73  &   $-$0.85 &   0.106$\pm$0.025 &   0.048$\pm$0.025 \\
531: \hline
532: \end{tabular}
533: \end{center}
534: \end{table}
535: 
536: 
537: 
538: For the RR Lyrae stars in Galactic globular clusters for which the
539: visual amplitude $A_V$ is available in the literature, Table 3 gives
540: the observed HB type (Harris 2003)\footnote{http://physwww.physics.mcmaster.ca/\%7Eharris/mwgc.dat)}, 
541: the average period of $RR_{ab}$
542: variables and the iron-to-hydrogen content [Fe/H]$_K$ on the Kraft \& Ivans
543: (2003) metallicity scale. For $\omega$~Cen, whose RR Lyrae stars are
544: characterized by a wide spread in metal abundance, we list the
545: average value ([Fe/H]=$-1.62\pm$0.27) based on Rey et al. (2000)
546: data and the HB type determined by Piersimoni et al. (2007, in
547: preparation). As far as NGC~6441 is concerned, the HB type has been 
548: determined by Catelan (2005) although it should be
549: mentioned that this cluster shows a very unusual HB extending from a
550: stubby red to a very blue component (Rich et al. 1997). Moreover,
551: the periods of the observed RR$_{ab}$ variables are too long for the
552: current cluster metallicity, thus hampering a safe Oosterhoff 
553: classification (see e.g. Pritzl et al. 2001).
554: 
555: \begin{figure}
556: \begin{center}
557: \includegraphics[width=8cm]{PAFig2.ps}
558: \caption{The HB type versus the metal content [Fe/H]$_K$ for
559: Oosterhoff type II (OoII, filled circles) and
560: Oosterhoff type I (OoI, open circles) Galactic globular clusters.
561: The error bars have been estimated by assuming $\epsilon (HB)=\pm0.1$
562: and $\epsilon [Fe/H]_K=\pm0.1$  For $\omega$~Cen (asterisk),
563: we plot the average value [Fe/H]$_R=-1.62\pm$0.27 derived by
564: Rey et al. (2000).}
565: \end{center}
566: \end{figure}
567: 
568: Figure 2 shows the cluster HB type as a function of the metal
569: content [Fe/H]$_K$.  It is worth noticing that even the selected
570: sample of RR Lyrae-rich globular clusters presents the so-called
571: {\it second parameter} problem: in order to account for the observed
572: HB morphology, together with the metal abundance it is required a 
573: further intrinsic parameter.  
574: However, we also note that OoI and
575: OoII clusters seem to follow quite different behaviors: the HB
576: morphology of the OoI clusters becomes bluer as the metal content 
577: decreases, whereas for the latter group the HB morphology becomes
578: bluer as the cluster becomes more metal-rich. As a consequence, the
579: OoII clusters with very blue HB morphology, including $\omega$~Cen,
580: appear to be the ``natural'' extension of OoI clusters to lower
581: metal abundances.
582: 
583: \begin{figure}
584: \begin{center}
585: \includegraphics[width=8cm]{PAFig3.ps}
586: \caption{Visual amplitude versus period for RR$_{ab}$ stars
587: in Oosterhoff type II (OoII, top panel) and Oosterhoff type I (OoI, bottom panel)
588: globular clusters. The solid line shows the ridge line of variables
589: in OoII clusters and is based on the predicted slope
590: $\delta$log$P_F/\delta A_V=-$0.189.}
591: \end{center}
592: \end{figure}
593: 
594: Figure 3 shows the $PA_V$ diagram of the observed RR$_{ab}$ stars
595: in OoII (top panel) and OoI (bottom panel) clusters. The variables
596: in $\omega$ Cen and in NGC~6441 have not been included in this figure
597: and will be discussed separately. The solid line in the top panel is
598: the ridge line of variables in OoII clusters and it was drawn by
599: adopting the predicted slope $\delta$log$P_F/\delta A_V=-$0.189 [see
600: Eq. (3)]. The same line is also plotted in the bottom panel to
601: emphasize that RR Lyrae stars in OoI clusters present systematically shorter period, 
602: at fixed pulsation amplitude.
603: 
604: \begin{figure}
605: \begin{center}
606: \includegraphics[width=8cm]{PAFig4.ps}
607: \caption{The average $\langle k(1.5)_{puls}\rangle$ (bottom panel) and 
608: $\langle k(2.0)_{puls}\rangle$ (top panel) values for RR$_{ab}$ stars
609: in Oosterhoff type I (OoI, open circles) and Oosterhoff type II
610: (OoII, filled circles) globular clusters plotted as a function of the
611: cluster HB type.}
612: \end{center}
613: \end{figure}
614: 
615: \begin{figure}
616: \begin{center}
617: \includegraphics[width=8cm]{PAFig5.ps}
618: \caption{The average $\langle k(1.5)_{puls}\rangle$ (bottom panel) and 
619: $\langle k(2.0)_{puls}\rangle$ (top panel) values for RR$_{ab}$ stars
620: in Oosterhoff type I (OoI, open circles) and Oosterhoff type II
621: (OoII) globular clusters as a function of metal abundance. The filled
622: circles mark OoII clusters with HB type ranging from red to
623: moderately blue, while the filled squares refer to those with very
624: blue HB type. The dashed and the dotted lines in the bottom panel
625: display two different choices in the selection of the calibrating
626: clusters. See text for more details.}
627: \end{center}
628: \end{figure}
629: 
630: 
631: Based on the data plotted in Fig. 3, we derive the average $\langle
632: k(1.5)_{puls}\rangle$ and $\langle k(2.0)_{puls}\rangle$ values
633: listed in Table 4 together with the their standard deviations. 
634: Figures 4 and 5 show these parameters versus the cluster HB type 
635: and the metal content [Fe/H]$_K$, respectively. In the latter figure, 
636: the OoII clusters are also selected according to the HB morphology.  
637: 
638: As a whole, we find that:
639: \begin{itemize}
640: \item among the OoI clusters, which have metal abundances 
641: from [Fe/H]=$-$1.8 to $-$1.1 and HB types redder than +0.75,
642: neither the $\langle k(1.5)_{puls}\rangle$ nor the 
643: $\langle k(2.0)_{puls}\rangle$ parameter show significant variations
644: with [Fe/H] or HB type;
645: \item among the OoII clusters, which have metal abundances ranging 
646: from [Fe/H]=$-$2.4 to $-$1.6 and HB types bluer than +0.44, both
647: $\langle k(1.5)_{puls}\rangle$ and $\langle k(2.0)_{puls}\rangle$
648: present a mild decrease for the clusters with bluer HB morphologies,
649: though they are also the less metal-poor ones of the group;
650: \item for [Fe/H]=$-1.7\pm$0.1, where both OoI and OoII clusters
651: are observed, the former clusters have redder HB types {\it and}
652: larger $\langle k_{puls}\rangle$ values than the latter ones.
653: \end{itemize}
654: 
655: Bearing in mind the above discussion on the $k_{ev}$
656: values listed in Table 2, the Bailey diagram of the RR$_{ab}$ stars
657: observed in Galactic globular clusters agrees with the evolutionary
658: prescriptions and does not support the use of a unique $PA_V$ relation
659: for robust metal abundance determinations. The linear fit over the 
660: entire dataset plotted in the bottom panel of Fig. 5 gives 
661: [Fe/H]$\sim -3.1+7.7k(1.5)_{puls}$. This relation 
662: would predict the RR$_{ab}$ metallicity with the unpleasant average 
663: uncertainty of $\sim$ 0.4 dex. The intrinsic error becomes even 
664: worse if the adopted empirical calibration relies on individual
665: clusters. The use of OoI clusters together with
666: OoII clusters with moderately blue HB morphology yields 
667: [Fe/H]$\sim -3.9+11.1k(1.5)_{puls}$ (see the dashed line in the 
668: bottom panel of Fig. 5), while the use of OoI clusters together 
669: with OoII clusters with very blue HB morphology yields (see 
670: the dotted line) [Fe/H]$\sim -2.7+5.8k(1.5)_{puls}$.
671: Note that the application of the former relation to RR$_{ab}$
672: variables in OoII clusters with very blue HB stellar populations
673: would underestimate by $\sim$ 0.7 dex the metallicity of these
674: variables, while the application of the latter relation to
675: RR$_{ab}$ variables in OoII clusters with moderately blue 
676: HB stellar populations would overestimate by $\sim$ 0.5 dex 
677: the metallicity of the these variables.
678: 
679: 
680: \subsection{NGC 6441 and $\omega$ Cen}
681: 
682: Figure 6 shows the $PA_V$ diagram of $ab$-type variables
683: in NGC~6441 and $\omega$~Cen together with the ridge line
684: of Oo II variables (see Fig. 3). Data plotted in this
685: figure support the evidence that all
686: the RR$_{ab}$ stars in NGC~6441 behave as OoII variables
687: (see also the $\langle k(1.5)_{puls}\rangle$ and $\langle
688: k(2.0)_{puls}\rangle$ values listed in Table 4) suggesting
689: that the RR Lyrae metal abundance is significantly lower than the
690: current cluster value. This is at odds with the recent spectroscopic
691: measurements by Clementini et al. (2005) confirming that the 
692: RR Lyrae stars in NGC~6441 are metal-rich with [Fe/H]$\sim -0.7\pm 0.3$, 
693: on the Zinn \& West (1984) scale (see also Gratton et al. 2007, and 
694: references therein) . 
695: 
696: \begin{figure}
697: \begin{center}
698: \includegraphics[width=8cm]{PAFig6.ps}
699: \caption{Same as in Fig. 3, but for RR$_{ab}$ stars in the two peculiar 
700: clusters NGC~6441 (triangles) and $\omega$~Cen (asterisks).}
701: \end{center}
702: \end{figure}
703: 
704: On the other hand, if the NGC~6441 variables are
705: generated by the very blue HB component, we should expect small
706: $k_{ev}$ values even with large metal abundances. However, even 
707: adopting HB$\sim$ +0.97 the SHB simulations for $Z$=0.003 and $Y\sim$ 0.25 
708: presented in Table 2 suggest $\langle k(1.5)_{ev}\rangle \sim$ 0.15 and
709: $\langle k(2.0)_{ev}\rangle\sim$ 0.14 which are
710: larger than the observed values. Since $k_{ev}$ significantly depends  
711: on the pulsator luminosity, this discrepancy might imply a larger helium 
712: content, as recently suggested by Caloi \& D'Antona (2007) who give 
713: $Y\sim$ 0.37. However, it is worth mentioning that star counts of HB and 
714: red giant branch stars in  NGC~6441 provided by Layden et al. (1999) do 
715: not support the high helium abundance scenario. The new HB simulations 
716: with $Y$=0.30 (Caputo et al. 2007, in preparation) and
717: the modeling of the observed light curves (Clementini \& Marconi 2007,
718: in preparation) will probably shed new lights on the unusual properties
719: of the NGC~6441 RR Lyrae variables.
720: 
721: \begin{figure}
722: \begin{center}
723: \includegraphics[width=8cm]{PAFig7.ps}
724: \caption{The $k(1.5)_{puls}$ (bottom panel) and the $k(2.0)_{puls}$ (top panel) 
725: parameter for RR$_{ab}$ stars in $\omega$~Cen (asterisks) as a function of 
726: the metal abundance. Open circles, filled circles, and filled squares display 
727: Galactic globular clusters and have the same meaning as in Fig. 5.}
728: \end{center}
729: \end{figure}
730: 
731: \begin{figure}
732: \begin{center}
733: \includegraphics[width=8cm]{PAFig8.ps}
734: \caption{Distribution of the $k(1.5)_{puls}$ parameter for RR$_{ab}$ stars 
735: in $\omega$~Cen (bottom panel) together with OoI and OoII Galactic globular clusters.}
736: \end{center}
737: \end{figure}
738: 
739: Regarding the variables in $\omega$~Cen, we plot in
740: Fig. 7 the $k(1.5)_{puls}$ and $k(2.0)_{puls}$ values versus the
741: [Fe/H]$_R$ metal abundance determined by Rey et al. (2000). We note
742: again the quite large dispersion of the metallicity at constant
743: $k_{puls}$, thus stressing once more the misleading use of the
744: Bailey diagram for reliable metal abundance determinations. The
745: comparison with the Galactic globular cluster data presented in Fig.
746: 5, here repeated for the sake of clearness, indicates that the bulk
747: of RR$_{ab}$ stars in $\omega$~Cen behave as the variables in OoII
748: clusters, with a minor fraction sharing the properties of the OoI
749: variables (see also Clement \& Rowe 2000). However, it is worth
750: noticing that, consistently with the $\omega$~Cen HB type, the
751: agreement with the OoII group mainly applies to clusters not very
752: metal-poor and with very blue HB morphology ([Fe/H]$\ge -$2.2 and HB
753: type $\ge$ +0.8, filled squares) since the $k_{puls}$ values typical
754: of the variables observed in clusters with very low metal abundance
755: and moderately blue HB morphology (e.g., M15-like) seem to be
756: absent. The lack of this kind of variables shows up quite clearly
757: from Fig. 8 which shows the frequency distribution of the
758: $k(1.5)_{puls}$ values in $\omega$~Cen (bottom) in comparison with
759: those for OoI and OoII clusters.  Note that this result, which holds
760: also if the new metal abundances by Sollima et al. (2006) are
761: adopted, cannot be explained by invoking a significant difference between the
762: Kraft \& Ivans (2003) and the Rey et al. (2000) metallicity scales. 
763: By using the Gratton et al. (2004) metal
764: abundance [Fe/H]$_G$ determinations for RR Lyrae stars in NGC~1851,
765: NGC~3201, and in NGC~4590 we get [Fe/H]$_G\sim
766: -$0.48+0.65[Fe/H]$_K$, while for $\omega$~Cen variables we derive
767: [Fe/H]$_G\sim -$0.41+0.71[Fe/H]$_R$. Eventually, we find  
768: [Fe/H]$_K\sim$ 0.1+1.1[Fe/H]$_R$.
769: 
770: \begin{figure}
771: \begin{center}
772: \includegraphics[width=8cm]{PAFig9.ps}
773: \caption{
774: RR$_{ab}$ stars in the solar neighborhood with measured [Fe/H] abundances
775: (top panel; Layden 2007, private communication) and visual amplitudes
776: (bottom panel; Nikolov, Buchantsova \& Frolov 1984). The arrows mark the
777: shortest period observed in OoI and OoII Galactic globular clusters. The
778: solid line shows the predicted ridge line for cluster OoII variables
779: (see Fig. 3).
780: }
781: \end{center}
782: \end{figure}
783: 
784: \begin{figure}
785: \begin{center}
786: \includegraphics[width=8cm]{PAFig10.ps}
787: \caption{Difference between the observed and the calculated [Fe/H] 
788: versus period for all the stars in Fig. 9.}
789: \end{center}
790: \end{figure}
791: 
792: \subsection{Field RR$_{ab}$ stars}
793: 
794: Figure 9 shows the $PA_V$ diagram of RR$_{ab}$ stars in the solar 
795: neighborhood for which [Fe/H] (Layden 1995,1998,2007, hereinafter [L07], private 
796: communication) and $A_V$ data (Nikolov, Buchantsova \& Frolov 1984) are 
797: available. These stars are a mixture of OoII and OoI variables, with a 
798: further population at shorter periods than the OoI limit (see also the 
799: analysis of Kinemuchi et al. (2006) of a quite huge sample of field 
800: variables.) and [Fe/H]$\sim -$0.5.   
801: As a first test, we show in Fig. 10 the difference between the measured 
802: metal content [Fe/H]$_L$ and the calculated values [Fe/H]$_A$ from Eq. (1) 
803: and [Fe/H]$_S$ from Eq. (2). In both cases, the average difference is 
804: $\sim \pm$ 0.3 dex, but the discrepancy for individual variables 
805: may be two or three times larger. 
806: 
807: 
808: \begin{figure}
809: \begin{center}
810: \includegraphics[width=8cm]{PAFig11.ps}
811: \caption{Residuals to Eq. (3) for all the fundamental 
812: models from $Z$=0.0001 to $Z$=0.02.}
813: \end{center}
814: \end{figure}
815: 
816: 
817: \begin{figure}
818: \begin{center}
819: \includegraphics[width=8cm]{PAFig12.ps}
820: \caption{Pulsational parameter  $k(1.5)_{puls}$ as a function of metal abundance 
821: [Fe/H]$_L$ for all the field RR$_{ab}$ stars plotted in Fig. 9. The average values 
822: for Galactic globular clusters (symbols as in Fig. 5) and NGC~6441 (triangle) 
823: are also reported.} 
824: \end{center}
825: \end{figure}
826: 
827: To repeat the procedure adopted for the variables in Galactic globular clusters, 
828: we have first verified that Eqs. (3) and (4) hold for fundamental RR Lyrae stars 
829: with $Z >$0.006. As shown in Fig. 11, our pulsation models constructed by adopting 
830: $l/H_p$=1.5 and $Z$=0.01, 0.02 (Bono et al. 1997) suggest that the constant 
831: term in Eq. (3) changes as 0.136+0.06(log$Z$+2.22). On this ground, we determine 
832: the $k(1.5)_{puls}$ values plotted in Fig. 12. 
833: A glance at the data plotted in this figure discloses three relevant points:
834: 
835: \begin{itemize}
836: \item the field stars, at constant $k_{puls}$, show a dispersion in 
837: iron abundance that might reach $\pm$ 0.5 dex.
838: \item  The $k_{puls}$ parameter steadly decreases, on average, when moving 
839: from [Fe/H]$\sim$ 0 to [Fe/H]$\sim -$2, but without any further decrease 
840: for the most metal-poor ([Fe/H]$\sim -$2.4) variables;
841: \item  The behavior of field stars and Galactic globular clusters, in 
842: the metallicity range [Fe/H]=$-$1.0 to $-$2.5, is quite similar. 
843: This finding supports the evidence for similar physical and evolutionary  
844: properties for field and cluster variables within this metallicity range.
845: \item There is a significant difference between the RR$_{ab}$ 
846: variables in NGC~6441 and field variables with similar metal content. 
847:    
848: \end{itemize}
849:   
850: 
851: \section{Exploiting the $PA_V$ diagram}
852: \subsection{Period-Amplitude-Magnitude relation for RR$_{ab}$ stars}
853: The circumstantial empirical and theoretical evidence
854: discussed in the above sections brought into focus the
855: deceptive use of the Bailey diagram of RR$_{ab}$ stars
856: to estimate metal abundances. Therefore we are now facing
857: the question: is there any possibility to exploit its dependence
858: on the evolutionary status of the variables?
859: 
860: It is well known that current updated HB models provide, for fixed
861: helium and metal content, slightly different luminosity values which
862: are due to different assumptions on input physics (see, e.g.,
863: Castellani 2003). On the contrary, the predicted mass of the RR Lyrae
864: stars appears a more safe parameter, with an average variation of
865: $\sim$ 2\% among the various evolutionary prescriptions available
866: in the recent literature. On this ground, it has already been shown in
867: Paper II and Paper III that the coupling between the predicted
868: relations inferred by the pulsation models, where mass and luminosity 
869: are free parameters, and the pulsator average mass
870: suggested by SHB simulations provides a reliable ``pulsational''
871: route to the determination of the absolute magnitude of RR Lyrae
872: stars {\it in globular clusters with known metal content and HB
873: morphology}.
874: 
875: 
876: 
877: \begin{figure}
878: \begin{center}
879: \includegraphics[width=8cm]{PAFig13.ps}
880: \caption{{\it Left panel:} Mean absolute magnitude of RR$_{ab}$ stars
881: in Galactic globular clusters versus $\langle k_{puls}\rangle$ for $l/H_p$=1.5
882: and  by adopting scaled-solar chemical compositions and the solar ratio
883: $(Z/X)_{\odot}$=0.0245. The symbols are the same as in Fig. 5. The solid line
884: is Eq. (5), while the dashed lines has a brighter zero-point (0.05 mag).
885: {\it Right panel:} Same as in the left panel, but with 
886: $l/H_p$=2.0. The solid line is Eq. (6).}
887: \end{center}
888: \end{figure}
889: 
890: 
891: \begin{table*}
892: \begin{center}
893: \caption{Average mass $M$(RR) of RR$_{ab}$ stars in Galactic
894: globular clusters inferred by SHB computations, adopting
895: solar-scaled chemical compositions and $(Z/X)_{\odot}$=0.0245. These
896: masses are used with Eq. (2) and Eq. (3) to estimate the 
897: visual distance moduli $\langle
898: \mu_V\rangle$ and the mean absolute magnitudes
899: $\langle M_V\rangle$ isted in columns (5)-(8).} \label{PLCM}
900: \begin{tabular}{lccccccc}
901: \hline \hline
902: Name&HB&[Fe/H]$_K$&$M$(RR)&$\mu_V^{k(1.5)}$& $\langle M_V^{k(1.5)}\rangle$ &$\mu_V^{k(2.0)}$&$\langle M_V^{k(2.0)}\rangle$\\	
903: \hline\\																	
904: \multicolumn{8}{c}{Oosterhoff	type	II}\\															
905: N4590	&   +0.44& $-$2.43&	0.81&	15.06$\pm$0.09& 0.54$\pm$0.13& 15.21$\pm$0.09&	 0.39$\pm$0.13	\\	
906: N6426	&   +0.58& $-$2.43&	0.80&	17.75$\pm$0.07& 0.42$\pm$0.11& 17.90$\pm$0.06&	 0.27$\pm$0.11	\\	
907: N7078	&   +0.67& $-$2.42&	0.78&	15.23$\pm$0.08& 0.57$\pm$0.10& 15.38$\pm$0.08&	 0.41$\pm$0.10	\\	
908: N5053	&   +0.52& $-$2.41&	0.81&	16.07$\pm$0.10& 0.50$\pm$0.11& 16.23$\pm$0.10&	 0.34$\pm$0.11	\\	
909: N6341	&   +0.91& $-$2.38&	0.72&	14.59$\pm$0.09& 0.48$\pm$0.11& 14.71$\pm$0.08&	 0.36$\pm$0.11	\\	
910: N5466	&   +0.58& $-$2.22&	0.77&	16.06$\pm$0.09& 0.40$\pm$0.11& 16.19$\pm$0.07&	 0.27$\pm$0.11	\\	
911: N5024	&   +0.81& $-$2.02&	0.71&	16.32$\pm$0.07& 0.47$\pm$0.10& 16.45$\pm$0.06&	 0.34$\pm$0.10	\\	
912: N6809	&   +0.87& $-$1.85&	0.69&	13.85$\pm$0.07& 0.47$\pm$0.11& 13.98$\pm$0.05&	 0.35$\pm$0.11	\\	
913: N6333	&   +0.87& $-$1.79&	0.68&	15.72$\pm$0.06& 0.47$\pm$0.10& 15.82$\pm$0.05&	 0.36$\pm$0.10	\\	
914: N7089	&   +0.96& $-$1.56&	0.66&	15.46$\pm$0.09& 0.48$\pm$0.13& 15.59$\pm$0.09&	 0.36$\pm$0.13	\\	
915: \hline\\																	
916: \multicolumn{8}{c}{Oosterhoff	type	I}\\								
917: N4147	&   +0.55& $-$1.79&	0.71&	16.24$\pm$0.11& 0.67$\pm$0.14& 16.35$\pm$0.11&	0.56$\pm$0.14	\\	
918: I4499	&   +0.11& $-$1.60&	0.70&	16.99$\pm$0.08& 0.66$\pm$0.10& 17.13$\pm$0.07&	0.52$\pm$0.10	\\	
919: N6934	&   +0.25& $-$1.59&	0.70&	16.19$\pm$0.12& 0.69$\pm$0.12& 16.32$\pm$0.10&	0.55$\pm$0.12	\\	
920: N3201	&   +0.08& $-$1.56&	0.70&	14.08$\pm$0.13& 0.67$\pm$0.13& 14.21$\pm$0.12&	0.54$\pm$0.12	\\	
921: N5272	&   +0.08& $-$1.50&	0.69&	15.00$\pm$0.08& 0.63$\pm$0.10& 15.12$\pm$0.07&	0.51$\pm$0.10	\\	
922: N7006	& $-$0.28& $-$1.48&	0.70&	18.11$\pm$0.14& 0.69$\pm$0.15& 18.24$\pm$0.14&	0.55$\pm$0.15	\\	
923: N6715	&   +0.75& $-$1.47&	0.67&	17.38$\pm$0.08& 0.71$\pm$0.11& 17.52$\pm$0.09&	0.57$\pm$0.11	\\	
924: N6981	&   +0.14& $-$1.42&	0.68&	16.10$\pm$0.11& 0.76$\pm$0.15& 16.24$\pm$0.11&	0.62$\pm$0.15	\\	
925: N6229	&   +0.24& $-$1.41&	0.68&	17.35$\pm$0.10& 0.70$\pm$0.13& 17.47$\pm$0.10&	0.58$\pm$0.13	\\	
926: N6864	& $-$0.07& $-$1.29&	0.67&	17.02$\pm$0.15& 0.66$\pm$0.16& 17.15$\pm$0.18&	0.52$\pm$0.16	\\	
927: N5904	&   +0.31& $-$1.26&	0.66&	14.38$\pm$0.09& 0.69$\pm$0.13& 14.50$\pm$0.08&	0.57$\pm$0.13	\\	
928: N1851	& $-$0.36& $-$1.19&	0.66&	15.40$\pm$0.12& 0.65$\pm$0.12& 15.52$\pm$0.11&	0.53$\pm$0.12	\\	
929: N6121	& $-$0.06& $-$1.15&	0.66&	12.73$\pm$0.06& 0.62$\pm$0.10& 12.82$\pm$0.05&	0.53$\pm$0.10	\\	
930: N6362	& $-$0.58& $-$1.15&	0.66&	14.56$\pm$0.06& 0.71$\pm$0.10& 14.68$\pm$0.05&	0.58$\pm$0.10	\\	
931: N6723	& $-$0.08& $-$1.11&	0.65&	14.68$\pm$0.13& 0.69$\pm$0.16& 14.80$\pm$0.13&	0.57$\pm$0.16	\\	
932: N6171	& $-$0.73& $-$1.10&	0.65&	14.91$\pm$0.14& 0.76$\pm$0.15& 15.04$\pm$0.13&	0.63$\pm$0.15	\\	
933: \hline
934: \end{tabular}
935: \end{center}
936: \end{table*}
937: 
938: 
939: Then, we estimate the average mass of RR Lyrae stars in the selected
940: globular clusters using the SHBs listed in Table 2, under the
941: hypothesis of scaled-solar chemical compositions. In order to transform
942: the measured [Fe/H] value into the global metallicity $Z$, we adopt the
943: solar value $(Z/X)_{\odot}$=0.0245 (Grevesse \& Noels 1993) and $f$=1
944: in the relation log$Z$=[Fe/H]$-$1.73+log(0.638$f$+0.362), 
945: where $f$ is the enhancement factor of $\alpha$-elements with respect 
946: to iron (Salaris et al. 1993). The predicted mass values, which have 
947: an intrinsic uncertainty of $\sim$ 2\%, are
948: listed in column (4) of Table 5 and, once inserted into Eqs. (3) and
949: (4), they provide the visual distance moduli $\mu_V^{k(1.5)}$ and
950: $\mu_V^{k(2.0)}$ and the RR$_{ab}$ mean absolute magnitudes
951: $\langle M_V^{k(1.5)}\rangle$ and $\langle M_V^{k(2.0}\rangle$
952: given in columns (5)-(8) in the same Table.
953: 
954: Data plotted in Fig. 13, where the error bars are not drawn for 
955: the sake of clearness, show the direct consequence of the
956: HB morphology-metallicity progression disclosed in Fig. 2:  
957: the RR$_{ab}$ stars
958: observed in OoII clusters with HB type bluer than +0.8 (filled
959: squares) and in OoI clusters (open circles) obey a common 
960: relations between the absolute magnitude and the $k_{puls}$ parameter, 
961: as given by 
962: 
963: $$\langle M_V^{k(1.5)}\rangle=0.12(\pm0.10)+2.65(\pm0.07)\langle k(1.5)_{puls}\rangle\eqno(5)$$
964: and
965: $$\langle M_V^{k(2.0)}\rangle=0.14(\pm0.10)+2.67(\pm0.07)\langle k(2.0)_{puls}\rangle,\eqno(6)$$
966: \noindent
967: while for the RR Lyrae variables in OoII clusters with moderately
968: blue HB morphology (filled circles) the zero-points of the above 
969: relations (dashed lines) are moderately brighter by $\sim$ 0.05 mag.
970: 
971: \begin{table*}
972: \begin{center}
973: \caption{Selected results of SHB simulations with $Z\ge$ 0.002. 
974: For each given metal abundance, we list the mean mass of HB stars 
975: producing very blue and very red HB types and 
976: the corresponding mean mass of RR Lyrae stars. 
977: The last column gives the average mass (logarithm) 
978: of the predicted RR Lyrae stars for the whole range 
979: from HB=+0.95 to HB=$-$0.95. All the mass values 
980: hold for old stellar structures (see text).}\label{PLCM}
981: \begin{tabular}{lcccccc}
982: \hline \hline
983: 
984: $Z$&[Fe/H]&$\langle M$(HB)$\rangle$&$\langle M$(RR)$\rangle$&$\langle M$(HB)$\rangle$&
985: $\langle M$(RR)$\rangle$&$\langle$log$M$(RR)$\rangle$\\
986:  &  & HB=+0.95 & HB=+0.95& HB=$-$0.95 & HB=$-$0.95 & \\ 
987: \hline																					
988: 0.002	&$-$0.96& 0.58&0.62$\pm$0.02 & 0.69&0.65$\pm$0.03&$-$0.200$\pm$0.024\\
989: 0.003	&$-$0.79& 0.56&0.60$\pm$0.02 & 0.66&0.62$\pm$0.03&$-$0.217$\pm$0.021\\
990: 0.004	&$-$0.66& 0.55&0.59$\pm$0.02 & 0.65&0.61$\pm$0.02&$-$0.225$\pm$0.013\\
991: 0.006	&$-$0.49& 0.54&0.58$\pm$0.02 & 0.64&0.59$\pm$0.02&$-$0.234$\pm$0.010\\
992: 0.008	&$-$0.37& 0.53&0.56$\pm$0.01 & 0.63&0.58$\pm$0.01&$-$0.245$\pm$0.008\\
993: 0.01	&$-$0.27& 0.52&0.56$\pm$0.01 & 0.62&0.57$\pm$0.01&$-$0.249$\pm$0.007\\
994: 0.02	&$+$0.03& 0.51&0.54$\pm$0.01 & 0.58&0.55$\pm$0.01&$-$0.264$\pm$0.005\\
995: \hline
996: \end{tabular}
997: \end{center}
998: \end{table*}
999: 
1000: Regarding the field RR Lyrae stars, we do not know the morphology of the 
1001: parent HB star distribution, but luckily enough we can take benefit by the 
1002: well-known evidence that, for a fixed age, the predicted 
1003: mass range of HB stars populating the RR Lyrae instability strip decreases with 
1004: increasing the metal content. This is shown in Table 6, where the data  
1005: already presented in Table 2 are implemented by new SHB results at $Y$=0.25 
1006: (Caputo et al. 2007, in preparation) based on Pietrinferni et al. (2004, 2006) 
1007: HB models produced by RGB progenitor having an age of about 13 Gyr. 
1008: Adopting [Fe/H]=1.73+log$Z$, a linear regression through 
1009: the average values listed in the last column in this Table gives 
1010: 
1011: $$\langle \log M(RR)\rangle=-0.265-0.063[Fe/H],\eqno(7)$$ 
1012: \noindent
1013: with the intrinsic uncertainty given by 
1014: $\epsilon (\langle$log$M$(RR)$\rangle)=0.005-0.02$[Fe/H]. 
1015: According to Eq. (3) and bearing in mind that with larger 
1016: metal content than $Z$=0.006 the constant term varies as 
1017: 0.136+0.06(log$Z$+2.22), we eventually derive 
1018: that the absolute magnitude of RR$_{ab}$ stars 
1019: is given by
1020: $$M_V^{k(1.5)}=0.56-0.49A_V-2.60\log P+0.05[Fe/H]\eqno(8)$$ 
1021: with $-1.0\le$[Fe/H]$\le -$0.5 and by 
1022: $$M_V^{k(1.5)}=0.64-0.49A_V-2.60\log P+0.20[Fe/H]\eqno(9)$$
1023: with $-0.5\le$[Fe/H]$\le$0, 
1024: with the magnitude total uncertainty varying as 
1025: $\epsilon (M_V)$=0.07$-$0.02[Fe/H].  
1026: 
1027: 
1028: 
1029: \subsection{$M_V$(RR)-[Fe/H] relation}
1030: 
1031: Many calibrations of the RR Lyrae luminosity as 
1032: function of the metal content have been published in the 
1033: relevant literature (e.g., see Cacciari \& Clementini 2003 
1034: for a summary) and the most recent ones suggest that the $M_V$(RR)-[Fe/H]  
1035: is nonlinear for metal abundances ranging from [Fe/H]$\sim -$0.5 to 
1036: $-$2.4 (see Sandage 2006; Sandage \& Tammann 2006, and 
1037: references therein).
1038: 
1039: \begin{figure}
1040: \begin{center}
1041: \includegraphics[width=8cm]{PAFig14.ps}
1042: \caption{Mean absolute visual magnitudes $\langle M_V^{k(1.5)}\rangle$ 
1043: (bottom panel) and $\langle M_V^{k(2.0}\rangle$ (top panel) of 
1044: RR$_{ab}$ stars in Galactic globular clusters versus [Fe/H]$_K$, 
1045: according to scaled-solar chemical compositions and a solar ratio 
1046: $(Z/X)_{\odot}$=0.0245.
1047: The symbols are the same as in Fig. 5. The solid line shows the linear
1048: regression through the entire sample and has a slope of 0.20 mag 
1049: dex$^{-1}$, while the dashed lines the 1$\sigma$ uncertainty. See text 
1050: for more details.}
1051: \end{center}
1052: \end{figure}
1053: 
1054:              
1055: \begin{figure}
1056: \begin{center}
1057: \includegraphics[width=8cm]{PAFig15.ps}
1058: \caption{Absolute visual magnitudes $M_V^{k(1.5)}$ versus [Fe/H]$_L$ for 
1059: field RR$_{ab}$ stars more metal-rich than [Fe/H]$_L=-$1.0 in comparison with 
1060: Galactic globular cluster variables. Symbols and lines are the same 
1061: as in the bottom panel of Fig. 14.}
1062: \end{center}
1063: \end{figure}
1064: 
1065: \begin{figure}
1066: \begin{center}
1067: \includegraphics[width=8cm]{PAFig16.ps}
1068: \caption{Same as Fig. 14, but with cluster and field data fitted with a 
1069: quadratic relation.} 
1070: \end{center}
1071: \end{figure}
1072: 
1073: 
1074: For our selected sample of Galactic globular clusters, 
1075: Fig. 14 displays the $PA_V$-based mean absolute magnitude of 
1076: RR$_{ab}$ stars (columns (6) and (8) in Table 5)   
1077: versus the
1078: cluster metallicity [Fe/H]$_K$. The linear regression over the
1079: entire sample (solid line) yields a slope of 0.20$\pm$0.06 mag
1080: dex$^{-1}$, regardless of the adopted mixing-length parameter, 
1081: while the zero-point of the relation changes 
1082: from 0.94$\pm$0.10 mag to 0.82$\pm$0.10 
1083: mag with $l/H_p$=1.5 and 2.0, respectively. However, the data given 
1084: in Table 5 clearly shows that at constant metal content the RR $_{ab}$ 
1085: luminosity depends on the cluster HB type: e.g., the variables in 
1086: NGC~7089 (HB=+0.96) are $\sim$ 0.2 mag brighter than those in 
1087: IC~4499, NGC~6934 and NGC~3201, which show a HB type from HB=+0.08 to 
1088: +0.25, 
1089: yet all these clusters have nearly the same metallicity. 
1090: This result is not a novelty 
1091: since theoretical (see Paper IV and references therein) and 
1092: observational studies (Lee \& Carney 1999; Clement \& Shelton 1999; 
1093: Alves, Bond \& Onken 2001) have already suggested that the RR Lyrae absolute 
1094: magnitude depends on the cluster HB morphology and metal content. 
1095: 
1096: The comparison with field RR$_{ab}$ stars  
1097: with [Fe/H]$\ge -$1.0 is shown in Fig. 15, where the absolute magnitudes 
1098: of the field variables are 
1099: determined by using Eqs. (8) and (9). It is quite clear that the linear 
1100: $M_V$(RR)-[Fe/H] relation provided by Galactic globular clusters is not 
1101: suitable to the most metal-rich ([Fe/H]$\ge -$0.7) field variables. Conversely, 
1102: we show in Fig. 16 that over the whole metallicity range of 
1103: [Fe/H]=$-$2.5 to $\sim$ 0 {\it all} the variables are nicely fitted 
1104: by the quadratic relation 
1105: $$M_V^{k(1.5)}=1.19(\pm0.10)+0.50[Fe/H]+0.09[Fe/H]^2\eqno(10)$$
1106:    
1107:  
1108: \begin{figure}
1109: \begin{center}
1110: \includegraphics[width=8cm]{PAFig17.ps}
1111: \caption{Unreddened visual magnitude $V_0$ of RR$_{ab}$ stars
1112: in $\omega$~Cen plotted versus $k(1.5)_{puls}$ and $k(2.0)_{puls}$.
1113: The solid line plotted in the left panel refers to Eq. (5) and accounts
1114: for an intrinsic distance modulus $\mu_0$=13.68 mag. The solid line
1115: plotted in the right panel refers to Eq. (6) and accounts for 
1116: $\mu_0$=13.80 mag.}
1117: \end{center}
1118: \end{figure}
1119: 
1120: 
1121: \begin{figure}
1122: \begin{center}
1123: \includegraphics[width=8cm]{PAFig18.ps}
1124: \caption{Comparison between the apparent distance moduli of RR$_c$
1125: variables based on the FOBE method and the RR$_{ab}$ distance moduli based
1126: on the $PA_V$ relation for the two adopted values of the mixing-length
1127: parameter. The data refer to scaled-solar chemical compositions and
1128: to the solar ratio $(Z/X)_{\odot}$=0.0245.}
1129: \end{center}
1130: \end{figure}
1131: 
1132: \subsection{Which value of the mixing length parameter?}
1133: 
1134: We have shown that the value of the mixing length parameter 
1135: influences the zero-point of the Period-Amplitude-Magnitude 
1136: relation [Eqs. (5) and (6)] and consequently the 
1137: $M_V$(RR)-[Fe/H] calibration (see Fig. 14).
1138:     
1139: In order to constrain the most appropriate value of the
1140: mixing-length parameter for globular cluster RR$_{ab}$ 
1141: stars, we show in Fig. 17 the $V_0$ magnitudes of
1142: RR$_{ab}$ stars in $\omega$~Cen (Piersimoni et al. 2007, in
1143: preparation) versus the observed $k(1.5)_{puls}$ and $k(2.0)_{puls}$
1144: parameters. By using Eqs. (5) and (6), we find a cluster intrinsic
1145: distance modulus of $\mu_0$=13.68$\pm$0.10 mag and 13.80$\pm$0.10
1146: mag, respectively. Unfortunately, both these estimates agree within
1147: 1$\sigma$ with the distance $\mu_0$=13.75$\pm0.04$ mag based on the
1148: eclipsing binary OGLEGC-17 (Thompson et al. 2001; Kaluzny et al.
1149: 2002). Therefore, we decided to consider a further pulsational
1150: method, namely the FOBE method (Caputo 1997; 
1151: Caputo et al. 2000) which provides the cluster apparent distance modulus by matching the
1152: observed distribution of the RR$_c$ variables in the $V$-log$P$
1153: plane with the predicted blue (hot) edge of 
1154: the first-overtone instability region. 
1155: The reason of this choice deals with the fact that the FOBE-based
1156: distance modulus $\mu_V$(FOBE) is expected to decrease with
1157: increasing the mixing-length parameter (see Eq. (2) in Paper III),
1158: at variance with the apparent distance $\mu_V(PA_V)$ inferred from
1159: the $PA_V$ relation. 
1160: 
1161: Figure 18 shows the comparison between the two
1162: sets of distance moduli. We find that for  $l/H_p$=1.5 the  
1163: $\mu_V$(FOBE) distances are on average larger than those 
1164: based on $\mu_V(PA_V)$, whereas the opposite applies for 
1165: $l/H_p$=2.0. This evidence indicates that we can adopt
1166: $l/H_p\sim$ 1.7, although the best solution discussed in 
1167: Paper III is probably given by a mixing-length parameter 
1168: that slightly increases  when moving from the blue to the 
1169: red side of the instability strip, 
1170: i.e., from $c$- to $ab$-type variables. In this context, it is worth 
1171: noting that the very recent investigation by Ferraro et al. (2006) 
1172: on red giant stars in globular clusters supports a value $l/H_p$=2.0 
1173: for these cool stars and a negligible dependence on metallicity.
1174: 
1175: Finally, we note that the use of different scalings between the iron
1176: abundance and the global metallicity ($Z$-[Fe/H]) has marginal
1177: effects on the RR$_{ab}$ absolute magnitudes listed in Table 5. As a
1178: matter of fact, by adopting $f$=3 ([$\alpha$/Fe]$\sim$ 0.5) with
1179: $(Z/X)_{\odot}$=0.0245 yields, at fixed [Fe/H], smaller masses by
1180: $\sim$ 6\%, and in turn fainter absolute magnitudes by $\sim$ 0.03
1181: mag, when compared with the values listed in Table 5. The dependence
1182: on the adopted solar ratio is even smaller, and indeed by adopting
1183: $(Z/X)_{\odot}$=0.0165 (Asplund et al. 2004), the mass and magnitude
1184: variations for $f$=1 are only $\sim$ +3\% and $-$0.01 mag, while for
1185: $f$=3 we estimate $\sim -$3\% and $\sim$+0.01 mag, respectively.
1186: 
1187: 
1188: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1189: \section{Conclusions and final remarks}
1190: 
1191: Hydrodynamical models of fundamental RR Lyrae stars computed by adopting 
1192: metal content from $Z$=0.0001 to 0.006 and   
1193: two different values of the mixing-length parameter ($l/H_p$=1.5 and 2.0) 
1194: provide detailed predictions concerning the pulsation parameters connecting 
1195: the period with the $V$-band amplitude. In order to investigate the 
1196: distribution of cluster RR$_{ab}$ stars in the $PA_V$ diagram, we consider 
1197: the following pulsational parameters  
1198: 
1199: $$k(1.5)_{puls}=0.13-\log P_{ab}-0.189A_V$$
1200: and 
1201: $$k(2.0)_{puls}=0.03-\log P_{ab}-0.142A_V,$$
1202: \noindent 
1203: and we find that the average values $\langle k(1.5)_{puls}\rangle$ 
1204: and $\langle k(2.0)_{puls}\rangle$ do not show significant changes 
1205: among OoI clusters with metal abundances ranging from [Fe/H]=$-$1.8 
1206: to $-$1.1 and intermediate to red HB types. 
1207: On the other hand, the same parameters present a mild decrease among 
1208: the OoII clusters with very blue HB types, even if these clusters are 
1209: also the less metal-poor of the group. 
1210: Moreover, in the relatively narrow metallicity range [Fe/H]=$-1.7\pm$0.1, 
1211: where both OoI and OoII clusters are observed, the former clusters have 
1212: redder HB types {\it and} larger $\langle k_{puls}\rangle$ values than 
1213: the latter ones.
1214: 
1215: A linear fit over the entire sample of globular clusters yields a 
1216: [Fe/H]-$k_{puls}$ relation with a large intrinsic dispersion of  
1217: $\approx 0.4$ dex. The dispersion becomes even larger if the 
1218: calibration relies on selected clusters: if we adopt a mix  
1219: of OoI and OoII clusters with moderately blue HB morphology, then 
1220: the metal abundance of RR$_{ab}$ in clusters characterized by 
1221: a very blue HB morphology will be underestimated by $\approx 0.7$ dex, whereas 
1222: if we adopt a mix of OoI and OoII clusters with 
1223: very blue HB morphologies the metallicity of RR$_{ab}$ in clusters 
1224: characterized by a moderately blue HB morphology will be overestimated 
1225: by $\approx 0.5$ dex. This circumstantial evidence casts several doubts 
1226: on the use of the $PA_V$ distribution of RR$_{ab}$ variables as a 
1227: diagnostic of the metal abundance. 
1228: This finding is independently supported by the sizable samples of 
1229: RR$_{ab}$ variables in $\omega$ Cen and and in the solar neighborhood 
1230: for which are available metal abundance and $V-$band amplitudes. 
1231: The distribution of these objects in the $PA_V$ plane shows that 
1232: the spread in metal abundance, at constant $k_{puls}$, is of the order 
1233: of 0.5 dex.
1234: 
1235: By coupling pulsation models and synthetic horizontal branch simulations, 
1236: we show that 
1237: the pulsation parameter $k_{puls}$ is a reliable distance indicator for 
1238: globular clusters with known metal content and HB type. We wish to mention 
1239: that the occurrence of a 
1240: Period-Luminosity-Amplitude relation for RR$_{ab}$ stars was originally 
1241: suggested by Sandage (1981a,b) and that the present use of detailed 
1242: evolutionary and pulsational predictions provides the opportunity to 
1243: constrain the dependence on the globular cluster HB type and metal 
1244: content. On this ground, we 
1245: find that the RR$_{ab}$ in OoI clusters and in OoII clusters with HB types
1246: bluer than +0.8 do obey to well defined $M_V$-$k_{puls}$ relations. 
1247: In particular, we find 
1248: $$\langle M_V^{k(1.5)}\rangle=0.12(\pm0.09)+2.65(\pm0.07)\langle k(1.5)_{puls}\rangle$$
1249: and
1250: $$\langle M_V^{k(2.0)}\rangle=0.14(\pm0.09)+2.67(\pm0.07)\langle k(2.0)_{puls}\rangle,$$
1251: \noindent
1252: while the RR$_{ab}$ in OoII clusters with moderately
1253: blue HB morphology present, at fixed $k_{puls}$, a zero-point that is 
1254: $\sim$ 0.05 mag brighter. 
1255: Regarding the variables in the solar neighborhood, additional 
1256: pulsation models with $l/H_p$=1.5 and 
1257: $Z>$0.006 together with the predicted metallicity dependence of the mass of 
1258: metal-rich ([Fe/H]$\ge-$1.0) RR Lyrae stars    
1259: $$\langle \log M(RR)\rangle=-0.265-0.063[Fe/H]$$
1260: \noindent yield  
1261: $$M_V^{k(1.5)}=0.56-0.49A_V-2.60\log P+0.05[Fe/H]$$ 
1262: with $-1.0\le$[Fe/H]$\le -$0.5 and  
1263: $$M_V^{k(1.5)}=0.64-0.49A_V-2.60\log P+0.20[Fe/H]$$
1264: with $-0.5\le$[Fe/H]$\le$0.  
1265:    
1266: Once the $PA_V$-based absolute magnitude $M_V$(RR) is derived, the 
1267: resulting correlation with the globular cluster metallicity [Fe/H]$_K$ 
1268: has a slope of 0.20$\pm$0.06 mag dex$^{-1}$, 
1269: regardless of the adopted mixing-length parameter, while  
1270: the zero-point changes from 0.94$\pm$0.10 to 0.82$\pm$0.10 mag 
1271: when using pulsation models constructed by assuming a mixing length 
1272: parameter $l/H_p$=1.5 and $l/H_p$=2.0, respectively. However, the inclusion of 
1273: the metal-rich field variables yields that over the total metallicity range 
1274: from [Fe/H]=$-$2.5 to $\sim$ the relation becomes quadratic as 
1275: $$M_V^{k(1.5)}=1.19(\pm0.10)+0.50[Fe/H]+0.09[Fe/H]^2$$
1276: \noindent 
1277: in agreement with the results presented by by 
1278: Bono et al. (2003) and Sandage (2006).  
1279: 
1280: Finally, in order to constrain the most appropriate value 
1281: of the mixing-length parameter, we adopt the RR$_{ab}$ stars 
1282: in $\omega$~Cen, but the $PA_V$-based true distance moduli, 
1283: $\mu_0$=13.68$\pm$0.09 mag for $l/H_p$=1.5 and 13.80$\pm$0.09 mag 
1284: for $l/H_p$=2.0, agree within 1$\sigma$ with the distance 
1285: $\mu_0$=13.75$\pm0.04$ mag based on the eclipsing binary 
1286: OGLEGC-17 (Thompson et al. 2001; Kaluzny et al.  2002). 
1287: Therefore, we adopt the FOBE method that provides cluster 
1288: apparent distance moduli which decrease with increasing the 
1289: mixing-length parameter. Eventually, we find that distance 
1290: estimates based on the $PA_V$ and on the FOBE method 
1291: agree for an intermediate mixing-length parameter, namely 
1292: $l/H_p\sim$ 1.7. 
1293: 
1294:  
1295: \begin{acknowledgements}
1296: It is a real pleasure to thank H. Smith for several suggestions 
1297: and a detailed reading of an early draft of this paper. We also 
1298: warmly thank A. Layden for his valuable data on field RR Lyrae 
1299: stars and his helpful comments.  
1300: We also acknowledge the anonymous referee for his/her positive 
1301: comments and suggestions that helped us to improve the readability 
1302: of the manuscript. 
1303: This work was partially supported by PRIN-INAF2005 (P.I.: A. Buzzoni),
1304: "Galactic Stellar Populations", by PRIN-INAF2004 (P.I.: M. Bellazzini),
1305: "A hierarchical merging tale told by stars: motions, ages and chemical
1306: compositions within structures and substructures of the Milky Way".
1307: \end{acknowledgements}
1308: 
1309: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1310: %\begin{references}
1311: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1312: %\pagebreak 
1313: \begin{thebibliography}{}
1314: 
1315: \bibitem{} Alcock, C., et al. 2000, AJ, 119, 2194  
1316: \bibitem{} Alves, D. R., Bond, H. E., \& Onken, C.  2001, AJ, 121, 318
1317: \bibitem{} Asplund, M., Grevesse, N., Sauval, A.J., Allende Prieto, C., \&
1318:     Kiselman, D., 2004, A\&A, 417, 751A
1319: \bibitem{} Bono, G., Caputo, F., Cassisi, S., Incerpi, R., \& Marconi, M. 1997, ApJ, 483, 811 
1320: \bibitem{} Bono, G., Caputo, F., Castellani, V., Marconi, M., Storm, J., \& Degl'Innocenti, S. 2003, MNRAS, 344, 1097 
1321: \bibitem{} Brown, T. M., Ferguson, H. C., Smith, E., Kimble, R. A.,
1322: Sweigart, A. V., Renzini, A., \& Rich, R. M. 2004, AJ, 127, 2738
1323: \bibitem{} Cacciari, C., \& Clementini, G. 2003, in  Stellar Candles for the Extragalactic 
1324: Distance Scale, ed.  D. Alloin \& W. Gieren, (Berlin: Springer-Verlag), LNP,  635, 105 
1325: \bibitem{} Caloi, V., \& D'Antona, F. 2007, A\&A, 463, 949
1326: \bibitem{} Caputo, F. 1997, MNRAS, 284, 994
1327: \bibitem{} Caputo, F., Castellani, V., Marconi, M., Ripepi, V.  2000, MNRAS, 316, 819
1328: \bibitem{} Cassisi, S., Castellani, M., Caputo, F. \& Castellani, V. 2004, A\&A, 
1329: 426, 641 [Paper IV]
1330: \bibitem{} Castellani, V. 2003, in New Horizons in Globular Cluster Astronomy, 
1331: ed. G. Piotto, G. Meylan, S.G. Djorgovski, \& M. Riello (San Francisco: ASP), 159
1332: \bibitem{} Castelli, F., Gratton, R. G., \& Kurucz, R. L., 1997a, A\&A, 318, 841
1333: \bibitem{} Castelli, F., Gratton, R. G., \& Kurucz, R. L., 1997b, A\&A, 324, 432
1334: \bibitem{} Catelan, M. 2005, in Resolved Stellar Populations, ed. D. Valls-Gabaud 
1335: \& M. Chavez (San Francisco, ASP), 123 
1336: \bibitem{} Catelan, M., Pritzl, B. J. \& Smith, H. A. 2004, ApJS, 154, 633
1337: \bibitem{} Clementini, G., Ripepi, V., Bragaglia, A., Fiorenzano, A. F. Martinez, Held, E. V., 
1338: \& Gratton, R. G. 2005, MNRAS, 363, 734
1339: \bibitem{} Ferraro, F. R., Valenti, E., Straniero, O., Origlia, L. 2006, ApJ, 642, 225
1340: \bibitem{} Clement, C. M., \& Rowe, J. 2000, AJ, 120, 2579
1341: \bibitem{} Clement, C. M., \& Shelton, I.  1999, ApJ, 515, L85
1342: \bibitem{} Demarque, P., Zinn, R., Lee, Y.-W., \& Yi, S.  2000, A J, 119, 1398
1343: \bibitem{} Di Criscienzo, M., Caputo, F., Marconi, M., \& Musella, I. 2006, MNRAS, 365, 1357
1344: \bibitem{} Di Criscienzo, M., Marconi, M.. \& Caputo, F., 2004, ApJ, 612, 1092 [Paper III]
1345: \bibitem{} Gratton, R. G., Bragaglia, A., Clementini, G., Carretta, E., Di Fabrizio, L., Maio, M., Taribello, E. 2004, A\&A, 421, 937
1346: \bibitem{} Gratton, R. G., Lucatello, S., Bragaglia, A.  et al. 2007, A\&A, 464, 953 
1347: \bibitem{} Grevesse, N., \& Noels, A. 1993, Physica Scripta, T47, 133
1348: \bibitem{} Harris, W. E. 1996, AJ, 112, 1487 
1349: \bibitem{} Kaluzny, J., Thompson, I., Krzeminski, W., Olech, A.,
1350: Pych, W., \& Mochejska, B. 2002, in $\omega$Cen,  a Unique Window into Astrophysics, ed.
1351: F. van Leeuwen, J.D. Hughes, G. Piotto (San Francisco: ASP), 155
1352: \bibitem{} Kinemuchi, K., Smith, H. A., Wozniak, P. R., \& McKay, T. A. 2006, AJ, 132, 1202
1353: \bibitem{} Kraft, R. P., \& Ivans, I. I., 2003, PASP, 115, 143
1354: \bibitem{} Layden, A. C. 1995, AJ, 110, 2312 
1355: \bibitem{} Layden, A. C. 1998, AJ, 115, 193
1356: \bibitem{} Layden, A. C., Ritter, L. A., Welch, D. L., \& Webb, T. M. A. 1999, AJ, 117, 1313 
1357: \bibitem{} Lee, Y.-W. 1990, ApJ, 363, 159
1358: \bibitem{} Lee, J.-W., Carney, B. W. 1999, AJ, 118, 1373
1359: \bibitem{} Marconi, M., Caputo, F., Di Criscienzo, M., \& Castellani, M. 2003, ApJ, 596, 299 [Paper II]
1360: \bibitem{} Nikolov, N., Buchantsova, N., \& Frolov, M. 1984, The 
1361: Mean Light and Color (B-V and U-B) of 210 Field RR Lyrae Type Stars
1362: (Sofia: Astron. Council USSR Acad. Sci.)   
1363: \bibitem{} Pietrinferni, A., Cassisi, S., Salaris, M., Castelli, F. 2004, ApJ, 612, 168
1364: \bibitem{} Pietrinferni, A., Cassisi, S., Salaris, M., Castelli, F. 2006, ApJ, 642, 797
1365: \bibitem{} Preston, G. W. 1959, ApJ, 130, 507
1366: \bibitem{} Pritzl, B. J., Smith, H. A., Catelan, M., \& Sweigart, A. V., 2001, AJ, 122, 2600 
1367: \bibitem{} Rey, S.-C., Lee, Y.-W., Joo, J.-M., Walker, A. R., \&  Baird, S. 2000, AJ, 119, 1824
1368: \bibitem{} Rich, R. M., et al. 1997, ApJ, 484, L25
1369: \bibitem{} Salaris, M., Chieffi, A., \& Straniero, O. 1993, \apj, 414, 580
1370: \bibitem{} Sandage, A. 1981a, ApJ, 244, L23 
1371: \bibitem{} Sandage, A. 1981b, ApJ, 248, 161 
1372: \bibitem{} Sandage, A. 2004, AJ, 128, 858	
1373: \bibitem{} Sandage, A. 2006, AJ, 131, 1750 
1374: \bibitem{} Sandage, A., \& Tammann, G. A. 2006, ARA\&A, 44, 93   
1375: \bibitem{} Sollima, A., Borissova, J., Catelan, M., Smith, H. A., Minniti, D., Cacciari, C., 
1376: \& Ferraro, F. R. 2006, ApJ, 640, L43
1377: \bibitem{} Stellingwerf, R. F. 1984, ApJ, 284, 712
1378: \bibitem{} Thompson, I. B., Kaluzny, J., Pych, W., et al. 2001, AJ, 121, 3089
1379: \bibitem{} van Albada, T. S., \& Baker, N. 1971, ApJ, 169, 311
1380: \bibitem{} van Albada, T. S., \& Baker, N. 1973, ApJ, 185, 477
1381: \bibitem{} Zinn, R., \& West, M. J. 1984, ApJS, 55, 45
1382: %\bibitem{}
1383: %\bibitem{}
1384: 
1385: \end{thebibliography}
1386: 
1387: 
1388: \end{document}
1389: