1: %\documentclass{emulateapj}

2: \documentclass[preprint,11pt]{aastex}

3: %\usepackage{emulateapj5}

4: %\usepackage{apjfonts}

5: %\usepackage[dvips]{epsfig}

6: 

7: \newcommand{\kms}{~km~s$^{-1}$} 

8: \newcommand{\teff}{$T_{\rm eff}$}

9: \newcommand{\logg}{$\log g$}

10: \newcommand{\loggf}{$\log gf$}

11: \newcommand{\vt}{$v_{\rm micro}$}

12: \newcommand{\loge}{$\log \epsilon$}

13: \newcommand{\ebv}{$E(B-V)$}

14: \newcommand{\CS}{CS~29526--110} 

15: \newcommand{\LP}{LP~706--7} 

16: \newcommand{\obja}{SDSS 0036--10} %{s2\_0654--011}

17: \newcommand{\objb}{SDSS 2047+00} %{s2\_0982--480}

18: \newcommand{\objc}{SDSS 0126+06} %{seg\_2314--090}

19: \newcommand{\objd}{SDSS 0817+26} %{s2\_1266--432}

20: \newcommand{\obje}{SDSS 0924+40} %{s2\_0938--608}

21: \newcommand{\objf}{SDSS 1707+58} %{s2\_0353--195}

22: \shorttitle{Carbon-Enhanced Metal-Poor Stars. III}

23: \shortauthors{Aoki et al.}

24: 

25: \begin{document}

26: 

27: \title{Carbon-Enhanced Metal-Poor Stars. III. Main-Sequence Turn-Off

28:   Stars from the SDSS/SEGUE Sample\altaffilmark{1}}

29: 

30: \author{Wako Aoki\altaffilmark{2,3}, Timothy C. Beers\altaffilmark{4},

31: Thirupathi Sivarani\altaffilmark{4}, Brian Marsteller\altaffilmark{4,5}, Young Sun

32: Lee\altaffilmark{4}, Satoshi Honda\altaffilmark{2,6}, John E. Norris\altaffilmark{7}, Sean

33: G. Ryan\altaffilmark{8}, Daniela Carollo\altaffilmark{9,10}}

34: 

35: \altaffiltext {1}{Based on data collected at the Subaru Telescope,

36: which is operated by the National Astronomical Observatory of Japan.}

37: 

38: \altaffiltext{2}{National Astronomical Observatory, Mitaka, Tokyo,

39: 181-8588 Japan; email: aoki.wako@nao.ac.jp}

40: \altaffiltext{3}{Department of Astronomical Science, The Graduate

41:   University of Advansed Stidies, Mitaka, Tokyo, 181-8588 Japan}

42: \altaffiltext{4}{Department of Physics and Astronomy, CSCE: Center for

43:   the Study of Cosmic Evolution, and JINA: Joint Institute for Nuclear

44:   Astrophysics, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI

45:   48824-1116; email: beers@pa.msu.edu, marsteller@pa.msu.edu,

46: thirupathi@pa.msu.edu}

47: \altaffiltext{5}{present address: Department of Physics \& Astronomy,

48: University of California, Irvine, Irvine, CA 92697-4575; email:

49: marsteller@pa.msu.edu}

50: \altaffiltext{6}{present address: Gunma Astronomical Observatory,

51: Takayama, Agatsuma, Gunma 377-0702, Japan; honda@astron.pref.gunma.jp}

52: \altaffiltext{7}{Research School of Astronomy and Astrophysics, The

53: Australian National University, Mount Stromlo Observatory, Cotter

54: Road, Weston, ACT 2611, Australia; email: jen@mso.anu.edu.au}

55: \altaffiltext{8}{Centre for Astrophysics Research,

56:   STRI and School of Physics, Astronomy and Mathematics, University of

57:   Hertfordshire, College Lane, Hatfield AL10 9AB, United Kingdom;

58:   email: s.g.ryan@herts.ac.uk}

59: \altaffiltext{9}{INAF -- Osservatorio Astronomico di Torino, 10025 Pino Torinese, Italy}

60: \altaffiltext{10}{present address:

61: Research School of Astronomy and Astrophysics, The

62: Australian National University, Mount Stromlo Observatory, Cotter

63: Road, Weston, ACT 2611, Australia; email: carollo@mso.anu.edu.au}

64: 

65: \begin{abstract} 

66: 

67: The chemical compositions of seven Carbon-Enhanced Metal-Poor (CEMP)

68: turn-off stars are determined from high-resolution spectroscopy. Five

69: of them are selected from the SDSS/SEGUE sample of metal-poor stars.

70: Another star, also chosen from the SDSS/SEGUE sample, has only a weak

71: upper limit on its carbon abundance obtained from the high-resolution

72: spectrum. The effective temperatures of these objects are all higher

73: than 6000~K, while their metallicities, parametrized by [Fe/H], are all below

74: $-2$; the star with the lowest iron abundance in this study has [Fe/H] = $-3.1.$

75: Six of our program objects exhibit high abundance ratios of barium ([Ba/H] $>

76: +1$), suggesting large contributions of the products of former AGB companions

77: via mass transfer across binary systems. One star in our study ({\objf})

78: exhibits a rapid variation in its radial velocity, which is a strong signature

79: that this star belongs to a close binary. Combining our results with previous

80: studies provides a total of 20 CEMP main-sequence turn-off stars for which the

81: abundances of carbon and at least some neutron-capture elements are determined.

82: Inspection of the [C/H] ratios for this sample of CEMP turn-off stars show that

83: they are generally higher than those of CEMP giants; their dispersion in this

84: ratio is also smaller. We take these results to indicate that the

85: carbon-enhanced material provided from the companion AGB star is preserved at

86: the surface of turn-off stars with no significant dilution, which appears

87: counter to expectations if processes such as thermohaline mixing have operated

88: in unevolved CEMP stars. In contrast to the behavior of [C/H], a large

89: dispersion in the observed [Ba/H] is found for the sample of CEMP turn-off stars,

90: suggesting that the efficiency of the s-process in very metal-poor AGB stars may

91: differ greatly from star to star. Four of the six stars from the SDSS/SEGUE

92: sample exhibit kinematics that are associated with membership in the outer-halo

93: population, a remarkably high fraction.

94: 

95: %, [C/Fe] $< +2.2$.  However, based on an analysis of its SDSS

96: %spectrum, it may also qualify as a CEMP star, with [C/Fe]$ = +1.2$.

97: 

98: \end{abstract}

99: \keywords{nuclear reactions, nucleosynthesis, abundances -- stars:

100: abundances -- stars: AGB and post-AGB --stars: Population II}

101: 

102: 

103: \section{Introduction}\label{sec:intro}

104: 

105: Abundance studies of very metal-poor (VMP; [Fe/H] $ <

106: -2.0$)\footnote{[A/B] = $\log(N_{\rm A}/N_{\rm B})- \log(N_{\rm

107:     A}/N_{\rm B})_{\odot}$, and $\log\epsilon_{\rm A} = \log(N_{\rm

108:     A}/N_{\rm H})+12$ for elements A and B.} stars have been pursued

109: over the past few decades in order to constrain models of

110: nucleosynthesis, stellar evolution, and early chemical enrichment in

111: the Galaxy \citep[e.g., ][]{beers05}. One important result of these

112: studies is the discovery of Carbon Enhanced Metal-Poor (CEMP) stars,

113: which appear with increasing frequency at lower metallicity

114: \citep{beers92, beers05, lucatello06, marsteller07}. These stars may

115: be closely related to carbon stars in the Galactic halo, known as CH

116: stars \citep{keenan42} and subgiant CH stars \citep{bond74}.

117: 

118: Recent chemical abundance studies

119: for CEMP stars have revealed that most (70--80\%) CEMP stars also

120: exhibit excesses of s-process elements such as Ba (the CEMP-s stars,

121: according to Beers \& Christlieb 2005), indicating that the origin of

122: the carbon excesses in these stars is likely to be the

123: triple-$\alpha$ reaction in Asymptotic Giant Branch (AGB) stars

124: \citep[e.g., ][]{aoki07}. The CEMP stars that are observed at present

125: are likely to have been polluted by the transfer of carbon-enhanced

126: material from a (former) AGB companion across a binary system, while

127: the AGB star itself has now evolved to an unseen white dwarf

128: \citep[e.g.,][]{lucatello05}. Thus, the abundance patterns of heavy

129: elements in these stars provide useful constraints on models for

130: s-process nucleosynthesis in AGB stars. On the order of 20\% of CEMP

131: stars exhibit no significant enhancement of their neutron-capture

132: elements (the CEMP-no stars, according to Beers \& Christlieb 2005),

133: suggesting the existence of other possible origins for their carbon

134: excesses \citep[e.g., ][]{norris97b, aoki02a}.  \citet{aoki07} have

135: shown that the CEMP-no stars generally occur at very low [Fe/H];

136: extreme examples of this class of stars include HE~0107--5240 and

137: HE~1327--2326, two hyper metal-poor (HMP) stars with [Fe/H] below

138: $-5.0$ \citep{christlieb02, frebel05} and having very large carbon

139: excesses ([C/Fe] $\sim +4$), as well as the recently identified ultra

140: metal-poor (UMP; [Fe/H] = $-4.8$) star HE~0557-4840, with [C/Fe] $=

141: +1.6$ (Norris et al. 2007).

142: 

143: Among the CEMP stars for which chemical compositions have been

144: obtained from high-resolution spectroscopy, main-sequence turn-off

145: stars are expected to be of particular importance. In the case of mass

146: transfer in binary systems, the accreted material from the primary AGB

147: star has been mixed at least by the first dredge-up in red giants,

148: while turn-off stars might preserve pure material accreted from the

149: primary at their surfaces. In such cases, one can investigate the

150: efficiency of the production of carbon and neutron-capture elements in

151: AGB stars from abundance measurements of the secondary star. Another

152: interesting view arises from the suggested influence of so-called

153: thermohaline mixing (Charbonnel \& Zahn 2007; Stancliffe et al. 2007;

154: Denissenkov \& Pinsonneault 2007), which provides the possibility of

155: mixing the accreted surface material while the observed star is still

156: on the main-sequence or only slightly evolved, prior to first

157: dredge-up.  In this scenario, the contrast of the observed surface

158: abundances of CEMP turn-off stars with more evolved CEMP stars also

159: provides valuable clues to the nature of this proposed extensive

160: mixing process.

161: 

162: Very large new samples of CEMP stars have recently become available,

163: discovered during the course of the Sloan Digital Sky Survey (SDSS;

164: York et al. 2000; Adelman-McCarthy et al. 2007). Although originally

165: designed as an extragalactic survey, SDSS has also discovered large

166: numbers of VMP stars \citep{beers06}.  Although some of the CEMP stars

167: are the result of directed studies (Margon et al. 2002; Downes et

168: al. 2004), many of them have appeared among the calibration objects

169: used by SDSS to obtain spectrophotometric and telluric

170: corrections for other spectroscopic data.  These calibration stars

171: are primarily brighter, metal-poor main-sequence turn-off F- and

172: G-type stars. The ongoing extension to SDSS, SDSS-II (which includes

173: the program SEGUE: Sloan Extension for Galactic Understanding and

174: Exploration), is expected to provide tens of thousands of additional

175: VMP stars, at least several thousand of which are expected to be CEMP

176: stars. This paper reports the first application of abundance

177: measurements obtained with high-resolution spectroscopy for CEMP star

178: candidates found by the SDSS/SEGUE surveys.

179: 

180: In \S 2 we discuss the identification of our sample stars and the

181: observations that were carried out. A description of our analysis

182: techniques and results is provided in \S 3. In \S 4 we present a

183: discussion of our findings. The interesting kinematics of the SDSS/SEGUE CEMP

184: turn-off stars are discussed in \S 5.  We conclude with a few remarks in \S 6.

185: 

186: \section{Sample Selection and Observations}\label{sec:obs}

187: 

188: The Sloan Digital Sky Survey uses a CCD camera (Gunn et al. 1998) on a dedicated

189: 2.5m telescope (Gunn et al. 2006) at Apache Point Observatory, New Mexico, to

190: obtain images in five broad optical bands ($ugriz$; Fukugita et al.~1996) over

191: approximately 10,000~deg$^2$ of the high Galactic latitude sky. The survey

192: data-processing software measures the properties of each detected object in the

193: imaging data in all five bands, and determines and applies both astrometric and

194: photometric calibrations (Pier et al. 2003; Lupton et al. 2001; Ivezi\'c et

195: al.~2004). Photometric calibration is provided by simultaneous observations with

196: a 20-inch telescope at the same site (Hogg et al.~2001; Smith et al.~2002;

197: Stoughton et al.~2002; Tucker et al.~2006).

198: 

199: \subsection{Sample selection and photometry data}

200: 

201: During the development of pipeline software for the determination of 

202: atmospheric parameters ({\teff}, {\logg}, [Fe/H]) for stars with available

203: photometry and spectroscopy from SDSS and SEGUE (the SEGUE Stellar Parameter

204: Pipeline; SSPP, see Lee et al. 2007a,b), it was noticed that a rather large

205: number of stars were present in the SDSS/SEGUE database with clearly enhanced CH

206: G-band strengths, and which were likely to be CEMP stars.  A list of over

207: 1000 candidate CEMP stars was assembled, drawing in particular on the

208: calibration stars used by SDSS.  The sample formed the basis for a detailed

209: investigation of the frequency of CEMP stars in the SDSS database (see

210: Marsteller et al. 2006; Marsteller 2007).  

211: 

212: A handful of the brighter examples of the CEMP turn-off stars were identified for

213: carrying out a pilot study of their high-resolution spectroscopic abundances,

214: reported on herein. The imaging procedures used during the course of SDSS

215: are tuned for extragalactic observations. As a result, there exists a bright

216: limit corresponding to $g \sim 14.5$. Thus, the stars available for our study

217: are somewhat faint for high-resolution abundance analyses, even with 8~m-class

218: telescopes. 

219: 

220: The targets for the present observing program are listed in

221: Table~\ref{tab:obs}. Figures~\ref{fig:sdss1} and \ref{fig:sdss2}

222: show the medium-resolution ($R=\lambda/\delta \lambda \sim 2000$) SDSS spectra

223: of the targets. In addition to our primary objects, we selected two well-known

224: CEMP turn-off stars, LP~706--7 \citep{norris97a} and CS~29526--110

225: \citep{aoki02c}, as comparison stars.

226: 

227: The effective temperatures are primarily estimated from adopted $(V-K)_{0}$

228: colors (see \S~\ref{sec:ana}). The photometric data and reddening corrections

229: used in this work are listed in Table~\ref{tab:photo}. For the SDSS/SEGUE stars

230: the optical photometry information ($B$ and $V$) are obtained from the SDSS photometric

231: system, employing the following empirical transformations, obtained by

232: comparison with existing photometry for HK survey stars and subsequently

233: observed by SDSS (Zhao \& Newberg 2006):

234: 

235: $V = g - 0.561(g-r) - 0.004 $ \\

236: 

237: $B = g + 0.348(g-r) + 0.175$ \\

238: 

239: \noindent The photometric data for the comparison

240: stars are taken from \citet{beers07}.  The $K$ photometry

241: is obtained from the 2MASS catalogue \citep{skrutskie06}. The

242: interstellar reddening is estimated from the dust map of

243: \citet{schlegel98}; the extinction in the $V$ and $K$ bands is

244: obtained from the reddening relation provided in their Table 6.

245: 

246: \subsection{High-resolution spectroscopy}

247: 

248: High-resolution spectroscopy was obtained with the Subaru Telescope

249: High Dispersion Spectrograph (HDS; Noguchi et al. 2002) in September

250: 2006 and February 2007. Our spectra cover the wavelength range from

251: 4050 to 6800~{\AA}, with a gap between 5350 and 5450~{\AA} due to the

252: separation between the two detectors. A two-by-two pixel on-chip

253: binning procedure was applied. The resolving power of the spectra

254: obtained in 2006 is $R = 60,000$ (using a slit width of 0.6\arcsec),

255: while that obtained during the 2007 run is somewhat lower ($R =

256: 45,000$) because a wider slit width (0.9\arcsec) was applied in order

257: to collect sufficient photons under relatively poor seeing

258: conditions. The total exposure times are listed in the third column

259: of Table \ref{tab:obs}. It was immediately obvious, during the course of the

260: observing run, that {\objf} exhibited a rapid variation in its radial velocity.

261: The exposure times for individual exposures for this object are listed

262: separately in Table~\ref{tab:s0353}. The total exposure time for this object in

263: Table~\ref{tab:obs} is the value for the spectrum used in the abundance analysis

264: (see \S~\ref{sec:ana}).

265: 

266: Data reduction was carried out using standard procedures within

267: IRAF\footnote{IRAF is distributed by the National Optical Astronomy

268: Observatories, which is operated by the Association of Universities

269: for Research in Astronomy, Inc. under cooperative agreement with the

270: National Science Foundation.}.  Cosmic-ray hits were removed using the

271: procedure described by \citet{aoki05}. The wavelength scale was

272: determined using Th-Ar arc spectra obtained during the observing

273: nights. Examples of the spectra around 5170~{\AA} are shown in

274: Figure~\ref{fig:sp}. The photon counts per pixel (0.031~{\AA})

275: collected at 5100~{\AA} in the final spectra are listed in

276: Table~\ref{tab:obs}.

277: 

278: \subsection{Equivalent widths}\label{sec:ew}

279: 

280: The equivalent widths of atomic lines are measured by fitting Gaussian profiles

281: to (apparently) isolated absorption features. The list of atomic lines was made

282: using those of our recent studies for CEMP stars

283: \citep{aoki07}; the values are given in Table~\ref{tab:ew}. 

284: 

285: %(line broadening)

286: 

287: Equivalent widths of the interstellar \ion{Na}{1} D1 line ($\lambda 5990$) are

288: measured from a direct integration of the absorption features. The values are

289: given in the last line of Table~\ref{tab:ew}. We estimated $E(B-V)$ from the

290: \ion{Na}{1} absorption by applying the correlation found by \citet{munari97}.

291: The values are given in Table~\ref{tab:photo}. The agreement between the two

292: estimates of $E(B-V)$ is good in general. An exception is {\objc}, for which a

293: significantly larger $E(B-V)$ is obtained from the

294: \ion{Na}{1} line than from the dust map of \citet{schlegel98}. This is

295: discussed in \S \ref{sec:sdss}.

296:  

297: 

298: \subsection{Radial velocities}

299: 

300: Radial velocities for our program stars are measured from the

301: wavelengths of clean Fe lines; results are given in

302: Table~\ref{tab:obs}. The random errors of the measurements are

303: estimated from $\sigma_{v} N^{-1/2}$, where $\sigma_{v}$ is the

304: standard deviation of the values from individual lines and $N$ is the

305: number of lines used for the measurement. Note that the reported error

306: for the {\objd} value is substantially larger than for the rest of our

307: targets, because of the low $S/N$ ratio of the spectrum and the small

308: number of Fe lines used (5 lines).

309: 

310: %{\bf (Possible systematic errors)}

311: 

312: Figure~\ref{fig:rv} shows the radial velocities of {\LP} and {\CS} obtained by

313: the present work, along with additional measurements obtained during recent

314: service observing runs with the Subaru Telescope. For {\LP}, the results of

315: \citet{norris97a} are also shown. A clear variation of radial velocity is found

316: for {\CS}, indicating that this object belongs to a binary system, although the

317: orbital period is still unclear. On the other hand, no evidence of variability

318: is obtained for {\LP}, as has been discussed by \citet{norris97a}, even though

319: we have now obtained data extending over a range of some 6000 days.

320: 

321: It was immediately noticed during the first observing night of 2007

322: that significant variations existed in the observed Doppler shift of

323: {\objf}. Figure \ref{fig:s0353} shows the spectra of this object

324: before any shifts have been obtained prior to co-addition for later

325: analysis. No velocity variation is found for the \ion{Na}{1} D

326: emission lines associated with the Earth's atmosphere at 5989.9 and

327: 5995.9~{\AA}, nor for the interstellar absorption feature due to Na,

328: found about 0.5~{\AA} blueward of these emission lines, indicating

329: that the wavelength calibration was correctly carried out over all

330: exposures. In contrast, absorption due to the stellar \ion{Na}{1}

331: features quickly shifted in the spectra obtained in the first

332: observing night (the upper three spectra in the Figure), while no

333: significant variation is found for those obtained during the second

334: night. We note that the exposure times applied to the first and second

335: observing nights are 40 and 20 minutes, respectively. The shift in the

336: first night is about 18{\kms} per 40 minutes. Hence, the broad

337: absorption features of the first three spectra are almost certainly

338: due to a radial velocity shift during the exposures rather than

339: stellar rotation or macro-turbulence.

340:  

341: The radial velocities and line widths measured for each spectrum of {\objf} are

342: listed in Table~\ref{tab:s0353}. The measurements are made for strong

343: \ion{Na}{1}, \ion{Mg}{1}, and \ion{Ba}{1} lines, because measurements from the

344: \ion{Fe}{1} lines for individual exposures were quite uncertain. During the

345: course of this procedure, it was decided to exclude the third spectrum obtained

346: during the second night because of significant contamination from the twilight

347: sky. The UT and JD (heliocentric Julian day) of the central time of each

348: exposure is listed in the Table. A spectrum of this object, suitable for carrying

349: out the abundance analysis described below, is obtained by combining individual

350: spectra obtained during the first night, after applying the appropriate Doppler

351: corrections.

352: 

353: Radial velocities are also measured from the SDSS spectra, as listed

354: in Table~\ref{tab:rv_sdss}. The radial velocities of {\obja}, {\objc},

355: and {\obje} agree with the results from the Subaru spectra within the

356: measurement errors.  The radial velocity of {\objb} on JD = 2,452,932

357: is significantly higher than the other three measurements, suggesting

358: a radial velocity variation and binarity of this object. We note that

359: this object shows large over-abundances of carbon and neutron-capture

360: elements (\S \ref{sec:ana}) that are expected from mass transfer in a

361: binary system. The radial velocity of {\objf} from the SDSS spectrum

362: is within the variation found in the Subaru spectra given in

363: Table~\ref{tab:s0353}. Finally, the radial velocity of {\objd} from

364: the SDSS spectrum, 45.8 $\pm 3.5$ km sec$^{-1}$, is much higher than

365: the value obtained from the HDS spectrum. However, the measurement is only

366: once for each instrument, so further measurement is required to

367: derive any firm conclusions on the binarity of this object.

368: 

369: \section{Chemical Abundance Analysis and Results}\label{sec:ana}

370: 

371: \subsection{Stellar parameters}\label{sec:param}

372: 

373: We determine the effective temperatures from the $(V-K)_{0}$ colors

374: using the scale of \citet{alonso96}; these are listed in

375: Table~\ref{tab:photo} as {\teff}$(V-K)$. The $(V-K)_{0}$ values of

376: {\CS}, {\obja}, {\objb}, {\objc} and {\objf} are slightly lower than

377: the range for which the Alonso et al. scale (formula) is applicable

378: ($V-K < 1.1$ for [Fe/H] $ < -1.5$). For these objects, we directly

379: estimate the effective temperature from Figure 8 of \citet{alonso96},

380: in which the correlation between $V-K$ and effective temperatures for

381: their calibration stars is shown.

382: 

383: The effective temperatures obtained from the $(B-V)_{0}$ colors using

384: the Alonso et al. scale are also listed in Table~\ref{tab:photo}.  For

385: CEMP stars, this color is sometimes severely affected by the presence

386: of molecular absorption, and it is not preferable for temperature

387: estimates. However, the molecular features of warm CEMP stars studied

388: here are not as significant as those for cooler stars, and would be

389: expected to have less of an affect on the observed colors. Moreover,

390: the errors in the $K$-band photometry for some of the fainter objects

391: in our sample are large (see below), and the $V-K$ colors are

392: relatively sensitive to the reddening correction. Hence, the effective

393: temperatures obtained from the $(B-V)_{0}$ colors are useful for

394: comparison purposes. The {\teff}$(B-V)$ of {\obja} and {\objf} agree

395: well with their {\teff}$(V-K)$ determinations. The {\teff}$(B-V)$ of

396: the two coolest stars in our sample, {\LP} and {\obje}, are lower than

397: their {\teff}$(V-K)$, perhaps as the result of their relatively strong

398: CH molecular bands affecting the $B$-band measurement. A similar

399: discrepancy between the two {\teff} estimates is found for {\objd},

400: even though this object exhibits no or perhaps only a modest ([C/Fe]$

401: \sim +1$) carbon overabundance. However, the error in the $K$

402: photometry for this star is relatively large, which might explain the

403: discrepancy.

404:  

405: The $T_{\rm eff}(V-K)$ of {\objb} is quite high (6800~K) for a VMP

406: turn-off star. However, the error of the $K$ photometry (0.12

407: magnitudes) and the reddening correction for this star

408: ($E(B-V)=0.088$) are the largest among our sample. Moreover, the

409: $T_{\rm eff}(B-V)$ is about 200~K lower than the $T_{\rm

410: eff}(V-K)$. For this object we adopt {\teff} = 6600~K, which is

411: slightly lower than the estimate from the $V-K$ color.

412: 

413: The {\teff} of {\CS} is also quite high (6800~K). However, the

414: reported error of the $K$ photometry for this object is 0.03

415: magnitudes, and the reddening correction adopted (0.033 magnitudes) is

416: not large. For this object, the $R$ and $I$ photometry data are also

417: available \citep{beers07}. The {\teff} from $V-R$ and $V-I$ estimated

418: using the figures of \citet{alonso96} are 6700--6800~K, while the

419: {\teff}$(B-V)$ is 6500~K. We adopt the {\teff} from $(V-K)_{0}$ with

420: no modification for this object.

421: 

422: We now estimate the uncertainty in the adopted {\teff} for our program stars,

423: taking the error in the $(V-K)_{0}$ colors and the error in the scale of

424: \citet{alonso96} into consideration. The error of the $K$ photometry is the

425: dominant source of the uncertainty in the $(V-K)_{0}$ values for most objects.

426: The sensitivity of {\teff} to the color is approximately 150~K per 0.1 magnitude

427: in $V-K$. We adopt 100~K as the errors arising from the temperature scale for

428: stars with $(V-K)_{0}\geq 1.1$, for which Alonso et al.'s formula is applicable,

429: and 150~K for other objects, respectively. The uncertainties are 100-150~K for

430: relatively cool or bright objects ({\objd}, {\obje}, {\LP}, and {\CS}), and

431: 150-200~K for others. The adopted errors of {\teff} in this study are listed in

432: Table~\ref{tab:param}.

433: 

434: The surface gravity, metallicity, and micro-turbulence for our program

435: stars are determined from an analysis of the \ion{Fe}{1} and

436: \ion{Fe}{2} lines, using the model atmospheres of

437: \citet{kurucz93}. The micro-turbulence ($v_{\rm turb}$) and gravity

438: (log $g$) are determined so that the derived Fe abundance is not

439: dependent on the strengths of Fe {\small I} lines, nor on the

440: ionization stages, respectively. An exception is {\objd}, for which

441: the number of useful \ion{Fe}{1} lines is too small to estimate the

442: micro-turbulence, and no \ion{Fe}{2} line is available to estimate the

443: gravity. We adopted typical values ({\logg} = 4.0 and {\vt} =

444: 1.5~{\kms}) found for turn-off stars\footnote{If a lower gravity

445: ($\log g =2.0$) is adopted for the case of a horizontal branch star,

446: the derived iron abundance is only slightly higher, while the derived

447: Sr and Ba abundances (see \S3.3) are about 0.6~dex lower.}. We note that this

448: object is excluded in the discussion of CEMP stars because its carbon

449: abundance is not determined by our analysis of the HDS spectrum (see

450: below); we only obtain a weak upper limit for [C/Fe]. The number of

451: \ion{Fe}{1} lines used in the analysis of {\objf} is also quite small,

452: due to the rapid changes of the radial velocity (see below). For this

453: object, {\vt}=1.5~{\kms} is also adopted. For {\objc}, a correlation

454: between the \ion{Fe}{1} line strengths and the derived Fe abundances

455: is found even if {\vt}$>2.0$~{\kms} is assumed. Since such a high

456: value of {\vt} is not known in turn-off stars, we adopt

457: {\vt}$=2.0$~{\kms} for this object. Larger errors in the gravity

458: ($\sigma$[{\logg}]) and the micro-turbulence ($\sigma$[{\vt}]) are

459: adopted for these objects. The atmospheric parameters adopted in the

460: following abundance analyses and their corresponding errors are listed

461: in Table~\ref{tab:param}.

462: 

463: Figure~\ref{fig:teffg} shows the estimated effective temperatures and

464: surface gravities for our sample (filled circles) along with other

465: CEMP stars studied in previous work (open circles; see below). The

466: lines are the isochrones by \citet{y2} for [Fe/H]$=-2.5$ and assumed

467: ages of 10, 12, and 14 Gyrs. Inspection of this Figure shows that our

468: objects fall around the turn-off region for old metal-poor stars,

469: although it is difficult to distinguish whether they are main-sequence

470: stars or subgiants. We note that if we adopt a higher effective

471: temperature (6800~K from $V-K$) for {\objb}, the surface gravity also

472: becomes quite high ({\logg}=4.9), far above the expected value based

473: on isochrones of VMP turn-off stars.

474: 

475: \subsection{Carbon abundance}

476: 

477: The carbon abundance estimates for our program stars are determined

478: from spectrum synthesis of the CH 4323~{\AA} band, as previously

479: described by \citet{aoki07}.  The sources of molecular data are

480: reported by \citet{aoki02c}. The oxygen abundance of [O/Fe]=+0.5 is

481: assumed in the analysis. We confirmed that the effect of assumed

482: oxygen abundance on the derived carbon abundances is negligible for

483: the range 0$<$[O/Fe]$<+2$ for a star with {\teff}$>6000$~K, in which

484: the fraction of carbon bound in the CO molecule is very small.

485: 

486: No signature of the CH band is detected in the HDS spectrum of {\objd},

487: so only an upper limit is determined (note that in the

488: medium-resolution SDSS spectrum, there is sufficient strength in this

489: band, and others, to obtain a detection, [C/Fe]$ = +1.2$; see \S

490: \ref{sec:sdss}). The determination of carbon abundance for {\objf},

491: based on the high-resolution spectrum alone, is very uncertain because

492: of the relatively low S/N ratio of the spectrum. The full set of

493: results is listed in Table~\ref{tab:abund}.

494: 

495: Carbon abundances are also measured from the C$_{2}$ Swan band at

496: 5165~{\AA} for {\LP}, {\obja}, and {\obje}. The result for {\obje}

497: agrees well with that obtained from the CH band, while the carbon

498: abundances of {\LP} and {\obja} from the C$_{2}$ band are slightly

499: (0.1--0.2~dex) higher than those from the CH band, as was also found

500: for the CEMP subgiant LP~625--44 by \citet{aoki02b}. Although there

501: may exist a small systematic error in the determination of carbon

502: abundances from the C$_{2}$ band and/or from the CH band, the

503: measurements from the C$_{2}$ band confirm the reliability of carbon

504: abundance determination from the other molecular band.

505: 

506: 

507: \subsection{Abundances of other elements}

508: 

509: The abundances for most of the other elements are determined by a

510: standard analysis based on measured equivalent widths. The effects of

511: hyperfine splitting and isotope shifts are included in the analysis,

512: using \citet{mcwilliam98} for Ba, \citet{lawler01} for La, and

513: \citet{simons89} for Pb. Solar isotope ratios are assumed for Pb. For

514: Ba, we first measured the abundances neglecting the effect of

515: hyperfine splitting, and then applied the isotope ratios of the

516: r-process component in Solar System material for the two stars having

517: [Ba/Fe] $< 1$ ({\obja} and {\objd}), and s-process ratios for the

518: stars that exhibit Ba excesses, as was done previously by

519: \citet{aoki07}.

520: 

521: While Sr and Ba abundances are measured for all objects in our sample,

522: other neutron-capture elements are detected in only a few stars. The

523: abundances of Pb, which is a key element for investigation of

524: neutron-capture nucleosynthesis, are measured for {\LP}, {\CS},

525: {\objc} and {\obje}, while an upper limit is estimated for other

526: stars. The upper limit on the Pb abundance is calculated based on the

527: 3$\sigma$ error of the equivalent-width measurement, estimated by

528: $\sigma_{W} = (\lambda n_{\rm pix}^{-1/2})/$($R$[S/N]), where $R$ is

529: the resolving power and $n_{\rm pix}$ is the number of pixels for

530: which equivalent width measurements are carried out

531: \citep{norris01}. The results are listed in Table~\ref{tab:abund}.

532: 

533: Six of our program stars exhibit large Ba over-abundances. In

534: particular, the over-abundance found for {\objf} is quite striking

535: ([Ba/Fe] = +3.4). This star also exhibits a large excess of Sr

536: ([Sr/Fe] = +2.25). Although the carbon abundance estimated from the CH

537: band for this object is very uncertain, we include this object in our

538: discussion of CEMP stars as an example of a star that is likely

539: affected by AGB nucleosynthesis (see \S \ref{sec:disc}).

540: 

541: \subsection{Uncertainties}

542: 

543: Random errors in our analysis, which include the uncertainty of the

544: equivalent-width measurements and in the adopted transition probabilities, are

545: estimated to be $\sigma N^{-1/2}$, where $\sigma$ is the standard

546: deviation of derived abundances from individual lines and $N$ is the

547: number of lines used in the analysis. When the number of lines are

548: smaller than four, the $\sigma$ of \ion{Fe}{1} ($\sigma_{\rm Fe}$) is

549: adopted in the estimates. Typical random errors are 0.05--0.15~dex,

550: depending on the number of lines used in the analysis.

551: 

552: We also estimate the error due to the uncertainty in equivalent-width

553: measurements for the \ion{Fe}{1} lines of {\obja}. A typical error in

554: equivalent width ($\sigma_{W}$) is estimated from the above

555: formula. The typical value for the \ion{Fe}{1} lines of {\obja} is

556: obtained to be 3~m{\AA}, assuming $\lambda = 5000$~{\AA} and $S/N

557: =70$. We added this value to the measured equivalent widths and

558: calculated the Fe abundance using the same model atmosphere as used in

559: the analysis. The derived iron abundance is 0.10~dex higher than the

560: original result. This value is comparable with the $\sigma_{\rm Fe}$

561: of 0.12~dex obtained for {\obja}. This result confirms that the random

562: errors of the abundance measurements are primarily due to the

563: uncertainties in the equivalent width measurements reflecting the

564: quality of the spectrum, although the $\sigma_{\rm Fe}$ also includes

565: the errors in the continuum placement and uncertainties of $gf$

566: values.

567: 

568: The errors due to the uncertainty of the atmospheric parameters are

569: estimated for {\LP} and {\CS}. Table~\ref{tab:err} lists the

570: sensitivity of the derived abundances ($\log \epsilon$ values) to the

571: changes of parameters. For other objects in our program, the

572: uncertainties are estimated by applying the data for the star of this

573: pair with the closest atmospheric parameters to the object under

574: consideration. Total uncertainties are obtained by adding these

575: values, in quadrature, to the random errors, and are listed in

576: Table~\ref{tab:abund}.

577: 

578: The chemical abundances of {\LP} are also determined using the updated

579: (NEWODF) ATLAS grid \citep{castelli03}, and the differences from those

580: based on the \citet{kurucz93} model are given in Table~\ref{tab:err}

581: ($\Delta_{\rm ATLAS}$). The abundances using the NEWODF model are

582: lower by 0.05--0.14~dex. The effect of the difference of model

583: atmospheres on the derived abundances is systematic, and that on the

584: abundance ratios is not significant. We also applied the model

585: including the excesses of $\alpha$ elements, and confirmed the effect

586: on the derived abundances is smaller than 0.01~dex.

587: 

588: Further systematic errors could exist in our LTE analysis based on

589: one-dimensional (1D) model atmospheres. The non-LTE correction for Fe

590: abundances derived from the \ion{Fe}{1} lines might be the order of

591: +0.2~dex \citep[][ and references therein]{collet05, asplund05a},

592: although the values estimated are different between authors. The

593: direction of the correction for the 3D effect is opposite

594: \citep{asplund05a}. The most significant 3D effect would appear in the

595: carbon abundances determined from CH molecular features, that could

596: reach to $-0.7$~dex in the most metal-poor cases \citep{collet06}. In

597: order to obtain the corrections for these effect, 3D analyses based on

598: non-LTE calculation are required.

599: 

600: \subsection{Comparison with previous studies}

601: 

602: The elemental abundances of {\LP} (= CS~31062--012) and {\CS} were

603: studied by \citet{aoki02b} and \citet{aoki02c}. The atmospheric

604: parameters adopted by them for {\LP} are {\teff} = 6250~K, {\logg} =

605: 4.5, [Fe/H] = $-2.55$, and {\vt} = 1.5 {\kms}, which are quite similar

606: to those in the present study.  Although the previous studies are

607: based on a spectrum covering only a blue range of wavelengths, and the

608: spectral line set used in the previous analyses is different from that

609: in the present study, the derived abundances of most elements agree

610: within 0.1~dex. The Cr abundance shows the largest discrepancy, on the

611: order of 0.17~dex, which is still within the 2~$\sigma$ range of the

612: measurement errors.

613: 

614: The effective temperature of {\CS} adopted by \citet{aoki02c} is 300~K

615: lower than that of the present analysis. The discrepancy of [Fe/H]

616: between the two measurements (0.32~dex) is well explained by the

617: difference in the adopted effective temperatures. The [C/Fe] values, after

618: correction for the difference in effective temperatures, also

619: agree within the measurement errors. The abundance ratios of other

620: elements ([X/Fe]) are relatively insensitive to the effective

621: temperature (see Table~\ref{tab:err}). It is clear that the results

622: for Cr and Ni from the two studies exhibit significant

623: discrepancies. However, the measurements for these elements are based

624: on only one line for each; the results might not be expected to be as

625: reliable as those for other elements. The [Ba/Fe] derived from the

626: present work is 0.28~dex higher than that of \citet{aoki02c}. This

627: result is not explained by the differences of adopted atmospheric

628: parameters. While the previous measurement is based on only the two

629: very strong resonance lines, our present analysis added two red lines

630: which are suitable for abundance determination, so the new measurement

631: should be more reliable than the previous one.

632: 

633: \subsection{Comparison with the estimates from SDSS/SEGUE spectra}\label{sec:sdss}

634: 

635: Table ~\ref{tab:comp} provides a comparison of the atmospheric

636: parameters and carbon abundances between the estimates obtained from

637: the SDSS spectra and the present measurements.

638: 

639: For the SDSS spectra, we begin by adopting the stellar parameters

640: obtained by the SSPP (Lee et al. 2007a,b). Based on these, we generate

641: synthetic spectra for each star in the region between

642: 4200--4400~{\AA}. The model atmospheres used are the NEWODF models of

643: Castelli \& Kurucz (2003). The synthetic spectra are generated using

644: the turbospectrum synthesis code \citep{alvarez98}, which employs

645: line broadening according to the prescription of \citet{barklem98} and

646: \citet{barklem05}. The atomic line data are taken mainly from the VALD

647: compilation (as of 2002) (Kupka et al. 1999), and updated from the

648: literature, whenever possible. The molecular species CH and CN are

649: provided by B. Plez (Plez \& Cohen 2005). We adopted the solar

650: abundances by Asplund, Grevesse \& Sauval (2005a). The synthetic

651: spectra are generated with a initial resolving power $R= 10^{6}$, then

652: were smoothed to the SDSS resolution and rebinned to 1~{\AA} pixels.

653: 

654: We find the best match to the region around the G band (4323~{\AA} and

655: 4325~{\AA}) by changing the carbon abundance of the synthetic spectra

656: in order to minimize the discrepancy with the observed spectra. We

657: estimate that the errors in the derived [C/Fe] arising from errors in

658: the stellar parameters from the SSPP is on the order of 0.35 dex.

659: 

660: The effective temperatures derived from the SDSS spectra agree with

661: the values adopted by the present work, based on colors, to within about

662: 100~K. An exception is that for {\objc}, for which the SDSS estimate

663: is 370~K higher than the value adopted in the above analysis. For this

664: object, larger interstellar reddening is derived from the \ion{Na}{1}

665: absorption than from the dust map that is adopted in the analysis

666: (\S~\ref{sec:ew}). If the $E(B-V)$ from the \ion{Na}{1} measurement is

667: adopted, the {\teff} is as high as 7000~K, and agrees with the

668: estimate from the SDSS spectrum.

669: 

670: In contrast to the agreement of effective temperatures, {\logg} values

671: estimated from SDSS spectra are systematically lower than those

672: determined by our analyses from Subaru spectra. Although the results

673: for {\objc} from the two estimates appear to agree well, a similar

674: discrepancy would result if the same effective temperature is adopted

675: in the estimate of gravity. Although further study or calibration to

676: resolve the discrepancy is desired, it should be noted that the

677: {\logg} values from SDSS spectra are already useful to estimate the

678: evolutionary status of the targets (i.e., in order to distinguish

679: giants and main-sequence turn-off stars).

680: 

681: The abundance ratios [Fe/H] and [C/Fe] from the two measurements agree fairly

682: well, as found in Table~\ref{tab:comp}. The discrepancy in [Fe/H] for {\objc}

683: (0.4~dex) is well explained by the difference in the estimated {\teff}. No CH

684: absorption feature is detected in the Subaru spectrum of {\objd}. A very weak CH

685: band is found in the SDSS spectrum of this object (see Figure 2), and we have

686: derived [C/Fe] = +1.19 $\pm 0.35$, based on its strength. \citet{marsteller07}

687: estimated that the detection limit of the CH feature in SDSS spectra can be as high as

688: [C/H]$\sim -1$ for stars with {\teff} $\sim 6300$~K. Thus, {\objd} could also be

689: mis-identified as a carbon-enhanced object in our sample selection, which was

690: carried out before detailed investigations for SDSS sample were made. Further

691: calibrations, or strict estimates for the detection limits of CH absorption in

692: SDSS spectra as a function of {\teff}, are desired for more efficiently

693: selecting carbon-enhanced objects from SDSS/SEGUE spectra.

694: 

695: \section{Discussion}\label{sec:disc}

696: 

697: \subsection{Elemental abundances of CEMP turn-off stars}

698: 

699: The present analysis has obtained elemental abundances for five new

700: CEMP stars selected from the SDSS/SEGUE surveys, as well as for two

701: known CEMP stars. The remaining program star in our sample ({\objd})

702: is excluded from the following discussion, because no clear excess of

703: carbon nor neutron-capture elements has been found in the

704: high-resolution spectrum. All seven CEMP stars are classified as

705: main-sequence turn-off stars, with {\teff}$>6000$~K. In order to

706: better investigate the nature of such stars, we have compiled all

707: known CEMP stars from the literature having {\teff} higher than 6000~K

708: (Table~\ref{tab:cemp_to}). In this section,

709: we discuss the abundance distributions of carbon and the

710: neutron-capture elements for these CEMP turn-off stars.

711: 

712: \subsection{Distribution of C and Ba abundances}

713: 

714: Figure~\ref{fig:cbafe} shows the C and Ba abundance ratios as a

715: function of [Fe/H]. All objects but one exhibit very large excesses of C

716: ([C/Fe] $\gtrsim +2$).  The exception is CS~29528--041, which has

717: [C/Fe]= +1.59 at [Fe/H]$=-3.25$ \citep{sivarani06}. Excluding this

718: object, a clear correlation is found between [C/Fe] and [Fe/H]. The

719: correlation indicates that there exists a constant [C/H] among these

720: stars.

721: 

722: Figure~\ref{fig:hist_ch} is a histogram of the [C/H] values for the

723: CEMP turn-off stars. The distribution is compared with that of the 31

724: CEMP giants selected from \citet{aoki07} that have $\log

725: L$/L$_{\odot}$ higher than 1.5, where $L$ is the luminosity estimated

726: from the stellar parameters assuming a constant stellar mass (see Aoki

727: et al. 2007). The Ba-enhanced (CEMP-s) stars are shown by open bars,

728: while Ba-normal (CEMP-no) stars are shown by the hatched bars.  A

729: glance at this figure shows that the [C/H] ratios of the CEMP-s

730: turn-off stars distribute within a narrow range around [C/H]$\sim 0$,

731: with the exception of the one object mentioned above (CS~29528--041).

732: The average and standard deviations of the [C/H] ratios for these two

733: CEMP-s samples are $<$[C/H]$>=-0.18$ and $\sigma$([C/H])$=0.18$ for

734: the turn-off stars, and $<$[C/H]$> = -0.54$ and $\sigma$([C/H])$=0.40$

735: for the giants. The two objects having the lowest [C/H] among turn-off

736: stars (CS~29528--041) and giants (CS~30322-023) are excluded in the

737: calculation of these statistics.

738: 

739: The lower portion of the [C/H] distribution might be affected by a

740: temperature-related selection bias for CEMP stars identified on the

741: basis of the CH molecular bands, which is significantly weaker in

742: turn-off stars than in giants. Our previous investigation for the

743: detection limit showed that the CH band of a turn-off star with

744: {\teff}$\sim 6400~K$ and [C/H]$\sim -1.6$ has depths of 2\%, which is

745: a conservative detection limit in high-resolution spectra. For the

746: carbon-enhanced stars selected from the lower-resolution spectra, such

747: as the SDSS/SEGUE sample, \citet{marsteller07} estimated that the

748: selection of CEMP stars from the CH band is complete for stars having

749: [C/H] $=-1$ and $=-0.3$ for stars with {\teff} = 6000 and 6500~K,

750: respectively. Hence, in order to investigate the complete distribution

751: of [C/H] for turn-off stars, abundance studies of candidate metal-poor

752: stars that are selected regardless of their CH band strengths in

753: medium-resolution spectra are required. Note, however, that the sample

754: of CEMP turn-off stars in Table~\ref{tab:cemp_to} includes stars with

755: {\teff} as low as 6000~K, and that several stars were observed on

756: programs that did not focus on carbon-enhanced stars

757: \citep[e.g. ][]{cohen04}. The absence of stars with $-1<$ [C/H] 

758: $<-0.5$ in the sample of CEMP turn-off stars suggests that such stars

759: are rare compared with CEMP stars with higher [C/H] values. We note

760: that we cannot derive any conclusion for the lower [C/H] range ([C/H]$

761: < -1.0$). There may well exist a number of CEMP turn-off stars that

762: have not yet been identified by the surveys to date. This range is

763: particularly important for studies of the Ba-normal CEMP stars, as

764: discussed by \citet{aoki07}.

765: 

766: \citet{aoki07} showed that the [C/H] distribution for 54 CEMP stars

767: with Ba excesses, including turn-off stars, subgiants, and giants,

768: exhibits a peak in the range $-0.5<$ [C/H] $<0.0$, and a cut-off at

769: [C/H] $\sim 0$. This was interpreted as an indication that (1) the

770: [C/H] ratios produced by AGB stars are almost constant at [C/H] $\sim

771: 0$, independent of metallicity, and (2) the carbon-enhanced material

772: transferred from AGB stars to the companion is directly observed, or

773: is only slightly diluted through the evolution from turn-off stars to

774: giants. In this study we confirmed the absence of objects having [C/H]

775: $>>0$, found that the average of the [C/H] values for CEMP turn-off

776: stars is higher than that of giants, and that their dispersion is

777: smaller. This result supports the interpretation of \citet{aoki07}.

778: 

779: \citet{stancliffe07} investigated the process of thermohaline mixing

780: in main-sequence stars that received carbon-enhanced material from a

781: companion AGB star across a binary system. They predicted that the

782: accreted material quickly mixes throughout 90\% of the star, and that

783: the enhanced carbon is diluted in main-sequence stars as a result. The

784: C abundance is predicted to change only slightly after the receiving

785: star evolves through first dredge-up.  This is not supported by the

786: comparison of [C/H] distributions in Figure~\ref{fig:hist_ch},

787: although the possible bias in the sample selection could slightly

788: affect the comparison. Our present observational result suggests that

789: the [C/H] ratios measured for turn-off stars represents the values

790: produced by the donor AGB stars, and the surface carbon abundance

791: decreases in some CEMP stars during their evolution after the first

792: dredge-up \footnote{One possible interpretation is that the mass

793: accreted from AGB stars is much larger than that assumed in the models

794: of \citet{stancliffe07} in most cases, and the dilution in

795: main-sequence stars is not as significant as predicted in their

796: models.}. It should be noted that the [C/H] values found in CEMP

797: turn-off stars (i.e. [C/H]$\sim 0$) agree well with predictions from

798: AGB models \citep[e.g. ][]{vandenhoek97}, as discussed by

799: \citet{aoki07}. This agreement supports the above interpretation.  

800: 

801: %If the dilution in CEMP turn-off stars was efficient

802: %as discussed by \citet{stancliffe07}, the material accreted from AGB

803: %stars was required to have significantly higher carbon abundance

804: %([C/H]$\sim +1$) to explain the [C/H] ratios ($\sim 0$) currently

805: %observed.

806: 

807: 

808: The carbon excesses of CS~29528--041 and CS~30322--023 are

809: exceptionally small among the sample of CEMP turn-off stars and giant

810: stars, respectively\footnote{After this paper is submitted, an analysis

811: result for the double-lined spectroscopic binary CS~22964--161 was

812: reported by \citet{thompson08}. The both components are CEMP turn-off

813: stars showing large excesses of neutron-capture elements. The [C/H] of

814: this system is $-1.2$, and is another example of CEMP turn-off stars

815: having relatively low [C/H] values.}. It is noteworthy that these two

816: stars both exhibit very large excesses of nitrogen -- the [N/Fe] of

817: CS~29528--041 is +3.0 \citep{sivarani06} and that of CS~30322--023 is

818: +2.8 \citep{masseron06}. Their [(C+N)/H] values are $-0.9$ and $-1.3$,

819: respectively, which are not by far lower than those of other stars,

820: although the nitrogen abundances are not determined for several stars

821: including our SDSS sample. CS~30322--023 is a highly evolved giant,

822: and possibly presently in the AGB stage (according to Masseron et

823: al.); its surface composition could have been altered significantly

824: during its evolution.  The observed nitrogen excess of CS~29528--041

825: should instead be a direct result of the nucleosynthesis in a donor

826: AGB star. As discussed by \citet{sivarani06}, CS~29528--041 might have

827: been polluted by an intermediate-mass AGB star in which nitrogen is

828: enriched by the hot bottom burning process.

829: 

830: %DISCUSSION ON LI ABUNDANCES (UPPER LIMITS) \\

831: 

832: 

833: \subsection{Neutron-capture elements}

834: 

835: Based on their observed [C/H] distribution, we have interpreted the

836: surface abundances of CEMP turn-off stars to represent the yields of

837: the AGB donors. If this is indeed the case, [Ba/H] can be used as an

838: indicator of the s-process efficiency in the donor

839: stars. Figure~\ref{fig:hist_bah} depicts the distribution of [Ba/H]

840: for the CEMP turn-off stars and giants that show excesses of Ba

841: ([Ba/Fe] $ > +0.5$). The [Ba/H] of the turn-off stars exhibits a wider

842: distribution than was observed for their [C/H]. The average and

843: standard deviation of the [Ba/H] for the 16 CEMP turn-off stars

844: discussed in the context of their [C/H] are $<$[Ba/H]$> = -0.25$ and

845: $\sigma$([Ba/H]) =0.68 dex, respectively. The wider distribution of

846: [Ba/H] of these stars, as compared to [C/H], implies that the Ba

847: abundances produced by AGB stars are likely to have a significantly

848: larger intrinsic dispersion. 

849: 

850: The abundance ratios currently observed are those of the material

851: transferred from the donor AGB stars, which would be dependent on the

852: evolutionary phase in which the mass transfer occurred. The abundances

853: of carbon and Ba are expected to increase with increasing the number

854: of thermal pulses. Detailed comparisons with model predictions for

855: surface abundances after each thermal pulse would be required. In

856: such comparisons, a strong constraint is the almost constant C/H

857: ratios found in most CEMP turn-off stars.

858: 

859: Figure \ref{fig:srbapb} shows the [Sr/Ba] and [Ba/Pb] ratios of CEMP

860: turn-off stars as a function of [Ba/H]. Here, the three elements Sr,

861: Ba, and Pb are regarded as representing the yields at the three

862: abundance peaks of the s-process, corresponding to the neutron magic

863: numbers 50, 82, and 126. The [Sr/Ba] ratios are distributed over a

864: narrow range (a standard deviation of 0.34~dex) around [Sr/Ba] $\sim

865: -1.3$. However, they also exhibit a statistically significant

866: anti-correlation with [Ba/H] -- the null hypothesis that no

867: correlation exists between [Sr/Ba] and [Ba/H] is rejected by a simple

868: t-test at the 98\% confidence level. That is, the production

869: efficiency of the heavy neutron-capture elements, with respect to the

870: light ones, apparently increases slightly with the total production

871: efficiency of neutron-capture elements.  It should be noted that the

872: [Sr/Ba] ratios in these stars are lower than the prediction from

873: models of the s-process in AGB stars by \citet{busso01}: the

874: [ls/hs]($=-$[hs/ls]) values of their calculations, where ls and hs

875: mean the elements in the first and second abundance peaks of the

876: s-process, range between 0 to $-1$, depending on stellar mass and

877: choice of $^{13}$C pocket, for the metallicity range of

878: [Fe/H]$<-2$. The observations suggest more efficient production of Ba

879: (hs), or less efficient production of Sr (ls), than model predictions.

880: 

881: %It should be noted, however, that the Sr and abundances ditribute

882: %quite wide range, and some systematic errors possibly exist in the

883: %Sr/Ba ratio. In particular, the Sr abudnances are determined from the

884: %two resonance lines, and are sensitive to the estimate of the

885: %micro-turbulent velocity for stars having high Sr abundance. 

886: 

887: A similar correlation was found from the abundance measurements for carbon-rich

888: post-AGB stars by \citet{reyniers04}. They reported a positive correlation

889: between the enhancement of s-process elements ([s/Fe], which is the mean of

890: the abundance ratios of several s-process elements) and the abundance ratios of

891: heavy to light neutron-capture elements ([hs/ls]). We note that the efficiency

892: of the neutron-capture nucleosynthesis is represented by [s/Fe] in

893: \citet{reyniers04}, while it is evaluated by [Ba/H] in our investigation.

894: However, a correlation between [Sr/Ba] and [Ba/Fe] is also found in our

895: sample at a similar confidence level as that between [Sr/Ba] and [Ba/H]. 

896: 

897: %The reasons for the existence of such a correlation are not identified by

898: %\citet{reyniers04}. No correlation is found between [Sr/Ba] and [Fe/H]

899: %for CEMP turn-off stars, as \citet{reyniers04} reported no correlation

900: %between [hs/ls] and [Fe/H] for post-AGB stars. (SOME MORE DISCUSSION?)

901: %<-- YES, THIS NEEDS BETTER FLESHED OUT.  <-- MAYBE JUST DROP THIS ENTIRE

902: %PARAGRAPH

903: 

904: %They suggested that the efficiency of the

905: %neutron-capture nucleosynthesis (production of heavier elements)

906: %increases with increasing third dredge-up efficiency. 

907: 

908: %No significant correlation is found for [Sr/Ba] ratios against

909: %[Ba/H].  

910: 

911: The lower panel of Figure \ref{fig:srbapb} suggests that there may

912: exist a correlation for [Ba/Pb] with [Ba/H], but this essentially

913: depends on only one object (HE~0024--2523), with [Ba/H] $=-1.36$ and

914: [Ba/Pb] $=-1.84$.  It should be kept in mind that the detection of Pb

915: lines is much more difficult than those of Sr and Ba, which could

916: result in a lack of objects having high [Ba/Pb] and low [Ba/H].  The

917: [Ba/Pb] ratios observed are higher than the prediction from models of

918: the s-process by \citet{busso99}, as has been argued by previous

919: studies \citep[e.g. ][]{cui06}. Further studies of Pb abundances, as well

920: as modeling of the s-process to explain the discrepancy between the

921: observations and predictions, are clearly required in order to better

922: understand the overall neutron-capture nucleosynthesis process in AGB

923: stars.

924: 

925: \subsection{{\objf}: an object belonging to a close binary?}

926: 

927: As discussed in \S~\ref{sec:obs}, {\objf} exhibited a rapid variation

928: of radial velocities on February 10, 2007, suggesting that this object

929: belongs to a close binary system. However, it is interesting that no

930: clear variation was found in the February 11 spectra, where the radial

931: velocity is close to the middle of the three spectra obtained on

932: February 10.  This result could well imply a large eccentricity of the

933: binary system, although the radial velocity measurements are still too

934: sparse to confidently derive orbital parameters. Further radial

935: velocity monitoring of this object is clearly desirable.

936: 

937: The observed excesses of neutron-capture elements in this object are

938: very large (e.g., [Ba/Fe] = +3.4). Indeed, the [Ba/H] value of this

939: object is the highest among the CEMP stars shown in

940: Figure~\ref{fig:hist_bah}. The [Sr/Ba] ratio ([Sr/Ba] $=-1.15$) is a

941: typical value found for Ba-enhanced CEMP stars

942: (Figure~\ref{fig:srbapb}), as compared to that of r-process-enhanced

943: stars ([Sr/Ba]$\sim -0.4$; e.g.  Sneden et al. 2003), suggesting that

944: the neutron-capture elements of this star originated from operation of

945: the s-process in an AGB donor star.

946: 

947: \citet{lucatello03} studied the CEMP turn-off star HE~0024--2523

948: ([Fe/H]$=-2.7$), which they showed to be a short-period spectroscopic

949: binary.  This star has a orbital period of 3.4~days, with a very small

950: eccentricity (0.01). \citet{sivarani06} also reported a candidate CEMP

951: turn-off close binary, CS~22958--042, for which a significant radial

952: velocity change was found based on two exposures taken during a single

953: observing run. {\objf} is possibly another example of CEMP stars

954: belonging to close binary systems. \citet{lucatello03} proposed that

955: HE~0024--2523 underwent a past common-envelope phase with its

956: companion that has become an AGB star. A similar past history may be

957: applicable to {\objf}.

958: 

959: The stellar parameters of {\objf} ({\teff} = 6700~K and {\logg} = 4.2)

960: are almost the same as those of HE~0024--2523 ({\teff} = 6625~K and

961: {\logg} = 4.3).  On the other hand, the abundance ratios of the

962: neutron-capture elements are different between these two stars -- while

963: HE~0024-2523 exhibits a very large excess of Pb ([Pb/Fe] = +3.3) and

964: moderate over-abundances of Ba ([Ba/Fe] = +1.46), {\objf} has a very

965: large overabundance of Ba ([Ba/Fe] = +3.40). Our derived upper limit

966: on the Pb abundance ratio of {\objf} is still quite high ([Pb/Fe] $ <

967: +3.7$), so it does not constrain this comparison at present. We note

968: that the possible close binary CS~22958--042 exhibits no excess of

969: neutron-capture elements, but shows a large over-abundance of Na, as found

970: also for {\objf}. Thus, large variations of chemical abundances are found

971: even in these three (candidate) close binary systems.  Further

972: abundance measurements, as well as radial velocity monitoring, for

973: {\objf} are clearly desired to understand the evolution of such binary

974: systems.

975: 

976: \section{Kinematics}

977: 

978: 

979: Table~\ref{tab:kinematics} provides kinematic data for our SDSS

980: targets.  Distances (expected to be accurate to on the order of

981: 10-15\%) for these stars are estimated using the methods described by

982: \citet{beers00}, under the assumption that they are main-sequence

983: stars, as suggested by the surface gravities determined in this

984: study. Proper motions are obtained based on the re-calibrated USNO-B2

985: catalog, as described by Munn et al. (2004), and are expected to be

986: accurate to on the order of 3 mas/year. The radial velocities are

987: taken from our high-resolution estimates listed in Table 1, with the

988: exception of SDSS 1707+58, where we adopt the value measured from the

989: SDSS spectrum. The space motions, errors in the space motions, and the

990: other derived quantities listed in Table~\ref{tab:kinematics} are

991: obtained following the procedures of \citet{beers00}. 

992: 

993: 

994: All six of the SDSS CEMP stars exhibit a derived $r_{\rm max}$ (maximum distance

995: from the Galactic center achieved during the course of their orbits) in excess of

996: 10 kpc from the Galactic center. Four of the stars exhibit $Z_{\rm max}$

997: (maximum height above or below the Galactic plane achieved during the course of

998: their orbits) values larger than 10~kpc, or significant retrograde motions,

999: indicating that these stars may belong to the outer-halo population of

1000: our Galaxy, according to the criteria of \citet{carollo07}. This is also

1001: reminiscent of the apparent excess of CEMP stars with increasing distance from

1002: the plane reported by Frebel et al. (2006). Although the sample size is too

1003: small to derive any firm conclusions, the fraction of outer-halo stars among the

1004: CEMP stars appears to be quite high compared with the fraction found for

1005: metal-poor stars ([Fe/H] $<-2.2$) studied by \citet{carollo07}. A comparison of

1006: the fraction of CEMP stars associated with the inner- and outer-halo

1007: populations, at a given metallicity, potentially constrains the initial mass

1008: function of early-generation stars, as discussed recently by \citet{tumlinson07}

1009: and

1010: \citet{komiya07}, and is clearly of interest for additional study, in particular

1011: given the very large samples of CEMP stars identified in SDSS/SEGUE.

1012: 

1013: \section{Concluding remarks}

1014: 

1015: Chemical compositions of seven CEMP turn-off stars are determined.

1016: Six stars among them exhibit a large excess of Ba, signature of a

1017: contribution by the nucleosynthesis in an AGB star. The distribution

1018: of carbon abundances in these stars suggest that the surface of such

1019: stars preserves the material transferred from the AGB star that was the

1020: erstwhile primary star in a binary system. If this is the case, the

1021: relatively wide distribution of Ba abundances ([Ba/H]) indicates a

1022: diversity of the efficiency of the s-process in metal-poor AGB stars.

1023: Further studies to identify the physical mechanism that produces such

1024: diversity are clearly desired.

1025: 

1026: The present study is the first application of high-resolution

1027: spectroscopy to candidate CEMP stars from the SDSS and SEGUE sample.

1028: Comparisons of our results on stellar parameters and chemical

1029: abundances with the estimates from the SDSS spectra confirmed that the

1030: selection of metal-poor stars works well in general. The SDSS/SEGUE

1031: survey is providing a large sample of candidate metal-poor stars.

1032: High-resolution spectroscopy for such stars in the near future will reveal the

1033: chemical abundance trends in the lowest metallicity range, as well as be useful

1034: for exploring the possible dependence of their chemical properties on

1035: their derived kinematics.

1036: 

1037: \acknowledgments

1038: 

1039: Funding for the SDSS and SDSS-II has been provided by the Alfred

1040: P. Sloan Foundation, the Participating Institutions, the National

1041: Science Foundation, the U.S. Department of Energy, the National

1042: Aeronautics and Space Administration, the Japanese Monbukagakusho, the

1043: Max Planck Society, and the Higher Education Funding Council for

1044: England. The SDSS Web Site is http://www.sdss.org/.

1045: 

1046: The SDSS is managed by the Astrophysical Research Consortium for the

1047: Participating Institutions. The Participating Institutions are the

1048: American Museum of Natural History, Astrophysical Institute Potsdam,

1049: University of Basel, University of Cambridge, Case Western Reserve

1050: University, University of Chicago, Drexel University, Fermilab, the

1051: Institute for Advanced Study, the Japan Participation Group, Johns

1052: Hopkins University, the Joint Institute for Nuclear Astrophysics, the

1053: Kavli Institute for Particle Astrophysics and Cosmology, the Korean

1054: Scientist Group, the Chinese Academy of Sciences (LAMOST), Los Alamos

1055: National Laboratory, the Max-Planck-Institute for Astronomy (MPIA),

1056: the Max-Planck-Institute for Astrophysics (MPA), New Mexico State

1057: University, Ohio State University, University of Pittsburgh,

1058: University of Portsmouth, Princeton University, the United States

1059: Naval Observatory, and the University of Washington.

1060: 

1061: W.~A. is supported by a Grant-in-Aid for Science Research from JSPS

1062: (grant 18104003). T.~C.~B., B.~M., and T.~S. acknowledge support by

1063: the US National Science Foundation under grants AST 04-06784 and AST

1064: 07-07776, as well as from grant PHY 02-16783; Physics Frontier

1065: Center/Joint Institute for Nuclear Astrophysics (JINA). D.~C. is

1066: grateful to JINA for support of her long-term visitor status at

1067: Michigan State University, where the kinematical analysis took place.

1068: J.E.N. acknowledges support from the Australian Research Council under

1069: grant DP0663562.

1070: 

1071: 

1072: \begin{thebibliography}{}

1073: 

1074: %\begin{thebibliography}{23}

1075: %\expandafter\ifx\csname natexlab\endcsname\relax\def\natexlab#1{#1}\fi

1076: 

1077: 

1078: %\bibitem[Adelman-McCarthy \& for the SDSS

1079: %Collaboration(2007)]{adelman-mccarthy07} Adelman-McCarthy, J.~K. et

1080: %al. 2007, submitted to ApJS, arXiv:0707.3413

1081: 

1082: \bibitem[Adelman-McCarthy et al.(2007)]{adelman-mccarthy07} 

1083: Adelman-McCarthy, J.~K., et al.\ 2007, \apjs, 172, 634 

1084: 

1085: \bibitem[Alonso, Arribas, \& Mart\'{i}nez-Roger (1996)]{alonso96}

1086:   Alonso, A., Arribas, S., \& {Mart{\'\i}nez-Roger}, C. 1996, \aap,

1087:   313, 873

1088: 

1089: \bibitem[Alvarez \& Plez (1998)]{alvarez98} Alvarez, R., \& Plez,

1090: B.\ 1998, \aap, 330, 1109

1091: 

1092: \bibitem[Aoki et al.(2005)]{aoki05} Aoki, W., et al.\ 2005, 

1093: \apj, 632, 611 

1094: 

1095: \bibitem[Aoki et al.(2007)]{aoki07} Aoki, W., Beers, T.~C., 

1096: Christlieb, N., Norris, J.~E., Ryan, S.~G., \& Tsangarides, S.\ 2007, \apj, 

1097: 655, 492 

1098: 

1099: \bibitem[Aoki et al.(2002a)]{aoki02a} Aoki, W., Norris, J.~E., 

1100: Ryan, S.~G., Beers, T.~C., \& Ando, H.\ 2002a, \apj, 567, 1166 

1101: 

1102: \bibitem[Aoki et al.(2002b)]{aoki02b} Aoki, W., Norris, J.~E., 

1103: Ryan, S.~G., Beers, T.~C., \& Ando, H.\ 2002b, \pasj, 54, 933 

1104: 

1105: \bibitem[Aoki et al.(2002c)]{aoki02c} Aoki, W., Ryan, S.~G., 

1106: Norris, J.~E., Beers, T.~C., Ando, H., \& Tsangarides, S.\ 2002c, \apj, 580, 

1107: 1149 

1108: 

1109: %\bibitem[Arlandini et al. (1999)]{arlandini99} Arlandini, C.,

1110: %  K\"{a}ppeler, F., Wisshak, K., Gallino, R., Lugaro, M., Busso, M.,

1111: %  \& Straniero, O. 1999, \apj, 525, 886

1112: 

1113: %\bibitem[{Arnone} {et~al.}(2005)]{arnone05}

1114: %{Arnone}, E., {Ryan}, S.~G., {Argast}, D., {Norris}, J.~E., \& {Beers}, T.~C.

1115: %  2005, \aap, 430, 507

1116: 

1117: \bibitem[Asplund(2005a)]{asplund05a} Asplund, M.\ 2005a, \araa, 43, 

1118: 481 

1119: 

1120: \bibitem[Asplund et al.(2005b)]{asplund05b} Asplund, M., Grevesse, 

1121: N., \& Sauval, A.~J.\ 2005b, ASP Conf.~Ser.~336: Cosmic Abundances as 

1122: Records of Stellar Evolution and Nucleosynthesis, 336, 25 

1123: 

1124: \bibitem[Barklem \& Aspelund-Johansson(2005)]{barklem05} Barklem,

1125: P.~S., \& Aspelund-Johansson, J.\ 2005, \aap, 435, 373

1126: 

1127: \bibitem[Barklem \& O'Mara(1998)]{barklem98} Barklem, P.~S., \&

1128: O'Mara, B.~J.\ 1998, \mnras, 300, 863

1129: 

1130: \bibitem[Beers \& Christlieb (2005)]{beers05} Beers, T. C., \&

1131: Christlieb, N. 2005, ARA\&A, 43, 531

1132: 

1133: \bibitem[Beers et al.(1992)]{beers92} Beers, T.~C., Preston, 

1134: G.~W., \& Shectman, S.~A.\ 1992, \aj, 103, 1987 

1135: 

1136: \bibitem[Beers et al. (2000)]{beers00} Beers, T. C., et al. 2000, \aj, 119, 2866

1137: 

1138: \bibitem[Beers et al. (2006)]{beers06} Beers, T.C., et al. 2006, BAAS

1139: 38, 168.08

1140: 

1141: \bibitem[Beers et al.(2007)]{beers07} Beers, T.~C., et al.\ 

1142: 2007, \apjs, 168, 128 

1143: 

1144: \bibitem[Bond (1974)]{bond74} Bond, H.~E.\ 1974, \apj, 194, 95

1145: 

1146: \bibitem[Busso et al.(2001)]{busso01} Busso, M., Gallino, R., 

1147: Lambert, D.~L., Travaglio, C., \& Smith, V.~V.\ 2001, \apj, 557, 802 

1148: 

1149: \bibitem[Busso et al.(1999)]{busso99} Busso, M., Gallino, R., 

1150: \& Wasserburg, G.~J.\ 1999, \araa, 37, 239

1151: 

1152: \bibitem[Carollo et al.(2007)]{carollo07} Carollo, D., et al.\ 

1153: 2007, \nat, 450, 1020 

1154: 

1155: \bibitem[Castelli \& Kurucz(2003)]{castelli03} Castelli, F., \& 

1156: Kurucz, R.~L.\ 2003, Modelling of Stellar Atmospheres, 210, 20P 

1157: 

1158: %\bibitem[{Cayrel {et~al.}(2004)Cayrel, Depagne, Spite, Hill, Spite, Francois,

1159: %  Beers, Primas, Andersen, Barbuy, Bonifacio, Molaro, \&

1160: %  Nordstr\"om}]{Cayreletal:2004}

1161: %Cayrel, R., Depagne, E., Spite, M., Hill, V., Spite, F., Francois, P., Beers,

1162: %  T., Primas, F., Andersen, J., Barbuy, B., Bonifacio, P., Molaro, P., \&

1163: %  Nordstr\"om, B. 2004, A\&A, 416, 1117

1164: 

1165: \bibitem[Charbonnel et al. (2007)]{charbonnel07} Charbonnel, C., \& Zahn, J.-P. 2007, \aap, 467, L15

1166: 

1167: %\bibitem[Chiba \& Beers(2000)]{chiba00} Chiba, M., \& Beers, 

1168: %T.~C.\ 2000, \aj, 119, 2843

1169: 

1170: \bibitem[Christlieb et al.(2002)]{christlieb02} Christlieb, N., et 

1171: al.\ 2002, \nat, 419, 904 

1172: 

1173: \bibitem[Cohen et al.(2003)]{cohen03}  Cohen, J.~G., Christlieb, 

1174: N., Qian, Y.-Z., \& Wasserburg, G.~J.\ 2003, \apj, 588, 1082 

1175: 

1176: \bibitem[Cohen et al.(2004)]{cohen04} Cohen, J.~G., et al.\ 

1177: 2004, \apj, 612, 1107 

1178: 

1179: \bibitem[Cohen et al.(2006)]{cohen06} Cohen, J.~G., et al.\ 

1180: 2006, \aj, 132, 137 

1181: 

1182: \bibitem[Collet et al.(2005)]{collet05} Collet, R., Asplund, M., 

1183: \& Th{\'e}venin, F.\ 2005, \aap, 442, 643

1184: 

1185: \bibitem[Collet et al.(2006)]{collet06} Collet, R., Asplund, M., 

1186: \& Trampedach, R.\ 2006, \apjl, 644, L121 

1187: 

1188: \bibitem[Cui \& Zhang(2006)]{cui06} Cui, W., \& Zhang, B.\ 

1189: 2006, \mnras, 368, 305 

1190: 

1191: \bibitem[Denissenkov \& Pinsonneault(2007)]{denissenkov07} 

1192: Denissenkov, P.~A., \& Pinsonneault, M.\ 2007, ArXiv e-prints, 709, 

1193: arXiv:0709.4240 

1194: 

1195: \bibitem[Downes et al. (2004)]{downes04} Downes, R.A., et al. 2004,

1196: \aj, 127, 2838

1197: 

1198: \bibitem[Frebel et al.(2005)]{frebel05} Frebel, A., et al.\ 

1199: 2005, \nat, 434, 871 

1200: 

1201: \bibitem[Frebel et al. (2006)]{frebel06} Frebel, A., et al. 2006,

1202: \apj, 652, 1585

1203: 

1204: \bibitem[Fukugita et al. (1996)]{fukugita96} Fukugita, M., Ichikawa, T., Gunn, J.E., Doi, M., Shimasaku, K., \&

1205: Schneider, D.P. 1996, \aj, 111, 1748  

1206: 

1207: \bibitem[Gunn et al. (1998)]{gunn98} Gunn, J.E., et al. 1998, \aj, 116, 3040 

1208: 

1209: \bibitem[Gunn et al. (2006)]{gunn06} Gunn, J.E., et al. 2006, \aj, 131, 2332 

1210: 

1211: \bibitem[Hogg et al. (2001)]{hogg01} Hogg, D.W., Finkbeiner, D.P., Schlegel, D.J., \& Gunn, J.E. 2001,

1212:    \aj, 122, 2129 

1213: 

1214: \bibitem[Ivans et al.(2005)]{ivans05} Ivans, I.~I., Sneden, C., 

1215: Gallino, R., Cowan, J.~J., \& Preston, G.~W.\ 2005, \apjl, 627, L145 

1216: 

1217: \bibitem[ Ivez\'ic et al. (2004)]{ivezic04} Ivez\'ic, Z., et al. 2004, AN, 325, 583 

1218: 

1219: \bibitem[Jonsell et al. (2006)]{jonsell06} Jonsell, K., Barklem, P. S.,

1220: Gustafsson, B., Christlieb, N., Hill, V., Beers, T. C., \& Holmberg, J.

1221: 2006, A\&A 451, 651

1222: 

1223: \bibitem[Keenan (1942)]{keenan42} Keenan, P. C., \apj, 96, 101

1224: 

1225: 

1226: 

1227: \bibitem[Kim et al.(2002)]{y2} Kim, Y.-C., Demarque, P., 

1228: Yi, S.~K., \& Alexander, D.~R.\ 2002, \apjs, 143, 499 

1229: 

1230: \bibitem[Komiya et al.(2007)]{komiya07} Komiya, Y., Suda, T., 

1231: Minaguchi, H., Shigeyama, T., Aoki, W., \& Fujimoto, M.~Y.\ 2007, \apj, 

1232: 658, 367 

1233: 

1234: \bibitem[Kupka et al.(1999)]{kupka99} Kupka, F., Piskunov, N.,

1235: Ryabchikova, T.~A., Stempels, H.~C., \& Weiss, W.~W.\ 1999, \aaps,

1236: 138, 119

1237: 

1238: \bibitem[{Kurucz(1993)}]{kurucz93} Kurucz, R.~L. 1993, CD-ROM 13,

1239: ATLAS9 Stellar Atmospheres Programs and 2~km/s Grid (Cambridge:

1240: Smithsonian Astrophys. Obs.)

1241: 

1242: \bibitem[Lawler et al.(2001)]{lawler01} Lawler, J.~E., 

1243: Bonvallet, G., \& Sneden, C.\ 2001, \apj, 556, 452 

1244: 

1245: \bibitem[Lee et al. (2007a)]{lee07a} Lee, Y.S., et al. 2007a, \aj,

1246: submitted

1247: 

1248: \bibitem[Lee et al. (2007b)]{lee07b} Lee, Y.S., et al. 2007b, \aj,

1249: submitted

1250: 

1251: \bibitem[Lucatello et al.(2006)]{lucatello06} Lucatello, S., Beers, 

1252: T.~C., Christlieb, N., Barklem, P.~S., Rossi, S., Marsteller, B., Sivarani, 

1253: T., \& Lee, Y.~S.\ 2006, \apjl, 652, L37 

1254: 

1255: \bibitem[Lucatello et al.(2003)]{lucatello03} Lucatello, S., Gratton,

1256: R., Cohen, J.~G., Beers, T.~C., Christlieb, N., Carretta, E., \&

1257: Ram{\'{\i}}rez, S.\ 2003, \aj, 125, 875

1258: 

1259: \bibitem[Lucatello et al.(2005)]{lucatello05} Lucatello, S., 

1260: Tsangarides, S., Beers, T.~C., Carretta, E., Gratton, R.~G., \& Ryan, 

1261: S.~G.\ 2005, \apj, 625, 825 

1262: 

1263: \bibitem[Lupton et al.(2001)]{lupton01} Lupton, R., Gunn, J.~E., 

1264: Ivezi{\'c}, Z., Knapp, G.~R., \& Kent, S.\ 2001, Astronomical Data Analysis 

1265: Software and Systems X, 238, 269 

1266: 

1267: \bibitem[Margon et al. (2002)]{margon02} Margon, B., et al. 2002, \aj, 124, 1651 

1268: 

1269: \bibitem[Marsteller (2007)]{marsteller07} Marsteller, B. 2007, PhD Thesis,

1270: Michigan State University

1271: 

1272: \bibitem[Marstellar et al. (2006)]{marstellar06} Marsteller, B., et

1273: al. 2006, BAAS, 38, 242.02

1274: 

1275: \bibitem[Masseron et al.(2006)]{masseron06} Masseron, T., et al.\ 

1276: 2006, \aap, 455, 1059 

1277: 

1278: %\bibitem[{McWilliam(1997)}]{mcwilliam97}

1279: %McWilliam, A. 1997, ARA\&A, 35, 503

1280: 

1281: \bibitem[{McWilliam(1998)}]{mcwilliam98}

1282: McWilliam, A. 1998, \aj, 115, 1640

1283: 

1284: %\bibitem[{McWilliam {et~al.}(1995)McWilliam, Preston, Sneden, \&

1285: %  Searle}]{mcwilliam95b}

1286: %McWilliam, A., Preston, G., Sneden, C., \& Searle, L. 1995, \aj, 109, 2757

1287: 

1288: \bibitem[Munn et al. (2004)]{munn04} Munn, J. A., et al. 2004, \aj, 127, 3034

1289: 

1290: \bibitem[{Munari \& Zwitter(1997)}]{munari97}

1291: Munari, U., \& Zwitter, T. 1997, A\&A, 318, 269

1292: 

1293: \bibitem[{Noguchi {et~al.}(2002)Noguchi, Aoki, \& et~al.}]{noguchi02}

1294: Noguchi, K. et~al. 2002, PASJ, 54, 855

1295: 

1296: %% included on 06/07/21

1297: %\bibitem[Nomoto et al.(2006)]{2006astro.ph..5725N} Nomoto, K., Tominaga, 

1298: %N., Umeda, H., Kobayashi, C., \& Maeda, K.\ 2006, \nphysa, in press (astro-ph/0605725) 

1299: 

1300: \bibitem[Norris et al.(1997a)]{norris97a} Norris, J.~E., Ryan, 

1301: S.~G., \& Beers, T.~C.\ 1997a, \apj, 488, 350 

1302: 

1303: \bibitem[Norris et al.(1997b)]{norris97b} Norris, J.~E., Ryan, 

1304: S.~G., \& Beers, T.~C.\ 1997b, \apjl, 489, L169 

1305: 

1306: \bibitem[{Norris {et~al.}(2001)Norris, Ryan, \& Beers}]{norris01}

1307: Norris, J. E., Ryan, S. G., \& Beers, T. C. 2001, ApJ, 561, 1034

1308: 

1309: 

1310: \bibitem[Norris et al.(2007)]{norris07} Norris, J.~E., 

1311: Christlieb, N., Korn, A.~J., Eriksson, K., Bessell, M.~S., Beers, T.~C., 

1312: Wisotzki, L., \& Reimers, D.\ 2007, \apj, 670, 774 

1313: 

1314: \bibitem[Preston \& Sneden(2001)]{preston01} Preston, G.~W., \& 

1315: Sneden, C.\ 2001, \aj, 122, 1545 

1316: 

1317: \bibitem[Pier et al. (2003)]{pier03} Pier, J.R., Munn, J.A., Hindsley, R.B., Hennessy, G.S., Kent, S.M.,

1318: Lupton, R.H., \& Ivez\'ic, Z. 2003, \aj, 125, 1559 

1319: 

1320: \bibitem[Plez \& Cohen(2005)]{2005A&A...434.1117P} Plez, B., \& Cohen,

1321: J.~G.\ 2005, \aap, 434, 1117

1322: 

1323: \bibitem[Reyniers et al.(2004)]{reyniers04} Reyniers, M., Van 

1324: Winckel, H., Gallino, R., \& Straniero, O.\ 2004, \aap, 417, 269 

1325: 

1326: \bibitem[{Schlegel {et~al.}(1998)Schlegel, Finkbeiner, \&

1327:   Davis}]{schlegel98}

1328: Schlegel, D., Finkbeiner, D., \& Davis, M. 1998, ApJ, 500, 525

1329: 

1330: \bibitem[Smith et al. (2002)]{smith02} Smith, J.A., et al. 2002, \aj, 123, 2121 

1331: 

1332: \bibitem[Sneden et al.(2003)]{sneden03} Sneden, C., et al.\ 

1333: 2003, \apj, 591, 936 

1334: 

1335: \bibitem[Simons et al. (1989)]{simons89} Simons, J.W., Palmer, B.A.,

1336: Hof, D.E., \& Oldenborg, R.C. 1989, J. Opt. Soc. Am. B., 6, 1097

1337: 

1338: \bibitem[Sivarani et al.(2006)]{sivarani06} Sivarani, T., et al.\ 

1339: 2006, \aap, 459, 125 

1340: 

1341: \bibitem[Skrutskie et al.(2006)]{skrutskie06} Skrutskie, M.~F., et 

1342: al.\ 2006, \aj, 131, 1163 

1343: 

1344: \bibitem[Stancliffe et al.(2007)]{stancliffe07} Stancliffe, R.~J., 

1345: Glebbeek, E., Izzard, R.~G., \& Pols, O.~R.\ 2007, \aap, 464, L57 

1346: 

1347: \bibitem[Stoughton et al. (2002)]{stoughton02} Stoughton, C., et al. 2002, \aj, 123, 485 

1348: 

1349: %\bibitem[{Takeda {et~al.}(2003)Takeda, Zhao, Takada-Hidai, Chen, Saito, \&

1350: %  Zhang}]{takeda03}

1351: %Takeda, Y., Zhao, G., Takada-Hidai, M., Chen, Y.-Q., Saito, Y.-J., \& Zhang,

1352: %  H.-W. 2003, ChJAA, 3, 316

1353: 

1354: \bibitem[Thompson et al.(2007)]{thompson08} Thompson, I.~B., et 

1355: al.\ 2007, ApJ, in press, ArXiv e-prints, 712, arXiv:0712.3228 

1356: 

1357: \bibitem[Tucker et al. (2006)]{1234} Tucker, D., et al. 2006, AN, 327, 821 

1358: 

1359: \bibitem[Tumlinson(2007)]{tumlinson07} Tumlinson, J.\ 2007, \apjl, 

1360: 664, L63 

1361: 

1362: \bibitem[van den Hoek \& Groenewegen(1997)]{vandenhoek97} van den

1363: Hoek, L.~B., \& Groenewegen, M.~A.~T.\ 1997, \aaps, 123, 305

1364: 

1365: \bibitem[York et al. (2000)]{york00} York, D.G., et al. 2000, \aj, 120, 1579

1366:  

1367: \bibitem[Zhao \& Newberg (2006)]{zhao06} Zhao, C., \& Newberg, H.J. 2006, unpublished manuscript

1368: (astro-ph/0612034)

1369: 

1370: 

1371: 

1372: \end{thebibliography}

1373: 

1374: %\input{figtabv11}

1375: 

1376: 

1377: \clearpage

1378: %\begin{deluxetable}{@{}l@{\extracolsep{\fill}}c@{\extracolsep{\fill}}c@{\extracolsep{\fill}}c@{\extracolsep{\fill}}c@{\extracolsep{\fill}}c@{\extracolsep{\fill}}c}

1379: \begin{deluxetable}{lccccc}

1380: \tablewidth{0pt}

1381: \tabletypesize{\footnotesize}

1382: %\caption{PROGRAM STARS AND OBSERVATIONS}\label{tab:obs}

1383: \tablecaption{\label{tab:obs} PROGRAM STARS AND OBSERVATIONS}

1384: \tablehead{

1385: Star    & IAU Name &  Exp.\tablenotemark{a} & Counts\tablenotemark{b} &  Obs. date (JD) & $V_{\rm helio}$ ({\kms}) ~  \\

1386: }

1387: \startdata

1388: {\LP}     &                                 & 20  & 16500 & 14 Sep 2006 (2453992.87) & $  80.35 \pm 0.10$ \\

1389: {\CS}   &                          & 40  & 8000  & 10 Feb 2007 (2454141.72) & $ 203.09 \pm 0.39$ \\

1390: {\obja} & SDSS J003602.17-104336.3 & 120 & 5350  & 14 Sep 2006 (2453992.95) & $-146.18 \pm 0.18$ \\

1391: {\objc} & SDSS J012617.95+060724.8 & 120 & 5150  & 14 Sep 2006 (2453993.04) & $-272.24 \pm 0.28$ \\

1392: {\objd} & SDSS J081754.93+264103.8 & 94  & 1050 & 10 Feb 2007 (2454141.76) & $   1.74 \pm 2.52$ \\

1393: {\obje} & SDSS J092401.85+405928.7 & 160 & 5250 & 10 Feb 2007 (2454141.87) & $-366.16 \pm 0.23$ \\

1394: {\objf} & SDSS J170733.93+585059.7 & 117 & 2300 & 10 Feb 2007 (2454142.10) & ... \\

1395: {\objb} & SDSS J204728.84+001553.8 & 160 & 3000  & 14 Sep 2006 (2453992.75) & $-417.92 \pm 0.20$ \\

1396: \enddata

1397: \tablenotetext{a}{Exposure time (minutes)}

1398: \tablenotetext{b}{The photon counts per pixel (0.18{\kms}) at 5100~{\AA}}

1399: \end{deluxetable}

1400: 

1401: 

1402: \begin{deluxetable}{lcccccccccc}

1403: \rotate

1404: \tablewidth{0pt}

1405: \tabletypesize{\footnotesize}

1406: \tablecaption{PHOTOMETRY DATA \label{tab:photo}}

1407: \tablehead{

1408: object        &   $V$\tablenotemark{a} &$\sigma(V)$ & $B-V$\tablenotemark{a} & $\sigma(B-V)$ & $K$ & $\sigma(K)$ &$E(B-V)$\tablenotemark{b} & $E(B-V)$\tablenotemark{b} & {\teff}$(V-K)$ &  {\teff}$(B-V)$  

1409: }

1410: \startdata

1411: {\LP}   &   12.098 &  0.001 & 0.467  & 0.003 & 10.771 &  0.017 & 0.022 & 0.007 & 6206 & 5933 \\ % 0.018, 0.01, 30

1412: {\CS}   &   13.352 &  0.004 & 0.356  & 0.007 & 12.367 &  0.023 & 0.033 & 0.025 & 6800 & 6500 \\

1413: {\obja} &   15.540 &  0.004 & 0.320  & 0.006 & 14.388 &  0.080 & 0.027 & 0.010 & 6500 & 6600 \\ % 0.08,  0.01, 120

1414: {\objc} &   15.525 &  0.004 & ...    & ...   & 14.468 &  0.077 & 0.029 & 0.094 & 6600 & ...  \\

1415: {\objd} &   15.990 &  0.004 & 0.43   & 0.006 & 14.707 &  0.077 & 0.024 & 0.028 & 6302 & 6097 \\

1416: {\obje} &   15.480 &  0.004 & 0.42   & 0.006 & 14.165 &  0.053 & 0.014 &\nodata& 6184 & 6097 \\

1417: {\objf} &   15.810 &  0.004 & 0.33   & 0.006 & 14.776 &  0.108 & 0.035 & 0.091 & 6700 & 6600 \\

1418: {\objb} &   16.009 &  0.004 & 0.390  & 0.006 & 14.880 &  0.120 & 0.088 & 0.126 & 6800 & 6600 \\ %

1419: \enddata

1420: \tablenotetext{a}{$V$ and $B-V$ for SDSS/SEGUE objects are already extinction

1421: and reddening corrected}

1422: \tablenotetext{b}{$E(B-V)$ from the dust map of \citet{schlegel98}}

1423: \tablenotetext{c}{$E(B-V)$ from the \ion{Na}{1} D1 line}

1424: \end{deluxetable}

1425: 

1426: %s2_0418_567      15.231   0.004  0.310   0.006    14.029   0.047      0.042

1427: %S3_1432-382      15.990   0.000  0.36    0.000    14.701   0.091      0.013

1428: 

1429: 

1430: 

1431: \begin{deluxetable}{lccccc}

1432: \tablewidth{0pt}

1433: \tablecaption{RADIAL VELOCITY VARIATION FOUND FOR {\objf}  \label{tab:s0353}}

1434: \tablehead{

1435: UT  & HJD & exposure & Shift & Width &  $V_{\rm helio}$ \\ 

1436:     &     & (minutes) & ({\kms}) & (m{\AA}) & ({\kms}) 

1437: }

1438: \startdata

1439: 10 Feb.2007, 14:19 & 2454142.097 & 40 & 35.4 & 27.5 &  40.7 \\

1440: 10 Feb.2007, 15:00 & 2454142.125 & 40 & 16.9 & 35.5 &  22.2 \\

1441: 10 Feb.2007, 15:41 & 2454142.153 & 37 &$-$2.3 & 23.3 &   3.0 \\

1442: 11 Feb.2007, 15:34 & 2454143.148 & 20 & 15.6 & 16.9 &  20.8 \\

1443: 11 Feb.2007, 15:49 & 2454143.159 & 20 & 16.5 & 20.0 &  21.7 \\

1444: \enddata

1445: %~ \\

1446: \end{deluxetable}

1447: 

1448: 

1449: %\input{sdss_ewtab}

1450: %\input{sdss_ewtabs}

1451: \clearpage

1452: \pagestyle{empty}

1453: \begin{deluxetable}{lccccccccccc}

1454: \tablewidth{0pt}

1455: \tabletypesize{\scriptsize}

1456: \rotate

1457: \tablecaption{EQUIVALENT WIDTHS \label{tab:ew}}

1458: \tablehead{Species &   Wavelength & L.E.P.&  $\log gf$ & \multicolumn{8}{c}{Equivalent width (m{\AA})} \\

1459:         &   ({\AA})    & (eV) &         & {\LP} & {\CS} & {\obja}  & {\objc}  & {\objd}  & {\obje}  & {\objf}  & {\objb} 

1460: }

1461: \startdata

1462:      Na I &   5889.95&    0.00&    0.10&   164.2&    98.6&   116.1&    75.3&    ... &   147.3&  313.8 &    69.5 \\

1463:      Na I &   5895.92&    0.00&   -0.20&   135.5&    77.0&    96.4&    55.5&    ... &   127.3&  277.6 &    ...  \\

1464:      Mg I &   4057.50&    4.35&   -0.89&    13.0&    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    ...  \\

1465:      Mg I &   4571.10&    0.00&   -5.69&     1.9&    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    ...  \\

1466:      Mg I &   5172.69&    2.71&   -0.38&   129.6&   117.6&    99.8&    84.9&    71.8&   120.2&   184.2&   124.9 \\

1467:      Mg I &   5183.60&    2.72&   -0.16&   147.5&   135.2&   122.0&   101.6&    77.3&   141.4&   196.5&   147.3 \\

1468:      Mg I &   5528.40&    4.35&   -0.49&    33.0&    28.8&    22.7&    11.2&    22.0&    28.7&    ... &    40.7 \\

1469:      Ca I &   4226.73&    0.00&    0.24&    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &   122.1&    ...  \\

1470:      Ca I &   4435.69&    1.89&   -0.52&    13.8&    17.9&     7.1&    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    27.7 \\

1471:      Ca I &   4454.78&    1.90&    0.26&    35.8&    41.0&    38.0&    ... &    ... &    41.2&    ... &    49.3 \\

1472:      Ca I &   4455.89&    1.90&   -0.53&    10.3&    12.4&     8.7&    ... &    ... &    12.9&    ... &    13.0 \\

1473:      Ca I &   5265.56&    2.52&   -0.11&     6.3&    ... &     6.8&    ... &    ... &     7.3&    ... &    ...  \\

1474:      Ca I &   5588.76&    2.53&    0.36&    12.5&    ... &    13.0&    ... &    ... &    12.8&    ... &    ...  \\

1475:      Ca I &   5594.47&    2.52&    0.10&    13.5&    17.4&    10.6&    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    13.0 \\

1476:      Ca I &   5598.49&    2.52&   -0.09&     6.3&    ... &     7.5&    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    19.7 \\

1477:      Ca I &   5857.45&    2.93&    0.24&     5.9&    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    18.3 \\

1478:      Ca I &   6102.72&    1.88&   -0.77&     4.3&    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    15.7 \\

1479:      Ca I &   6122.22&    1.89&   -0.32&    12.7&    16.5&    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    21.1 \\

1480:      Ca I &   6162.17&    1.90&   -0.09&    19.2&    22.3&    21.5&    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    ...  \\

1481:      Ca I &   6439.07&    2.53&    0.39&    16.8&    19.1&    ... &    ... &    ... &    17.7&    ... &    26.2 \\

1482:      Ca I &   6462.57&    2.52&    0.26&    13.0&    13.1&    13.1&    ... &    ... &    16.5&    ... &    ...  \\

1483:      Ti I &   4981.73&    0.85&    0.56&     9.9&     9.1&    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    ...  \\

1484:      Ti I &   4991.07&    0.84&    0.44&     6.8&    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    ...  \\

1485:      Ti I &   4999.50&    0.83&    0.31&     8.2&    11.9&    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    ...  \\

1486:      Ti I &   5007.21&    0.82&    0.17&     8.6&    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    14.4 \\

1487:      Ti I &   5064.65&    0.05&   -0.94&     4.6&    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    ...  \\

1488:      Cr I &   4652.16&    1.00&   -1.03&     4.1&    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    ...  \\

1489:      Cr I &   5206.04&    0.94&    0.02&    21.0&    ... &    14.6&    ... &    ... &    13.4&    ... &    26.2 \\

1490:      Cr I &   5208.44&    0.94&    0.16&    23.5&    31.9&    22.5&    ... &    ... &    25.9&    ... &    37.4 \\

1491:      Fe I &   4063.59&    1.56&    0.06&    88.2\tablenotemark{a} &    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    ...  \\

1492:      Fe I &   4071.74&    1.61&   -0.02&    82.1&    90.4&    75.8&    ... &    56.5&    74.8&    ... &    74.5 \\

1493:      Fe I &   4107.49&    2.83&   -0.88&    10.6&    20.7&    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    ...  \\

1494:      Fe I &   4143.41&    3.05&   -0.20&    17.9&    19.3&    19.2&    ... &    ... &    27.0&    ... &    23.8 \\

1495:      Fe I &   4143.87&    1.56&   -0.51&    61.5&    68.6&    59.2&    26.9&    ... &    62.1&    ... &    59.6 \\

1496:      Fe I &   4202.03&    1.49&   -0.71&    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    43.3&    ...  \\

1497:      Fe I &   4271.76&    1.49&   -0.16&    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    38.1&    ...  \\

1498:      Fe I &   4307.90&    1.56&   -0.07&    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    62.1&    ...  \\

1499:      Fe I &   4325.76&    1.61&    0.01&    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    65.0&    ...  \\

1500:      Fe I &   4383.54&    1.49&    0.20&    98.9\tablenotemark{a} &   102.5&    87.1&    69.4&    ... &   102.2&    91.0&    99.6 \\

1501:      Fe I &   4404.75&    1.56&   -0.14&    77.6&    84.7&    65.4&    56.4&    41.5&    52.6&    66.7&    76.9 \\

1502:      Fe I &   4415.12&    1.61&   -0.62&    67.5&    65.4&    59.5&    22.7&    21.0&    85.3&    37.2&    65.9 \\

1503:      Fe I &   4427.31&    0.05&   -2.92&    36.0&    19.7&    29.3&    ... &    ... &    68.0&    ... &    39.7 \\

1504:      Fe I &   4442.34&    2.20&   -1.25&    ... &    19.4&    22.3&    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    19.5 \\

1505:      Fe I &   4447.72&    2.22&   -1.34&    ... &     7.1&    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    ...  \\

1506:      Fe I &   4459.12&    2.18&   -1.28&    14.2&    15.6&    11.8&    ... &    ... &    14.9&    ... &    22.1 \\

1507:      Fe I &   4461.65&    0.09&   -3.21&    13.2&    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    12.5&    ... &    22.1 \\

1508:      Fe I &   4466.55&    2.83&   -0.60&    14.5&    22.9&    17.4&    17.8\tablenotemark{a} &    ... &    12.6&    ... &    ...  \\

1509:      Fe I &   4476.02&    2.85&   -0.82&    13.3&    ... &     7.5&    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    11.6 \\

1510:      Fe I &   4494.56&    2.20&   -1.14&    15.3&     9.0&    11.9&    ... &    ... &    15.2&    ... &    ...  \\

1511:      Fe I &   4528.61&    2.18&   -0.82&    29.6&    42.7&    22.6&    ... &    ... &    29.8&    ... &    28.7 \\

1512:      Fe I &   4531.15&    1.49&   -2.15&    10.7&    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    ...  \\

1513:      Fe I &   4592.65&    1.56&   -2.45&     4.9&    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    ...  \\

1514:      Fe I &   4602.94&    1.49&   -2.21&     6.8&    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    11.5 \\

1515:      Fe I &   4871.32&    2.87&   -0.36&    ... &    17.2&    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    ...  \\

1516:      Fe I &   4872.14&    2.88&   -0.57&    13.3&    12.9&     9.6&    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    16.1 \\

1517:      Fe I &   4890.75&    2.88&   -0.39&    22.2&    28.9&    11.1&    ... &    ... &    19.5&    ... &    28.4 \\

1518:      Fe I &   4891.49&    2.85&   -0.11&    31.8&    34.5&    21.9&    ... &    ... &    36.5&    ... &    31.5 \\

1519:      Fe I &   4903.31&    2.88&   -0.93&     5.2&     9.4&    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    17.4 \\

1520:      Fe I &   4918.99&    2.87&   -0.34&    19.7&    24.4&    ... &    ... &    ... &    21.1&    ... &    28.8 \\

1521:      Fe I &   4920.50&    2.83&    0.07&    40.3&    54.7&    31.8&    ... &    ... &    40.2&    ... &    46.5 \\

1522:      Fe I &   4957.30&    2.85&   -0.41&    22.7&    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    21.8&    ... &    ...  \\

1523:      Fe I &   4957.60&    2.81&    0.23&    49.7&    61.9&    42.2&    ... &    23.8&    42.2&    ... &    ...  \\

1524:      Fe I &   4966.09&    3.33&   -0.87&     5.1&     6.2&    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    ...  \\

1525:      Fe I &   4994.13&    0.92&   -2.96&     4.2&    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    ...  \\

1526:      Fe I &   5006.12&    2.83&   -0.61&    13.5&    12.9&    ... &    ... &    ... &    14.2&    ... &    ...  \\

1527:      Fe I &   5012.07&    0.86&   -2.64&    10.7&    ... &     8.6&    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    19.9 \\

1528:      Fe I &   5041.76&    1.49&   -2.20&    ... &    28.8\tablenotemark{a} &    11.4&    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    ...  \\

1529:      Fe I &   5049.82&    2.28&   -1.34&    10.0&     9.9&    ... &    ... &    ... &    14.8&    ... &    ...  \\

1530:      Fe I &   5051.63&    0.92&   -2.80&     6.5&    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    15.2\tablenotemark{a} &    ... &    10.0 \\

1531:      Fe I &   5151.91&    1.01&   -3.32&     7.7\tablenotemark{a} &    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    ...  \\

1532:      Fe I &   5171.60&    1.49&   -1.79&    16.8&    14.3&    ... &    ... &    ... &    13.8&    ... &    23.2 \\

1533:      Fe I &   5191.46&    3.04&   -0.55&    10.7&    26.5&     9.0&    ... &    ... &    13.1&    ... &    17.2 \\

1534:      Fe I &   5192.34&    3.00&   -0.42&    14.4\tablenotemark{a} &    15.7&    11.0&    ... &    ... &    16.7&    ... &    20.8 \\

1535:      Fe I &   5194.94&    1.56&   -2.09&     9.5&    ... &    14.6&    ... &    ... &     8.9&    ... &    ...  \\

1536:      Fe I &   5198.71&    2.22&   -2.13&     2.2&    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    ...  \\

1537:      Fe I &   5202.34&    2.18&   -1.84&     4.4&    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    ...  \\

1538:      Fe I &   5216.27&    1.61&   -2.15&     7.5&    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    ...  \\

1539:      Fe I &   5232.94&    2.94&   -0.06&    28.7&    32.6&    19.5&    ... &    ... &    29.6&    ... &    39.2 \\

1540:      Fe I &   5266.56&    3.00&   -0.39&    14.9&    20.5&    14.3&    ... &    ... &    15.2&    ... &    16.9 \\

1541:      Fe I &   5269.54&    0.86&   -1.32&    67.4&    64.6&    57.4&    17.7&    42.4&    58.0&   39.4 &    74.5 \\

1542:      Fe I &   5270.36&    1.61&   -1.34&    36.0&    40.9&    29.8&    ... &    ... &    37.3&    ... &    57.5\tablenotemark{a}  \\

1543:      Fe I &   5281.79&    3.04&   -0.83&     4.7&    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    ...  \\

1544:      Fe I &   5324.18&    3.21&   -0.10&    16.4&    23.8&    14.4&    ... &    ... &    17.7&    ... &    23.8 \\

1545:      Fe I &   5328.04&    0.92&   -1.47&    57.4&    57.9&    45.9&    13.4&    ... &    50.4&   40.6 &    67.7 \\

1546:      Fe I &   5328.53&    1.56&   -1.85&    14.4&    13.1&    11.5&    ... &    ... &    10.2&    ... &    19.7 \\

1547:      Fe I &   5339.93&    3.27&   -0.65&     7.9&    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    ...  \\

1548:      Fe I &   5455.61&    1.01&   -2.10&    27.5&    30.7&    22.1&    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    34.9 \\

1549:      Fe I &   5497.52&    1.01&   -2.85&     4.9&    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    ...  \\

1550:      Fe I &   5506.78&    0.99&   -2.80&     6.5&    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    ...  \\

1551:      Fe I &   5569.62&    3.42&   -0.54&     6.2&    10.7&    ... &    ... &    ... &    11.1&    ... &    ...  \\

1552:      Fe I &   5572.84&    3.40&   -0.28&     8.7&    13.9&    ... &    ... &    ... &    13.0&    ... &    15.8 \\

1553:      Fe I &   5586.75&    3.37&   -0.10&    12.6&    17.2&     8.5&    ... &    ... &    14.4&    ... &    17.5 \\

1554:      Fe I &   5615.64&    3.33&    0.05&    18.2&    23.5&    14.2&    ... &    ... &    20.9&    ... &    24.1 \\

1555:      Fe I &   6136.61&    2.45&   -1.40&     6.9&    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    ...  \\

1556:      Fe I &   6137.69&    2.59&   -1.40&     6.9&    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    ...  \\

1557:      Fe I &   6191.56&    2.43&   -1.42&     6.4&    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    ...  \\

1558:      Fe I &   6230.72&    2.56&   -1.28&     6.2&    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &     9.4&    ... &    ...  \\

1559:      Fe I &   6393.60&    2.43&   -1.43&     5.8&    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    ...  \\

1560:      Fe I &   6677.99&    2.69&   -1.42&     4.8&    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    ...  \\

1561:      Co I &   4121.32&    0.92&   -0.32&    10.6&    ... &     7.7&    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    ...  \\

1562:      Ni I &   5476.91&    1.83&   -0.89&    11.9&    21.0&     5.7&    ... &    ... &    11.9&    ... &    16.5 \\

1563:      Zn I &   4722.15&    0.00&   -0.37&     3.0&    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    ...  \\

1564:      Sc II&   4320.75&    0.61&   -0.25&    11.5&    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    19.4&    ... &    ...  \\

1565:      Ti II&   4395.00&    1.08&   -0.51&    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    42.3&    ...  \\

1566:      Ti II&   4443.77&    1.08&   -0.70&    35.8&    45.6&    33.3&    18.1&    ... &    42.2&    ... &    46.1 \\

1567:      Ti II&   4444.54&    1.12&   -2.21&    ... &    ... &     5.1&    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    ...  \\

1568:      Ti II&   4450.50&    1.08&   -1.51&     6.9&    12.2&    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    14.3 \\

1569:      Ti II&   4464.46&    1.16&   -2.08&     5.4&    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &     6.6&    ... &    ...  \\

1570:      Ti II&   4468.52&    1.13&   -0.60&    39.4&    52.7&    37.6&    29.3&    ... &    38.1&    ... &    57.5 \\

1571:      Ti II&   4501.27&    1.12&   -0.76&    29.8&    44.4&    29.2&    20.1&    ... &    29.8&    ... &    47.0 \\

1572:      Ti II&   4533.97&    1.24&   -0.77&    37.1&    47.6&    34.6&    ... &    ... &    37.7&    33.2&    57.0 \\

1573:      Ti II&   4563.77&    1.22&   -0.96&    24.5&    29.7&    29.8&    13.9&    ... &    24.3&    31.2&    27.6 \\

1574:      Ti II&   4571.96&    1.57&   -0.53&    29.6&    ... &    33.9&    ... &    ... &    41.8&    33.0&    ...  \\

1575:      Ti II&   4589.92&    1.24&   -1.79&    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    11.1 \\

1576:      Ti II&   4805.09&    2.06&   -1.10&    ... &     9.6&    ... &    ... &    ... &     8.7&    ... &    ...  \\

1577:      Ti II&   5226.53&    1.57&   -1.30&     6.5&    ... &     9.5&    ... &    ... &     8.3&    ... &    16.0 \\

1578:      Fe II&   4491.40&    2.86&   -2.70&     3.9&    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    10.6 \\

1579:      Fe II&   4508.28&    2.86&   -2.58&     7.4&    13.4&    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    12.8 \\

1580:      Fe II&   4515.34&    2.84&   -2.48&    ... &     9.9&    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    ...  \\

1581:      Fe II&   4520.23&    2.81&   -2.60&     4.5&     9.1&    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    ...  \\

1582:      Fe II&   4522.63&    2.84&   -2.03&    10.0&    ... &    11.9&    ... &    ... &    17.5&    ... &    17.9 \\

1583:      Fe II&   4555.89&    2.83&   -2.29&    ... &    20.3&    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    17.1 \\

1584:      Fe II&   4583.83&    2.81&   -2.02&    17.1&    42.7&    ... &    ... &    ... &    20.1&    22.1&    26.8 \\

1585:      Fe II&   4923.93&    2.89&   -1.32&    34.2&    63.4&    32.6&    15.7&    ... &    ... &    23.9&    46.8 \\

1586:      Fe II&   5018.45&    2.89&   -1.22&    41.4&    68.5&    43.1&    21.7&    ... &    45.4&    47.3&    57.2 \\

1587:      Fe II&   5197.56&    3.23&   -2.10&     3.5&    14.1&     8.1&    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    ...  \\

1588:      Fe II&   5234.62&    3.22&   -2.27&     4.8&    12.9&    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    ...  \\

1589:      Fe II&   5276.00&    3.20&   -1.94&     7.4&    18.0&    10.9&    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    17.7 \\

1590:      Fe II&   5316.62&    3.15&   -1.85&     9.5&    29.3&    ... &    ... &    ... &    10.6&    ... &    17.0 \\

1591:      Sr II&   4077.71&    0.00&    0.15&    74.1&   129.9&    60.4&   102.7&    ... &    91.5&   287.1&   104.5 \\

1592:      Sr II&   4215.52&    0.00&   -0.18&    63.5&   111.0&    43.9&    92.6&    43.7&    82.8&   160.9&    99.0 \\

1593:       Y II&   4204.69&    0.00&   -1.76&    61.5&    ... &    55.5&    25.2&    ... &   101.2&    ... &    ...  \\

1594:       Y II&   4883.68&    1.08&    0.07&    ... &    15.1&    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    12.7 \\

1595:       Y II&   4900.12&    1.03&   -0.09&    ... &    47.1&    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    35.6&    ...  \\

1596:      Zr II&   4048.67&    0.80&   -0.48&    ... &    14.8&    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    ...  \\

1597:      Zr II&   4149.20&    0.80&   -0.03&    ... &    31.9&    ... &    20.0&    ... &    32.6&    ... &    24.2 \\

1598:      Zr II&   4150.97&    0.80&   -1.08&     4.2&    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    ... &    ...  \\

1599:      Ba II&   4554.03&    0.00&    0.16&   152.3&    ... &    ... &   140.8&    51.2&    88.9&   282.2&   108.1 \\

1600:      Ba II&   4934.09&    0.00&   -0.16&   147.0\tablenotemark{a} &   169.5&    34.1&   127.9&    ... &   126.9&   248.2&   102.8 \\

1601:      Ba II&   5853.70&    0.60&   -1.01&    48.1&    77.8&     9.0&    38.6&    ... &    37.8&    77.6&    30.2 \\

1602:      Ba II&   6141.70&    0.70&   -0.07&    92.4&   123.4&    12.7&    85.3&    ... &    78.4&   192.0&    74.4 \\

1603:      Ba II&   6496.91&    0.60&   -0.38&    81.8&   115.8&     8.6&    88.6&    ... &    68.3&   150.3&    63.5 \\

1604:      La II&   4086.71&    0.00&   -0.07&    23.1&    41.5&    ... &    16.5&    ... &    ... &    ... &     8.0 \\

1605:      La II&   4123.22&    0.32&    0.13&    21.4&    43.2&    ... &    16.7&    ... &    ... &    ... &    12.7 \\

1606: \hline

1607:      Na I\tablenotemark{b} &   5889.95&    0.00&    0.10&    27.6&    90.6&    38.9&   259.0&   252.0&   100.0&    ... &   319.0 \\

1608: \enddata

1609: \tablenotetext{a}{Equivalent width measured, but not used in the analysis.}

1610: \tablenotetext{b}{Equivalent width of interstellar absorption.}

1611: \end{deluxetable}

1612: 

1613: \clearpage

1614: \thispagestyle{plaintop}

1615: \begin{deluxetable}{llll}

1616: \tablewidth{0pt}

1617: \tabletypesize{\footnotesize}

1618: %\caption{PROGRAM STARS AND OBSERVATIONS}\label{tab:obs}

1619: \tablecaption{\label{tab:rv_sdss} RADIAL VELOCITIES FROM SDSS SPECTRA}

1620: \tablehead{

1621: Star    & JD &   $V_{\rm helio}$ ({\kms}) & Remarks 

1622: }

1623: \startdata

1624: {\obja} & 2,452,146 & $-150.2 \pm 2.4$ & SDSS \\

1625:         & 2,452,162 & $-143.9 \pm 1.9$ & SDSS \\

1626:         & 2,453,993 & $-146.18 \pm 0.18$ & this work \\

1627: {\objc} & 2,453,712 & $-267.1 \pm  2.5$ &  SDSS \\

1628:         & 2,453,713 & $-273.8 \pm  2.9$ & SDSS \\

1629:         & 2,453,993 & $-272.24 \pm 0.28$ & this work \\

1630: {\objd} & 2,452,709 & $45.8 \pm 3.5$ & SDSS \\ 

1631:         & 2,454,142 & $1.7 \pm 2.5$ & this work \\

1632: {\obje} & 2,452,708 & $-365.5 \pm 1.8 $ & SDSS \\ 

1633:         & 2,452,636 & $-369.5 \pm 2.2 $ & SDSS \\ 

1634:         & 2,454,142 & $-366.16 \pm 0.23$ & this work \\

1635: {\objf} & 2,451,703 & $37.2 \pm 3.2$ & SDSS \\

1636: {\objb} & 2,452,466 & $-419.2  \pm 2.3$ & SDSS \\

1637:         & 2,452,524 & $-420.4  \pm 1.9$ &SDSS \\

1638:         & 2,452,932 & $-404.3  \pm 2.3$ &SDSS \\

1639:         & 2,453,993 & $-417.92 \pm 0.20$ & this work\\

1640: \enddata

1641: \end{deluxetable}

1642: 

1643: \begin{deluxetable}{lcccccccc}

1644:  \tablewidth{0pt}

1645: \tablecaption{ATMOSPHERIC PARAMETERS \label{tab:param}}

1646: \tablehead{

1647: Star    & {\teff} & $\sigma$({\teff}) & {\logg} & $\sigma$({\logg}) & [Fe/H] & $\sigma$([Fe/H]) & {\vt} & $\sigma$({\vt}) \\

1648:         & (K)     & (K)               & (dex) & (dex) & (dex) & (dex)  & {\kms} & {\kms}  

1649: }

1650: \startdata

1651: {\LP}    & 6200 & 150 & 4.3 & 0.3 & $-2.5$ & 0.3 & 1.4 & 0.3 \\

1652: {\CS}    & 6800 & 150 & 4.1 & 0.3 & $-2.1$ & 0.3 & 2.1 & 0.3 \\

1653: {\obja}  & 6500 & 200 & 4.5 & 0.3 & $-2.5$ & 0.3 & 1.5 & 0.3 \\

1654: {\objc}  & 6600 & 200 & 4.1 & 0.3 & $-3.2$ & 0.3 & 2.0 & 0.5 \\

1655: {\objd}  & 6300 & 150 & 4.0 & 0.5 & $-3.2$ & 0.3 & 1.5 & 0.5 \\

1656: {\obje}  & 6200 & 150 & 4.0 & 0.3 & $-2.6$ & 0.3 & 1.4 & 0.3 \\

1657: {\objf}  & 6700 & 200 & 4.2 & 0.3 & $-2.5$ & 0.3 & 1.5 & 0.5 \\

1658: {\objb}  & 6600 & 200 & 4.5 & 0.3 & $-2.1$ & 0.3 & 1.3 & 0.3 \\

1659: %s2\_0982-480 & 6900 & 200 & 4.9 & 0.3 & $-2.0$ & 0.3 & 1.5 & 0.3 \\

1660: \enddata

1661: %~ \\

1662: \end{deluxetable}

1663: 

1664: \clearpage

1665: 

1666: \begin{deluxetable}{@{}l@{\extracolsep{\fill}}c@{\extracolsep{\fill}}c@{\extracolsep{\fill}}c@{\extracolsep{\fill}}c@{\extracolsep{\fill}}c@{\extracolsep{\fill}}c@{\extracolsep{\fill}}c@{\extracolsep{\fill}}c@{\extracolsep{\fill}}c@{\extracolsep{\fill}}c@{\extracolsep{\fill}}c@{\extracolsep{\fill}}c@{\extracolsep{\fill}}c@{\extracolsep{\fill}}c@{\extracolsep{\fill}}c@{\extracolsep{\fill}}c@{\extracolsep{\fill}}c@{\extracolsep{\fill}}c@{\extracolsep{\fill}}c@{\extracolsep{\fill}}c@{\extracolsep{\fill}}c}

1667: %\begin{deluxetable}{lcccccccccccccccccccccc}

1668: \tabletypesize{\scriptsize}

1669: \rotate

1670: \tablewidth{24cm}

1671: %\caption{PROGRAM STARS AND OBSERVATIONS}\label{tab:abund}

1672: \tablecaption{\label{tab:abund} CHEMICAL ABUNDANCES RESULTS}

1673: \tablehead{

1674: %Star & 126 & 226 & 6 & 7 & 111 & 112 & 120 & 221 & 122 & 222 & 124 & 127 & 128 & 130 & 238 & 239 & 240 & 256 & 257  & 182 \\

1675:      & FeI & FeII & Li & C & Na I & MgI & CaI & ScII & TiI & TiII & CrI & CoI & NiI & ZnI & SrII & YII & ZrII & BaII & LaII & Pb I 

1676: }

1677: \startdata

1678: Sun & &&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&& \\

1679: \hline

1680:  log(A) & 7.45 & 7.45 & 1.05 & 8.39 & 6.17 & 7.53 & 6.31 & 3.05 & 4.90 & 4.90 & 5.64 & 4.92 & 6.23 & 4.60 & 2.92 & 2.21 & 2.59 & 2.17 & 1.13 & 2.00 \\

1681: 

1682: \hline

1683: {\LP} & &&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&& \\

1684: \hline

1685: $\log \epsilon$(X) & 4.92 & 4.92 & 2.3 & 8.00 & 4.76 & 5.42 & 4.00 & 0.72 & 2.92 & 2.76 & 3.04 & 2.60 & 3.77 & 2.07 & 0.47 & \nodata & \nodata & 1.72 & 0.52 & 2.0 \\

1686: $[$X/Fe] & -2.53 & -2.53 & \nodata & 2.14 & 1.12 & 0.42 & 0.22 & 0.20 & 0.55 & 0.39 & -0.07 & 0.21 & 0.07 & 0.00 & 0.08 & \nodata & \nodata & 2.08 & 1.92 & 2.53 \\

1687: $ N$   &   59 &   11 &  1  &     & 2    & 5    & 13   & 1    & 5    & 9    & 3    & 1    & 1    & 1    & 2    & \nodata   & \nodata   & 4     & 2     & 1   \\

1688: $\sigma$ & 0.12 & 0.12 & 0.2 & 0.25 & 0.25 & 0.13 & 0.09 & 0.18 & 0.14 & 0.12 & 0.14 & 0.19 & 0.18 & 0.13 & 0.22 & \nodata  &  \nodata & 0.18 & 0.16 & \\

1689: 

1690: \hline

1691: {\CS} & &&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&& \\

1692: \hline

1693: $\log \epsilon$(X) & 5.39 & 5.38 & $<2.3$ & 8.4 & 4.25 & 5.69 & 4.45 & \nodata & 3.39 & 3.08 & 3.53 &  & 4.52 & \nodata & 1.63 & 1.50 & 1.80 & 2.5 & 1.16 & 3.1 \\

1694: $[$X/Fe] & -2.06 & -2.07  && 2.07 & 0.14 & 0.22 & 0.19 & \nodata & 0.54 & 0.24 & -0.05 & \nodata & 0.35 & \nodata & 0.77 & 1.34 & 1.26 & 2.39 & 2.09 & 3.16 \\

1695: $N$ & 40 & 11 & &  & 2 & 4 & 8 & & 2 & 7 & 1 & \nodata & 1 & \nodata  & 2 & 2 & 2 & 4 & 2 & 1\\

1696: $\sigma$ & 0.11 & 0.12 & & 0.26 & 0.19 & 0.16 & 0.10 & \nodata & 0.11 & 0.14 & 0.11 & \nodata & 0.11 & \nodata & 0.27 & 0.20 & 0.20 & 0.22 & 0.20 & \\

1697: 

1698: \hline

1699: {\obja} & &&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&& \\

1700: \hline

1701: $\log \epsilon$(X) & 5.04 & 5.03 & $<2.0$ &8.30 & 4.54 & 5.37 & 4.16 & \nodata & \nodata & 3.00 & 3.05 & 2.73 & 3.65 & \nodata & 0.24 & \nodata & \nodata & 0.05 & \nodata & $<2.3$ \\

1702: $[$X/Fe] & -2.41 & -2.42 & & 2.32 & 0.78 & 0.25 & 0.26 & \nodata & \nodata & 0.51 & -0.18 & 0.22 & -0.17 & \nodata & -0.27 & \nodata & \nodata & 0.29 & \nodata & \\

1703: $N$ & 33 & 5 & &  & 2 & 3 & 9 & \nodata & \nodata & 8 & 2 & 1 & 1  & \nodata & 2 & \nodata & \nodata & 4 & \nodata &  \\

1704: $\sigma$ & 0.17 & 0.15 & & 0.32 & 0.32 & 0.19 & 0.13 & \nodata & \nodata & 0.15 & 0.16 & 0.18 & 0.15 & \nodata & 0.29 & \nodata & \nodata & 0.24 & \nodata &  \\

1705: 

1706: 

1707: \hline

1708: {\objc} & &&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&& \\

1709: \hline

1710: $\log \epsilon$(X) & 4.34 & 4.34 & $<2.2$ & 8.2 & 3.75 & 5.03 & \nodata &  & \nodata & 2.45 & \nodata &  & \nodata &   & 1.15 & \nodata & 1.41 & 1.81 & 0.48 & 2.3\\

1711: $[$X/Fe] & -3.11 & -3.11 & & 2.92 & 0.69 & 0.61 & \nodata & \nodata & \nodata & 0.66 & \nodata & \nodata & \nodata & \nodata & 1.35 & \nodata & 1.93 & 2.75 & 2.46 & 3.41\\

1712: $N$ & 6 & 2 & &  & 2 & 4 & \nodata & \nodata & \nodata & 4 & \nodata & \nodata & \nodata & \nodata  & 2 & \nodata & 1 & 5 & 2 & 1\\

1713: $\sigma$ & 0.16 & 0.14 & & 0.32 & 0.20 & 0.18 & \nodata & \nodata & \nodata & 0.14 & \nodata & \nodata & \nodata & \nodata & 0.37 & \nodata & 0.19 & 0.30 & 0.16 &  \\

1714: 

1715: \hline

1716: {\objd} & &&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&& \\

1717: \hline

1718: $\log \epsilon$(X) & 4.29 & \nodata & $<2.3$ &$<7.6$ & \nodata & 4.8 & \nodata & \nodata & \nodata & \nodata & \nodata &  & \nodata &   & -0.1 & \nodata & \nodata & -0.22 &  & \\

1719: $[$X/Fe]           & -3.16 & \nodata & & $<2.2$ & \nodata & 0.43 & \nodata & \nodata & \nodata & \nodata & \nodata & \nodata & \nodata & \nodata & 0.14 & \nodata & \nodata & 0.77 & \nodata & \\

1720: $N$                & 5 & \nodata &  & & \nodata & 3 & \nodata & \nodata & \nodata & \nodata & \nodata & \nodata & \nodata & \nodata & 1 & \nodata & \nodata & 1 & \nodata & \nodata\\

1721: $\sigma$           & 0.20 & \nodata & & \nodata & \nodata & 0.23 & \nodata & \nodata & \nodata & \nodata & \nodata & \nodata & \nodata & \nodata & 0.40 & \nodata & \nodata & 0.35 & \nodata & \nodata\\

1722: 

1723: \hline

1724: {\obje} & &&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&& \\

1725: \hline

1726: $\log \epsilon$(X) & 4.94 & 4.91 & $<2.0$ & 8.6 & 4.97 & 5.55 & 4.08 & 0.89 & \nodata & 2.79 & 2.84 &  & 3.78 & \nodata  & 1.02 & \nodata & \nodata & 1.48 & \nodata & 2.5\\

1727: $[$X/Fe] & -2.51 & -2.55 & & 2.72 & 1.31 & 0.52 & 0.28 & 0.35 & \nodata & 0.40 & -0.29 & \nodata & 0.05 & \nodata & 0.60 & \nodata & \nodata & 1.81 & \nodata & 3.01\\

1728: $N$ & 33 & 4 & &  & 2 & 4 & 6 & 1 & \nodata & 9 & 2 &  & 1 & \nodata & 2 & \nodata & \nodata & 5 & \nodata & 1 \\

1729: $\sigma$ & 0.16 & 0.13 & & 0.32 & 0.29 & 0.15 & 0.12 & 0.14 & \nodata & 0.14 & 0.16 & \nodata & 0.15 & \nodata & 0.25 & \nodata & \nodata & 0.22 & \nodata & \\

1730: 

1731: \hline

1732: {\objf} & &&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&& \\

1733: \hline

1734: $\log \epsilon$(X) & 4.93 & 4.96 & $<2.5$ & 8.0: & 6.36 & 6.14 & 4.58 & \nodata & \nodata & 2.98 & \nodata &  & \nodata & \nodata  & 2.65 & \nodata & \nodata & 3.05 &  & $<3.2$\\

1735: $[$X/Fe] & -2.52 & -2.49 & & +2.1: & 2.71 & 1.13 & 0.79 & \nodata & \nodata & 0.60 & \nodata & \nodata & \nodata & \nodata & 2.25 & \nodata & \nodata & 3.40 & \nodata & \\

1736: $N$ & 9 & 3 & &  & 2 & 2 & 1 & \nodata & \nodata & 4 & \nodata & \nodata & \nodata & \nodata  & 2 & \nodata & \nodata & 5 & \nodata & \\

1737: $\sigma$ & 0.16 & 0.15 & & 0.32 & 0.22 & 0.21 & 0.21 & \nodata & \nodata & 0.15 & \nodata & \nodata & \nodata & \nodata & 0.38 & \nodata & \nodata & 0.31 & \nodata & \\

1738: 

1739: 

1740: \hline

1741: {\objb} & &&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&& \\

1742: \hline

1743: $\log \epsilon$(X) & 5.40 & 5.40 & $<2.3$ &   & 4.45 & 5.75 & 4.59 & \nodata & 3.66 & 3.29 & 3.49 & \nodata & 4.26 & \nodata  & 1.56 & 0.95 & 1.5 & 1.62 & \nodata & \nodata\\

1744: $[$X/Fe]           & -2.05 & -2.05 & & 2.00 & 0.33 & 0.27 & 0.32 & \nodata & 0.80 & 0.44 & -0.10 & \nodata & 0.08 & \nodata & 0.68 & 0.79 & 0.96 & 1.50 & \nodata & \nodata\\

1745: $N$ & 32 & 9 & &  & 1 & 4 & 9 & \nodata & 1 & 8 & 2 & \nodata & 1 & \nodata & 2 & 1 & 1 & 5 & \nodata & \nodata\\

1746: $\sigma$ & 0.15 & 0.13 & & 0.32 & 0.28 & 0.18 & 0.13 & \nodata & 0.15 & 0.15 & 0.15 & \nodata & 0.15 & \nodata & 0.29 & \nodata & \nodata & 0.24 & \nodata & \nodata\\

1747: 

1748: \enddata

1749: \end{deluxetable}

1750: 

1751: 

1752: \clearpage

1753: \thispagestyle{plaintop}

1754: \begin{deluxetable}{lcccccccccc}

1755: \tabletypesize{\small}

1756:  \tablewidth{0pt}

1757: \tablecaption{ABUNDANCE CHANGES BY CHANGING ATMOSPHERIC PARAMETERS \label{tab:err}}

1758: \tablehead{

1759:     & \multicolumn{5}{c}{\LP}  & & \multicolumn{4}{c}{\CS} \\

1760:   \cline{2-6} \cline{8-11}

1761:     & $\sigma${\teff} &  $\sigma${\logg} & $\sigma$[Fe/H] & $\sigma${\vt}  & $\Delta_{\rm ATLAS}$ &  & $\sigma${\teff} &  $\sigma${\logg} & $\sigma$[Fe/H] & $\sigma${\vt} \\

1762:     & 100~K & 0.3~dex & 0.3~dex & 0.3~{\kms} & & & 100~K & 0.3~dex & 0.3~dex & 0.3~{\kms} 

1763:  }

1764: \startdata

1765: \ion{Fe}{1} & 0.08 & $-0.01$ & 0.01 & $-0.02$ & $-0.08$ & & 0.07 & $-0.01$ & 0.01 & $-0.03$ \\

1766: \ion{Fe}{2} & 0.01 & $ 0.10$ & 0.00 & $-0.01$ & $-0.06$ & & 0.02 & 0.10 & 0.00 & $-0.02$ \\

1767: C (CH)      & 0.15 & $-0.10$ & 0.00 & 0.00    & $-0.10$ & & 0.15 & $-0.12$ & 0.01 & 0.00 \\

1768: \ion{Na}{1} & 0.11 & $-0.15$ & 0.00 & $-0.05$ & $-0.11$ & & 0.07 & $-0.03$ & 0.00 & $-0.07$ \\

1769: \ion{Mg}{1} & 0.04 & $-0.08$ & $-0.02$ & $-0.05$ &$-0.13$ & & 0.06 & $-0.04$ & 0.00 & $-0.06$ \\

1770: \ion{Ca}{1} & 0.05 & $0.00$ & $0.00$ & $-0.01$ & $-0.08$ & & 0.05 & $-0.01$ & 0.00 & $-0.01$ \\

1771: \ion{Ti}{1} & 0.08 & $0.00$ & $0.01$ & $0.00$  & $-0.08$ & & 0.07 & $-0.01$ & 0.01 & $0.00$ \\

1772: \ion{Ti}{2} & 0.04 & $0.10$ & $0.00$ & $-0.02$ & $-0.06$ & & 0.04 & $0.09$ & 0.00 & $-0.02$ \\

1773: \ion{Cr}{1} & 0.08 & $0.00$ & $0.01$ & $-0.01$ & $-0.08$ & & 0.08 & $-0.01$ & 0.01 & $-0.02$ \\

1774: \ion{Ni}{1} & 0.08 & $0.01$ & $0.01$ & $-0.01$ & $-0.07$ & & 0.07 & $-0.01$ & 0.01 & $-0.01$ \\

1775: \ion{Sr}{2} & 0.08 & $0.03$ & $0.00$ & $-0.16$ & $-0.10$ & & 0.07 & $0.02$ & $-0.01$ & $-0.2$ \\

1776: \ion{Ba}{2} & 0.09 & $-0.02$ & $0.00$ & $-0.10$ & $-0.14$ & & 0.07 & $0.02$ & $-0.02$ & $-0.15$ \\

1777: \ion{La}{2} & 0.06 & $0.10$ & $0.00$ & $-0.02$ & $-0.06$ & & \nodata & \nodata & \nodata & \nodata \\

1778: \ion{Eu}{2} & 0.06 & $0.11$ & $0.00$ & $0.02$ & $-0.05$ & & \nodata & \nodata & \nodata & \nodata \\

1779: \ion{Pb}{1} & 0.08 & $0.01$ & $0.00$ & $-0.01$ & $-0.10$ & & 0.07 & $-0.01$ & $0.01$ & $-0.02$ 

1780: \enddata

1781: %~ \\

1782: \end{deluxetable}

1783: 

1784: \begin{deluxetable}{lccccccccccc}

1785:  \tablewidth{0pt}

1786: \tablecaption{COMPARISONS OF ATMOSPHERIC PARAMETERS AND ABUNDANCES WITH SDSS ESTIMATES \label{tab:comp}}

1787: \tablehead{

1788:     & \multicolumn{2}{c}{{\teff}} && \multicolumn{2}{c}{{\logg}} && \multicolumn{2}{c}{[Fe/H]} && \multicolumn{2}{c}{[C/Fe]}\\

1789:      \cline{2-3}\cline{5-6}\cline{8-9}\cline{11-12}

1790:     & SDSS & this work            && SDSS & this work            && SDSS & this work           && SDSS & this work 

1791:  }

1792: \startdata

1793: {\obja} & 6595 & 6500 && 3.58 & 4.5 &&  $-2.49$  & $-2.41$ &&   2.50 & 2.3 \\

1794: {\objc} & 6970 & 6600 && 4.01 & 4.1 &&  $-2.68$  & $-3.11$ &&   2.71 & 2.9 \\

1795: {\objd} & 6213 & 6300 && 3.28 & 4.0: &&  $-2.88$  & $-3.16$ &&   1.19 & $<2.2$  \\

1796: {\obje} & 6264 & 6200 && 3.67 & 4.0 &&  $-2.65$  & $-2.51$ &&   2.58 & 2.7 \\

1797: {\objf} & 6656 & 6700 && 3.19 & 4.2 &&  $-2.44$  & $-2.52$ &&   2.27 & 2.1: \\

1798: {\objb} & 6489 & 6600 && 3.76 & 4.5 &&  $-2.22$  & $-2.05$ &&   1.93 & 2.0 

1799: \enddata

1800: \end{deluxetable}

1801: 

1802: \clearpage

1803: %\begin{deluxetable}{@{}l@{\extracolsep{\fill}}c@{\extracolsep{\fill}}c@{\extracolsep{\fill}}c@{\extracolsep{\fill}}c@{\extracolsep{\fill}}c@{\extracolsep{\fill}}c@{\extracolsep{\fill}}c@{\extracolsep{\fill}}c@{\extracolsep{\fill}}c@{\extracolsep{\fill}}c@{\extracolsep{\fill}}c@{\extracolsep{\fill}}c@{\extracolsep{\fill}}c@{\extracolsep{\fill}}c@{\extracolsep{\fill}}c@{\extracolsep{\fill}}c@{\extracolsep{\fill}}c@{\extracolsep{\fill}}c}

1804: \begin{deluxetable}{lccccccccccccccccc}

1805: \tabletypesize{\scriptsize}

1806: \rotate

1807: \tablewidth{0pt}

1808: %\caption{TURN-OFF CEMP STARS}\label{tab:abund}

1809: \tablecaption{\label{tab:cemp_to} ABUNDANCES RESULTS}

1810: \tablehead{

1811:             & [Fe/H]& [C/Fe] & [N/Fe] & [Na/Fe] &[Mg/Fe] &[Ca/Fe] &[Sc/Fe] &[Ti/Fe] &[Cr/Fe] &[Ni/Fe] &[Zn/Fe]& [Sr/Fe] &[Ba/Fe]& [Pb/Fe] & Teff & logg & ref.\tablenotemark{a}

1812: }

1813: \startdata

1814: {\LP}       & $-$2.53 & 2.14 & 1.20 & 0.60 & 0.42 & 0.22 & 0.20 & 0.47 &$-$0.07 & 0.07  &0.00 & 0.08 & 2.08 & 2.53 &  6300 & 4.30  & 1  \\ 

1815: {\CS}       & $-$2.06 & 2.07 & 1.40 & 0.14 & 0.22 & 0.19 &\nodata & 0.39 &$-$0.05 & 0.35 &\nodata & 0.77 & 2.39 & 3.16 &  6800 & 4.10 & 1     \\ 

1816: {\obja}     & $-$2.41 & 2.32 &\nodata & 0.78 & 0.25 & 0.26 &\nodata & 0.51 &$-$0.18 &$-$0.17 &\nodata &$-$0.27 & 0.29 &\nodata &  6500 & 4.50 & 1    \\ 

1817: {\objc}     & $-$3.11 & 2.92 &\nodata & 0.69 & 0.61 &\nodata &\nodata & 0.66 & 0.62 &\nodata &\nodata & 1.35 & 2.75 & 3.41 &  6600 & 4.10 & 1 \\ 

1818: {\obje}     & $-$2.51 & 2.72 &\nodata & 1.31 & 0.52 & 0.28 & 0.35 & 0.40 &$-$0.29 & 0.05 &\nodata & 0.60 & 1.81 & 3.10 &  6200 & 4.00 & 1 \\ 

1819: {\objf}     & $-$2.52 & 2.1  &\nodata & 2.71 & 1.13 & 0.79 &\nodata & 0.60 &\nodata &\nodata &\nodata & 2.25 & 3.40 &\nodata &  6700 & 4.20  & 1 \\       

1820: {\objb}     & $-$2.05 & 2.   &\nodata & 0.33 & 0.27 & 0.32 &\nodata & 0.62 &$-$0.10 & 0.08 &\nodata & 0.68 & 1.50 &\nodata &  6600  & 4.50 & 1 \\ 

1821: CS29528-028 & $-$2.86 & 2.77 &\nodata & 2.33 & 1.69 & 0.46 & 0.59 & 0.87 &\nodata & 0.26 &\nodata &\nodata & 3.27 &\nodata &  6800 & 4.00  & 2 \\ 

1822: CS22898-027 & $-$2.26 & 2.20 & 0.90 & 0.33 & 0.41 & 0.40 &\nodata & 0.41 &$-$0.10 & 0.02 & 0.92 & 0.92 & 2.23 & 2.84 &  6250 & 3.70  & 3,4 \\  

1823: CS29497-030 & $-$2.57 & 2.47 & 2.12 & 0.58 & 0.44 & 0.47 & 0.67 & 0.64 & 0.03 & 0.04 &\nodata & 0.84 & 2.32 & 3.55 &  7000 & 4.10  & 5 \\  

1824: HE2148-1247 & $-$2.32 & 1.91 & 1.65 &\nodata & 0.50 & 0.45 & 0.59 & 0.55 &$-$0.35 & 0.06 &\nodata & 0.76 & 2.36 & 3.12 &  6380 & 3.90   & 6 \\ 

1825: HE0024-2523 & $-$2.72 & 2.60 & 2.10 &$-$0.17 & 0.73 & 0.66 & 0.37 & 0.85 &$-$0.41 &\nodata &\nodata & 0.34 & 1.46 & 3.30 &  6625 & 4.30    & 7 \\ 

1826: HE22881-036 & $-$2.06 & 1.96 & 1.00 & 0.16 & 0.40 & 0.62 &\nodata & 0.33 &\nodata &\nodata &\nodata & 0.59 & 1.93 &\nodata &  6200 & 4.00   & 8 \\  

1827: HE0007-1832 & $-$2.65 & 2.55 & 1.85 &\nodata & 0.76 & 0.32 &\nodata & 0.39 &\nodata & 0.02 &\nodata &\nodata & 0.16 &\nodata &  6515 & 3.80    & 9\\  

1828: HE0338-3945 & $-$2.42 & 2.13 & 1.55 & 0.36 & 0.30 & 0.38 & 0.53 & 0.37 &$-$0.12 & 0.01 &\nodata & 0.74 & 2.41 & 3.10 &  6160 & 4.13   & 10 \\   

1829: HE1105+0027 & $-$2.42 & 2.00 &\nodata &\nodata & 0.47 & 0.47 & 0.28 & 0.32 & 0.05 &$-$0.29 &\nodata &\nodata & 2.45 &\nodata &  6132 & 3.50  & 11  \\   

1830: HE0143-0441 & $-$2.31 & 1.98 & 1.73 &\nodata & 0.63 & 0.43 & 0.67 & 0.40 &$-$0.38 &$-$0.31 & 0.46 & 0.86 & 2.32 & 3.11 &  6240 & 3.70   & 12 \\   

1831: CS31080-095 & $-$2.80 & 2.69 & 0.70 &$-$0.48 & 0.65 & 0.17 &$-$0.02 & 0.32 & 0.02 & 0.09 & 0.58 &$-$0.41 & 0.77 &\nodata &  6050 & 4.50  & 13\\ 

1832: CS22958-042 & $-$2.80 & 3.15 & 2.15 & 2.62 & 0.32 & 0.36 & 0.05 & 0.32 &$-$0.15 &$-$0.09 &\nodata &$-$0.20 &\nodata &\nodata &  6250 & 3.50  & 13\\ 

1833: CS29528-041 & $-$3.25 & 1.59 & 3.00 & 1.00 & 0.40 & 0.40 & 0.26 & 0.40 &$-$0.17 & 0.00 &\nodata &$-$0.20 & 0.97 &\nodata &  6150 & 4.00  & 13\\ 

1834: \enddata

1835: \tablenotetext{a}{References-- (1)This work; (2)\citet{aoki07};

1836: (3)\citet{aoki02b}; (4)\citet{aoki02c}; (5)\citet{ivans05};

1837: (6)\citet{cohen03}; (7)\citet{lucatello03}; (8)\citet{preston01};

1838: (9)\citet{cohen04}; (10)\citet{jonsell06}; (11)\citet{barklem05};

1839: (12)\citet{cohen06}; (13)\citet{sivarani06}}

1840: \end{deluxetable}

1841: 

1842: 

1843: \begin{deluxetable}{lrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr} % ccccccccccccccccc}

1844:  \tablewidth{0pt}

1845: \rotate

1846: \tabletypesize{\footnotesize}

1847: \tablecaption{KINEMATICS DATA \label{tab:kinematics}}

1848: \tablehead{

1849: star    & $D$ & $V_{\rm helio}$ & $\mu_{\alpha}$ & $\mu_{\delta}$ & & $U$ & $\sigma(U)$ & $V$ & $\sigma(V)$ & $W$ & $\sigma(W)$ & $V_{\phi}$ & $\sigma(V_{\phi})$ & $e$ & $r_{\rm min}$ & $r_{\rm max}$ & $Z_{\rm max}$ \\

1850: \cline{4-5} \cline{7-14}

1851:         & (kpc) & ({\kms}) & \multicolumn{2}{c}{(mas/yr)} & & \multicolumn{8}{c}{({\kms})} &  & (kpc) & (kpc) & (kpc)

1852: }

1853: \startdata

1854: {\obja} &  2.27 & $-146$ & $-11$ & $-50$ && $-399$ & 48 & $-403$ & 47 & $   2$ & 17 & $-154$ & 43 & 0.92 & 3 & 66 &  22 \\

1855: {\objc} &  1.75 & $-272$ &  $15$ & $ 11$ && $  15$ & 23 & $ -99$ & 19 & $ 298$ & 13 & $ 120$ & 19 & 0.41 & 9 & 22 &  20 \\

1856: {\objd} &  1.46 & $   2$ &  $21$ & $-10$ && $ -95$ & 13 & $ -78$ & 20 & $ 111$ & 19 & $ 139$ & 20 & 0.38 & 5 & 12 &   5 \\

1857: {\obje} &  1.39 & $-366$ & $-31$ & $-46$ && $-130$ & 18 & $-293$ & 35 & $-392$ & 18 & $ -73$ & 35 & 0.74 & 8 & 54 &  53 \\

1858: {\objf} &  2.43 & $  37$ &  $-2$ & $  1$ && $   5$ & 33 & $  30$ & 20 & $  46$ & 27 & $ 242$ & 20 & 0.24 & 8 & 13 &   2 \\

1859: {\objb} &  2.23 & $-418$ &  $20$ & $-33$ && $ 209$ & 22 & $-510$ & 32 & $-138$ & 41 & $-326$ & 32 & 0.66 & 6 & 31 &   9 

1860: \enddata

1861: \end{deluxetable}

1862: 

1863: \clearpage

1864: \pagestyle{plaintop}

1865: \begin{figure} 

1866: \includegraphics[width=12cm]{f1.ps} 

1867: \caption[]{Medium-resolution, flux-calibrated SDSS spectra of our SDSS/SEGUE targets.}

1868: \label{fig:sdss1} 

1869: \end{figure}

1870: 

1871: \begin{figure} 

1872: \includegraphics[width=12cm]{f2.ps} 

1873: \caption[]{The blue range of the normalized SDSS spectra.}

1874: \label{fig:sdss2} 

1875: \end{figure}

1876: 

1877: \begin{figure} 

1878: \includegraphics[width=8cm]{f3.ps} 

1879: \caption[]{Examples of the Subaru spectra for the range including the C$_{2}$ Swan 0-0 band and the \ion{Mg}{1} triplet.}

1880: \label{fig:sp} 

1881: \end{figure}

1882: 

1883: \begin{figure} 

1884: \includegraphics[width=8cm]{f4.ps} 

1885: \caption[]{Radial velocity as a function of Julian Day number for {\LP} and

1886: {\CS}. The filled circles indicate our measurements with the Subaru Telescope,

1887: including the results by \citet{aoki02b}, while open circles mean the results by

1888: \citet{norris97a} for {\LP} and by

1889: \citet{aoki02c} obtained with the William Herschel Telescope for {\CS}.}

1890: \label{fig:rv} 

1891: \end{figure}

1892: 

1893: \begin{figure} 

1894: \includegraphics[width=8cm]{f5.ps} 

1895: \caption[]{Spectra of the \ion{Na}{1} D lines region for {\objf}

1896:   obtained by individual HDS exposures. The center of the exposure

1897:   (UT) is presented for each spectrum. The exposure time is different

1898:   between the two observing nights (see Table \ref{tab:s0353}). The

1899:   positions of intersteller \ion{Na}{1} lines are shown by dotted

1900:   lines, while the line positions of the stellar absorption are shown

1901:   by solid lines. The emission from the Earth's atmosphere and

1902:   interstellar absorption show no variation in wavelengths, while the

1903:   stellar absorption lines show rapid changes in the 10 February (UT)

1904:   spectra.}

1905: \label{fig:s0353} 

1906: \end{figure}

1907: 

1908: \begin{figure} 

1909: \includegraphics[width=8cm]{f6.ps} 

1910: \caption[]{Surface gravity as a function of effective temperature for

1911:   our sample (filled circles) and other CEMP turn-off stars from the

1912:   literature given in Table~\ref{tab:cemp_to} (open circles). The

1913:   dotted, solid, and dashed lines indicate the isochrones of

1914:   \citet{y2} for [Fe/H] $=-2.5$, with ages of 10, 12, and 14 Gyr,

1915:   respectively.}

1916: \label{fig:teffg}

1917: 

1918: \end{figure}

1919: 

1920: \begin{figure} 

1921: \includegraphics[width=8cm]{f7.ps} 

1922: \caption[]{The abundance ratios of [C/Fe] and [Ba/Fe] as functions of

1923:   [Fe/H]. Filled circles are objects studied by the present work,

1924:   while open ones are from the literature given in

1925:   Table~\ref{tab:cemp_to}. The dotted line in the upper panel means

1926:   the line for [C/H]=0.}

1927: \label{fig:cbafe} 

1928: \end{figure}

1929: 

1930: %\clearpage

1931: \begin{figure} 

1932: \includegraphics[width=8cm]{f8.ps} 

1933: \caption[]{[C/H] distributions for CEMP turn-off stars (upper) and

1934:   giants (lower). See text for the selection criteria for these

1935:   samples. The open histogram with strong lines indicates the objects

1936:   having excesses of Ba ([Ba/Fe] $> +0.5$). The hatched one is for

1937:   Ba-normal stars.}

1938: \label{fig:hist_ch} 

1939: \end{figure}

1940: 

1941: \begin{figure} 

1942: \includegraphics[width=8cm]{f9.ps} 

1943: \caption[]{The same as Fig.~\ref{fig:hist_ch}, but for [Ba/H]. Only the

1944:   histogram for Ba-enhanced ([Ba/Fe] $>+0.5$) stars are shown.}

1945: \label{fig:hist_bah} 

1946: \end{figure}

1947: 

1948: \begin{figure} 

1949: \includegraphics[width=8cm]{f10.ps} 

1950: \caption[]{The abundance ratios of [Sr/Ba] (upper) and [Ba/Pb]

1951:   (lower), as functions of [Ba/H], for CEMP turn-off stars.}

1952: \label{fig:srbapb} 

1953: \end{figure}

1954: 

1955: 

1956: 

1957: 

1958: \end{document}

1959: 

1960: 

1961: 

1962: 

1963: 

1964: 

1965: 

1966: