1: %\documentstyle[preprint2]{opt/local/aastex/aastex-5.0.2/aastex}
2: %\usepackage{/opt/local/aastex/aastex-5.0.2/aastexug}
3: %\documentstyle[12pt,aasms4]{article}
4: %\documentstyle[11pt,aaspp4]{article}
5: %\documentclass{emulateapj}
6: \documentclass[12pt,preprint]{aastex}
7:
8: \lefthead{Cunha et al.}
9: \righthead{Fluorine Abundances in the Milky Way Bulge}
10:
11: \begin{document}
12:
13: \title{Fluorine Abundances in the Milky Way Bulge}
14:
15: \author{Katia Cunha\altaffilmark{1}, \& Verne V. Smith}
16: \affil{National Optical Astronomy Observatory,
17: Casilla 603, La Serena, Chile; kcunha@noao.edu; vsmith@noao.edu}
18:
19: \author{Brad K. Gibson}
20: \affil{University of Central Lancashire,
21: Preston PR1 2HE, UK; bkgibson@uclan.ac.uk}
22:
23: \altaffiltext{1}{On leave from
24: Observat\'orio Nacional; Rio de Janeiro, Brazil}
25:
26: \begin{abstract}
27: Fluorine ($^{19}$F) abundances are derived in a sample of 6 bulge red giants
28: in Baade's Window. These giants span a factor of 10 in metallicity
29: and this is the first study to define the behavior of $^{19}$F with
30: metallicity in the bulge. The bulge results show an increase in F/O with increasing
31: oxygen. This trend overlaps what is found in the disk at comparable
32: metallicities, with the most oxygen-rich bulge target extending the disk trend.
33: The increase in F/O in the disk arises from $^{19}$F synthesis in both
34: asymptotic giant branch (AGB) stars and metal-rich Wolf-Rayet (WR) stars through stellar winds.
35: The lack of an s-process enhancement in the most fluorine-rich bulge giant in this study,
36: suggests that WR stars represented a larger contribution than AGB stars to $^{19}$F
37: production in the bulge when compared to the disk. If this result for fluorine is
38: combined with the previously published overall decline in the O/Mg abundance ratios in metal-rich
39: bulge stars, it suggests that WR winds played a role in shaping chemical evolution in the bulge.
40: One star in this study exhibits a very low value of F/O while having a large O-abundance; this
41: chemical mixture can be understood if this star formed from gas that was
42: enriched by metal-poor core-collapse supernovae and may indicate that
43: chemical evolution in the bulge was inhomogeneous.
44: \end{abstract}
45:
46: \keywords{stars: abundances; Galaxy: abundances; Galaxy: bulge}
47:
48: \section{INTRODUCTION}
49:
50: Understanding how chemical evolution has proceeded in the Galactic bulge can
51: provide clues for models of bulge formation and evolution. It is not known, for example,
52: whether the Milky Way bulge was formed rapidly in a single collapse
53: or via secular dynamical evolution driven by the disk.
54: Certain elemental abundance ratios can be used to infer
55: timescales for chemical enrichment within a particular stellar population.
56: The most studied of these ratios involves comparing the abundances of the so-called
57: $\alpha$-elements (such as O, Mg, or Ca),
58: which are produced via massive-star core-collapse supernovae of type II (SNII),
59: to abundances of iron, which is produced in SN Ia.
60: Probing elemental species that are
61: created in other astrophysical sites, such as AGB stars
62: or WR stars, can add further constraints to bulge formation scenarios.
63:
64: The first study to provide chemical abundance distributions of several elements
65: in a sample of bulge red giants was
66: McWilliam \& Rich (1994).
67: It is only within
68: the last few years that additional abundance studies have appeared, all of which
69: rely on the 8-10m class telescopes. These recent studies include, in the optical,
70: Zoccali et al. (2006); Fulbright et al. (2006, 2007); Lecureur et al. (2007); McWilliam
71: et al. (2007)
72: and, in the infrared, Rich \& Origlia (2005);
73: Cunha \& Smith (2006); Rich et al. (2007) and Melendez et al. (2008).
74: Although a relatively large number of bulge targets have been studied so far,
75: the abundance patterns of the Galactic bulge population continue to be probed
76: in increasing detail.
77:
78:
79: One element that can add new insight into the nature of chemical evolution
80: in the bulge is fluorine. Understanding the origins of this light element has advanced
81: considerably in recent years, based upon $^{19}$F abundances derived from infrared
82: vibration-rotation lines of HF (Jorissen et al. 1992; Cunha et al. 2003; Cunha \& Smith
83: 2005; Smith et al. 2005). Renda et al. (2004) use the observed abundances to model the
84: Galactic chemical evolution of fluorine, with its synthesis occurring primarily
85: in three different astrophysical sites:
86: in AGB stars as a result of He-burning (Goriely et al. 1989; Forestini et al. 1992; Jorissen et al. 1992),
87: in SN II via neutrino nucleosynthesis (Woosley et al. 1990; Woosley \& Weaver 1995), and in WR stars
88: as a result of He-burning and extensive stellar winds (Meynet \& Arnould 2000).
89: Renda et al. (2004) found that neutrino nucleosynthesis was the important source of
90: $^{19}$F in the early Galaxy (at low metallicity); however, the fluorine abundances
91: found in near-solar metallicity stars required significant contributions from both
92: AGB stars and WR winds.
93:
94: This paper concentrates on determining fluorine abundances in a sample of red giants
95: of the Galactic bulge and these results are combined with previously derived
96: abundances from other elements. Observational evidence for fluorine production
97: in WR stars, compared to AGB stars or neutrino nucleosynthesis in SN II, is
98: discussed as well as the implication for the nature of chemical evolution in the bulge.
99:
100: \section{OBSERVATIONS}
101:
102: The target stars for this analysis of fluorine
103: were taken from our previous
104: infrared high-resolution spectroscopic study
105: of Galactic bulge giants (Cunha \& Smith 2006).
106: The sample, which is composed of 5 K- and 2 M-giants, is presented in Table 1. Details
107: about the nature of these stars, all of which lie in Baade's Window, can be found in Cunha \&
108: Smith (2006).
109: The spectra were observed in queue mode with the 8.1m Gemini South
110: telescope and the NOAO spectrograph Phoenix (Hinkle et al. 1998) at a resolution R$\sim$50,000; these
111: were centered at 23400\AA\ in order to include the HF 1-0 R9 line and covered a window of
112: $\sim$120\AA.
113: The K-giants in our sample were observed in May and July 2004; June and July 2005 (same spectra
114: were analyzed previously for Na in Cunha \& Smith 2006);
115: while the two M-giant observations were taken more recently during one night in June 2007.
116: A description of the Phoenix observations and the reduction of the high-resolution spectra
117: can be found in Cunha \& Smith (2006) and Smith et al. (2002).
118:
119: \section{Analysis}
120:
121: All target stars were previously analyzed in the literature and had stellar parameters
122: and microturbulent velocities (Table 1) derived in Cunha \& Smith (2006). The effective
123: temperatures were obtained
124: using calibrations of infrared photometry (J-K and/or V-K colors) and extinction maps of
125: Stanek (1996). The surface gravities were derived from standard relations
126: between stellar luminosity and mass as defined by isochrones corresponding to 10 Gyr by
127: Girardi et al. (2000). The microturbulent velocities were estimated from measurements
128: of CO molecular lines which are also present in the observed Phoenix spectra in the K-band.
129: More detailed information on the derivation of the stellar parameters can be found
130: in Cunha \& Smith (2006).
131:
132: The fluorine abundances are derived from the HF 1-0 R9 line at 23357 \AA.
133: The reliability of this line as an acurate abundance indicator has been verified in
134: Cunha et al. (2003) from comparisons with other HF lines (which were analyzed in
135: Jorissen et al. 1992). Fluorine abundances were obtained from
136: synthetic spectra computed with an updated version of the synthesis code MOOG
137: (Sneden 1973) and adopting MARCS model atmospheres (Gustafsson et al. 1975).
138: Figure 1 shows both synthetic and observed spectra
139: for one sample star. The derived fluorine abundances are presented in Table 1 in the
140: nomenclature of A(x)=Log[N(x)/N(H)] + 12.0.
141:
142:
143: In addition to the $^{19}$F abundances in Table 1, values for A(Na) are also shown, with 5
144: of the Na abundances taken from Cunha \& Smith (2006). They are presented here along
145: with the two new Na abundance results for
146: BMB78 and BMB289; from the Na I line at 23379\AA. Oxygen abundances are also included for
147: completeness with abundances taken from Cunha \& Smith (2006).
148:
149:
150: \section{DISCUSSION}
151:
152: The chemical evolution of the Galatic bulge has been modelled recently by Ballero et al. (2007),
153: who focused on the contraints provided by recently published abundances of iron
154: and $\alpha$-elements in bulge red-giants. Although at the moment such models do not predict
155: the evolution of the element fluorine in particular,
156: the behavior of the fluorine abundances derived in this study can be used to
157: interpret some aspects of chemical evolution in the bulge
158: population.
159:
160: This interpretation begins with Figure 2,
161: where the ratio of F/O (Log[N(F)/N(O)]) is plotted as a function of
162: the oxygen abundance, A(O), and oxygen is used as a proxy for the overall
163: metallicity. The five bulge $^{19}$F measurements are
164: shown as the red circles, with estimated errors
165: indicated. All results to-date for Galactic field stars are also
166: plotted, with these abundances taken from Cunha et al. (2003), Cunha \&
167: Smith (2005), and Cunha et al. (2008).
168: The two populations shown in Figure 2 (the Galactic field and the bulge) both exhibit
169: generally increasing values of F/O as the O-abundance increases.
170: Overall, the bulge giants overlap the trend set by the field stars, with the most
171: O-rich bulge star studied (IV-072) apparently defining a smooth extension of the
172: field-star trend to ever increasing oxygen abundances.
173: One bulge M-giant, BMB78, defies the general trend by having a
174: relatively low value of F/O given its high oxygen abundance.
175:
176:
177:
178: The solid line in Figure 2 represents the predicted values of
179: $^{19}$F/$^{16}$O, as a function of metallicity, derived from the Woosley \& Weaver (1995) SN II yields,
180: convolved with a Salpeter mass function and an upper limit
181: of 40M$_{\odot}$; the $^{19}$F from these models is produced by neutrino nuclesosynthesis.
182: More recently, however, Heger et al. (2005) argue that $^{19}$F production via neutrino
183: nucleosynthesis should be lowered by about a factor of two, due to reduced
184: cross-sections, and the dashed line in Figure 2 is a shift of the Woosley \& Weaver (1995)
185: yields downward by 0.3 dex as a simple way of viewing these suggested revisions.
186: It is clear from the results in the figure that
187: at the lowest metallicities, the observed values of F/O for field disk stars tend to approach
188: the values predicted by the yields in which $^{19}$F is synthesized via neutrino nucleosynthesis.
189: The Sun and near-solar metallicity field stars, however, fall above the predicted F/O values
190: from neutrino nucleosynthesis and this difference points to significant contributions
191: to $^{19}$F production from WR and AGB stars, as suggested by Renda et al. (2004).
192:
193:
194: With four out of the five bulge stars containing larger ratios of fluorine to oxygen than can
195: be accommodated by neutrino nucleosynthesis alone, one is left with two possibilities
196: for $^{19}$F production at high metallicities, based upon the Renda et al. (2004) model:
197: the AGB and WR stars. Can one now attempt to distinguish between these two sites for
198: $^{19}$F production in the bulge, keeping in mind that there are no bulge-specific chemical evolution
199: models for $^{19}$F?
200: Looking first at the AGB stars, Jorissen et al. (1992) pointed out that there is a positive
201: correlation between F/O with the s-process abundances (their figure 12) and this correlation
202: was modelled by Goriely \& Molawi (2000) for neutron capture nucleosynthesis in AGB stars.
203: Both the model predictions and the observed correlation between fluorine and s-process abundances
204: would suggest that the most fluorine-rich star observed in the bulge, IV-072, should be
205: heavily enriched in s-process elements at the level of [s/Fe] $\sim$ +1.5 dex, if the $^{19}$F
206: resulted from AGB production. However, McWilliam \& Rich (1994) derived abudances for two
207: s-process elements in IV-072 and obtained [Y/Fe]=-0.02 dex and [La/Fe]=-0.04 dex; far below what
208: would expected from AGB models and observed correlations. In addition, recent results for
209: heavy-element abundances in three metal-rich bulge dwarfs, whose brightnesses were increased
210: during microlensing events, do not find s-process enrichments:
211: [s/Fe] $\sim$ +0.12 dex (Zr, Ba and La from Cohen et al. 2008); -0.24 dex (Ba from Johnson et al. 2008)
212: and -0.28 dex (Ba from Johnson et al. 2007).
213:
214: Given the apparent lack of s-process enriched
215: high-metallicity bulge stars, the best explanation for the large F/O value in IV-072 may be
216: WR fluorine production. Such a conclusion is reached by Renda et al. (2004) for the
217: metal-rich end of disk chemical evolution.
218: We note, however, the cautionary points raised by Palacios et al. (2005) in regard to $^{19}$F production
219: in WR stars; rotationally-induced mixing and mass-loss prescriptions can in fact lead to either an
220: order-of-magnitude decrease in $^{19}$F production (for high-mass ($>$30-80 M$_{\odot}$) fast rotators at
221: solar-to-supersolar metallicities) or an order-of-magnitude increase in $^{19}$F production (for lower
222: mass ($<$30 M$_{\odot}$) fast rotators at supersolar metallicities). The issue of the $^{19}$F($\alpha$,p)$^{22}$Ne
223: reaction rate uncertainty raised by the downwards revision proposed by Lugaro et al (2004),
224: appears ameliorated by the recent work of Ugalde et al (2008), which is consistent with the canonical
225: rate of Caughlan \& Fowler (1988).
226: The large $^{19}$F abundance in IV-072 may
227: require a relatively large amount of WR-wind material sculpting the chemical evolution
228: of the metal-rich bulge population. This conclusion, based on fluorine, agrees with conclusions
229: that are based on the ratios of O to Mg in metal-rich bulge and
230: disk stars by McWilliam et al. (2007).
231:
232:
233: While 4 out of 5 bulge fluorine abundances follow an increase in F/O as
234: the stellar metallicity increases, the peculiar position of BMB78 in Figure 2 questions whether
235: bulge metallicity increased in a monotonic fashion.
236: This star is quite oxygen-rich yet has a low fluorine
237: abundance: its value of $^{19}$F/$^{16}$O is consistent with the yields predicted from
238: neutrino nucleosynthesis only. The low value of F/O in BMB78 does not result from errors
239: within the analysis. Errors in the HF and OH abundances are discussed in detail in Cunha et al.
240: (2003) and Smith et al, (2003), respectively. Abundance uncertainties are expected to be
241: $\pm$0.15 dex for fluorine and $\pm$0.20 dex for oxygen. Since both HF and OH exhibit
242: similar sensitivities to changes in stellar parameters, their ratio is effectively
243: less sensitive to analysis uncertainties. As BMB78 falls about 1.0 dex below the trend
244: defined by the other stars, analysis errors are unlikely to explain its low value of
245: F/O. Since the $^{19}$F-yield from SN II neutrinos is sensitive to
246: the metallicity of the supernova progenitor star, it is possible that BMB78 is a star that formed
247: from gas that was substantially enriched by ejecta from a metal-poor supernova. Such a
248: picture would indicate that metallicity in bulge stars proceeded in an inhomogeneous manner
249: at some level.
250:
251: This scenario can be tested, as $^{19}$F is not the only metallicity-dependent
252: element that has been studied in BMB78. Sodium yields fom SN II are also metallicity dependent
253: and Na has been measured in BMB78 (Table 1). Figure 3 displays results for sodium, where
254: Na-to-O ratios
255: are plotted versus the oxygen abundance. Field-star values of Na/O and A(O) are included
256: as the small blue open symbols.
257: The solid curve contains the massive-star yields from WW95 convolved with a
258: Salpeter mass function. Sodium yields are sensitive to stellar metallicity, with the Na-to-O
259: ratio increasing with increasing metallicity (taken here to be mapped by the oxygen
260: abundance), and the observed field star values track this curve quite well. The bulge values
261: of Na/O and A(O) from Cunha \& Smith (2006) are shown as the large filled symbols with their
262: associated estimated errors: note that Na abundances for BMB78 and BMB289 are presented
263: here for the first time. Additional bulge stars from Fulbright et al. (2007) and Lecureur et al.
264: (2007) are shown as the smaller filled symbols. The agreement in the trend of Na/O with
265: A(O) is similar for all three bulge studies.
266:
267: The sample of bulge red giants included in Figure 3 show some peculiarities
268: compared to the field stars.
269: First there are the two Na-rich but O-poor giants from the Fulbright
270: et al. (2007) paper. The pattern of Na/O and A(O) found in these two stars is very similar
271: to what is found in globular clusters and Fulbright et al. conclude that these two red giants are
272: actually members of the bulge globular cluster NGC6522 located in Baade's Window.
273: All three bulge studies also contain a small number of stars that fall to the O-rich side of the distribution,
274: with lower Na-to-O ratios. The star BMB78 is one of these examples, having a low Na abundance
275: when compared to its large oxygen abundance. Since both F and Na have massive-star
276: yields that increase with metallicity, whereas O does not, the low values of F/O and Na/O in
277: this star can result from enrichment by a low-metallicity SN II. Such a picture would suggest
278: that chemical evolution within the bulge population was not homogeneous. The small number
279: of bulge stars that are found with lower values of Na/O may result from inhomogeneous
280: chemical evolution.
281:
282:
283: A picture of inhomogeneous chemical evolution can be checked for consistency as illustrated
284: in Figure 4, where the abundance ratios of F/Ti are plotted versus Na/Ti. Titanium is chosen as
285: the fiducial element since there is evidence that oxygen yields are being altered at high
286: metallicity by metal-rich WR winds (McWilliam et al. 2007) and Ti typifies an $\alpha$-element
287: and thus serves as a monitor of SN II enrichment. In
288: this diagram the bulge stars fall along a sequence of increasing values of F/Ti with increasing
289: Na/Ti; the metallicity sensitive elements F and Na increase in lockstep and, in this case, BMB78
290: exhibits the lowest values of F/Ti and Na/Ti, which is consistent with processed gas from a
291: metal-poor SNII.
292:
293: \section{Conclusions}
294:
295: Fluorine abundances are measured for the first time in a sample of red-giants in the
296: Galactic bulge.
297: The fluorine abundances obtained generally define a steady increase in
298: F/O versus A(O), which is reminiscent of the disk results and can be explained
299: by production of $^{19}$F in a combination of AGB and WR stars.
300: The most oxygen-rich target in this sample has a large fluorine abundance, but no
301: accompanying s-process
302: enhancement, in contrast to the predictions for AGB nucleosynthesis by Goriely \&
303: Mowlavi (2000). The abundance pattern observed for this metal-rich bulge target favors $^{19}$F
304: production during the WR phase of evolution.
305: One oxygen-rich giant in this sample, however, fails to follow the disk trend and shows a fluorine
306: abundance, as well as sodium, that is more compatible with pollution from
307: metal-poor SN II, where $^{19}$F is synthesized by neutrino nucleosynthesis. These results
308: may indicate that there was inhomogeneous
309: mixing in the gas that formed the Milky Way bulge during its phase of chemical enrichment.
310:
311: \acknowledgements
312: We thank Andy McWilliam for kindly sending us bulge s-process results prior to publication
313: and the referee whose suggestions improved the paper.
314: This work is supported in part by the NSF
315: (AST06-46790) and NASA (NAG5-9213).
316: Based on observations obtained at the Gemini Observatory, which is operated by the
317: Assoc. of Univ. for Research in Astronomy Inc., under a cooperative agreement
318: with the NSF on behalf of the Gemini partnership: the NSF (United
319: States), the STFC (UK),
320: the NRC (Canada), CONICYT (Chile),
321: the ARC (Australia), CNPq (Brazil) and SECYT (Argentina).
322: Based on observations obtained with the Phoenix
323: spectrograph, developed and operated by NOAO.
324:
325: \begin{thebibliography}{}
326:
327: \bibitem[]{471} Ballero, S. K., Matteucci, F., Origlia, L. \& Rich, R. M. 2007, A\&A, 467, 123
328:
329: \bibitem[]{473} Bensby, T., Feltzing, S., \& Lundstrom, I., 2004, A\&A, 415, 155
330:
331: \bibitem[]{475} Cohen, J. G., Huang, W., Udalski, A., Gould, A., Johnson, J. 2008, arXiv:0801.3264v1
332:
333: \bibitem[]{477} Caughlan, G. A. \& Fowler, W. A. 1988, ADNDT, 40, 283
334:
335: \bibitem[]{479} Cunha, C., Smith, V. V., Lambert, D. L., \& Hinkle K. H. 2003, AJ, 126, 1305
336:
337: \bibitem[]{481} Cunha, K. \& Smith, V. V. 2005, ApJ, 626, 425
338:
339: \bibitem[]{483} Cunha, K. \& Smith, V. V. 2006, ApJ, 651, 49
340:
341: \bibitem[]{485} Cunha, K. \& Smith, V. V. 2008, in preparation
342:
343: \bibitem[]{487} Forestini, M., Goriely, S., Jorissen, A., \& Arnould, M. 1992, A\&A 261, 157
344:
345: \bibitem[]{489} Fulbright, J. P. 2002, AJ, 123, 404
346:
347: \bibitem[]{491} Fulbright, J. P., McWilliam, A. \& Rich, R. M., 2006, ApJ, 636, 821
348:
349: \bibitem[]{493} Fulbright, J.P., McWilliam, A. \& Rich, R.M. 2007 ApJ, 661, 1152
350:
351: \bibitem[]{495} Girardi, L. Bressan, A. Bertelli, G., \& Chiosi, C. 2000, A\&AS, 141, 371
352:
353: \bibitem[]{497} Goriely, S., Jorissen, A., Arnould, M. 1989, in Proc. 5th Workshop on Nuclear Astrophysics, ed. W. Hillebrandt, \& E. Müller (Munich: Max-Planck-Institut für Astrophysik Report), 60
354:
355: \bibitem[]{498} Goriely, S., \& Mowlavi, N. 2000, A\&A, 362, 599
356:
357: \bibitem[]{499} Gustafsson, B., Bell, R. A., Eriksson, K., \& Nordlund, A. 1975, A\&A, 42, 407
358:
359: \bibitem[]{501} Heger, A., Kolbe, E., Haxton, W. C., Langanke, G., Martinez-Pinedo, G., \& Woosley, S. E. 2005, Phys. Lett. B606, 258
360:
361: \bibitem[]{503} Hinkle, K. H., Cuberly, R., Gaughan, N., et al.
362: %Heynssens, J., Joyce, R., Ridgway, S., Schmitt, P., \& Simmons, J. E.
363: 1998, Proc. SPIE, 3354, 810
364:
365: \bibitem[]{507} Johnson, J. A., Gal-Yam, A., Leonard, D. C., Simon, J. D., Udalski, A. \& Gould, A., 2007, ApJ,
366: 655, L3
367:
368: \bibitem[]{510} Johnson, J. A., Gaudi, B. S., Sumi, T., Bondi, I. \& Gould, A. 2008, arXiv:0801.2159v1
369:
370: \bibitem[]{512} Jorissen, A., Smith, V. V., \& Lambert, D. L. 1992, A\&A, 261, 164
371:
372: \bibitem[]{514} Lecureur, A., Hill, V., Zoccali, M., Barbuy, B., Gomez, A., Minniti, D., Ortolani, S. \& Renzini, A. 2007, A\&A, 465, 799
373:
374: \bibitem[]{516} Lugaro, M., Ugalde, C., Karakas, et al. 2004, ApJ, 615, 934
375:
376: \bibitem[]{518} McWilliam, A. \& Rich, M. R. 1994, ApJS, 91, 749
377:
378: \bibitem[]{520} McWilliam, A., Matteucci, F., Ballero, S., Rich, R. M., Fulbright, J. P., Cescutti, G. 2007, arXiv:0708.4026v1
379:
380: \bibitem[]{524} Meynet, G., \& Arnould, M. 2000, A\&A, 355, 176
381:
382: \bibitem[]{528} Melendez, J., Asplund, M. et al. 2008, A\&AL submitted
383:
384: \bibitem[]{530} Nissen, P. E., \& Schuster, W. J. 1997, A\&A, 326, 751
385:
386: \bibitem[]{532} Palacios, A., Arnould, M., \& Meynet, G. 2005, A\&A, 443, 243
387:
388: \bibitem[]{534} Reddy, Bacham, E., Tomkin, J., Lambert, D. L., \& Allende Prieto, C. 2003, MNRAS, 340, 304
389:
390: \bibitem[]{536} Renda, A., Fenner, Y., et al. 2004, MNRAS, 354, 575
391:
392: \bibitem[]{538} Rich, M. R. \& Origlia, L. 2005, ApJ, 634, 1293
393:
394: \bibitem[]{540} Rich, R. M., Origlia, L., Valenti, E. 2007, ApJL, 665, 119
395:
396: \bibitem[]{542} Smith, V. V., et al. 2002, AJ, 124, 3241
397:
398: \bibitem[]{544} Smith, V. V., Cunha, K., Ivans, I., Lattanzio, J. C., Campbell, S., \& Hinkle, K. H. 2005, ApJ, 633, 392
399:
400: \bibitem[]{546} Sneden, C. 1973, ApJ, 184, 839
401:
402: \bibitem[]{548} Stanek, K. Z. 1996, ApJ, 460, L37
403:
404: \bibitem[]{550} Ugalde, C., Azuma, R. E., Couture, A., et al. 2008, Phys. Rev. C 77, 035801
405:
406: \bibitem[]{552} Zoccali, M., Lecureur, A., Barbuy, B., et al. 2006, A\&A, 457, L1
407:
408: \bibitem[]{554} Woosley, S. E., \& Weaver, T. A. 1995, ApJS, 101, 181
409:
410: \bibitem[]{556} Woosley, S. E., Hartmann, D. H., Hoffman, R. D., \& Haxton, W. C. 1990, ApJ, 356, 272
411:
412: \end{thebibliography}
413:
414: \clearpage
415:
416: \begin{deluxetable}{lcccccc}
417: \tablecaption{Sample Stars and Derived Abundances}
418: \tablewidth{0pt}
419: \tablehead{
420: \colhead{Star} & \colhead{$T_{eff}$} & \colhead{Log g} & \colhead{$\xi$(km s$^{-1}$)} & \colhead{A(F)} & \colhead{A(Na)} & \colhead{A(O)}}
421: %\startdata
422: \startdata
423: I-322 & 4250 & 1.5 & 2.0 & 4.50 & 6.13 & 8.60 \\
424: IV-003 & 4500 & 1.3 & 1.8 & ... & 4.23 & 8.05 \\
425: IV-167 & 4375 & 2.5 & 2.2 & $<$6.10: & 7.30 & 9.10 \\
426: IV-072 & 4400 & 2.4 & 2.2 & 5.60 & 7.35 & 9.20 \\
427: IV-329 & 4275 & 1.3 & 1.8 & 4.30 & 5.30 & 8.35 \\
428: BMB 78 & 3600 & 0.8 & 2.5 & 4.26 & 5.58 & 9.00 \\
429: BMB 289 & 3375 & 0.4 & 3.0 & 4.90 & 6.05 & 8.75 \\
430: \enddata
431: \end{deluxetable}
432:
433: \clearpage
434:
435: \begin{figure}
436: \includegraphics[scale=0.2,angle=270]{f1.eps}
437: \caption{\label{fig1} Observed (dotted line) and synthetic (solid and dashed lines) spectra
438: of the star BMB78 in the region of the HF line.
439: The synthetic spectra were calculated for three fluorine abundances as specified in the figure.}
440: \end{figure}
441:
442: \begin{figure}
443: \includegraphics[scale=0.3,angle=270]{f2.eps}
444: \caption{\label{fig2} Ratios of F to O plotted versus the oxygen
445: abundance, A(O). The values of F/O in 4 of the bulge stars track the trend defined for field stars,
446: with the O-rich star IV-072 extending the general field-star trend. The bulge star BMB78 has a low
447: value of F/O for its O-abundance. The solid curve illustrates model values of F/O versus A(O) for neutrino
448: nucleosynthesis from Woosley \& Weaver (1995), with the dashed curve representing
449: a downward shift of the values of F/O as suggested by Heger et al. (2005). }
450: \end{figure}
451:
452: \begin{figure}
453: \includegraphics[scale=0.3,angle=270]{f3.eps}
454: \caption{\label{fig3} The behavior of Na/O versus O for bulge stars from this study
455: (red circles with errorbars), Fulbright et al. (2007 - small red asteriks) and
456: Lecureur (2007 - small red crosses). Galactic field star results are the small blue open symbols from
457: Nissen \& Schuster (1997), Fulbright (2002), Reddy et al. (2003), and Bensby et al. (2004).
458: The solid line represents yields from Woosley \& Weaver (1995) convolved with a standard
459: IMF. Note the position of BMB78, with a low ratio of Na/O at high metallicity; this
460: abundance pattern can result from enrichment by metal-poor SN II.
461: }
462: \end{figure}
463:
464: \begin{figure}
465: \includegraphics[scale=0.3,angle=270]{f4.eps}
466: \caption{\label{fig4} The run of fluorine over Titanium versus the abundances of
467: sodium over titanium for the bulge targets stars and the field star $\alpha$ Boo
468: (Cunha et al. 2003; Cunha \& Smith 2006).
469: The position of the sun in this diagram is also shown for comparison. }
470: \end{figure}
471:
472:
473: \end{document}
474: