1: \documentclass[11pt,preprint]{aastex}
2: \newcommand{\iras}{IRAS 04158+2805 }
3:
4: \begin{document}
5:
6: \shorttitle{Submillimeter Observations of IRAS 04158+2805}
7:
8: \shortauthors{Andrews et al.}
9:
10: \title{Submillimeter Observations of the Young Low-Mass Object \\
11: IRAS 04158+2805}
12:
13: \author{Sean M. Andrews\altaffilmark{1,2},
14: Michael C. Liu\altaffilmark{3,4}, Jonathan P. Williams\altaffilmark{3}, and K.
15: N. Allers\altaffilmark{3}}
16:
17: \altaffiltext{1}{Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics, 60 Garden
18: Street, Cambridge, MA 02138; sandrews@cfa.harvard.edu}
19: \altaffiltext{2}{Hubble Fellow}
20: \altaffiltext{3}{Institute for Astronomy, University of Hawaii, 2680 Woodlawn
21: Drive, Honolulu, HI 96822; mliu@ifa.hawaii.edu, jpw@ifa.hawaii.edu, allers@ifa.hawaii.edu}
22: \altaffiltext{4}{Alfred P. Sloan Research Fellow}
23:
24: \begin{abstract}
25: We present high spatial resolution Submillimeter Array observations and
26: supplementary single-dish photometry of the molecular gas and dust around IRAS
27: 04158+2805, a young source with spectral type M5-M6 in the Taurus star-forming
28: region. A bright, highly elongated dust structure that extends 8\arcsec\
29: ($\sim$1120\,AU) in diameter is revealed in a 883\,$\mu$m thermal continuum
30: image. This emission geometry is in good agreement with optical observations
31: that show a similar structure in absorption, aligned perpendicular to bipolar
32: scattered light nebulae. However, the interferometric data also clearly
33: demonstrate that the submillimeter continuum emission is not centrally
34: concentrated, but rather appears to have a toroidal geometry with substantially
35: lower intensities inside a radius of $\sim$250-300\,AU. Spatially resolved
36: emission from the CO $J$=3$-$2 transition exhibits a velocity gradient along
37: the major axis of the dust structure. If this kinematic pattern is interpreted
38: as the signature of rotation around a central object, a relatively low mass is
39: inferred ($M_{\ast} \sim 0.3$\,M$_{\odot}$, with a $\sim$50\% uncertainty). We
40: discuss several possible explanations for the observed gas and dust environment
41: around IRAS 04158+2805, including a flattened envelope with an outflow cavity
42: and a large circumbinary ring. This source offers unique views of the gas and
43: dust environment surrounding a young low-mass stellar system. Its properties
44: are generally not commensurate with formation scenarios for such low-mass
45: objects that rely on dynamical ejection, but rather confirms that a single
46: mechanism $-$ molecular cloud core collapse and fragmentation $-$ can produce
47: stars over a wide range of stellar masses (at least an order of magnitude).
48: \end{abstract}
49:
50: \keywords{circumstellar matter --- stars: formation --- stars: low-mass, brown
51: dwarfs --- stars: pre-main-sequence --- stars: individual (IRAS 04158+2805)}
52:
53:
54: \section{Introduction}
55:
56: Circumstellar material profoundly influences the star formation process. A
57: large-scale envelope acts as the local mass reservoir during the collapse and
58: growth of a central protostar; a more compact disk regulates how that material
59: is transported onto the star itself. A great deal of progress has been made in
60: understanding the physical conditions present in the gas and dust surrounding
61: Sun-like stars ($M_{\ast} \approx 0.5$-3\,M$_{\odot}$). However, it is unclear
62: if those results can be extrapolated across the entire stellar mass spectrum.
63: The low end of this spectrum ($M_{\ast} \le 0.3$\,M$_{\odot}$) is of particular
64: interest, as observations of the material around young low-mass
65: objects\footnote{For simplicity, we will refer to objects with $M_{\ast}
66: \lesssim 0.3$\,M$_{\odot}$ as low-mass objects, including both very low-mass
67: stars and brown dwarfs.} can help resolve an ongoing debate over their dominant
68: formation mechanism.
69:
70: The observed abundance of such low-mass objects relative to their more massive
71: counterparts is difficult to account for with the traditional model for
72: isolated star formation. Two distinct modifications have been proposed: ($a$)
73: the turbulent fragmentation of cloud cores into smaller building units
74: \citep[e.g.,][]{padoan04}; and ($b$) a dynamical alternative where one
75: component of a multiple system is ejected and prematurely cut off from its
76: accretion reservoir \citep[e.g.,][]{reipurth01,umbreit05}. Both scenarios make
77: distinct and conflicting predictions about the gas and dust environments that
78: should be associated with low-mass objects. In the former, a disk/envelope
79: structure similar to those noted around higher mass T Tauri stars would be
80: expected. And for the latter, only a truncated disk (with an initial $R_d
81: \lesssim 10$\,AU) would survive the tidal stripping and ejection process
82: \citep{bate03}. If the remnant material is sufficiently viscous, it could
83: spread to radii up to $\sim$100\,AU in $\sim$1\,Myr \citep{armitage97}, but
84: would have shed a vast majority of its initial mass in the ejection process.
85: Therefore, observational constraints on the structure of the gas and dust
86: around low-mass objects offer one avenue to help distinguish how they form.
87:
88: A variety of observations demonstrate that the signatures of circumstellar gas
89: and dust at small radii (up to a few AU) are indeed common for young low-mass
90: objects \citep[see the recent review by][]{luhman07b}. More detailed
91: individual studies confirm that such material has a geometry and composition
92: similar to the disks around more massive T Tauri stars
93: \citep{natta01,pascucci03,allers06,buoy08}, although typically at lower masses
94: \citep{klein03,scholz06}. However, these {\it unresolved} observations can not
95: unambiguously constrain some key properties of this material, most
96: significantly its spatial structure and extent.
97:
98: In this article, we present new submillimeter observations of the molecular gas
99: and dust surrounding IRAS 04158+2805. Located in the $\sim$1\,Myr-old Taurus
100: star-forming region, \iras has a cool central source with an estimated spectral
101: type of M5-M6 \citep{white04,luhman06,beck07}. Recently, \citet{glauser08}
102: provided an initial analysis of this source and the dust structure surrounding
103: it by modeling the broadband spectrum along with optical/infrared scattered
104: light images. They suggested that their observations are best explained by a
105: large (diameter of 2240\,AU), massive (dust mass of
106: 1-2$\times$10$^{-4}$\,M$_{\odot}$; gas/dust ratio of $220^{+150}_{-170}$)
107: circumstellar disk around a low-mass star ($M_{\ast} \approx
108: 0.1$-0.2\,M$_{\odot}$), with no need to include any contribution from a
109: more extended envelope. Our new data represent the first high spatial
110: resolution view of the gas and dust environment around this and similar cool,
111: young objects at submillimeter wavelengths. They also provide an opportunity
112: for a rare, albeit crude, estimate of $M_{\ast}$ from the spatio-kinematics of
113: circumstellar gas that is independent of pre-main-sequence evolution models.
114: These observations are addressed in \S 2, and the resulting data products are
115: highlighted in \S 3. In \S 4, we discuss the structure of the gas and dust
116: surrounding \iras and what it can tell us about the central source and the
117: formation of low-mass objects in general. The results are summarized in \S 5.
118:
119:
120: \section{Observations and Data Reduction}
121:
122: Submillimeter interferometric observations of \iras ($\alpha =
123: 4^{\mathrm h}18^{\mathrm m}58\fs14$, $\delta = +28\degr12\arcmin23\farcs8$
124: [J2000]) were conducted in both the extended and compact configurations of the
125: Submillimeter Array \citep[SMA;][]{ho04} on 2006 December 8 and 2007 January
126: 27, respectively. In these configurations, the 8 SMA antennas (6\,m diameter
127: each) spanned baselines from $\sim$15-225\,m. Double sideband receivers with a
128: total bandwidth of 4\,GHz were tuned to an effective continuum frequency of
129: 339.9\,GHz (883\,$\mu$m). The correlator was simultaneously configured to
130: observe the CO $J$=3$-$2 transition at 345.796\,GHz at a spectral resolution of
131: 0.70\,km s$^{-1}$.
132:
133: The observations cycled between \iras and two gain calibrators (3C111 and
134: 3C84), with 20 minutes on target and 10 minutes on calibrator. The data were
135: obtained in excellent observing conditions, with zenith optical depths at
136: 225\,GHz of 0.05-0.07. The raw visibilities were calibrated with the IDL-based
137: MIR package.\footnote{\url{http://cfa-www.harvard.edu/$\sim$cqi/mircook.html.}}
138: Passband calibration was conducted with bright quasars (3C273, 3C279), and
139: complex gain calibration was performed with 3C111. Using 3C84 as a consistency
140: check on the gain solution, we estimate that phase noise generates an effective
141: ``seeing" of $<$0\farcs1. Titan and Callisto were used to set the absolute
142: flux scale, which is accurate to $\sim$10\%. The MIRIAD package was utilized
143: for the standard tasks of Fourier inversion, deconvolution, and imaging of the
144: calibrated visibilities. Continuum and line maps from the combined datasets
145: were made with natural weighting, providing a synthesized beam FWHM of
146: $1\farcs12\times0\farcs86$ at a position angle of 92\degr.
147:
148: \iras was also mapped at 450 and 850\,$\mu$m using the jiggle-mode of the SCUBA
149: camera at the 15\,m James Clerk Maxwell Telescope (JCMT) on 2003 November 12 in
150: dry, stable conditions ($\tau \approx 0.05$ at 225\,GHz). Flux calibration
151: accurate to $\sim$10\%\ and 25\%\ at 850 and 450\,$\mu$m, respectively, was
152: achieved with observations of Neptune, and pointing was referenced to DG Tau
153: and CRL 618. The bright emission, $0.44\pm0.04$\,Jy at 850\,$\mu$m and
154: $1.6\pm0.4$\,Jy at 450\,$\mu$m, was not resolved at either wavelength in
155: 15\arcsec\ and 9\arcsec\ beams, respectively. An additional map at
156: 350\,$\mu$m was obtained with the SHARC-II camera at the 10\,m Caltech
157: Submillimeter Observatory (CSO) on 2004 October 3 in similarly dry weather.
158: Those data confirm an unresolved source (9\arcsec\ beam) with a total flux
159: density of $2.0\pm0.5$\,Jy. All errors on flux densities include absolute
160: calibration uncertainties (10\%\ at 850\,$\mu$m, and $\sim$25\%\ at shorter
161: wavelengths).
162:
163: Optical images of \iras in the $R$-band were obtained with the University of
164: Hawaii 2.2\,m telescope on 2004 October 6. After the standard reduction of CCD
165: data, the $7\times300$\,s images were co-added and convolved with a 3-pixel
166: (0\farcs7) FWHM Gaussian kernel to match the typical seeing for the
167: observations and improve sensitivity to faint emission. The observations were
168: not photometric.
169:
170:
171: \section{Results}
172:
173: Images of the gas and dust surrounding \iras are shown in Figure \ref{images}.
174: The optical $R$-band ($\sim$0.7\,$\mu$m) image in Figure \ref{images}a reveals
175: a high aspect ratio dark lane of {\it absorbing} material oriented roughly E-W
176: (shown as grayscale-filled contours) that can be traced nearly 8\arcsec\ in
177: diameter. First discovered by \citet[][see also Watson et
178: al.~2007]{glauser08}, this silhouette lane obscures the faint nebulosity
179: associated with the nearby Herbig Ae star V892 Tau. Also pointed out by
180: \citet{glauser08}, the image in Figure \ref{images}a shows the conical nebulae
181: perpendicular to the dark lane that are often produced by starlight scattered
182: off the surface of flattened dust structures.
183:
184: Figure \ref{images}b shows the first high resolution image of the thermal
185: continuum emission from IRAS 04158+2805, at a wavelength of 883\,$\mu$m. The
186: morphology of that emission is remarkably similar to the optical silhouette,
187: extending roughly 8\arcsec\ across, corresponding to a diameter of 1120\,AU at
188: the distance of the Taurus clouds \citep[$d \approx 140$\,pc;][]{elias78}.
189: Note that \citet{glauser08} trace $I$-band scattered light for this source to
190: twice this diameter ($\sim$16\arcsec, or 2240\,AU). The difference compared to
191: the $R$-band image in Figure \ref{images}a is related to the comparatively poor
192: sensitivity of our observations, as was also noted for the infrared scattered
193: light images in their study. Because the submillimeter emission was clearly
194: unresolved in the 350 and 450\,$\mu$m maps, we can infer that it has a diameter
195: of $\le 9\arcsec$ (1260\,AU). The absence of very short antenna spacings
196: implies that the interferometric observations have significantly diminished
197: sensitivity to structures larger than $\sim$10\arcsec\
198: \citep[e.g.,][]{wilner94}. Therefore, because of the diminished sensitivity to
199: faint submillimeter emission on large scales, there is no reason to suspect
200: that the sized inferred here is physically inconsistent with the scattered
201: light image presented by \citet{glauser08}. The integrated flux density at
202: 883\,$\mu$m is $407\pm41$\,mJy, consistent with the SCUBA measurement. A fit
203: of the SMA visibilities with an elliptical Gaussian model indicates an
204: inclination of $62\pm3\degr$ (where 90\degr\ corresponds to edge-on) at a
205: position angle of $93\pm1$\degr\ (measured east of north), in excellent
206: agreement with the constraints imposed by modeling the scattered light
207: \citep{glauser08}. Fits with a ring or pedastal emission model give the same
208: results.
209:
210: The high surface brightness at large distances from the central source and
211: large spatial extent of the continuum emission are fairly unique. The steep
212: drop of the visibilities over a short range of baseline lengths, as shown in
213: Figure \ref{vis}, indicates that essentially all of the emission is
214: concentrated at large spatial scales (radii $\gtrsim 250$\,AU). More
215: significantly, the visibilities show a pronounced null at
216: $\sim$30-40\,k$\lambda$ and very little flux on longer baselines. These are
217: definitive signatures of a brightness distribution with a central ``hole",
218: inside of which there is significantly diminished intensity. Assuming a simple
219: ring geometry, the location of the null suggests an inner radius of
220: $\sim$250-300\,AU \citep[e.g.,][]{hughes07}. Asymmetries in the submillimeter
221: map confirm this geometry, with emission peaks centered roughly $\pm 1\farcs9$
222: ($\sim$265\,AU) from the image center. The western lobe is approximately 50\%\
223: brighter than the eastern lobe. These asymmetries are real, as they are
224: clearly detected in 3 separate observing runs at the same location and
225: intensity \citep[the 2 detailed here, and the hybrid compact/extended
226: observations described by][]{aw07}\footnote{In fact, the image made from the
227: hybrid configuration in \citet{aw07} shows {\it only} the western peak of this
228: asymmetry, and heavily resolves the remainder of the emission.}.
229:
230: A velocity-integrated intensity (0$^{\mathrm{th}}$ moment) map of the CO
231: $J$=3$-$2 emission from \iras is shown in Figure \ref{images}c. The CO
232: emission morphology is significantly different than the optical silhouette and
233: submillimeter continuum, occupying a region $\sim$4\arcsec\ on a side with a
234: central, slightly elongated peak. The integrated intensity is $40.7\pm0.4$\,Jy
235: km s$^{-1}$ (using 9 channels for a total width of 6.3\,km s$^{-1}$). Fainter
236: CO emission extends above and below the plane of the continuum emission in an
237: ``X"-shaped pattern out to $\sim$2\arcsec\ from the image center. There is a
238: steep drop in the CO intensity along the plane of the silhouette that
239: corresponds precisely to the positions of the submillimeter continuum peaks
240: described above. The kinematic structure of the CO associated with \iras is
241: exhibited in Figure \ref{chanmaps}. These channel maps clearly show a CO
242: velocity gradient along the major axis of the continuum emission and silhouette
243: (i.e., in the east-west direction), similar to the pattern expected for
244: rotation around a central source.
245:
246:
247: \section{Discussion}
248:
249: \subsection{The Central Object}
250:
251: Estimating the masses of young stars and brown dwarfs generally requires
252: reference to theoretical models of their structural evolution. The
253: quantitative reliability of such models for individual stars at ages
254: $\lesssim$1\,Myr is highly uncertain, particularly for the low end of the
255: stellar mass spectrum where complicated convection physics, dusty atmospheres,
256: and uncertain molecular opacities and initial conditions can strongly affect
257: the observational diagnostics
258: \citep[e.g.,][]{dantona94,baraffe02,montalban04}. Dynamical constraints on
259: $M_{\ast}$ from the orbital properties of either a companion star
260: \citep[e.g.,][]{mathieu94} or gas in a circumstellar disk
261: \citep[e.g.,][]{simon00} provide an extremely valuable independent check that
262: can potentially be used to calibrate these models
263: \citep[see][]{hillenbrand04}. \citet{stassun06} report the only such
264: measurements of young $\sim$M6 dwarfs to date, for an eclipsing binary system
265: in Orion. With the first spatially resolved measurements of molecular gas in
266: apparent rotation around a young low-mass object with similar spectral type,
267: the CO observations of \iras presented here can provide another such estimate
268: of $M_{\ast}$, although admittedly with a great deal more uncertainty.
269:
270: Figure \ref{pv_spec} shows the position-velocity diagram of the CO $J$=3$-$2
271: line emission for IRAS 04158+2805, where the angular offset is the distance
272: from the observed phase center (such that positions to the east have positive
273: values) and the velocity offset is taken relative to the systemic value
274: ($V_{\ast} = 7.4$\,km s$^{-1}$). Overlaid on the diagram is an inclined ($i =
275: 62$\degr) Keplerian rotation profile that matches the general kinematic trend
276: in the data rather well (thick curve), with a central point mass of $M_{\ast} =
277: 0.30$\,M$_{\odot}$. Additional rotation profiles for $M_{\ast} = 0.15$ and
278: 0.45\,M$_{\odot}$ are also shown for reference. It should be noted that these
279: profiles assume pure Keplerian orbital motion around a central source, which
280: may not be the case in the more complex \iras environment. For now, we assume
281: that the dominant kinematic trend is such rotation, but potential complications
282: will be addressed below.
283:
284: A comparison of this dynamical $M_{\ast}$ estimate with predictions from
285: stellar evolution models is a challenge because of uncertainties in the
286: luminosity (due to scattered light contamination at short wavelengths),
287: extinction, and effective temperature for the central source. Recent analysis
288: of the scattered light spectrum from \iras suggest that this source is cool,
289: with initial spectral type estimates of M6$\pm1$ \citep{white04,beck07} refined
290: to M5.25$\pm$0.25 (optical) and M6$\pm$0.5
291: \citep[infrared;][]{luhman06}.\footnote{Note that previous spectral type
292: assignments ranged from $\sim$K7 to M3 \citep{kenyon98,luhman99}.} Using the
293: latter classifications and the \citet{luhman03} empirical effective temperature
294: scale, we estimate $T_{\ast} = 3050\pm75$\,K. Unfortunately, large
295: uncertainties in the extinction, where estimates range from $A_V \approx 9$-16
296: \citep[e.g.,][]{white04,beck07}, make a luminosity determination difficult.
297: However, we can use pre-main-sequence models for an assumed age in the inferred
298: temperature range to estimate a central mass. Using the $T_{\ast}$ range
299: quoted above and an age of $\sim$1\,Myr, the \citet{dantona97} and
300: \citet{baraffe98} models indicate $M_{\ast} \approx 0.09$-0.16\,M$_{\odot}$.
301: This mass range does not include the additional uncertainties on the adopted
302: effective temperature scale or the unknown age of the source.
303:
304: The $M_{\ast}$ values inferred from the pre-main-sequence models lie roughly a
305: factor of 2 below the nominal value that best describes the kinematics of the
306: CO gas inferred above. The unquoted and poorly understood uncertainties in
307: both measurements may be the simple explanation for this apparent discrepancy.
308: Without a detailed physical model for the local gas structure around IRAS
309: 04158+2805, it is difficult to estimate a statistically acceptable range of
310: $M_{\ast}$ from the CO kinematics; there may very well be overlap with the
311: higher end of the $M_{\ast}$ range from the pre-main-sequence models. The
312: effective temperature scale adopted above is also uncertain. A $\sim$500\,K
313: increase in the effective temperature (to a value that is typically associated
314: with M2 stars) would reconcile the $M_{\ast}$ estimates. Indeed, using an
315: independent method of fitting infrared spectra, \citet{doppmann05} infer
316: $T_{\ast} = 3500$\,K for the \iras central source, leading to $M_{\ast} \approx
317: 0.35$-0.45\,M$_{\odot}$ in the aforementioned models. Moreover,
318: \citet{hillenbrand04} have shown that pre-main-sequence models generally tend
319: to underpredict $M_{\ast}$ compared to dynamical measurements in this low-mass
320: range, although typically only by $\le 20$\%. In their recent study that
321: explicitly includes the effects of scattered starlight, \citet{glauser08} argue
322: for a very luminous central source, $L_{\ast} \approx 0.4$\,L$_{\odot}$. While
323: this value must be somewhat degenerate with the dust properties and structure
324: assumed in their model, it is clearly the most robust estimate available. The
325: pre-main-sequence models imply that such a luminous cool source would be very
326: young, with an age significantly less than 1\,Myr. The model mass tracks at
327: such ages are not well understood in light of the uncertain initial conditions.
328:
329: Clearly, the aforementioned uncertainties can be solely responsible for the
330: apparently different $M_{\ast}$ estimates from the CO kinematics and
331: pre-main-sequence models. Alternatively, there is also an appealing and simple
332: physical explanation $-$ the \iras central source may be a roughly equal-mass
333: binary. In this scenario, the $M_{\ast}$ estimate from the CO kinematics
334: refers to the total mass of the stellar system (i.e., the mass interior to the
335: gas that produces the line emission), while the estimate from the
336: pre-main-sequence models assumes only a single star. Therefore we would expect
337: to see both a high luminosity \citep[as claimed by][]{glauser08} and
338: $M_{\ast}$(CO) $\sim 2 M_{\ast}$(models). A variety of surveys suggest that
339: such binaries are fairly common, $\sim$35-45\% for M dwarfs
340: \citep{fischer92,reid97} and $\sim$10-30\% for cooler objects
341: \citep[e.g.,][]{burgasser07}. While it is difficult to definitively state the
342: properties of the central source(s), we can further assess the nature of \iras
343: by analyzing the structure of the material that surrounds it.
344:
345:
346: \subsection{The Gas and Dust Environment}
347:
348: Given the elongated structures shown in Figure \ref{images}, it is reasonable
349: to suggest that the gas and dust around \iras reside in an exceptionally large
350: circumstellar disk. \citet{glauser08} have recently demonstrated that they are
351: able to fit high-quality scattered light images and the SED for this source
352: with a simple disk structure, and without the need to invoke any envelope
353: component. With the new data presented here, it is worthwhile to re-examine
354: the structure of this material.
355:
356: \iras is exceptionally bright at submillimeter wavelengths, with an 850\,$\mu$m
357: luminosity larger than $\sim$85\% of all other sources detected in the
358: \citet{aw05} Taurus survey. Breaking that sample down further, the \iras
359: submillimeter emission is brighter than $\sim$90\% of Class II sources (disk
360: only), but is comparable to the median Class I source (disk + envelope). If we
361: adopt the standard emissivity for disks (0.034\,cm$^2$ g$^{-1}$ at 883\,$\mu$m,
362: including a gas-to-dust ratio of 100) and assume that the submillimeter
363: continuum emission is optically thin and has a characteristic temperature of
364: $\sim$20\,K \citep[e.g.,][]{beckwith90,aw05,aw07b}, the integrated SMA flux
365: density suggests a large total mass of gas and dust is present around IRAS
366: 04158+2805, $\sim$0.03\,M$_{\odot}$. This value is in good agreement with the
367: disk mass range inferred by \citet{glauser08}, $M_d \approx
368: 0.02$-0.04\,M$_{\odot}$. Estimating masses for circumstellar material in this
369: way is inherently uncertain (perhaps by an order of magnitude), due to the
370: challenge of observationally constraining the optical properties of dust grains
371: and the assumed mass conversion of a trace constituent (dust) to the presumably
372: dominant species (molecular gas).
373:
374: Perhaps more compelling (and easier to interpret) is the unusual geometry that
375: is observed for the dust structure around IRAS 04158+2805. The enormous size
376: of the scattered light nebulae noted by \citet[][2240\,AU diameter]{glauser08}
377: and the submillimeter continuum emission presented here (1120\,AU diameter) is
378: exceptionally rare for circumstellar disks
379: \citep[e.g.,][]{pietu07,watson07,aw07,hughes08}, rivaled only by the
380: circumbinary disk around UY Aur \citep{duvert98,close98,potter00}. On the
381: contrary, the observed size is fairly typical (if not on the small end) for
382: larger-scale envelopes \citep[e.g.,][]{looney00,eisner05}.
383:
384: Moreover, our resolved observations of the submillimeter continuum reveal that
385: a large central region (perhaps $\sim$500\,AU in diameter) has significantly
386: diminished intensity at 883\,$\mu$m, suggesting a ring-like or toroidal
387: geometry for the dust structure. Similar geometries have been inferred for a
388: handful of circumstellar disks, and a variety of underlying causes are
389: possible. The so-called ``transition" disks have their inner regions (out to a
390: few tens of AU in radius) largely cleared of observable material, presumably by
391: disk evolution processes like particle growth, photoevaporation, or dynamical
392: interactions with a young planetary system
393: \citep[e.g.,][]{pietu06,hughes07,brown08}. However, given the large spatial
394: scale of the central depression and the absence of a corresponding dip in the
395: infrared part of the \iras SED, as shown in Figure \ref{sed}, this scenario is
396: unlikely.
397:
398: Alternatively, extremely dense disks with edge-on orientations can potentially
399: render even the submillimeter emission optically thick, resulting in a central
400: depression in its brightness distribution \citep[e.g.,][]{wolf08}. Although
401: the \iras dust structure is not oriented edge-on, perhaps longer pathlengths
402: through the exceptionally large structure can provide compensating column
403: densities. If the bulk of the submillimeter emission is optically thick, the
404: spectrum should have a spectral index $\alpha = 2$, where $F_{\nu} \propto
405: \nu^{\alpha}$ \citep{beckwith91}. Power-law fits to the submillimeter
406: photometry are significantly steeper than the optically thick case, with
407: $\alpha = 2.7\pm0.3$ (0.45-1.3\,mm; $\alpha = 3.8\pm0.6$ for 0.85-1.3\,mm). At
408: these wavelengths, such a steep spectrum is only noted for a few percent of
409: Class II sources in Taurus and $\rho$ Oph, but is more common (25-35\%) in the
410: envelopes around Class I objects \citep{aw05,aw07b}. The observed steep
411: submillimeter SED would be difficult to produce unless a large fraction of the
412: dust was optically thin at those wavelengths. As noted by \citet{wolf08}, a
413: clear test of this possibility can be made with resolved continuum observations
414: at $\lambda > 883$\,$\mu$m. In such data, the material should become optically
415: thick only at significantly smaller radii than at 883\,$\mu$m, resulting in a
416: more centrally concentrated emission profile (or, equivalently, the null in the
417: visibilities should be detected at a comparatively longer deprojected
418: baseline). Note that if the material inside this central depression is
419: optically thick at 883\,$\mu$m, an enormous reservoir of mass is not accounted
420: for in the above estimate.
421:
422: A third possibility for explaining the submillimeter continuum depression is
423: that the emitting dust resides in a circumbinary ring. The material around
424: close binary stars is expected to be dynamically cleared on scales similar to
425: the physical separation of the stellar components
426: \citep[e.g.,][]{jensen96,guilloteau99}.\footnote{Recent observations suggest
427: that the circumbinary scenario may be the more appropriate explanation in some
428: cases for the diminished central emission in both transition \citep{ireland08}
429: and dense, edge-on disks \citep{guilloteau08}.} Numerical simulations of this
430: dynamical interaction suggest that a circumbinary disk gap would be cleared out
431: to a radius $\sim$1.5-3$\times$ the projected semimajor separation of the
432: stellar components, and the individual circumstellar disks would be truncated
433: at a radius $\sim$0.2-0.5$\times$ the projected semimajor separation
434: \citep[e.g.,][]{artymowicz94}. If the 883\,$\mu$m continuum depression noted
435: here is caused by such clearing, we would expect the projected binary
436: separation to be $\sim$90-180\,AU ($\sim$0\farcs6-1\farcs3) for a reasonable
437: range of eccentricities, and the remnant individual circumstellar disks might
438: be truncated at radii of $\sim$20-90\,AU. This configuration is similar to the
439: UY Aur system, where a ring with $\sim$20\arcsec\ diameter is detected in both
440: scattered light and CO around a roughly equal-mass binary with a similar
441: projected separation \citep{duvert98,close98,potter00}. The primary difference
442: is in the masses involved; the stellar mass in the \iras system is
443: $\sim$4$\times$ less than for UY Aur, but the circumstellar mass (or rather
444: 850\,$\mu$m luminosity) is $\sim$4$\times$ higher. While this possibility is
445: certainly appealing in its reconciliation of both the information on the
446: central source (see \S 4.1) and the structure of the gas and dust emission,
447: testing the multiplicity of \iras will be a challenge given the obscuration of
448: the central region by the dust structure. Decomposing high resolution spectra
449: of scattered starlight may represent the best opportunity in this case.
450:
451: The \iras SED, shown in Figure \ref{sed}, exhibits a strong infrared excess
452: with a flat or slightly rising slope from 2-25\,$\mu$m. A variety of
453: solid-state absorption features are noted in higher resolution infrared
454: spectra, including H$_2$O ice (3\,$\mu$m; not shown), silicates (10\,$\mu$m),
455: and CO$_2$ ice \citep[15\,$\mu$m;][]{beck07,furlan08}. The bright and steep
456: submillimeter spectrum has already been discussed above. While all of these
457: SED properties are not necessarily inconsistent with a large, cold, highly
458: inclined circumstellar disk
459: \citep[e.g.,][]{menshchikov97,chiang99,pontoppidan05}, taken together they are
460: more common for Class I/Flat-Spectrum objects that harbor a remnant accretion
461: envelope \citep[e.g.,][]{whitney03,watson04,boogert04,pontoppidan07}.
462: \citet{furlan08} demonstrate that the \iras SED features are strikingly similar
463: to those for several other Class I sources in Taurus (see their Fig.~2) and can
464: be successfully reproduced in detail with an envelope model (although the new
465: observations of this source warrant a modification of their geometric
466: assumptions). So, all of the observational evidence presented here is also
467: consistent with a flattened envelope structure around IRAS 04158+2805. Such a
468: flattened envelope geometry is predicted by molecular cloud core collapse
469: models that incorporate rotation or magnetic fields \citep{terebey84,galli93},
470: and have been clearly detected in other cases, albeit on significantly larger
471: spatial scales than noted here \citep[e.g.,][]{looney07}.
472:
473: In this scenario, a partially evacuated outflow cavity at the center of the
474: flattened envelope may explain the central depression in the submillimeter
475: continuum data \citep[e.g.,][their Models 3 or 4]{whitney03}.
476: \citet{glauser08} indicate that \iras drives a substantial H$\alpha$ jet
477: oriented in the north-south direction, perpendicular to the observed dust
478: structure. The velocity-integrated CO $J$=3$-$2 morphology does resemble the
479: bases of some molecular outflows \citep[e.g.,][]{arce06}, but the absence of
480: both a velocity gradient in the proposed flow direction (north-south) and
481: larger scale molecular outflow signatures \citep{bontemps96,gomez97} are
482: difficult to reconcile with that interpretation. Nevertheless, some
483: contribution to the CO emission from an outflow and even the envelope (i.e.,
484: motions unrelated to Keplerian rotation) would complicate the observed
485: spatio-kinematics. The dynamical estimate of $M_{\ast}$ discussed above
486: should be treated with caution with regards to this possibility. Of course,
487: the envelope and binary ideas are not mutually exclusive, and dynamical
488: clearing of the inner envelope and disks is still a viable alternative.
489:
490: The images in Figures \ref{images}c and \ref{chanmaps} demonstrate that,
491: unlike the submillimeter continuum, the CO emission is centrally concentrated;
492: most of the line emission is from radii inside the toroidal structure traced in
493: the continuum. While this may suggest that the bulk of the line emission is
494: generated in the disk(s) interior to that structure, it is difficult to provide
495: a reliable origin without a more complete physical model for the \iras
496: environment. Future studies of this source should focus on searching for
497: definitive molecular outflow signatures, resolving dense gas tracers that are
498: commonly associated with envelopes \citep[e.g.,][]{jorgensen07}, observing CO
499: transitions at higher spectral resolution to provide a better tracer of the
500: velocity field, and reconciling the optical/near-infrared scattered light
501: observations with the submillimeter results in an effort to converge on a
502: consistent model of the local gas and dust structure.
503:
504: Considering the low stellar mass range implied for IRAS 04158+2805, it is
505: difficult to reconcile the large mass reservoir and size of this environment
506: with any formation scenario that relies on it being dynamically ejected from a
507: more massive system \citep[e.g.,][]{reipurth01,bate03}. Rather, the observed
508: gas and dust structure is more consistent with the standard scenario, where an
509: accretion disk and perhaps a remnant envelope developed around a single (or
510: binary) source during the gravitational collapse of a molecular cloud core
511: fragment. Regardless of the precise value of $M_{\ast}$, \iras is a remarkable
512: example of the fact that the standard picture for star formation worked out for
513: higher-mass stars is also applicable at the low end of the stellar mass
514: function.
515:
516:
517: \section{Summary}
518:
519: We have presented new submillimeter observations of the molecular gas and dust
520: around IRAS 04158+2805, a young low-mass object in the Taurus star-forming
521: region. The data reveal a complex and surprising environment, from which we
522: infer the following:
523:
524: 1. A high aspect ratio ($i \approx 62$\degr) dust structure with a projected
525: diameter of $\sim$1120\,AU and estimated (gas+dust) mass of
526: $\sim$0.03\,M$_{\odot}$ is noted in optical absorption and submillimeter
527: continuum emission images. The resolved 883\,$\mu$m data clearly demonstrate
528: a central depression in the emission, suggesting a ring-like geometry with an
529: inner radius of $\sim$250-300\,AU. A variety of structures that may explain
530: the observations are investigated, with a flattened envelope or circumbinary
531: ring perhaps the most likely.
532:
533: 2. Spatially resolved CO $J$=3$-$2 line emission shows a velocity gradient
534: along the major axis of the dust structure. Assuming the gas traced by this
535: transition is in Keplerian orbital motion around a central source, the
536: spatio-kinematic properties of the emission are used to estimate a central
537: mass, $M_{\ast} \approx 0.3$\,M$_{\odot}$ (with $\sim$50\% uncertainty). This
538: estimate is roughly a factor of 2 higher than the mass range inferred from a
539: reasonable effective temperature range and pre-main-sequence models,
540: $\sim$0.09-0.16\,M$_{\odot}$, but the significant uncertainties on both
541: measurements do not formally rule out their mutual consistency. However, a
542: roughly equal-mass binary system represents an intriguing possibility in this
543: case, as it would naturally account for this possible $M_{\ast}$ discrepancy, a
544: very high luminosity, and the ring-like geometry of the dust structure.
545:
546: 3. The large spatial extent and mass of the complex gas and dust environment
547: surrounding \iras would be difficult to retain in the dynamical ejection models
548: used to explain the formation of such low-mass objects. Instead, this case
549: appears to illustrate that the standard gravitational collapse models applied
550: to stars with masses up to $\sim$2-3\,M$_{\odot}$ can be extrapolated down to
551: objects with $M_{\ast} \sim 0.1$-0.3\,M$_{\odot}$. More detailed models of the
552: \iras gas and dust structure and specialized observations are recommended.
553:
554:
555: \acknowledgments
556: We thank F.~M{\'{e}}nard and G.~Duch{\^{e}}ne for encouraging
557: our interest in this source, and Elise Furlan for kindly providing the
558: mid-infrared spectrum. We are grateful to an anonymous referee for a helpful,
559: constructive review and for emphasizing the potential circumbinary nature of
560: IRAS 04158+2805. The SMA is a joint project between the Smithsonian
561: Astrophysical Observatory and the Academia Sinica Institute of Astronomy and
562: Astrophysics and is funded by the Smithsonian Institution and the Academia
563: Sinica. Support for this work was provided by NASA through Hubble Fellowship
564: grant \#HF-01203.01-A awarded by the Space Telescope Science Institute, which
565: is operated by the Association of Universities for Research in Astronomy, Inc.,
566: for NASA, under contract NAS 5-26555. MCL and KNA acknowledge support for this
567: work from NSF grant AST-0407441.
568:
569:
570: \begin{thebibliography}{}
571: \bibitem[Allers et al.(2006)]{allers06} Allers, K. N., Kessler-Silacci, J. E., Cieza, L. A., \& Jaffe, D. T. 2006, \apj, 644, 364
572: \bibitem[Andrews \& Williams(2005)]{aw05} Andrews, S. M., \& Williams, J. P. 2005, \apj, 635, 1134
573: \bibitem[Andrews \& Williams(2007a)]{aw07} --------- 2007, \apj, 659, 705 (2007a)
574: \bibitem[Andrews \& Williams(2007b)]{aw07b} --------- 2007, \apj, 671, 1800 (2007b)
575: \bibitem[Arce \& Sargent(2006)]{arce06} Arce, H. G., \& Sargent, A. I. 2006, \apj, 646, 1070
576: \bibitem[Armitage \& Clarke(1997)]{armitage97} Armitage, P. J., \& Clarke, C. J. 1997, \mnras, 285, 540
577: \bibitem[Artymowicz \& Lubow(1994)]{artymowicz94} Artymowicz, P., \& Lubow, S. H. 1994, \apj, 421, 651
578: \bibitem[Baraffe et al.(1998)]{baraffe98} Baraffe, I., Chabrier, G., Allard, F., \& Hauschildt, P. H. 1998, \aap, 337, 403
579: \bibitem[Baraffe et al.(2002)]{baraffe02} ---------, 2002, \aap, 382, 563
580: \bibitem[Bate et al.(2002)]{bate03} Bate, M. R., Bonnell, I. A., \& Bromm, V. 2002, \mnras, 332, L65
581: \bibitem[Beck(2007)]{beck07} Beck, T. L. 2007, \aj, 133, 1673
582: \bibitem[Beckwith et al.(1990)]{beckwith90} Beckwith, S. V. W., Sargent, A. I., Chini, R., \& G{\"{u}}sten, R. 1990, \aj, 99, 924
583: \bibitem[Beckwith \& Sargent(1991)]{beckwith91} Beckwith, S. V. W., \& Sargent, A. I. 1991, \apj, 381, 250
584: \bibitem[Beichman et al.(1986)]{beichman86} Beichman, C. A., et al. 1986, \apj, 307, 337
585: \bibitem[Bontemps et al.(1996)]{bontemps96} Bontemps, S., Andr{\'{e}}, P., Terebey, S., \& Cabrit, S. 1996, \aap, 311, 858
586: \bibitem[Boogert et al.(2004)]{boogert04} Boogert, A. C., et al. 2004, \apjs, 154, 359
587: \bibitem[Bouy et al.(2008)]{buoy08} Bouy, H., et al. 2008, \aap, in press (astro-ph/0803.2051)
588: \bibitem[Brown et al.(2008)]{brown08} Brown, J. M., Blake, G. A., Qi, C., Dullemond, C. P., \& Wilner, D. J. 2008, \apj, 675, L109
589: \bibitem[Burgasser et al.(2007)]{burgasser07} Burgasser, A. J., Reid, I. N., Siegler, N., Close, L., Allen, P., Lowrance, P., \& Gizis, J. 2007, in Protostars \& Planets V, eds. B. Reipurth, D. Jewitt, \& K. Keil (Univ.~Arizona Press: Tucson), 427
590: \bibitem[Chiang \& Goldreich(1999)]{chiang99} Chiang, E. I., \& Goldreich, P. 1999, \apj, 519, 279
591: \bibitem[Close et al.(1998)]{close98} Close, L. M., et al. 1998, \apj, 499, 883
592: \bibitem[Cutri et al.(2003)]{cutri03} Cutri, R. M., et al. 2003, 2MASS All-Sky Point Source Catalog (Pasadena: IPAC)
593: \bibitem[D'Antona \& Mazzitelli(1994)]{dantona94} D'Antona, F., \& Mazzitelli, I. 1994, \apjs, 90, 467
594: \bibitem[D'Antona \& Mazzitelli(1997)]{dantona97} --------- 1997, Mem. Soc. Astron. Italiana, 68, 807
595: \bibitem[Doppmann et al.(2005)]{doppmann05} Doppmann, G. W., Greene, T. P., Covey, K. R., \& Lada, C. J. 2005, \aj, 130, 1145
596: \bibitem[Duvert et al.(1998)]{duvert98} Duvert, G., Dutrey, A., Guilloteau, S., M{\'{e}}nard, F., Schuster, K., Prato, L., \& Simon, M. 1998, \aap, 332, 867
597: \bibitem[Eisner et al.(2005)]{eisner05} Eisner, J. A., Hillenbrand, L. A., Carpenter, J. M., \& Wolf, S. 2005, \apj, 635, 396
598: \bibitem[Elias(1978)]{elias78} Elias, J. H. 1978, \apj, 224, 857
599: \bibitem[Fischer \& Marcy(1992)]{fischer92} Fischer, D., \& Marcy, G. 1992, \apj, 396, 178
600: \bibitem[Furlan et al.(2008)]{furlan08} Furlan, E., et al. 2008, \apjs, 176, 184
601: \bibitem[Galli \& Shu(1993)]{galli93} Galli, D., \& Shu, F. H. 1993, \apj, 417, 220
602: \bibitem[Glauser et al.(2008)]{glauser08} Glauser, A. M., M{\'{e}}nard, F., Pinte, C., Duch{\^{e}}ne, G., G{\"{u}}del, M., Monin, J.-L., \& Padgett, D. L. 2008, \aap, in press (astro-ph/0804.3483)
603: \bibitem[Gomez et al.(1997)]{gomez97} Gomez, M., Whitney, B. A., \& Kenyon, S. J. 1997, \aj, 114, 1138
604: \bibitem[Guilloteau et al.(1999)]{guilloteau99} Guilloteau, S., Dutrey, A., \& Simon, M. 1999, \aap, 348, 570
605: \bibitem[Guilloteau et al.(2008)]{guilloteau08} Guilloteau, S., Dutrey, A., Pety, J., \& Gueth, F. 2008, \aap, 478, L31
606: \bibitem[Hillenbrand \& White(2004)]{hillenbrand04} Hillenbrand, L. A., \& White, R. J. 2004, \apj, 604, 741
607: \bibitem[Ho et al.(2004)]{ho04} Ho, P. T. P., Moran, J. M., \& Lo, K. Y. 2004, \apj, 616, L1
608: \bibitem[Hughes et al.(2007)]{hughes07} Hughes, A. M., Wilner, D. J., Calvet, N., D'Alessio, P., Claussen, M. J., \& Hogerheijde, M. R. 2007, \apj, 664, 536
609: \bibitem[Hughes et al.(2008)]{hughes08} Hughes, A. M., Wilner, D. J., Qi, C., \& Hogerheijde, M. R. 2008, \apj, 678, 1119
610: \bibitem[Ireland \& Kraus(2008)]{ireland08} Ireland, M. J., \& Kraus, A. L. 2008, \apj, 678, L59
611: \bibitem[Jensen et al.(1996)]{jensen96} Jensen, E. L. N., Mathieu, R. D., \& Fuller, G. A. 1994, \apj, 429, L29
612: \bibitem[J{\o}rgensen et al.(2007)]{jorgensen07} J{\o}rgensen, J. K., et al. 2007, \apj, 659, 479
613: \bibitem[Kenyon et al.(1998)]{kenyon98} Kenyon, S. J., Brown, D. I., Tout, C. A., \& Berlind, P. 1998, \aj, 115, 2491
614: \bibitem[Klein et al.(2003)]{klein03} Klein, R., Apai, D., Pascucci, I., Henning, T., \& Waters, L. B. F. M. 2003, \apj, 593, L57
615: \bibitem[Lay et al.(1997)]{lay97} Lay, O. P., Carlstrom, J. E., \& Hills, R. E. 1997, \apj, 489, 917
616: \bibitem[Looney \& Mundy(2000)]{looney00} Looney, L. W., \& Mundy, L. G. 2000, \apj, 529, 477
617: \bibitem[Looney et al.(2007)]{looney07} Looney, L. W., Tobin, J. J., \& Kwon, W. 2007, \apj, 670, L131
618: \bibitem[Luhman(1999)]{luhman99} Luhman, K. L. 1999, \apj, 525, 466
619: \bibitem[Luhman(2006)]{luhman06} --------- 2006, \apj, 645, 676
620: \bibitem[Luhman et al.(2003)]{luhman03} Luhman, K. L., Stauffer, J. R., Muench, A. A., Rieke, G. H., Lada, E. A., Bouvier, J., \& Lada, C. J. 2003, \apj, 593, 1093
621: \bibitem[Luhman et al.(2006)]{luhman06b} Luhman, K. L., et al. 2006, \apj, 647, 1180
622: \bibitem[Luhman et al.(2007)]{luhman07b} Luhman, K. L., Joergens, V., Lada, C., Muzerolle, J., Pascucci, I., \& White, R. 2007, in Protostars \& Planets V, eds. B. Reipurth, D. Jewitt, \& K. Keil (Univ.~Arizona Press: Tucson), 443
623: \bibitem[Luhman \& Rieke(1998)]{luhman98} Luhman, K. L., \& Rieke, G. H. 1998, \apj, 497, 354
624: \bibitem[Mathieu(1994)]{mathieu94} Mathieu, R. D. 1994, \araa, 32, 465
625: \bibitem[Men'shchikov \& Henning(1997)]{menshchikov97} Men'shchikov, A. B., \& Henning, T. 1997, \aap, 318, 879
626: \bibitem[Montalb{\'{a}}n et al.(2004)]{montalban04} Montalb{\'{a}}n, J., D'Antona, F., Kupka, F., \& Heiter, U. 2004, \aap, 416, 1081
627: \bibitem[Motte \& Andr{\'{e}}(2001)]{motte01} Motte, F., \& Andr{\'{e}}, P. 2001, \aap, 365, 440
628: \bibitem[Natta \& Testi(2001)]{natta01} Natta, A., \& Testi, L. 2001, \aap, 376, L22
629: \bibitem[Pascucci et al.(2003)]{pascucci03} Pascucci, I., Apai, D., Henning, T., \& Dullemond, C. P. 2003, \apj, 590, L111
630: \bibitem[Padoan \& Nordlund(2004)]{padoan04} Padoan, P., \& Nordlund, \AA. 2004, \apj, 617, 559
631: \bibitem[Pi{\'{e}}tu et al.(2006)]{pietu06} Pi{\'{e}}tu, V., Dutrey, A., Guilloteau, S., Chappilon, E., \& Pety, J. 2006, \aap, 460, L43
632: \bibitem[Pi{\'{e}}tu et al.(2007)]{pietu07} Pi{\'{e}}tu, V., Dutrey, A., \& Guilloteau, S. 2007, \aap, 467, 163
633: \bibitem[Pontoppidan et al.(2005)]{pontoppidan05} Pontoppidan, K. M., et al. 2005, \apj, 622, 463
634: \bibitem[Pontoppidan et al.(2007)]{pontoppidan07} --------- 2008, \apj, 678, 1005
635: \bibitem[Potter et al.(2000)]{potter00} Potter, D. E., et al. 2000, \apj, 540, 422
636: \bibitem[Reid \& Gizis(1997)]{reid97} Reid, I. N., \& Gizis, J. 1997, \aj, 113, 2246
637: \bibitem[Reipurth \& Clarke(2001)]{reipurth01} Reipurth, B., \& Clarke, C. 2001, \aj, 122, 432
638: \bibitem[Scholz et al.(2006)]{scholz06} Scholz, A., Jayawardhana, R., \& Wood, K. 2006, \apj, 645, 1498
639: \bibitem[Simon et al.(2000)]{simon00} Simon, M., Dutrey, A., \& Guilloteau, S. 2000, \apj, 545, 1034
640: \bibitem[Stassun et al.(2006)]{stassun06} Stassun, K. G., Mathieu, R. D., \& Valenti, J. A. 2006, Nature, 440, 311
641: \bibitem[Terebey et al.(1984)]{terebey84} Terebey, S., Shu, F. H., \& Cassen, P. 1984, \apj, 286, 529
642: \bibitem[Umbreit et al.(2005)]{umbreit05} Umbreit, S., Burkert, A., Henning, T., Mikkola, S., \& Spurzem, R. 2005, \apj, 623, 940
643: \bibitem[Watson et al.(2004)]{watson04} Watson, D. M., et al. 2004, \apjs, 154, 391
644: \bibitem[Watson et al.(2007)]{watson07} Watson, A. M., Stapelfeldt, K. R., Wood, K., M{\'{e}}nard, F. 2007, in Protostars \& Planets V, eds. B. Reipurth, D. Jewitt, \& K. Keil (Univ.~Arizona Press: Tucson), 523
645: \bibitem[White \& Hillenbrand(2004)]{white04} White, R. J., \& Hillenbrand, L. A. 2004, \apj, 616, 998
646: \bibitem[Whitney et al.(2003)]{whitney03} Whitney, B. A., Wood, K., Bjorkman, J. E., \& Wolff, M. J. 2003, \apj, 591, 1049
647: \bibitem[Wilner \& Welch(1994)]{wilner94} Wilner, D. J., \& Welch, W. J. 1994, \apj, 427, 898
648: \bibitem[Wolf et al.(2008)]{wolf08} Wolf, S., Schegerer, A., Beuther, H., Padgett, D. L., \& Stapelfeldt, K. R. 2008, \apj, 674, L101
649: \end{thebibliography}
650:
651: \clearpage
652:
653: \begin{figure}
654: \epsscale{1.}
655: \plotone{f1.eps}
656: \caption{Images of the gas and dust surrounding IRAS 04158+2805. ({\it left})
657: Optical $R$-band (0.7\,$\mu$m) image showing a dark lane in silhouette
658: (grayscale contours; linear steps) against background nebulosity and scattered
659: starlight (unfilled contours; logarithmic steps). ({\it middle}) Submillimeter
660: (883\,$\mu$m) dust continuum image from the SMA. Contours start at 3\,$\sigma$
661: ($\sim$3.5\,mJy beam$^{-1}$) and increase by factors of $\sqrt{2}$. ({\it
662: right}) Velocity-integrated (0$^{\mathrm{th}}$ moment) emission image from the
663: CO $J$=3$-$2 transition, constructed from 9 spectral channels (a velocity
664: width of 6.3\,km s$^{-1}$). Contours start at 3\,$\sigma$ (0.5\,Jy km s$^{-1}$
665: beam$^{-1}$) and increase by factors of $\sqrt{2}$. Effective FWHM
666: (synthesized) beam sizes are shown in the lower right corner of each panel.
667: \label{images}}
668: \end{figure}
669:
670: \begin{figure}[b]
671: \epsscale{0.6}
672: \plotone{f2.eps}
673: \caption{The real part of the \iras 883\,$\mu$m visibilities as a function of
674: the interferometer baseline, after deprojection and elliptical averaging
675: according to the observed geometry \citep[see][]{lay97}. The steep drop in the
676: visibilities at short baselines and the pronounced null at
677: $\sim$30-40\,k$\lambda$ confirm the morphology in Fig.~1b; the submillimeter
678: emission is not centrally peaked. \label{vis}}
679: \end{figure}
680:
681: \begin{figure}
682: \epsscale{1.05}
683: \plotone{f3.eps}
684: \caption{Channel maps of the \iras CO $J$=3$-$2 line emission. Contours start
685: at 3\,$\sigma$ (0.2\,Jy beam$^{-1}$) and increase linearly in 6\,$\sigma$
686: increments. The FWHM synthesized beam sizes are shown in the lower right of
687: each panel, and the LSR velocity of each channel (in km s$^{-1}$) is shown in
688: the upper left. The crosshairs mark the horizontal extent of the submillimeter
689: continuum emission and the vertical extent corresponding to the inclination
690: (62\degr) derived from fits of the continuum visibilities. There is a clear
691: velocity gradient along the major axis of the continuum emission and optical
692: silhouette.
693: \label{chanmaps}}
694: \end{figure}
695:
696: \begin{figure}
697: \epsscale{0.5}
698: \plotone{f4.eps}
699: \caption{Position-velocity diagram of the CO $J$=3$-$2 line emission. Contours
700: start at 0.1\,Jy and increase in steps of $\sqrt{2}$. The ordinate shows the
701: projected offset from the image center (with positive values to the east), and
702: the abscissa shows the velocity offset from the systemic value, +7.4\,km
703: s$^{-1}$. The heavy curve represents an inclined ($i = 62$\degr) Keplerian
704: rotation profile that is most similar to the data, for $M_{\ast} =
705: 0.3$\,M$_{\odot}$. Lighter curves on either side show similar profiles for
706: $M_{\ast} = 0.15$ and 0.45\,M$_{\odot}$. \label{pv_spec}}
707: \end{figure}
708:
709: \begin{figure}
710: \epsscale{0.6}
711: \plotone{f5.eps}
712: \caption{The \iras spectral energy distribution. Optical photometry was taken
713: from \citet{luhman98}, infrared data from the 2MASS Point Source Catalog
714: \citep{cutri03}, \citet{luhman06b}, and \citet{beichman86}, the mid-infrared
715: {\it Spitzer} IRS spectrum from \citet{furlan08}, the submillimeter data from
716: measurements presented here, and the 1.3\,mm flux density from
717: \citet{motte01}. See \citet{furlan08} for a more detailed discussion of the
718: mid-infrared spectral features. \label{sed}}
719: \end{figure}
720:
721: \end{document}
722: