1: %% manuscript produces a one-column, single-spaced document:
2: %\documentclass[apjpt4]{aastex}
3: \documentclass[12pt,preprint]{aastex}
4:
5: %% manuscript produces a one-column, double-spaced document:
6: %\documentclass[manuscript]{aastex}
7:
8: %% preprint2 produces a double-column, single-spaced document:
9: %\documentclass[preprint2]{aastex}
10: %\documentclass[11pt,preprint2]{aastex}
11:
12: \shorttitle{Molecular Emission Line Formation in Prestellar Cores}
13: \shortauthors{Pavlyuchenkov et al.}
14:
15: \begin{document}
16: \title{Molecular Emission Line Formation in Prestellar Cores}
17:
18: \author{
19: Ya. Pavlyuchenkov\altaffilmark{1,2},
20: D. Wiebe\altaffilmark{2},
21: B. Shustov\altaffilmark{2},}
22: \author{
23: Th. Henning\altaffilmark{1},
24: R. Launhardt\altaffilmark{1},
25: D. Semenov\altaffilmark{1}}
26: \altaffiltext{1}{Max Planck Institut f\"ur Astronomie,
27: K\"onigstuhl 17, D69117 Heidelberg, Germany;}
28: \altaffiltext{2}{Institute of Astronomy, Russian Academy of Sciences,
29: Pyatnitskaya 48, Moscow, 109117, Russia}
30:
31:
32: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
33:
34: \begin{abstract}
35: We investigate general aspects of molecular line formation
36: under conditions which are typical of prestellar cores. Focusing on
37: simple linear molecules, we study formation of their rotational lines by
38: radiative transfer simulations. We present a
39: thermalization diagram to show the effects of collisions and radiation
40: on the level excitation. We construct a detailed scheme (contribution
41: chart) to illustrate the formation of emission line profiles. This chart
42: can be used as an efficient tool to identify which parts of the cloud
43: contribute to a specific line profile. We show how molecular
44: line characteristics for uniform model clouds depend on hydrogen
45: density, molecular column density, and kinetic temperature. The results
46: are presented in a 2D plane to illustrate cooperative effects of the
47: physical factors. We also use a core model with a non-uniform
48: density distribution and chemical stratification to study the effects of
49: cloud contraction and rotation on spectral line maps. We discuss the
50: main issues that should be taken into account when dealing with
51: interpretation and simulation of observed molecular lines.
52: \end{abstract}
53:
54: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
55:
56: \keywords{line: formation --- line: profiles ---
57: radiative transfer --- stars: formation --- ISM: clouds}
58:
59: \section{Introduction}
60:
61: Star formation is a fundamental process in the universe. Dense,
62: gravitationally bound, and genuinely starless cores, which we call here
63: ``prestellar cores'', are the earliest visible precursors of forming
64: stars. The interplay between gravitation and thermal/magnetic pressure
65: as well as the conservation of angular momentum are all driving
66: forces behind prestellar core evolution. While the thermal structure
67: is determined by dust properties and molecular composition, magnetic
68: support is sensitive to the ionization degree. The interaction and relative
69: importance of these processes as well as the role of external forces
70: are still not well understood \citep[see, e.g. reviews by][]{Klessen:2004, Bergin:2007}.
71: Thus, it is important to study the physical and chemical evolution of these cores
72: in detail to reveal the underlying physics.
73:
74: The interiors of such prestellar cores are well-shielded from
75: interstellar or stellar radiation, leading to low internal temperatures.
76: Under such conditions, the main component of these cores, H$_2$, is not
77: easily observable. Therefore, we have to rely on indirect methods to
78: determine the physical structure of prestellar cores, e.g., on
79: observations of thermal dust emission or emission lines from
80: other molecules, like CO, CS and N$_2$H$^+$. Observations of spectral
81: lines have an important advantage over continuum observations since
82: they also carry information about kinematics of the gas. A disadvantage of
83: molecular tracers can be that they are only present under certain
84: conditions and can be frozen-out on dust surfaces. Numerous studies,
85: including single-dish and interferometric observations along with their
86: theoretical analysis, have been performed over the past years,
87: significantly deepening our understanding of the physical and chemical
88: processes in star-forming regions
89: \citep[see, e.g. reviews of][]{Myers:1999,Evans:1999,DiFrancesco:2007,
90: Bergin:2007}. However, deriving physical properties from molecular
91: lines is a difficult (inverse) problem because of the many factors which
92: can affect the line formation.
93: %and because the observed line is an integral quantity.
94:
95: Even if we assume that the studied object is spherically symmetric and
96: uniform, we have to specify at least 5 independent parameters describing
97: the formation of molecular lines. These are density $n({\rm H}_2)$, kinetic
98: temperature $T_{\rm kin}$, molecular column density $N({\rm mol})$,
99: radial velocity $V_r$, and micro-turbulent velocity $V_{\rm turb}$. In
100: more realistic models, additional parameters should also be considered,
101: e.g., electron concentration and external radiation field, with spatial
102: distributions of all the above parameters.
103:
104: An exact analytical treatment of this multi-parameter system is, in most
105: cases, impossible. Optically thin line formation can be described
106: analytically to some extent \citep[see, e.g.,][]{Wilson:2000},
107: but it is very difficult to do the same for optically thick lines.
108: Also, it is difficult to use analytic methods to solve the inverse
109: problem, i.e., to restore physical distributions of relevant parameters
110: from observed spectra because of the non-local and non-linear nature of
111: the radiative transfer problem. This is why numerical line radiative
112: transfer (LRT) models are commonly used as an exploratory tool. Several
113: reliable numerical methods and numerical codes have been developed by
114: various groups for this purpose \citep[see reviews
115: by][]{Peraiah:2004,Zadelhoff:2002}. There are also fast approximate
116: numerical tools available for the molecular line radiative transfer
117: analysis\footnote{{\it http://www.sron.rug.nl/\~{}vdtak/radex/radex.php}}
118: \citep{vanderTak:2007}. However, input
119: data for line
120: modeling include not only physical conditions but also distributions
121: of molecular abundances. All these data can be represented with
122: some analytical prescription or extracted from chemical and dynamical
123: models.
124:
125: As recently outlined by \citet{tsamis}, there are two alternative
126: approaches to the diagnostics of protostellar objects. The first
127: approach is a systematic study of the influence of various factors on
128: emergent spectra in order to facilitate the analysis of forthcoming
129: observations. Such studies (based mainly on approximate LRT methods)
130: have already started more than 30 years ago with the analysis of
131: the excitation conditions for various molecules and effects of the
132: density, temperature and velocity gradients on the emission line
133: profiles
134: \citep[e.g.,][]{Lucas:1974,Goldreich:1974,Leung:1978,Stenholm:1980}.
135: The alternative approach is a detailed study of an individual
136: source. To infer
137: its parameters, a number of models is constructed and the direct LRT
138: problem is solved for each model. Varying the model parameters, it is
139: possible to find the combination which provides the best agreement
140: between observed and modeled spectra (maps) or their derived parameters,
141: like, e.g., velocity centroids \citep{walker1994} or line ratios
142: \citep{vanderTak:2007}. Both trial-and-error methods or any sophisticated
143: numerical algorithm for isolating the ``best''\ set of free parameters
144: can be utilized \citep{Keto:2004}. This second approach has already been
145: successfully applied in a number of studies, aimed to extract detailed
146: characteristics of pre-stellar and protostellar objects from observed
147: spectra, in particular, their chemical and kinematical structure
148: \citep[e.g.,][]{Tafalla:2002,Tafalla:2004,Keto:2004,
149: Evans:2005,Brinch:2007} as well as to test different star formation
150: theories \citep[e.g.][]{Pavlyuchenkov:2003, Offner:2007}.
151:
152:
153: Following the first approach, efforts of various authors are mainly
154: concentrated toward evolutionary stages later than the prestellar phase. Most
155: cores investigated in detail are closer to the formation of a first
156: hydrostatic core, when the collapse is well-developed and can be
157: described by Shu or Larson-Penston solutions. This interest may be
158: partly caused by the fact that first proofs of infall have been reported
159: for Class\,0 objects \citep{walker1986,b335}, in which the collapse has
160: already resulted in the formation of a deeply embedded source.
161: \cite{zhou1992} considered spectral differences between Shu and
162: Larson-Penston solutions, assuming constant molecular abundances, and
163: identified four line properties, supposedly unique to collapsing cores.
164: \citet{rawlings1992} combined a dynamical description, based on the Shu
165: model, with a detailed chemical model and identified species with broad
166: line wings, indicative of infall motions. \citet{ry2001} coupled a
167: similar chemical and dynamical model to a more realistic radiation
168: transfer model, implemented as an approximate $\Lambda$-iteration code,
169: and studied the sensitivity of emergent central optically thin and
170: optically thick spectra to various model parameters.
171: %They concluded that
172: %careful consideration of chemistry and multiple line-of-sight
173: %observations of many different molecules and transitions are needed to
174: %constrain the collapse dynamics.
175: The assumption of isothermality, used by \citet{rawlings1992} and
176: \citet{ry2001}, was relaxed in \citet{tsamis} in application to a
177: ``B335-like'' Class~0 object. The sensitivity of line profiles in this
178: model to the intensity of the ambient radiation field was studied in
179: \citet{redman2004}.
180: %\cite{cec} modeled line emission from a collapsing protostellar
181: %envelope, computing both chemical evolution and thermal balance on top
182: %of the Shu model.
183: The influence of various parameters on Class~0 central spectra, with
184: a particular emphasis on turbulence and rotation, was also studied by
185: \citet{wtb2001} under the assumption of flat abundance distributions.
186: The role of high angular resolution in studying such clouds was
187: investigated by \citet{choi}. More details about line modeling
188: can be also found in review by \citet{Evans:1999}.
189:
190: %\citet{walker1994} used
191: %results of 3D hydrodynamic modeling to generate spectral maps of a
192: %collapsing protostar at different evolutionary times and viewing angles
193: %under the assumption of LTE, while \citet{matsun} applied a non-LTE
194: %radiation transfer model to a 1D hydrodynamic simulation. Spectral maps
195: %of a collapsing core were computed by \cite{narwalk}.
196:
197: Large amounts of data have also been accumulated for starless cores,
198: most of which are presumably ``prestellar'' \citep[e.g.,][]{infall},
199: together with the theoretical modeling of molecular lines. E.g.,
200: \citet{Tafalla:2004} investigated the effects of depletion on the line
201: intensity. \citet{Lee:2004} studied the evolution of line profiles
202: during core contraction based on the models where the chemical
203: evolution is calculated along with dynamical evolution of the cloud.
204: \citet{Pavlyuchenkov:2007} investigated the combined effects of
205: temperature and depletion, and \citet{DeVries:2005} investigated
206: the possibility to use approximate analytical models to extract velocity
207: gradients from the line profiles. In principle, all the mentioned studies of line
208: formation in protostellar objects are also relevant for prestellar cores.
209: However, despite the obvious
210: observational and theoretical progress, the interpretation of the data
211: is still far from being straightforward, as infall and rotation
212: velocities in prestellar cores are both comparable or even smaller than
213: the sound speed. Difficulties in restoring the information about
214: structural, thermal, and kinematic properties are also caused by the
215: lack of relevant methods for molecular line analysis.
216:
217: In this paper, we systematically study the formation of molecular lines
218: in prestellar cores and present different tools which can be used to
219: analyze the formation of lines in detail. Using the linear molecules CO and
220: HCO$^+$ as examples, we model their emission by means of non-LTE LRT
221: simulations. The role of hydrogen density, molecular column density,
222: kinetic temperature, infall, and rotation is examined and illustrated
223: in the paper. Such an analysis may form the basis of a more
224: sophisticated interpretation of observational data and can be useful for
225: those who are going to use LRT simulations in their studies
226: or want to get a global view of the factors influencing observed
227: line profiles.
228:
229:
230: In Section~2 we describe the radiation transfer model used in the paper,
231: introduce parameters to characterize line profiles, and provide
232: some basic considerations on the line formation in prestellar cores. In
233: Section~3 we show how molecular line characteristics depend on hydrogen
234: density, molecular column density, and kinetic temperature for the
235: parameter sample of uniform model clouds. In Section~4 we consider a
236: non-uniform model cloud and study the effects of chemical
237: stratification, contraction and rotation on spectral line maps. In
238: Section~5 we discuss additional problems related to the LRT analysis.
239: Section~6 summarizes the main conclusions of this paper.
240:
241:
242: \section{Notes on Molecular Line Transfer}
243:
244: \subsection{Equations of Radiation Transfer}
245:
246: %To calculate the spectrum of the radiation from an astronomical
247: %object, distributions of density, kinetic temperature, and velocity
248: %within the medium must be provided along with molecular abundances.
249:
250: The goal of the LRT simulation is to obtain level populations and to
251: produce appropriate molecular line profiles. For that purpose, one
252: solves a system of equations, describing the radiative transfer
253: \citep[e.g., ][]{Peraiah:2004}. This system includes the transfer
254: equation itself
255: \begin{equation}
256: \frac{dI_{\nu}}{ds}=-\alpha_{\nu}I_{\nu}+j_{\nu}
257: \label{transfer}
258: \end{equation}
259: and a set of balance equations for level populations
260: \begin{equation}
261: n_u \left[ \sum_{l<u}A_{ul} + \sum_{l\neq u}
262: (B_{ul}\overline{J}_{ul}+C_{ul})\right]= %\\
263: \sum_{l>u}n_{l}A_{lu}+\sum_{l\neq u}n_{l}(B_{lu}\overline{J}_{ul}+C_{lu}).
264: \label{balance}
265: \end{equation}
266: Here $I_{\nu}$ is the intensity of radiation, $s$ is the length along
267: the ray, $n_u$ and $n_l$ are level populations, $A_{ul}$ and $B_{ul}$
268: are the Einstein coefficients; $C_{ul}$ are coefficients of collisional
269: excitation; $ul$ indices specify the transition from the upper level $u$
270: to the lower level $l$. Equations (\ref{transfer}) and (\ref{balance})
271: are coupled by the emission and absorption coefficients
272: $j_{\nu}$ and $\alpha_{\nu}$, respectivelly:
273: \begin{eqnarray}
274: &j_{\nu}=\frac{h\nu_{ul}}{4\pi}n_{u}A_{ul}\phi_{ul}(\nu), \\
275: &\alpha_{\nu}=\frac{h\nu_{ul}}{4\pi}(n_{l}B_{lu}-n_{u}B_{ul})\phi_{ul}(\nu)
276: \end{eqnarray}
277: and by the mean intensity $\overline{J}_{ul}$. The mean intensity
278: is defined as
279: \begin{equation}
280: \overline{J}_{ul}=\frac{1}{4\pi}\int\limits_{4\pi} d\Omega
281: \int\limits_0^{\infty} I_{\nu}\,\phi_{ul}(\nu) d\nu.
282: \end{equation}
283: where $\phi_{ul}(\nu)$ is the line profile function
284: and $\Omega$ is the spatial angle.
285: The line profile function can be expressed as
286: \begin{equation}
287: \phi_{ul}(\nu)=\frac{c}{b\nu_{ul} \sqrt{\pi}}\exp
288: \left( -\frac{c^2(\nu-\nu_{ul} -
289: (\vec{v}\,\vec{n})\;\nu_{ul}/c)}{\nu_{ul}^2 b^2} \right)
290: \end{equation}
291: in the approximation of total redistribution over frequencies and a
292: Maxwellian turbulent velocity distribution.
293: Here, $\nu_{ul}$ is the central frequency of
294: the transition $u \rightarrow l$; $\vec{v}$ is the regular velocity;
295: $\vec{n}$ is unit vector associated with $d\Omega$; and $b$ is a
296: parameter, which is related to the kinetic temperature $T_{\rm kin}$ and the
297: most probable value of the microturbulent velocity $V_{\rm t}$ by the
298: expression
299: \begin{equation}
300: b^2=\sqrt{\frac{2kT_{\rm kin}}{m_{\rm mol}}+V_{\rm t}^2}.
301: \label{vturb}
302: \end{equation}
303: The intensity $I_{\nu}$ can be expressed in units of the
304: brightness temperature $T_{\rm B}$ via the Planck equation
305: \begin{equation}
306: I_{\nu}=\frac{2h\nu^3}{c^2}\frac{1}{e^{\frac{h\nu}{kT_{\rm B}}}-1},
307: \end{equation}
308: or in the units of radiative temperature $T_{\rm R}$ via the
309: Rayleigh-Jeans approximation with subtracted background radiation
310: \begin{equation}
311: T_{\rm R}=\frac{c^2}{2k\nu^2}(I_{\nu}-I_{\nu}^{\rm bg}),
312: \end{equation}
313: where $I_{\nu}^{\rm bg}$ is the intensity
314: of the background radiation with the temperature $T_{\rm bg}$.
315: The radiative temperature $T_{\rm R}$ is commonly used in
316: radio astronomy and we use it throughout this paper.
317:
318: In order to calculate the emergent profile, one first calculates level populations
319: and then integrates Eq.~(\ref{transfer}) to get a spectrum, which can
320: be later convolved with a telescope beam, if necessary. For our LRT simulations
321: we use the 2D non-LTE code URAN(IA), developed by \cite{Pavlyuchenkov:2004}.
322: This code partly utilizes the scheme originally proposed and implemented in the
323: publicly available 1D code RATRAN \citep{Hogerheijde:2000}. The idea of the
324: method is to solve the system of LRT equations with the Accelerated
325: $\Lambda$-Iterations method, where the mean intensity $J_\nu$ is calculated
326: with a Monte-Carlo approach.
327:
328: We focus on pure rotational transitions and restrict ourselves to linear
329: molecules with the simplest level structure (CO, HCO$^+$) in order to
330: avoid the complexity caused by blends, uncertainties in collisional
331: coefficients, etc. All the molecular data needed for the LRT simulation are
332: taken from the Leiden Molecular
333: Database\footnote{{\it http://www.strw.leidenuniv.nl/\~{}moldata/}}
334: \citep{Shoier:2005}.
335:
336:
337: To describe and to analyze the results of the simulations, we use two
338: important parameters of the transition, namely, the optical depth
339: $\tau_{\nu}$ and the excitation temperature $T_{\rm ex}$. The optical depth
340: is defined as
341: \begin{equation}
342: \tau_{\nu}=\int\limits_{s_0}^{s_1} \alpha_{\nu} ds,
343: \label{tau}
344: \end{equation}
345: where $\nu$ is the frequency within the line profile, $s_0$ and $s_1$ are
346: near and far edges of the cloud along the ray, respectively, and
347: $\alpha_{\nu}$ is the absorption coefficient. The optical depth
348: determines how opaque the medium is and how effectively different regions
349: are coupled by radiation. The excitation temperature $T_{\rm ex}$ of the transition is
350: defined as
351: \begin{equation}
352: \frac{n_l}{n_u}=\frac{g_l}{g_u} \exp
353: \left\{ -\frac{h \nu_{ul}}{kT_{\rm ex}} \right\},
354: \label{texc}
355: \end{equation}
356: where $n_l$ and $n_u$ are populations of levels $l$ and $u$, and $g_l$ and
357: $g_u$ are their statistical weights. The excitation temperature indicates
358: how close the medium (transition) is to local thermodynamical equilibrium
359: (LTE), when $T_{\rm ex} = T_{\rm kin}$. The excitation temperature and the
360: optical depth can be used to constrain the LRT problem. In the optically thin
361: case the temperature of the emergent radiation $T_{\rm B}$ is proportional
362: to the optical depth and excitation temperature of the transition
363: \begin{equation}
364: T_{\rm B} \approx \tau T_{\rm ex}.
365: \end{equation}
366: In the optically thick case
367: \begin{equation}
368: T_{\rm B} \approx T_{\rm ex}(\tau=1),
369: \end{equation}
370: i.e., $T_{\rm B}$ is close to the excitation temperature at $\tau\approx 1$.
371:
372: \subsection{Contribution Chart}
373:
374: \citet{Tafalla:2006} implemented the contribution function (CF) as a
375: convenient tool to analyze the relative input of a particular core region to
376: the line profile. They applied it to the study of line formation and
377: chemical differentiation in starless cores, using
378: the frequency-integrated CF. We extend their analysis, taking into account all the
379: velocity channels, and investigate in detail the formation of the entire line
380: profile. The contribution function is defined as
381: \begin{equation}
382: F_v(l)=e^{-\tau_v} \left\{ 1-e^{-\Delta\tau_v}\right\}S,
383: \label{contribition}
384: \end{equation}
385: where $\tau_v$ is the optical depth toward the element at distance $l$,
386: $\Delta \tau_v$ is the optical depth of this element, and $S$ is the source
387: function of the element. The index $v$ indicates that a corresponding value is
388: related to a velocity offset $v$.
389:
390: \clearpage
391: \begin{figure}[h]
392: \centering
393: \includegraphics[clip=,width=0.95\textwidth]{f1.ps}
394: \caption{Contribution chart for HCO$^+$(3--2) spectrum from
395: uniform cloud. (SPEC) Emission line profile toward the center of the
396: cloud. (TAU) Spectrum of the optical depth toward the center of the
397: cloud. (TEX) Excitation temperature as a function of position along the
398: ray. The position, $D$, is given in units of cloud radius. The value
399: $D=-1$ corresponds to the cloud face, while $D=1$ corresponds to the
400: cloud rear; (MOL) Distribution of the molecular concentration as a
401: function of position. (CF) Contribution function for the given position
402: and velocity offset. The projection of regular velocity onto the line of
403: sight is shown with a white line. (ICF) Contribution function integrated
404: over the velocity.}
405: \label{combine}
406: \end{figure}
407: \clearpage
408:
409: We find it convenient to combine the contribution function with some other
410: auxiliary plots into a common contribution chart, which is shown in Fig.~\ref{combine}.
411: In this Figure we present results of HCO$^+$(3--2)
412: line simulations for a static uniform spherically symmetric
413: cloud having
414: $T_{\rm kin}=10$~K, $n({\rm H}_2)=10^5$~cm$^{-3}$,
415: $N({\rm HCO}^+)=10^{13}$~cm$^{-2}$ and $V_{\rm turb}=100$~m/s,
416: which are typical parameters of prestellar cores.
417:
418: The emergent spectrum for the ray passing through a core center
419: is shown in panel~SPEC. Panel~TAU contains the
420: corresponding line optical depth. Distributions of excitation temperature
421: and molecular number density along the ray are shown in panels~TEX and MOL.
422: The central part of the chart is occupied by a plot depicting the CF for
423: the ray as a function of position and velocity (CF).
424:
425: From this chart, one readily sees that in this particular example
426: radiation of the line comes almost exclusively from the nearby part of the
427: cloud. Only in wings there is some weak contribution from more remote
428: regions. This is emphasized in panel~ICF, where the velocity-integrated CF
429: along the ray is shown. We will see later that in more realistic situations
430: the picture may not be that straightforward.
431:
432: \subsection{Thermalization and Critical Density}
433: \label{therm}
434:
435: Before we start modeling the line profiles under the varios conditions,
436: a brief comment on the conditions in starless cores is in order. There
437: are two primary mechanisms for molecules to be excited in molecular
438: clouds. These mechanisms are collisions with other species (primarily
439: with H$_2$, He, and e$^-$) and radiative excitation. The efficiency
440: of the first process depends on gas density and kinetic temperature.
441: The radiative excitation, in turn, depends on the intensity of the
442: ambient radiation field.
443:
444: To demonstrate the relative importance of collisional and radiative
445: excitation, we consider a simple model of a uniform cloud with
446: temperature $T_{\rm kin}$ and molecular hydrogen density $n({\rm
447: H}_2)$, which is illuminated by isotropic blackbody radiation. The
448: temperature of background radiation is set to be $T_{\rm
449: bg}=2.73$~K (first case) and $T_{\rm bg}=50$~K (second case), while
450: $T_{\rm kin}$ is varied between 10~K and 100~K. For our analysis, we
451: assume that the cloud is extremely optically thin ($\tau\ll1$), i.e. we
452: neglect the self-radiation of the cloud to show the effect of
453: radiation and collisions more clearly. We discuss the situation for two
454: molecules with low and large dipole moments, namely, for CO and HCO$^+$
455: (note, that their lines, as a rule, are not optically thin in real prestellar cores).
456: Excitation temperatures of CO(2--1) and HCO$^+$(1--0) as functions of
457: hydrogen density and kinetic temperature are presented in
458: Fig.~\ref{thermal}.
459:
460: \clearpage
461: \begin{figure}[h]
462: \centering
463: \includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{f2a.ps}
464: \includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{f2b.ps} \\
465: \includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{f2c.ps}
466: \includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{f2d.ps}
467: \caption{Excitation temperature of CO(2--1) and HCO$^+$(1--0) as a function
468: of hydrogen density and kinetic temperature in the optically thin limit. The
469: temperature of the background radiation is $T_{\rm bg}=2.73$~K (top row) and 50~K
470: (bottom row). Different colors correspond to different excitation temperatures,
471: as indicated on a scale located to the right of each plot.
472: The black area in the HCO$^+$(1--0) plots corresponds to negative
473: excitation temperatures, i.e., to an inversion in level populations.
474: The solid white line stands for the critical density $n_{\rm cr}$, see
475: Eq.~[\ref{ncr}], while the dashed white line corresponds to the thermalization
476: density $n_{\rm th}$.}
477: \label{thermal}
478: \end{figure}
479: \clearpage
480:
481: It can be clearly seen that the map can be divided into three different parts.
482: If the hydrogen density is lower than the so-called ``critical density'' $n_{\rm
483: cr}$,
484: \begin{equation}
485: n_\mathrm{cr}=\frac{A_{ul}}{\sum_iC_{ui}},
486: \label{ncr}
487: \end{equation}
488: the molecular excitation temperature is determined by the radiation field. In
489: Eq.~(\ref{ncr}), $A_{ul}$ is the Einstein coefficient and $C_{ui}$ are
490: collisional rates from the upper level $u$ to other low-lying levels $i$. At
491: densities lower than the critical density, collisions are not effective to
492: excite the molecules. In this region (left part of all plots in
493: Fig.~\ref{thermal}) $T_{\rm ex} \approx T_{\rm bg}$ and, thus, does not
494: depend on $T_{\rm kin}$. Note that $n_{\rm cr}$ is different for different
495: transitions. In our case, $n_{\rm cr}\approx 10^4$~cm$^{-3}$ for CO(2--1), and
496: $n_{\rm cr}\approx 10^5$~cm$^{-3}$ for HCO$^+$(1--0). Also, $n_{\rm cr}$ is
497: usually greater for upper transitions of the same molecule.
498:
499: We also introduce the thermalization density $n_{\rm th}$,
500: as the density, above which collisional transitions define
501: level populations, so that levels are ``thermalized'', and $T_{\rm ex}
502: \approx T_{\rm kin}$ (right part of all plots in Fig.~\ref{thermal}).
503: More precisely, we define $n_{\rm th}$ as a density at which the relative
504: difference between $T_{\rm ex}$ and $T_{\rm kin}$ is 5\%.
505:
506:
507: At intermediate hydrogen densities, $n_{\rm cr}<n({\rm H}_2)<n_{\rm th}$,
508: both collisional and radiative transitions effectively populate and
509: depopulate levels, so that the excitation temperature is equal neither to
510: $T_{\rm kin}$, nor to $T_{\rm bg}$. It can even be negative because of
511: specific ratios between collisional excitation rates. The important point,
512: which we would like to make here, is that these intermediate densities are
513: just typical densities of starless cores. This emphasizes the necessity to
514: use adequate methods for interpretation of observed molecular lines.
515:
516: \subsection{Characterization of Line Profiles}
517:
518: In order to perform a qualitative analysis of line profiles, it is
519: necessary to introduce some values to characterize them. There are
520: different ways to describe numerically a given line profile with a few
521: parameters. In our study we will use the peak intensity $T_{\max}$, the total
522: line intensity $J$ (zero moment), the mean velocity $V_{\rm cntr}$ (first
523: moment), the intensity at mean velocity $T_{\rm cntr}$, and the total line
524: width $W$ (second moment). We put a factor $(8 \ln 2)$ in the
525: expression for $W$ in order to make $W$ equal to HPBW for Gaussian
526: profiles. In addition, we introduce the relative strength of the
527: self-absorption dip for symmetric profiles, DIP. Definitions for these
528: quantities are given in Table~\ref{express} and illustrated in
529: Fig.~\ref{char}.
530:
531: \clearpage
532: \begin{table}[t]
533: \caption{Parameters of line profiles}
534: \label{express}
535: \begin{tabular}{ll}
536: \hline
537: Parameter & Definition\\
538: \hline
539: Peak intensity, $T_{\max}$ &$\max\,T_{\rm R}(V)$ \\
540: Total intensity, $J$ &$\int\limits_{-\infty}^{+\infty} T_{\rm R}(V) dV$ \\
541: Mean velocity, $V_{\rm cntr}$ &$J^{-1}\int\limits_{-\infty}^{+\infty}
542: T_{\rm R}(V) VdV$ \\
543: Intensity at mean velocity, $T_{\rm cntr}$ &$T_{\rm R}(V_{\rm cntr})$ \\
544: Total line width, $W$ &$\sqrt{(8 \ln 2)\, J^{-1}\int\limits_{-\infty}^{+\infty}
545: (V-V_{\rm cntr})^2 T_{\rm R}(V) dV}$ \\
546: Self absorption dip, DIP &$(T_{\max}-T_{\rm cntr})/T_{\max}$\\
547: \hline
548: \end{tabular}
549: \end{table}
550: \clearpage
551:
552: \begin{figure}[h]
553: \centering
554: \includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{f3.eps}
555: \caption{Various parameters used to characterize line profiles.}
556: \label{char}
557: \end{figure}
558: \clearpage
559:
560: \section{Molecular lines from uniform clouds}
561:
562: In the previous section we showed that hydrogen density, gas temperature,
563: and background radiation are all responsible for line excitation.
564: In the optically thin medium, the LRT problem is in some sense local, i.e.,
565: the excitation temperature is completely defined by local values of $n({\rm H}_2)$, $T_{\rm
566: kin}$, and by the global radiation field. However, as soon as the total column density of
567: emitting molecules is large enough (i.e., lines become optically thick), the
568: radiation from the entire cloud plays a role in the molecular excitation.
569: Formation of line profiles in the optically thick regime is a complex
570: non-local problem even in the simple case of a static uniform spherically symmetric
571: cloud.
572: %{\em Yaroslav, esli vse voobshche opticheski tolstoe, opjat ved' vse stanovitsja ochen prosto? (Diffusion limit?)}
573:
574: In general, to describe the structure of such a simple cloud one specifies
575: its radius $R$, temperature, $T_{\rm kin}$, micro-turbulent velocity,
576: $V_{\rm turb}$, hydrogen density, $n({\rm H}_2)$, and the number density of
577: a molecule, $n({\rm mol})$. However, the solution of the LRT problem depends
578: on $R$ and $n({\rm mol})$ only via their product $R\times n({\rm mol}) =
579: N({\rm mol})$\footnote{
580: It is even possible to use
581: $N({\rm mol})/W$ as an independent parameter, where $W$ is the velocity
582: dispersion \citep[see, e.g., ][]{Lucas:1974}}.
583:
584: Therefore, spectra of uniform clouds with different radii and
585: different molecular abundances but with the same molecular column density
586: (other parameters being fixed) should be identical. Values of $n({\rm
587: H}_2)$, $T_{\rm kin}$, and $N({\rm mol})$ are sufficient to get a unique
588: solution of the LRT problem in a uniform cloud (at some velocity $v$). From
589: the point of view of balance equations, $n({\rm H}_2)$ and $T_{\rm kin}$ are
590: needed to calculate collision rates, while $N({\rm mol})$ determines the
591: mean radiation field (in the absence of background radiation). Kinetic
592: temperature and micro-turbulent velocity affect the line width.
593:
594: To show how basic properties of emergent spectra depend on $n({\rm H}_2)$,
595: $T_{\rm kin}$, and $N({\rm mol})$, we generate a series of models with
596: different parameter sets and perform LRT simulation for each of them. Then,
597: for each model we calculate the spectrum toward the center of the cloud and
598: extract the main line characteristics (see Table~\ref{express}). As three
599: physical parameters control the line formation in this setup, we vary two of
600: them, keeping the third parameter constant. We present calculated line
601: characteristics as a function of the varied parameters to illustrate their
602: cooperative effects, assuming that all these parameters are independent in
603: the considered ranges. Molecular abundance $X(mol)=n({\rm mol})/n({\rm
604: H}_2)$ and temperature $T_{\rm kin}$ are assumed to be uniform over the
605: cloud. For the analysis, we use the HCO$^+$(3--2) line which is commonly used in
606: observations to probe dense parts of starless cores.
607: {\it Models in this Section are by no means intended to represent real
608: starless cores. We use them only to demonstrate the main LRT effects.}
609:
610: \subsection{Effects of hydrogen density and molecular column density}
611:
612: In this subsection we consider results of $n({\rm H}_2)$ and $N($HCO$^+)$
613: variations at a fixed temperature $T_{\rm kin}=10$~K. The cloud is static
614: but has a micro-turbulent velocity $V_{\rm turb}$=100~m/s, which is a
615: typical value for starless cores. The basic characteristics of an emergent
616: spectrum of HCO$^+$(3--2) toward the cloud center are presented in
617: Fig.~\ref{column-uniform}.
618:
619: \clearpage
620: \begin{figure}[h]
621: \centering
622: \includegraphics[width=0.75\textwidth]{f4.eps}
623: \caption{
624: Greyscale maps of the line parameters for a uniform cloud.
625: a) Peak intensity, $T_{\max}$, b) relative depth of the
626: self-absorption dip, DIP, c) total line width, $W$, and d) logarithm of
627: optical depth, $\lg(\tau)$ of the emergent HCO$^+$(3--2) spectrum as a
628: function of $n({\rm H}_2)$ and $N($HCO$^+)$.
629: %The color bar which shows the correspondence between
630: %the derived value and the color is depicted
631: %on the right side of each plot.
632: The kinetic temperature is fixed at 10~K.}
633: \label{column-uniform}
634: \end{figure}
635: \clearpage
636:
637: When both hydrogen density and molecular column density are high
638: (Fig.~\ref{column-uniform}a, top right corner), $T_{\max}$ is close to the
639: LTE value ($T_{\rm R}\approx 4.8$~K for HCO$^+$(3--2)). At low $n({\rm
640: H}_2)~$ and/or $N({\rm mol})$ the intensity is also low.
641: However, this plot demonstrates that the common perception of a molecule
642: tracing a specific density is somewhat oversimplified. The comparison of
643: Fig.~\ref{column-uniform}a and Fig.~\ref{column-uniform}b shows that the
644: HCO$^+$(3--2) profile can be both bright and self-absorbed even if the gas
645: density is much lower than $ n_{\rm cr}$, provided the molecular column
646: density is high.
647:
648: Of course, this situation may not be realistic for
649: HCO$^+$(3--2) in prestellar cores as at typical HCO$^+$ abundances of
650: about few times $10^{-9}$ \citep{ohishi} the column density of
651: $10^{14}$~cm$^{-2}$ and the hydrogen density of $10^{4}$~cm$^{-3}$
652: correspond to a linear extent of about 3~pc. But, it can be relevant for
653: other molecules and/or transitions, e.g. for CO(3--2). With a column
654: density $N({\rm CO})=10^{17}$~cm$^{-2}$ (which corresponds to an
655: optical depth of about 100), density $n({\rm H}_2)=10^{3}$~cm$^{-3}$
656: (below critical), and molecular abundance $X({\rm CO})=10^{-4}$, the
657: linear extent of the cloud is about 0.3~pc, which is comparable to
658: typical sizes of prestellar cores.
659:
660: On top right panel of Fig.~\ref{column-uniform}, the relative strength of
661: the self-absorption dip is shown. As long as ${\rm DIP}=0$, the profile is
662: single-peaked, otherwise it is double-peaked. The dip in HCO$^+$(3--2) line
663: appears when the molecular column density is larger than $10^{13}$~cm$^{-2}$.
664: This corresponds to an optical depth $\approx$1, and a hydrogen
665: density $n({\rm H}_2) \le n_{\rm cr}$. If the density is greater than the critical
666: density, the line has a single peak even at very high HCO$^+$ column density.
667: The self-absorption profile forms when a gradient in the excitation
668: temperature is present. But at high density the excitation temperature is
669: equal to the kinetic temperature over the whole cloud (which is assumed to
670: be uniform). Thus, in such a situation we obtain a flat-top profile instead
671: of a self-absorbed profile.
672:
673: In the bottom panels of Fig.~\ref{column-uniform}, the total line width of the
674: spectra and the optical depth are shown as functions of $n({\rm H}_2)$ and $
675: N({\rm mol})$. Both parameters are mostly determined by the molecular column
676: density and only weakly depend on gas density.
677:
678: We consider a broad range of HCO$^+$ column densities
679: (five orders of magnitude), with lower values being
680: not typical for prestellar cores. Our reason is two-fold.
681: First, we intend to show the effects of LRT in general.
682: Second, the presented plots can be relevant for the isotopomers
683: of HCO$^+$, e.g. for H$^{13}$CO$^+$ and HC$^{18}$O$^+$
684: which have similar excitation parameters but smaller
685: abundances (defined by both isotopic ratios and isotope-dependent
686: chemistry).
687:
688: \subsection{Effects of kinetic temperature and hydrogen density}
689:
690: In Fig.~\ref{kinetic-uniform} we show the combined effect of temperature and
691: hydrogen density variations, keeping the molecular column density constant.
692: To show the complexity of the LRT effects, we explore the case of a moderate optical
693: depth, which corresponds to a representative value of $N({\rm HCO}^+)=10^{13}$~cm$^{-2}$,
694: as follows from the previous subsection. This value is close to that inferred for the CB17
695: globule in \cite{Pavlyuchenkov:2006}. To test the sensitivity of the considered
696: parameters, we vary the temperature in a range, which is wider than is inferred
697: for starless cores, however, all the patterns described below are seen at
698: $T_{\rm kin}<20$~K.
699:
700: \clearpage
701: \begin{figure}[h]
702: \centering
703: \includegraphics[width=0.75\textwidth]{f5.eps}
704: \caption{Line parameters as functions
705: of $n({\rm H}_2)$ and $T_{\rm kin}$ at
706: a fixed column density $N({\rm HCO}^+)=10^{13}$~cm$^{-2}$ for a uniform
707: cloud. a) Peak intensity, $T_{\max}$, b) relative depth of the
708: self-absorption dip, DIP, c) total line width, $W$, and d) optical depth,
709: $\tau$, of the emergent HCO$^+$(3--2) spectrum are shown.}
710: \label{kinetic-uniform}
711: \end{figure}
712: \clearpage
713:
714: The increase in temperature as well as the increase in hydrogen density leads to
715: an increase of the line intensity. At 10~K, the self-absorption dip only
716: appears at densities between $10^4$ and $10^6$~cm$^{-3}$.
717: At densities below $10^4$~cm$^{-3}$ collisional excitation is too slow to populate
718: levels of the transition, and the optical depth
719: is also correspondingly low. At larger densities ($>10^6$) levels higher than 3
720: are populated more efficiently, while lower levels are thermalized.
721: Because of this fact, population of lower levels decreases, which results in
722: a low optical depth for densities above $10^6$~cm$^{-3}$.
723: The line width is sensitive to the self-absorption dip and thus
724: has its maximum at densities between $10^4$ and $10^6$~cm$^{-3}$.
725: When temperatures are higher, the density range, at which the dip appears,
726: gets narrower, and the dip itself
727: becomes less pronounced, while the line becomes wider, and its optical depth
728: decreases.
729:
730: Even though we consider just one particular molecule and
731: particular transition, the same diagrams can be obtained for other
732: molecules and transitions. In essence, the diagrams for
733: linear molecules (for the same transitions) look similar.
734: The difference is that features of the diagrams are shifted along
735: the corresponding axes reflecting different critical densities
736: and different column densities per unit optical depth. Such diagrams
737: for more complicated models can be used to illustrate the main
738: non-LTE effects of the line formation process and to derive parameters
739: of prestellar cores from the observed spectra.
740:
741:
742: \section{Molecular line formation in starless cores}
743:
744: Even in uniform clouds and in the absence of regular velocity field,
745: line shapes can be quite different from simple gaussians, having
746: self-absorption dips or flat tops due to thermalization (see above). Of
747: course, when regular velocity fields and chemical differentiation are
748: taken into account, line profiles become even more diverse, which
749: further complicates their analysis. In this Section we consider the
750: formation of the HCO$^+$(1--0) line in the presence of chemical
751: stratification and regular motions, using a simple
752: ``chemo-dynamical''\, model, where the chemical evolution is calculated
753: along with the dynamical evolution of the core.
754:
755: \subsection{Model of starless core}
756:
757: We assume that a starless core is spherically symmetric with the
758: density distribution given by $n(r)=n_0/(1+(r/r_0)^p)$, where $p=2.4$,
759: $r_0=2800$~AU, $n_0=1.35\times10^6$~cm$^{-3}$. Parameters are chosen to represent
760: the L1544 core \citep{Tafalla:2004}. To calculate
761: the chemical and kinematic structure of a starless core, we
762: use the model described in \cite{Pavlyuchenkov:2006}.
763:
764: We consider models of a static core, collapsing core, and rotating core.
765: To quantify collapse and rotation velocities, we assume that the model
766: core forms over a time $t_0=0.8$ Myr as a result of contraction from an
767: uniform initial configuration with density $n_{\rm
768: ini}=5\cdot10^3$~cm$^{-3}$ and rotation velocity at the core edge
769: $V_0=100$ m s$^{-1}$. The micro-turbulent velocity is 100~m s$^{-1}$ in
770: the static model and 50~m s$^{-1}$ in the non-static models.
771: Molecular abundances are calculated with the same chemical model as described in
772: \cite{Pavlyuchenkov:2006}. Briefly, it is a time-dependent chemical
773: model which includes gas-phase reactions as well as the freezing-out of
774: molecules onto dust grains and their desorption back to the gas-phase.
775: Surface reactions are not taken into account. Species stick to dust
776: grains with the probability of 0.3 for all components except for H$_2$
777: and He, for which zero sticking is assumed. We calculate the sticking
778: probability for atomic hydrogen according to \cite{hmk}. Three
779: desorption mechanisms are taken into account, which are thermal
780: desorption, photodesorption, and cosmic ray induced desorption. It is
781: assumed that a cosmic ray particle impulsively heats a dust grain to a
782: peak temperature $T_{\rm crp}$, which is close to 70~K for cold
783: $0.1\mu$m silicate grain. Data from \cite{leger} are used to
784: approximate the dependence of $T_{\rm crp}$ on the initial dust
785: temperature \citep{swh2004}. Gas-phase reactions are taken from the
786: UMIST\,95 ratefile \citep{umist95}. We consider the evolution of species
787: containing H, He, C, N, O, Mg, Na, Fe, S, and Si atoms.
788:
789: Kinetic temperature is assumed to be 9~K. The core is subject to an
790: external UV field with the intensity, $G$, measured in units of the mean
791: interstellar field \citep{Draine}, and to cosmic rays, which ionize
792: molecular hydrogen with the rate $\zeta$. The assumed distance to the
793: core is 140~pc as believed to be relevant for cores in Taurus
794: cloud complex (which in fact maybe closer; see note in \cite{taurus}).
795: Using these parameters we perform LRT simulations and produce ``ideal''\,
796: (non-convolved) spectral maps and contribution charts for the
797: HCO$^+$(1--0) line.
798:
799: To illustrate the importance of the cosmic ray (CR) ionization rate and
800: ultraviolet (UV) radiation intensity for the chemical structure of the
801: core in Fig.~\ref{hco+} we present abundance profiles for HCO$^+$
802: molecules calculated with $G=0.01$ and 1.0 and $\zeta=10^{-18}$ s$^{-1}$
803: and $10^{-16}$ s$^{-1}$ at $t=0.8$~Myr.
804:
805: \clearpage
806: \begin{figure}[h]
807: \centering
808: \includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{f6.eps}
809: \caption{Distribution of the HCO$^+$ relative abundances in the
810: prestellar core model for the different parameters of UV radiation and CR
811: flux.}
812: \label{hco+}
813: \end{figure}
814: \clearpage
815:
816: The relative abundance of HCO$^+$ strongly depends on
817: both parameters and varies up to a few orders of magnitude. The strong
818: UV radiation destroys molecules in the envelope, while enhanced CR flux
819: prevents molecules from sticking to dust grains (via CR-induced desorption)
820: and enhances HCO$^+$ abundance over the whole cloud.
821:
822: \subsection{Static core}
823:
824: We first assume that the core is static, i.e., both infall and
825: rotation velocities are zero. The calculated spectral
826: map and the contribution chart for the central
827: spectrum are shown in Fig.~\ref{explain1} for the case when $G=0.1$ and $\zeta=10^{-18}$~s$^{-1}$.
828:
829: \clearpage
830: \begin{figure}[h]
831: \centering
832: \includegraphics[width=0.8\textwidth]{f7.eps}
833: \caption{Top: Contribution chart for the central spectrum of
834: the non-uniform static core. Bottom: Spectral map
835: of HCO$^+$(1--0) for the same core.}
836: \label{explain1}
837: \end{figure}
838: \clearpage
839:
840: The contribution chart demonstrates all the aspects of HCO$^+$(1--0) line formation.
841: In the inner part of
842: the core the excitation temperature $T_{\rm ex}$ is nearly equal to the kinetic
843: temperature while in the envelope it decreases with radius (TEX). This is
844: mainly because of the lower density in the envelope, so that collisions
845: are not effective enough to excite the level populations. The molecular
846: density distribution is not uniform but has a maximum at $R/R_0=0.2$ (MOL).
847: In the inner part the core molecules are depleted onto the dust grains. The optical depth in
848: the line center is about 20, i.e., the line is optically thick (TAU).
849: From the chart, it can be seen that emission in the line center
850: comes from the outer part of the core where the excitation temperature
851: is relatively low. The emission in blue and red peaks comes mainly from inside,
852: where the excitation temperature is higher. This results in the
853: double peaked profile. At the same time, the very center of the core does
854: not contribute to the HCO$^+$(1--0) profile even in line wings
855: because of molecular depletion.
856:
857: \subsubsection{Uncertainties of the chemical structure}
858:
859: A non-uniform chemical structure of starless cores is of crucial
860: importance for the interpretation of observed spectral maps. A particular
861: starless core may look very different in lines of various
862: molecules just because of the different molecular abundance
863: distributions \citep{Tafalla:2002}. In general, current models of starless cores, which
864: include chemical and micro-physical processes (e.g., depletion and desorption
865: of molecules on dust grains), allow us to understand {\it qualitatively}
866: distributions of simple molecules like CO, CS, HCO$^+$, and
867: N$_2$H$^+$ \citep[see, e.g.,][]{Bergin:2007,Aikawa:2008}.
868: However, it is still difficult to use such models for the {\it quantitative} analysis, mainly because
869: of two reasons. First, rates
870: of many chemical and physical processes, involved in determining
871: the abundance gradients, are still very uncertain.
872: Here we refer to the papers by \citet{Vasyunin:2004} and
873: \citet{Wakelam:2006} where the uncertainties of chemical reaction rates are studied.
874: Second, external physical conditions such as intensity of the CR and UV radiation
875: fields, are often not well constrained, but they strongly affect the
876: core chemical structure \citep[see, e.g.,][]{Farquhar:1994, Pavlyuchenkov:2006}.
877:
878: Here we want to illustrate the influence of the $G$ and $\zeta$ values on the emergent spectra.
879: We consider a range of ``L1544-like'' models, but varying $G$ from 0.01 to 1 and
880: $\zeta$ from $10^{-18}$~s$^{-1}$ to $10^{-16}$~s$^{-1}$.
881: The resulting difference in abundances affects both the intensity and the relative
882: strength of the self-absorption dip (Fig.~\ref{core-chem}).
883:
884: \clearpage
885: \begin{figure}[h]
886: \centering
887: \includegraphics[width=0.75\textwidth]{f8.ps}
888: \caption{Results of the variation of the UV and CR radiation fields for a non-uniform model
889: of a prestellar core. a) Peak intensity, $T_{\max}$, b) relative
890: strength of the self-absorption dip, DIP, c) the logarithm of optical
891: depth, lg~$(\tau)$, and d) the logarithm of contributing density
892: $\lg n$(cont), (see text) of the line formation for HCO$^+$(1--0) are
893: shown as functions of $G$ and $\zeta$.}
894: \label{core-chem}
895: \end{figure}
896: \clearpage
897:
898: In the bottom right panel we show the density of the line formation,
899: or ``contributing density'', which we define as the density where the integrated
900: contribution function has a maximum (Fig.~\ref{explain1}-ICF). This
901: density approximately indicates which densities are actually ``traced''
902: by the considered transition. The contributing density depends on the
903: UV and CR values and can be even smaller than the critical density (cf.
904: Fig.~\ref{thermal}). In the adopted parameter space the optical depth
905: of the HCO$^+$(1--0) transition varies from 10 to 1000.
906:
907: From the point of view of the line intensity and its optical depth, $\zeta$
908: seems to be more important than $G$. The reason is chemistry.
909: In the considered parameter space,
910: $T_{\max}$ and $\tau$ almost do not depend on the UV field intensity,
911: because, when $G$ increases, the maximum of the absolute HCO$^+$ abundance
912: just moves deeper into core, without changing the column density
913: much. On the other hand, an increase in $\zeta$
914: affects the entire core, enhancing the gas-phase molecule abundance and
915: the column density.
916:
917: As can be seen from Fig.~\ref{column-uniform}d, the optical depth depends strongly on
918: the column density and is almost independent on gas density (i.e., excitation
919: conditions). This is reflected in Fig.~\ref{core-chem}c. Peak intensity
920: and the depth of the self-absorption dip depend both on molecular column density and
921: H$_2$ volume density (Fig.~\ref{column-uniform}a,b). Thus, the corresponding plots in
922: Fig.~\ref{core-chem}a,b have a more ``diagonal''\ appearance. The dip gets deeper as the UV
923: intensity decreases, because at lower $G$ the maximum HCO$^+$ abundance occurs
924: closer to the core edge, i.e., at smaller densities. In other words, when $G$ is low,
925: HCO$^+$(1--0) traces lower densities (Fig.~\ref{core-chem}d).
926:
927: It must be noted that the description used in this subsection is somewhat simplified
928: in the sense that it does not take into account the temperature gradient which may appear
929: due to enhanced UV irradiation and/or CR flux. Even though these small temperature
930: variations are of minor importance for chemistry, they do affect the excitation conditions
931: and, thus, further complicate the situation.
932:
933:
934: \subsection{Collapsing core}
935:
936: The next step is to abandon the assumption of zero regular velocity in the core.
937: First, we assume that the core is contracting, with a maximum
938: infall velocity of about 50 m/s. The corresponding spectral map is shown
939: in Fig.~\ref{explain2} for the case with $G=0.1$ and $\zeta=10^{-18}$~s$^{-1}$.
940:
941: \clearpage
942: \begin{figure}[h]
943: \centering
944: \includegraphics[width=0.8\textwidth]{f9.eps}
945: \caption{
946: Contribution chart for HCO$^+$(1--0) emission from the collapsing
947: core with $G=0.1$ and $\zeta=10^{-18}$~s$^{-1}$. Because of strong
948: depletion, the line peaks mainly form in the outer parts of the core,
949: but there is still some contribution of the core center in the blue
950: peak. Projection of regular velocity onto the line of sight is shown
951: with a white line.}
952: \label{explain2}
953: \end{figure}
954: \clearpage
955:
956: In contrast to the static model, line profiles show the classical
957: infall asymmetry, with the blue peak dominating over the red peak. The
958: map itself is symmetric relative to the center. The combination of factors behind the line profile asymmetry is well
959: seen on the chart. The contribution chart for
960: the central spectrum (Fig.~\ref{explain2}) has a complex appearance, which,
961: in general, follows the projected velocity (white curve in Fig.~\ref{explain2}).
962: There is a common perception that optically thick lines trace
963: outer parts of the source. However, as we see from
964: the chart in Fig.~\ref{explain2}, in general, the line profile includes information
965: about different parts of the cloud. The integrated contribution function (Fig.~\ref{explain2}-ICF) shows that
966: both near and far parts of the core participate in the formation of the
967: central spectrum. As in the static case (Fig.~\ref{explain1}), the emission around
968: the dip (at zero velocity) and in the red peak comes from the envelope part closest to the
969: observer. However, this region contributes some emission in the blue peak as well.
970: The most of the emission in the blue peak comes from the
971: rear part of the model core (a hallmark of the infall asymmetry) and also
972: from its center. The gap between the near and rear parts of the
973: contribution function (Fig.~\ref{explain2}-CF) at negative velocities
974: is caused by depletion of HCO$^+$ in the core center.
975:
976: Self-absorption spectra toward centers of some prestellar cores
977: \citep[e.g.][]{Lee:1999,Lee:2001} are dominated by red peaks,
978: as if the corresponding core is expanding.
979: The asymmetry of the line profile in a particular core can also be caused
980: by an outflow powered by an unseen central object (protostar).
981: In addition, spectral maps of some cores
982: \citep[e.g.][]{Lada:2003} indicate that their kinematics cannot
983: be described as pure contraction, expansion and/or rotation.
984: \citet{Keto:2006} suggested that the velocity field in these prestellar
985: cores can be reproduced by a model of an oscillating pressure-bounded,
986: thermally-supported object.
987:
988: If we, for the purpose of discussion, consider a
989: model of an expanding core by changing the velocity sign, we end up
990: with a spectral map and contribution chart for the central
991: spectrum, which are just mirror reflections of the same plots for the
992: model of contracting core but with the opposite asymmetry.
993: In general, a detailed dynamical model is needed to quantify such motions.
994:
995: \subsection{Rotating core}
996:
997: Now, we assume that the core does not collapse, but rotate with the
998: axis being perpendicular to the line of sight. The
999: corresponding spectral map and the contribution chart for HCO$^+$(1--0) are
1000: presented in Fig.~\ref{explain3}. The line profiles are asymmetric everywhere
1001: in the map except for the projection of the rotation axis.
1002: To the left of this axis, profiles are blue-dominated and blue-shifted along the velocity,
1003: while to its right they are red-dominated and red-shifted. The map is symmetric
1004: with respect to the projection of the rotation axis.
1005: As in the case of the contracting core, the appearance of the contribution
1006: function follows the projected velocity.
1007:
1008: \clearpage
1009: \begin{figure}[h]
1010: \centering
1011: \includegraphics[width=0.8\textwidth]{f10.eps}
1012: \caption{Contribution chart for HCO$^+$(1--0) emission from the rotating core. Projection of
1013: the rotation velocity onto the line of sight is shown with a white line.}
1014: \label{explain3}
1015: \end{figure}
1016: \clearpage
1017:
1018: Comparing lines from contracting and rotating models, we see that they
1019: produce very similar profiles in some off-central positions. Therefore,
1020: in order to distinguish between the models it is necessary to analyze
1021: the complete spectral map, not just the central or single off-central
1022: spectrum. Moreover, in order to extract the information about kinematics
1023: of the cloud it is of a great importance to analyze simultaneously
1024: spectral maps for different transitions (optically thin and optically
1025: thick) and different molecules.
1026:
1027: \subsection{Collapsing and Rotating core}
1028: Finally, let us assume the more realistic case, i.e. that the core is collapsing and rotating at
1029: the same time. The corresponding spectral line map and the contribution chart
1030: for HCO$^+$(1--0) and $i=90^\circ$ are presented in Fig.~\ref{explain4}. The spectra map
1031: is no longer symmetric, neither with respect to the center (as in the
1032: case of a purely contracting core), nor with respect to the projection of the
1033: rotation axis (as in the case of pure rotation). On the left side
1034: of the map, the effects of infall and rotation are coherent and profiles
1035: are strongly blue-dominated. On the right side of the map, infall
1036: and rotation tend to produce opposide line asymmetries
1037: (see Fig.~\ref{explain2}--\ref{explain3}) and their net result is the
1038: formation of nearly symmetric line profiles. To the left of the rotation
1039: axis, profiles are blue-shifted, while to its right
1040: they are red-shifted, as in the case of pure rotation.
1041:
1042: \clearpage
1043: \begin{figure}[h]
1044: \centering
1045: \includegraphics[width=0.8\textwidth]{f11.eps}
1046: \caption{
1047: Contribution chart for the HCO$^+$(1--0) emission from a
1048: collapsing and rotating core. The projection of the regular velocity
1049: onto the line of sight is shown with a white line.}
1050: \label{explain4}
1051: \end{figure}
1052: \clearpage
1053:
1054: Combination of collapse and rotation allows to reproduce the
1055: spectral features observed in a number of molecular cores. In
1056: particular, \cite{Pavlyuchenkov:2006} used a similar model for the
1057: CB17 prestellar core and derived the infall and rotation
1058: velocity by fitting the maps of optically thin and optically thick lines
1059: simulteneously. The presence of both rotation and infall is also seen in
1060: the L1544 core \citep{Ohashi:1999, Williams:2006}. To distinguish
1061: between rotation and infall it is also useful to use the first-moment
1062: maps, \citep[e.g.][]{walker1994,Chen:2007}.
1063:
1064: \section{Discussion}
1065:
1066: Starless cores arguably represent the simplest configuration among all
1067: stages of the formation of a low-mass star. Despite this simplicity, the
1068: interpretation of observed spectra is not straightforward, especially,
1069: in terms of kinematics, because regular motions in these objects have
1070: velocities which are comparable to or even less than the sound speed.
1071:
1072: Above, we have given some examples of molecular line formation in static
1073: and dynamic cores, demonstrating how line profiles are influenced by gas
1074: density and temperature, molecular abundance, presence of regular
1075: motions, and external parameters which drive the chemical evolution.
1076: Contribution charts show clearly that any optically thick line,
1077: generally speaking, does not represent some specific part of the core
1078: but rather combines contributions from different regions. Incidentally,
1079: this is what makes it possible to use optically thick lines as a
1080: diagnostic for core-wide kinematics. On the other hand, while the
1081: contribution function in general follows the regular velocity profile,
1082: emission at a given velocity is not unambiguously related to a region
1083: which moves with this velocity, bearing information from other regions
1084: as well because of finite microturbulent line broadening.
1085:
1086: There are some other potential complications which are not accounted for
1087: in the present paper. In particular, in the models presented above, the
1088: gas temperature is assumed to be uniform over the core. In reality, the
1089: thermal structure of starless cores can be more complex. Following the
1090: theoretical considerations, the gas temperature is a result of heating
1091: by cosmic rays, photoelectric heating, collisional exchange with dust,
1092: and cooling by atomic and molecular lines. The dust temperature, in
1093: turn, is mostly controlled by external radiation and
1094: expected to rise from inside ($\sim5-7$~K) to outside ($\sim15$~K)
1095: \citep[see e.g.][]{zucconi, Evans:2001, Young:2004}. Cooling by
1096: molecular and atomic lines depends on the abundance of key species, like
1097: CO, C and C$^+$ \citep{goldsmith}. Thus, in order to estimate
1098: the gas temperature distribution one needs to model the chemical structure,
1099: line radiative transfer, and the energy exchange between gas and dust.
1100: %In order to estimate the thermal structure of a core one needs to model
1101: %continuum radiative transfer, chemical structure and line radiative
1102: %transfer simultaneously.
1103: \cite{Keto:2008} showed that the thermal structure of starless cores may
1104: differ depending on their central density. For cores with high central
1105: density ($n({\rm H}_2)>10^5$ cm$^{-3}$), the temperature rises from
1106: inside to outside, while for less dense cores the temperature
1107: distribution is more uniform, which seems to be supported by
1108: observations of several prestellar cores. As shown by
1109: \cite{Pavlyuchenkov:2007} over-simplified thermal models may lead to
1110: wrong interpretations of line data. Thus, the thermal structure of the
1111: starless cores should be considered in the LRT simulations. In
1112: fact, the sensitivity of CO lines to the gas temperature in the
1113: envelope makes it possible to use these lines to constrain the
1114: UV part of the radiation field, while the dust RT modeling
1115: allows to estimate the overall level of the interstellar radiation
1116: field, \citep[see][]{Evans:2005}.
1117:
1118: From the observational side, there is a convolution problem which
1119: is related to the finite resolution of radio-telescopes. If the
1120: telescope beam is comparable to the angular size of an object then
1121: different regions contribute to the emergent line profile which
1122: makes derivation of source parameters even more difficult and often
1123: ambiguous.
1124:
1125: There are also some uncertainties which are related to the LRT problem
1126: itself. One of them is the commonly used assumption of the full
1127: frequency redistribution (FFR) over the line profile which dramatically
1128: simplifies equations of the LRT (e.g., the source function does not
1129: depend on frequency). However, this assumption may not be valid in low
1130: density regions where collisions are not frequent enough to redistribute
1131: the absorbed energy. As a result, the line formation may proceed in a
1132: way between two extreme modes, namely, between FFR and coherent
1133: scattering. In the latter case, lines would not have any
1134: self-absorption dips (but shapes can still be complex because of the
1135: regular velocity).
1136:
1137: Another commonly used approach is to simplify the non-regular
1138: (turbulent) velocity field in cores by introducing the micro-turbulence
1139: velocity (Eq.~[\ref{vturb}]). Such representation of the real (unknown)
1140: velocity field by the combination of the regular and microturbulent
1141: velocities also may lead to misinterpretations. For instance, line
1142: asymmetry can be considered as an evidence of infall (outflow), being
1143: actually a reflection of a complex kinematic structure due to turbulence
1144: or oscillations. Moreover, even if we are not interested in line shapes,
1145: the microturbulent approach can fail in reproducing line intensities. As
1146: shown by, e.g., \cite{Hegmann:2000}, the turbulent structure of prestellar
1147: cores can be rather represented by meso-turbulence which again requires
1148: the modification of the radiative transfer equation.
1149:
1150: \section{Conclusions}
1151:
1152: In this paper we analyze molecular line formation at
1153: conditions typical of starless cores. In particular, we show the effect
1154: of density, molecular column density, and temperature on line
1155: parameters for a sample of uniform clouds. We also consider non-uniform
1156: models and show the effect of the chemical differentiation, collapse and
1157: rotation on the molecular spectral maps. We present a chart of line
1158: formation which may serve as valuable tool for understanding results of LRT
1159: simulations. This chart clearly demonstrates which parts of the model core
1160: contribute to the line profile at each velocity.
1161:
1162: We would like to make the following conclusions:
1163: \begin{itemize}
1164: \item Densities in starless cores fall into the range where level populations are
1165: neither radiatively, nor collisionally dominated.
1166: \item Large column densities do not necessarily lead to the appearance of self-absorption dips.
1167: \item When the column density is fixed, a specific line can be optically thick only in a range of densities, being
1168: optically thin at densities both below and above this range.
1169: \item The density which is ``traced'' by some transition depends on external factors (UV field and CR ionization), which shape the molecular distribution. In particular, the ``traced'' density can be lower than the critical density.
1170: \item Rotation and infall may produce very similar spectra and in general can only be distinguished by spectral mapping.
1171: \end{itemize}
1172:
1173: \acknowledgements
1174: We are grateful to Ted Bergin, Michiel Hogerheijde, Kees Dullemond
1175: and Juergen Steinacker for useful discussions. We also thank the referee Neal J.
1176: Evans II, for valuable suggestions and comments.
1177: This research has made use of NASA's Astrophysics Data System. DW, and
1178: BS are supported by the RFBR grant 07-02-01031.
1179:
1180: \begin{thebibliography}{100}
1181:
1182: \bibitem[Aikawa et al.(2008)]{Aikawa:2008} Aikawa, Y., Wakelam, V.,
1183: Garrod, R.~T., \& Herbst, E.\ 2008, \apj, 674, 984
1184:
1185: \bibitem[Bergin
1186: \& Tafalla(2007)]{Bergin:2007} Bergin, E.~A., \& Tafalla, M.\ 2007, \araa, 45, 339
1187: \bibitem[Brinch et al.(2007)]{Brinch:2007} Brinch, C., Crapsi, A., Hogerheijde, M.~R., \&
1188: J{\o}rgensen, J.~K.\ 2007, \aap, 461, 1037
1189:
1190: %\bibitem[Ceccarelli et al.(1996)]{cec} Ceccarelli, C., Hollenbach, D. J., Tielens, A. G. G. M.
1191: %1996, \apj, 471, 400
1192:
1193: \bibitem[Chen et al.(2007)]{Chen:2007} Chen, X., Launhardt, R.,
1194: \& Henning, T.\ 2007, \apj, 669, 1058
1195:
1196: \bibitem[Choi(2002)]{choi} Choi, M. 2002, \apj, 575, 900
1197:
1198: \bibitem[Crapsi et al.(2007)]{Crapsi:2007} Crapsi, A., Caselli, P.,
1199: Walmsley, M.~C., \& Tafalla, M.\ 2007, \aap, 470, 221
1200:
1201: \bibitem[De Vries \& Myers(2005)]{DeVries:2005} De Vries, C.~H., \&
1202: Myers, P.~C.\ 2005, \apj, 620, 800
1203:
1204: \bibitem[di Francesco et al.(2007)]{DiFrancesco:2007} di Francesco, J.,
1205: Evans, N.~J., II, Caselli, P., Myers, P.~C., Shirley, Y., Aikawa, Y.,
1206: \& Tafalla, M.\ 2007, Protostars and Planets V, 17;
1207: B. Reipurth, D. Jewitt, and K. Keil (eds.),
1208: University of Arizona Press, Tucson, 951 pp., 2007., p.17-32
1209:
1210: \bibitem[Draine(1978)]{Draine} Draine, B. T. 1978 \apjs, 36, 595
1211:
1212: \bibitem[Evans(1999)]{Evans:1999} Evans, N.~J., II 1999, \araa, 37, 311
1213:
1214: \bibitem[Evans et al.(2001)]{Evans:2001} Evans, N.~J., II,
1215: Rawlings, J.~M.~C., Shirley, Y.~L., \& Mundy, L.~G.\ 2001, \apj, 557,
1216:
1217: \bibitem[Evans et al.(2005)]{Evans:2005} Evans, N.~J., II, Lee,
1218: J.-E., Rawlings, J.~M.~C., \& Choi, M.\ 2005, \apj, 626, 919
1219:
1220: \bibitem[Farquhar et al.(1994)]{Farquhar:1994} Farquhar, P.~R.~A.,
1221: Millar, T.~J., \& Herbst, E.\ 1994, \mnras, 269, 641
1222:
1223: \bibitem[Goldreich \& Kwan(1974)]{Goldreich:1974} Goldreich, P., \& Kwan, J.\ 1974, \apj, 189, 441
1224:
1225: \bibitem[Goldsmith(2001)]{goldsmith} Goldsmith, P. F. 2001, \apj, 557, 736
1226:
1227: \bibitem[Goldsmith et al.(2008)]{taurus} Goldsmith, P. F., Heyer, M.,
1228: Narayanan, G., Snell, R., Li, D., \& Brunt, Ch. 2008, \apj, 680, 428
1229:
1230: \bibitem[Hegmann \& Kegel(2000)]{Hegmann:2000} Hegmann, M., \&
1231: Kegel, W.~H.\ 2000, \aap, 359, 405
1232:
1233: \bibitem[Hogerheijde \& van der Tak(2000)]{Hogerheijde:2000}
1234: Hogerheijde, M.~R., \& van der Tak, F.~F.~S.\ 2000, \aap, 362, 697
1235:
1236: \bibitem[Hollenbach \& McKee(1979)]{hmk}
1237: Hollenbach, D., \& McKee, Ch.~F.\ 1979, \apjs, 41, 555
1238:
1239: \bibitem[Keto et al.(2004)]{Keto:2004} Keto, E., Rybicki, G.~B.,
1240: Bergin, E.~A., \& Plume, R.\ 2004, \apj, 613, 355
1241:
1242: \bibitem[Keto et al.(2006)]{Keto:2006} Keto, E., Broderick,
1243: A.~E., Lada, C.~J., \& Narayan, R.\ 2006, \apj, 652, 1366
1244:
1245: \bibitem[Keto \& Caselli(2008)]{Keto:2008} Keto, E., \& Caselli, P. 2008, \apj, in press.
1246:
1247: \bibitem[Mac Low \& Klessen(2004)]{Klessen:2004} Mac Low, M.-M., \& Klessen, R.~S.\
1248: 2004, Reviews of Modern Physics, 76, 125
1249:
1250:
1251: \bibitem[Lada et al.(2003)]{Lada:2003} Lada, C.~J., Bergin,
1252: E.~A., Alves, J.~F., \& Huard, T.~L.\ 2003, \apj, 586, 286
1253:
1254: \bibitem[Lee et al.(1999)]{Lee:1999} Lee, C.~W., Myers, P.~C.,
1255: \& Tafalla, M.\ 1999, \apj, 526, 788
1256:
1257: \bibitem[Lee et al.(2001)]{Lee:2001} Lee, C.~W., Myers, P.~C.,
1258: \& Tafalla, M.\ 2001, \apjs, 136, 703
1259:
1260: \bibitem[Lee et al.(2004)]{Lee:2004} Lee, J.-E., Bergin, E.~A.,
1261: \& Evans, N.~J., II 2004, \apj, 617, 360
1262:
1263: \bibitem[Leung(1978)]{Leung:1978} Leung, C.~M.\ 1978, \apj, 225, 427
1264:
1265: \bibitem[L\'eger et al. (1985)]{leger}
1266: L\'eger, A., Jura, M., Omont, A. 1985, \aap, 144, 147
1267:
1268: \bibitem[Lucas(1974)]{Lucas:1974} Lucas, R.\ 1974, \aap, 36, 465
1269:
1270: \bibitem[Millar et al.(1997)]{umist95}
1271: Millar, T. J., Farquhar, P. R. A., \& Willacy, K. 1997, \aaps, 121, 139
1272:
1273: \bibitem[Myers(1999)]{Myers:1999} Myers, P.~C.\ 1999, The Physics
1274: and Chemistry of the Interstellar Medium, 227, Proceedings of the
1275: 3rd Cologne-Zermatt Symposium, Eds.: V. Ossenkopf, J. Stutzki,
1276: and G. Winnewisser
1277:
1278: %\bibitem[Masunaga \& Inutsuka(2000)]{matsun} Masunaga, H., \& Inutsuka, S.-I. 2000, \apj, 536, 406
1279:
1280: %\bibitem[Narayanan \& Walker(1998)]{narwalk} Narayanan, G., \& Walker, Ch. K. 1998, \apj, 508, 780
1281:
1282: \bibitem[Offner et al.(2007)]{Offner:2007} Offner, S.~S.~R.,
1283: Krumholz, M.~R., Klein, R.~I.,
1284: \& McKee, C.~F.\ 2007, ArXiv e-prints, 712, arXiv:0712.3053
1285:
1286: \bibitem[Ohashi et al.(1999)]{Ohashi:1999} Ohashi, N., Lee, S.~W.,
1287: Wilner, D.~J., \& Hayashi, M.\ 1999, \apjl, 518, L41
1288:
1289: \bibitem[Ohishi et al.(1992)]{ohishi}
1290: Ohishi, M., Irvine, W. M., \& Kaifu, N. 1992, in Astrochemistry of Cosmic Phenomena, ed. P. D. Singh (Dordrecht: Kluwer), 171
1291:
1292: \bibitem[Pavlyuchenkov et al.(2007)]{Pavlyuchenkov:2007} Pavlyuchenkov,
1293: Y., Henning, T., \& Wiebe, D.\ 2007, \apjl, 669, L101
1294:
1295: \bibitem[Pavlyuchenkov \& Shustov(2004)]{Pavlyuchenkov:2004}
1296: Pavlyuchenkov, Y.~N., \& Shustov, B.~M.\ 2004, Astronomy Reports, 48, 315
1297:
1298: \bibitem[Pavlyuchenkov et al.(2003)]{Pavlyuchenkov:2003} Pavlyuchenkov,
1299: Y.~N., Shustov, B.~M., Shematovich, V.~I., Wiebe, D.~S., \& Li, Z.-Y.\
1300: 2003, Astronomy Reports, 47, 176
1301:
1302: \bibitem[Pavlyuchenkov et al.(2006)]{Pavlyuchenkov:2006} Pavlyuchenkov,
1303: Y., Wiebe, D., Launhardt, R., \& Henning, T.\ 2006, \apj, 645, 1212
1304:
1305: \bibitem[Peraiah(2001)]{Peraiah:2004} Peraiah, A.\ 2001,
1306: An Introduction to Radiative Transfer (Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press)
1307:
1308: \bibitem[Rawlings et al.(1992)]{rawlings1992} Rawlings, J. M. C., Hartquist,
1309: T. W., Menten, K. M., \& Williams, D. A. 1992, \mnras, 255, 471
1310:
1311: \bibitem[Rawlings \& Yates(2001)]{ry2001} Rawlings, J. M. C., \&
1312: Yates, J. A. 2001, \mnras, 326, 1423
1313:
1314: \bibitem[Redman et al.(2004)]{redman2004} Redman, M. P., Rawlings, J. M. C.,
1315: Yates, J. A., \& Williams D. A. 2004, \mnras, 352, 243
1316:
1317: \bibitem[Rohlfs \& Wilson(2000)]{Wilson:2000} Rohlfs, K., \& Wilson, T.~L.\ 2000,
1318: Tools of radio astronomy / ~New York : Springer, 2000
1319:
1320: \bibitem[Sch{\"o}ier et al.(2005)]{Shoier:2005} Sch{\"o}ier, F.~L.,
1321: van der Tak, F.~F.~S., van Dishoeck, E.~F., \& Black, J.~H.\ 2005, \aap,
1322: 432, 369
1323:
1324: \bibitem[Semenov et al.(2004)]{swh2004} Semenov, D., Wiebe, D., Henning, Th.
1325: 2004, \aap, 417, 93
1326:
1327: \bibitem[Sohn et al.(2007)]{infall} Sohn, J., Won Lee, C., Park, Y.-S., Lee H. M., Myers, Ph. C., \& Lee, Y.
1328: 2007, \apj, 664, 928
1329:
1330: \bibitem[Stenholm(1980)]{Stenholm:1980} Stenholm, L.~G.\ 1980, \aaps, 42, 23
1331:
1332: \bibitem[Tafalla et al.(2002)]{Tafalla:2002} Tafalla, M., Myers,
1333: P.~C., Caselli, P., Walmsley, C.~M., \& Comito, C.\ 2002, \apj, 569, 815
1334:
1335: \bibitem[Tafalla et al.(2004)]{Tafalla:2004} Tafalla, M., Myers,
1336: P.~C., Caselli, P., \& Walmsley, C.~M.\ 2004, \apss, 292, 347
1337:
1338: \bibitem[Tafalla et al.(2006)]{Tafalla:2006} Tafalla, M.,
1339: Santiago-Garc{\'{\i}}a, J., Myers, P.~C., Caselli, P., Walmsley, C.~M., \&
1340: Crapsi, A.\ 2006, \aap, 455, 577
1341:
1342: \bibitem[Tsamis et al.(2008)]{tsamis} Tsamis, Y. G., Rawlings, J. M. C., Yates, J. A., \& Viti, S.
1343: 2008, \apj, submitted.
1344:
1345: \bibitem[van der Tak et al.(2007)]{vanderTak:2007} van der Tak,
1346: F.~F.~S., Black, J.~H., Sch{\"o}ier, F.~L., Jansen, D.~J., \& van Dishoeck,
1347: E.~F.\ 2007, \aap, 468, 627
1348:
1349: \bibitem[Vasyunin et al.(2004)]{Vasyunin:2004} Vasyunin, A.~I.,
1350: Sobolev, A.~M., Wiebe, D.~S., \& Semenov, D.~A.\ 2004, Astronomy Letters, 30, 566
1351:
1352: \bibitem[van Zadelhoff et al.(2002)]{Zadelhoff:2002} van Zadelhoff,
1353: G.-J., et al.\ 2002, \aap, 395, 373
1354:
1355: \bibitem[Young et al.(2004)]{Young:2004} Young, K.~E., Lee, J.-E.,
1356: Evans, N.~J., II, Goldsmith, P.~F., \& Doty, S.~D.\ 2004, \apj, 614, 252
1357:
1358: \bibitem[Ward-Thompson \& Buckley(2001)]{wtb2001} Ward-Thompson, D., \& Buckley,
1359: H. D. 2001, \mnras, 327, 955
1360:
1361: \bibitem[Wakelam et al.(2006)]{Wakelam:2006} Wakelam, V., Herbst, E., \& Selsis, F.
1362: 2006, \aap, 451, 551
1363:
1364: \bibitem[Walker et al.(1986)]{walker1986} Walker, Ch. K., Lada, Ch. J., Young, E. T.,
1365: Maloney, Ph. R., Wilking, B. A. 1986, \apjl, 309, L47
1366:
1367: \bibitem[Walker et al.(1994)]{walker1994} Walker, C. K., Narayanan, G., \& Boss, A. P.
1368: 1994, \apj, 431, 767
1369:
1370: \bibitem[Williams et al.(2006)]{Williams:2006} Williams, J.~P., Lee,
1371: C.~W., \& Myers, P.~C.\ 2006, \apj, 636, 952
1372:
1373: \bibitem[Zhou(1992)]{zhou1992} Zhou, S. 1992, \apj, 394, 204
1374:
1375: \bibitem[Zhou et al.(1993)]{b335} Zhou, S., Evans, N. J., II, Koempe, C., Walmsley, C. M.
1376: 1993, \apj, 404, 232
1377:
1378: \bibitem[Zucconi et al.(2001)]{zucconi} Zucconi, A., Walmsley, C. M., \& Galli, D. 2001, \aap, 376, 650
1379:
1380: \end{thebibliography}
1381: \end{document}