1: \documentclass[useAMS,usegraphicx,usenatbib]{mn2e}
2:
3: \title[Beryllium abundances in metal-poor stars]{Beryllium abundances in metal-poor
4: stars \thanks{Based on observations made with the European Southern Observatory
5: telescopes obtained from the ESO/ST-ECF Science Archive Facility.}}
6: \author[K. F. Tan, J. R. Shi and G. Zhao]{K. F. Tan$^{1,2}$\thanks{E-mail: tan@bao.ac.cn},
7: J. R. Shi$^{1}$ and G. Zhao$^{1}$\\
8: $^{1}$National Astronomical Observatories, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100012, China\\
9: $^{2}$Graduate University of the Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, China}
10:
11: \begin{document}
12:
13: \date{Accepted ?. Received ?; in original form ?}
14:
15: \pagerange{\pageref{firstpage}--\pageref{lastpage}} \pubyear{2008}
16:
17: \label{firstpage}
18:
19: \maketitle
20:
21: \begin{abstract}
22: We have determined beryllium abundances for 25 metal-poor stars
23: based on the high resolution and high signal-to-noise ratio spectra
24: from the VLT/UVES database. Our results confirm that Be abundances
25: increase with Fe, supporting the global enrichment of Be in the
26: Galaxy. Oxygen abundances based on \mbox{[O\,{\sc i}]} forbidden
27: line implies a linear relation with a slope close to one for the Be
28: vs. O trend, which indicates that Be is probably produced in a
29: primary process. Some strong evidences are found for the intrinsic
30: dispersion of Be abundances at a given metallicity. The
31: deviation of HD\,132475 and HD\,126681 from the general Be vs. Fe
32: and Be vs. O trend favours the predictions of the superbubble model,
33: though the possibility that such dispersion originates from the
34: inhomogeneous enrichment in Fe and O of the protogalactic gas cannot
35: be excluded.
36: \end{abstract}
37:
38: \begin{keywords}
39: stars: abundances -- stars: atmospheres -- stars: Population II
40: -- Galaxy: evolution -- Galaxy: halo
41: \end{keywords}
42:
43: \section{Introduction}\label{intro}
44:
45: The light element beryllium (Be) has very special origins. The
46: primordial Be abundance (on the order of $N\rmn{(Be/H)}=10^{-17}$,
47: \citealt{thomas1994}) is negligible as predicted by the standard Big
48: Bang Nucleosynthesis. Be can not be produced by nuclear fusion in
49: the interiors of stars; on the opposite, Be will be destroyed by
50: this process. It was first proposed by \citet*{reeves1970} that Be
51: can be created by spallation reactions between galactic cosmic rays
52: (GCRs) and the CNO nuclei in the interstellar medium (ISM). This
53: model predicts a quadratic relation between the abundances of Be
54: and O (or a slope of 2 in logarithmic plane), assuming that the CNO
55: abundance is proportional to the cumulative number of Type II
56: supernovae (SNe\,II) and the cosmic ray flux is proportional to the
57: instantaneous rate of SNe\,II. However, recent observational results
58: (e.g., \citealt{gilmore1992, boesgaard1993,molaro1997}) showed a
59: linear relation between Be and O abundances, which indicates that Be
60: may be produced in a primary process instead of the standard
61: secondary GCRs process. \citet{duncan1997} suggested that Be can be
62: produced in a reverse spallation of C and O nuclei onto protons and
63: $\alpha$-particles. This process will lead to a linear dependence of
64: Be on O abundances. The results from the latest big survey by
65: \citet[hereafter B99]{boesgaard1999} showed that the slope of the Be
66: vs. O trend in logarithmic scale is about 1.5, which makes the Be
67: production scenario more complicated and confusing. In addition, the
68: exact slope of the Be vs. O relationship depends on which oxygen
69: indicator is used (see discussion in Sect.~\ref{oxygen}).
70:
71: If Be is produced in a primary process and the cosmic rays were
72: transported globally across the early Galaxy, Be abundances should
73: show a very small scatter at a given time. This makes the Be
74: abundance an ideal cosmic chronometer \citep{suzuki2001}.
75: \citet{pasquini2004,pasquini2007} found that Be abundances in
76: globular clusters NGC\,6397 and NGC\,6752 are very similar to that
77: of the field stars with the same Fe abundances. Furthermore, the
78: derived ages from Be abundances based on the model of
79: \citet{valle2002} are in excellent agreement with the ages
80: determined by main-sequence fitting. They suggested that Be is
81: produced in primary spallation of cosmic rays acting on a Galactic
82: scale, and therefore can be used as a cosmochronometer. However, B99
83: and \citet{boesgaard2006} found strong evidences for intrinsic
84: spread of Be abundances at a given metallicity, which may indicate
85: that there is also local enrichment of Be in the Galaxy. But
86: interestingly, \citet{pasquini2005} found that stars belonging
87: to the the accretion and dissipative populations (see
88: \citealt{gratton2003} for the exact definitions for these two
89: kinematical classes) are neatly separated in the [O/Fe] vs.
90: $\log$(Be/H) diagram, and especially, the accretion component shows
91: a large scatter in the [O/Fe] vs. $\log$(Be/H) diagram. They
92: proposed that most of the scatter in the Be vs. Fe (O) trend may be
93: attributed to the intrinsic spread of Fe and O abundances (probably
94: due to the inhomogeneous enrichment in Fe and O of the protogalactic
95: gas), rather than Be.
96:
97: In this work, we present Be abundances of 25 metal-poor stars, for
98: most of which the Be abundances are derived for the first time.
99: Oxygen abundances are also determined from both \mbox{[O\,{\sc i}]}
100: forbidden line and \mbox{O\,{\sc i}} triplet lines to investigate
101: the chemical evolution of Be with O in the Galaxy. In Sect.~\ref{od}
102: we briefly describe the observations and data reduction. The adopted
103: model atmosphere and stellar parameters are discussed in
104: Sect.~\ref{ms}. Sect.~\ref{au} deals with the abundances
105: determinations and uncertainties. Sect.~\ref{rd} presents the
106: results and discussions, and the conclusions are given in the last
107: section.
108:
109: \section{Observations and data reduction}\label{od}
110:
111: Our analysis are based on the high resolution and high
112: signal-to-noise ratio spectra of 25 metal-poor main sequence and
113: subgiant stars from the archive database of observations obtained
114: with UVES, the Ultraviolet and Visual Echelle Spectragraph
115: \citep{dekker2000} at the ESO VLT 8\,m Kueyen telescope. The spectra
116: were obtained during two observation runs: April 8--12, 2000 and April
117: 10--12, 2001 (Programme ID 65.L-0507 and 67.D-0439), both with standard
118: Dichroic {\#}1 setting in the blue and red arms. The blue arm spectra
119: ranged from 3050 to 3850\,{\AA} with a resolution of 48\,000, while
120: the red arm spectra ranged from 4800 to 6800\,{\AA} with a resolution
121: of 55\,000.
122:
123: The spectra were reduced using the standard {\sc eso midas} package.
124: Reduction procedure includes location of echelle orders, wavelength
125: calibration, background subtraction, flat-field correction, order
126: extraction, and continuum normalization.
127:
128: \section{Model atmospheres and stellar parameters}\label{ms}
129: \begin{table}
130: \centering
131: \caption{Stellar parameters adopted in the analysis.}
132: \label{parameter}
133: \begin{tabular}{lccccc}\hline
134: Star & $T_{\rmn{eff}}$ & $\log g$ & [Fe/H] & $\xi$ & Mass \\
135: & K & cgs & dex & km\,s$^{-1}$ & $\mathcal{M}_{\sun}$ \\
136: \hline
137: HD\,76932 & 5890 & 4.12 & $-0.89$ & 1.2 & 0.91 \\
138: HD\,97320 & 6030 & 4.22 & $-1.20$ & 1.3 & 0.81 \\
139: HD\,97916 & 6350 & 4.11 & $-0.88$ & 1.5 & 1.03 \\
140: HD\,103723 & 6005 & 4.23 & $-0.82$ & 1.3 & 0.87 \\
141: HD\,106038 & 5990 & 4.43 & $-1.30$ & 1.2 & 0.81 \\
142: HD\,111980 & 5850 & 3.94 & $-1.11$ & 1.2 & 0.83 \\
143: HD\,113679 & 5740 & 3.94 & $-0.70$ & 1.2 & 0.94 \\
144: HD\,121004 & 5720 & 4.40 & $-0.73$ & 1.1 & 0.80 \\
145: HD\,122196 & 5975 & 3.85 & $-1.74$ & 1.5 & 0.81 \\
146: HD\,126681 & 5595 & 4.53 & $-1.17$ & 0.7 & 0.71 \\
147: HD\,132475 & 5705 & 3.79 & $-1.50$ & 1.4 & 0.88 \\
148: HD\,140283 & 5725 & 3.68 & $-2.41$ & 1.5 & 0.79 \\
149: HD\,160617 & 5940 & 3.80 & $-1.78$ & 1.5 & 0.86 \\
150: HD\,166913 & 6050 & 4.13 & $-1.55$ & 1.3 & 0.77 \\
151: HD\,175179 & 5780 & 4.18 & $-0.74$ & 1.0 & 0.85 \\
152: HD\,188510 & 5480 & 4.42 & $-1.67$ & 0.8 & 0.55 \\
153: HD\,189558 & 5670 & 3.83 & $-1.15$ & 1.2 & 0.95 \\
154: HD\,195633 & 6000 & 3.86 & $-0.64$ & 1.4 & 1.11 \\
155: HD\,205650 & 5815 & 4.52 & $-1.13$ & 1.0 & 0.77 \\
156: HD\,298986 & 6085 & 4.26 & $-1.33$ & 1.3 & 0.81 \\
157: CD\,$-$30$\degr$18140 & 6195 & 4.15 & $-1.87$ & 1.5 & 0.79 \\
158: CD\,$-$57$\degr$1633 & 5915 & 4.23 & $-0.91$ & 1.2 & 0.84 \\
159: G\,013-009 & 6270 & 3.91 & $-2.28$ & 1.5 & 0.80 \\
160: G\,020-024 & 6190 & 3.90 & $-1.92$ & 1.5 & 0.83 \\
161: G\,183-011 & 6190 & 4.09 & $-2.08$ & 1.5 & 0.77 \\
162: \hline
163: \end{tabular}
164: \end{table}
165:
166: We adopted the one dimensional line-blanketed local thermodynamic
167: equilibrium (LTE) atmospheric model MAFAGS \citep{fuhrmann1997} in
168: our analysis. This model utilizes the \citet{kurucz1992} ODFs but
169: rescales the iron abundance by $-0.16$\,dex to match the improved
170: solar iron abundance of $\log\varepsilon\rmn{(Fe)}=7.51$
171: \citep{anders1989}. Individual models for each star were computed
172: with $\alpha$-enhancement of 0.4\,dex if $\rmn{[Fe/H]}<-0.6$ and
173: with the mixing length parameter $l/H_{\rmn{p}}=0.5$ to get
174: consistent temperatures from the Balmer lines.
175:
176: The effective temperatures were derived by fitting the wings of
177: H$\alpha$ and H$\beta$ lines, and then averaged.
178: \citet{nissen2002} studied oxygen abundances of a large sample
179: stars, which includes all the objects investigated in this work
180: (actually our sample is a subset of those employed by
181: \citealt{nissen2002}). They determined the effective temperatures
182: from the $b-y$ and $V-K$ colour indices based on the infrared flux
183: method (IRFM) calibrations of \citet*{alonso1996}. As shown by
184: Fig.~\ref{para_comp}a, the agreement between the two sets of
185: temperatures are good for most of the stars with a mean difference
186: of $15\pm89$\,K. For the star G\,020-024, \citet{nissen2002} gave
187: a temperature of 6440\,K, which is 250\,K higher than ours.
188: Recently, \citet{asplund2006} derived a temperature of 6247\,K for
189: G\,020-024 based on H$\alpha$ profile fitting, which is very close
190: to ours. \citet{nissen2002} likely overestimated the reddening of
191: this star \citep{asplund2006}.
192:
193: \begin{figure*}
194: \centering
195: \includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{fig1.eps}
196: \caption{Comparison of effective temperature, surface gravity and
197: iron abundance with \citet{nissen2002}.}
198: \label{para_comp}
199: \end{figure*}
200:
201: The surface gravities were determined from the fundamental relation
202: \begin{equation}
203: \log\frac{g}{g_{\sun}}=\log\frac{\mathcal{M}}{\mathcal{M}_{\sun}}
204: +4\log\frac{T_{\rmn{eff}}}{T_{\rmn{eff},\sun}}+0.4(M_{\rmn{bol}}-M_{\rmn{bol},\sun})
205: \end{equation}
206: and
207: \begin{equation}
208: M_{\rmn{bol}}=V+BC+5\log\pi+5
209: \end{equation}
210: where $\mathcal{M}$ is the stellar mass, $M_{\rmn{bol}}$ is the
211: absolute bolometric magnitude, $V$ is the visual magnitude, $BC$
212: is the bolometric correction, and $\pi$ is the parallax.
213:
214: The absolute visual magnitude were directly derived from the
215: \emph{Hipparcos} parallax \citep{esa1997} if available with a
216: relative error smaller than 30\,per cent. For two stars
217: G\,020-024 and G\,183-011, their uncertainties in parallaxes are
218: larger than 40\,per cent, so only photometric absolute visual
219: magnitude can be adopted. For G\,183-011 we followed the
220: $M_{\rmn{V,phot}}=4.08$ from \citet{nissen2002}. While for
221: G\,020-024 a large difference exists between the result of
222: \citet{nissen2002} ($M_{\rmn{V,phot}}=4.33$) and that of
223: \citet{asplund2006} ($M_{\rmn{V,phot}}=3.72$). We adopted the
224: latter value because \citet{asplund2006} used the spectroscopic
225: H$\alpha$ index which provides more precise estimate of
226: interstellar reddening excess than the photometric H$\beta$ index
227: employed by \citet{nissen2002}. The bolometric correction was
228: taken from \citet*{alonso1995} and the stellar mass was estimated
229: by comparing its position in the
230: $\log(L/L_{\sun})$-$\log T_{\rmn{eff}}$ diagram with the
231: evolutionary tracks of \citet*{yi2003}. The final $\log g$ values
232: are given in Table~\ref{parameter}. Our results are
233: $0.03\pm0.11$\,dex lower than those of \citet{nissen2002} on
234: average. Good agreement holds on for majority of the stars except
235: for G\,020-024, whereas a difference of 0.43\,dex exists. This
236: is mainly due to the very different absolute visual magnitude
237: adopted by \citet{nissen2002} and us as discussed above. The
238: difference in $M_{\rmn{V}}$ (0.61\,mag) alone will introduce a
239: difference of 0.24\,dex to the surface gravity according to
240: Equation (1).
241:
242: \begin{table}
243: \centering
244: \caption{Fe {\sc ii} lines used to determine the iron abundances.}
245: \label{feii}
246: \begin{tabular}{cccc}\hline
247: Wavelength & $E_{\scriptsize\textrm{low}}$ & $\log gf$ & $\log C_6$ \\
248: \AA & eV & & \\
249: \hline
250: 4993.350 & 2.79 & $-3.73$ & $-32.18$ \\
251: 5100.664 & 2.79 & $-4.18$ & $-31.78$ \\
252: 5197.575 & 3.22 & $-2.27$ & $-31.89$ \\
253: 5234.631 & 3.21 & $-2.21$ & $-31.89$ \\
254: 5325.560 & 3.21 & $-3.21$ & $-32.19$ \\
255: 5425.257 & 3.19 & $-3.27$ & $-32.19$ \\
256: 6084.110 & 3.19 & $-3.84$ & $-32.19$ \\
257: 6149.250 & 3.87 & $-2.76$ & $-32.18$ \\
258: 6247.560 & 3.87 & $-2.33$ & $-32.18$ \\
259: 6416.928 & 3.87 & $-2.67$ & $-32.18$ \\
260: 6432.680 & 2.88 & $-3.61$ & $-32.11$ \\
261: 6456.383 & 3.89 & $-2.09$ & $-32.18$ \\
262: \hline
263: \end{tabular}
264: \end{table}
265:
266: Iron abundances were determined from 12 unblended \mbox{Fe\,{\sc
267: ii}} lines with spectra synthesis method. We adopted the differential
268: $\log gf$ values with respect to
269: $\log\varepsilon\rmn{(Fe)}_{\sun}=7.51$ from \citet*{korn2003} and
270: the van der Waals damping constants from \citet{anstee1991,anstee1995}.
271: Our final iron abundances are in excellent agreement with those of
272: \citet{nissen2002}, who also derived the iron abundances from
273: \mbox{Fe\,{\sc ii} lines}. The mean difference is only
274: $-0.02\pm0.05$\,dex. The microturbulent velocities were determined by
275: requiring that the derived [Fe/H] are independent of equivalent widths.
276:
277: The typical error for our effective temperature is about $\pm80$\,K.
278: The uncertainty of parallax contributes most to the error of the
279: surface gravity. The typical relative error of $\pm$15\,per cent in
280: parallax corresponds to an error of $\pm$0.13\,dex. In addition,
281: the estimated error of $\pm$0.05\,$\mathcal{M}_{\sun}$ in stellar
282: mass translates to an error of $\pm$0.02\,dex, while errors of
283: $\pm$80\,K in effective temperature and $\pm$0.05\,mag in $BC$ each
284: leads to an uncertainty of $\pm$0.02\,dex. So the total error of
285: $\log g$ is about $\pm0.15$\,dex. It is already noted that the iron
286: abundance is insensitive to the effective temperature. The
287: uncertainty of [Fe/H] is dominated by the error of surface gravity.
288: A typical error of $\pm$0.15\,dex in $\log g$ results in an error
289: of about $\pm$0.07\,dex in [Fe/H]. Combined with the line-to-line
290: scatter of about $\pm$0.03\,dex, the total error of [Fe/H] is about
291: $\pm$0.08\,dex. And the error for the microturbulent velocity is
292: estimated to be about $\pm0.2$\,km\,s$^{-1}$.
293:
294: \section{Abundances and uncertainties}\label{au}
295:
296: \subsection{Oxygen}\label{oxygen}
297:
298: As Be is mainly produced by the spallation of
299: CNO nuclei, oxygen abundances can be a preferred alternative to iron
300: in investigating the galactic evolution of Be. It is also important
301: to know the O content when determining Be abundances, because there
302: are many OH lines around the \mbox{Be\,{\sc ii}} doublet. Therefore,
303: the oxygen abundances were firstly investigated here.
304:
305: There are several indicators for oxygen abundance: the ultraviolet
306: OH, the \mbox{[O\,{\sc i}]} 6300 and 6363\,{\AA}, the infrared
307: \mbox{O\,{\sc i}} 7774\,{\AA} triplet and the infrared
308: vibration-rotation OH lines. However, OH molecules and \mbox{O\,{\sc
309: i}} atoms in the lower state of the 7774\,{\AA} transitions are
310: minority species compared to total number of oxygen atoms, thus are
311: very sensitive to the adopted stellar parameters, such as the
312: effective temperature and surface gravity. Moreover, line formations
313: are far from LTE for either the ultraviolet OH
314: \citep{hinkle1975,asplund2001} or the \mbox{O\,{\sc i}} 7774\,{\AA}
315: triplet lines \citep{kiselman2001}. In contrast, \mbox{[O\,{\sc i}]}
316: lines are formed very close to LTE and nearly all the oxygen atoms
317: in the photosphere of dwarf and giant stars are in the ground
318: configuration which provide the lower and upper level of the
319: forbidden lines \citep{nissen2002}. Therefore, it is believed that
320: the \mbox{[O\,{\sc i}]} line is the most reliable indicator for
321: oxygen abundances, but the difficulty is that the \mbox{[O\,{\sc i}]}
322: lines are very weak in dwarf and subgiant stars.
323:
324: High resolution and high sinal-to-noise ratio spectra covering the
325: infrared \mbox{O\,{\sc i}} triplet for 10 stars were available from
326: the archived VLT/UVES spectra database. We re-reduced the spectra and
327: measured the equivalent widths. Since for six of these ten stars
328: O abundances from the \mbox{O\,{\sc i}} triplet were previously
329: derived by other authors, we compare our measurements with those
330: found in literature in Fig.~\ref{ew_comp}. It can be seen that the
331: agreement is good on the whole. For the rest 15 stars, we collected
332: their \mbox{O\,{\sc i}} 7774\,{\AA} triplet equivalent widths from
333: the literatures directly. Oxygen abundances were computed with the
334: $\log gf=0.369$, 0.223, and 0.002 from \citet*{wiese1996} in LTE
335: first. Then non-LTE corrections were applied according to the
336: results of \cite{takeda2003}.
337:
338: \begin{figure}
339: \centering
340: \includegraphics[width=0.4\textwidth]{fig2.eps}
341: \caption{Comparison of \mbox{O\,{\sc i}} triplet equivalent widths between
342: this work and the literatures (\emph{circles}: \citealt{jonsell2005};
343: \emph{diamonds}: \citealt{nissen1997}; \emph{squares}: \citealt{boesgaard1993}).}
344: \label{ew_comp}
345: \end{figure}
346:
347: In addition, \citet{nissen2002} measured the equivalent widths of
348: \mbox{[O\,{\sc i}]} 6300\,{\AA} line for 18 main-sequence and
349: subgiant stars, of which 15 stars are included in our sample. They
350: performed the measurement in a very careful fashion, including
351: removing the possible blending telluric O$_2$ and H$_2$O lines with
352: the observed spectra of rapidly rotating B-type stars and
353: subtracting the equivalent width of the blending \mbox{Ni\,{\sc i}}
354: line at 6300.339\,{\AA}. The typical error for the equivalent width
355: of \mbox{[O\,{\sc i}]} 6300\,{\AA} line was estimated to be about
356: only $\pm0.3$\,m{\AA}. For these 15 stars, we also determined their
357: oxygen abundances with the equivalent widths of \mbox{[O\,{\sc i}]}
358: 6300\,{\AA} line from \citet{nissen2002} using the accurate
359: oscillator strength $\log gf=-9.72$ from \citet*{allendeprieto2001}.
360:
361: Finally, we derived the oxygen abundances with \mbox{O\,{\sc i}}
362: 7774\,{\AA} triplet for all the 25 sample stars and with
363: \mbox{[O\,{\sc i}]} 6300\,{\AA} line for 15 stars, which are given
364: in Table~\ref{abun} (the reference solar O abundance is
365: $\log\varepsilon\rmn{(O)}=8.77$ computed from \mbox{[O\,{\sc i}]}
366: 6300\,{\AA} line using the equivalent width of 4.1\,m{\AA} from
367: \citealt{nissen2002}).
368:
369: Oxygen abundance from the weak \mbox{[O\,{\sc i}]} 6300\,{\AA} line
370: is not sensitive to stellar parameters. Its uncertainty is
371: dominated by the error in equivalent width. Normally, a typical
372: error of $\pm$0.3\,m{\AA} in equivalent width corresponds on average
373: to an error of $\pm$0.1\,dex in oxygen abundance. For the infrared
374: \mbox{O\,{\sc i}} triplet, errors of $\pm$80\,K in effective
375: temperature and $\pm$0.15\,dex in gravity each translates to an
376: error of $\pm$0.05\,dex in oxygen abundance. The uncertainties in
377: iron abundance and microturbulence nearly have no effect on [O/Fe].
378: A typical error of $\pm$3\,m{\AA} in equivalent width corresponds to
379: an error of $\pm$0.04\,dex. In total, the error of [O/Fe] from
380: \mbox{O\,{\sc i}} triplet is around $\pm$0.08\,dex. The uncertainty
381: stated above is a random one, and the systematic error can be much
382: higher, as can be seen from the differences of O abundances between
383: \mbox{[O\,{\sc i}]} forbidden line and \mbox{O\,{\sc i}} triplet
384: lines discussed below.
385:
386: As there are 15 stars with oxygen abundances from both
387: \mbox{[O\,{\sc i}]} 6300\,{\AA} and \mbox{O\,{\sc i}} 7774\,{\AA}
388: lines, it is interesting to investigate whether these two
389: indicators give consistent oxygen abundances.
390: Fig.~\ref{6300_7774_comp} shows the differences of O abundances based
391: on \mbox{[O\,{\sc i}]} 6300\,{\AA} and \mbox{O\,{\sc i}} 7774\,{\AA}
392: lines. We find that, on average, O abundances from \mbox{O\,{\sc i}}
393: 7774\,{\AA} lines with NLTE corrections are $0.14\pm0.10$\,dex higher
394: than those from \mbox{[O\,{\sc i}]} 6300\,{\AA} line for the 15 sample
395: stars, which means that these two indicators are not consistent in our
396: study. \citet{nissen2002} found that the mean difference between O
397: abundance from the forbidden and permitted lines is only 0.03\,dex
398: for five of their stars, and they concluded that these two
399: indicators produce consistent O abundances. As a test, we reanalyse
400: the O abundances of \citet{nissen2002}'s sample using their stellar
401: parameters and equivalent widths. The only differences are the
402: adopted model atmospheres and the NLTE corrections for the
403: \mbox{O\,{\sc i}} triplet lines. We found that, for the forbidden
404: line, our abundances are almost the same as those from
405: \citet{nissen2002}, but for the triplet lines, our mean LTE O
406: abundance is about 0.06\,dex larger than that of \citet{nissen2002},
407: and the NLTE correction for the triplet lines from \citet{takeda2003}
408: is 0.06\,dex lower than theirs. These two factors lead to a total
409: difference of 0.12\,dex for the permitted lines. Therefore, the
410: different model atmospheres (MAFAGS vs. MARCS) and NLTE corrections
411: are responsible for the differences. Recently,
412: \citet{garciaperez2006} determined O abundances for 13 subgiant stars
413: with \mbox{[O\,{\sc i}]}, \mbox{O\,{\sc i}} and OH lines. They
414: followed exactly the same method as \citet{nissen2002}, but their
415: results showed that O abundances based on \mbox{O\,{\sc i}} triplet
416: are on average $0.19\pm0.22$\,dex higher than that from the forbidden
417: line.
418:
419: \begin{figure}
420: \centering
421: \includegraphics[width=0.47\textwidth]{fig3.eps}
422: \caption{\label{6300_7774_comp}Comparison of O abundances from
423: \mbox{[O\,{\sc i}]} 6300\,{\AA} line with those from \mbox{O\,{\sc
424: i}} 7774\,{\AA} lines.}
425: \end{figure}
426:
427: \subsection{Beryllium}
428:
429: \begin{figure}
430: \centering
431: \includegraphics[width=0.47\textwidth]{fig4.eps}
432: \caption{Spectral synthesis of the \mbox{Be\,{\sc ii}} doublet region for the KPNO Solar Flux Atlas data.}
433: \label{be_sun}
434: \end{figure}
435:
436: Beryllium abundances were derived by spectra synthesis of the
437: \mbox{Be\,{\sc ii}} 3130\,{\AA} resonance doublet region using the
438: {\sc idl/fortran siu} software package of Reetz (1993). It is well
439: known that this spectral region is rich with atomic and molecular
440: lines for solar-type stars, which results in substantial line
441: absorption and a deficit of continuum. We firstly computed the
442: synthetic solar spectrum around \mbox{Be\,{\sc ii}} doublet region
443: based on the line list carefully compiled and tested by
444: \citet{primas1997}, and then compared them with the integrated solar
445: flux atlas of \citet{kurucz1984}. Some changes were made in order to
446: make the theoretical solar spectrum match the \citet{kurucz1984}
447: solar flux atlas best. The major change made to the
448: \citet{primas1997} line list is that we increased the $\log gf$ of
449: the \mbox{Mn\,{\sc ii}} 3131.017\,{\AA} line by 1.72\,dex instead of
450: adding a predicted \mbox{Fe\,{\sc i}} line at 3131.043\,{\AA}.
451: Similar adjustment was adopted by \citet*{king1997}. Based on this
452: adjusted line list, we reproduced the solar flux atlas best with
453: $\rmn{A(Be)}=1.12$, which is in good agreement with the result of
454: $\rmn{A(Be)}=1.15\pm0.20$ derived by \citet*{chmielewski1975}.
455: \citet{balachandran1998} found that the standard UV
456: continuous opacity of the sun need to be multiplied by a factor of
457: 1.6 in order to get consistent oxygen abundances from the UV and IR
458: OH lines. With the increased UV continuous opacity, they determined
459: the solar Be abundance to be 1.40, which is very close to the
460: meteoritic value 1.42. \citet{bell2001} proposed later that the
461: `missing' UV opacity could be accounted for by the \mbox{Fe\,{\sc
462: i}} bound-free transitions. However, until now there is no confirmed
463: evidence about this. But one should keep in mind the `missing' UV
464: opacity problem. If it does exist, the Be vs. Fe (O) trend of this
465: work and all the previous work based on the standard UV opacity might
466: change.
467:
468: In addition to some strong OH lines, a strong \mbox{Ti\,{\sc ii}}
469: line at 3130.810\,{\AA} also presents in the \mbox{Be\,{\sc ii}}
470: region. In order to minimize its effect on the beryllium abundance
471: as well as to provide a constraint on the location of continuum, we
472: derived the Ti abundances for our sample stars from the
473: \mbox{Ti\,{\sc i}} 5866.461, 6258.110, and 6261.106\,{\AA} lines.
474: The oscillator strengths for these lines are differentially adjusted
475: to produce the solar Ti abundance $\log\varepsilon\rmn{(Ti)}=4.94$.
476: For five very metal-poor stars with $\rmn{[Fe/H]}<-1.8$, the
477: \mbox{Ti\,{\sc i}} lines are too weak to be detected, thus a common
478: value of $\rmn{[Ti/Fe]}=0.35$ \citep{magain1989} was adopted. As a
479: matter of fact, due to the metal deficiency of these stars, the line
480: blending and continuum normalization were much less problematic than
481: solar-type stars. The abundances of other elements, which are less
482: critical for Be abundance determination, were adopted by scaling a
483: solar composition. Beryllium abundances were
484: then determined by varying the value of Be to best fit the observed
485: line profiles. It was reported by \citet*{garcialopez1995} and
486: \citet{kiselman1996} that non-LTE effects for \mbox{Be\,{\sc ii}}
487: doublet are insignificant, normally smaller than 0.1\,dex. We took
488: the weaker 3131.066\,{\AA} line as the primary abundance indicator
489: because it's less blended compared to the stronger 3130.421\,{\AA}
490: component.
491:
492: The uncertainties of Be abundances were estimated from the errors of
493: stellar parameters and pseudo-continuum location. An error of
494: $\pm$0.15\,dex in surface gravity implies uncertainties of
495: $\pm$(0.06--0.09)\,dex, while an uncertainty of $\pm$0.08\,dex in
496: [Fe/H] corresponds to an error of $\pm$0.06\,dex. Errors due to
497: effective temperature and microturbulence are always within
498: $\pm$0.04\,dex in total. The error in continuum location was
499: estimated to be less than five per cent in the worst case, which
500: results in an error of $\pm$0.15\,dex at most. The final errors for
501: each star are given in Table~\ref{abun}.
502: \begin{figure*}
503: \centering
504: \includegraphics[width=0.9\textwidth]{fig5.eps}
505: \caption{\label{be_sample} Spectrum synthesis for six representative
506: stars. The dots are the observational data, the solid line is the
507: best-fit synthesis, and the dotted lines are synthetic spectra with
508: Be abundances of $\pm0.2$\,dex relative to the best fit.}
509: \end{figure*}
510:
511: \begin{table*}
512: \begin{minipage}{150mm}
513: \caption{Abundances and population membership.}
514: \label{abun}
515: \begin{tabular}{lcccccrrcc}\hline
516: Star & [Fe/H] & \multicolumn{3}{c}{[O/H]} & [Ti/Fe] & A(Li) & A(Be) & $\sigma$(Be) & Pop.$^b$ \\
517: & & 6300 & 7774 LTE$^a$ & 7774 $n$-LTE & & & & & \\
518: \hline
519: HD\,76932 & $-0.89$ & $-0.46$ & $-0.24^{(5)}$ & $-0.36$ & 0.24 & 2.00 & $ 0.73 $ & 0.14 & 0 \\
520: HD\,97320 & $-1.20$ & $-0.85$ & $-0.56^{(6)}$ & $-0.66$ & 0.21 & 2.32 & $ 0.43 $ & 0.17 & 0 \\
521: HD\,97916 & $-0.88$ & $\cdots$ & $-0.06^{(1)}$ & $-0.27$ & 0.23 & $<1.23$ & $ <-0.76$ & $\cdots$ & 1 \\
522: HD\,103723 & $-0.82$ & $-0.68$ & $-0.33^{(6)}$ & $-0.44$ & 0.15 & 2.22 & $ 0.51 $ & 0.17 & 1 \\
523: HD\,106038 & $-1.30$ & $\cdots$ & $-0.62^{(3)}$ & $-0.70$ & 0.21 & 2.55 & $ 1.37 $ & 0.12 & 1 \\
524: HD\,111980 & $-1.11$ & $-0.76$ & $-0.38^{(6)}$ & $-0.50$ & 0.29 & 2.31 & $ 0.67 $ & 0.13 & 1 \\
525: HD\,113679 & $-0.70$ & $-0.43$ & $-0.15^{(6)}$ & $-0.28$ & 0.32 & 2.05 & $ 0.87 $ & 0.12 & 1 \\
526: HD\,121004 & $-0.73$ & $-0.42$ & $-0.19^{(2)}$ & $-0.27$ & 0.28 & $<1.18$ & $ 0.94 $ & 0.15 & 1 \\
527: HD\,122196 & $-1.74$ & $\cdots$ & $-1.07^{(6)}$ & $-1.17$ & 0.28 & 2.28 & $-0.51 $ & 0.14 & 0 \\
528: HD\,126681 & $-1.17$ & $-0.72$ & $-0.65^{(4)}$ & $-0.70$ & 0.30 & 1.48 & $ 0.90 $ & 0.12 & 0 \\
529: HD\,132475 & $-1.50$ & $-1.09$ & $-0.82^{(4)}$ & $-0.91$ & 0.27 & 2.23 & $ 0.62 $ & 0.13 & 1 \\
530: HD\,140283 & $-2.41$ & $-1.61$ & $-1.65^{(3)}$ & $-1.73$ & $\cdots$ & 2.16 & $-0.94 $ & 0.14 & 1 \\
531: HD\,160617 & $-1.78$ & $-1.34$ & $-1.24^{(3)}$ & $-1.33$ & 0.23 & 2.25 & $-0.41 $ & 0.12 & 1 \\
532: HD\,166913 & $-1.55$ & $-1.16$ & $-0.81^{(4)}$ & $-0.90$ & 0.30 & 2.32 & $ 0.27 $ & 0.14 & 0 \\
533: HD\,175179 & $-0.74$ & $\cdots$ & $-0.13^{(6)}$ & $-0.24$ & 0.32 & $<0.87$ & $ 0.73 $ & 0.15 & 0 \\
534: HD\,188510 & $-1.67$ & $\cdots$ & $-0.98^{(5)}$ & $-1.02$ & 0.31 & 1.48 & $-0.25 $ & 0.13 & 0 \\
535: HD\,189558 & $-1.15$ & $-0.73$ & $-0.54^{(1)}$ & $-0.64$ & 0.25 & 2.24 & $ 0.64 $ & 0.14 & 0 \\
536: HD\,195633 & $-0.64$ & $-0.55$ & $-0.16^{(6)}$ & $-0.34$ & 0.06 & 2.25 & $ 0.53 $ & 0.18 & 2 \\
537: HD\,205650 & $-1.13$ & $-0.69$ & $-0.48^{(4)}$ & $-0.54$ & 0.21 & 1.70 & $ 0.51 $ & 0.19 & 0 \\
538: HD\,298986 & $-1.33$ & $-0.93$ & $-0.70^{(6)}$ & $-0.79$ & 0.15 & 2.26 & $-0.04 $ & 0.12 & 1 \\
539: CD\,$-$30$\degr$18140 & $-1.87$ & $\cdots$ & $-1.09^{(3)}$ & $-1.18$ & $\cdots$ & 2.21 & $-0.35 $ & 0.15 & 1 \\
540: CD\,$-$57$\degr$1633 & $-0.91$ & $\cdots$ & $-0.51^{(6)}$ & $-0.60$ & 0.01 & 2.15 & $ 0.31 $ & 0.18 & 1 \\
541: G\,013-009 & $-2.28$ & $\cdots$ & $-1.54^{(3)}$ & $-1.65$ & $\cdots$ & 2.21 & $-0.84 $ & 0.13 & 1 \\
542: G\,020-024 & $-1.92$ & $\cdots$ & $-1.19^{(3)}$ & $-1.30$ & $\cdots$ & 2.19 & $-0.72 $ & 0.17 & 1 \\
543: G\,183-011 & $-2.08$ & $\cdots$ & $-1.27^{(6)}$ & $-1.36$ & $\cdots$ & 2.21 & $-0.61 $ & 0.14 & 1 \\
544: \hline
545: \end{tabular}
546: $^a$~Sources of equivalent width for O {\sc i} triplet: (1) \citet{cavallo1997}, (2) \citet{nissen1997}, (3) \citet{nissen2002},
547: (4) \citet{gratton2003}, (5) \citet{jonsell2005}, (6) measured from archival UVES spectra (Programme ID 65.L-0507).
548:
549: $^b$~Population membership: 0 -- dissipative component; 1 -- accretion component; 2 -- thin disc.
550: \end{minipage}
551: \end{table*}
552:
553: Be abundances for several stars of our sample have been published
554: by other authors and they are summarized in Table~\ref{be_compare}.
555: We can see that, though relatively large scatter
556: exists, Be abundances from different researches are not different
557: within uncertainties for majority of the stars. The exceptions are
558: HD\,160617 and HD\,189558. Our Be abundance of HD\,160617 is
559: 0.5\,dex higher than that of \citet{molaro1997}. This difference
560: is mostly due to the different stellar parameters adopted by
561: \citet{molaro1997} and us. Their effective temperature and surface
562: gravity are 276\,K and 0.51\,dex lower than ours, respectively,
563: which result in a much lower Be abundance. Another exception is
564: HD\,189558, where a difference of 0.37\,dex in Be abundance exists
565: between the result of \citet{boesgaard1993} and ours. The slight
566: differences in the adopted stellar parameters could not produce
567: such a large difference. \citet{rebolo1988} derived a Be
568: abundance of $\log N\rmn{(Be/H)}=-12.0\pm0.4$\,dex for this star
569: with similar stellar parameters. It is 1\,dex lower than the result
570: of \citet{boesgaard1993}. We noted that \citet{boesgaard1993}
571: determined Be abundances by measuring the equivalent width of
572: \mbox{Be\,{\sc ii}} doublet, which is very sensitive to the location
573: of the continuum. It is probably that they overestimated the
574: continuum. Moreover, both the spectra of \citet{molaro1997}
575: and \citet{boesgaard1993} were obtained with 3.6\,m telescopes. The
576: signal-to-noise ratios around \mbox{Be\,{\sc ii}} region of their
577: spectra are much lower than that of this work.
578:
579: \begin{table*}
580: \begin{minipage}{151mm}
581: \caption{Comparison of Be abundances with those from literatures.}
582: \label{be_compare}
583: \begin{tabular}{lcccccc}\hline
584: Star & (1) & (2) & (3) & (4) & (5) & This work \\
585: \hline
586: HD\,76932 & $-11.04\pm0.11$ & $-11.45\pm0.18$ & $-11.21\pm0.21$ & $-11.17\pm0.05$ & $\cdots$ & $-11.27\pm0.14$ \\
587: HD\,132475 & $\cdots$ & $\cdots$ & $\cdots$ & $\cdots$ & $-11.43\pm0.12$ & $-11.38\pm0.13$ \\
588: HD\,140283 & $-12.78\pm0.14$ & $-13.07\pm0.20$ & $-12.91\pm0.17$ & $-13.08\pm0.09$ & $\cdots$ & $-12.94\pm0.14$ \\
589: HD\,160617 & $\cdots$ & $\cdots$ & $-12.90\pm0.27$ & $\cdots$ & $\cdots$ & $-12.41\pm0.12$ \\
590: HD\,166913 & $\cdots$ & $\cdots$ & $-11.77\pm0.15$ & $\cdots$ & $\cdots$ & $-11.73\pm0.14$ \\
591: HD\,189558 & $-10.99\pm0.15$ & $\cdots$ & $\cdots$ & $\cdots$ & $\cdots$ & $-11.36\pm0.14$ \\
592: HD\,195633 & $-11.21\pm0.07$ & $\cdots$ & $\cdots$ & $\cdots$ & $-11.34\pm0.11$ & $-11.47\pm0.18$ \\
593: \hline
594: \end{tabular}
595: References: (1) \citet{boesgaard1993}, (2) \citet{garcialopez1995}, (3) \citet{molaro1997}, (4) B99, (5) \citet{boesgaard2006}.
596: \end{minipage}
597: \end{table*}
598:
599: \subsection{Lithium}
600:
601: It is well known that beryllium can be destroyed in stars by fusion
602: reactions at a relatively low temperature (about 3.5 million K). In
603: order to avoid contamination of our sample from the effect of
604: depletion process in stars, we also determined the $^7$Li abundances
605: for our sample stars. Because the destruction temperature for $^7$Li
606: is lower than that of Be, if $^7$Li is not depleted, Be should not
607: be depleted either\footnote{For subgiant stars, Li and Be
608: can be diluted due to the enlargement of the convection zone. In
609: this case, Li and Be will be diluted by the same percentage.
610: Nevertheless, Be cannot be depleted more than Li in any case.}.
611:
612: We adopted the oscillator strengths from the NIST data base, namely
613: $\log gf=0.002$ and $-0.299$ for the \mbox{Li\,{\sc i}} 6707.76 and
614: 6707.91\,{\AA} lines, respectively. Collisional broadening
615: parameters describing van der Waals interaction with hydrogen atoms
616: were taken from \citet*{barklem1998} (see \citealt{shi2007} in
617: detail). Li abundances were derived by spectra synthesis in LTE.
618: Results from \citet{asplund2006} and \citet{shi2007} showed that
619: non-LTE effects for \mbox{Li\,{\sc i}} resonance lines are
620: insignificant. The typical error for our Li abundance was estimated
621: to be about 0.1\,dex.
622:
623: \begin{figure}
624: \centering
625: \includegraphics[width=0.47\textwidth]{fig6.eps}
626: \caption{\label{li_fe}Li abundances as a function of [Fe/H]. The
627: filled circles are the determined Li abundances, while the inverse
628: triangles represent the upper limit.}
629: \end{figure}
630:
631: \section{Results and discussion}\label{rd}
632:
633: \subsection{Be vs. Fe and Be vs. O relation}
634:
635: \begin{figure}
636: \centering
637: \includegraphics[width=0.47\textwidth]{fig7.eps}
638: \caption{\label{be_fe}Be abundances against [Fe/H] (\emph{filled circles}:
639: stars without $^{7}$Li depletion; \emph{filled squares}: stars with depleted
640: $^{7}$Li; \emph{filled inverse triangle}: upper limit Be abundance for
641: HD\,97916; \emph{filled star}: solar meteoritic Be abundance; \emph{open
642: circles}: data from B99). The solid line is the best
643: linear fitting (not including HD\,106038, HD\,97916, HD\,132475 and
644: HD\,126681) with a slope of 1.1 for our Be vs. Fe trend, while the dotted
645: lines represents the best fitting for the B99 data.}
646: \end{figure}
647:
648: Encouraged by the agreement of Be abundances between our results and
649: literatures, we now turn to investigate the chemical evolution of
650: beryllium in the Galaxy. As we have mentioned before, it is first
651: necessary to investigate whether some of our stars are depleted in Be.
652: Fig.~\ref{li_fe} displays the $^7$Li abundances as a function of
653: metallicity. We can see that six stars in our sample are obviously
654: depleted in $^7$Li and another two seem to be slightly depleted,
655: while the star HD\,106038 has an exceptionally high $^7$Li abundance,
656: about 0.3\,dex higher than the Spite plateau (it also has an
657: abnormally high Be abundance, see discussion in Sect.~\ref{spec} for
658: this star). Among those stars with depleted $^7$Li, only one
659: (HD\,97916, denoted by filled inverse triangle in Fig.~\ref{be_fe}
660: and Fig.~\ref{be_o}) is also depleted seriously in Be, while the rest
661: (denoted by filled squares in Fig.~\ref{be_fe} and Fig.~\ref{be_o})
662: seem to have normal Be abundances at their metallicities.
663:
664: Excluding HD\,106038 and HD\,97916 (abnormally high Be abundance and
665: seriously depleted in Be, respectively; these two stars will not be
666: included in the analysis of Be vs. O trend either), the relation
667: between Be and Fe abundances can be well represented by linear fitting
668: \[
669: \log N\rmn{(Be/H)}=(1.15\pm0.07)\,\rmn{[Fe/H]}-(10.24\pm0.10)
670: \]
671: One may note that HD\,132475 and HD\,126681 seem to deviate from the
672: trend far beyond the uncertainties. If we exclude these two stars
673: (see discussion in Sect.~\ref{spec}), the relationship will be
674: \[
675: \log N\rmn{(Be/H)}=(1.10\pm0.07)\,\rmn{[Fe/H]}-(10.37\pm0.10)
676: \]
677: Our result is in reasonable agreement with the result
678: $\log N\rmn{(Be/H)}=(0.96\pm0.04)\,\rmn{[Fe/H]}-(10.59\pm0.03)$
679: of B99, considering the relatively smaller
680: metallicity range of our sample. The overall increase of Be with Fe
681: suggests that Be is enriched globally in the Galaxy.
682:
683: As the yields of Be is believed to be correlated with CNO nuclei
684: directly, it's more meaningful to investigate the relationship
685: between Be and O abundances. Due to the inconsistent oxygen
686: abundances based on the forbidden and triplet lines in our
687: study, it is necessary to investigate their relations with Be
688: abundance separately. Fig.~\ref{be_o} shows the trend of Be with
689: O abundances. Again, the Be abundances increase linearly with
690: increasing [O/H] both for the forbidden line (though with relatively
691: large scatter partly due to the small sample number) and triplet
692: lines. The relationships are best represented by
693: \begin{eqnarray*}
694: \log N\rmn{(Be/H)}=(1.55\pm0.17)\,\rmn{[O/H]}-(10.29\pm0.15) & [\rmn{O}\,\rmn{\scriptstyle{I}}] \\
695: \log N\rmn{(Be/H)}=(1.36\pm0.09)\,\rmn{[O/H]}-(10.69\pm0.08) & \rmn{O}\,\rmn{\scriptstyle{I}}
696: \end{eqnarray*}
697: If we exclude HD\,132475 and HD\,126681, the relationships will be
698: \begin{eqnarray*}
699: \log N\rmn{(Be/H)}=(1.49\pm0.16)\,\rmn{[O/H]}-(10.42\pm0.15) & [\rmn{O}\,\rmn{\scriptstyle{I}}] \\
700: \log N\rmn{(Be/H)}=(1.30\pm0.08)\,\rmn{[O/H]}-(10.81\pm0.08) & \rmn{O}\,\rmn{\scriptstyle{I}}
701: \end{eqnarray*}
702:
703: Our result based on \mbox{O\,{\sc i}} triplet lines is slightly
704: flatter than the result
705: $\log N\rmn{(Be/H)}=(1.45\pm0.04)\,\rmn{[O/H]}-(10.69\pm0.04)$
706: of B99. This can be partly due to our smaller
707: [Fe/H] range as mentioned above. Besides, the O abundances of
708: B99 were averaged from the UV OH and infrared
709: \mbox{O\,{\sc i}} triplet lines. They thought that such a result
710: (a slope of roughly 1.5 for Be vs. O) is neither consistent with
711: the secondary process, nor the primary process. However, the
712: secondary process added with some chemical evolution effects, such
713: as an outflow of mass from the halo, indicates that there would be
714: a quadratic relation only at the very lowest metallicities and a
715: progressive shallowing of the slope to disc metallicities, for
716: example a slope of 1.5 between $\rmn{[Fe/H]}=-2$ and $-1$ (B99).
717: So they suggested that this process is most consistent with their
718: results.
719:
720: As discussed above, \mbox{[O\,{\sc i}]} forbidden line is the most
721: reliable O abundance indicator for its insensitivity to the
722: adopted stellar parameters as well as the non-LTE effects. Our
723: oxygen abundances from \mbox{[O\,{\sc i}]} 6300\,{\AA} line produces
724: a `moderate' slope 1.49 for the Be vs. O trend. However,
725: \citet{nissen2002} studied the effects of 3D model atmospheres on
726: the derived O abundance from \mbox{[O\,{\sc i}]} forbidden lines.
727: They found that O abundances based on \mbox{[O\,{\sc i}]} will
728: decrease if 3D models are applied. Especially, the decreasing
729: amplitude increases with decreasing metallicity (see fig.~6 and
730: table~6 of \citealt{nissen2002}). While 3D effects on \mbox{Be\,{\sc
731: ii}} doublet are negligible according to \citet{primas2000}. This
732: means that the slope will be closer to one than our present result
733: when the 3D effects were considered for the \mbox{[O\,{\sc i}]}
734: forbidden lines. This implies that the Be production scenario is
735: probably a primary process.
736: \begin{figure*}
737: \centering
738: \includegraphics[width=0.9\textwidth]{fig8.eps}
739: \caption{\label{be_o}Be abundances as a function of [O/H]. a)
740: Results from \mbox{[O\,{\sc i}]} forbidden lines. b) Results from
741: \mbox{O\,{\sc i}} permitted lines. The symbols and lines have the same
742: meaning as Fig.~\ref{be_fe}. Remember that O abundances of
743: B99, for both of the two panels, are the mean
744: abundances based on UV OH and infrared \mbox{O\,{\sc i}} triplet lines.}
745: \end{figure*}
746:
747: \subsection{Special stars: hints on the Be production scenario}\label{spec}
748:
749: HD\,106038 is very special for its exceptionally overabundance in Li
750: and Be as mentioned before. Its Li abundance is 0.3\,dex higher than
751: the Li plateau, while its Be abundance is about 1.2\,dex higher than
752: that of normal stars with the same metallicity. The Be abundance of
753: this star is even similar to the solar meteoritic value. Such a Be-rich
754: star is extremely rare. \citet{asplund2006} derived $\rmn{A(Li)}=2.49$
755: and \citet{smiljanic2008} reported a Be abundance of
756: $\log N\rmn{(Be/H)}=-10.60$ for this star, both in good agreement
757: with our results. In addition to Li and Be, \citet{nissen1997} showed
758: that this star also has obviously enhanced abundances of Si, Ni, Y,
759: and Ba. Based on its special abundance pattern, \citet{smiljanic2008}
760: suggested that HD\,106038 is most probably formed in the vicinity of
761: a hypernova (HNe).
762:
763: In addition to HD\,106038, another two stars, namely HD\,132475 and
764: HD\,126681, seem to stand out of the Be vs. Fe and Be vs. O trends
765: distinctly. Their Be abundances are about 0.6 and 0.5\,dex higher,
766: respectively, than that of most stars with the same metallicities.
767: \citet{boesgaard2006} also found an abnormally high Be abundance
768: for HD\,132475 (0.5\,dex above the normal stars at its metallicity).
769: Their sample included another star BD$+$23$\degr$3912, which has
770: very similar atmospheric parameters as HD\,132475 but very different
771: Be abundance. In fact, BD$+$23$\degr$3912 has a Be abundance
772: matching perfectly the linear Be vs. Fe relation. Combined with
773: another star HD\,94028 also with excess Be abundance found by B99,
774: \citet{boesgaard2006} concluded that dispersion in Be abundances
775: does exist at a given metallicity, which implies a local enrichment
776: of Be in the Galaxy.
777:
778: However, \citet{pasquini2005} proposed that such dispersion
779: could be mostly attributed to the scatter of Fe and O abundances,
780: rather than Be, as we have mentioned in Sect.~\ref{intro}. Following
781: \citet{pasquini2005}, we calculated the space velocities using the
782: method presented by \citet{johnson1987}, and determined the orbital
783: parameters based on the Galactic mass model of \citet{allen1991} for
784: our sample stars. Input parameters, such as radial velocities,
785: parallaxes and proper motions were obtained from the SIMBAD
786: database. According to the criteria of \citet{gratton2003}, fifteen
787: stars in our sample belong to the accretion component, nine stars
788: belong to the dissipative component and one star belongs to the thin
789: disc.
790:
791: \begin{figure*}
792: \centering
793: \includegraphics[width=0.9\textwidth]{fig9.eps}
794: \caption{\label{kin}a) [O/Fe] vs. [Fe/H] based on \mbox{O\,{\sc i}}
795: triplet lines. b) [O/Fe] vs. [Fe/H] based on \mbox{[O\,{\sc i}]}
796: forbidden line. c) [O/Fe] vs. $\log N\rmn{(Be/H)}$ based on
797: \mbox{O\,{\sc i}} triplet lines. d) [O/Fe] vs. $\log N\rmn{(Be/H)}$
798: based on \mbox{[O\,{\sc i}]} forbidden line. \emph{Open squares}
799: represent the accretion component, \emph{filled squares} represent
800: the dissipative component, and the \emph{asterisk} represents the
801: only thin disc star HD\,195633 in our sample. The open square with
802: a \emph{left pointing arrow} represents the upper limit Be abundance
803: for HD\,97916.}
804: \end{figure*}
805:
806: Fig.~\ref{kin} shows [O/Fe] vs. [Fe/H] and [O/Fe] vs. $\log
807: N\rmn{(Be/H)}$ for our sample stars, based on the results from both
808: \mbox{[O\,{\sc i}]} forbidden line and \mbox{O\,{\sc i}} triplet
809: lines. One may find that no clear separation exists between the two
810: components in the [O/Fe] vs. [Fe/H] diagram, though the accretion
811: component shows a relatively larger scatter than the dissipative
812: component. However, in the [O/Fe] vs. $\log N\rmn{(Be/H)}$ diagram,
813: the two populations are distinctly different, and especially, the
814: accretion component shows a much larger scatter compared to the
815: dissipative component. Our results agree well with the findings of
816: \citet{pasquini2005}. They proposed that such results support the
817: idea that the formation of the two components took place under
818: significantly different conditions: an inhomogeneous, rapidly
819: evolving `halo phase' for the accretion component, and a more
820: chemically homogeneous, slowly evolving `thick disc phase' for the
821: dissipative component. The large scatter of the accretion component
822: in the [O/Fe] vs. $\log N\rmn{(Be/H)}$ diagram may reflect the
823: inhomogeneous enrichment in oxygen and iron of the halo gas. We note
824: that, for our Be-rich stars, HD\,106038 and HD\,132475 belong to the
825: accretion component, while HD\,126681 belongs to the dissipative
826: component. Another Be-rich star HD\,94028, first discovered by B99
827: and later confirmed by \citet{boesgaard2006}, is also classified as
828: a dissipative component star according to the definitions of
829: \citet{gratton2003}. While the deviation of the accretion component
830: stars could be due to the inhomogeneous enrichment in Fe and O of
831: the halo gas, HD\,126681 and HD\,94028 cannot be interpreted in this
832: way. However, one should keep in mind that stellar kinematics is
833: only of statistical meaning in describing the Galactic populations.
834: It has been shown by many previous work that substantial overlap
835: exists between the halo and thick disc stars. Therefore, it is
836: dangerous to attribute an individual star to one stellar population
837: and accordingly derive a firm conclusion. Moreover, we didn't find
838: any distinct differences in the abundance pattern between
839: HD\,126681/HD\,94028 and typical halo stars. So the possibility that
840: dispersion in Be vs. Fe and Be vs. O trend originates from the
841: inhomogeneous enrichment in Fe and O of the protogalactic gas cannot
842: be excluded.
843:
844: As an alternative, the scatter in Be can be interpreted by
845: the so-called superbubble (SB) model (\citealt{higdon1998,
846: parizot1999,parizot2000b,ramaty2000}). The basic idea of the SB
847: model is that repeated SNe occurring in an OB association can
848: generate a superbubble, in which the CNO nuclei (ejected by SNe)
849: mixed with some ambient, metal-poor material are accelerated onto
850: the metal deficient material in the supershell and at the surface of
851: the adjacent molecular cloud, and then broken into smaller atoms
852: like Li, Be and B. The produced light elements are then mixed with
853: other SNe ejecta as well as the ambient, metal-poor gas. However,
854: such a mixing cannot be perfect, and new stars can form before all
855: the massive stars explode or the induced light elements production
856: occurs. As a result, scatter in the abundances of light elements for
857: a given SB may occur \citep{parizot2000a}. \citet{boesgaard2006}
858: noted that Na, Mg, Si, Y, Zr, and Ba abundances of HD\,132475 are
859: typically 0.2\,dex above the mean values of the other stars at that
860: metallicity according to the results of
861: \citet{fulbright2000,fulbright2002}. We also noted that Y and Ba
862: abundances of HD\,126681 are roughly 0.2 and 0.15\,dex higher,
863: respectively, than the mean values of the remaining sample as found
864: by \citet{nissen1997}, and the $\alpha$-elements of this star are in
865: the upper range of their sample. Na and $\alpha$-elements are
866: typical ejecta of SNe\,II, and Y, Zr, and Ba, though not very
867: efficiently, can also be produced by the $r$-process in SNe\,II. It
868: is probably that stars like HD\,132475 and HD\,126681 were formed
869: from the material that underwent enrichment of light elements and
870: SNe\,II ejecta but not plenty of dilution process in SBs. In
871: addition, the SB model also predicts a primary process for the Be
872: production, which is consistent with our Be vs. O trend.
873:
874: Except for the possibilities stated above, some other
875: scenarios for the overabundance of Be can be excluded. It is
876: unlikely that the Be-rich stars were accreted from the satellite
877: systems of our Galaxy. \citet*{shetrone2001} and \citet{tolstoy2003}
878: found that abundance patterns among the dwarf spheroidal (dSph)
879: galaxies stars are remarkably uniform. We note that
880: $\alpha$-elements and Y abundances of the dSph stars are obviously
881: lower than the Be-rich stars. The possibility that the overabundance
882: of Be in our Be-rich stars could be due to the accretion of a planet
883: or planetesimals debris can also be excluded. If the excess Be in
884: our Be-rich stars were accreted from some material having similar
885: composition as chondrites meteorites, then the mass of the accreted
886: iron would be even larger than the total mass of iron in the surface
887: convective zone of the star, which is certainly impossible.
888:
889: \section{Conclusions}\label{con}
890:
891: We have derived Be abundances for 25 main sequence and subgiant stars
892: spanning the range $-2.5$ $<$ [Fe/H] $<$ $-0.5$. Relations between Be
893: and Fe as well as Be and O are investigated. The Be vs. Fe trend can
894: be well represented by a linear relation with a slope of 1.1. This
895: result is in good agreement with that of B99, and
896: suggests that Be is enriched globally in the Galaxy, as proposed by
897: \citet{suzuki2001}. Our Be abundances increase linearly with
898: increasing [O/H] based on both the \mbox{[O\,{\sc i}]} 6300\,{\AA}
899: and \mbox{O\,{\sc i}} triplet lines, but with slightly different
900: slopes. O abundances based on \mbox{O\,{\sc i}} triplet gives a slope
901: of 1.30 between [Be/H] and [O/H]. This is a little flatter than the
902: result of B99, which may be partly due to different
903: metallicity range. The most reliable O abundance indicator,
904: \mbox{[O\,{\sc i}]} forbidden line gives a steeper relationship (a
905: slope of 1.49). However, this slope will decrease if 3D effects are
906: took into account according to the results of \citet{nissen2002},
907: which means that the production process of Be is probably a primary
908: process.
909:
910: Moreover, we find some strong evidences for the intrinsic dispersion
911: of Be abundances at a given metallicity. The special abundance
912: pattern of HD\,106038, especially its exceptionally high Be
913: abundance, can be interpreted most consistently only if the material
914: which formed HD\,106038 was contaminated by the nucleosynthetic
915: products of a HNe \citep{smiljanic2008}. The deviations of
916: HD\,132475 and HD\,126681 from the general Be vs. Fe and Be vs. O
917: trend can be interpreted by the SB model. However, the possibility
918: that such dispersion originates from the inhomogeneous enrichment in
919: Fe and O of the protogalactic gas cannot be excluded.
920:
921: \section*{Acknowledgments}
922:
923: Thanks goes to the referee Luca Pasquini for constructive suggestions
924: and comments. This work is supported by the National Natural Science
925: Foundation of China under grants Nos. 10433010, 10521001 and 10778626.
926: It has made use of the SIMBAD database, operated at CDS, Strasbourg,
927: France.
928:
929: \begin{thebibliography}{99}
930: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Allen \& Santillan}{1991}]{allen1991}
931: Allen C., Santillan A., 1991, Rev. Mex. Astron. Astrofis., 22, 255
932:
933: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Allende Prieto, Lambert \& Asplund}
934: {Allende Prieto et al.}{2001}]{allendeprieto2001}
935: Allende Prieto C., Lambert D. L., Asplund M., 2001, ApJ, 556, L63
936:
937: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Alonso, Arribas \& Martinez-Roger}
938: {Alonso et al.}{1995}]{alonso1995}Alonso A., Arribas S.,
939: Martinez-Roger C., 1995, A\&A, 297, 197
940:
941: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Alonso, Arribas \& Martinez-Roger}
942: {Alonso et al.}{1996}]{alonso1996}Alonso A., Arribas S.,
943: Martinez-Roger C., 1996, A\&A, 313, 873
944:
945: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Anders \& Grevesse}{1989}]{anders1989}
946: Anders E., Grevesse N., 1989, Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta, 53, 197
947:
948: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Anstee \& O'Mara}{1991}]{anstee1991}
949: Anstee S. D., O'Mara B. J., 1991, MNRAS, 253, 549
950:
951: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Anstee \& O'Mara}{1995}]{anstee1995}
952: Anstee S. D., O'Mara B. J., 1995, MNRAS, 276, 859
953:
954: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Asplund \& Garc{\'{\i}}a P{\'e}rez}{2001}]
955: {asplund2001}Asplund M., Garc{\'{\i}}a P{\'e}rez A. E., 2001, A\&A, 372, 601
956:
957: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Asplund et al.}{2006}]{asplund2006}
958: Asplund M., Lambert D. L., Nissen P. E., Primas F., Smith V. V.,
959: 2006, ApJ, 644, 229
960:
961: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Balachandran \& Bell}{1998}]{balachandran1998}
962: Balachandran S. C., Bell R. A., 1998, Nat, 392, 791
963:
964: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Barklem, O'Mara \& Ross}{Barklem et al.}{1998}]
965: {barklem1998}Barklem P. S., O'Mara B. J., Ross J. E., 1998, MNRAS, 296, 1057
966:
967: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Bell, Balachandran \& Bautista}{2001}]{bell2001}
968: Bell R. A., Balachandran S. C., Bautista M., 2001, ApJ, 546, L65
969:
970: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Boesgaard \& King}{1993}]{boesgaard1993}
971: Boesgaard A. M., King J. R., 1993, AJ, 106, 2309
972:
973: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Boesgaard et al.}{1999}]{boesgaard1999}
974: Boesgaard A. M., Deliyannis C. P., King J. R., Ryan S. G., Vogt S. S.,
975: Beers, T. C., 1999, AJ, 117, 1549 (B99)
976:
977: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Boesgaard \& Novicki}{2006}]{boesgaard2006}
978: Boesgaard A. M., Novicki M. C., 2006, ApJ, 641, 1122
979:
980: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Cavallo, Pilachowski \& Rebolo}{Cavallo et al.}{1997}]
981: {cavallo1997}Cavallo R. M., Pilachowski C. A., Rebolo R., 1997, PASP, 109, 226
982:
983: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Chmielewski, Brault \& Mueller}{Chmielewski et al.}{1975}]
984: {chmielewski1975}Chmielewski Y., Brault J. W., Mueller E. A., 1975, A\&A, 42, 37
985:
986: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Dekker et al.}{2000}]{dekker2000}
987: Dekker H., D'Odorico S., Kaufer A., Delabre B., Kotzlowski H.,
988: 2000, SPIE, 4008, 534
989:
990: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Duncan et al.}{1997}]{duncan1997}
991: Duncan D. K., Primas F., Rebull L. M., Boesgaard A. M.,
992: Deliyannis C. P., Hobbs L.M., King J. R., Ryan S. G., 1997, ApJ,
993: 488, 338
994:
995: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Fuhrmann et al.}{1997}]{fuhrmann1997}
996: Fuhrmann K., Pfeiffer M., Frank C., Reetz J., Gehren T., 1997,
997: A\&A, 323, 909
998:
999: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Fulbright}{2000}]{fulbright2000}
1000: Fulbright J. P., 2000, AJ, 120, 1841
1001:
1002: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Fulbright}{2002}]{fulbright2002}
1003: Fulbright J. P., 2002, AJ, 123, 404
1004:
1005: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Garc{\'{\i}}a L\'{o}pez, Severino \& Gomez}
1006: {Garc{\'{\i}}a L\'{o}pez et al.}{1995}]{garcialopez1995}Garc{\'{\i}}a L\'{o}pez
1007: R. J., Severino G., Gomez M. T., 1995, A\&A, 297, 787
1008:
1009: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Garc{\'{\i}}a P{\'e}rez et al.}{2006}]
1010: {garciaperez2006}Garc{\'{\i}}a P{\'e}rez A. E., Asplund M., Primas F.,
1011: Nissen P. E., Gustafsson B., 2006, A\&A, 451, 621
1012:
1013: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Gilmore et al.}{1992}]{gilmore1992}
1014: Gilmore G., Gustafsson B., Edvardsson B., Nissen P. E., 1992, Nat, 357, 379
1015:
1016: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Gratton et al.}{2003}]{gratton2003}
1017: Gratton R. G., Carretta E., Claudi R., Lucatello S., Barbieri M.,
1018: 2003, A\&A, 404, 187
1019:
1020: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Higdon, Lingenfelter \& Ramaty}{1998}]
1021: {higdon1998}Higdon J. C., Lingenfelter R. E., Ramaty R., 1998, ApJ 509, L33
1022:
1023: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Hinkle \& Lambert}{1975}]{hinkle1975}
1024: Hinkle K. H., Lambert D. L., 1975, MNRAS, 170, 447
1025:
1026: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Johnson \& Soderblom}{1987}]{johnson1987}
1027: Johnson D. R. H., Soderblom D. R., 1987, AJ, 93, 864
1028:
1029: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Jonsell et al.}{2005}]{jonsell2005}
1030: Jonsell K., Edvardsson B., Gustafsson B., Magain P., Nissen P. E.,
1031: Asplund M., 2005, A\&A, 440, 321
1032:
1033: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{King, Deliyannis \& Boesgaard}
1034: {King et al.}{1997}]{king1997}King J. R., Deliyannis C. P.,
1035: Boesgaard A. M., 1997, ApJ, 478, 778
1036:
1037: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Kiselman}{2001}]{kiselman2001}
1038: Kiselman D., 2001, New Astronomy Review, 45, 559
1039:
1040: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Kiselman \& Carlsson}{1996}]
1041: {kiselman1996}Kiselman D., Carlsson M., 1996, A\&A, 311, 680
1042:
1043: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Korn, Shi \& Gehren}{Korn et al.}{2003}]
1044: {korn2003}Korn A. J., Shi J. R., Gehren T., 2003, A\&A, 407, 691
1045:
1046: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Kurucz}{1992}]{kurucz1992}
1047: Kurucz R. L., 1992, Rev. Mex. Astron. Astrofis., 23, 45
1048:
1049: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Kurucz et al.}{1984}]{kurucz1984}
1050: Kurucz R. L., Furenlid I., Brault J., Testerman L., 1984, Solar
1051: flux atlas from 296 to 1300 nm, National Solar Observatory
1052:
1053: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Magain}{1989}]{magain1989}Magain P.,
1054: 1989, A\&A, 209, 211
1055:
1056: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Molaro et al.}{1997}]{molaro1997}
1057: Molaro P., Bonifacio P., Castelli F., Pasquini L., 1997, A\&A,
1058: 319, 593
1059:
1060: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Nissen \& Schuster}{1997}]{nissen1997}
1061: Nissen P. E., Schuster W. J., 1997, A\&A, 326, 751
1062:
1063: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Nissen et al.}{2002}]{nissen2002}
1064: Nissen P. E., Primas F., Asplund M., Lambert D. L., 2002, A\&A,
1065: 390, 235
1066:
1067: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Pasquini et al.}{2004}]{pasquini2004}
1068: Pasquini L., Bonifacio P., Randich S., Galli D., Gratton R. G.,
1069: 2004, A\&A, 426, 651
1070:
1071: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Pasquini et al.}{2005}]{pasquini2005}
1072: Pasquini L., Galli D., Gratton R. G., Bonifacio P., Randich S.,
1073: Valle G., 2005, A\&A, 436, L57
1074:
1075: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Pasquini et al.}{2007}]{pasquini2007}
1076: Pasquini L., Bonifacio P., Randich S., Galli D., Gratton R. G.,
1077: Wolff B., 2007, A\&A, 464, 601
1078:
1079: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{ESA}{1997}]{esa1997}The Hipparcos and
1080: Tycho Catalogues, ESA SP-1200
1081:
1082: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Parizot}{2000a}]{parizot2000a}
1083: Parizot E., 2000, A\&A, 356, L66
1084:
1085: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Parizot}{2000b}]{parizot2000b}
1086: Parizot E., 2000, A\&A, 362, 786
1087:
1088: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Parizot \& Drury}{1999}]{parizot1999}
1089: Parizot E., Drury L., 1999, A\&A, 349, 673
1090:
1091: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Primas et al.}{1997}]{primas1997}
1092: Primas F., Duncan D. K., Pinsonneault M. H., Deliyannis C. P.,
1093: Thorburn J. A., 1997, ApJ, 480, 784
1094:
1095: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Primas et al.}{2000}]{primas2000}
1096: Primas F., Asplund M., Nissen P. E., Hill V., 2000, A\&A, 364, L42
1097:
1098: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Ramaty et al.}{2000}]{ramaty2000}
1099: Ramaty R., Scully S. T., Lingenfelter R. E., Kozlovsky B., 2000, ApJ, 534, 747
1100:
1101: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Rebolo et al.}{1988}]{rebolo1988}
1102: Rebolo R., Abia C., Beckman J. E., Molaro P., 1988, A\&A, 193, 193
1103:
1104: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Reeves, Fowler \& Hoyle}{Reeves et al.}{1970}]
1105: {reeves1970}Reeves H., Fowler W. A., Hoyle F., 1970, Nat, 226, 727
1106:
1107: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Shetrone, Cote \& Sargent}{Shetrone et al.}{2001}]
1108: {shetrone2001}Shetrone M. D., Cote, P., Sargent, W. L. W., 2001, ApJ, 548, 592
1109:
1110: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Shi et al.}{2007}]{shi2007}
1111: Shi J. R., Gehren T., Zhang H. W., Zeng J. L., Zhao G., 2007,
1112: A\&A, 465, 587
1113:
1114: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Smiljanic et al.}{2008}]{smiljanic2008}
1115: Smiljanic R., Pasquini L., Primas F., Mazzali P. A., Galli D.,
1116: Valle G., 2008, MNRAS, 385, L93
1117:
1118: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Suzuki \& Yoshii}{2001}]{suzuki2001}
1119: Suzuki T. K., Yoshii Y., 2001, ApJ, 549, 303
1120:
1121: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Takeda}{2003}]{takeda2003}Takeda Y., 2003,
1122: A\&A, 402, 343
1123:
1124: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Thomas et al.}{1994}]{thomas1994}
1125: Thomas D., Schramm D. N., Olive K. A., Mathews G. J., Meyer B. S.,
1126: Fields B. D., 1994, ApJ, 430, 291
1127:
1128: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Tolstoy et al.}{2003}]{tolstoy2003}
1129: Tolstoy, E., Venn, K. A., Shetrone, M., Primas, F., Hill, V., Kaufer, A.,
1130: Szeifert, T., 2003, AJ, 125, 707
1131:
1132: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Valle et al.}{2002}]{valle2002}
1133: Valle G., Ferrini F., Galli D., Shore S. N., 2002, ApJ, 566, 252
1134:
1135: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Wiese, Fuhr \& Deters}{Wiese et al.}{1996}]
1136: {wiese1996}Wiese W. L., Fuhr J. R., Deters T. M., 1996, J. Phys. Chem. Ref.
1137: Data, Monograph No. 7
1138:
1139: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Yi, Kim \& Demarque}{Yi et al.}{2003}]{yi2003}
1140: Yi S. K., Kim Y. C., Demarque P., 2003, ApJS, 144, 259
1141:
1142: \end{thebibliography}
1143:
1144: \bsp
1145:
1146: \label{lastpage}
1147:
1148: \end{document}
1149: