1: \documentclass[12pt,preprint]{aastex}
2: \usepackage{lscape}
3:
4: \pagestyle{myheadings}
5: \markright{NGC~5694}
6:
7: \begin{document}
8:
9: \title{CHEMICAL ABUNDANCE STUDY OF ONE RED GIANT STAR IN NGC~5694 :
10: A GLOBULAR CLUSTER WITH DWARF SPHEROIDALS'
11: CHEMICAL SIGNATURE?\footnote{This paper includes data gathered with the 6.5 meter
12: Magellan Telescopes located at Las Campanas Observatory, Chile.}}
13:
14:
15: \author{Jae-Woo Lee\altaffilmark{1},
16: Mercedes L\'opez-Morales\altaffilmark{2,3}, \&
17: Bruce W.\ Carney\altaffilmark{4}}
18:
19: \altaffiltext{1}{Department of Astronomy and Space Science,
20: Astrophysical Research Center for the Structure and
21: Evolution of the Cosmos,
22: Sejong University, 98 Gunja-Dong, Gwangjin-Gu, Seoul, 143-747, Korea;
23: jaewoolee@sejong.ac.kr}
24: \altaffiltext{2}{Carnegie Institution of Washington,
25: Department of Terrestrial Magnetism,
26: 5241 Broad Branch Road NW, Washington, DC 20015, USA; mercedes@dtm.ciw.edu}
27: \altaffiltext{3}{Carnegie Fellow}
28: \altaffiltext{4}{Department of Physics \& Astronomy, University of
29: North Carolina, CB\#3255, Chapel Hill, NC 27599-3255; bruce@unc.edu}
30:
31:
32: \begin{abstract}
33: We report the abundance analysis of one red giant branch star
34: in the metal-poor outer halo globular cluster NGC~5694.
35: We obtain [Fe/H] = $-$1.93, based on the ionized lines, and
36: our metallicity measurement is in good agreement with previous estimates.
37: We find that [Ca+Ti/2Fe] and [Cu/Fe] of NGC~5694 are
38: about 0.3 -- 0.4 dex lower than other globular clusters with similar
39: metallicities, but similar to
40: some LMC clusters and stars in some dwarf spheroidal galaxies.
41: Differences persist, however, in the abundances of neutron capture elements.
42: The unique chemical abundance pattern and the large Galactocentric
43: distance (30 kpc) and radial velocity ($-138.6 \pm 1.0$ km sec$^{-1}$)
44: indicate that NGC~5694 had an extragalactic origin.
45: \end{abstract}
46:
47: \keywords{Galaxy: halo ---
48: globular clusters: individual (NGC~5694) --- stars: abundances}
49:
50:
51: \section{INTRODUCTION}
52: The cold dark matter model for cosmology predicts
53: a hierarchical formation mechanism for galaxies,
54: with smaller units accreting to construct larger ones
55: (e.g.\ Navarro, Frenk, \& White 1995). Signs of merger
56: fragments have been identified kinematically, especially
57: the Sagittarius dwarf galaxy (Ibata et al.\ 1994), and
58: probably the Monoceros Ring (Yanny et al.\ 2003).
59: More substructure is predicted by the models but confirmations
60: have proven elusive.
61:
62: With the advent of large aperture telescopes, ``chemical tagging"
63: becomes a powerful technique to probe past merger histories.
64: As Freeman \& Bland-Hawthorn (2002) discussed, stars born in galaxies whose
65: star formation histories differ from those that have created the
66: bulk of the Galaxy's stars may still be discernible in
67: unusual element-to-iron ratios. For example, Cohen (2004) has
68: found a compelling link between Palomar~12 and the Sagittarius
69: dwarf, confirming the dynamical association found earlier
70: by Dinescu et al.\ (2000).
71: Venn et al.\ (2004) summarized the unusual abundance
72: patterns found in the Galaxy's dwarf spheroidal (dSph) galaxy neighbors,
73: demonstrating that the bulk of the Galactic halo did not come from such
74: surviving systems.
75: Unique chemical abundance patterns of globular clusters and halo field stars
76: may become a primary method to identify common star formation
77: origins and histories.
78:
79: NGC~5694 ($\ell = 331.1$, $b = +30.4$) is a metal-poor outer
80: halo globular cluster lying far from the Sun (Harris 1975;
81: Ortolani \& Gratton 1990), as well as far from the Galactic center.
82: Harris (1996) cites a Galactocentric distance of 29 kpc, E($B-V$) = 0.09,
83: and a large radial velocity, $v_{\rm rad}$ = $-$144.1 km sec$^{-1}$.
84: The large velocity and distance led Harris (1975) and
85: Harris \& Hesser (1976) to suggest that
86: NGC~5694 has a hyperbolic orbit and it is not bound to our Galaxy,
87: or that the Galaxy contains considerable additional mass beyond
88: the solar orbit than simple model potentials indicate.
89: We have used the analytical model of the Galactic gravitational
90: potential from Allen \& Santillan (1991) to estimate a lower
91: limit to its apogalacticon distance.
92: We first re-estimate the cluster's distance,
93: employing a mean horizontal branch $V$ magnitude
94: of 18.5 (Harris 1996) and the $M_{\rm V}$ vs.\ [Fe/H] relation of
95: Cacciari (2003), finding $R_{\rm GC}$ = 30 kpc.
96: Based only on the radial velocity,
97: the cluster travels over 100 kpc from the Galactic center. Any significant
98: tangential velocity will likely increase this value further.
99: Inspired by the outer halo nature of the
100: cluster, we have begun a high-resolution spectroscopic
101: study of one red giant branch star in the cluster.
102: Our results suggest that NGC~5694 has a very distinctive elemental
103: abundance pattern, similar in some respects to those of nearby
104: dwarf spheroidal galaxies.
105:
106: \section{OBSERVATIONS, DATA REDUCTION AND ANALYSIS}
107:
108: We selected as our program star I-62 from the $BV$ photometry
109: by Harris (1975; $V$ = 15.55; $B-V$ = 1.32).
110: The star has quality ``A" 2MASS $JK$ photometry (Cutri et al.\ 2000;
111: $K$ = 12.21, $J-K$ = 0.80).
112: The radial velocity measurements for red giant stars in NGC~5694
113: by Geisler et al (1995) using medium-resolution spectra
114: at the \ion{Ca}{2} infrared triplet showed that I-62
115: is a probable member of NGC~5694.
116:
117: Our observations were carried out with the Magellan Clay
118: Telescope using the Magellan Inamori Kyocera
119: Echelle spectrograph (MIKE; Bernstein et al.\ 2003) on 6 July 2005.
120: A 0.\arcsec35 slit was used providing a resolving power of $\approx$ 50,000
121: in the red with wavelength coverage from 4950~\AA~to 7250~\AA,
122: based on the full-with half maximum of the Th-Ar emission features.
123: Four 2400s exposure were taken with this setting.
124: We also obtained a spectrum of a fast rotating hot star to remove
125: telluric absorption features.
126: We used {\sc MIKE Redux}\footnote{http://web.mit.edu/$\sim$burles/www/MIKE/}
127: to extract the spectra, and which effectively correct for the tilted slit.
128:
129: Equivalent widths were measured mainly by direct integration of
130: each line profile using the SPLOT task in IRAF ECHELLE package.
131: We estimate our measurement error in equivalent width to be
132: $\pm2$ to $\pm4$ m\AA\ from the size of noise features
133: in the spectra and our ability to determine the proper continuum level.
134:
135: For our line selection, laboratory oscillator strengths
136: were adopted whenever possible,
137: with supplemental solar oscillator strength values.
138: We adopted the ``Uns\"old approximation" to account for
139: van der Waals line broadening with no enhancement
140: (Lee \& Carney 2002; Lee, Carney, \& Habgood 2005).
141: We included the effects of hyperfine splitting
142: for Mn, and both hyperfine and isotopic splitting for Cu and Ba.
143: We neglected such corrections for La and Eu
144: because the lines are very weak and the derived abundances are
145: therefore insensitive to damping.
146:
147: The initial temperature of the program star was estimated
148: using its available $BVK$ photometry and the empirical color-temperature and
149: bolometric correction-color relations given by
150: Alonso, Arribas, \& Martinez-Roger (1999).
151: To estimate the star's relative to the Sun gravity using photometric data,
152: we used $\log g_{\sun}$ = 4.44 in cgs units, $M_{\rm bol,\sun}$ =
153: 4.74 mag, and $T_{\rm eff,\sun}$ = 5777~K. Using the estimated cluster
154: distance and a stellar mass of $0.8 M_{\odot}$, we found $T_{\rm eff}$ = 4135~K
155: and log~$g$ = 0.6.
156:
157: The abundance analysis was performed using the current version
158: of the local thermodynamic equilibrium (LTE) line analysis
159: program MOOG (Sneden 1973).
160: For input model atmospheres, we interpolated Kurucz models
161: using a program kindly supplied by A.\ McWilliam (2005, private communication).
162: Adopting the photometric temperature and surface gravity
163: as our initial values, we began by restricting the analysis to
164: those \ion{Fe}{1} lines with $\log$(W$_{\lambda}$/$\lambda$) $\leq$ $-5.2$
165: (i.e., for the linear part of the curve of growth),
166: and comparing the abundances as a function of excitation potential.
167: New model atmospheres were computed with a slightly different effective
168: temperature until the slope of the $\log$~n(\ion{Fe}{1})
169: versus excitation potential relation was zero to within the uncertainties.
170: The stronger \ion{Fe}{1} lines were then added and the microturbulent
171: velocity $v_{\rm turb}$ altered until the $\log$ n(\ion{Fe}{1}) versus
172: $\log$(W$_{\lambda}$/$\lambda$) relation had no discernible slope.
173: We obtained $T_{\rm eff}$ = 4200~K and $v_{\rm turb}$ = 2.2 km sec$^{-1}$.
174: [Fe/H] was found to be $-2.08 \pm 0.11$, based on the neutral iron lines,
175: and $-1.93 \pm 0.07$, based on the ionized lines.
176: Since metal-poor stars have much weaker metal-absorption in the ultraviolet (UV),
177: more non-local UV flux can penetrate from the deeper layers,
178: which leads to over-ionization of neutral lines.
179: Therefore Fe abundance derived from \ion{Fe}{1} lines for metal-poor stars
180: will always be underestimated,
181: while Fe abundance derived from \ion{Fe}{2} lines remains unaffected
182: (Th\'evenin \& Idiart 1999; Ivans et al.\ 2001).
183: Our [Fe/H] values compare well with those
184: estimated by other means by Zinn \& West (1985; $-1.92$) and its
185: recalibration by Kraft \& Ivans (2003), based on reliance on only
186: the ionized lines for the calibrating clusters.
187: Their derived [Fe/H] value, obtained using Kurucz models
188: with convective overshoot turned on, as we have employed, was $-2.04$.
189:
190: \section{RESULTS AND DISCUSSION}
191:
192: \subsection{Radial Velocity}
193:
194: We measured the heliocentric radial velocity of the program star
195: with respect to that of HD116713 using the IRAF FXCOR task and
196: obtained $-$138.6 $\pm$ 1.0 km sec$^{-1}$.
197: Our result is in good agreement with that of Geisler et al.\ (1995).
198: Neglecting the three most deviant velocities, the remaining ten stars in Geisler's sample
199: have a mean radial velocity of $-140.7 \pm 2.4$ km sec$^{-1}$ (the
200: error is that of the mean).
201: Our radial velocity measurement re-confirms that star I-62 is a member
202: of NGC~5694.
203:
204: \subsection{Elemental Abundances}
205: Table~\ref{tab1} summarizes the elemental abundances of
206: NGC~5694 I-62 using the photometric surface gravity and
207: the spectroscopic temperature.
208: The [el/Fe] ratios for neutral elements are estimated from [el/H]
209: and [\ion{Fe}{1}/H] ratios.
210: The [el/Fe] for singly ionized elements (\ion{Ti}{2}, \ion{Y}{2},
211: \ion{Ba}{2}, \ion{La}{2}, and \ion{Eu}{2})
212: are estimated from [el/H] and [\ion{Fe}{2}/H] ratios.
213: This procedure follows the study of M5 giants by Ivans et al.\ (2001),
214: and has been employed in our prior work as well
215: (Lee \& Carney 2002; Lee, Carney, \& Habgood 2005).
216: See also Johnson et al.\ (2006) for a discussion of the challenges
217: presented in comparing photometric and spectroscopic temperatures
218: and gravities.
219: In the Table, $n$ is the number of lines used for the calculations of
220: mean elemental abundances and $\sigma$ is the standard deviation per line.
221: Systematic errors, such as in adopted $gf$ values as a function
222: of excitation potential, which could lead to systematically
223: erroneous temperature estimates, are not included.
224: A more detailed discussion of elemental abundances will be presented elsewhere
225: in the future.
226:
227: \subsection{Comparisons with other Stellar Systems}
228:
229: Our results are based on the analysis of only one star,
230: and the comparisons given below must be considered suggestive rather
231: than definitive. But NGC~5694 appears to be unusual, almost unique,
232: in its chemical abundance pattern and warrants further study.
233:
234: NGC~5694 I-62 is deficient in $\alpha$-elements, in particular Ca and Ti, and
235: the iron-peak element, Cu, compared with other globular clusters in our Galaxy.
236: For [Ti/Fe], we adopt the unweighted average of
237: [\ion{Ti}{1}/\ion{Fe}{1}] and [\ion{Ti}{2}/\ion{Fe}{2}].
238: Use of neutral titanium lines may suffer from NLTE effects,
239: such as an over-ionization.
240: However, the results from \ion{Ti}{2} lines
241: also yield lower titanium abundance scales in our program star,
242: indicating that it is truly titanium deficient.
243: In Figure~1, we show [Ca+Ti/2Fe] and [Cu/Fe] ratios as functions of [Fe/H].
244: We also show those of other globular clusters
245: in our Galaxy (Pritzl et al.\ 2005; Simmerer et al.\ 2003),
246: Large Magellanic Cloud (LMC) globular clusters (Johnson et al.\ 2006)
247: and nearby dSph galaxies (Shetrone et al.\ 2003).
248: The [Ca+Ti/2Fe] ratio of NGC~5694 I-62 is very similar to those of
249: Palomar~12 and Terzan~7, which are associated with the Sagittarius
250: dwarf galaxy (see Dinescu et al.\ 2000 regarding Palomar~12's association),
251: and Ruprecht~106, which has been suggested to have been
252: associated with the Magellanic Clouds (Lin \& Richer 1992).
253: On the other hand, other $\alpha$-elemental abundances, [Mg/Fe] and [Si/Fe],
254: appears to be normal.
255: The LMC cluster results from Johnson et al.\ (2005) also showed
256: [Mg/Fe] and [Si/Fe] ratios similar to those of globular clusters in our Galaxy.
257: Some iron-peak elemental abundances for NGC~5694 I-62,
258: [Mn/Fe] and [Ni/Fe], appear to be normal
259: (Sobeck et al.\ 2006; Gratton et al.\ 2004) relative to other clusters.
260: However, the [Cu/Fe] ratio of NGC~5694 I-62 is $\approx$ 0.4 dex
261: lower than those of globular clusters studied by Simmerer et al.\ (2003)
262: at [Fe/H] $\approx$ $-$2.0 dex
263: and the nearby dSphs studied by Shetrone et al.\ (2003).
264: Some RGB stars in the Sculptor dSph galaxy\footnote{
265: Note that Sculptor dSph is the oldest dSph galaxy studied by
266: Shetrone et al.\ (2003). However, it appears to have several Gyr of
267: active star formation and its star formation ended about 4 Gyr ago.
268: On the other hand other dSphs have had even more extended periods
269: of star formation, stopping only in the last 1 or 2 Gyr
270: (Dolphin 2002; Tolstoy et al.\ 2003).
271: As noted by the referee, proto-galactic fragments that disrupted very early
272: in the first few Gyr would resemble only the oldest stellar populations
273: in dSphs, which is not the dominant population in the dSphs
274: because of their slow, but steady, star formation rates.}
275: and LMC appear to have similar [Cu/Fe] ratios.
276:
277: The $\alpha$-elements are predominantly synthesized during
278: the SNe~II shell-burning at the end of the lives of massive stars.
279: Most Cu appears to be synthesized by an $s$ process in massive stars.
280: (The relative importance of SN~Ia for Cu abundance remains uncertain,
281: according to Clayton 2003.)
282: Since NGC~5694 has a very old age (De Angeli et al.\ 2005),
283: the contributions from SNe~Ia are unlikely to be significant,
284: since such events are not thought to appear until $10^9$ or
285: more years following the beginning of star formation.
286: Further, the low [Cu/Fe] ratio of NGC~5694 cannot be understood by
287: a metallicity-dependent yield from SNe~Ia, which appears to be more important
288: in more metal-rich regimes (e.g.\ McWilliam \& Smecker-Hane 2005).
289: One possible explanation would be that NGC~5694 formed from a proto-globular
290: cluster cloud which was contaminated by relatively rare, massive SNe~II
291: (e.g.\ Tolstoy et al.\ 2003).
292: This suggests that NGC~5694 formed in very different environment
293: than the bulk of globular clusters in our Galaxy.
294:
295: The neutron capture elements reveal even greater complexity. Venn
296: et al.\ (2004) and Johnson et al.\ (2006) have noted the low
297: abundances of [$\alpha$/Fe] and [Cu/Fe] for dSphs and
298: LMC clusters compared to Galactic halo field and
299: globular cluster stars, and Venn et al.\ (2004) drew special
300: attention to [Ba/Y] as a significant difference as well. The
301: LMC clusters studied by Johnson et al.\ (2006)
302: do not share this trend, having solar [Y/Fe] ratios, as found
303: in the Galactic halo, but somewhat enhanced [Ba/Fe]. NGC~5694 I-62
304: has a very low [Y/Fe] value, like the dwarf spheroidal galaxies, but
305: its [Ba/Fe] ratio is lower, and lower than the LMC clusters as well.
306: [Eu/Fe] is only slightly super-solar, resulting in a [Ba/Eu] ratio
307: well below the LMC clusters or the dSphs.
308:
309: In short, NGC~5694 is similar in some chemical abundance ratios to
310: the LMC clusters and the dSphs, but a closer look
311: at the neutron capture elements suggests significant differences.
312:
313: Is NGC~5694 related to any of the existing dSphs? Kinematically
314: the answer appears to be ``no". Lynden-Bell \& Lynden-Bell (1994) introduced
315: the concept of alignments of orbital poles, but did not identify NGC~5694
316: as related to any of the dwarf spheroidal galaxies. Majewski (1994)
317: employed radial velocities in addition to positional data and drew
318: a similar conclusion. Finally, space velocities have been employed
319: by Palma et al.\ (2002) to compare the clusters' motions, but,
320: unfortunately, NGC~5694 still does not have a measured proper
321: motion. We await such a measurement with keen interest, given that the
322: estimated large apogalacticon distance and unique chemical abundances
323: suggest that NGC~5694 formed independently of the bulk of the Galaxy,
324: and was captured subsequently.
325:
326: \acknowledgements
327: The authors thank David Yong and the anonymous referee
328: for helpful discussions.
329: Support for this work was provided by the Korea Science
330: and Engineering Foundation (KOSEF) to the Astrophysical Research Center
331: for the Structure and Evolution of the Cosmos (ARCSEC),
332: the Carnegie Institution of Washington through a Carnegie Fellowship
333: and a National Science Foundation grant AST-0305431 to the University
334: of North Carolina.
335:
336:
337: \begin{references}
338:
339: \reference{} Allen, C., \& Santillan, A.\ 1991, Rev.\ Mex., 22, 255
340:
341: \reference{} Alonso, A., Arribas, S., \& Martinez-Roger, C.\ 1999,
342: \aaps, 140, 261
343:
344: \reference{} Bernstein, R., Shectman, S.\ A., Gunnels, S.\ M.,
345: Mochnacki, S., \& Athey, A.\ E. 2003, in Instrument Design and Performance for
346: Optical/Infrared Ground-based Telescopes. Edited by Iye, Masanori; Moorwood,
347: Alan F.\ M.\ Proceedings of the SPIE, volume 4841, pp.\ 1694-1704 (2003).,
348: 1694--1704
349:
350: \reference{} Cacciari, C.\ 2003, in New Horizons in Globular Cluster
351: Astronomy. Edited by G.\ Piotto, G.\ Meylan, S.\ G.\ Djorgovski,
352: \& M.\ Riello, ASP Conf.\ Ser.\, volume 296, p.\ 329
353:
354: \reference{} Clayton, D.\ 2003, Handbook of Isotopes in the Cosmos: Hydrogen to Gallium
355: (Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press)
356:
357: \reference{} Cohen, J.\ G.\ 2004, \aj, 127, 1545
358:
359: \reference{} Cutri, R. M., et al.\ 2000,
360: 2MASS Second Incremental Data Release (Pasadena: Caltech)
361:
362: \reference{} De Angeli, F., Piotto, G., Cassisi, S., Busso, G., Recio-Blanco, A., Salaris, M.,
363: Aparicio, A., \& Rosenberg, A.\ 2005, \aj, 130, 116
364:
365: \reference{} Dinescu, D.\ I., Majewski, S.\ R., Girard, T.\ M., \& Cudworth, K.\ M.\
366: 2000, \aj, 120, 1892
367:
368: \reference{} Dolphin, A.\ E.\ 2002, \mnras, 332, 91
369:
370: \reference{} Freeman, K., \& Bland-Hawthorn, J.\ 2002, \araa, 40, 487
371:
372: \reference{} Geisler, D., Piatti, A.\ E., Clari\'a, J.\ J., Minniti, D. \
373: 1995, \aj, 109, 605
374:
375: \reference{} Gratton, R., Sneden, C., \& Carretta, E.\ 2004, \araa, 42, 385
376:
377: \reference{} Harris, W.\ E.\ 1975, \apjs, 29 ,397
378:
379: \reference{} Harris, W.\ E.\ 1996, \aj, 112, 1487
380:
381: \reference{} Harris, W.\ E., \& Hesser, J.\ E.\ 1976, \pasp, 88, 377
382:
383: \reference{} Ibata, R.\ A., Gilmore, G., \& Irwin, M.\ J.\ 1994,
384: \nat, 370, 194
385:
386: \reference{} Ivans, I.\ I., Kraft, R.\ P., Sneden, C., Smith, G.\ H.,
387: Rich, R.\ M., \& Shetrone, M.\ 2001, \aj, 122, 1438
388:
389: \reference{} Johnson, J.\ A., Ivans, I.\ I., Stetson, P.\ B.\ 2006,
390: \apj, 640, 801
391:
392: \reference{} Kraft, R.\ P., \& Ivans, I.\ I.\ 2003, \pasp, 1115, 143
393:
394: \reference{} Lee, J.\ -W., \& Carney, B.\ W.\ 2002, \aj, 124, 1511
395:
396: \reference{} Lee, J.\ -W., Carney, B.\ W., Habgood, M.\ J.\ 2005, \aj, 129, 251
397:
398: \reference{} Lin, D.\ D.\ C., \& Richer, H.\ B.\ 1992, \apjl, 338, 57
399:
400: \reference{} Lynden-Bell, D., \& Lynden-Bell, R.\ M.\ 1995, \mnras, 275, 429
401:
402: \reference{} Majewski, S.\ R.\ 1994, \apjl, 431, L17
403:
404: \reference{} McWilliam, A., \& Smecker-Hane, T.\ A.\ 2005, \apjl, 622, 29
405:
406: \reference{} Navarro, J.\ F., Frenk, C.\ S., \& White, S.\ D.\ M.\ 1995, \mnras, 275, 56
407:
408: \reference{} Ortolani, S.\, \& Gratton, R.\ 1990, \aaps, 82, 71
409:
410: \reference{} Palma, C., Majewski, S.\ R., \& Johnston, K.\ V.\ 2002,
411: \apj, 564, 736
412:
413: \reference{} Pritzl, B.\ J., Venn, K.\ A., \& Irwin, M., J.\ 2005, \aj, 130, 2140
414:
415: \reference{} Shetrone, M., Venn, K.\ A., Tolstoy, E., Primas, F., Hill, V. \& Kaufer, A.\
416: 2003, \aj, 125, 684
417:
418: \reference{} Simmerer, J., Sneden, C., Ivans, I.\ I., Kraft, R.\ P.\, Shetrone, M.\ D., \&
419: Smith, V.\ V.\ 2003, \aj, 125, 2018
420:
421: \reference{} Sobeck, J.\ S., Ivans, I.\ I., Simmerer, J.\ A., Sneden, C.,
422: Hoeflich, P., Fulbright, J.\ P., Kraft, R.\ P.\ 2006, \aj, 131, 2949
423:
424: \reference{} Sneden, C.\ 1973, PhD thesis, The University of Texas at Austin
425:
426: \reference{} Th\'evenin, F., \& Idiart, T. P. 1999, \apj, 521, 753
427:
428: \reference{} Tolstoy, E., Venn, K.\ A., Shetrone, M., Primas, F., Hill, V., Kaufer, A., \&
429: Szeifert, T.\ 2003, \aj, 125, 707
430:
431: \reference{} Venn, K.\ A., Irwin, M., Shetrone, M.\ D., Tout, C.\ A.,
432: Hill, V., \& Tolstoy, E.\ 2004, \aj, 128, 1177
433:
434: \reference{} Yanny et al.\ 2003, \apj, 588, 824
435:
436: \reference{} Zinn, R., \& West, M.\ J.\ 1985, \apjs, 55, 45
437:
438: \end{references}
439: %=======================================================================
440:
441: \clearpage
442:
443: \begin{deluxetable}{lrlrrr}
444: \tablecaption{Elemental abundances.\label{tab1}}
445: \tablenum{1}
446: \tablewidth{0pc} \tablehead{ \multicolumn{1}{c}{Elem.} &
447: \multicolumn{1}{c}{Sun} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{} &
448: \multicolumn{1}{c}{} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{n} &
449: \multicolumn{1}{c}{$\sigma$} } \startdata
450: Fe & 7.52 & [Fe/H]$_{\rm{I}}$ & $-$2.08 & 40 & 0.11 \\
451:
452: & & [Fe/H]$_{\rm{II}}$ & $-$1.93 & 7 & 0.07 \\
453:
454: Mg & 7.58 & [Mg/Fe] & +0.15 & 2 & 0.03 \\
455:
456: Si & 7.55 & [Si/Fe] & +0.32 & 2 & 0.01 \\
457:
458: Ca & 6.36 & [Ca/Fe] & +0.00 & 7 & 0.06 \\
459:
460: Ti & 4.99 & [Ti/Fe]$_{\rm{I}}$ & +0.00 & 10 & 0.11 \\
461:
462: & & [Ti/Fe]$_{\rm{II}}$ & $-$0.15 & 2 & 0.14 \\
463:
464: & & [Ti/Fe]$_{\rm{mean}}$ & $-$0.07 & \nodata & \nodata \\
465:
466: Mn & 5.39 & [Mn/Fe] & $-$0.38 & 2 & 0.09 \\
467:
468: Ni & 6.52 & [Ni/Fe] & $-$0.10 & 3 & 0.09 \\
469:
470: Cu & 4.21 & [Cu/Fe] & $-$1.05 & 1 & \nodata \\
471:
472: Y & 2.24 & [Y/Fe]$_{\rm{II}}$ & $-$0.58 & 2 & 0.02 \\
473:
474: Ba & 2.13 & [Ba/Fe]$_{\rm{II}}$ & $-$0.52 & 3 & 0.09 \\
475:
476: La & 1.22 & [La/Fe]$_{\rm{II}}$ & $-$0.26 & 1 & \nodata \\
477:
478: Eu & 0.51 & [Eu/Fe]$_{\rm{II}}$ & +0.18 & 2 & 0.11 \\
479:
480: \enddata
481: \end{deluxetable}
482:
483:
484: %=======================================================================
485:
486:
487: \clearpage
488:
489: \begin{figure}
490: %\epsscale{1}
491: \figurenum{1}
492: \plotone{f1.eps}
493: \caption{[Ca+Ti/2Fe] and [Cu/Fe] ratios as functions of [Fe/H].
494: Dots represent globular clusters in our Galaxy, open circles the Carina dSph,
495: open triangles the Fornax dSph, open squares the Sculptor dSph,
496: and crosses LMC clusters.}\label{fig1}
497: \end{figure}
498:
499: \begin{figure}
500: %\epsscale{1}
501: \figurenum{2}
502: \plotone{f2.eps}
503: \caption{[Ba/Eu] and [Ba/Y] ratios as functions of [Fe/H].
504: We use the same symbols as in Figure~\ref{fig1}.} \label{fig2}
505: \end{figure}
506:
507: \end{document}
508: