2011
DOI: 10.1088/0004-6256/142/4/136
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

THE DISTRIBUTION OF THE ELEMENTS IN THE GALACTIC DISK. III. A RECONSIDERATION OF CEPHEIDS FROMl= 30° TO 250°

Abstract: This paper reports on the spectroscopic investigation of 238 Cepheids in the northern sky. Of these stars, about 150 are new to the study of the galactic abundance gradient. These new Cepheids bring the total number of Cepheids involved in abundance distribution studies to over 400. In this work, we also consider systematics between various studies and also those which result from the choice of models. We find that systematic variations exist at the 0.06 dex level both between studies and model atmospheres. In… Show more

Help me understand this report
View preprint versions

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

59
268
5

Year Published

2013
2013
2018
2018

Publication Types

Select...
5
2

Relationship

1
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 214 publications
(332 citation statements)
references
References 79 publications
59
268
5
Order By: Relevance
“…Both Cheng et al (2012) and Hayden et al (2014) have measured a steep radial gradients of about −0.06 dex kpc −1 (0.15 < | z| < 0.5 kpc) and −0.087±0.002 dex kpc −1 (0.0 < | z| < 0.25 kpc), respectively, close to the plane and have confirmed that the radial gradients become flatter as one moves away from the Galactic midplane in the vertical range 0.5 < | z| < 2 kpc. Again the sample of Cepheids used in measuring the radial abundance gradients is concentrated close to the Galactic plane within | z| < 0.5 kpc (Luck & Lambert 2011). At R gc > 12 kpc and away from the midplane, the mean metallicity of about −0.3 dex and the flat radial gradient observed for the present sample of OCs is consistent with very similar values reported for field dwarfs (Cheng et al 2012) and field giants (Hayden et al 2014).…”
Section: Radial Abundance Distribution Of Ocs and The Field Starssupporting
confidence: 90%
See 3 more Smart Citations
“…Both Cheng et al (2012) and Hayden et al (2014) have measured a steep radial gradients of about −0.06 dex kpc −1 (0.15 < | z| < 0.5 kpc) and −0.087±0.002 dex kpc −1 (0.0 < | z| < 0.25 kpc), respectively, close to the plane and have confirmed that the radial gradients become flatter as one moves away from the Galactic midplane in the vertical range 0.5 < | z| < 2 kpc. Again the sample of Cepheids used in measuring the radial abundance gradients is concentrated close to the Galactic plane within | z| < 0.5 kpc (Luck & Lambert 2011). At R gc > 12 kpc and away from the midplane, the mean metallicity of about −0.3 dex and the flat radial gradient observed for the present sample of OCs is consistent with very similar values reported for field dwarfs (Cheng et al 2012) and field giants (Hayden et al 2014).…”
Section: Radial Abundance Distribution Of Ocs and The Field Starssupporting
confidence: 90%
“…As a result, the initial and the present-day gradient derived for the younger populations are very similar out to 12 kpc. This fairly explains the similarity in the radial gradients observed for the younger tracers such as OCs of age less than 2 Gyr ( Figure 4 and figure 5), field stars (Cheng et al 2012;Hayden et al 2014) and Cepheids (Luck & Lambert 2011;Genovali et al 2014) for Rgc < 12 kpc. The steep gradient of slope −0.058 dex kpc −1 for stars younger than 2 Gyr in the radial range 6−11 kpc and a shallow gradient of old stellar populations predicted after taking the radial migration into account is in fair agreement with our values of gradient measured for respective age groups.…”
Section: Comparison With Chemodynamical Modelssupporting
confidence: 73%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…Several previous studies (Costa et al 2004;Jacobson et al 2011b;Yong et al 2012) have shown evidence for a transition to a flat radial gradient at large Galactocentric radii in the plane, with the transition occurring between 10 and 14 kpc. This flattening of the radial gradient is not observed with Cepheids Luck & Lambert 2011;Lemasle et al 2013). There is some question about whether the apparent flattening might arise if one does not consider vertical gradients when the radial gradients are measured (Cheng et al 2012b).…”
Section: Intermediate Radiimentioning
confidence: 89%