All Figures

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=7cm,clip]{2396fg01.eps} \end{figure}$ Figure 1: The duration of the phases of hydrogen and helium burning as a function of the initial mass for the NACRE intermediate mass models. Top: H-burning time; middle: He-burning time; bottom: ratio between the He-burning and the H-burning times.
Open with DEXTER

In the text

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=7.5cm,clip]{2396fg02.eps} \end{figure}$ Figure 2: Top: the mass coordinate of the innermost point reached by the base of the envelope during the second dredge-up for the same models discussed in Fig. 1. Bottom: the penetration (in solar masses) of the base of the external convective zone beyond the location of the CNO burning shell during the second dredge-up.
Open with DEXTER

In the text

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=7.5cm,clip]{2396fg03.eps} \end{figure}$ Figure 3: The variation of the surface chemical abundances of some elements following the 2nd dredge-up. Top: helium mass fraction; middle: variation of the ¹⁶O abundance, expressed as the logarithm of ratio between the final abundance and the initial mass fraction; bottom: the same as the middle panel, but for ²³Na.
Open with DEXTER

In the text

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=8cm,clip]{2396fg04.eps} \end{figure}$ Figure 4: The maximum luminosity ( top) and temperature at the base of the convective envelope ( bottom) achieved by the standard NACRE models during their AGB evolution.
Open with DEXTER

In the text

$\begin{figure} { \includegraphics[width=7.5cm,clip]{2396fg5a.eps}\hspace*{4mm} \includegraphics[width=7.5cm,clip]{2396fg5b.eps} }\end{figure}$ Figure 5: Variation of the surface chemical abundances of the CNO elements during the evolution of the same models as in Fig. 1. For clarity reason, for ¹²C we decided to show only the variation at the surface of the models with initial masses 3, 4, 5 and 6 $M_{\odot }$ .
Open with DEXTER

In the text

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=8.4cm,clip]{2396fg06.eps} \end{figure}$ Figure 6: The variation of the surface sodium abundance for the standard NACRE models.
Open with DEXTER

In the text

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=8.4cm,clip]{2396fg07.eps} \end{figure}$ Figure 7: Observed data which define the anticorrelation sodium vs. oxygen in the stars of several GCs. Stars: M 13, open squares: M 3 (both from Sneden et al. 2004); full squares: NGC 6752 from Grundahl et al. (2002); full triangles: M 4 and open triangles: M 5 (both from Ivans et al. 1999); full dots: NGC 2808 from Carretta et al. (2003). Models by Fenner et al. (2004) of 3.5, 5 and 6.5 $M_{\odot }$ , and models of this paper are also shown. The standard models with $\eta =0.02$ (left line, points labelled by the mass value) and the models with $\eta =0.10$ have been shifted by 0.3 dex in [O/Fe] to be compared with the observations. Equal masses are joined.
Open with DEXTER

In the text

$\begin{figure} \par {\includegraphics[width=4.7cm,clip]{2396fg8a.eps}\hspace*{4m... ...}\hspace*{4mm} \includegraphics[width=4.7cm,clip]{2396fg8c.eps} }\end{figure}$ Figure 8: The variation of the magnesium and aluminum isotopes for the standard NACRE models of 3.5, 4 and 5 $M_{\odot }$ .
Open with DEXTER

In the text

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=8cm,clip]{2396fg09.eps} \end{figure}$ Figure 9: The average chemical content of the ejecta of the standard NACRE models as a function of the initial mass. Top: oxygen abundance; bottom: sodium abundance.
Open with DEXTER

In the text

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=8cm,clip]{2396fg10.eps} \end{figure}$ Figure 10: The comparison between the time-scale for helium burning ( top) and the ratio between the time-scales for helium and for hydrogen burning ( bottom) for the NACRE (solid) and CF88 (dotted) models of intermediate mass.
Open with DEXTER

In the text

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=8cm,clip]{2396fg11.eps} \end{figure}$ Figure 11: The average chemical content of the ejecta of the NACRE (solid) and CF88 (dotted) models of intermediate mass in terms of lithium, carbon, nitrogen and oxygen abundances.
Open with DEXTER

In the text

$\begin{figure} { \includegraphics[width=7cm,clip]{2396f12a.eps}\hspace*{4mm} \includegraphics[width=7cm,clip]{2396f12b.eps} }\end{figure}$ Figure 12: Left: variation with temperature of the logarithm of the ratio between the CF88 and the NACRE cross section of the reaction ¹⁷O(p, $\gamma )^{18}$ F ( top), ¹⁷O(p, $\alpha )^{14}$ N ( middle) and of the ratio $\sigma (^{17}$ O(p, $\gamma )^{18}$ F)/ $\sigma (^{17}$ O(p, $\alpha )^{14}$ N) ( bottom). Right: the same as the left panel, but for reactions ²³Na(p, $\gamma )^{24}$ Mg and ²³Na(p, $\alpha )^{20}$ Ne.
Open with DEXTER

In the text

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=8cm,clip]{2396fg13.eps} \end{figure}$ Figure 13: Average chemical content of the ejecta of IMS models calculated with NACRE (solid) and CF88 (dotted) sets of nuclear cross-sections in terms of ²³Na and ²⁴Mg. The bottom panels show the isotopic ratios of magnesium.
Open with DEXTER

In the text

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=8.5cm,clip]{2396fg14.eps} \end{figure}$ Figure 14: The AGB evolution of the surface abundances of ²³Na ( top) and ²²Ne ( bottom) of two models with initial mass 5 $M_{\odot }$ calculated with the NACRE (solid) and CF88(dotted) nuclear cross-sections.
Open with DEXTER

In the text

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=8.5cm,clip]{2396fg15.eps} \end{figure}$ Figure 15: Variation with time of the total mass of three models of initial mass $5~M_{\odot}$ calculated with three different value of the parameter for mass loss, $\eta _{\rm R}$ . Time has been set to 0 at the beginning of the AGB evolution.
Open with DEXTER

In the text

$\begin{figure} { \includegraphics[width=5.5cm]{2396f16a.eps}\hspace*{4mm} \inclu... ...c.eps}\hspace*{4mm} \includegraphics[width=5.5cm]{2396f16d.eps} }\end{figure}$ Figure 16: Variation with time and total mass of the CNO surface abundances of the same models presented in Fig. 15. The right-lower panel shows the total C+N+O abundance. The abundances are given in mass fraction.
Open with DEXTER

In the text

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=8.5cm,clip]{2396fg17.eps} \end{figure}$ Figure 17: AGB evolution of the surface abundances of ²³Na ( top) and ²²Ne ( bottom) of the same models presented in Fig. 15.
Open with DEXTER

In the text

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=8.5cm,clip]{2396fg18.eps} \end{figure}$ Figure 18: The evolution of luminosity ( top) and temperature at the base of the envelope (bottom) of two models with initial mass 4 $M_{\odot }$ calculated with two values of the parameter entering Blöcker (1995) prescription for mass loss: $\eta _{\rm R}=0.02$ (solid track) and $\eta _{\rm R}=0.1$ (dotted).
Open with DEXTER

In the text

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=8.5cm,clip]{2396fg19.eps} \end{figure}$ Figure 19: Comparison between the depletion of surface oxygen within two models with initial mass 4 $M_{\odot }$ calculated with two different values of $\eta _{\rm R}$ .
Open with DEXTER

In the text

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=7cm,clip]{2396fg01.eps} \end{figure}$	Figure 1: The duration of the phases of hydrogen and helium burning as a function of the initial mass for the NACRE intermediate mass models. Top: H-burning time; middle: He-burning time; bottom: ratio between the He-burning and the H-burning times.
Open with DEXTER

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=7.5cm,clip]{2396fg02.eps} \end{figure}$	Figure 2: Top: the mass coordinate of the innermost point reached by the base of the envelope during the second dredge-up for the same models discussed in Fig. 1. Bottom: the penetration (in solar masses) of the base of the external convective zone beyond the location of the CNO burning shell during the second dredge-up.
Open with DEXTER

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=7.5cm,clip]{2396fg03.eps} \end{figure}$	Figure 3: The variation of the surface chemical abundances of some elements following the 2nd dredge-up. Top: helium mass fraction; middle: variation of the ¹⁶O abundance, expressed as the logarithm of ratio between the final abundance and the initial mass fraction; bottom: the same as the middle panel, but for ²³Na.
Open with DEXTER

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=8cm,clip]{2396fg04.eps} \end{figure}$	Figure 4: The maximum luminosity ( top) and temperature at the base of the convective envelope ( bottom) achieved by the standard NACRE models during their AGB evolution.
Open with DEXTER

$\begin{figure} { \includegraphics[width=7.5cm,clip]{2396fg5a.eps}\hspace*{4mm} \includegraphics[width=7.5cm,clip]{2396fg5b.eps} }\end{figure}$	Figure 5: Variation of the surface chemical abundances of the CNO elements during the evolution of the same models as in Fig. 1. For clarity reason, for ¹²C we decided to show only the variation at the surface of the models with initial masses 3, 4, 5 and 6 $M_{\odot }$ .
Open with DEXTER

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=8.4cm,clip]{2396fg06.eps} \end{figure}$	Figure 6: The variation of the surface sodium abundance for the standard NACRE models.
Open with DEXTER

$\begin{figure} \par {\includegraphics[width=4.7cm,clip]{2396fg8a.eps}\hspace{4m... ...}\hspace{4mm} \includegraphics[width=4.7cm,clip]{2396fg8c.eps} }\end{figure}$	Figure 8: The variation of the magnesium and aluminum isotopes for the standard NACRE models of 3.5, 4 and 5 $M_{\odot }$ .
Open with DEXTER

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=8cm,clip]{2396fg09.eps} \end{figure}$	Figure 9: The average chemical content of the ejecta of the standard NACRE models as a function of the initial mass. Top: oxygen abundance; bottom: sodium abundance.
Open with DEXTER

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=8cm,clip]{2396fg10.eps} \end{figure}$	Figure 10: The comparison between the time-scale for helium burning ( top) and the ratio between the time-scales for helium and for hydrogen burning ( bottom) for the NACRE (solid) and CF88 (dotted) models of intermediate mass.
Open with DEXTER

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=8cm,clip]{2396fg11.eps} \end{figure}$	Figure 11: The average chemical content of the ejecta of the NACRE (solid) and CF88 (dotted) models of intermediate mass in terms of lithium, carbon, nitrogen and oxygen abundances.
Open with DEXTER

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=8cm,clip]{2396fg13.eps} \end{figure}$	Figure 13: Average chemical content of the ejecta of IMS models calculated with NACRE (solid) and CF88 (dotted) sets of nuclear cross-sections in terms of ²³Na and ²⁴Mg. The bottom panels show the isotopic ratios of magnesium.
Open with DEXTER

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=8.5cm,clip]{2396fg14.eps} \end{figure}$	Figure 14: The AGB evolution of the surface abundances of ²³Na ( top) and ²²Ne ( bottom) of two models with initial mass 5 $M_{\odot }$ calculated with the NACRE (solid) and CF88(dotted) nuclear cross-sections.
Open with DEXTER

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=8.5cm,clip]{2396fg15.eps} \end{figure}$	Figure 15: Variation with time of the total mass of three models of initial mass $5~M_{\odot}$ calculated with three different value of the parameter for mass loss, $\eta _{\rm R}$ . Time has been set to 0 at the beginning of the AGB evolution.
Open with DEXTER

$\begin{figure} { \includegraphics[width=5.5cm]{2396f16a.eps}\hspace{4mm} \inclu... ...c.eps}\hspace{4mm} \includegraphics[width=5.5cm]{2396f16d.eps} }\end{figure}$	Figure 16: Variation with time and total mass of the CNO surface abundances of the same models presented in Fig. 15. The right-lower panel shows the total C+N+O abundance. The abundances are given in mass fraction.
Open with DEXTER

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=8.5cm,clip]{2396fg17.eps} \end{figure}$	Figure 17: AGB evolution of the surface abundances of ²³Na ( top) and ²²Ne ( bottom) of the same models presented in Fig. 15.
Open with DEXTER

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=8.5cm,clip]{2396fg18.eps} \end{figure}$	Figure 18: The evolution of luminosity ( top) and temperature at the base of the envelope (bottom) of two models with initial mass 4 $M_{\odot }$ calculated with two values of the parameter entering Blöcker (1995) prescription for mass loss: $\eta _{\rm R}=0.02$ (solid track) and $\eta _{\rm R}=0.1$ (dotted).
Open with DEXTER

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=8.5cm,clip]{2396fg19.eps} \end{figure}$	Figure 19: Comparison between the depletion of surface oxygen within two models with initial mass 4 $M_{\odot }$ calculated with two different values of $\eta _{\rm R}$ .
Open with DEXTER