A&A 450, 509-521 (2006)
DOI: 10.1051/0004-6361:20053590
M. Gavilán1 - M. Mollá2 - J. F. Buell3
1 - Departamento de Física Teórica, Universidad Autónoma
de Madrid, 28049 Cantoblanco, Spain
2 - Departamento de Investigación Básica,
C.I.E.M.A.T., Avda. Complutense 22, 28040 Madrid, Spain
3 - Department of Mathematics and Physics, Alfred State College,
Alfred, NY 14802, USA
Received 7 June 2005 / Accepted 25 November 2005
Abstract
Aims. We analyze the impact on the Galactic nitrogen abundances with a new set of low and intermediate mass star yields. These yields contain a significant yield of primary nitrogen from intermediate mass stars.
Methods. We use these yields as an input for a galactic chemical evolution model and study the nitrogen abundances in the halo and in the disc, and compare them with models obtained using other yield sets and with a large amount of observational data.
Results. We find that with these new yields our model reproduces the observed trends adequately. In particular, these yields solve the historical problem of nitrogen evolution, giving the right level of relative abundance N/O by producing a primary component in intermediate mass stars. Moreover, using different evolutionary rates for each radial region of the Galaxy, we can explain the observed N dispersion.
Key words: galaxies: abundances - galaxies: evolution - galaxies: spirals
Most elements are created in the interiors of stars by nucleosynthesis processes (see Wallerstein et al. 1997, for a review), starting with hydrogen and progressing toward heavy elements. These processes are called primary production. Some elements, however, can be formed from heavier nuclei than the hydrogen originally present in the star. They are called secondary. This is the case for nitrogen, which can be created during the CNO cycle using seeds of original carbon and/or oxygen. From a theoretical point of view, it has been considered that massive stars produce secondary nitrogen (Peimbert 1987), while low and intermediate mass (LIM) stars have mechanisms, like the third dredge-up and the hot bottom burning (HBB) processes, to produce both primary and secondary nitrogen (Alloin et al. 1979; Edmunds & Pagel 1978). The third dredge-up event is a consequence of the thermal pulses in the star, and transport C and He to the outer layers. The HBB occurs when the CNO cycle takes place at the base of the convective envelope.
Observationally, there are several open questions about the primary or
secondary character of nitrogen that up to now remain unsolved. When N
and O data are represented as log(N/O) vs. log(O/H), including
the galactic stars, H II regions for the Milky Way Galaxy (MWG),
external galaxies (Garnett et al. 1995; Izotov & Thuan 1999; van Zee et al. 1998a; Garnett et al. 1999), and the high
redshift data (Pettini et al. 2002; Prochaska et al. 2002; Centurión et al. 2003, and references therein), a
clear positive slope appears for abundances larger than
dex, which indicates a secondary behavior; but the
plot shows a flat slope for low metallicities that can only be
explained with a primary component of nitrogen. Taking into account
that this flat slope occurs for low abundances, the first idea
proposed, shared by some authors (Diaz & Tosi 1986; Pagel et al. 1979; Dahmen et al. 1995) is that
observations would be reproduced if the nitrogen ejected by massive
stars were primary, while intermediate mass stars might have both
primary and secondary components.
Thus, some authors have tried to look for mechanisms that explain how massive stars could produce primary nitrogen. This is the case of Meynet & Maeder (2002) who have recently proposed rotation as a possible source of primary nitrogen, since low metallicity stars show a bigger rotation than high metallicity ones. Chiappini et al. (2003a) used these yields in their chemical evolution models, concluding that they are only a lower limit for the primary nitrogen production since the HBB is not considered in their calculation. In fact, Chiappini et al. (2005) find that an extra production of N in low metallicity massive stars by a large factor, between 40 and 200 along the mass range, is necessary to explain the data of very metal-poor halo stars since these yields do not produce a sufficient amount of primary N. Moreover, if the production of primary nitrogen proceeded from massive stars, the left side of the (N/O) vs. (O/H) plot should not show any scatter. Although some authors claim to observe (Pilyugin et al. 2003; Izotov & Thuan 1999) this lack of scatter, recent observations from low metallicity objects (Israelian et al. 2004; Spite et al. 2005; Pettini et al. 2002; Prochaska et al. 2002; Centurión et al. 2003) do show a clear dispersion.
Serrano & Peimbert (1983) have already claimed that a secondary production by intermediate mass stars must exist and suggested that the zero slope may be explained by two factors: 1) a delay in the ejection of N to the ISM due to the different mean-lifetimes of stars and 2) the gas infall effects. The advantage of taking a delay into account is that the large data scatter can be explained by considering different evolutionary states for each galaxy, so this possibility has been supported by a large number of authors: Pilyugin (1992); van Zee et al. (1998b); Pilyugin (1993); Henry et al. (2000); Vila Costas & Edmunds (1993). This last group also includes gas flows - infall or/and outflow - and low efficiency for the star formation rate (the equivalent mechanism to produce a delay) in the low evolved regions, in order to reproduce the flat slope in the (N/O) vs. (O/H) plot. They conclude that the secondary production of nitrogen should dominate in high metallicity environments, while the primary one should act at low metallicities.
Some new yields for LIM stars were given in Gavilán et al. (2005, hereinafter Paper I), where they were adequately evaluated and calibrated by using them in a Galaxy chemical evolution model. It was shown that the results about C and O abundances reproduce the Galactic and Solar Neighborhood data adequately. The purpose of this work is to analyze the impact of these stellar yields on the nitrogen abundances. In particular, we use the same prescriptions of Paper I to check if the contribution to N given by these yields for LIM stars is sufficient to justify the amount of primary nitrogen the observations point to.
We describe the yields in Sect. 2, analyzing in particular the primary and secondary components of the nitrogen production. In Sect. 3 we briefly describe the chemical evolution model. Section 4 is devoted to the results, and the conclusions are presented in Sect. 5.
The aim of this work is the study of the nitrogen behavior, using the
same set of yields as in Paper I, that we call BU yields. For
comparison purposes we also take the LIM stars yields from
van den Hoek & Groenewegen (1997) and Marigo (2001) that we call VG and MA, respectively.
The complete table of BU yields was already given in Paper I for five
metallicities: -0.2, -0.1, 0.0, +0.1, and +0.2, expressed as
,
where solar abundances were taken from Grevesse & Sauval (1998)
.
![]() |
Figure 1:
Total yields (BU) of: a) 12C and b) 14N
produced by LIM stars for different metallicities following label
on panel b), expressed as
|
| Open with DEXTER | |
We summarize the behavior of the carbon and nitrogen yields for LIM stars, as shown in Fig. 1. In panel a) we see that the
12C yield is extremely small for stars with mass lower than 2
,
since they do not experience third dredge up events.
However, stars begin to suffer these kinds of events for smaller
masses at lower metallicity. In other words, in the low mass range,
the metallicity and the 12C yield are anti-correlated. When the
stars have enough mass to undergo HBB, the 12C yield drops
abruptly because of the conversion of carbon into nitrogen. The
14N yield presents a local maximum in the mass range from 3.5 to 5
,
depending on the metallicity, then decreases before
beginning to increase again as a function of stellar mass. The
largest amount of nitrogen is produced by stars of intermediate mass
because HBB and the 2nd dredge-up occur only in stars with
.
As the HBB increases the luminosity and the
mass-loss rate, stars that suffer this process have shorter TP-AGB
lifetimes. The local maximum occurs in the transition between stars
with HBB and those without. The increase at higher masses is due to
the shortened time between third dredge-up events. The yields at the
lowest masses are due to the 1st dredge-up.
![]() |
Figure 2:
The ratio of the yield of primary
|
| Open with DEXTER | |
The most important difference among the used yields resides in the
contribution of primary and secondary components of nitrogen by LIM stars. In Fig. 2 we represent the fraction of primary 14N for the three sets used, as labeled, as a function of mass (
,
except for MA, for which
). In panel a) we show the results for solar abundances.
All of them show a similar behavior with a maximum for masses around 3.5-4
.
We must clear up some points about the components of N. The only
difference between primary and secondary nitrogen is the origin of the
carbon atom producing it. Although the idea is conceptually clear, it
is not so simple to separately compute both components. Thus, although
BU and MA give the two components separately for each model, VG do
not. These authors, however, show their yields in each phase of
stellar evolution. If we consider that all the nitrogen created in
the AGB phase is primary, about
90% of the N ejected by LIM stars will be primary. This is sometimes assumed when these yields are
used. This hypothesis, which we call AGB technique leads to a
primary N component that is excessively large and is not totally
adequate.
Let us return to the definition: secondary N proceeds from the burning
of original 12C. If a fraction of the original carbon is burned
in the pre-AGB phase, it produces secondary N. Sometimes, this gives
a negative 12C yield. But, not all the initial carbon is consumed
before the AGB phase. If we take a star of 4
of solar
abundance as an example, that is, with
,
it has an initial 12C mass
.
The pre-AGB phase carbon yield is
,
so the mass of this element present in the star
before the AGB begins is:
![]() |
(1) |
![]() |
(2) |
We have then computed the integrated yields of 14N produced by
LIM stars that we present in Fig. 3 as a
function of metallicity Z. In panel a), we represent the BU results
as solid circles on which we have performed a least-squares fit shown
by the solid (red) line. This integrated yield for 14N,
equivalent to the yield produced by a single stellar population, is
located between the two other sets in this panel, showing a similar
dependence on Z as VG
but with lower absolute values.
More significant, however, is how the ratio of primary
to total integrated yields,
N depends on metallicity,
shown in panel b). This ratio increases for decreasing metallicity for all
sets, as expected, although the integrated yield for VG is quite
different if we consider the AGB technique rather than the r method.
This metallicity effect can be easily explained: low metallicity stars
have smaller radii and take longer to reach super-winds, so they have
more time to experience third dredge-up events than solar metallicity
stars. As a consequence, they have more fresh
in their
envelopes and can make more primary nitrogen by the HBB process. On
the other hand, due to the lower amount of original carbon, they
produce, obviously, less secondary nitrogen. For VG yields the ratio
is almost constant at a value of 15% with the r technique,
represented by the short-dashed (blue) line, for metallicities greater
then 0.01, increasing for metallicities lower than this value. While
it is
90% when the AGB technique, represented by a
dot-short-dashed (blue) line, is used, showing a smooth variation with Z. It is interesting that the integrated yield for solar abundance in
the BU case
is around 20%,
very similar to the value computed as necessary by Alloin et al. (1979) two
decades ago on the basis of the observations available at that time.
![]() |
Figure 3: a) Dependence of the integrated yield of 14N produced by LIM stars on metallicity for the three yield sets, marked with different symbols as in Fig. 2. The crosses are the results obtained by Henry et al. (2000) for the same VG yields using a Salpeter IMF. b) The ratio between the primary to the total nitrogen yield with the same symbols than in panel a). The two possible techniques to compute the primary component of VG yields are represented as short-dashed line (method r) and dot-short-dashed line (method AGB). |
| Open with DEXTER | |
All these considerations indicate that the primary nitrogen appears on
a different time scale in the ISM depending on the value of Z. The first
primary N will be ejected when stars of 8
die (5 for MA),
while Z is still low.
The model used in this work is the multiphase chemical evolution model described in Ferrini et al. (1994,1992), in the version presented in Mollá & Díaz (2005), and in Paper I. For LIM stars, we used the same yields BU as in these two last papers, and for comparison purposes, those from MA and VG. For massive stars we chose Portinari et al. (1998) and Woosley & Weaver (1995, hereinafter PCB and WW, respectively). We ran different models computed with different combination of yields: BU + WW, VG + WW, and MA + PCB, which we distinguish as BU, VG, and MA, respectively.
The nitrogen study is usually done by comparing its behavior relative to iron and oxygen, so it is very important to have a careful calibration for these two elements. Oxygen calibration was done in Paper I. The SNIa are the main manufacturer of iron. The yields for type Ia supernova (SNIa) explosions are taken from Iwamoto et al. (1999) and Branch & Nomoto (1986). The evolution of this element in the model is quasi-independent of the normal stars yields. However, since iron is mainly produced by SNIa, even if its yield is very well known, its abundance is very dependent on the method of computing the rate of these explosions. For this purpose we analyzed the results obtained with different possibilities in order to eliminate, if possible, uncertainties in the iron abundance evolution. This point is relatively important because the Age-metallicity relation and the G-dwarf metallicity distribution are usually used as calibration methods for chemical evolutions models. Furthermore, we go on to compare our results with observed stellar nitrogen abundances, most of which are given as [N/Fe], so, we checked that the Iron evolution is adequately reproduced by our models before this comparison be made.
We used three methods to compute the SNIa rates as given by the
following authors: the classical one (Matteucci & Greggio 1986; Ferrini & Poggianti 1993), the one
given by Tornambe (1989), and the last, more recent, described in
Ruiz-Lapuente et al. (2000), hereinafter MAT, TOR, and RL, respectively. The first
authors estimate the SN rates by using only the initial mass
function. We summarize her the method that is well explained in the first
two cited works: a proportion of the stellar masses in a given
range [
]
will be in binary systems and a fraction
of them will develop type Ia supernova. Based on this idea, a mass
function for the secondary stars is computed from the original
one. Finally the SNIa rate depends on the number of secondary stars
that died in each time step, which implies that the time scale for the
iron appearing in the ISM is controlled by the mean lifetimes of these
secondary stars.
![]() |
Figure 4: Evolution of SNIa/SNII rates for MAT, TOR, and RL techniques as labeled in the figure. The observed values for the Galaxy, given by Cappellaro et al. (1999); Cappellaro (2004); Mannucci et al. (2005), are shown with the error bars by the (magenta) full dot, the (cyan) open square, and the (black) triangle, respectively. |
| Open with DEXTER | |
Actually, this time scale does not depend only on the secondary mean
lifetimes, since there are other processes that also participate in
the conversion of a binary system into a SNIa explosion. It is
necessary to take into account the effects of the distances between
both stellar components, the orbital velocities, and other parameters
to finally obtain the time taken for the system to explode after the
moment of its formation. Tornambe (1989) performed these calculations
for several combinations of possible candidates of binary system or
SNIa scenarios (double degenerate, single degenerate, etc.), thereby
providing the supernova rate as a function of time normalized for a
binary system of 1
.
All the physical processes and
assumptions are included in their calculations, so we only need to
include the selected functions in our code and multiply them by the
number of binary systems, avoiding the need to compute the secondary
and primary initial mass functions necessary in the first method.
A similar technique was also performed more recently
by Ruiz-Lapuente et al. (2000) who provides us with a numerical table (private
communication) with the time evolution of the supernova rates for a
single stellar population, computed under updated assumptions about
different scenarios and probabilities of occurrence. We computed the
supernova rates using the three methods, thus producing three models
MAT, TOR, and RL. These different techniques mostly affect the iron
abundances, the other elemental abundances being equal for all of
them. Therefore, we will compare the three types of SN rate
calculations by using only BU yields in the analysis of the iron
abundance evolution, as well as in the calibration of the model (next
section). We will compare the three set of LIM stars yields when N is
studied, using only the RL technique. Only for the comparison of the
relative abundance [N/Fe] we will show the nine possible combinations
of models.
![]() |
Figure 5: Age-metallicity relation: a) for the BU and RL model dividing WW iron yield by 1, 1.5, 2, and 2.5. b) using MAT, TOR, and RL SNIa rates with BU yields dividing the WW iron yield by 2. Data are from authors of Table 1 as labeled. |
| Open with DEXTER | |
The main disparity among the three techniques described above resides in the different evolutions of the SN rate in time. As we see in Fig. 4, MAT is the technique that presents highest values of SNIa/SNII at any time, reaching the maximum at 2.5 Gyr. RL has a maximum between 2 and 5 Gyr, with values approximately 1/2 or 1/3 of those given by MAT. The TOR model is the only one with low values. Even if it presents a maximum before the first Gyr, this will not be seen in the results because its value is very small. From the first Gyr, SNIa/SNII has positive slope and almost reaches the observed value at the present time. Nevertheless, all of them still are within the error bar given by observations (Cappellaro et al. 1999; Cappellaro 2004; Mannucci et al. 2005). Note that this value has been reduced for the most recent determinations compared with the oldest ones.
The results for iron abundance obtained with these three methods are shown in Fig. 5, the age-metallicity Relation (AMR) and in Fig. 6, the G-Dwarf distribution, for the Solar vicinity. For this comparison we show only BU yields, keeping in mind that the set of yields will have only small effects on this relation. Nevertheless, this model uses WW yields for massive stars and these authors claim that this could produce too much iron, and advised in Timmes et al. (1995) to divide the iron ejections at least by two. In order to calculate how much that WW iron excess is, we calculated four different models for BU yields and RL technique, where the iron production of massive stars is divided by 1, 1.5, 2, and 3. Results are represented in panel a where it is clearly shown that a factor of 2 is a good compromise that we will use in panel b. In this last panel we present the age-metallicity relation for the three SNIa cases, where all of them are in reasonable agreement with data, given their wide dispersion. Although there are small differences between models, it can be seen that the iron appears later and takes a little more time to reach high values when MAT and RL techniques are used than for the TOR SNIa method, but all of them reach the Solar abundance.
Regarding the G-dwarf distribution, represented in Fig. 6, differences appear mainly between TOR and the others because it provides a narrower distribution than the others. The three models are able to reproduce the low metallicity tail without showing any G-dwarf problem.
In Fig. 7 we show the relation between iron and oxygen. As
before, in panel a the BU + RL model is presented by varying the
massive stars iron ejection. In this case the differences are clearer
than in the AMR case. We chose the model Fe/2 that we use for the
rest of the paper. In panel b we plot the model results using BU yields with the three SNIa techniques. As in the previous case, the
LIM star yields do not change the results because oxygen is ejected by
massive stars and iron is mainly produced by SNIa events. In the end,
the three models have a very similar behavior.
![]() |
Figure 6: The G-dwarf distribution in the Solar vicinity. Data are from Chang et al. (2000) (dotted line) and Jørgensen (2000) (long-dashed line) |
| Open with DEXTER | |
![]() |
Figure 7: The relation [O/Fe] vs. [Fe/H]: a) The model results for BU + RL varying WW iron ejection; b) model BU using MAT, TOR, and RL SNIa techniques and BU yields. Open (black) dots are stellar data from authors listed in Table 1, from which we represented the most recent from Israelian et al. (2004) and Akerman et al. (2004) as (red) triangles and full (blue) dots. |
| Open with DEXTER | |
![]() |
Figure 8:
Time evolution of elemental abundances in the Solar vicinity
for nitrogen, as
|
| Open with DEXTER | |
Figure 8 shows the evolution of nitrogen compared with
observations in the Solar region, that is corresponding to objects at
a radial galactocentric distance between 7.5 and 9.5 kpc. Models BU,
VG, and MA are represented by the (red) solid, the (blue)
short-dashed, and the (green) long-dashed lines, respectively. Both
VG models, following the two possible techniques for calculating the
proportion of primary nitrogen, techniques r and AGB described in
Sect. 2, yield results indistinguishable for times
larger than 1 Gyr, so we represent only the results for the first one.
In panel a MA and VG models give a higher value than BU, since at the
lowest metallicity their nitrogen yield is higher than the
corresponding one from BU (see Fig. 2). Then, once an
abundance higher than
0.004 is reached, the model BU continues
increasing smoothly until the present time, reproducing both solar and
ISM abundances. The shapes shown by the three models are similar and
all of them reproduce both the solar value and the ISM value.
The same kind of information can also be extracted from the relative abundances represented in panel b. In panel b, we show the time evolution of log(N/O). Since there is good agreement in fitting the abundance of oxygen for all models (see Gavilán et al. 2005), the differences in this plot must be due only to the nitrogen production. The disagreement between different models is important for times shorter than 1.5 Gyr, when intermediate mass and massive stars are the main contributors and the distinct primary/secondary ratio effects are evident there. Model MA shows a strong increase in the first Gyr due to the primary component, and then it flattens. Model BU out a higher ratio of primary nitrogen than MA for all Z except for the lowest one, which produces a smoother evolution, and, finally, N remains below MA. The resulting final N/O ratios are similar in both models and agree with observations. The mostly primary behavior of the model VG, mostly when all AGB nitrogen is considered as such, at the lowest Z, implies a very strong increase in the abundance at the earliest times. After that, both methods give a smooth slope, reaching an absolute value around -0.5 dex that is higher than the observed Solar abundance.
The good behavior of BU yields is also evident in panel c where log(N/C) is shown. The MA model presents a maximum at the first Gyr, the decrease is due to the higher amount of carbon ejected in that model (see Paper I) so the absolute value at the present time is only marginally reached. The shape of the VG model is similar to the BU one but with a nitrogen excess. All models seem to fit the solar and ISM data, but the model BU is the best one for reproducing the stellar data, and, more importantly, for fitting all of the data simultaneously.
We now explore the radial distributions of nitrogen over the galactic disc, as shown in Fig. 9. The data correspond to H II regions from references as labeled in the figure and to stars from references in Table 1.
The radial distribution is reproduced more or less within the errors by all models. Actually, the shape of the radial distribution is fitted well in all cases, independent of the absolute values, since this is an effect of the ratio infall/SFR along the galactocentric radius, produced by the scenario of our MWG model, and therefore is rather independent of the yields used. However, the observed slope of the radial distribution at the two ends of the disc, in the center and in the outer regions, is a matter of discussion. Thus, Vílchez & Esteban (1996) claim that the gradients are not as steep in these regions as in the rest of the galactic disc. The same occurs in the inner disc where the most recent data from Smartt et al. (2001) show that the distribution flattens. Our models have been tuned to fit these two sets of data, causing the resulting overall gradient to be smaller than that obtained by other authors. As can be seen in Fig. 9, MA and VG models produce a flatter gradient than has been observed.
In Figs. 9b and 9c, the radial distributions log(N/O) and log(N/C) are plotted, as they are considered important for the study of different yields. In panel b the radial distribution of log(N/O) showed by data presents a clear slope, although there is some data that shows a flatter distribution in the outer regions. A steep radial distribution for N/O is expected because oxygen is produced by massive stars. If nitrogen were ejected by massive stars, its secondary character would cause it to enter the ISM after the oxygen. Instead, if it were ejected by intermediate stars, the time needed for their evolution would be larger. Thus, in both cases, the nitrogen appears in the ISM after the oxygen does.
Once again, the large dispersion of the data prevents a clear selection of the best model, however the BU model seems most adequate for reproducing the H II region data from Vílchez & Esteban (1996) and Fich & Silkey (1991). The MA model shows a flatter radial gradient than the indicated by observations, with higher absolute values compared to the mean values of data, mostly in the outer disc, and VG models, as before, show higher values than data. The same arguments are also valid when panel c is analyzed. In this case a slightly negative gradient is shown for log(N/C). The small amount of data and the large dispersion prevent the selection of any model as better than the others, although it seems clear that MA remains below most of them as corresponds to the large production of C and that VG lies on the upper side of the data. It is apparent that the BU model shows a behavior better than VG and MA compared to the data. Once again we stress the importance of using adequate yields to reproduce simultaneously the whole set of data at the same time. The BU yields seem to produce the adequate quantity of N, C, and O, since the model appears in the zone occupied by data in the three panels simultaneously.
![]() |
Figure 9:
Radial distributions of nitrogen abundances, a) as
|
| Open with DEXTER | |
It is necessary to remember that open dots represent stellar abundances. We tried to select only those corresponding to young stars, but we do not know the age of the complete set of stars with available data. In this case we preferred to use the available abundances; thus, it is possible that some data does not correspond to stars young.
As the iron evolution may have also an influence over the model results, we represented the relation between nitrogen and iron, Fig. 10, with a different panel, a, c, and e, for each set of yields, MA, BU, and VG, respectively. The three possible methods of computing the SNIa, RL, TOR, and MAT are shown in each panel. The first thing we observe is that the effects of the different SNIa techniques are almost indistinguishable. Therefore, the main features of each model at those metallicities are due to yields. In other words, we may analyze the behavior of the nitrogen that corresponds to each yield set disregarding the accuracy in the SNIa calculations.
Table 1: References for CNO stellar abundances used for the comparison with model results.
All results agree in the sense that the first nitrogen to be ejected
is secondary, as due to the massive stars, so the initial slope is
positive and large - although this behavior is not shown in the figure
because it occurs when iron abundances are lower than -5 dex - but
they differ when the slope begins to change. When the N ejected by LIM
stars appear, there is a strong increase due to the change from a
secondary to a primary behavior. In MA yields, LIM stars eject less
primary nitrogen and later, since it is ejected as secondary for stars
up to 5
.
Then the main contributors to primary N are the
stars with masses between
and
.
For this
reason the slope does not change until it reaches
,
the moment at which these stars begin to die. When BU yields are
used, the trend changes earlier in the evolution due to the
contribution of the primary nitrogen ejected by stars in the range
.
As their lives are so brief, the ejection occurs at
.
From then, the slope is close to zero, the
signature of primary nitrogen. The case of VG behaves like BU.
The data dispersion is so great that all the models lie in the data
area, regardless of their large discrepancies, although the region of
the metal-rich objects (
)
is particularly well fitted
in panel c by Model BU. It is necessary to use the very low
metallicity data to clarify which model works better. In fact, the
most recent observations from Israelian et al. (2004) and Spite et al. (2005) show a
slope flatter than before, even with a negative slope, which is more
consistent with our model BU than with the model obtained with MA yields. This last model might be considered acceptable when the
available low-metallicity data were only those from Carbon et al. (1987); but
when using the new determinations of N abundances for this kind of
object, the conclusion is that BU reproduces the generic trend of data
better than the other models.
It is also necessary to take into account that most of the metal-poor objects do not belong to the disc but to the halo. In this way, we represent the halo model results for the zone located over the disc at a galactocentric distance equal to 8 Kpc, the right panels b, d, and f of Fig. 10. We see that the trend shown by the recent observations from Israelian et al. (2004) and Spite et al. (2005) is more compatible with BU and VG than MA.
Finally, we show in Fig. 11 the classical and well-known graph
of the relative abundance of N vs. O as
vs.
.
We show the results of the computed models for the
Solar neighborhood. Model BU reproduces the expected behavior of N when all data are taken into account. Not only is the level of N adequate but the shape is also smoother than the one shown by the
other two models. The observed trend at low metallicity can be
reproduced well with BU yields because they have the appropriate
primary to secondary ratio, and the adequate integrated nitrogen
yields. The MA yields also have a primary nitrogen component, but the
integrated nitrogen yield has a metallicity dependence in the opposite
way as BU for the lowest Z, so the trend shown by the data can not be
reproduced. Both VG models have the right shape and are almost the
same for
.
The problem is that the integrated
yields are high. It would be necessary to change the input parameters,
such as the infall rate or the efficiencies to form stars, in order to
fit the solar abundances. In that case, probably, other data will not
be reproduced. Only the BU model shows the correct shape and adequate
absolute abundances simultaneously. For comparison purposes, we have
also shown the resulting model using VG yields but assuming that the
Nitrogen is completely secondary.
If the smooth behavior shown by oxygen abundances lower than 8 dex
were caused by massive stars, the data dispersion would be smaller
than observed. A problem arises when the metal-poor objects
(Israelian et al. 2004; Spite et al. 2005) are included in the figure, as can be seen in
Fig. 11. Some values follow the described trend over the flat
line, but some lower abundances exist that are around
.
This behavior is not compatible with a primary component
proceeding only from massive stars.
We show the evolution given by the BU model in Fig. 12 for
four different radial regions of the Galaxy: two inner (
2 and 4 kpc) more evolved regions, the solar vicinity (
8 kpc), and an
outer one (
18 kpc) where the evolution takes place slowly. In
panel a we show the results for the halo zones and in panel b for
the disk regions. In both panels we have included the stellar data for
the MWG. The numbers on the graph indicate the evolutionary time, in
million years, that corresponds to that points of the line. This is
necessary because the
value is not the same for each
radius at the same value of time.
The halo regions have similar evolutions independent of their distance
to the center of the Galaxy. All of them reproduce the recent data
from Israelian et al. (2004) and Spite et al. (2005), obtained for
well, while the disk regions fit the stellar data of the disk
obtained for
.
Their evolutionary tracks, however,
are very different, corresponding to their distinct input parameters
(infall rates, initial gas masses, efficiencies to form stars,etc.)
which are translated into very different star-formation
histories. Thus, the dispersion of the MWG data can be explained on
the basis of a primary production of nitrogen from LIM stars, (higher
for the lowest metallicities) and with different star formation
efficiencies in the different regions.
We represent the same results for the disk regions in
Fig. 13 compared with data referring to Galactic HII regions
taken from the same authors as in Fig. 11, but without limiting
the possible galactocentric distance. Other galaxies data
(Garnett et al. 1995; Izotov & Thuan 1999; van Zee et al. 1998a; Garnett et al. 1999) are also shown. The large open
triangle is the recent estimate obtained from Izotov et al. (2005) for the
galaxy with the lowest metallicity known. We have also added the DLA objects data from Pettini et al. (2002); Prochaska et al. (2002); Centurión et al. (2003) as solid points. The disk
regions evolve in good agreement with all of them, showing a steeper
evolution for the inner regions, while the outer one shows a very flat
evolution with a high and constant value
dex,
similar to the behavior of dwarf galaxies. These results suggest that
the observed dispersion in this kind of plot, when other galaxies data
(such as dwarf or DLA galaxies) are included, might be reproduced if
different star formation histories have occurred in different
galaxies. This argument has already been invoked by other authors, in
particular by Henry et al. (2000) and Prantzos (2003). It was even demonstrated
by Pilyugin et al. (2003), who analyzed data for different radial regions in
spiral galaxies and showed the changes of the evolutionary track in
the plane N/O vs. O/H for each one of them. It is evident that
this kind of behavior may be represented by our models and that the
new yields may reproduce the whole set of data better than other
yields. In fact, these yields have already been used in a grid of
chemical evolution models for a large number of theoretical galaxies
(Mollá & Díaz 2005). A discussion about the resulting N/O abundances and its
possible dispersion for different objects may be found in
Mollá et al. (2006).
![]() |
Figure 10: The relative abundances of [N/Fe] vs. the iron abundance [Fe/H] for the Solar region. The panels on the left show the disc evolution and the panels on the right show the halo evolution. In each panel, the evolution obtained with three different methods to compute the SN-Ia rates are shown as labeled in panel a). Data are taken from the references listed in Table 1 marking the most recent ones from Israelian et al. (2004); Ecuvillon et al. (2004) and Spite et al. (2005) separately in panel b). |
| Open with DEXTER | |
This figure and the behavior of C/O vs. O/H, as shown in Paper I, are
the main clues to the present yields are the most adequate for
representung the evolution of galaxies. The production of carbon by
LIM stars is sufficient for obtaining an increase in C/O without the
need to invoke mass loss by massive star winds, and the N/O behavior
may be reproduced with different star formation efficiencies due to
the adequate level of the primary component produced by LIM stars and
to the right dependence of this component with Z.
![]() |
Figure 11:
The relative abundances of log (N/O) vs. the Oxygen
abundance as
|
| Open with DEXTER | |
![]() |
Figure 12:
The relative abundances of log (N/O) vs. the Oxygen
abundance as |
| Open with DEXTER | |
![]() |
Figure 13:
The relative abundances of log (N/O) vs. the Oxygen
abundance as |
| Open with DEXTER | |
Acknowledgements
This work was partially supported by the Spanish PNAYA project AYA2004-8260-C03-03. We acknowledge Pilar Ruiz-Lapuente for her personal contribution in the SNIa rates data. We also thank José Manuel Vílchez for his valuable suggestions and the referees, Leonid S. Pilyugin and Angeles I. Díaz, for their comments that have greatly improved this paper.