All Figures

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=7.5cm,clip]{ms09924_fig1.ps}\end{figure}$ Figure 1: Comparison between our measured EWs and values in the literature. Circles: Aller & Jugaku (1958), but excluding uncertain values, triangles: Gies & Lambert (1992), squares: Kilian & Nissen (1989). The 1:1 relationship is shown as a dashed line, while the two dotted lines indicate a discrepancy reaching 25%.
Open with DEXTER

In the text

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=8.4cm,clip]{ms09924_fig2.ps}\end{figure}$ Figure 2: Variations of the LTE ( open symbols) and NLTE ( filled symbols) abundances, as a function of the reduced EWs. The Ne I and Ne II lines are denoted by circles and squares, respectively (in the online version of this journal, these are plotted in blue and red, respectively). The dotted and dashed-dotted lines indicate the solar Ne abundances of GS98 and AGS05, respectively. Each panel corresponds to a different star (ordered from top to bottom by increasing $T_{\rm eff}$ ). The adopted physical parameters and mean NLTE corrections for the Ne I and Ne II lines, $\Delta \epsilon=\log(\epsilon)_{\rm NLTE}-\log(\epsilon)_{\rm LTE}$ (in dex), are given on the right-hand side of the panels.
Open with DEXTER

In the text

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=14cm,clip]{ms09924_fig3.ps}\end{figure}$ Figure 3: Abundance data as a function of the effective temperature for the default ( left panels) and the revised ( right panels) temperature scale (see Sect. 4). From top to bottom: variation of the Ne I abundances, the Ne II abundances, the difference between the abundances yielded by the Ne I and Ne II lines, and the mean neon abundance using lines of both ions. The unweighted mean data value is given in each panel. The long-dashed line indicates the neon abundance needed to reconcile the solar interior models and the results of helioseismology (8.29 $\pm$ 0.05 dex; Bahcall et al. 2005), while the dotted and dashed-dotted lines show the standard (8.08 $\pm$ 0.06 dex; GS98) and the new (7.84 $\pm$ 0.06 dex; AGS05) solar Ne abundances, respectively. The horizontal, shaded strips show the corresponding uncertainties. In the online version of this journal, these are plotted in green, red and blue, respectively.
Open with DEXTER

In the text

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=8.8cm,clip]{ms09924_fig4.ps}\end{figure}$ Figure 4: Neon abundances from different indicators recently reported in the literature. The stellar coronal sources are roughly ordered as a function of decreasing activity from top to bottom. The long-dashed line indicates the Ne abundance needed to reconcile the solar interior models and the results of helioseismology (8.29 $\pm$ 0.05 dex, Bahcall et al. 2005), while the dotted and dashed-dotted lines show the standard (8.08 $\pm$ 0.06 dex, GS98) and the new (7.84 $\pm$ 0.06 dex, AGS05) solar Ne abundances, respectively. The vertical, shaded strips show the corresponding uncertainties. In the online version of this journal, these are plotted in green, red and blue, respectively. References: (1) this paper; (2) Cunha et al. (2006); (3) Hempel & Holweger (2003); (4) Dworetsky & Budaj (2000); (5) Sigut (1999); (6) Kilian (1994), but corrected by -0.05 dex (see text); (7) Drake & Testa (2005); (8) García-Alvarez et al. (2008); (9) Sanz-Forcada et al. (2006); (10) Nordon & Behar (2007); (11) Nordon & Behar (2008); (12) Wargelin et al. (2008); (13) Huenemoerder et al. (2006); (14) Ball et al. (2005); (15) Ayres et al. (2007); (16) García-Alvarez et al. (2006); (17) Ness & Jordan (2008); (18) Wood & Linsky (2006); (19) Liefke & Schmitt (2006); (20) Landi et al. (2007); (21) Schmelz et al. (2005) (upper limit); (22) Young (2005); (23) Bochsler (2007); (24) Raassen et al. (2008); (25) Esteban et al. (2004). In the case of (8) and (16), we used the abundances derived from differential emission measure (DEM) reconstruction.
Open with DEXTER

In the text

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=17cm,clip]{ms09924_figA1.ps}\end{figure}$ Figure A.1: Comparison for $\iota$ CMa between the observed (blue dots) and the synthetic profiles (red line) computed for the abundance given by the corresponding spectral line (value given in every panel, along with the measured EW; see Table B.1). The synthetic spectra were convolved with a rotational broadening function with $v \sin i = 32$ km s^-1 (Morel et al. 2008). The effect of varying the abundance by $\pm$ 0.1 dex is shown for Ne I $\lambda$ 6402. The spectral range in each panel is 4 Å.
Open with DEXTER

In the text

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=17cm,clip]{ms09924_figA2.ps}\end{figure}$ Figure A.2: Same as Fig. A.1, but for $\gamma$ Peg. The synthetic spectra were convolved with a rotational broadening function with $v \sin i = 10$ km s^-1 (Morel et al. 2008).
Open with DEXTER

In the text

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=17cm,clip]{ms09924_figA3.ps}\end{figure}$ Figure A.3: Same as Fig. A.1, but for $\xi ^1$ CMa. The synthetic spectra were convolved with a rotational broadening function with $v \sin i = 10$ km s^-1 (Morel et al. 2008). Ne II $\lambda$ 4392 has been omitted in this figure, as it falls in the wing of He I $\lambda$ 4387.9 (which is not included in the model calculations).
Open with DEXTER

In the text

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=12cm,clip]{ms09924_figA4.ps}\end{figure}$ Figure A.4: Same as Fig. A.1, but for $\tau$ Sco. The synthetic spectra were convolved with a rotational broadening function with $v \sin i = 8$ km s^-1 (Hubrig et al. 2008). The effect of varying the abundance by $\pm$ 0.1 dex is shown for Ne II $\lambda$ 4220. Ne II $\lambda$ 4392 has been omitted in this figure, as it falls in the wing of He I $\lambda$ 4387.9 (which is not included in the model calculations).
Open with DEXTER

In the text

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=7.5cm,clip]{ms09924_fig1.ps}\end{figure}$	Figure 1: Comparison between our measured EWs and values in the literature. Circles: Aller & Jugaku (1958), but excluding uncertain values, triangles: Gies & Lambert (1992), squares: Kilian & Nissen (1989). The 1:1 relationship is shown as a dashed line, while the two dotted lines indicate a discrepancy reaching 25%.
Open with DEXTER

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=17cm,clip]{ms09924_figA2.ps}\end{figure}$	Figure A.2: Same as Fig. A.1, but for $\gamma$ Peg. The synthetic spectra were convolved with a rotational broadening function with $v \sin i = 10$ km s^-1 (Morel et al. 2008).
Open with DEXTER

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=17cm,clip]{ms09924_figA3.ps}\end{figure}$	Figure A.3: Same as Fig. A.1, but for $\xi ^1$ CMa. The synthetic spectra were convolved with a rotational broadening function with $v \sin i = 10$ km s^-1 (Morel et al. 2008). Ne II $\lambda$ 4392 has been omitted in this figure, as it falls in the wing of He I $\lambda$ 4387.9 (which is not included in the model calculations).
Open with DEXTER