Issue |
A&A
Volume 515, June 2010
|
|
---|---|---|
Article Number | A95 | |
Number of page(s) | 16 | |
Section | Interstellar and circumstellar matter | |
DOI | https://doi.org/10.1051/0004-6361/200913481 | |
Published online | 15 June 2010 |
Warm dusty discs: exploring the A star
24
m
debris population
R. Smith1 - M. C. Wyatt2
1 - Astrophysics Group, Keele University, Staffordshire, ST5 5BG, UK
2 - Institute of Astronomy, University of Cambridge, Madingley Road,
CB3 0AH Cambridge, UK
Received 15 October 2009 / Accepted 22 March 2010
Abstract
Aims. Studies of the debris disc phenomenon have
shown that most systems are analogous to the Edgeworth-Kuiper belt
(EKB). In this study we aim to determine how many of the IRAS
25 m
excesses towards A stars, which may be indicative of asteroid belt
analogues, are real, and investigate where the dust must lie and so
build up a picture of what these systems are like.
Methods. We observe using ground-based mid-infrared
imaging with TIMMI2, VISIR, Michelle and TReCS a sample of A and B-type
main sequence stars previously reported as having mid-infrared excess.
We combine modelling of the emission spectrum from multi-wavelength
photometry with a modelling technique designed to constrain the radial
extent of emission in mid-infrared imaging to constrain the possible
location of the debris.
Results. We independently confirm the presence of
warm dust around three of the candidates: HD 3003, HD 80950 and Tel.
For the binary HD3003 a stability analysis indicates the dust is either
circumstellar and lying at
4 AU
with the binary orbiting at >14 AU, or the dust lies in
an unstable location; there is tentative evidence for temporal
evolution of its excess emission on a
20 year timescale. For 7 of the targets
we present quantitative limits on the location of dust around the star
based on the unresolved imaging. We demonstrate that the disc around
HD71155 must have multiple spatially distinct components at 2 and
60 AU. We model the limits of current instrumentation to
resolve debris disc emission and show that most of the known A star
debris discs which could be readily resolved at 18
m on
8 m instruments have been resolved, but identify several that
could be resolved with deep (>8 h total) integrations
(such as HD19356, HD139006 and HD102647).
Conclusions. Limits from unresolved imaging can help
distinguish between competing models of the disc emission, but resolved
imaging is key to an unambiguous determination of the disc location.
Modelling of the detection limits for extended emission can be useful
for targeting future observational campaigns towards sources most
likely to be resolved. MIRI on the JWST will be able to resolve the
majority of the known A star debris disc population. METIS on the E-ELT
will provide the opportunity to explore the hot disc population more
thoroughly by detecting extended emission down to where calibration
accuracy limits disc detection through photometry alone, reaching
levels below 1 zodi for stars within 10 pc.
Key words: circumstellar matter - techniques: high angular resolution - infrared: stars
1 Introduction
Analysis of the IRAS database over the last 20 years
has shown that
over 300 main sequence stars have dust discs around
them. This material is thought to be the debris left over at the end
of the planet formation process (e.g. Mannings
& Barlow 1998). The spectral energy
distribution (SED) of this excess in the best studied cases
(e.g., Vega,
Pictoris, Fomalhaut,
Eridani)
peaks longward of 60
m
implying that this dust is cool (<80 K), and so
resides in Edgeworth-Kuiper belt (EKB)-like regions in the systems. The
EKB-like location and analogy is confirmed in the majority of cases
where
these discs have been resolved (in thermal emission, e.g. Holland
et al. 1998; Greaves et al. 2005; in
scattered light imaging, e.g.
Schneider
et al. 2009,2006; Kalas et al. 2007), since
the dust is shown to lie >40 AU from the stars, and its
short lifetime means that it must be continually replenished by
the collisional destruction of km-sized planetesimals
(Wyatt & Dent 2002).
The inner 40 AU radius hole is thus thought to arise from
clearing by an unseen planetary system, the existence of which is
supported by the presence of clumps and asymmetries seen in the
structure of the dust rings (e.g. Augereau et al. 2001; Wyatt
et al. 1999; Greaves et al. 1998).
On closer examination the inner regions of known cool debris
disc
systems are much more complex than simply ``dust-free inner holes''.
Pictoris has (a relatively small amount of) resolved dust in this inner
region (Boccaletti
et al. 2009; Lagage & Pantin 1994; Telesco
et al. 2005), thought to be there because this is
a young (12 Myr, Zuckerman
et al. 2001) transitional system in which
these regions have yet to be fully cleared by planet formation
processes. Absil et al. (2006)
have recently presented
interferometric data showing Vega (thought to be around
380-500 Myr old,
Peterson et al. 2006)
is likely to possess extended dust
emission within 8 AU, with evidence for a similar warm dust
propulation around Fomalhaut (Absil
et al. 2009), and di
Folco et al. (2007) have also recently
presented evidence for hot dust around the 10 Gyr old
Ceti.
Multiple-component discs mirror our own Solar System, with our debris
disc concentrated in the asteroid belt and EKB. It
is possible that more sources with known cold discs have dust in the
inner system, but the difficulty of separating hot dust emission from
the stellar photosphere often limits detection. Chen
et al. (2009) presented a sample of
11 debris systems believed to have
multiple dust belts, although confirmation of the multiple components
via resolved imaging is required for several of these stars.
The presence of excess in the mid-infrared range is of
particular
interest. The temperature of dust emitting at 24 m suggests
that
it should lie close to the star, in regions of a few to a few tens of
AU. These are regions in which we might expect planets to reside (see
above), and so the origin of the emission and possible links with any
cold debris in the system must be explored. Surveys suggest that
24
m
excess may be common, with around half of main sequence stars
that exhibit excess mid-infrared emission in the IRAS database
(Mannings & Barlow 1998)
having an excess at 25
m only (Zuckerman
2001).
However, excesses taken from the IRAS database cannot be used at face
value. Song et al. (2002),
who searched the IRAS database for excess
emission towards M-type stars, noted that when searching a large number
of stars for excesses close to the detection threshold, a
number of false positives must be expected due to noise. There have
also been a few instances in which the IRAS excess has been shown to be
attributed to background objects that fall within the relatively
large IRAS beams (>30''; such objects range from highly reddened
carbon stars or Class II YSO's Lisse
et al. 2002, to distant galaxies
Sheret et al. 2004).
Another possible source of mid-infrared excess
emission is reflection nebulosity (Kalas
et al. 2002). Indeed it is now
routine for papers discussing the excess sources found by IRAS to
address the possibility that some of these are bogus debris discs
(Moór
et al. 2006; Rhee et al. 2007).
Recent statistical studies using Spitzer data have revealed a
large
sample of A stars with excess emission at 24 and/or 70 m
(Su et al.
2006; Rieke
et al. 2005). Spitzer observations benefit from
smaller beamsizes
and higher resolution compared to IRAS, improving the reliability of
excess
measurements. The 24 and 70
m excesses around A stars have a
wide variation in levels amongst systems of similar ages, but overall
there is a decrease in the upper envelope of excess inversely
proportional to
time (Su
et al. 2006; Rieke et al. 2005). These
features can be interpreted in terms of
a steady-state evolution of belt-like planetesimal discs in a
collisional cascade, where the fall-off with time is due to the
collisional grinding away of material and the variation in excess
levels between systems of similar ages can be reproduced by variations
in initial disc mass and planetesimal belt radii (Wyatt et al. 2007b).
Although recent work by Currie
et al. (2008) has shown that excess emission at
24
m
around A stars increases from 5-10 Myr and peaks around
10-15 Myr before declining with age, which is not predicted by
the
steady-state model, this can be explained by the delayed formation of
Pluto-sized bodies in the disc (Kenyon
& Bromley 2004a). It is only when
Pluto-sized bodies are formed that the orbits of planetesimals are
stirred to high relative velocities and the steady-state collisional
cascade can begin.
However this model does not account for the possibility of
multiple
belts (see above). There have also been other models proposed to
explain the variance in excess levels between similarly aged stars and
the variety in the SED slopes of those stars with excess at both 24
and 70 m
in Rieke et al. (2005),
which can be interpreted as evidence
for stochastic evolution (Rhee
et al. 2007). A collision similar to the
Earth-Moon forming massive collision has been proposed as the
explanation for the large excess and spectral features observed around
HD172555 (Lisse et al. 2009).
Similarly short-lived dust production origins have
been proposed for dust found close to the central star around several
Sun-like stars. For these systems a steady-state collisional cascade
production from a spatially coincident planetesimal belt cannot
explain the levels of excess (Wyatt et al. 2007a; Löhne et al.
2008). For debris discs
with a cold dust population in addition to hot dust emitting at
24
m
the outer planetesimal belt could be feeding the hot dust
population (as has been proposed for
Corvi, Wyatt
et al. 2007a; Smith et al. 2009b,2008).
However, the mechanism that might be
transporting the dust from cold outer regions to the hot inner
locations observed at 24
m is as yet unclear (possibilities
include dynamical scattering by a migrating planet, see
e.g. Gomes
et al. 2005; Booth et al. 2009).
To tackle these issues regarding the origin of the 24 m dust
emission, and in particular explore what its presence may reveal
about planet formation and as yet undetected planetary populations,
this paper looks at the constraints on the true dust distribution
around a sample of A stars with 24
m excess.
This can be assessed indirectly from SED fitting to multi-wavelength
infrared photometry, but uncertainties arising from degeneracies
in dust model fitting and the possibility of multiple temperatures of
dust mean that determining radial location from SED fitting alone is
challenging (see discussions of individual sources in
Sect. 4). Resolved imaging provides more direct constraints on
the dust
location.
This paper is structured as follows; in Sect. 2 the sample selection is described. In Sect. 3 we describe the various observational and analysis techniques employed for the observations, with the results and discussion of individual sources presented in Sect. 4. An extension modelling technique is used to explore which of the A star discs in the literature may be fruitful subjects of future imaging in Sect. 5. The implications of these and the observational results are discussed in Sect. 6. Conclusions are in Sect. 7.
2 The sample
The sample consists of A and B stars with IRAS published
detections
of excess emission at 12 and/or 25 m
.
A first-cut was applied to the list of all published detections to
produce a final sample of 11 candidates (Table 1). This
first-cut consisted of the analysis outlined below to determine if the
excess identified by IRAS was likely to be real.
For each star J, H,
and K band fluxes were obtained from 2MASS
(Skrutskie et al. 2006)
and V and B magnitudes from
Tycho2
(Høg et al. 2000). The
photospheric emission was then determined by adopting a Kurucz model (Kurucz 1979) for the
appropriate spectral type (as listed in the Michigan Spectral
Catalogues or SIMBAD) scaled to the K band
flux. IRAS fluxes were
extracted using SCANPI (the Scan Processing and Integration tool).
The expected stellar flux was multiplied by the colour-correction
factor (at the levels described in the IRAS Explanatory
Supplement
) before subtraction
from the IRAS flux to determine the excess. The proximity
of the IRAS sources to the stars was also checked given the quoted
uncertainty error ellipse, since some surveys allowed excess sources
to be up to 60
offset and have since been shown to not be related
(Sylvester & Mannings 2000).
Table 1: The sample.
3 Observations and data reduction
3.1 Observations
Observations were performed using: TIMMI2 on the ESO 3.6m telescope at
La Silla (proposals 71.C-0312, 72.C-0041 and 74.C-0070); VISIR on the
ESO VLT (proposal 076.C-0305); and Michelle and TReCS on the twin
telescopes of Gemini (GN-2005B-Q-15 and GS-2005B-Q-67). All
observations used chop-nod pattern to remove sky and telescope
emission. A chop of 10
in the North-South
direction with a perpendicular 10
nod was used for the ESO
observations. The Gemini observations used a 15
chop and
parallel nod (also of 15
)
at 30
East of
North. Observations of
Gem were performed with a chop at 268
to ensure the image of
the binary companion would fall on the array.
Table 2: The observations.
This chop-nod pattern means that a simple co-addition of the data produces an image with two positive and two negative images of the source for the ESO observations, and one positive and two negative images at half the intensity level for the Gemini observations. A dark current offset is determined from median values for each row and column of the image (excluding pixels on which the source image fell) and subtracted from the final frame. Pixels showing high levels of variation throughout the observation (10 times the average) were masked off. Pixels showing very high or low gain (determined by comparing average sky emission detected across the image to that detected in each individual pixel detection) were also masked. In total an average of around 7% of pixels were removed in the TIMMI2 observations, and around 4% of pixels in the MICHELLE, TReCS and VISIR observations. Calibration observations of standard stars within a few degrees of the science object were taken immediately before and after science observations. The standards were chosen from the list of K and M giants identified by Cohen et al. (1999). In addition to photometric calibration, these standards were used to characterise the PSF and used for comparison with the science sources to detect any extension (see Sect. 3.3).
![]() |
Figure 1: The observational results for sources with excess emission photometrically confirmed by our observations. Top: the results for HD 3003. The SED ( left) includes a fit to the excess emission at a temperature of 265 K (dotted line). The dashed lines indicate the photospheres of the two A star components, with the solid line being the sum of their emission. Bottom: the results for HD 80950. The excess emission is fit with a temperature of 180 K (dotted line - solid line shows photospheric emission). For both targets the limits on disc extension are shown in the right-hand plots, with the shaded region indicating the area the disc must lie in to have avoided being resolved. The difference between the limits on disc extension arise from the differences in the PSF model for the different observations. Specifically, the standard star observations associated with HD80950 showed large changes in the wings of the PSF over the course of the observations, giving rise to large uncertainties in the detection of excess emission extended over a broad spatial region. Thus the limits on broad disc structures (dashed lines) with small central radius are poorer for HD80950 than for HD3003. The disc flux marked on these plots comes directly from the VISIR photometry. The radial location marked arises from assuming the emitting material is blackbody-like. These results are discussed in detail in Sect. 4.1. |
Open with DEXTER |
![]() |
Figure 2:
Top left: the SED of HD 71155 with a single
blackbody fit to the excess emission at a temperature of 120 K
(symbols >5 |
Open with DEXTER |
![]() |
Figure 3:
The observations of |
Open with DEXTER |
3.2 Photometry and background/companion objects
The multiple images resulting from the chop-nod pattern were
co-added to get a final image by first determining the centroid of each
of the individual images. Photometry was then performed using a
1
radius aperture for the TIMMI2 images and a 0
5
radius aperture for the VISIR and MICHELLE images. These sizes were
chosen to just exceed the full-width at half-maximum (FWHM)
found for
each instrument (average FWHM: 0
80
0
12
in the N band, and 1
34
0
10
at Q for TIMMI2; 0
465
0
161
at N on VISIR, and in the Q
band 0
597
0
166;
for Michelle 0
557
0
107
in N and 0
579
0
101
in Q; and for
the N band observations with TReCS 0
475
0
054).
Note
that the filters used in these observations were narrow band and so no
colour-correction was applied. Residual statistical image noise
was calculated using an annulus centred on the star with inner radius
matching the outer radius of the aperture used for the photometry, and
outer radius of twice the inner radius (so 2
for TIMMI2 and
1
for VISIR and MICHELLE). Typical levels for statistical
noise at the 1
level in a half hour observation were
44 mJy total in the 1
0
radius aperture of TIMMI2, 4 mJy and
12 mJy for the 0
5
aperture of VISIR in N and Q respectively,
6mJy in the 0
5
aperture of MICHELLE and 3 mJy in the 0
5
aperture of TReCS. Calibration uncertainty was determined from
variation in standard star photometry, and was added in quadrature to
statistical uncertainty to give the total error on the photometry as
listed in Table 2.
![]() |
Figure 4:
The results of analysis of the observations
of HD 75416 ( top) and HD 141795 ( bottom).
Left: the SEDs with symbols at
>5 |
Open with DEXTER |
Smaller apertures were used to search for background sources and to
place limits on undetected sources. The aperture radius was determined
through examination of the standard star images. Circular apertures of
increasing radius were centered on the standard star images and the
radius giving the highest signal-to-noise (statistical noise only, as
determined in the annuli listed above) was recorded. For each
instrument and observing wavelength the median optimal radius for
maximising signal-to-noise on the standard stars was chosen to optimise
point source detection. The apertures
had radii of: 0
8
for TIMMI2 observations; 0
4
for MICHELLE
and for TReCS; and 0
32
and 0
35
for the N and Q filters
for
VISIR. Apertures were systematically centred on each pixel of each
array to search for >3
detections; where none were found the
limits on any background object were based on the 3
uncertainty
in the aperture plus calibration uncertainty. For the
non-photometric nights, limits were based on calibration to the IRAS
flux of the object. The upper limits
to background sources are listed in Table 2. These
have been translated into a limit on the spectral type of any
companion source. These spectral limits assume any companion is a
main-sequence star at the same distance as the source, and are given
as the hottest star that does not exceed the point source limits found
in the imaging.
3.3 Extension testing and limits on disc size
Evidence for extended emission was checked for all science
targets. The source's surface brightness profile was determined by
calculating
the average surface brightness in a series of annuli centred on the
source of 2 pixel thickness by increasing inner radius from 0 to
3
,
and this was compared to profiles of the standard targets.
Finally the images of the point-like standard stars scaled to the peak
of the science images were subtracted from the science images and the
residuals checked for consistency with noise levels measured on the
pre-subtraction image. A range of regions optimised for different disc
geometries were tested for evidence of residual flux indicating
spatially extended emission. These optimal regions were determined from
extensive modelling work and are outlined in detail in Sect. 4
of Smith et al. (2008).
To test the limits we can place on disc extension with
unresolved
images, we performed the same PSF subtraction and residuals testing on
models of stars + discs. The stellar component was modelled as a
point source with flux set as predicted for each star in the
appropriate filter (see Table 2). Discs with
different radii, width and inclination to the line of sight and with
different levels of flux were added to the point source. The whole
model was convolved with the PSF as modelled by standard star images
to create a range of model images. Different standard star images
were used to model the effects of PSF variation. This process is
described in detail in Smith
et al. (2008). The disc geometries considered are
simple ring-like discs with uniform brightness, with central
radius r and width dr.
The limits shown in Figs. 1-4 are for disc
widths dr = 0.2r (so a disc
extending from r-0.1r to r+0.1r
in radius) and dr=2r (a disc
from the central star to 2r). The central
disc radius was varied from 0 to 1
5
for the observations with VISIR and Gemini, and up to 4
for TIMMI2 observations. The flux of the disc was scaled from 0 to 100%
of the total flux of the source in the observed filter. Each model
image was subjected to the same testing procedures as the science image
itself, testing regions of the point-source subtracted image that had
been optimised for the detection of extension for the disc parameters
used as input. These optimised regions were based on modelling work
described in Smith et al.
(2008). Regions above the lines for different disc geometries
in Figs. 1-4 represent
disc models that were detected as extended objects (emission
detected in optimal testing regions) at a level of at least 3
(noise
included pixel-pixel background noise and noise from PSF
uncertainty as detailed in Smith
et al. 2008). Regions below the
lines (shaded area) represent disc models that were not detected. The
resulting limits on
detecting extended emission are dependent on PSF stability for discs
at small radii, and on the sensitivity of the observation for discs at
larger radii (see Figs. 2
and 3
of Smith et al. 2008).
Table 3: The results.
As we do
not resolve any extended emission in the observations presented in
this paper, these limits are compared with the predicted radial
location of the disc. The excess emission SED is fitted with a
single-temperature blackbody which is converted to a radial offset
assuming blackbody-like grains. If the grains which dominate the
emission are small they will be inefficient radiators, hotter than
blackbody grains at a fixed radial location. Thus the predicted
radial location will be an underestimate of the disc offset if small
grains dominate the emission (as has been seen in scattered light and
thermal imaging of resolved discs, see Sect. 5). Schneider et al. (2006)
showed that for the HD181327 system its disc was imaged at a radius
corresponding to 3 times that expected from a blackbody fit to
the emission spectrum, a fact attributed to the emission from this disc
being dominated by small inefficiently emitting but efficiently
absorbing grains. Other resolved discs have been shown to have radii
that can differ from the blackbody fit by up to a factor of 3
(seeTable 4).
As the grain properties of the discs are unknown, in the results
section the extension limits are compared to the radius suggested by
assuming blackbody grains and up to 3
the blackbody radius. In all cases the extension limits are consistent
with a disc lying at the blackbody radius (see Table 3) but the discs
could also be dominated by smaller grains at a larger radial offset (up
to the extension limit). The exception in the single disc case is
HD71155, for which the extension limits indicate the disc must have
multiple belts (see discussion in Sect. 4.2). We therefore
also determine the minimum grain size that will not exceed the
temperature fit to the excess emission when at the extension limit
listed in Table 3.
This calculation requires the assumption of grain composition which we
take for reference to be non-porous grains with no ice inclusions with
a silicate fraction of 1/3 and 2/3 organic refractory material (see Wyatt & Dent 2002 for
details of how grain temperatures were calculated for the assumed
composition). These minimal grain sizes are listed as
in Table 3.
In all cases these grains are smaller than the blowout limit
(1.3
m
for an A0V-type star assuming the grain properties given above, or
greater for cooler stars), and so it's more likely that the true disc
radius is smaller than the extension limit given in Table 3.
4 Results
We split our debris disc targets into 3 subgroups based on the observational results: those with excess independently confirmed in our photometry; those for which limits can be placed on the extent of the disc with these observations; and those for which we cannot place limits on the disc with our data (HD 31295 and HD 38206). These categories are identified in Table 3. In addition HD 23432 was found to have excess due to a reflection nebula and not a disc. This source together with HD 31295 and HD 38206 are described in Appendix A. The photometrically confirmed sources and those for which we can place limits on the disc with our observations are described below.
4.1 Photometrically confirmed discs
Tel:
The excess emission towards
Tel was
confirmed in our N band photometry with TIMMI2 at a
4
level of
significance (Table 2).
Resolved imaging of this
target, revealing a two-component disc system with an outer component
lying at 24 AU resolved at 18
m and a further unresolved inner
component which SED fitting shows is at 4 AU, is presented in
detail in
Smith et al. (2009a).
We shall not discuss this source further in
this section, but will include this source in the discussion of the
sample in Sect. 6.
HD 3003: This star was identified as
having significant
25 m
excess (see Table 1)
by Oudmaijer et al. (1992).
This
star is a binary: both components are A stars with similar
luminosities (
,
Dommanget & Nys 1994).
The B component was listed as being at an offset of 0
1,
143
East of
North in 1925. The last confirmed observation of the separate
components was in 1964 with the B component at an offset of 0
1,
171
(Mason et al. 2001).
The star was observed with TIMMI2 at N and
Q with follow-up on 8 m
telescopes in both bands (see Table 2). None of
the observations resolved the separate stellar components. Excess was
confirmed
photometrically at Q (detected mJy,
expected
mJy
from photosphere giving an excess of
mJy
- uncertainty on photosphere taken from fitting Kurucz model profiles
to K band flux
1
error, and uncertainty on the detected emission and on the photosphere
were added in quadrature to give error on excess), although calibration
uncertainty prevents confirmation at shorter wavelengths. This is in
good agreement with Smith
et al. (2006) who presented MIPS 24
m
confirmation of excess for this source (detected
mJy
after subtraction of the
photosphere). The recent 24
m and 18
m detections presented
here suggest a lower excess than that suggested by IRAS photometry (
mJy at 25
m). Though
the results are different at the
4
level only, it is possible that the emission from the
source may show temporal variance. A dust temperature fit of
265
+30-60 K
is consistent with the observed excess and shorter
wavelength limits (see Table 3 and SED in
Fig. 1).
Uncertainty on the blackbody temperature fit was taken from temperature
range that allows a fit to within 3
for all excess measurements. Undetected background targets within the
TReCS field-of-view (Sect. 3) are constrained to
<10 mJy at N, confirming the excess
is centred on the star.
The final images showed no evidence of extended emission at
any band.
The Q band VISIR images place the tightest
constraints on the disc
size, putting a limit of <6.5 AU on the disc's extent.
If the binary
listed in Mason et al. (2001)
is a true binary at a separation of
0
1
(4.7 AU at 47 pc, Table 1) the stability
analysis
carried out by Holman & Wiegert
(1999) would suggest the disc cannot be
circumbinary, as the disc should be at a radius of
0
24
(11.3 AU or greater if the orbital separation is larger or the
orbit is
eccentric)
. We conclude that the disc
must
therefore be circumstellar. Assuming that the dust is around the
primary star the temperature fit of 265 K translates to an
offset of
4 AU assuming blackbody grains using
(e.g. Backman & Paresce 1993,
where r is the dust location in AU, T
is the temperture in Kelvin and
is the stellar luminosity in units of
). This assumes the grains are
in thermal equilibrium with their environment. Grains smaller than the
wavelength at which the excess emission peaks are inefficient emitters
and are thus hotter than blackbody temperature at that radial offset
from the star. Such grains can be offset by three times the radius
suggested by a blackbody approximation (see discussion in
Sect. 3.3). Assuming a radius of 4 AU there are then
two possibilities for
the system: either the dust is in a stable location and the binary
must have a semi-major axis of at least 14.4 AU (or larger if
the
binary orbit is eccentric, according to equations of
Holman & Wiegert 1999);
or the binary is closer to the star and the dust is
unstable. Such unstable dust populations have already been detected
in a small number of binary systems (Trilling
et al. 2007). However, if the
dust is in an unstable region this could naturally explain the
tentative evidence for temporal evolution in the level of excess. If
the dust resides in a stable location, the motion of the binary
changing the overall illumination of the system as it travels on its
orbit could also possibly explain any temporal evolution. Determining
the orbit of the binary will be a crucial step in determining the
stability of the dust in this system.
HD 80950: This star was identified by Mannings & Barlow (1998)
as a possible host of mid-infrared excess based on the IRAS 25 m
measurement of its flux (excess
mJy,
see Table 1).
The source was observed with TIMMI2 at N and VISIR
at
N and Q, with the Q
band photometry allowing a confirmation of the
excess (total detected flux
mJy,
predicted stellar
photospheric emission in this filter
mJy with uncertainty
taken from 2MASS K band uncertainty, see
Table 2).
A fit to the Q band excess emission and
the 24
and 70
m
excess reported in Su et al. (2006)
suggests a temperature of
180
+20-30 K
for the excess emission (uncertainty determined by range of temperature
fits that fit all excess measurements to within 3
). Morales
et al. (2009) used a similar
blackbody temperature of 188 K to fit the Spitzer MIPS and IRS
data on
this target. No background/companion sources were detected in any of
the images (see
Table 2
for brightness limits on such sources). No
evidence of extension was detected in any of the images. The
resulting limits on possible disc sizes and geometry are relatively
broad due to high levels of variation in the PSF during the
observations. For face-on discs the limits suggest a disc
radius of <24.5 AU if the dust is distributed in a
narrow ring (at a
distance of 81 pc, Table 1), or
<61 AU for a broad face-on
disc (see Fig. 1).
Assuming the grains are
blackbody-like suggests an offset of 13.6 AU, consistent with
these
limits for all disc geometries. Grains much smaller than the peak of
emission can lying at 3
blackbody radius (see discussion of HD 3003 and Sect. 3.3)
would lie at 40.8 AU
(0
51)
which should be detectable in 8 m observations with a more
stable PSF. With our
current constraints we can say that if very small grains dominate the
emission, the dust must be distributed over a broad radial range.
4.2 Limits on disc extension
HD 71155: This star was identified by Coté (1987) as
being a host of mid-infrared excess based on IRAS observations (see
Table 1).
Calibration uncertainty
prevented photometric confirmation of the excess in our observations,
but we can rule out background objects within the TIMMI2 field of view
of >98 mJy at N or within the VISIR
field-of-view >16 mJy at Q
(Table 2).
We thus confirm any excess should lie on
the target. Rieke et al. (2005)
and Su et al. (2006)
used MIPS photometry to
confirm the excess at 24 and 70 m. These results suggested
somewhat lower excess than found with IRAS, but the difference is not
significant at 3
.
In the following analysis we retain the
MIPS 24
m
result (detected
mJy)
in preference to the
IRAS 25
m
result to take advantage of the reduced errors.
The more recent measurements (upper limits at N
and Q presented in
this paper and the MIPS excesses) allow a single temperature dust fit
(model A) at K
(uncertainty from all temperatures that fits
excess data with 3
,
see Table 3
and Fig. 2;
temperature similar to the 105 K fit suggested by
Su et al. 2006). However,
if the 12
m
excess detected by IRAS
is taken into account, which is not ruled out by the limits
presented here, then a two-temperature dust model (model B)
fits the
spectral energy distribution better (
K and
K,
see Fig. 2).
Although no evidence for extension was seen on any
of our images, the non-detection in the VISIR Q
band image allows us
to place constraints on the dust location in the context of the two
alternative models making the assumption that the different
temperatures represent different radial locations. Figure 2 shows that we
should have detected resolved emission
if the dust was located at a radius of 34 AU (assuming
blackbody grains
at 120 K; model A), regardless of disc geometry. The results
therefore support a two component disc model, as was found for
Tel (Smith et al. 2009a). The
inner component of this model is limited to
<8.4 AU assuming a face-on orientation (Fig. 2). The
predicted location of 500 K dust assuming blackbody-like
grains is
2 AU.
This predicted location agrees with the results of
Moerchen et al. (2009),
who found extended emission around this source
at 10.4
m
consistent with a disc at 2 AU. The outer component is
predicted to be at 61 AU (1
59)
where sufficiently deep
observations on current instruments could resolve this
disc.
Gem: This source was listed in Cheng
et al. (1992), a study
of main-sequence A-stars, as having an IRAS excess. This source is
notable as having one of the largest 24
m excesses amongst older
stars (Rieke et al. 2005,
stellar age is 560 Myr). The star is
listed in the Washington Double Star Catalogue as having a visual
binary companion at a distance of 9
6
at a position angle of
33
East of North. Additionally, component A has a binary
companion confirmed through lunar occultation measurements
(Dunham 1977;
Richichi
et al. 1999). These measurements show evidence for a
binary orbit that changes the companion's relative position
significantly over 20 years (offset 45 mas, PA 300
in 1977, offset 14mas, PA 120
in 1999).
The visual binary was resolved in TIMMI2 and VISIR N band
observations at a
separation of 9
83
0
05,
PA 30
(measured in
VISIR image). The secondary component is also resolved at M
(central wavelength 4.6
m) with a flux of
mJy.
We do not resolve the
separate components of visual component A. Calibration
uncertainty
was high in the VISIR observations, as indicated by the low flux
measured on the primary (Table 2), and thus
we do not
photometrically confirm the excess. The flux of the
binary given in Table 2
and shown on the SED (Fig. 3) was scaled
to the expected primary photometry (so
multiplied by
).
The visual binary was fitted with a K7 spectral type to fit
the JHK photometry from the 2MASS catalogue.
Adopting the parallax distance
to the primary of
pc
the luminosity of the binary is
,
consistent with a luminosity of
typical
for K8-type stars.
After subtracting the primary and binary contributions
predicted from
the SED fitting the IRAS measurements still indicate significant
excess at 12 and 25 m
(see Fig. 3
and Table 1).
There are no nearby 2MASS or MSX sources likely to be
responsible for the excess measurements in the IRAS results, the
source is not in the galactic plane (b = 13.2), and
no additional
sources are detected in our field of view, thus the IRAS excess
is not likely to be due to a background source (limits on background
sources listed in Table 2). No
evidence for
extension is found in the images. We should have detected discs
larger than 6.1 AU assuming a disc flux of
260 mJy
at Q from a
dust temperature fit of 420 K (scaled to IRAS 12 and
24
m
photometry, error on the blackbody fit is 80 K from errors on
excesses measured in IRAS). Blackbody
grains at this temperature would be at an offset of 2.2 AU, or
if the grains are small and lie at 3
blackbody offset (as discussed in Sects. 3.3 and 4.1)
they would be at 6.6 AU, just beyond the limits on disc
extension. The
excess emission and SED fit should be confirmed before we can
interpret these limits in terms of constraints on the emitting
grains.
HD 23281: HD 23281 was first identified
as a possible host of
mid-infrared excess by Shylaja
& Ashok (2002). IRAS photometry at 25 m
is indicative of excess emission at 3.8
significance (Table 1).
Our photometric results do not confirm the excess on
this target (Q band photometry is
consistent with excess but at a
<3
level, see Table 2).
No additional
objects are seen in the field of view, with a limit on undetected
sources of
4 mJy
at N. There are no bright 2MASS or MSX sources
nearby that may have been caught in the IRAS beam and could be
responsible for source confusion. There is no indication of extension
found on any of the images of this object. Narrow discs at
9.5 AU
or broader discs
15.9 AU
should have been detected as extended
emission in the VISIR Q band imaging
(assuming
mJy
from SED fitting, see Fig. 3). We fit
the IRAS
25
m
photometry and VISIR upper limits on excess with a dust temperature of
210
+10-80 K.
Blackbody-like grains at 210 K would lie
at an offset of 5.4 AU, consistent with the limits on extended
emission. Very small grains
that could lie at 3
this offset (see Sects. 3.3 and 4.1) should have been
detected as extended
emission, if
mJy
although the level of excess and
dust temperature fit are currently too uncertain to allow constraints
to be placed on the dust properties.
HD 75416: HD 75416 (
Cha) was identified as a possible
mid-infrared excess host by Mannings
& Barlow (1998) in their study of the
IRAS catalogues. It has significant excess at 12
m
(Table 1).
Our observation (TIMMI2, N band)
did not confirm the excess (detected
mJy,
predicted stellar
flux is
mJy).
MIPS photometry at 24
m
(Rieke et al. 2005) is
in good agreement with the IRAS detection at 25
m (MIPS
mJy
photosphere
mJy,
IRAS
mJy photosphere
mJy).
Su et al. (2006)
presented new 24 and 70
m photometry which also confirms the excess. The
limit on any background source within the
TIMMI2 field-of-view is <48 mJy (3
at N), and thus it is very
likely the excess is centred on the source. There is no evidence of
extended emission in the image, and thus we can place a limit on the
disc radius of <55 AU on a disc of flux 55 mJy
in the N band
(based on a fit to the MIPS and IRAS photometry). The fit to the excess
at a temperature of 250 K would translate to 11.1 AU
for blackbody grains, consistent with the non-detection of extension in
the TIMMI2 image (error on blackbody temperature 60 K from
errors on excess emission). Even
very small grains at 3
the blackbody radial offset (see
Sect. 4.1) would not be detected as extended emission.
HD 141795: This star was listed as an
excess candidate by Shylaja &
Ashok (2002). The IRAS 25 m measurements of this source's
photometry suggests an excess of
mJy.
Calibration
uncertainties prevent a photometric confirmation of the excess in the
TIMMI2 and Michelle observations of the target (Table 2). Background
and companion sources are ruled out at a level of 49 mJy (N band,
TIMMI2) and 8 mJy (Q band,
Michelle), and thus any excess is not likely due to detection of an
additional source in the IRAS beam.
The images show no evidence for extension, and we place limits
on
the extension of a disc with flux of 146 mJy at Q
(estimated from the 25 m excess measurement and 12 and 60
m upper
limits) of
<6.2 AU (Fig. 4). This is
consistent with the SED
fit which uses a dust temperature of 250 K putting the
dust at 4.2 AU for blackbody grains. However, the true dust
temperature
and disc flux at Q is highly uncertain (error on
blackbody temperature fit is 70 K). Photometric confirmation
of the excess is
necessary to confirm the limits provided by the extension testing.
5 Resolvability of discs in the mid-infrared
We now consider what mid-infrared debris discs could be resolved with currently available instruments and future instrumentation. We use the extension testing method described in Sect. 3.3 and in detail in Smith et al. (2008) with PSF size and sensitivity appropriate to each instrument considered to determine the limiting disc parameters for resolution (disc size and flux for different geometries). A short description of the parameters used for each instrument considered are given in the subsections below, and the limits shown in Fig. 5.
Table 4: The predicted and measured disc parameters of sources with resolved debris discs in the mid-infrared.
On each plot we also show a representative sample of A star
debris
discs for comparison with the determined limits (overplotted with
filled circles). This sample is from Wyatt
et al. (2007b) and shows A
star discs detected at 24 and 70 m or 25 and 60
m. Disc radii
and flux levels are taken from fits to the excess emission with a
single temperature blackbody as described in that paper. There are
several uncertainties inherent in this fitting. The radii
determined for the discs assumes the emitting grains behave like
blackbodies, when in reality small grains which are inefficient
emitters may dominate the emission and the dust could be up to 3 times
further from the star than this blackbody radius.
Multi-temperature fits to the excess are possible.
Different temperatures could represent different grain populations at
one radial location, or could indicate dust at
several radial locations (as is the case for
Tel,
Smith et al. 2009a).
In such cases the predicted radial location and
the level of disc flux for each component would be different from the
simple single temperature fit shown here. The level
of disc flux predicted at wavelengths other than 24 and 70
m (or
25 and 60
m)
may be incorrect even in the case that a single
temperature is an accurate model for the emission. This is
particularly true if spectral features are involved, for example
several spectra of debris disc targets with IRS on Spitzer have shown
strong silicate features in the N band (see, e.g. Chen et al.
2006; Rieke
et al. 2005; Lisse et al. 2009). The
effect of these uncertainties can be seen in
the discs already resolved (shown in red in Fig. 5).
The resolved disc locations and fluxes are shown by asterisks and
listed in Table 4.
The value of
(observed disc radius / predicted disc
radius) is as high as 2.3 (for Fomalhaut) for the restricted
set of discs
resolved in the mid-infrared. This ratio is as low as 0.42 for
HD38678, which may have a multiple component disc (as suggested
by Fitzgerald et al. 2007)
which was incorrectly fitted with a single temperature. As a final note
of caution, the population shown on these plots is only a sample of
known discs detected at 24 and 70
m and thus may not be truly
representative of the population of discs at 10 and 18
m (e.g. hot
discs detectable at 10
m may not be detected strongly at
70
m).
Discs around Sun-like stars, which will in general be
smaller than the A star discs (as dust must be closer to cooler stars
to heat to mid-infrared temperatures) are also excluded from the
sample shown. These plots can be used as a
guide to the best sources to include in future observational
programmes aimed at resolving mid-infrared discs, but only through
such resolution can the true disc parameters be known.
![]() |
Figure 5:
Predictions for the resolvability of discs
with current and future instruments. See text for details of model
limits and disc properties. Lines represent 3 |
Open with DEXTER |
5.1 Gemini instruments
We consider the detection limits achieved in 2 h of observing
at 18 and 25 m
(2 h on-source; after overheads and repeated
standard star observation to monitor the PSF total observing time
approximately 8.5 h). The PSF model used is a Gaussian with FWHM
of
0
6
at 18
m
(typical of 18
m
observations presented here)
and 0
72
at 25
m
(taken from Telesco et al.
2005). The point
source sensitivity follows from the detection levels found in the
0
5
apertures at 18
m
and is 1.8 mJy in 2 h on source;
extrapolation to 25
m
(sensitivity 4.8 mJy in 2 h) assumes a
factor of 8/3 brightness increase needed for a source to achieve the
same signal-to-noise in the Qb filter (25
m) of TReCS
as in the Qafilter (18
m), as
outlined on the Gemini website. The detection limits for extended disc
emission were determined in the same way as the extension limits for
the observations presented in this paper. Models of disc+star emission
(with disc geometries and disc flux as described in Sect. 3.3)
convolved with the model PSF were treated as model images, and
subjected to extension testing. Point-source subtracted model images
were tested for significant residual emission in optimal testing
regions as described in Smith
et al. (2008). Emission above 3
significance was regarded as a detection of extended disc structure.
The resulting
limits (Fig. 5,
top line) show that the best targets
for resolved disc imaging campaigns are those that have already been
resolved (as for Figs. 1-4, the region above the lines
represents the disc parameter space that would result in a significant
detection of extension according to the method outlined in
Sect. 3.3 and in detail in Smith
et al. 2008). This plot was
used to identify
Tel, whose excess was independently confirmed in the TIMMI2 data
presented here, as a prime
target for 8 m resolution. The resulting observations
presented in
Smith et al. (2009a)
resolved the outer disc component and highlight the
utility of this technique. Of the known A star debris discs
population few sources remain that could be resolved in reasonable
observing times with current instruments at 18
m (those
most
amenable to resolved imaging are HD19356, HD139006 and HD102647 from
current predictions of the disc parameters). More discs could be
resolved at 25
m,
although conditions suitable for 25
m
observing are more rare.
5.2 MIRI on the JWST
The James Webb Space Telescope is due to be launched in 2013. MIRI, the mid-infrared instrument, will provide vastly greater sensitivity to debris discs in the 5-27








The resulting limits on resolved disc parameter space are
shown in
Fig. 5,
middle panel and bottom left for face-on
discs at 10 m.
The increase in sensitivity over current
ground-based imaging is clear from the low levels of disc flux for
which detection of extended emission is possible in only 1 h
observing. Almost 100% of the A star discs detected at 24 and
70
m
should be resolvable with MIRI, although the resolution of
the discs close to the inner radius limit will strongly depend on
accurate PSF calibration (and of course the caveats relating to disc
flux/radius predictions from SED fitting must be considered). The
resolution of edge-on discs is a strong function of
position angle as the PSF is not circularly symmetric. Discs which lie
along the direction of the corners of the hexagonal shape (see
Fig. 6)
are more difficult to detect in residual emission
as these regions see more noise resulting from mirror misalignment and
aberrations; observing at different position angles could mitigate
against this issue. The ``bump'' in the detectability limits for
face-on ring models also arises from the hexagonal feature of the
PSF. Wider rings and discs lying edge-on are less strongly
effected by this as their detection depends on less confined radial
locations. A four quadrant phase-mask (4QPM) coronagraph will be
offered at 3 wavelengths; 10.65, 11.4 and 15.5
m
(wavelengths
optimised for planet detection, Boccaletti
et al. 2005). We approximate
the effect of including a 4QPM at 10
m (bottom panel, Fig. 5) by increasing
the sensitivity of the observations by
a factor of 250 at 0.3
/D
and 50 at 5
/D,
falling to a
factor of 1 at 10
/D
(where D is 6.5 m). These values are
based in Fig. 8 of Boccaletti
et al. (2005). Including these sensitivity
improvements allows the detection of discs of flux down to a limit of
9
Jy if the
disc is at the optimal detection radius (1
44,
minimum of dot-dashed line in Fig. 5 bottom panel).
Without the coronograph the minimum
disc flux required for the detection of extended emission is
0.013 mJy. A Lyot mask optimised at
23
m
will also be provided, and will be used primarily for the
detection of cold circumstellar discs. However, due to the large
opaque mask of the Lyot objects at
1
cannot be detected
with the Lyot (Boccaletti
et al. 2005). As we can explore within this radius
with our PSF subtraction method we do not include the effects of a
coronagraph in our predictions at longer wavelengths (middle panel,
Fig. 5).
5.3 METIS on the E-ELT
The European Extremely Large Telescope (E-ELT) is currently planned to have a 42 m dish and to start operation in 2018. In the mid-infrared the current proposed first generation instrument is METIS, which will cover the 3-13









![]() |
Figure 6:
A model of the MIRI PSF at 18 |
Open with DEXTER |
The predictions for resolvable disc parameter space with METIS at
10 m
are shown in Fig. 5
bottom left. The
comparison with MIRI on the JWST is representative of the different
strengths of ground-based and space-bourne instrumentation. Larger
discs with lower surface brightness will be ideal targets for MIRI
observations, but a large dish like the E-ELT will be needed to
resolve very small discs (
0
3),
or indeed structure within larger discs. Although the A star disc
sample shown
on this plot does not fill much of the small scale region, this is
because discs detected at 24 and 70
m are cool and thus at large radii. The inner
components of multiple dust population discs or dust
at 10
m
around Sun-like stars will live in these small spatial
regions (see earlier discussion). This 10
m disc
populationis
poorly known as studies of these discs have been limited by
calibration accuracy (specifically we cannot detect discs by classical
aperture photometry fainter than the level of accuracy with which we
know the stellar emission at this
wavelength, which is typically 10% of
,
although
interferometric techniques can allow this limit to be surpassed).
METIS on the E-ELT would enable the discovery of disc
populations
which cannot be detected photometrically (see above) through the
detection of extended emission at 10 m. At the optimal detection radius (0
05)
METIS should be able to detect extended discs at the level of
6
Jy.
We can compare this value to the flux expected for an exozodiacal cloud
around nearby stars. If a star has 1 zodi of emission between
0-3 AU with constant optical depth then it is most likely to
be resolved in observations with METIS at 0
05.
We therefore calculate the detectability of exozodiacal emission by
assuming this is equivalent to the detectability of a ring at the
optimal radius. Taking the optical depth of the zodiacal cloud,
(Dermott et al. 2002a),
and assuming a ring of width
gives a fractional luminosity of
.
If we consider a sunlike star at 10 pc, the optimal detection
radius would be centered at r=0.5 AU.
Adopting the blackbody temperature for this dust (
,
see Sect. 4.1) then the observed flux from exo-zodiacal dust
should be 10
Jy
at 10
m
(using Eq. (6) of Wyatt
2008:
where
is the Planck function,
is the wavelength of observation assumed here to be 10
m and d
is the distance to the star here assumed to be 10 pc) with
higher flux for closer stars. Thus we could expect to resolve discs
down to
1
zodi out to 10 pc. This result is consistent with the previous
expectations of the performance of METIS (as discussed in
Sect. 2.3.3 of Brandl
et al. 2008, METIS is expected to be able to resolve
the exozodiacal emission in the 1 AU region around stars at
<10 pc.) We
will also be able to resolve details of the strucutre of the few
bright discs already known at 10
m, such as those around HD69830
and
Corvi (K0V and F2V) which are believed to have dust in the
terrestrial planet regions (
1 AU,
Smith et al. 2009b).
6 Discussion
This sample contains 7 sources with excess infrared emission
confirmed
either in this paper or with Spitzer data (Chen et al. 2006; Rieke et al.
2005), and a
further 3 sources with excess emission in IRAS requiring confirmation.
The
SED fitting indicates that these objects are surrounded by dust at a
distance of between 2-60 AU (or alternatively two temperatures
of dust
at 2 and 61 AU for HD71155 and 4 and 24 AU for
Tel). These
regions are those in which we might expect the formation of giant
planets, and so it is important consider how the existence of this
dust emitting in the mid-infrared adds to our current understanding of
dust distributions in circumstellar regions.
Rieke et al. (2005)
looked at a sample of 266 A-type stars between 5-626 Myr old
with MIPS at 24 and 70 m and examined the relationship
between fractional excess and the age of the central star. They found
that the upper limit of excess emission generally fell off as
time-1 for the stars with
detected excess. Assuming the fits to
the SED profiles presented in this paper and plotting the predicted
24
m
excess emission compared to stellar flux versus
age it is clear that the results presented here are in-line with this
relationship (Fig. 7).
Combining this with the age
spread in sources suggests we have a representative sample of A star
debris discs.
![]() |
Figure 7:
Plot of age versus fractional excess from SED fitting at 24 |
Open with DEXTER |
HD71155 and
Tel, the two systems with resolved dust
populations, have both been found to have multiple disc components. Chen et al. (2009)
summarised the debris systems which have, through SED
fitting or resolved imaging, been identified as multiple component
discs. Adding HD71155 to this sample brings the total number to 12
known ``Solar System analogues'' (as defined in Chen
et al. 2009, systems with multiple component discs).
The FEPS survey on Spitzer surveyed
328 solar-like stars finding
10% have 70
m emission
indicating the presence of cold debris, and of these 1/3 have SEDs
that are best fit by multiple temperature excesses
(Hillenbrand et al. 2008).
From our sample of 10 debris disc sources (3
of which,
Gem, HD23281 and HD141795, still require
photometric confirmation), 2 are multi-component discs (20%;
consistent with the 1/3 rate given our small sample size).
These
results are further evidence that multiple component or extended discs
are common. The traditional view of debris discs is that of a ring of
planetesimals residing outside any planetary system producing cold
dust, analogous to the Edgeworth-Kuiper belt (EKB) in the
Solar System.
Multiple component discs could be seen as analogous to the Solar
System, although of course the
extrasolar discs detected to date are much brighter than the asteroid
belt and EKB (
for detected
extrasolar discs; asteroid and Edgeworth-Kuiper belts
and 10-7-10-6respectively,
Stern
& Colwell 1997; Dermott et al. 2002b).
For sources with large amounts of emission from close to the
star, the
origin of the dust is uncertain. Wyatt
et al. (2007a) presented a
model based on the collisional evolution models of Dominik
& Decin (2003) that
predicted a maximum dust luminosity dependent on age for a disc at a
given radius. This maximum brightness occurs when discs just reach
collisional equilibrium, in which the size distribution of the
planetesimals in a disc is fixed as mass is transferred down through a
cascade of collisions to smaller and smaller sizes until they are
removed by radiation pressure. Very massive discs process their mass
very quickly and are therefore short-lived, whereas sparse discs take
a long time to reach collisional equilibrium but are not very
luminous. This model has been shown to accurately recreate the A star
debris disc population observed with Spitzer (Rieke
et al. 2005) under
assumptions of a distribution of initial disc mass, radius, and current
age (Wyatt et al. 2007b).
The predicted maximum luminosity for each
disc (or disc component) in this study is given in Table 3 (
from equation 20 in Wyatt
et al. 2007b where r is the
radius of the dust belt from our fits and
is the age of the system as given in Table 1). Uncertainties in
the model parameters
mean that only if
do we take
this as evidence of
transient emission (level of excess cannot be produced by a
collisional cascade). Most of our targets have
,
with
Gem and the inner
disc of HD71155 exceeding this value, and HD141795 having
.
Of these possibly transient
sources only HD71155 has confirmed excess emission (see
Sect. 4.2),
and confirmation of the other discs would be required before
speculating on their origin.
At an offset of 2 AU around HD71155 the collisional
lifetime of bodies
is short and thus we interpret the emission as evidence for a
transient dust producing event. A recent massive collision in an
otherwise quiescent disc could produce a short lived increase in
excess, although as such events are likely to be rare (and the
resulting dust grains have short lifetimes) the probability of
witnessing such an event is low (see discussion in
Wyatt et al. 2007a).
At an age of 169 Myr (Table 1),
ongoing terrestrial planet formation could be responsible for the
emission (Kenyon & Bromley
2004b), with collisions between planetary embryos
resulting in large amounts of dust production. The cooler belt at
61 AU could represent a parent population of the hot dust
emission as
well as producing spatially coincident dust dominating the excess at
longer wavelengths (a similar possibility exists for the older
Sun-like star Corvi,
Smith
et al. 2009b,2008). However,
the transport mechanism to get the dust to 2 AU is unknown. A
dynamical instability like that thought to have caused the Late Heavy
Bombardment (LHB) in the Solar System (triggered by the migration of
Jupiter/Saturn, see e.g. Gomes
et al. 2005; Levison et al. 2008),
during which large amounts of debris from the EKB
was thrown into the inner Solar System, could be
responsible. Booth et al. (2009)
concluded that such an event occured around
at most 12% of Sun-like stars. Around A stars, where the
70
m
excess has been shown to exhibit a fall-off proportional to
time like the 24
m
emission (albeit with a longer decay time, Su
et al. 2006), the statistics are less clear.
Resolving
the outer disc component would allow further examination of a possible
link between the two populations (for example, emission
spread inwards towards the hot dust population rather than confined to
a narrow belt could be evidence for a link). A further possibility is
that
the emission arises from dust grains not produced in collisions but in
the sublimation of a population of comets or one Super-comet. These
possibilities were explored as the origin of the hot dust population
around HD69830 by Beichman
et al. (2005), who concluded that the
continuous generation of small grains by a population of comets would
require too large a mass reservoir to be the likely origin of the
dust. A single massive comet (Sedna-sized in the case of HD69830)
could release small dust grains over a few Myr if captured into a
close orbit Beichman
et al. (2005). This mechanism could be responsible
for the 24
m
dust population in more systems.
Dust emission that is from a transient event will necessarily
show
temporal variation. The difference between the IRAS photometry on
HD3003 and the measurements taken with MIPS and those presented in this
paper (see Sect. 4.1) could be evidence of such evolution. If
real,
this variance could be a reflection of the binary nature of the
system, with the orientation of the secondary as it proceeds on its
orbit changing the overall illumination of the system. A
determination of the orbit of the binary will allow this possibility
to be checked. Alternatively, if the temporal variance reflects
changing levels of dust or changing dust distributions then a
transient origin is more likely. Taking the assumed circumstellar
radius of 4 AU for the dust (see Sect. 4.1) ,
a high level but one at which we
would not state the emission must be transient conclusively (see above
and detailed discussion of uncertainties in
Wyatt et al. 2007a).
However, if the dust is of transient
origin, the dust location needs not be stable, and the constraint of
>14.4 AU for the binary semi-major axis need not hold.
In this
situation the determination of the orbit of the binary could
again greatly improve our understanding of this system. Alternatively
resolving the dust distribution (as would be possible with METIS on
the E-ELT, see Fig. 5)
could also inform our models
of the stability of the system, and thus the likely origin of the dust.
Of the sources considered in this paper only Tel
and HD71155 have had the location of the dust population confirmed by
resolved imaging. For the remaining discs constraints have been
placed on the dust location, but degeneracies in the SED fitting in
particular (summarised in Sect. 5) mean that resolved imaging
is
required to determine the true dust distributions in these systems,
and so constrain models for the dust origin particularly where
transience is inferred. The predictions in Sect. 5 can be used
to
target sources most likely to be resolved with currently available
instruments, but as shown in Fig. 5 most currently
known disc targets will require the use of MIRI to detect faint levels
of extended emission or the high resolution of METIS on the E-ELT to
resolve emission on small scales. High resolution will also be
important for the detection of sub-structure in the discs which could
indicate the presence of planets which will be important for
ascertaining the nature of these systems and distinguishing between
models for the origin of the dust. Evidence for planets in the dust
distribution of debris disc systems include: sharp disc edges (as seen
around Fomalhaut, Kalas
et al. 2005); clumps (Vega, Wyatt
2003;
similar structure may be observable in the EKB because of Neptune's
resonant Plutino population if the disc were brighter); warps (
Pic, Augereau et al. 2001);
and asymmetries (HR4796A,
Wyatt et al. 1999).
7 Summary
In this paper we have presented new observations of 11 early-type stars which have been proposed to be debris disc hosts based on their IRAS photometry. We have used TIMMI2, VISIR, Michelle and TReCS data to confirm excess emission and/or place constraints on debris discs for the observed sample. Our results are:
- For HD 3003, HD80950, and
Tel our photometry yields an independent confirmation of excess emission around the target. Subsequent analysis of the HD3003 system indicates that if the dust lies in a stable region it must be circumstellar and the binary must orbit at a semi-major axis of
14.4 AU (assuming blackbody grains).
- Our data on 5 targets allow us to place quantitative limits on the location and level of emission of any dust in the system. For HD71155 these limits allow us to determine that the disc must have multiple components.
- We use simple disc models to determine the region of disc
flux versus radius parameter space for which discs can be resolved with
currently available 8 m mid-IR instruments. This technique
successfully identified
Tel as a resolvable disc, which was confirmed with TReCS (Smith et al. 2009a).
- We predict the parameter space of resolvable discs that
could be opened by future instruments MIRI on the JWST and METIS on the
E-ELT. Spatially extended disc structures will be best observed with
MIRI because of their lower levels of surface brightness, whereas discs
close to their central star (within
0
3), or those with structure on small spatial scales, will be prime targets for E-ELT imaging which would be able to detect emission below 1 zodi out to 10 pc.
R.S. is grateful for the support of a Royal Commission for the Exhibition of 1851 Fellowship. Based on observations made with ESO Telescopes at the La Silla and Paranal Observatories under programme IDs 71.C-0312, 72.C-0041 and 74.C-0700. Also based on observations obtained at the Gemini Observatory, which is operated by the Association of Universities for Research in Astronomy, Inc., under a cooperative agreement with the NSF on behalf of the Gemini partnership: the National Science Foundation (US), the Particle Physics and Astronomy Research Council (UK), the National Research Council (Canada), CONICYT (Chile), the Australian Research Council (Australia), CNPq (Brazil) and CONICET (Argentina).
Appendix A: Additional sources
A.1 Observed sources with no new limits
HD 31295: HD 31295 was first identified
by Sadakane & Nishida (1986)
in their
sample of Vega-excess stars as a star with infrared excess identified
in the IRAS PSC (significant at 25 m, see Table 1). TIMMI2 N band
observations do not confirm the excess
(Table 2).
Results of Spitzer observations
(Su et al.
2006; Jura
et al. 2004) place a
limit of
70 mJy
excess at 8.5
m,
and the IRS spectrum shows
no evidence of excess at
20
m.
Further results
presented in Su et al. (2006)
showed that in MIPS 24 and 70
m photometry the
excess was confirmed. We find no evidence of background/companion
sources in the TIMMI2 field-of-view (such objects limited to
<33 mJy).
![]() |
Figure A.1: The SED fits of the excess emission of two stars with excess at longer wavelengths than that of the observations presented here. Left: HD 31295 with excess fit by a blackbody at 80 K. Right: HD 38206 with excess fit by a blackbody at 90 K. |
Open with DEXTER |
We fit the confirmed excesses with a blackbody at 80 K
(similar to
the Chen et al. fit of 90 K, our errors are 12 K
from errors on the
excess detections), which translates to a radial offset of
52.6 AU (1
4,
see Fig. A.1
for SED). The image shows no
evidence for extension. The disc flux expected in the observed TIMMI2filter
from the SED fit is <1 mJy; longer wavelength
observations
would be required to resolve/limit the disc extension around this
source. Martínez-Galarza
et al. (2009)
explored the possibility that this
Bootis star could be interacting with the ISM, and found that
such
interaction could produce the observed excess. With the current data
it is not possible to distinguish between
this theory and that of a circumstellar disc, although the fact that
this star lies within the local bubble (at 37 pc, see
Table 1)
means that the probability of the star lying within a cloud which
could produce the observed emission is low (Martínez-Galarza et al.
2009).
HD 38206: HD 38206 was first
identified as a host of
mid-infrared excess by Mannings
& Barlow (1998) in their analysis of the IRAS
catalogues. The TIMMI2 photometry presented here does not confirm the
excess (Table 2).
Recent MIPS observations of this star (Rieke
et al. 2005) have confirmed the 24 m excess,
with flux of
mJy
(expected photospheric flux
mJy, good
agreement with the IRAS measurements, see Table 1). Su
et al. (2006) list the
MIPS 24
m
photometry as 107 mJy at 24
m and 342 mJy at 70
m
(errors of 1.58 mJy and 12.87 mJy respectively do not
include
calibration errors which are less than 5% at 24
m and 10% at
70
m).
The excess emission is fitted with a blackbody at
K
(translating to a radial offset of 48.4 AU, 0
70,
see Fig. A.1
right and Table 3).
This fit suggests the
disc flux at the wavelength observed with TIMMI2 is
<1 mJy; as for HD
31295, only longer wavelength high resolution imaging will be able to
constrain or potentially resolve this disc's location and geometry.
A.2 Not a debris disc candidate
![]() |
Figure A.2:
The SED of HD 23432 with symbols at > |
Open with DEXTER |
HD 23432: HD 23432 (asterope) was identified by Oudmaijer et al. (1992)
as being amongst a sample of SAO stars with IRAS infrared
excess. This star has an excess of mJy
at 12
m
and
mJy at 25
m (after
subtraction of the
photosphere). In addition it also has excess at longer wavelengths:
mJy at 60
m; and
mJy
at 100
m.
The excess emission is not confirmed in the TIMMI2
observations of
HD 23432, as a flux of mJy
at 11.6
m
is found compared
to an expected stellar flux of
mJy from a Kurucz
profile fit (see
Table 2).
The TIMMI2 data points plotted on the SED (Fig. A.2) are shown
with the calibration limits taken from the standards immediately
before and after the science observation. The overall photometric
errors are much higher, with a change of calibration factor
over the course of the night of around 30%. Optical
observations of
this Pleiades member show it to lie close to a diffuse reflection
nebula Ced 19h Cederblad
(1946). The shape of the
excess emission spectrum (fit here with blackbody emission at
K,
K,
and
K,
where errors on the temperatures arise from fitting the excess emission
within 3
)
suggests that this is the result of the emission from the reflection
nebula and not from a dust population centred on
the star itself. Gorlova
et al. (2006) found that the Spitzer 24
m
observations of this source were contaminated by flux from the
reflection nebula. Similar interactions with interstellar dust have
been
shown to be responsible for excess emission towards other stars
(Kalas
et al. 2002; Gáspár et al. 2008).
References
- Absil, O., di Folco, E., Mérand, A., et al. 2006, A&A, 452, 237 [NASA ADS] [CrossRef] [EDP Sciences] [Google Scholar]
- Absil, O., Mennesson, B., Le Bouquin, J., et al. 2009, ApJ, 704, 150 [NASA ADS] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
- Augereau, J. C., Nelson, R. P., Lagrange, A. M., Papaloizou, J. C. B., & Mouillet, D. 2001, A&A, 370, 447 [NASA ADS] [CrossRef] [EDP Sciences] [Google Scholar]
- Backman, D. E., & Paresce, F. 1993, in Protostars and Planets III, ed. E. H. Levy, & J. I. Lunine (Tucson: University of Arizona Press), 1253 [Google Scholar]
- Beichman, C. A., Bryden, G., Gautier, T. N., et al. 2005, ApJ, 626, 1061 [NASA ADS] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
- Boccaletti, A., Augereau, J.-C., Baudoz, P., Pantin, E., & Lagrange, A.-M. 2009, A&A, 495, 523 [NASA ADS] [CrossRef] [EDP Sciences] [Google Scholar]
- Boccaletti, A., Baudoz, P., Baudrand, J., Reess, J. M., & Rouan, D. 2005, Advances in Space Research, 36, 1099 [Google Scholar]
- Booth, M., Wyatt, M. C., Morbidelli, A., Moro-Martín, A., & Levison, H. F. 2009, MNRAS, 399, 385 [NASA ADS] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
- Brandl, B. R., Lenzen, R., Pantin, E., et al. 2008, in SPIE Conf. Ser., 7014 [Google Scholar]
- Cederblad, S. 1946, Meddelanden fran Lunds Astronomiska Observatorium Serie II, 119, 1 [Google Scholar]
- Chen, C. H., Sargent, B. A., Bohac, C., et al. 2006, ApJS, 166, 351 [NASA ADS] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
- Chen, C. H., Sheehan, P., Watson, D. M., Manoj, P., & Najita, J. R. 2009, ApJ, 701, 1367 [NASA ADS] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
- Cheng, K.-P., Bruhweiler, F. C., Kondo, Y., et al. 1992, ApJ, 396, L83 [NASA ADS] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
- Cohen, M., Walker, R. G., Carter, B., et al. 1999, AJ, 117, 1864 [NASA ADS] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
- Coté, J. 1987, A&A, 181, 77 [NASA ADS] [Google Scholar]
- Currie, T., Kenyon, S. J., Balog, Z., et al. 2008, ApJ, 672, 558 [Google Scholar]
- Dermott, S. F., Durda, D. D., Grogan, K., et al. 2002a, Asteroids III, 423 [Google Scholar]
- Dermott, S. F., Kehoe, T. J. J., Durda, D. D., Grogan, K., & Nesvorný, D. 2002b, in Asteroids, Comets, and Meteors: ACM 2002, ed. B. Warmbein, ESA SP, 500, 319 [Google Scholar]
- di Folco, E., Absil, O., Augereau, J.-C., et al. 2007, A&A, 475, 243 [NASA ADS] [CrossRef] [EDP Sciences] [Google Scholar]
- Dominik, C., & Decin, G. 2003, ApJ, 598, 626 [NASA ADS] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
- Dommanget, J., & Nys, O. 1994, Communications de l'Observatoire Royal de Belgique, 115, 1 [Google Scholar]
- Dunham, D. W. 1977, Occultation Newsl., 1, 119 [Google Scholar]
- Fisher, R. S., Telesco, C. M., Piña, R. K., Knacke, R. F., & Wyatt, M. C. 2000, ApJ, 532, L141 [NASA ADS] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Fitzgerald, M. P., Kalas, P. G., & Graham, J. R. 2007, ApJ, 670, 557 [NASA ADS] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
- Gáspár, A., Su, K. Y. L., Rieke, G. H., et al. 2008, ApJ, 672, 974 [NASA ADS] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
- Gomes, R., Levison, H. F., Tsiganis, K., et al. 2005, Nature, 435, 466 [NASA ADS] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Gorlova, N., Rieke, G. H., Muzerolle, J., et al. 2006, ApJ, 649, 1028 [NASA ADS] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
- Greaves, J. S., Holland, W. S., Moriarty-Schieven, G., et al. 1998, ApJ, 506, L133 [NASA ADS] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
- Greaves, J. S., Holland, W. S., Wyatt, M. C., et al. 2005, ApJ, 619, L187 [NASA ADS] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
- Hauck, B., & Mermilliod, M. 1998, A&AS, 129, 431 [NASA ADS] [CrossRef] [EDP Sciences] [Google Scholar]
- Hillenbrand, L. A., Carpenter, J. M., Kim, J. S., et al. 2008, ApJ, 677, 630 [Google Scholar]
- Høg, E., Fabricius, C., Makarov, V. V., et al. 2000, A&A, 355, L27 [NASA ADS] [Google Scholar]
- Holland, W. S., Greaves, J. S., Zuckerman, B., et al. 1998, Nature, 392, 788 [Google Scholar]
- Holman, M. J., & Wiegert, P. A. 1999, AJ, 117, 621 [NASA ADS] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
- Jura, M., Chen, C. H., Furlan, E., et al. 2004, ApJS, 154, 453 [NASA ADS] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
- Kalas, P., Duchene, G., Fitzgerald, M. P., et al. 2007, ApJ, 671, L161 [NASA ADS] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
- Kalas, P., Graham, J. R., Beckwith, S. V. W., Jewitt, D. C., & Lloyd, J. P. 2002, ApJ, 567, 999 [NASA ADS] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
- Kalas, P., Graham, J. R., & Clampin, M. 2005, Nature, 435, 1067 [NASA ADS] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Kenyon, S. J., & Bromley, B. C. 2004a, AJ, 127, 513 [NASA ADS] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
- Kenyon, S. J., & Bromley, B. C. 2004b, ApJ, 602, L133 [NASA ADS] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
- Kunzli, M., & North, P. 1998, A&A, 330, 651 [NASA ADS] [Google Scholar]
- Kurucz, R. L. 1979, ApJS, 40, 1 [NASA ADS] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
- Lagage, P. O., & Pantin, E. 1994, Nature, 369, 628 [NASA ADS] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
- Levison, H. F., Morbidelli, A., Vanlaerhoven, C., Gomes, R., & Tsiganis, K. 2008, Icarus, 196, 258 [NASA ADS] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
- Lisse, C., Schultz, A., Fernandez, Y., et al. 2002, ApJ, 570, 779 [NASA ADS] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
- Lisse, C. M., Chen, C. H., Wyatt, M. C., et al. 2009, ApJ, 701, 2019 [NASA ADS] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
- Löhne, T., Krivov, A. V., & Rodmann, J. 2008, ApJ, 673, 1123 [NASA ADS] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
- Mannings, V., & Barlow, M. J. 1998, ApJ, 497, 330 [NASA ADS] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
- Martínez-Galarza, J. R., Kamp, I., Su, K. Y. L., et al. 2009, ApJ, 694, 165 [NASA ADS] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
- Mason, B. D., Wycoff, G. L., Hartkopf, W. I., Douglass, G. G., & Worley, C. E. 2001, AJ, 122, 3466 [Google Scholar]
- Moerchen, M. M., Telesco, C. M., De Buizer, J. M., Packham, C., & Radomski, J. T. 2007a, ApJ, 666, L109 [NASA ADS] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
- Moerchen, M. M., Telesco, C. M., Packham, C., et al. 2007b, ApJ, 655, L109 [NASA ADS] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
- Moerchen, M. M., Telesco, C. M., & Packham, C. 2009, ApJ, submitted [Google Scholar]
- Moon, T. T., & Dworetsky, M. M. 1985, MNRAS, 217, 305 [NASA ADS] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
- Moór, A., Ábrahám, P., Derekas, A., et al. 2006, ApJ, 644, 525 [NASA ADS] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
- Morales, F. Y., Werner, M. W., Bryden, G., et al. 2009, ApJ, 699, 1067 [NASA ADS] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
- Oudmaijer, R. D., van der Veen, W. E. C. J., Waters, L. B. F. M., et al. 1992, A&AS, 96, 625 [NASA ADS] [Google Scholar]
- Peterson, D. M., Hummel, C. A., Pauls, T. A., et al. 2006, Nature, 440, 896 [NASA ADS] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Rhee, J. H., Song, I., Zuckerman, B., et al. 2007, ApJ, 660, 1556 [NASA ADS] [CrossRef] [MathSciNet] [Google Scholar]
- Richichi, A., Ragland, S., Calamai, G., et al. 1999, A&A, 350, 491 [NASA ADS] [Google Scholar]
- Rieke, G. H., Su, K. Y. L., Stansberry, J. A., et al. 2005, ApJ, 620, 1010 [NASA ADS] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
- Sadakane, K., & Nishida, M. 1986, PASP, 98, 685 [NASA ADS] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
- Schneider, G., Silverstone, M. D., Hines, D. C., et al. 2006, ApJ, 650, 414 [NASA ADS] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
- Schneider, G., Weinberger, A. J., Becklin, E. E., Debes, J. H., & Smith, B. A. 2009, AJ, 137, 53 [NASA ADS] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
- Sheret, I., Dent, W. R. F., & Wyatt, M. C. 2004, MNRAS, 348, 1282 [NASA ADS] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
- Shylaja, B. S., & Ashok, N. M. 2002, BAS India, 30, 491 [Google Scholar]
- Skrutskie, M. F., Cutri, R. M., Stiening, R., et al. 2006, AJ, 131, 1163 [NASA ADS] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
- Smith, P. S., Hines, D. C., Low, F. J., et al. 2006, ApJ, 644, L125 [NASA ADS] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
- Smith, R., Wyatt, M. C., & Dent, W. R. F. 2008, A&A, 485, 897 [NASA ADS] [CrossRef] [EDP Sciences] [Google Scholar]
- Smith, R., Churcher, L. J., Wyatt, M. C., Moerchen, M. M., & Telesco, C. M. 2009a, A&A, 493, 299 [NASA ADS] [CrossRef] [EDP Sciences] [Google Scholar]
- Smith, R., Wyatt, M. C., & Haniff, C. A. 2009b, A&A, 503, 265 [NASA ADS] [CrossRef] [EDP Sciences] [Google Scholar]
- Song, I., Caillault, J.-P., Barrado y Navascués, D., et al. 2001, ApJ, 546, 352 [NASA ADS] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
- Song, I., Weinberger, A. J., Becklin, E. E., Zuckerman, B., & Chen, C. 2002, AJ, 124, 514 [NASA ADS] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
- Stapelfeldt, K. R., Holmes, E. K., Chen, C., et al. 2004, ApJS, 154, 458 [NASA ADS] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
- Stern, S. A., & Colwell, J. E. 1997, AJ, 114, 841 [NASA ADS] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
- Su, K. Y. L., Rieke, G. H., Misselt, K. A., et al. 2005, ApJ, 628, 487 [NASA ADS] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
- Su, K. Y. L., Rieke, G. H., Stansberry, J. A., et al. 2006, ApJ, 653, 675 [NASA ADS] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
- Sylvester, R. J., & Mannings, V. 2000, MNRAS, 313, 73 [NASA ADS] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
- Telesco, C. M., Fisher, R. S., Piña, R. K., et al. 2000, ApJ, 530, 329 [NASA ADS] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
- Telesco, C. M., Fisher, R. S., Wyatt, M. C., et al. 2005, Nature, 433, 133 [NASA ADS] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Trilling, D. E., Stansberry, J. A., Stapelfeldt, K. R., et al. 2007, ApJ, 658, 1289 [NASA ADS] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
- Wahhaj, Z., Koerner, D. W., & Sargent, A. I. 2007, ApJ, 661, 368 [NASA ADS] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
- Wyatt, M. C. 2003, ApJ, 598, 1321 [NASA ADS] [CrossRef] [MathSciNet] [Google Scholar]
- Wyatt, M. C. 2005, A&A, 433, 1007 [NASA ADS] [CrossRef] [EDP Sciences] [Google Scholar]
- Wyatt, M. C. 2008, ARA&A, 46, 339 [NASA ADS] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
- Wyatt, M. C., & Dent, W. R. F. 2002, MNRAS, 334, 589 [NASA ADS] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
- Wyatt, M. C., Dermott, S. F., Telesco, C. M., et al. 1999, ApJ, 527, 918 [NASA ADS] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
- Wyatt, M. C., Smith, R., Greaves, J. S., et al. 2007a, ApJ, 658, 569 [NASA ADS] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
- Wyatt, M. C., Smith, R., Su, K. Y. L., et al. 2007b, ApJ, 663, 365 [NASA ADS] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
- Zuckerman, B. 2001, ARA&A, 39, 549 [NASA ADS] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
- Zuckerman, B., Song, I., Bessell, M. S., et al. 2001, ApJ, 562, L87 [NASA ADS] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
Footnotes
- ...
m
- The sample stars are listed in the Debris Disc Database at http://www.roe.ac.uk/ukatc/research/topics/dust
- ... tool)
- http://scanpi.ipac.caltech.edu:9000/
- ...
Supplement
- The IRAS Explanatory Supplement is available at http://irsa.ipac.caltech.edu/IRASdocs/exp.sup/
- ...
eccentric)
- We have tacitly assumed here that the dust grains are
distributed following the orbits of the parent planetesimals. As dust
grains are affected by Poynting-Robertson drag they may have a
different spatial distribution to the parent bodies. However, following
the equations in Wyatt (2005)
we
find that the grain collisional lifetime (
) is shorter than the Poynting-Robertson drag timescale (
) for all disc radii up to the resolution limit, i.e. that
for r<6.5 AU. The dust grains are therefore likely to be collisionally dominated and occupy a spatial distribution similar to the parent population.
All Tables
Table 1: The sample.
Table 2: The observations.
Table 3: The results.
Table 4: The predicted and measured disc parameters of sources with resolved debris discs in the mid-infrared.
All Figures
![]() |
Figure 1: The observational results for sources with excess emission photometrically confirmed by our observations. Top: the results for HD 3003. The SED ( left) includes a fit to the excess emission at a temperature of 265 K (dotted line). The dashed lines indicate the photospheres of the two A star components, with the solid line being the sum of their emission. Bottom: the results for HD 80950. The excess emission is fit with a temperature of 180 K (dotted line - solid line shows photospheric emission). For both targets the limits on disc extension are shown in the right-hand plots, with the shaded region indicating the area the disc must lie in to have avoided being resolved. The difference between the limits on disc extension arise from the differences in the PSF model for the different observations. Specifically, the standard star observations associated with HD80950 showed large changes in the wings of the PSF over the course of the observations, giving rise to large uncertainties in the detection of excess emission extended over a broad spatial region. Thus the limits on broad disc structures (dashed lines) with small central radius are poorer for HD80950 than for HD3003. The disc flux marked on these plots comes directly from the VISIR photometry. The radial location marked arises from assuming the emitting material is blackbody-like. These results are discussed in detail in Sect. 4.1. |
Open with DEXTER | |
In the text |
![]() |
Figure 2:
Top left: the SED of HD 71155 with a single
blackbody fit to the excess emission at a temperature of 120 K
(symbols >5 |
Open with DEXTER | |
In the text |
![]() |
Figure 3:
The observations of |
Open with DEXTER | |
In the text |
![]() |
Figure 4:
The results of analysis of the observations
of HD 75416 ( top) and HD 141795 ( bottom).
Left: the SEDs with symbols at
>5 |
Open with DEXTER | |
In the text |
![]() |
Figure 5:
Predictions for the resolvability of discs
with current and future instruments. See text for details of model
limits and disc properties. Lines represent 3 |
Open with DEXTER | |
In the text |
![]() |
Figure 6:
A model of the MIRI PSF at 18 |
Open with DEXTER | |
In the text |
![]() |
Figure 7:
Plot of age versus fractional excess from SED fitting at 24 |
Open with DEXTER | |
In the text |
![]() |
Figure A.1: The SED fits of the excess emission of two stars with excess at longer wavelengths than that of the observations presented here. Left: HD 31295 with excess fit by a blackbody at 80 K. Right: HD 38206 with excess fit by a blackbody at 90 K. |
Open with DEXTER | |
In the text |
![]() |
Figure A.2:
The SED of HD 23432 with symbols at > |
Open with DEXTER | |
In the text |
Copyright ESO 2010
Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.
Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.
Initial download of the metrics may take a while.