Free Access
Erratum
This article is an erratum for: [this article]

Issue
A&A
Volume 543, July 2012
Article Number C1
Number of page(s) 2
Section Interstellar and circumstellar matter
DOI https://doi.org/10.1051/0004-6361/201117910e
Published online 03 July 2012

Two errors have appeared in the original published version of this article. A copy-and-paste error resulted in two subsequent LSR space motion corrections to the values for CW Leo reported in the original Table 1. The correct values are given here in Table 1. The second error resulted from the omission of the “square” term for the distance in the actual computation of the dust mass following Eq. (5) (). This correction results in a, distance dependent, increase of dust mass by approximately two orders of magnitude. The complete corrected original Table 5 is reproduced in this erratum. Only the values in Cols. 9 and 10 have changed.

The above corrections give total observed gas and dust masses ranging from 0.002 to 0.56 M. These corrections change in part the conclusions arrived at in the final paragraph of Sect. 3.3. In particular, we note that the inferred total mass of gas and dust is significantly higher than the potential mass swept-up from interstellar medium (ISM). The estimated swept-up ISM mass, MISM, ranges from ~10-5 to 10-1 M. These results indicate that on average only a few percent of the observed dust in the bow shock region originates from the surrounding medium. For individual objects, notably CW Leo and α Ori, the contribution from ISM dust could be as much as 10−25%, while for others it is estimated to be even less than one percent (Table 5). These corrections now show that the derived masses are consistent with dust emission being predominantly from stellar wind grains trapped in the wind-ISM interaction rather than from

interstellar grains, which is consistent with hydrodynamical modeling as discussed recently for α Ori by e.g. Mohamed et al. (2012) and Mackey et al. (2012). Note that the derived dust masses are sensitive not only to the adopted dust temperature, but also the dust opacity law, and the adopted gas-to-dust ratio. These uncertainties together potentially introduce an order of magnitude uncertainty to the derived total dust and gas mass. For example, an increase in dust temperature results in a decrease of the dust mass, thus increasing the relative importance of the ISM contribution.

Table 1

LSR proper motion, space velocity, position angle and inclination for CW Leo.

Table 5

Aperture flux of observed bow shocks (Class I and II) and detached rings (Class III).

Acknowledgments

We thank Dr. Anthony Marston for alerting us to the error in the dust mass calculation.

References


© ESO, 2012

All Tables

Table 1

LSR proper motion, space velocity, position angle and inclination for CW Leo.

Table 5

Aperture flux of observed bow shocks (Class I and II) and detached rings (Class III).

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.