Free Access

Table A.1

Distances to cluster containing Cepheids.

Name Cepheid Name Cluster Adopted DM Method Reference Remarks

BB Sgr Collinder 394 9.38  ±  0.10 JHK Turner (2010)
V Cen NGC 5662 9.28  ±  0.05 JHK Turner (2010)
RU Sct Trumpler 35 11.11  ±  0.10 JHK Turner (2010)
SU Cyg Turner 9 9.33  ±  0.05 JHK Turner (2010)
S Vul Anon Vul OB 12.47  ±  0.29 JHK Turner (2011)
delta Cep Cep OB6 7.21  ±  0.13 JHK Majaess et al. (2012a)
zeta Gem ADS 5742 7.75  ±  0.09 JHK Majaess et al. (2012b)
SU Cas Alessi 95 8.04  ±  0.08 JHK Majaess et al. (2012c)
VY Car Car OB2 11.66  ±  0.15* BV Turner (1977) includes a +0.09 correction in DM
RZ Vel Vel OB1 11.32  ±  0.15* BV Turner (1979b) includes a +0.09 correction in DM
CS Vel Ruprecht 79 12.55  ±  0.16 BV Walker (1987c) includes a +0.08 correction in DM
SZ Tau NGC 1647 8.76  ±  0.02 BV Turner (1992) includes a +0.09 correction in DM
SW Vel Vel OB 5 12.08  ±  0.15 BV Turner et al. (1993) includes a +0.09 correction in DM
X Cyg Ruprecht 175 10.52  ±  0.04 BV Turner (1998) includes a +0.09 correction in DM
U Sgr IC 4725 9.05  ±  0.09 BV a a
DL Cas NGC 129 11.10  ±  0.07 BV b b
S Nor NGC 6087 9.82  ±  0.18 BV c c
TW Nor Lynga 6 11.40  ±  0.12 BV d d
QZ Nor, V340 Nor NGC 6067 11.15  ±  0.09 BV e e
CV Mon vandenBergh 1 11.12  ±  0.15 BV f f
WZ Sgr Turner 2 11.31  ±  0.10 BV g g
CF Cas NGC 7790 12.63  ±  0.11 BV h h

Notes. 

(a)

The average of the distances quoted in An et al. (2007; 8.93  ±  0.08 plus a +0.02 correction), Hoyle et al. (2003; 9.08  ±  0.18 plus a +0.09 correction), and Pel et al. (1985; 8.95  ±  0.10 plus a +0.08 correction).

(b)

The average of the distances quoted in Turner et al. (1992; 11.11  ±  0.02 plus a +0.09 correction), An et al. (2007; 11.04  ±  0.05 plus a +0.02 correction), and Hoyle et al. (2003; 10.94  ±  0.14 plus a +0.09 correction).

(c)

The average of the distances quoted in Turner (1986; 9.78  ±  0.03 plus a +0.09 correction), An et al. (2007; 9.65  ±  0.06 plus a +0.02 correction), and Pel et al. (1985; 9.84  ±  0.10 plus a +0.08 correction).

(d)

The average of the distances quoted in An et al. (2007; 11.51  ±  0.13 plus a +0.02 correction), Hoyle et al. (2003; 11.33  ±  0.18 plus a +0.09 correction), and Walker et al. (1985a; 11.15  ±  0.3 plus a +0.09 correction).

(e)

The average of the distances quoted in An et al. (2007; 11.03  ±  0.08 plus a +0.02 correction), Hoyle et al. (2003; 11.18  ±  0.12 plus a +0.09 correction), and Walker et al. (1985b; 11.05  ±  0.10 plus a +0.09 correction).

(f)

Three distance determinations have been considered: Turner et al. (1998; 11.08  ±  0.03 plus a +0.09 correction, adopting E(B − V) = 0.75), An et al. (2007; 10.74  ±  0.21 plus a +0.02 correction, adopting E(B − V) = 0.57), and Hoyle et al. (2003; 11.34  ±  0.21 plus a +0.09 correction, adopting E(B − V) = 0.90). The adopted distance is the average of the three, but the dispersion is large. This is likely due to the very different reddenings adopted. If a correction is made to a reddening of 0.75, adopting Δ DM/Δ E(B-V)  ~ 2 (An et al. 2007), then the average becomes 11.14 with a very small dispersion.

(g)

The average of the distances quoted in Turner et al. (1993; 11.26  ±  0.10 plus a +0.09 correction), and Hoyle et al. (2003; 11.18  ±  0.16 plus a +0.09 correction).

(h)

The average of the distances quoted in An et al. (2007; 12.46  ±  0.11 plus a +0.02 correction), Hoyle et al. (2003; 12.58  ±  0.14 plus a +0.09 correction), and Romeo et al. (1989; 12.65  ±  0.15 plus a +0.08 correction).

(*)

No error quoted, conservative error adopted.

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.