Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dk4vv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T15:57:36.781Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

‘Dust around Nearby Stars’ The Survey Observational Results

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 January 2014

Jonathan P. Marshall
Jonathan P. Marshall*
Affiliation:
Depto. de Fisica Teorica, Universidad Autonoma de Madrid, Cantoblanco, 28039, Madrid, Spain email: [email protected]
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

In this conference proceedings we summarize the key observational findings of the Herschel DUNES survey. We found 31 discs in our sample, equating to an increased dust incidence with Herschel of 20.2 ±2.0% compared to previous measurement of ~12.5±5% with Spitzer for the same population of nearby, Sun-like stars. We identify no trend towards fewer discs around later spectral types, as had previously been reported for A-M stars. Around half of the discs exhibit extended emission, representing a vast improvement in the number of spatially resolved debris discs and thereby the quality of modelling that can be applied to those systems. We also identify unusual sub-groups of discs, including ‘steep SED’ sources with dust spectral indexes in the 70–160 μm range, steeper than the Rayleigh-Jeans tail which, whilst not unheard of, are more typically seen at sub-mm wavelengths and candidate ‘cold discs’ which are identified through their lack of significant excess emission at wavelengths shorter than 100 μm.

Keywords

stars: infraredstars: circumstellar matterstars: planetary systems
Type
Contributed Papers
Information
Proceedings of the International Astronomical Union , Volume 8 , Symposium S299: Exploring the Formation and Evolution of Planetary Systems , June 2013 , pp. 322 - 325
Copyright
Copyright © International Astronomical Union 2013 

References

Berta, S., et al. 2011, A&A, 532, A49Google Scholar
Eiroa, C., et al. 2010, A&A, 518, L131Google Scholar
Eiroa, C., et al. 2012, A&A, 536, L4Google Scholar
Eiroa, C., et al. 2013, A&A, 555, A11Google Scholar
Ertel, S., et al. 2012, A&A, 541, A148Google Scholar
Griffin, M., et al. 2010, A&A, 518, L3Google Scholar
Hillenbrand, L., et al. 2008, ApJ, 677, 630CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Krivov, A. V. 2010, RAA, 10, 383Google Scholar
Krivov, A. V., et al. 2013, ApJ, 772, 32Google Scholar
Liseau, R., et al. 2010, A&A, 518, L132Google Scholar
Liseau, R., et al. 2013, A&A, 549, L7Google Scholar
Löhne, T., et al. 2012, A&A, 537, A110Google Scholar
Marshall, J. P., et al. 2011, A&A, 529, A117Google Scholar
Matthews, B., et al. 2010, A&A, 518, A135Google Scholar
Pilbratt, G., et al. 2010, A&A, 518, L1Google Scholar
Poglitsch, A., et al. 2010, A&A, 518, L2Google Scholar
Sibthorpe, B., et al. 2012, MNRAS, 428, L6CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Trilling, D., et al. 2008, ApJ, 674, 1086CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vitense, C., et al. 2012, A&A, 540, A30Google Scholar
Wyatt, M. C. 2008, ARA&A, 46, 339Google Scholar