Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 000, 1–5 (2007)
Printed 17 January 2014
(MN LATEX style file v2.2)
Dynamical parallax of σ Ori AB: mass, distance and age
arXiv:0710.3541v1 [astro-ph] 18 Oct 2007
José
Antonio Caballero1⋆
1
Dpto. de Astrofı́sica y Ciencias de la Atmósfera, Facultad de Ciencias Fı́sicas, Universidad Complutense de Madrid,
E-28040 Madrid, Spain. E-mail: caballero@astrax.fis.ucm.es
Accepted 2007 October 18. Received 2007 October 01; in original form 2007 August 21
ABSTRACT
The massive OB-type binary σ Ori AB is in the centre of the very young σ Orionis
cluster. I have computed the most probable distances and masses of the binary for several ages using a dynamical parallax-like method. It incorporates the BV RIH-band
apparent magnitudes of both components, precise orbital parameters, interstellar extinction and a widely used grid of stellar models from the literature, the Kepler’s third
law and a χ2 minimisation. The derived distance is 334+25
−22 pc for an age of 3±2 Ma;
larger ages and distances are unlikely. The masses of the primary and the secondary
lie on the approximate intervals 16–20 and 10–12 M⊙ , respectively. I also discuss the
possibility of σ Ori AB being a triple system at ∼385 pc. These results will help to
constrain the properties of young stars and substellar objects in the σ Orionis cluster.
Key words: stars: individual: σ Ori – stars: binaries: close – open clusters and
associations: individual: σ Orionis
1
INTRODUCTION
The Trapezium-like system σ Ori, that illuminates the encolure of the Horsehead Nebula, is the fourth brightest star
in the young Ori OB 1 b association. The multiple system
is composed of at least five early-type stars (Burnham 1892;
Greenstein & Wallerstein 1958; van Loon & Oliveira 2003;
Caballero 2007b). The two hottest components, σ Ori A and
B (O9.5V and B0.5V), are separated by only ∼0.25 arcsec
and were for a long time “the most massive visual binary
known” (MA + MB ∼ 25 + 15 M⊙ ; Heintz 1974). Although
the binary has not yet completed a whole revolution, the
orbital parameters are relatively well determined (Hartkopf,
Mason & McCalister 1996; Heintz 1997; Horch et al. 2002).
It has been suggested that σ Ori AB is a hyerarchical triple,
being the primary a short-period, double-line spectroscopic
binary (Frost & Adams 1904; Henroteau 1921; Miczaika
1950; Bolton 1974; Morrell & Levato 1991). However, a large
amount of accurate, comprehensive spectroscopic investigations have failed to confirm this hypothesis (Heard 1949;
Conti & Leep 1974; Humphreys 1978; Bohannan & Garmany 1978; Garmany, Conti & Massey 1980; Simón-Dı́az &
Lennon, priv. comm.).
The σ Ori system is located in the centre of the wellknown σ Orionis open cluster. The proper motions, radial
velocities and spacial distribution of stars in this cluster
strongly suggests a physical association between σ Ori itself and the young cluster (Zapatero Osorio et al. 2002a;
Caballero 2007a, 2007c – see also Jeffries et al. [2006], who
⋆
Investigador Juan de la Cierva at the UCM.
discovered a second older and kinematically and spacially
distinct population). Because of its youth, comparative nearness and low extinction, the cluster has become the richest hunting ground for brown dwarfs and planetary-mass
objects in the whole sky (Béjar et al. 1999; Zapatero Osorio et al. 2000, 2002b, 2007). There is plentiful material
in the literature about this cluster, covering topics like the
initial mass function down to a few Jupiter masses (Béjar
et al. 2001; González-Garcı́a et al. 2006; Caballero et al.
2007), jets and Herbig-Haro objects (Reipurth et al. 1998;
Andrews et al. 2004), the frequency of accretors and discs
(Zapatero Osorio et al. 2002a; Oliveira, Jeffries & van Loon
2004; Kenyon et al. 2005; Oliveira et al. 2006; Hernández
et al. 2007; Caballero et al. 2007), the X-ray emission from
young objects (Walter et al. 1997; Sanz-Forcada et al. 2004;
Franciosini, Pallavicini & Sanz-Forcada 2006) or their photometric variability (Caballero et al. 2004; Scholz & Eislöffel
2004). The most used values of heliocentric distance and age
of the σ Orionis cluster are d ∼ 360 pc and ∼3 Ma (Brown,
de Geus & de Zeeuw 1994; Perryman et al. 1997; Zapatero
Osorio et al. 2002a; Oliveira et al. 2002). There is a consensus in the literature that the cluster is younger than 8 Ma
and older than 1 Ma. There is, however, a strong divergence
of opinion on the heliocentric distance. Caballero (2007a)
compiled determinations in the literature of the distance to
the σ Orionis cluster from the 352+166
−168 pc from Hipparcos
parallax to almost 500 pc from colour-magnitude diagrams.
Apart from the uncertainties of theoretical isochrones
at very young ages, the derivation of the initial mass function of the cluster is strongly affected by the uncertainty
in the actual age and heliocentric distance (Jeffries et al.
2
José A. Caballero
measurement, that was estimated from the Tycho-2 BT VT
magnitudes, all the data come from adaptive optics observations. The Hipparcos catalogue also tabulated the nonstandard HP -band magnitudes. The magnitudes and colours
of both stars correspond to what it was expected of an O9.5V
and a B0.5V at d ∼ 350 pc.
I have computed through a simple minimisation method
which are the most probable heliocentric distances for several cluster ages. In particular, I have looked for the minima
of the following chi-square distributions:
Table 1. Photometry of σ Ori A and B from the literature.
Band
B
V
R
I
H
[mag]
[mag]
[mag]
[mag]
[mag]
σ Ori A
σ Ori B
3.85±0.05
4.10±0.03
4.15±0.04
4.41±0.04
4.81±0.10
5.18±0.05
5.34±0.10
5.49±0.13
5.66±0.16
6.02±0.10
References
Ca07a
tBr00
tBr00
tBr00
Ca06
2006; Caballero et al. 2007). There are other investigations
that require a precise age determination, such as the evolution of the angular momentum due to discs and stellar
winds (Eislöffel & Scholz 2007), disc dissipation (Hernández
et al. 2007) and evolution of hot massive stars. In this Letter, I revisit a well known method for distance determination: the dynamical parallax (e.g. Russell 1928). I apply it
to the σ Ori AB binary using state-of-the-art data and tools
to determine its mass, age and heliocentric distance.
2
ANALYSIS AND RESULTS
The determination of the dynamical parallax of a binary
of known orbital period, P , and angular semimajor axis, α,
uses the Kepler’s third law and a power-law mass-luminosity
relation (e.g. Reed 1984). In this Letter, I instead use the
grids of theoretical models from the Geneva group (Schaller
et al. 1992). On the contray to other widely used grids,
like those by the Lyon and Padova groups (Baraffe et al.
1998; Girardi et al. 2000), the Geneva grids tabulate absolute magnitudes in a large number of passbands and ages
down to 1 Ma and are valid up to very high masses (i.e.
M > 10 M⊙ ). Although there are more binaries and binary candidates in the cluster (Caballero 2005; Kenyon
et al. 2005; Caballero et al. 2006 and references therein),
σ Ori AB is the only pair whose orbital parameters are
known. Here, I have employed the parameters given by
Hartkopf et al. (1996). The almost face-on orbit is characterised by a long period (P = 155.3±7.5 a), a close angular
separation (α = 0.2642±0.0052 arcsec) and a low eccentricity (e = 0.051±0.015). The orbital parameters are consistent
with those of Heintz (1997; P = 158 a, α = 0.265 arcsec, e
= 0.06).
Using the standard units M⊙ , a (annum) and AU for
MA + MB , P and the physical semimajor axis a, respectively, the Kepler’s third law takes the simple expression
(MA + MB )P 2 = a3 . Accounting for a = d tan α ≈ dα,
where d is the heliocentric distance in parsecs, and replacing the values of P and α from Hartkopf et al. (1996), then
the third law for σ Ori AB can be written as:
MA + MB = 7.45 10−7 d3
(1)
(Mtotal ≡ MA +MB ). At the Hipparcos distance d = 352 pc,
the total mass of the binary would be about 32 M⊙ , that
is less than the classical value of Mtotal ∼ 40 M⊙ , but is
consistent with the value of Mtotal ∼ 30 M⊙ estimated by
Caballero (2007a).
I tabulate in Table 1 the BV RIH-band magnitudes
of both components in σ Ori AB, taken from the literature (ten Brummelaar et al. 2000 –tBr00–; Caballero 2006
–Ca06–; Caballero 2007a –Ca07a–). Except for the B-band
χ2 (d, MA , MB ) = χ2A (d, MA ) + χ2B (d, MB )
(2)
(for fixed ages and metallicities), where χ2A and χ2B are:
χ2A =
X (mλ,A − m∗λ,A )2
δm2λ,A
, χ2B =
X (mλ,B − m∗λ,B )2
δm2λ,B
(3)
(λ ≡ B, V, R, I, H). mλ,[A,B] and δmλ,[A,B] are the
observed apparent magnitudes and corresponding uncertainties of σ Ori A and B in Table 1, and m∗λ,[A,B] =
m∗λ,[A,B] (d, M[A,B] ) are the theoretical apparent magnitudes
that a hypothetical star of mass M[A,B] would have at an
heliocentric distance d. To compute m∗λ,[A,B] , I have used:
(i) the theoretical absolute magnitudes Mλ,[A,B] from the
basic grids of non-rotating stellar models with solar metallicity (Z = 0.020), overshooting and OPAL opacities of the
Geneva group, (ii) the colour excess E(B −V ) = 0.05 mag of
σ Ori AB from Lee (1968) and (iii) the interstellar extinction law parameters Aλ /AV and RV from Rieke & Lebofski
(1985). In detail, I have used the grids with standard mass
loss Ṁ and ages 1.0, 2.0, 3.2, 4.9 and 10.0 Ma (Schaller et al.
1992 – Sc92) and high mass loss 2 × Ṁ and age 3.2 Ma
(Meynet et al. 1994 – Me94). The models do not provide
data for other ages less than 32 Ma. Caballero (2006) measured an average solar metallicity of solar-like stars in the
σ Orionis cluster, [Fe/H] = 0.0±0.1 dex, which justifies the
use of Z = 0.020.
For a fixed age (and metallicity), there is a one-to-one
correspondence in the grids between Mλ,[A,B] and M[A,B]
if both A and B stars are in the main sequence. For each
heliocentric distance, there is only one corresponding total mass of the hypothetical binary, Mtotal ∝ d3 (Eq. 1).
If the mass of the primary, MA , is fixed, then the mass
of the secondary is obtained from the simple expression
MB (d, MA ) = Mtotal (d) − MA . To sum up, there is a value
of χ2 for each trio (d, MA , age). Because of the known spectral types of σ Ori A and B, I conservatively imposed that
the masses of the primary and of the secondary should lie on
the intervals 10 M⊙ 6 MA 6 50 M⊙ and 1.5 M⊙ 6 MB 6
MA , respectively. These constraints speed up the minimization but do not influence the results (see below).
Fig. 1 illustrates the χ2 minimisation for an age of
3.2 Ma and standard mass loss. Top and bottom windows
display different coverage resolutions of the (d, MA ) plane.
The results for normal and high mass loss for 3.2 Ma are
almost identical. The plots for the other ages except for
10.0 Ma are quite similar, with the minimum shifted along
the X axis (distance). There are no solutions (i.e. the masses
of A and B simultaneouly satisfy Eq. 1 and the above constraints) for d . 250 pc and d & 500 pc. In addition, the
4.9 Ma models do not provide solutions for d & 370 pc.
Finally, there are no solutions at all for 10.0 Ma. At this
Dynamical parallax of σ Ori AB
Age = 3.2 Ma
3
Table 2. Best fits of the dynamical parallax of σ Ori AB.
4
10
3
χ
2
10
Mass
loss
Age
[Ma]
d
[pc]
MA
[M⊙ ]
MB
[M⊙ ]
χ2
Ṁ
Ṁ
Ṁ
Ṁ
Ṁ
2 × Ṁ
1.0
2.0
3.2
4.9
10.0
3.2
346±13
337±13
334±13
325±13
...
333±13
20.1±0.2
18.3±0.2
17.6±0.2
16.0±0.2
...
17.4±0.2
11.7±0.2
11.1±0.2
10.8±0.2
10.2±0.2
...
10.8±0.2
8.70
9.38
9.76
10.56
...
9.72
2
10
1
10
200
250
300
350
400
450
500
550
d [pc]
for all ages. Finally, I have determined the most probable
masses of A and B for the Hipparcos parallax distance (d =
352 pc): MA = 21.4 M⊙ , MB = 12.0 M⊙ for an age of 1 Ma.
The minimum χ2 for 1 Ma is an order of magnitude smaller
than for the other ages tested, meaning that a binary age
older than 1 Ma would be unlikely at the Hipparcos distance.
Age = 3.2 Ma
3
DISCUSSION
4
10
3
χ
2
10
2
10
1
10
315
320
325
330
335
340
345
350
355
d [pc]
Figure 1. χ2 vs. heliocentric distance for several masses of
σ Ori A. The dotted lines indicate curves of constant mass. The
basic grid of models is from Schaller et al. (1992), the age is 3.2 Ma
and the metallicity is Z = 0.020. Top window: whole interval of
heliocentric distance in steps of 1 pc from 200 to 550 pc and of
mass of the primary in steps of 2 M⊙ from 10 to 50 M⊙ . The
minimum χ2 is for MA = 18 M⊙ (d = 336 pc). Bottom window:
same as top window, but for intervals of heliocentric distance in
steps of 0.2 pc and of mass of the primary in steps of 0.2 M⊙ . The
minimum in χ2 is better constrained (cf. Table 2).
age, the primary has left the main sequence and got much
brighter than the secondary.
The values of (d, MA ) that minimise χ2 for a given age
and mass loss are provided in Table 2. The uncertainties in
the values of d account for the error bars in the photometric
data in Table 1 and in the orbital parameters P (5 %) and α
(2 %) in Hartkopf et al. (1996), and the size of the steps in
the high resolution minimisation (∆d = 0.2 pc). The uncertainty in the masses is set to the step size, ∆MA = 0.2 M⊙ .
The results would be identical if no mass constraints were
set. For an age interval of 3±2 Ma, the corresponding heliocentric distance interval is d = 334+25
−22 pc. Distances larger
than 400 pc and less than 290 pc are less likely for the 1–5 Ma
age range; distances larger than 450 pc are highly unlikely
The theoretical effective temperatures that correspond to
the optimal fits lie on the intervals Teff = 30.4–34.6 kK for
the primary and Teff = 25.2–27.5 kK for the secondary. The
hottest temperatures are for the youngest ages. These values
are consistent with the expected Teff for O9.5V and B0.5V
stars, respectively (e.g. O9.5V: 30–35 kK – Popper 1980; Gulati, Malagnini & Morossi 1989; Castelli 1991; Vacca, Garmany & Shull 1996; Martins, Schaerer & Hillier 2005), and
with previous measurements of the Teff of σ Ori A (30.0–
33.0 kK – Morrison 1975; Underhill et al. 1979; Morossi &
Crivellari 1980; Repolust et al. 2005). The corresponding
theoretical gravities (log g ∼ 4.00–4.22) are also normal for
class V at such temperatures.
The minima of χ2 in Table 2 are very sensitive to the
variations of heliocentric distance and of mass: on the one
hand, at fixed mass and age, a fluctuation of d of barely
30 pc results in a change of three orders of magnitude in χ2 ;
on the other hand, at fixed distance and age, a fluctuation of
MA of barely 5 M⊙ results in a change of almost two orders
of magnitude in χ2 . The minima of χ2 are, however, quite
unresponsive to the variations of the age between 1.0 and
4.9 Ma (see last column in Table 2). A younger age gives a
slightly better fit results and that favours a slightly larger
distance (d ∼ 350 pc). The results do not strongly suggest
a younger age of 1 Ma, but they are useful in excluding an
older age. The absence of a solution at 10 Ma agrees with
previous upper limits on the ages of the Ori OB 1 b association from the presence of very early-type stars in the
main sequence (Blaauw 1964) and of the σ Orionis cluster
from spectral synthesis surrounding the Li i λ670.78 nm line
(Zapatero Osorio et al. 2002a).
The derived distance interval for 3±2 Ma, d =
334+25
−22 pc, is consistent with the canonical distance to the
σ Orionis cluster of d ∼ 360 pc, but is difficult to conciliate
with the distance of 440 pc for 2.5 Ma that Sherry, Walter &
Wolk (2004) used. The derived distance interval also deviates from very recent determinations of the distance to some
elements in the Ori OB 1 complex. In particular, Terrell,
Munari & Siviero (2007), using the eclipsing spectroscopic
binary VV Ori close to Alnilam (ǫ Ori) in Ori OB 1 b, and
4
José A. Caballero
Sandstrom et al. (2007), employing the Very Large Baseline
Array in the Orion Nebula Cluster in Ori OB 1 a, have determined very accurate heliocentric distances of 388–389 pc (see
also Menten et al. 2007). These values are also lower than
the classical distance to the Ori OB 1 complex of ∼440 pc
from average Hipparcos parallax (Brown, Walter & Blaauw
1999; de Zeeuw et al. 1999). Because of projection effects
and the large physical size of Ori OB 1 (Reynolds & Ogden
1979), σ Ori could be easily contained within the complex.
Given their kinematic and spacial association, the σ Ori
system and the young σ Orionis cluster are likely at the
same heliocentric distance and also age, if one assumes that
massive and low mass star formation in a cluster is coeval
(Prosser et al. 1994; Massey, Johnson & Degioia-Eastwood
1995; Stauffer et al. 1997; see, however, Sacco et al. 2007).
Recently, it has been suggested that the σ Orionis cluster
is actually kinematically distinct from the Ori OB 1 b association (Jeffries et al. 2006), just as 25 Ori is distinct from
Ori OB 1 a (Briceño et al. 2007).
If σ Ori AB were a hyerarchical triple, as described
in Section 1, it would be located at a larger heliocentric distance. The hypothetical companion to σ Ori A, to
which I tentatively call σ Ori F, would be 0.5 mag fainter
than the primary in the 370–493 nm interval according to
Bolton (1974). This wavelength interval corresponds to the
U, B Johnson
bands. Taking
into account mA = mA+F +
2.5 log 1 + 10−
mA −mF
2.5
and the difference BA+F − BB in
Table 1, then the apparent magnitudes in the blue band
of the three components would be related to the combined
magnitude BA+F through: BA ≈ BA+F + 0.53 mag, BB ≈
BA+F + 1.33 mag and BF ≈ BA+F + 1.03 mag. I have looked
for the distances and theoretical masses whose corresponding apparent magnitudes match the B[A,B,F] relations and
the Kepler’s third law, (MA + MF ) + MB = 7.45 10−7 d3 .
There are only a few solutions that simultaneously verify
Teff,A ≈ 30.0–33.0 kK and Teff,B ≈ 26.0–30.0 kK, as expected
from the spectral types of σ Ori A+F and σ Ori B. In the
triple scenario, the F component would have an intermediate temperature between the A and B stars (roughly B0.0V)
and would orbit very close to σ Ori A. The valid solutions
are found for the narrow distance interval 370–400 pc and
only for ages between 1.0 and 4.9 Ma. Although distances
less than 290 pc and larger than 450 pc are ruled out again,
the most probable distance to σ Ori under the triple hypothesis, d ∼ 385 pc, agrees very well with those of VV Ori
and the Orion Nebula Cluster. Further high-resolution spectroscopic studies are needed to ascertain the existence and
characteristics of σ Ori F.
4
SUMMARY
I have determined the most probable heliocentric distances
and masses of the components in the young binary σ Ori AB.
The used methodology is an improvement of the dynamical
parallax method using a χ2 minimisation of observed and
theoretical apparent magnitudes of A and B. The values
range in the intervals 325 pc . d . 346 pc, 16 M⊙ . MA .
20 M⊙ , 10 M⊙ . MB . 12 M⊙ for 1–5 Ma. Ages and distances larger than or equal to 10 Ma and ∼450 pc are excluded from the minimisation. The theoretical effective tem-
peratures of both components are consistent with the observed spectral types. Accounting for uncertainties in the
orbital parameters and photometric data from the literature, the derived distance interval for age = 3±2 Ma is d =
2
334+25
−22 pc. The values of χ are minimum for the largest distances within this interval, that translate into the youngest
ages. If there were a third component, σ Ori F, in a tight
orbit to σ Ori A, then the system could be at a larger heliocentric distance of about 385 pc.
The σ Ori star system is in the centre of the young
σ Orionis cluster. The knowledge of the age and heliocentric
distance of the cluster is fundamental for the study of the
initial mass function down to the planetary regime and the
evolution of discs and angular momentum in very young objects.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
I thank the anonymous referee for improving comments and
suggestions, and D. Montes for revising the manuscript. Partial financial support was provided by the Universidad Complutense de Madrid and the Spanish Ministerio Educación
y Ciencia under grant AyA2005–02750 of the Programa Nacional de Astronomı́a y Astrofı́sica and by the Comunidad
Autónoma de Madrid under PRICIT project S–0505/ESP–
0237 (AstroCAM).
REFERENCES
Andrews S. M., Reipurth Bo, Bally J., Heathcote S. R.,
2004, ApJ, 606, 353
Baraffe I., Chabrier G., Allard F., Hauschildt P. H., 1998,
A&A, 337, 403
Béjar V. J. S., Zapatero Osorio, M. R., Rebolo, R., 1999,
ApJ, 521, 671
Béjar V. J. S., Martı́n E. L., Zapatero Osorio M. R., 2001,
ApJ, 556, 830
Blaauw A., 1964, ARA&A, 2, 213
Bohannan B., Garmany C. D., 1978, ApJ, 223, 908
Bolton C. T., 1974, ApJ, 192, L7
Briceño C., Hartmann L., Hernández J., Calvet N., Vivas
A. K., Furesz G., Szentgyorgyi A., 2007, ApJ, 661, 1119
Brown A. G. A., de Geus E. J., de Zeeuw P. T., 1994, A&A,
289, 101
Brown A. G. A., Walter F. M., Blaauw A., 1999, in ASP
Conf. Ser., The Orion Complex Revisited, ed. M. J. McCaughrean & A. Burkert, eprint arXiv:astro-ph/9802054
ten Brummelaar T., Mason B. D., McAlister H. A., Roberts
L. C. Jr., Turner N. H., Hartkopf W. I., Bagnuolo W. G. Jr.,
2000, AJ, 119, 2403
Burnham S. W., 1892, AN, 130, 257
Caballero J. A., 2005, AN, 326, 1007
Caballero J. A., 2006, PhD thesis, Universidad de La Laguna, Spain
Caballero J. A., 2007a, A&A, 466, 917
Caballero J. A., 2007b, AN, 328, 917
Caballero J. A., 2007c, MNRAS, in press, eprint
arXiv:0710.1255
Caballero J. A., Béjar V. J. S., Rebolo R., Zapatero Osorio
M. R., 2004, A&A, 424, 857
Dynamical parallax of σ Ori AB
Caballero J. A., Martı́n E. L., Dobbie P. D., Barrado y
Navascués D. 2006, A&A, 460, 635
Caballero J. A., Béjar V. J. S., Rebolo R. et al., 2007, A&A,
470, 903
Castelli F., 1991, A&A, 251, 106
Conti P. S., Leep E. M., 1974, ApJ, 193, 113
Eislöffel J., Scholz A., 2007, Proceedings for IAU Symposium No. 243, 2007, “Star-disk interaction in young stars”,
eprint arXiv:0708.1479
Franciosini E., Pallavicini R., Sanz-Forcada J., 2006, A&A,
446, 501
Frost E. B., Adams W. S., 1904, ApJ, 19, 151
Garmany C. D., Conti P. S., Massey P., 1980, ApJ, 242,
1063
Girardi L., Bressan A., Bertelli G., Chiosi C., 2000, A&AS,
141, 371
González-Garcı́a B. M., Zapatero Osorio M. R., Béjar
V. J. S., Bihain G., Barrado y Navascués D., Caballero
J. A., Morales-Calderón M., 2006, A&A, 460, 799
Greenstein J. L., Wallerstein G., 1958, ApJ, 127, 237
Gulati R. K., Malagnini M. L., Morossi C., 1989, A&AS,
80, 73
Hartkopf W. I., Mason B. D., McAlister H. A., 1996, AJ,
111, 370
Heard J. F., 1949, ApJ, 109, 185
Heintz W. D., 1974, AJ, 79, 397
Heintz W. D., 1997, ApJS, 111, 335
Henroteau F., 1921, Pub. Dominion Obs. Ottawa, 5, 45
Hernández J., Hartmann L., Megeath T. et al., 2007, ApJ,
662, 1067
Horch E. P., Robinson S. E., Meyer R. D., van Altena
W. F., Ninkov Z., Piterman A., 2002, AJ, 123, 3442
Humphreys R. M., 1978, ApJS, 38, 309
Jeffries R. D., Maxted P. F. L., Oliveira J. M., Naylor T.,
2006, MNRAS, 371, L6
Kenyon M. J., Jeffries R. D., Naylor T., Oliveira J. M.,
Maxted P. F. L., 2005, MNRAS, 356, 89
Lee T. A., 1968, ApJ, 152, 913
van Loon J. Th., Oliveira J. M., 2003, A&A, 405, L33
Martins F., Schaerer D., Hillier D. J., 2005, A&A, 436, 1049
Massey P., Johnson K. E., Degioia-Eastwood K., 1995,
ApJ, 454, 151
Menten K. M., Reid M. J., Forbrich J., Brunthaler A., 2007,
A&A, 474, 515
Meynet G., Maeder A., Schaller G., Schaerer D., Charbonnel C., 1994, A&AS, 103, 97
Miczaika G. R., 1950, ApJ, 111, 443
Morrell N., Levato H., 1991, ApJS, 75, 965
Morossi C., Crivellari L., 1980, A&AS, 41, 299
Morrison N. D., 1975, ApJ, 200, 113
Oliveira J. M., Jeffries R. D., Kenyon M. J., Thompson
S. A., Naylor T., 2002, A&A, 382, L22
Oliveira J. M., Jeffries R. D., van Loon J. Th., 2004, MNRAS, 347, 1327
Oliveira J. M., Jeffries R. D., van Loon J. Th., Rushton M.
T., 2006, MNRAS, 369, 272
Perryman M. A. C., Lindegren L., Kovalevsky J. et al.,
1997, A&A, 323, L49
Popper D. M., 1980, ARA&A, 18, 115
Prosser C. F., Stauffer J. R., Hartmann L., Soderblom D.
R., , Jones B. F., Werner M. W., McCaughrean M. J., 1994,
ApJ, 421, 517
5
Reed B. C., 1984, JRASC, 78, 83
Reipurth Bo, Bally J., Fesen R. A., Devine D., 1998, Nature, 396, 343
Repolust T., Puls J., Hanson M. M., Kudritzki R.-P., Mokiem M. R., 2005, A&A, 440, 261
Reynolds R. J., Ogden P. M., 1979, ApJ, 229, 942
Rieke G. H., Lebofsky M. J., 1985, ApJ, 288, 618
Russell H. N., 1928, AJ, 38, 89
Sacco G. G., Randich S., Franciosini E., Pallavicini R.,
Palla F. 2007, A&A, 462, L23
Sandstrom K. M., Peek J. E. G., Bower G. C., Bolatto A.
D., Plambeck R. L., 2007, ApJ, 667, 1161
Sanz-Forcada J., Franciosini E., Pallavicini R., 2004, A&A,
421, 715
Schaller G., Schaerer D., Meynet G., Maeder A., 1992,
A&AS, 96, 269
Scholz A., Eislöffel J., 2004, A&A, 419, 249
Sherry W. H., Walter F. M., Wolk S. J., 2004, AJ, 128,
2316
Stauffer J. R., Hartmann L. W., Prosser C. F., Randich S.,
Balachandran S., Patten B. M., Simon T., Giampapa M.,
1997, ApJ, 479, 776
Terrell D., Munari U., Siviero A., 2007, MNRAS, 374, 530
Underhill A. B., Divan L., Prevot-Burnichon M.-L., Doazan
V., 1979, MNRAS, 189, 601
Vacca W. D., Garmany C. D., Shull J. M., 1996, ApJ, 460,
914
Walter F. M., Wolk S. J., Freyberg M., Schmitt J. H. M. M.,
1997, MmSAI, 68, 1081
Zapatero Osorio M. R., Béjar V. J. S., Martı́n E. L., Rebolo
R., Barrado y Navascués D., Bailer-Jones C. A. L., Mundt
R., 2000, Science, 290, 103
Zapatero Osorio M. R., Béjar V. J. S., Pavlenko Ya., Rebolo
R., Allende Prieto C., Martı́n E. L., Garcı́a López R. J.,
2002a, A&A, 384, 937
Zapatero Osorio M. R., Béjar V. J. S., Martı́n E. L., Rebolo R., Barrado y Navascués D., Mundt R., Eislöffel J.,
Caballero J. A., 2002b, ApJ, 578, 536
Zapatero Osorio M. R., Caballero J. A., Béjar V. J. S. et al.,
2007, A&A, 472, L9
de Zeeuw P. T., Hoogerwerf R., de Bruijne J. H. J., Brown
A. G. A., Blaauw A., 1999, AJ, 117, 354
This paper has been typeset from a TEX/ LATEX file prepared
by the author.