Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 6 minor 37 references

Modeling Time Dependent Water Chemistry Due to Powerful X-ray Flares from T-Tauri Stars

T0 review · 3 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-14 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read Rare, powerful X-ray flares from a young T Tauri star can temporarily raise gas-phase water near the disk surface by factors of 3–5 or more, with a smaller but potentially observable change in water column density.

desk verdict Useful time-dependent water chemistry model with a likely robust qualitative prediction; the 'detectable bursts' claim needs line modeling before it is trusted. read the letter →

arxiv 1908.08048 v1 pith:2TCADVLR submitted 2019-08-21 astro-ph.SR astro-ph.EP

Abygail R. Waggoner (1) , L. Ilsedore Cleeves (1) , ((1) University of Virginia) This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.SRastro-ph.EP
keywords protoplanetarydisksX-rayflareswaterchemistryTTauristarstime-dependentastrochemistrygas-grainchemicalnetworksfar-infraredobservations
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

This paper asks whether the frequent X-ray flares of young Sun-like stars can change the chemistry of the surrounding planet-forming disk in a detectable way. Using a time-dependent chemical model of the disk around a young solar-mass star, it finds that only rare, very strong flares—those that raise the X-ray ionization rate by a factor of about 100 every few years—can temporarily boost gas-phase water near the disk surface by factors of roughly 3–5 or more. The boost lasts only days and produces at most about a factor-of-two increase in the vertical water column density between 5 and 30 au, which future far-infrared observations might catch as a water burst. Common weaker flares produce no significant observable change. The paper identifies dissociative recombination of $\mathrm{H_3O^+}$ as the main production route, with X-ray-induced ultraviolet photolysis, adsorption onto grains, and ion-neutral reactions with $\mathrm{C^+}$ as the main destruction routes.

What carries the argument

The carrying mechanism is a time-dependent gas-grain chemical network—647 species and 5,944 reactions—run at 35 independent points in a model protoplanetary disk after first reaching a pseudo-steady state, then followed through a synthetic flare. The paper identifies the load-bearing chemical channels by ranking reaction rates at representative times before, during, and after the flare: water is produced mainly by dissociative recombination of $\mathrm{H_3O^+}$ ($\mathrm{H_3O^+} + e^- \rightarrow \mathrm{H_2O} + \mathrm{H}$), and removed by ultraviolet photolysis of $\mathrm{H_2O}$, adsorption of $\mathrm{H_2O}$ onto grains, and ion-neutral reactions with $\mathrm{C^+}$. These channels, together with water adsorption and desorption, determine which of five response curve shapes appears at each disk location.

What would settle it

Observe a known T Tauri disk in the far-infrared water lines at 557 GHz or 1113 GHz, catch a flare with a peak X-ray ionization rate near 100 times baseline, and measure the 5–30 au region before, during, and about 1–3 days after peak; failing to see roughly a factor-of-two rise in water column density would contradict the prediction.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that a strong X-ray flare—one whose unattenuated ionization rate reaches 100 times the baseline, an event expected every few years—can temporarily increase the gas-phase water abundance relative to hydrogen by factors of more than about 3–5 along the disk surface at $Z/R \ge 0.3$, out to tens of au. The effect is short-lived, with most locations returning to pre-flare water levels within days, though some surface points retain enhanced water for more than ten days. When integrated vertically, the flare changes the gas-phase water column density by just over a factor of two between 5 and 30 au, which the paper argues is the most promising observable signature in far-infrared ground-state water lines. Typical flares, a factor of a few above baseline every few weeks, do not produce significant observable changes. The chemistry is dominated by dissociative recombination of $\mathrm{H_3O^+}$ producing water, balanced by X-ray-induced ultraviolet photolysis, adsorption of water onto grains, and reactions with $\mathrm{C^+}$ destroying it.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the 35 modeled disk locations evolve independently; if gas mixing moves water between layers on the relevant day-to-week timescales, the predicted localized bursts would be diluted and could become unobservable.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • A 100-fold flare should appear as a days-long water burst in the 5–30 au region, with the vertical gas-phase water column density changing by just over a factor of two.
  • Common flares of only a few times the baseline ionization rate predict no significant observable water variability, so detections should be tied to rare super-flares.
  • Because gas-phase water returns to pre-flare levels within days at most locations, any observation made during a major flare would sample a temporarily enhanced water abundance rather than the disk's typical state.
  • Since the excess water is split between gas and ice with little net long-term change, flare chemistry alters short-term gas abundance more than the disk's total water reservoir.
  • Multiple flares in quick succession produce stacked responses rather than new curve shapes, so the timing between flares matters but the qualitative chemistry does not change.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • If the bursts are real, far-infrared water-line monitoring could double as a flare detector for disks, since the same ionization spike should also move other ionization-sensitive molecules such as $\mathrm{HCO^+}$.
  • The roughly linear scaling between flare strength and peak water response suggests an observational calibration strategy: measure water during flares of known X-ray strength and then use water as a proxy for flare history.
  • Disks with lower gas mass or gaps let X-rays penetrate deeper, so the same flare may boost water closer to the midplane and produce a larger column-density signal than in the disk modeled here; this is an untested extrapolation.
  • Repeated rare super-flares across the disk lifetime could cumulatively add modest amounts of water ice in the 5–30 au zone, potentially shifting where water freezes out; the paper leaves this question to future work.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 6 minor

Summary. The paper models the time-dependent gas-phase water chemistry of the IM Lup protoplanetary disk during X-ray flares, using the Fogel/Cleeves chemical network with 647 species and 5944 reactions at 35 independent point locations between 1 and 50 au. For a fiducial flare that increases the unattenuated X-ray ionization rate by a factor of 100, with a 3-hour rise and 5-hour decay, the authors find temporary H2O abundance enhancements of up to roughly a factor of 13 at surface layers with Z/R greater than about 0.3, peaking at 1-2 days and decaying over days to weeks. They attribute the production to dissociative recombination of H3O+ and the main losses to photolysis, adsorption onto grains, and reactions with C+. They conclude that strong, rare flares may produce time-varying water column-density enhancements of about a factor of 2 between 5 and 30 au that could be observed in future far-infrared 557/1113 GHz observations, while weaker, more frequent flares will not lead to significant observable changes.

Significance. If the central chemistry result holds, the paper provides a concrete mechanism linking stellar X-ray flaring to time-variable water emission in protoplanetary disks, and it makes a falsifiable prediction about the magnitude and duration of H2O column-density changes. The model is clearly specified: Table 2 lists the relevant H2O production and destruction processes, Table 3 provides the physical conditions at all 35 modeled grid points, and the authors categorize the time-dependent responses into five distinct curve types. The paper is also explicit about the main limitations of the model, including the independent-point treatment of the disk and the absence of horizontal transport. These strengths make the chemical part of the work reproducible and useful, while the observational claim requires additional steps beyond the column-density calculation.

major comments (3)
  1. [Section 4.2 and Figure 10] The claim that the factor-of-about-2 changes in N(H2O) 'may be detectable' as 557/1113 GHz water bursts is not established, because the paper computes only abundances and vertical column densities. At the burst locations (e.g., R=10 au, Z/R=0.4, rho=2.86e-16 g cm^-3, n_H2 approximately 6e7 cm^-3), water rotational lines can be subthermally excited and can become optically thick, so line flux is not generally proportional to column density. No non-LTE excitation calculation, line transfer, or instrument sensitivity estimate is presented, so the observability claim in the abstract and Section 4.2 is unsupported even if the chemistry is otherwise correct.
  2. [Section 2.1 and Section 4.2] The model treats the 35 point locations independently and does not include vertical or radial mixing, as stated in Section 2.1. The predicted H2O bursts have day-to-week timescales (Section 3.2), and if transport mixes the flare-produced water on comparable timescales, the localized column-density peaks in Figure 10 would be diluted and could fall below detectability. The manuscript does not estimate mixing timescales or justify neglecting this process for the observability claim, so the central observational prediction is not robust against a plausible and unmodeled physical effect.
  3. [Sections 3.3 and 5] The conclusion that 'typical' flares, i.e., increases by factors of a few, will not significantly impact H2O is in tension with the paper's own linear fit at (10 au, 0.4), namely (Delta chi)_max = 0.12 Delta L_XR + 0.88 (Figure 7). For a factor-of-5 flare this gives Delta chi_max approximately 1.48, corresponding to a 48% abundance increase, which exceeds the 5% observability threshold quoted in Section 4.2. Because no column-density or line-flux calculation is presented for weak flares, the summary statement in Section 5 that common flares 'do not significantly impact H2O in the disk' is not supported by the reported results and should be reconciled with the strength-variation fits.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Section 2.2, equation (1)] The definition 'Delta chi = Delta chi_with flare / Delta chi_without flare' is dimensionally ill-defined; presumably the intended quantity is the ratio of the water abundance with the flare to that without the flare. Please correct the notation so the plotted quantity is unambiguous.
  2. [Abstract] The sentence 'can temporarily increase the gas-phase H2O abundance relative to H can by more than a factor of about 3-5' is missing a word; it should read something like 'relative to H can change by more than a factor of about 3-5.'
  3. [Section 3.1] The text says 'Table 2 lists the key reactions and processes at the twenty points of the disk considered here,' but Table 2 lists reactions and the model considers 35 points; please correct the number.
  4. [Section 4.1] The parenthetical '(R, Z/R) = (1.0 au, 3)' should read Z/R = 0.3; the missing decimal point is confusing given the otherwise normalized heights.
  5. [Table 3] The entry '1.48E x 10^7' for the UV flux contains a typographical artifact ('E x'), and the X-ray ionization rate column header 's-1 H-1 2' should be typeset as s^-1 (H2)^-1.
  6. [Section 3.2.2] The text states that H2O increases by 'about 1340%' at (10 au, 0.4), while Delta chi = 13.4 corresponds to a 1240% increase relative to the pre-flare abundance; please make the percentage and the plotted ratio consistent.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No material circularity: the water-abundance response is emergent from a pre-existing chemical network and disk model, and no water observation is used to tune the prediction.

full rationale

The central claim — that a 100x X-ray flare can transiently raise surface gas-phase H2O by factors of ~3–5 (Z/R ≥ 0.3) and produce factor-of-~2 column-density changes between 5 and 30 au — is obtained by time-integrating a published 647-species, 5944-reaction network (Fogel et al. 2011; Cleeves et al. 2014) at 35 disk points whose physical conditions are taken from the Cleeves et al. (2016) IM Lup disk model. The initial abundances (Table 1) come from interstellar cloud modeling, and the flare amplitude and timescales are set before the calculation as "typical of observed X-ray flares," cited to Preibisch & Feigelson (2005). Nothing in the water prediction is fitted to H2O observations; the self-citations supply the chemical network, disk structure, and motivation, but none of them encodes the predicted H2O response. The paper's explicit caveat that points are treated independently and horizontal mixing is ignored is a modeling limitation, not a circular reduction, and the lack of line excitation or radiative-transfer calculations weakens the observability claim as a correctness matter, not a circularity matter. Accordingly, no load-bearing step reduces to its own input by construction.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The free parameters are scenario choices (flare strength and timing). The axioms reflect the model's reliance on prior chemical networks, the specific IM Lup disk structure, the simplified flare representation, the no-mixing approximation, and initial abundance assumptions. There are no new particles or physical entities introduced.

free parameters (3)
  • Peak flare strength factor (ΔL_XR) = 100 (fiducial); also 5, 10, 25, 50 explored
    Chosen to represent an extremely strong, rare X-ray flare and to illustrate the maximum effect; the quantitative results, including the linear fits in Figure 7, depend on these chosen strengths.
  • Flare rise time and exponential decay time = 3 hr rise, 5 hr decay
    Chosen as typical of T Tauri X-ray flares following Preibisch & Feigelson (2005); the water response amplitude and decay tail may depend on this temporal shape.
  • Typical flare frequency and strength = factor of a few increase every few weeks
    Assumed scenario for the 'typical' flare conclusion; not directly simulated in detail in the presented runs, but inferred from the low-amplitude runs.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption The Fogel et al. (2011) and Cleeves et al. (2014) chemical network (647 species, 5944 reactions) is complete and its rate coefficients are accurate.
    The H2O production/consumption balance and the dominant processes identified in Table 2 come from this network; no sensitivity analysis or uncertainty propagation is presented.
  • domain assumption The IM Lup disk physical structure from Cleeves et al. (2016) is representative of protoplanetary disks.
    Section 4.2.1 explicitly notes IM Lup is unusually massive (0.17 M_sun vs typical 0.04 M_sun) and vertically flared; this affects photon penetration and thus the magnitude of the flare response.
  • ad hoc to paper A flare is modeled purely as a multiplicative increase of the X-ray ionization rate, with no change in X-ray spectrum or attenuation depth.
    Section 2.2 describes scaling the unattenuated ionization rate by factors up to 100 at all points; if real flares have harder spectra or different penetration, the spatial pattern of H2O enhancement could shift.
  • domain assumption Each of the 35 modeled points evolves independently with no mixing or transport between zones.
    Section 2.1 states 'The model treats the point locations independently and does not take into account interactions between horizontal zones.' This is needed for the localized 'burst' prediction; mixing would dilute the bursts.
  • domain assumption Initial chemical abundances (Table 1) from cloud models represent the disk starting conditions.
    The model runs 0.5 Myr to a pseudo steady state before the flare, so the initial abundances are likely relaxed, but they influence the pre-flare H2O abundance and hence the relative change Δχ.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Modeling Time Dependent Water Chemistry Due to Powerful X-ray Flares from T-Tauri Stars." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/2TCADVLR

@misc{pith2026190808048,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Modeling Time Dependent Water Chemistry Due to Powerful X-ray Flares from T-Tauri Stars},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/2TCADVLR}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:1908.08048}
}
abstract

Young stars emit strong flares of X-ray radiation that penetrate the surface layers of their associated protoplanetary disks. It is still an open question as to whether flares create significant changes in disk chemical composition. We present models of the time-evolving chemistry of gas-phase water during X-ray flaring events. The chemistry is modeled at point locations in the disk between 1 and 50 au at vertical heights ranging from the mid-plane to the surface. We find that strong, rare flares, i.e., those that increase the unattenuated X-ray ionization rate by a factor of 100 every few years, can temporarily increase the gas-phase water abundance relative to H can by more than a factor of $\sim3-5$ along the disk surface (Z/R $\ge$ 0.3). We report that a "typical" flare, i.e., those that increase the unattenuated X-ray ionization rate by a factor of a few every few weeks, will not lead to significant, observable changes. Dissociative recombination of H$_3$O$^+$, water adsorption and desorption onto dust grains, and ultraviolet photolysis of water and related species are found to be the three dominant processes regulating the gas-phase water abundance. While the changes are found to be significant, we find that the effect on gas phase water abundances throughout the disk is short-lived (days). Even though we do not see a substantial increase in long term water (gas and ice) production, the flares' large effects may be detectable as time varying inner disk water 'bursts' at radii between 5 and 30 au with future far infrared observations.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 1908.08048 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. H2O response grid from Test 1. See §2.2 for test parameters. Initial H2O abundances appear at the top of each plot and correspond to ∆χ = 1. Curve types are described in §3.2, and represent the five different response curves seen in the model. For the points where the maximum abundance is not visible on the plot, the maxima occur: 1. (R, Z/R) = (10 au, 0.4) at t = 1.3 days, ∆χ = 13.4, 2. (R, Z/R) = (5 au, 0.2) at t … view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Type 1 Reaction Curve: Destruction, (R, Z/R) = (1.0 au, 0.4). H2O is temporarily destroyed through photol￾ysis to produce OH (Reaction 4), but H2O is reformed by Reactions 7 and 8 to return to its initial abundance. OH abundance decreases due to rapid photolysis. Detailed rates are evaluated at four representative times, before the flare (t = 0 days), at the peak H2O response (t = 1.25 days and t = 4.35 days), and a… view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Type 4: Hybrid, (R, Z/R) = (5.0 au, 0.4). Ini￾tially, H2O is consumed by an increase in photolysis reac￾tions (Processes 5 and 6), then is produced by dissociative recombination of H3O + (Process 1), then it is consumed by a combination of photolysis (Processes 4, 5, and 6) and ion￾ization (Process 13) to return to its initial abundance. Refer to [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_5.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (5 more)
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: The maximum change in H2O abundance that occurs due to peak flare strengths of 100, 50, 25, 10, and 5 times the relative background X-ray ionization rate , along with linear fits as indicated. 3.2.5. Type 5: No Observable Response Observable flare responses do not occu…
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: H2O response grid from Test 2. See §2.2 for test parameters. Flares occur at t = 0 days and t = 5 days. Maximums at (R, Z/R) = (10, 0.4) occurs at ∆χ = 12.6, t = 1.7 days and ∆χ = 13.4, t = 6.6 days. Second maximum at (R, Z/R) = (20, 0.4) occurs at ∆χ = 5.8, t = 7.5 da…
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Gas-phase H2O and H2O(gr) responses radially along the vertical heights of Z/R = 0.4 and 0.3, between R = 5 au and 30 au. For the point (R, Z/R) = (10 au, 0.4), where the maximum abundance is not visible on the plot, the H2O(gr) maximum occurs at t = 2.3 days and ∆χ = …
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: shows the vertical column density of gas phase water at different times after our fiducial strong flare model. Changes in radial column density presented in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_10.png]
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: These plots represent density, temperature, X-ray ionization rate, and UV flux in the IM Lup protoplanetary disk, a disk encircling a solar-mass young star. Red dots indicate the 35 locations modeled and analyzed in this paper [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_11.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

37 extracted references · 10 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    2003, PASJ, 55, 11, doi: 10.1093/pasj/55.1.11

    Aikawa, Y., Momose, M., Thi, W.-F., et al. 2003, PASJ, 55, 11, doi: 10.1093/pasj/55.1.11

    work page doi:10.1093/pasj/55.1.11 2003

  2. [2]

    Aikawa, Y., Umebayashi, T., Nakano, T., & Miyama, S. M. 1999, ApJ, 519, 705, doi: 10.1086/307400

    work page doi:10.1086/307400 1999

  3. [3]

    2002, A&A, 386, 622, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20020037

    Herbst, E. 2002, A&A, 386, 622, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20020037

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20020037 2002

  4. [4]

    Johns-Krull, C. M. 2002, ApJ, 567, 1013, doi: 10.1086/338586

    work page doi:10.1086/338586 2002

  5. [5]

    P., Garufi, A., et al

    Avenhaus, H., Quanz, S. P., Garufi, A., et al. 2018, ApJ, 863, 44, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aab846

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aab846 2018

  6. [6]

    A., Aikawa, Y., Blake, G

    Bergin, E. A., Aikawa, Y., Blake, G. A., & van Dishoeck, E. F. 2007, Protostars and Planets V, 751

    work page 2007

  7. [7]

    J., & Bergin, E

    Bethell, T. J., & Bergin, E. A. 2011, ApJ, 739, 78, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/739/2/78 Time Dependent W ater Chemistry 13

    doi:10.1088/0004-637x/739/2/78 2011

  8. [8]

    I., Adams, F

    Cleeves, L. I., Adams, F. C., & Bergin, E. A. 2013, ApJ, 772, 5, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/772/1/5

    doi:10.1088/0004-637x/772/1/5 2013

Show all 37 references
  1. [9]

    I., Bergin, E

    Cleeves, L. I., Bergin, E. A., Alexander, C. M. O. ., et al. 2014, Science, 345, 1590, doi: 10.1126/science.1258055

    2014 doi

  2. [10]

    I., Bergin, E

    Cleeves, L. I., Bergin, E. A., ¨Oberg, K. I., et al. 2017, ArXiv e-prints. https://arxiv.org/abs/1706.00833

    2017 arXiv

  3. [11]

    I., ¨Oberg, K

    Cleeves, L. I., ¨Oberg, K. I., Wilner, D. J., et al. 2016, ApJ, 832, 110, doi: 10.3847/0004-637X/832/2/110

    2016 doi

  4. [12]

    1997, A&A, 317, L55

    Dutrey, A., Guilloteau, S., & Guelin, M. 1997, A&A, 317, L55

    1997

  5. [13]

    2007, A&A, 464, 615, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20065385

    Dutrey, A., Henning, T., Guilloteau, S., et al. 2007, A&A, 464, 615, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20065385

    2007 doi

  6. [14]

    Jayawardhana, R., & Oliveira, J. M. 2010, A&A, 510, A72, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/200912810

    2010 doi

  7. [15]

    2011, ApJ, 726, 29, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/726/1/29

    Semenov, D. 2011, ApJ, 726, 29, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/726/1/29

    2011 doi

  8. [16]

    Garmire, G. P. 2008, ApJ, 688, 418, doi: 10.1086/592033

    2008 doi

  9. [17]

    E., Feigelson, E

    Glassgold, A. E., Feigelson, E. D., Montmerle, T., & Wolk, S. 2005, in Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference

    2005

  10. [18]

    E., Najita, J., & Igea, J

    Glassgold, A. E., Najita, J., & Igea, J. 1997, ApJ, 480, 344, doi: 10.1086/303952

    1997 doi

  11. [19]

    1998, ApJ, 492, 323, doi: 10.1086/305032

    Gullbring, E., Hartmann, L., Brice˜ no, C., & Calvet, N. 1998, ApJ, 492, 323, doi: 10.1086/305032

    1998 doi

  12. [20]

    E., Lada, E

    Haisch, Jr., K. E., Lada, E. A., & Lada, C. J. 2001, ApJL, 553, L153, doi: 10.1086/320685

    2001 doi

  13. [21]

    I., Herbst, E., & Leung, C

    Hasegawa, T. I., Herbst, E., & Leung, C. M. 1992, ApJS, 82, 167, doi: 10.1086/191713

    1992 doi

  14. [22]

    Johns-Krull, C. M. 2004, ApJ, 607, 369, doi: 10.1086/383340

    2004 doi

  15. [23]

    M., P´ erez, L

    Huang, J., Andrews, S. M., P´ erez, L. M., et al. 2018, ApJL, 869, L43, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/aaf7a0

    2018 doi

  16. [24]

    Ilgner, M., & Nelson, R. P. 2006, A&A, 455, 731, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20065308

    2006 doi

  17. [25]

    Lynden-Bell, D., & Pringle, J. E. 1974, MNRAS, 168, 603

    1974

  18. [26]

    2019, MNRAS, 486, 1094, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stz902

    Mackey, J., Walch, S., Seifried, D., et al. 2019, MNRAS, 486, 1094, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stz902

    2019 doi

  19. [27]

    R., Hollenbach, D

    Maloney, P. R., Hollenbach, D. J., & Tielens, A. G. G. M. 1996, ApJ, 466, 561, doi: 10.1086/177532

    1996 doi

  20. [28]

    1996, in IAU Colloq

    Montmerle, T., & Casanova, S. 1996, in IAU Colloq. 153: Magnetodynamic Phenomena in the Solar Atmosphere - Prototypes of Stellar Magnetic Activity, ed. Y. Uchida, T. Kosugi, & H. S. Hudson, 247 ¨Oberg, K. I., Guzm´ an, V. V., Furuya, K., et al. 2015, Nature, 520, 198, doi: 10....

    1996 doi

  21. [29]

    L., M´ enard, F., et al

    Pinte, C., Padgett, D. L., M´ enard, F., et al. 2008, A&A, 489, 633, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:200810121

    2008 doi

  22. [30]

    B., Hubickyj, O., Bodenheimer, P., et al

    Pollack, J. B., Hubickyj, O., Bodenheimer, P., et al. 1996, Icarus, 124, 62, doi: 10.1006/icar.1996.0190

    1996

  23. [31]

    Preibisch, T., & Feigelson, E. D. 2005, ApJS, 160, 390, doi: 10.1086/432094

    2005 doi

  24. [32]

    Smith, I. W. M., Herbst, E., & Chang, Q. 2004, MNRAS, 350, 323, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2004.07656.x

    2004

  25. [33]

    Skrutskie, M. F. 1989, AJ, 97, 1451, doi: 10.1086/115085

    1989 doi

  26. [34]

    A., ¨Oberg, K

    Walsh, C., Loomis, R. A., ¨Oberg, K. I., et al. 2016, ApJL, 823, L10, doi: 10.3847/2041-8205/823/1/L10

    2016 doi

  27. [35]

    Cowin, J. P. 2005, ApJ, 620, 1027, doi: 10.1086/427072

    2005 doi

  28. [36]

    P., & Cieza, L

    Williams, J. P., & Cieza, L. A. 2011, ARA&A, 49, 67, doi: 10.1146/annurev-astro-081710-102548

    2011 doi

  29. [37]

    J., Harnden, Jr., F

    Wolk, S. J., Harnden, Jr., F. R., Flaccomio, E., et al. 2005, ApJS, 160, 423, doi: 10.1086/432099 14 W aggoner, Cleeves APPENDIX A. PROTOPLANETARY DISK PHYSICAL CONDITIONS Within a protoplanetary disk, gas and dust density is highest along the mid-plane and near the central st...

    2005 doi

Pith tools

Reviewed August 14, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.