Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 5 minor 75 references

Emission from multiple molecular isotopologues in a high-inclination protoplanetary disk

T0 review · 4 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-08 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read A JWST MIRI-MRS spectrum of the edge-on disk MY Lup yields the first inner-disk detections of the rare isotopologues C18O16O and H13CN, opening isotopic fractionation in planet-forming regions to observation.

desk verdict Genuinely new inner-disk isotopologue detections that hold up; the derived isotope ratios are honestly labeled as model-dependent and need a closer look, but the paper deserves refereeing. read the letter →

arxiv 2502.05061 v1 pith:TG4AEKQQ submitted 2025-02-07 astro-ph.SR astro-ph.EPastro-ph.GA

Colette Salyk , Klaus M. Pontoppidan , Andrea Banzatti , Edwin Bergin , Nicole Arulanantham , Joan Najita , Geoffrey A. Blake , John Carr
show 2 more authors
Ke Zhang Chengyan Xie
This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.SRastro-ph.EPastro-ph.GA
keywords protoplanetarydisksisotopologuesJWSTMIRI-MRSCO2emissionHCNisotopicfractionationinnerdiskchemistryMYLup
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 reports a JWST MIRI-MRS spectrum of the nearly edge-on protoplanetary disk around the young star MY Lup and claims the first detections in an inner disk of the rare isotopologues C$^{18}$O$^{16}$O and H$^{13}$CN, along with tentative detections of C$^{17}$O$^{16}$O and HC$^{15}$N. A sympathetic reader would care because these molecules carry the isotope ratios used to test how volatiles are fractionated in the terrestrial-planet-forming region. The authors use LTE slab models to derive molecular temperatures, column densities, and emitting areas, finding cold, high-column CO$_2$ and HCN and unusually weak water. They interpret the spectrum as a combination of inner disk clearing and high inclination, and argue that MIRI-MRS can open inner-disk isotopologue astronomy even though the current ratios are too uncertain to distinguish fractionation scenarios.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing tool is a single-temperature, single-column LTE slab emission model (a 'slab model') applied to the blended Q-branch spectra: for each molecular species, a grid of column densities and temperatures is generated, the projected emitting area is scaled to match peak fluxes, and chi-squared contours locate the best fit. The key trick for isotopologues is using the Q-branch peak ratios of the main and rare species, with one isotope ratio fixed to an ISM value, to break the degeneracy between column density and abundance ratio. A second geometric ingredient is the high inclination: in a plane-parallel atmosphere, the path through the gas grows roughly as the secant of the inclination angle (a factor of 3–4 at MY Lup's 77° inclination), amplifying the line-of-sight column without requiring unusual abundances.

What would settle it

Take a deeper, higher-resolution MIRI spectrum of MY Lup that resolves the C$^{17}$O$^{16}$O and HC$^{15}$N Q branches: if the C$^{17}$O$^{16}$O feature disappears at higher signal-to-noise, the tentative $^{17}$O depletion is not real; if it persists with a peak ratio implying $^{16}$O/$^{17}$O below roughly 2000, the depletion is confirmed and simple mass-dependent fractionation alone cannot explain the isotope pattern.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central observational claim is that MY Lup's inner disk emits from multiple isotopologues of CO$_2$ and HCN, including the first clear detections of C$^{18}$O$^{16}$O and H$^{13}$CN in any inner disk and tentative detections of C$^{17}$O$^{16}$O and HC$^{15}$N. When fit with single-temperature, single-column LTE slabs, the emission requires CO$_2$ column densities of $3.5\times10^{18}$ to $5.6\times10^{18}$ cm$^{-2}$ at $T \approx 300$–$325$ K and a high HCN column of $1.4\times10^{19}$ cm$^{-2}$ at $T = 250$ K, with small emitting radii near 0.4–0.65 AU. The isotopologue Q-branch peak ratios, combined with assumed ISM carbon or oxygen ratios, yield $^{16}$O/$^{18}$O $\approx 381^{+132}_{-100}$, $^{12}$C/$^{13}$C $\approx 77^{+84}_{-25}$, and a marginal $^{16}$O/$^{17}$O that suggests mild depletion of $^{17}$O relative to ISM in both modeling approaches; all are consistent with ISM values within about 2σ. The paper proposes that MY Lup's unique spectrum is caused by a cleared inner disk that suppresses warm water, combined with the edge-on viewing geometry that lengthens the observed gas column.

Load-bearing premise

Everything derived about isotope ratios assumes the main and rare isotopologues of each molecule share a single well-mixed slab with one temperature and column density, an assumption the paper acknowledges is 'certainly not strictly true' for a disk with vertical and radial structure.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Trace isotopologues of CO$_2$ and HCN are detectable in inner disks with JWST MIRI-MRS, making inner-disk isotope ratios an observable quantity rather than an extrapolation from the solar system.
  • Nearly edge-on disks and disks with inner clearings are the most promising targets for isotopologue searches, since geometry and reduced dust opacity raise the observed gas column.
  • The derived ratios, while uncertain, are consistent with ISM values within about 2σ, so this dataset does not yet demand exotic fractionation; it sets the stage for higher-resolution tests.
  • If follow-up spectroscopy confirms the high CO$_2$ and HCN columns at cold temperatures, models invoking inner clearing and pebble drift of volatile-rich material become testable for MY Lup specifically.

Reading between the lines

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

  • A natural extension is to relax the single-slab assumption and fit the main and rare isotopologues with separate temperature layers; if the apparent $^{18}$O enhancement and $^{17}$O depletion shift together or vanish, the current isotope ratios are artifacts of vertical stratification.
  • A survey of high-inclination and transition disks with MIRI-MRS could map $^{12}$C/$^{13}$C and $^{16}$O/$^{18}$O/$^{17}$O in inner disks and compare directly with ALMA measurements of outer-disk CO isotopologues, exposing radial fractionation gradients.
  • The apparent link between high column density and isotopologue detectability implies a selection effect: any statistical sample of inner-disk isotope ratios will be biased toward the most column-rich, often edge-on, disks, which should be accounted for in population interpretations.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

4 major / 5 minor

Summary. This paper presents JWST MIRI-MRS spectroscopy of the high-inclination protoplanetary disk around MY Lup. The spectrum shows weak H2O emission but strong CO2 and HCN emission, and the authors report detections of the rare isotopologues C18O16O and H13CN, with tentative detections of C17O16O and HC15N. LTE slab modeling is used to derive temperatures, column densities, and emitting areas for H2O, CO2, and HCN, and isotopologue ratios are estimated by fixing either the carbon or oxygen isotope ratio to ISM values. The paper attributes the unusual spectral appearance to a combination of inner disk clearing and the near-edge-on viewing geometry, and discusses the implications for isotopic fractionation studies in inner disks.

Significance. If the line identifications are correct, the C18O16O and H13CN detections are the first in an inner protoplanetary disk and demonstrate that JWST MIRI-MRS can access trace isotopologues in the terrestrial-planet-forming region. This is a valuable observational result with clear follow-up potential. The paper is transparent about its modeling degeneracies, makes the reduced data publicly available, and places the results in the context of other MIRI-MRS disk spectra. The main quantitative conclusions on isotope ratios and column densities are, however, conditional on a single-slab LTE assumption and on fixing one isotope ratio to ISM values; the quoted uncertainties do not include the resulting systematic errors, so the fractionation interpretation is not yet supported at the claimed confidence.

major comments (4)
  1. [Section 4.2 and Appendix B] The central quantitative analysis assumes that all CO2 isotopologues arise from a single LTE slab with one temperature and column density. The paper's own residual analysis shows this assumption is already strained: the 13.88 micron and 16.2 micron features prefer high column densities (~1e18 cm^-2) while the red edge of the main CO2 Q branch near 14.98 micron prefers low column densities. Since the isotope-ratio estimates are derived from Q-branch peak ratios under the same single-slab assumption, the inconsistency introduces an unquantified systematic bias into the derived N and isotope ratios. The authors should either fit a multi-component or non-LTE model, or explicitly present the isotope ratios as conditional on the single-slab assumption with an estimate of the resulting systematic uncertainty.
  2. [Section 4.2, Table 1] The derivation of the isotope ratios is circular in a practical sense: the 16O/18O value of 381(+132,-100) is obtained after fixing 12C/13C to the ISM value of 68, while the 12C/13C value of 77(+84,-25) is obtained after fixing 16O/18O to the ISM value of 557. The paper explicitly acknowledges the N-versus-ratio degeneracy, but the quoted error bars nevertheless include only the statistical scatter under each fixed-ratio assumption. The systematic uncertainty from the fixed ratio and from the same-reservoir assumption is not propagated. Because the derived ratios are consistent with ISM values at only about 2 sigma, the statements in Section 5.1 about possible 18O enhancement and 17O depletion should be reframed as conditional constraints rather than measurements.
  3. [Section 4.3 and Figure 12] The HCN analysis has a similar load-bearing degeneracy. The HCN-only fit produces a family of models within the 1-sigma contour with 12C/13C values spanning roughly 21 to 373, and the combined HCN plus H13CN fit only tightly constrains the parameters after fixing 12C/13C to the ISM value. Consequently, the quoted NHCN = 1.4e19 cm^-2 and NH13CN = 2.0e17 cm^-2 are conditional on that fixed ratio and on the same-temperature, same-area assumption. The claim that the high HCN column density is supported by the isotopologue detection is therefore only as strong as the fixed-ratio assumption; this should be stated more prominently and the systematic dependence of NHCN on the assumed ratio should be quantified.
  4. [Section 5.2 and Figure 15] The geometric enhancement factor invoked to explain the high line-of-sight column densities assumes a plane-parallel slab with no self-absorption. The paper itself notes that the high inclination could produce self-absorption in the molecular lines, which would affect the measured fluxes and hence the derived column densities and ratios. Since the inclination argument is one of the two main explanations for MY Lup's unique spectrum, the authors should estimate the magnitude of possible self-absorption effects or clearly state that the column densities and ratios are upper/lower limits under the adopted geometry.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Abstract] The phrase 'observations at higher spectral resolving power is needed' should be 'observations at higher spectral resolving power are needed'.
  2. [Figure 7 caption] The caption refers to '12CO and 13CO' and to '12CO/C18O16O'; these should be '12CO2 and 13CO2' and '12CO2/C18O16O' to match the plotted species.
  3. [Table 1] The notation for isotope ratios is confusing: column (a) defines the ratio as main isotope divided by heavy isotope, while note (b) defines Ri as the heavy-to-main ratio. Please reconcile the definitions so the reader does not have to invert ratios when reading the table.
  4. [Section 4.2] The sentence describing C17O16O says 'a12CO2 P-branch line' with a missing space after the article; this should read 'a 12CO2 P-branch line'.
  5. [Section 5.1] The statement that 'It is not clear that there is a mechanism to explain enhancement in one heavy isotope with simultaneous depletion in another' would benefit from a reference to relevant photodissociation or chemical fractionation models, if one exists.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the detections are direct spectroscopic identifications, and the isotopologue ratio estimates are explicitly conditional fits, not self-referential predictions.

full rationale

The paper's central claims are empirical detections of C18O16O, H13CN, C17O16O, and HC15N, identified by Q-branch positions and HITRAN line data; these identifications do not depend on the model inputs. The slab-model temperatures, column densities, and emitting areas are fits to the spectra, and the paper explicitly acknowledges the N-T degeneracy in Section 4.2. The isotopologue ratios are obtained by fixing the complementary ratio to an assumed ISM value: Section 4.2 states 'we therefore cannot independently fit the column density and abundance ratio' and 'We start by fixing the C ratios to the ISM value (12C/13C=68) ... using the resulting constraints to pinpoint the oxygen isotope ratios.' This is transparent conditional model fitting rather than circularity, because the fitted 16O/18O and 12C/13C values are still constrained by independent spectral features (the C18O16O, 13CO2, and H13CN Q branches), rather than being algebraic identities of the fixed inputs. The paper twice discloses the conditioning: Section 5.1 notes 'one of the points we showed was artificially fixed to the ISM value on the x axis,' and Section 6 states that isotopologue fitting 'requires the fixing of isotopologue ratios.' The single-reservoir LTE assumption is acknowledged as 'certainly not strictly true' (Section 5.1), and Appendix B documents an internal inconsistency (the CO2 red edge preferring low N while the 16.2 um feature prefers high N), suggesting non-LTE or multi-component emission; this is a modeling limitation and a correctness risk, not a circular reduction. Self-citations (Pontoppidan et al. 2024 for data reduction, Salyk 2022 for spectools-ir, and the in-prep JDISCS survey for uniqueness context) are methodological or observational context, and no uniqueness theorem or ansatz is imported from them to force the results. The 'first ever detection' uniqueness claim depends partly on an in-prep survey citation, which is a completeness or evidence matter, not a circular derivation. No step of the claimed derivation chain is equivalent to its own input by construction.

Assumptions & free parameters 16 free parameters · 7 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central detections rest on standard spectroscopic modeling with a small number of fitted parameters (T, N, Aproj per molecule) and on literature isotope ratios used as fixed inputs. The isotope ratio estimates are fitted quantities conditional on the fixed ratios, not independent predictions. No new physical entities are introduced.

free parameters (16)
  • H2O_T = 336 K
    MCMC slab fit to 18 isolated water lines (Section 4.1).
  • H2O_logN = 18.00 cm-2
    MCMC slab fit (Section 4.1).
  • H2O_R = 1.20 AU
    Derived from Aproj assuming disk geometry with i=77 deg (Section 4.1).
  • CO2_T_fixedC = 325 K
    Grid fit to 12CO2 and 13CO2 with 12C/13C fixed to 68 (Section 4.2).
  • CO2_N_fixedC = 3.5e18 cm-2
    Grid fit, same as above (Section 4.2).
  • CO2_R_fixedC = 0.58 AU
    Derived from Aproj (Section 4.2).
  • CO2_T_fixedO = 300 K
    Grid fit to 12CO2 and C18O16O with 16O/18O fixed to 557 (Section 4.2).
  • CO2_N_fixedO = 5.6e18 cm-2
    Grid fit, same as above (Section 4.2).
  • CO2_R_fixedO = 0.65 AU
    Derived from Aproj (Section 4.2).
  • HCN_T = 250 K
    Grid fit to HCN and H13CN with 12C/13C fixed to 68 (Section 4.3).
  • HCN_N = 1.4e19 cm-2
    Same fit (Section 4.3).
  • HCN_R = 0.61 AU
    Derived from Aproj (Section 4.3).
  • H13CN_N = 2.0e17 cm-2
    Same fit (Section 4.3).
  • 16O/18O_ratio_fixedC = 381 (+132,-100)
    Derived by varying 16O/18O with N and T fixed from the fixed-C fit (Section 4.2).
  • 16O/17O_ratio_fixedC = 2272 (-882)
    Derived from the marginal C17O16O feature (Section 4.2).
  • 12C/13C_ratio_fixedO = 77 (+84,-25)
    Derived by varying 12C/13C with O fixed (Section 4.2).
assumptions (7)
  • domain assumption LTE slab model for all molecular emission
    All molecular emission is modeled as an isothermal slab in local thermodynamic equilibrium (Sections 4.2, 4.3).
  • domain assumption Single shared reservoir for isotopologues
    The 12CO2 and 13CO2 are assumed to emit from the same gas with the same T, N, R (Section 4.2). Acknowledged as 'certainly not strictly true' in Section 5.1.
  • domain assumption Disk geometry conversion Aproj = pi R^2 cos(i) with i=77 deg
    Used to convert emitting area to radius (Section 4.1).
  • domain assumption Continuum can be approximated by interpolation between line-free regions
    The continuum is estimated by iteratively selecting points below a smoothed spectrum (Section 2).
  • domain assumption ISM isotope ratios as fixed inputs
    12C/13C=68, 16O/18O=557, 16O/17O=2005 from Milam et al. 2005 and Wilson 1999 (Table 2).
  • standard math HITRAN line lists are accurate
    Molecular line positions and energies from HITRAN (Gordon et al. 2022).
  • domain assumption Fringe correction is stable over time
    The asteroid-based fringe correction assumes temporal stability of fringing (Section 2).

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Emission from multiple molecular isotopologues in a high-inclination protoplanetary disk." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/TG4AEKQQ

@misc{pith2026250205061,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Emission from multiple molecular isotopologues in a high-inclination protoplanetary disk},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/TG4AEKQQ}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2502.05061}
}
abstract

We present a MIRI-MRS spectrum of the high-inclination protoplanetary disk around the solar-mass (K0) star MY Lup, obtained as part of the JWST Disk Infrared Spectral Chemistry Survey (JDISCS). The spectrum shows an unusually weak water emission spectrum for a disk around a star of its spectral type, but strong emission from CO$_2$, HCN, and isotopologues of both molecules. This includes the first ever detection of C$^{18}$O$^{16}$O and H$^{13}$CN in an inner disk, as well as tentative detections of C$^{17}$O$^{16}$O and HC$^{15}$N. Slab modeling provides molecular temperatures, column densities and emitting areas of the detected molecules. The emitting molecular gas is cold compared to that of other observed protoplanetary disk spectra. We estimate the isotopologue ratios of CO$_2$ and HCN, albeit with significant uncertainty. We suggest that the unusual spectrum of MY Lup arises from a combination of inner disk clearing, which removes emission from warm water, and its nearly edge-on inclination, which enhances line-of-sight column densities, although unusual chemistry may also be required. MY Lup's spectrum highlights the potential to detect and measure trace isotopologues to study isotopic fractionation in protoplanetary disks; observations at higher spectral resolving power is needed to constrain the isotopologue ratios to greater precision.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2502.05061 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Observed MIRI-MRS spectrum of MY Lup (black, top), continuum fit (blue) and continuum-subtracted flux (black, bottom). Prominent atomic and molecular emission features are labeled; S(X) refers to H2 0-0 transitions. The broad feature at 10 µm is emission from solid silicates. Insets show continuum-subtracted spectra in the regions with significant HCN, CO2 and OH emission; vertical bars also highlight locations of t… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Continuum-subtracted MIRI-MRS spectrum of MY Lup (black) and Keck-NIRSPEC spectrum of weak-line T Tauri star TWA 7, convolved to a resolving power of R=3000 (blue) and scaled to visually match the MY Lup spectrum. Regions of the TWA 7 spectrum with high telluric contamination have been removed. lines because their high critical densities likely result in non-Local Thermodynamic Equilibrium (non-LTE) excita￾tion (Mei… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Line images of [Ne II], H2 S(1), 12CO2 and a combination of 5 H2O emission lines near 17 µm. Circles mask an inner working angle of 1 x 1.22 λ/D around the star. Yellow contours show the ALMA continuum from Andrews et al. (2018) (contours mark 5, 50 and 100σ). best-fit emission model is shown in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (15 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Portions of the continuum-subtracted MY Lup MIRI-MRS spectrum (black) and slab water emission model (blue) with T=336 K, N=9.9×1017 cm−2 , R=1.20 AU. Gray dashed lines mark locations of water lines used in the MCMC fit; note that rovibrational emission at 7 µ is not in…
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Observed continuum-subtracted MY Lup spectrum (black), best-fit slab water model convolved to a FWHM of 120 kms−1 (blue), and residuals (gray, offset) in the HCN and CO2-emitting regions. Vertical bars mark the same molecular Q branches highlighted in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE…
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: MY Lup MIRI-MRS continuum-subtracted and water model-subtracted spectrum in the CO2 emitting region (black) plus slab emission models for CO2 and isotopologues (various colors) assuming a C ratio fixed to the ISM value — see [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: (a) χ 2 contour plot for fits to the CO2 emission, as a function of temperature and CO2 column density. White solid contour lines mark 1,2, and 3-sigma confidence intervals on the best-fit model, shown with a white star. Dashed yellow lines show best-fit emitting radii…
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Continuum and water-subtracted MIRI-MRS spectrum of MY Lup (black) compared with 3 slab models (colors). Residuals (with regions contaminated by isotopologue or atomic emission removed) are shown below. The middle panels highlight two regions with significant differenc…
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Analysis with C ratios fixed to ISM values. (a) χ 2 diagram for combined 13CO2 and 12CO2 fit. White star shows the best-fit model, while white circles show models highlighted in panel (b). White solid and yellow dashed lines have the same meaning as in [PITH_FULL_IMAG…
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Analysis with 16O/18O ratio fixed to the ISM value. (a) χ 2 diagram for combined C18O 16O and CO2 fit. The white star shows the best-fit model, while white circles show models highlighted in panel (b). White solid and yellow dashed lines have the same meaning as in […
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Subtraction of CO2 model from water model-subtracted data in HCN-emitting region. a mechanism to explain enhancement in one heavy isotope with simultaneous depletion in another. Isotopic ratios are also consistent with ISM values to within ∼ 2σ, so observed enhancemen…
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: (a) χ 2 contours for a fit to HCN only. Here and in panel (b), a white star marks the best-fit model; white circles mark additional models explored in panel (c). White contours mark 1, 2 and 3σ confidence intervals assuming the minimum χ 2 red = 1. (b) χ 2 contours fo…
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: Left: Oxygen isotope fractionation relative to ISM ratios; following standard cosmochemistry notation, heavier O is on the upper right of the plot. δ 17O ′ is defined as 103 ln ( 17Ri/ 17RLocal ISM), δ 18O ′ = 103 ln ( 18Ri/ 18RLocal ISM), and Ri is the atomic ratio w…
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: Left: Best-fit CO2 column density vs. temperature for published slab models. For 2MASS-J16053215-1933159 we show the “Component II” fits, which are consistent with the non-detection of 13CO2 in that source (Tabone et al. 2023), and for Sz 98 we show both reported mode…
Figure 15
Figure 15. Figure 15: Schematic demonstrating how an edge-on line of sight can increase the optical path through the disk atmosphere as com￾pared to a face-on line of sight. inner clearing, the derived R reflects the width of the emit￾ting ring of material, but not its physical location in…
Figure 16
Figure 16. Figure 16: Close-up of selected H I transitions. Upper and lower electronic levels are shown in the upper right of each panel. Calvet, N., D’Alessio, P., Hartmann, L., et al. 2002, ApJ, 568, 1008. doi:10.1086/339061 Carr, J. S. & Najita, J. R. 2008, Science, 319, 1504. doi:10.11…
Figure 17
Figure 17. Figure 17: Upper level energies of emission lines in regions highlighted in Section 4.2 (from HITRAN database; Gordon et al. 2022); labels show the upper state quantum numbers (v1, v2, l2, v3, r) where vi are ith vibrational levels, l2 is the angular momentum of the v2 state, an…
Figure 18
Figure 18. Figure 18: Continuum-subtracted MIRI-MRS spectra (reduced by the JDISCS team Pontoppidan et al. 2024) for the four sources with the highest reported CO2 column densities: MY Lup (this work), Sz 98 (Gasman et al. 2023), GW Lup (Grant et al. 2023) and DF Tau (Grant et al. 2024). T…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

75 extracted references · 18 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    doi:10.1086/310837

    Aikawa, Y., Umebayashi, T., Nakano, T., et al.\ 1997, , 486, L51. doi:10.1086/310837

    work page doi:10.1086/310837 1997

  2. [2]

    M., Manara, C

    Alcal \'a , J. M., Manara, C. F., Natta, A., et al.\ 2017, , 600, A20. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201629929

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201629929 2017

  3. [3]

    M., Manara, C

    Alcal \'a , J. M., Manara, C. F., France, K., et al.\ 2019, , 629, A108. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201935657

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201935657 2019

  4. [4]

    M., Huang, J., P \'e rez, L

    Andrews, S. M., Huang, J., P \'e rez, L. M., et al.\ 2018, , 869, L41. doi:10.3847/2041-8213/aaf741

    doi:10.3847/2041-8213/aaf741 2018

  5. [5]

    P., Garufi, A., et al.\ 2018, , 863, 44

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

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aab846 2018

  6. [6]

    M., Carr, J

    Banzatti, A., Pontoppidan, K. M., Carr, J. S., et al.\ 2023, , 957, L22. doi:10.3847/2041-8213/acf5ec

    doi:10.3847/2041-8213/acf5ec 2023

  7. [7]

    M., et al.\ 2024, arXiv:2409.16255

    Banzatti, A., Salyk, C., Pontoppidan, K. M., et al.\ 2024, arXiv:2409.16255. doi:10.48550/arXiv.2409.16255

    arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2409.16255 2024

  8. [8]

    A., Bosman, A., Teague, R., et al.\ 2024, , 965, 147

    Bergin, E. A., Bosman, A., Teague, R., et al.\ 2024, , 965, 147. doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad3443

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad3443 2024

Show all 75 references
  1. [9]

    & Bergin, E.\ 2009, Science, 326, 1675

    Bethell, T. & Bergin, E.\ 2009, Science, 326, 1675. doi:10.1126/science.1176879

    2009 doi

  2. [10]

    doi:10.1007/s11214-015-0156-9

    Bockel \'e e-Morvan, D., Calmonte, U., Charnley, S., et al.\ 2015, , 197, 47. doi:10.1007/s11214-015-0156-9

    2015 doi

  3. [11]

    D., Bruderer, S., & van Dishoeck, E

    Bosman, A. D., Bruderer, S., & van Dishoeck, E. F.\ 2017, , 601, A36. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201629946

    2017 doi

  4. [12]

    D., Bergin, E

    Bosman, A. D., Bergin, E. A., Calahan, J. K., et al.\ 2022, , 933, L40. doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ac7d9f

    2022 doi

  5. [13]

    W., Shappee, B

    Bredall, J. W., Shappee, B. J., Gaidos, E., et al.\ 2020, , 496, 3257. doi:10.1093/mnras/staa1588

    2020 doi

  6. [14]

    F.\ 2015, , 575, A94

    Bruderer, S., Harsono, D., & van Dishoeck, E. F.\ 2015, , 575, A94. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201425009

    2015 doi

  7. [15]

    Bushouse, H., Eisenhamer, J., Dencheva, N., et al.\ 2024, Zenodo

    2024

  8. [16]

    K., Bergin, E

    Calahan, J. K., Bergin, E. A., & Bosman, A. D.\ 2022, , 934, L14. doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ac7e55

    2022 doi

  9. [17]

    doi:10.1086/339061

    Calvet, N., D'Alessio, P., Hartmann, L., et al.\ 2002, , 568, 1008. doi:10.1086/339061

    2002 doi

  10. [18]

    Carr, J. S. & Najita, J. R.\ 2008, Science, 319, 1504. doi:10.1126/science.1153807

    2008 doi

  11. [19]

    Carr, J. S. & Najita, J. R.\ 2011, , 733, 102. doi:10.1088/0004-637X/733/2/102

    2011 doi

  12. [20]

    N., Grossman, L., & Mayeda, T

    Clayton, R. N., Grossman, L., & Mayeda, T. K.\ 1973, Science, 182, 485. doi:10.1126/science.182.4111.485

    1973 doi

  13. [21]

    W., Lang, D., et al.\ 2013, , 125, 306

    Foreman-Mackey, D., Hogg, D. W., Lang, D., et al.\ 2013, , 125, 306. doi:10.1086/670067

    2013 doi

  14. [22]

    F., Grant, S

    Gasman, D., van Dishoeck, E. F., Grant, S. L., et al.\ 2023, , 679, A117. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202347005

    2023 doi

  15. [23]

    E., Rothman, L

    Gordon, I. E., Rothman, L. S., Hargreaves, R. J., et al.\ 2022, , 277, 107949. doi:10.1016/j.jqsrt.2021.107949

    2022

  16. [24]

    L., van Dishoeck, E

    Grant, S. L., van Dishoeck, E. F., Tabone, B., et al.\ 2023, , 947, L6. doi:10.3847/2041-8213/acc44b

    2023 doi

  17. [25]

    L., Kurtovic, N

    Grant, S. L., Kurtovic, N. T., van Dishoeck, E. F., et al.\ 2024, arXiv:2406.10217. doi:10.48550/arXiv.2406.10217

    2024 doi arXiv

  18. [26]

    doi:10.1088/1538-3873/ad3455

    Henning, T., Kamp, I., Samland, M., et al.\ 2024, , 136, 054302. doi:10.1088/1538-3873/ad3455

    2024 doi

  19. [27]

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201730524

    Hily-Blant, P., Magalhaes, V., Kastner, J., et al.\ 2017, , 603, L6. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201730524

    2017 doi

  20. [28]

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201936750

    Hily-Blant, P., Magalhaes de Souza, V., Kastner, J., et al.\ 2019, , 632, L12. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201936750

    2019 doi

  21. [29]

    R., Roellig, T

    Houck, J. R., Roellig, T. L., van Cleve, J., et al.\ 2004, , 154, 18. doi:10.1086/423134

    2004 doi

  22. [30]

    M., Dullemond, C

    Huang, J., Andrews, S. M., Dullemond, C. P., et al.\ 2018, , 869, L42. doi:10.3847/2041-8213/aaf740

    2018 doi

  23. [31]

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac1e96

    Kalyaan, A., Pinilla, P., Krijt, S., et al.\ 2021, , 921, 84. doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac1e96

    2021 doi

  24. [32]

    Karhu, J.A., Bekker, A. (2023). Carbon Isotopes in the Solar System. In: Gargaud, M., et al. Encyclopedia of Astrobiology. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-65093-6\_5395

    2023 doi

  25. [33]

    W., Sargent, A

    Koerner, D. W., Sargent, A. I., & Beckwith, S. V. W.\ 1993, , 106, 2. doi:10.1006/icar.1993.1154

    1993

  26. [34]

    C., Biver, N., Bockel \'e e-Morvan, D., et al.\ 2013, , 774, L3

    Lis, D. C., Biver, N., Bockel \'e e-Morvan, D., et al.\ 2013, , 774, L3. doi:10.1088/2041-8205/774/1/L3

    2013 doi

  27. [35]

    doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ad99d2

    Long, F., Pascucci, I., Houge, A., et al.\ 2025, , 978, L30. doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ad99d2

    2025 doi

  28. [36]

    Lyons, J. R. & Young, E. D.\ 2005, , 435, 317. doi:10.1038/nature03557

    2005 doi

  29. [37]

    doi:10.1016/j.epsl.2011.10.040

    Marty, B.\ 2012, Earth and Planetary Science Letters, 313, 56. doi:10.1016/j.epsl.2011.10.040

    2012 doi

  30. [38]

    D., Kallio, A

    McKeegan, K. D., Kallio, A. P. A., Heber, V. S., et al.\ 2011, Science, 332, 1528. doi:10.1126/science.1204636

    2011 doi

  31. [39]

    M., Blake, G

    Meijerink, R., Pontoppidan, K. M., Blake, G. A., et al.\ 2009, , 704, 1471. doi:10.1088/0004-637X/704/2/1471

    2009 doi

  32. [40]

    N., Savage, C., Brewster, M

    Milam, S. N., Savage, C., Brewster, M. A., et al.\ 2005, , 634, 1126. doi:10.1086/497123

    2005 doi

  33. [41]

    F.\ 2014, , 572, A96

    Miotello, A., Bruderer, S., & van Dishoeck, E. F.\ 2014, , 572, A96. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201424712

    2014 doi

  34. [42]

    A.\ 2009, , 700, L92

    Moynier, F., Dauphas, N., & Podosek, F. A.\ 2009, , 700, L92. doi:10.1088/0004-637X/700/2/L92

    2009 doi

  35. [43]

    E., \"O berg, K

    Mu \ n oz-Romero, C. E., \"O berg, K. I., Banzatti, A., et al.\ 2024, , 964, 36. doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad20e9

    2024 doi

  36. [44]

    doi:10.1086/300636

    Muzerolle, J., Hartmann, L., & Calvet, N.\ 1998, , 116, 2965. doi:10.1086/300636

    1998 doi

  37. [45]

    R., \'A d \'a mkovics, M., & Glassgold, A

    Najita, J. R., \'A d \'a mkovics, M., & Glassgold, A. E.\ 2011, , 743, 147. doi:10.1088/0004-637X/743/2/147

    2011 doi

  38. [46]

    R., Carr, J

    Najita, J. R., Carr, J. S., Salyk, C., et al.\ 2018, , 862, 122. doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aaca39

    2018 doi

  39. [47]

    doi:10.1038/s41586-023-06317-9

    Perotti, G., Christiaens, V., Henning, T., et al.\ 2023, , 620, 516. doi:10.1038/s41586-023-06317-9

    2023 doi

  40. [48]

    M., Salyk, C., Blake, G

    Pontoppidan, K. M., Salyk, C., Blake, G. A., et al.\ 2010, , 720, 887. doi:10.1088/0004-637X/720/1/887

    2010 doi

  41. [49]

    M., Salyk, C., Banzatti, A., et al.\ 2024, , 963, 158

    Pontoppidan, K. M., Salyk, C., Banzatti, A., et al.\ 2024, , 963, 158. doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad20f0

    2024 doi

  42. [50]

    A., Savage, P

    Pringle, E. A., Savage, P. S., Jackson, M. G., et al.\ 2013, , 779, 123. doi:10.1088/0004-637X/779/2/123

    2013 doi

  43. [51]

    H., Wright, G

    Rieke, G. H., Wright, G. S., B \"o ker, T., et al.\ 2015, , 127, 584. doi:10.1086/682252

    2015 doi

  44. [52]

    doi:10.1088/0004-637X/801/1/31

    Rigliaco, E., Pascucci, I., Duchene, G., et al.\ 2015, , 801, 31. doi:10.1088/0004-637X/801/1/31

    2015 doi

  45. [53]

    A., Schreiber, M

    Romero, G. A., Schreiber, M. R., Cieza, L. A., et al.\ 2012, , 749, 79. doi:10.1088/0004-637X/749/1/79

    2012 doi

  46. [54]

    S., Jacquemart, D., Barbe, A., et al.\ 2005, , 96, 139

    Rothman, L. S., Jacquemart, D., Barbe, A., et al.\ 2005, , 96, 139. doi:10.1016/j.jqsrt.2004.10.008

    2005 doi

  47. [55]

    M., Blake, G

    Salyk, C., Pontoppidan, K. M., Blake, G. A., et al.\ 2008, , 676, L49. doi:10.1086/586894

    2008 doi

  48. [56]

    A., Boogert, A

    Salyk, C., Blake, G. A., Boogert, A. C. A., et al.\ 2009, , 699, 330. doi:10.1088/0004-637X/699/1/330

    2009 doi

  49. [57]

    github.com/csalyk/spectools\_ir: First release, v1.0.0, Zenodo, 1104 doi: 10.5281/zenodo.5818682

    doi

  50. [58]

    & Golay, M

    Savitzky, A. & Golay, M. J. E.\ 1964, Analytical Chemistry, 36, 1627

    1964

  51. [59]

    R., Henning, T., Christiaens, V., et al.\ 2024, , 962, 8

    Schwarz, K. R., Henning, T., Christiaens, V., et al.\ 2024, , 962, 8. doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad1393

    2024 doi

  52. [60]

    L., Pontoppidan, K

    Smith, R. L., Pontoppidan, K. M., Young, E. D., et al.\ 2009, , 701, 163. doi:10.1088/0004-637X/701/1/163

    2009 doi

  53. [61]

    L., Pontoppidan, K

    Smith, R. L., Pontoppidan, K. M., Young, E. D., et al.\ 2015, , 813, 120. doi:10.1088/0004-637X/813/2/120

    2015 doi

  54. [62]

    F., et al.\ 2023, Nature Astronomy, 7, 805

    Tabone, B., Bettoni, G., van Dishoeck, E. F., et al.\ 2023, Nature Astronomy, 7, 805. doi:10.1038/s41550-023-01965-3

    2023 doi

  55. [63]

    A., Perevalov, V

    Tashkun, S. A., Perevalov, V. I., Teffo, J.-L., et al.\ 2003, , 82, 165. doi:10.1016/S0022-4073(03)00152-3

    2003 doi

  56. [64]

    F., Grant, S

    Temmink, M., van Dishoeck, E. F., Grant, S. L., et al.\ 2024, , 686, A117. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202348911

    2024 doi

  57. [65]

    F., Gasman, D., et al.\ 2024, , 689, A330

    Temmink, M., van Dishoeck, E. F., Gasman, D., et al.\ 2024, , 689, A330. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202450355

    2024 doi

  58. [66]

    Thiemens, M. H. & Heidenreich, J. E.\ 1983, Science, 219, 1073. doi:10.1126/science.219.4588.1073

    1983

  59. [67]

    P., Ansdell, M., et al.\ 2018, , 854, 177

    van der Marel, N., Williams, J. P., Ansdell, M., et al.\ 2018, , 854, 177. doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aaaa6b

    2018 doi

  60. [68]

    E., et al.\ 2020, Nature Methods, 17, 261

    Virtanen, P., Gommers, R., Oliphant, T. E., et al.\ 2020, Nature Methods, 17, 261. doi:10.1038/s41592-019-0686-2

    2020 doi

  61. [69]

    F., Tabone, B., et al.\ 2024, , 682, A91

    Vlasblom, M., van Dishoeck, E. F., Tabone, B., et al.\ 2024, , 682, A91. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202348224

    2024 doi

  62. [70]

    L.\ 1999, Reports on Progress in Physics, 62, 143

    Wilson, T. L.\ 1999, Reports on Progress in Physics, 62, 143. doi:10.1088/0034-4885/62/2/002

    1999 doi

  63. [71]

    S., Rieke, G

    Wright, G. S., Rieke, G. H., Glasse, A., et al.\ 2023, , 135, 048003. doi:10.1088/1538-3873/acbe66

    2023 doi

  64. [72]

    doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ad0ed9

    Xie, C., Pascucci, I., Long, F., et al.\ 2023, , 959, L25. doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ad0ed9

    2023 doi

  65. [73]

    C., Nomura, H., Furuya, K., et al.\ 2022, , 932, 126

    Yoshida, T. C., Nomura, H., Furuya, K., et al.\ 2022, , 932, 126. doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac6efb

    2022 doi

  66. [74]

    & Kuramoto, K.\ 2004, Science, 305, 1763

    Yurimoto, H. & Kuramoto, K.\ 2004, Science, 305, 1763. doi:10.1126/science.1100989

    2004 doi

  67. [75]

    K., Guo, Y., O'Nions, R

    Zhu, X. K., Guo, Y., O'Nions, R. K., et al.\ 2001, , 412, 311

    2001

Pith tools

Reviewed August 8, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.