Pith. sign in

REVIEW 5 major objections 6 minor 44 references

When the Wall Fell: Study of Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons in T Chamaeleontis using JWST

T0 review · 5 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-06 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read The paper claims that PAH emission in T Cha's outer disk brightened after its inner wall collapsed, with the 11.2 micron band tripling in flux while its profile shape stayed unchanged.

desk verdict The paper's new 2005 Spitzer PAH detections look real, but the headline factor-of-three variability claim is built on an uncalibrated epoch comparison and should be substantially toned down. read the letter →

arxiv 2507.21639 v1 pith:DLZVCCZN submitted 2025-07-29 astro-ph.SR astro-ph.GA

R. Arun This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.SRastro-ph.GA
keywords polycyclicaromatichydrocarbonsTChamaeleontistransitionaldisksinnerdiskwallJWSTMIRISpitzerIRSPAHchargestatemid-infraredvariability
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 argues that the transitional disk around T Cha, a young G8 star, responded to the destruction of its inner dust wall by shining brighter in PAH emission. Using the 2005 Spitzer IRS low-resolution spectrum, it reports the first detection of weak 6.2, 7.7, and 8.6 micron PAH bands from that epoch; the 2022 JWST MIRI MRS spectrum then shows the 11.2 micron band roughly three times brighter, with an unchanged band shape and a PAH population that stays about 75 percent neutral. The mechanism proposed is simple: with the wall gone, more ultraviolet photons reach the outer disk surface and excite the same population of small, mostly neutral PAHs harder. If correct, T Cha becomes a benchmark for watching disk evolution and UV-driven PAH processing in real time.

What carries the argument

The central object is the 11.2 micron PAH band, the solo C-H out-of-plane bending mode of large neutral PAHs, used as a flux-and-shape tracer across epochs. Its companion diagnostics are the 6.2/11.2 and 7.7/11.2 flux ratios and the (11.2+11.0)/7.7 versus (11.2+11.0)/3.3 charge-size grid, plus the PAH spectral classification into classes A, B, and C defined by band peak positions and shapes. The argument runs by comparing continuum-subtracted, spline-anchored spectra from 2004 Spitzer SH, 2005 Spitzer SL, and 2022 JWST MIRI MRS, after Gaussian decomposition of the 6 micron complex.

What would settle it

Re-reduce the 2005 Spitzer IRS SL observation with an independent flux calibration, or compare its 11.2 micron band flux against contemporaneous photometry; if the 2005 flux is off by more than the quoted uncertainty, the claimed factor-of-three increase shrinks. Alternatively, re-observe T Cha in a wall-high state with JWST MIRI MRS and check whether the 11.2 micron flux returns to the Spitzer level.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that the 'seesaw' inner-wall collapse in T Cha did not just rearrange continuum emission; it directly modulated PAH fluorescence in the outer disk. The 2005 Spitzer IRS SL spectrum, previously unexamined at PAH wavelengths, shows weak 6.2, 7.7, and 8.6 micron emission, so PAHs were present before the wall vanished. In the 2022 JWST MIRI MRS spectrum, the 11.2 micron band flux is about three times higher than in 2004-2005 while the band shape is unchanged, and the 6.2/11.2 ratio rises from 0.77 to 1.34, yet the PAH population stays about 75 percent neutral with Nc <= 30. The paper reads these together as evidence of more UV photons, not harder UV, reaching the outer disk and exciting the same population of small, neutral PAHs more intensely.

Load-bearing premise

The 2005 Spitzer IRS SL spectrum is assumed to be on the same absolute flux scale as the 2022 JWST MIRI MRS spectrum, despite different resolution, aperture, and pipeline, so the claimed factor-of-three increase in the 11.2 micron flux rests on this comparability.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The 2005 Spitzer SL detection establishes that PAHs were already present in T Cha's outer disk before the inner wall collapsed, so the JWST detections are a brightening, not a first appearance.
  • The factor-of-three increase in 11.2 micron flux, with unchanged profile shape and no 11.0 micron cation bump, indicates the wall destruction delivered more UV photons to the outer disk without significantly changing PAH charge or size.
  • The 6.2/11.2 and 7.7/11.2 ratios nearly double yet stay in the low-ionization regime, placing T Cha at about 75 percent neutral on the PAH charge-size grid.
  • The class C profiles with a weak class A subcomponent at 6.19 and 7.6 microns support a second, harder UV source, likely accretion hotspots, superimposed on the soft G8 photosphere.
  • T Cha becomes a benchmark target for time-domain PAH studies, since its wall-high and wall-low states can be scheduled from photometric monitoring.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The same comparison could be applied to other transitional disks that show seesaw variability; if their 11.2 micron flux also rises without profile change, the T Cha pattern is a general consequence of inner-wall destruction rather than a peculiarity.
  • A triggered JWST campaign during a wall-high state would test whether the 6.2 and 7.7 micron profiles move toward class B while 11.2 stays fixed, directly checking the accretion-hotspot hypothesis.
  • Because the 2005 spectrum was already in archival data, re-examining other Spitzer SL spectra of variable transition disks could uncover more pre-wall PAH baselines without new observations.
  • The paper's use of the 2006 3.3 micron flux for both epochs leaves the JWST charge-size point dependent on the assumption that the 3.3 micron band rose like 11.2; a contemporaneous NIRSpec observation would remove that assumption.
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

5 major / 6 minor

Summary. The paper analyzes PAH emission in the transitional disk of T Cha using a 2022 JWST/MIRI MRS spectrum, two archival Spitzer/IRS spectra from 2004 and 2005, and a 2006 VLT/ISAAC L-band spectrum. It reports first detections of 6.2, 7.7, and 8.6 micron PAH features in the 2005 Spitzer low-resolution spectrum, interprets the 11.2 micron flux increase between the Spitzer and JWST epochs as a consequence of inner-wall destruction allowing more UV photons to reach the outer disk, and uses PAH diagnostic grids to argue for a largely neutral, small (N_C < 30) PAH population. The paper also classifies the PAH profiles as class C with a weak class A sub-component and interprets the weak 12.7/11.2 ratio as evidence for zigzag PAH structures.

Significance. If the flux comparisons and charge-size inference hold, the paper provides a rare multi-epoch view of PAH response to a dramatic disk-geometry change, using JWST and archival Spitzer data to connect inner-disk variability to outer-disk PAH excitation. The explicit comparison with reference sources and the identification of T Cha as a benchmark for temporal PAH monitoring are useful contributions. The paper also gives a detailed description of continuum subtraction, Gaussian decomposition, and Monte Carlo flux uncertainties. However, the central variability and charge-state claims currently rest on flux ratios that are not placed on a common instrument scale, on a profile comparison that does not account for the very different spectral resolutions, and on model-grid placements that lie outside the grid; these load-bearing issues prevent the paper from being accepted in its present form.

major comments (5)
  1. [Abstract; §3.3, §3.4, Table 3] The headline factor-of-three increase in the 11.2 micron PAH flux is not supported by the better-controlled comparison. Table 3 lists 11.0+11.2 fluxes of (2.85±0.30)e-13 for the 2004 SH spectrum and (5.40±0.24)e-13 for the 2005 SL spectrum, a factor of ~1.9 within one year; §3.3 reports a 2022/2005 ratio of ~1.75, and the abstract's factor of three uses the 2004 SH baseline rather than the 2005 SL baseline. The abstract and §5 should quote the 2005-SL-based ratio or explicitly justify why the 2004 SH baseline is preferred.
  2. [§3.1, §3.3, §3.4] The epoch-to-epoch flux comparison is not on a secure absolute scale. Section 3.1 attributes the higher 2005 flux to 'the larger aperture of Spitzer low resolution data,' but no aperture/PSF matching, slit-loss correction, or systematic uncertainty is applied when comparing the 2005 SL fluxes with the 2022 MIRI MRS fluxes. If aperture effects can change the measured flux by a factor of ~1.9 between two Spitzer modes, then the 2022/2005 ratio of ~1.75 cannot be interpreted as astrophysical variability without a demonstrated common flux scale or an explicit systematic error budget.
  3. [§3.4, Figure 4] The claim that the 11.2 micron profile shape is 'remarkably stable' across all three epochs is not supported by the available data. The 2005 Spitzer SL spectrum has R~60, leaving the 11.2 micron band unresolved, while JWST MIRI MRS has R~3000; comparing normalized profile shapes requires convolving the JWST spectrum to the SL resolution or fitting both with instrument-convolved models, and no such convolution is described. The stable-profile conclusion should be restricted to comparisons where resolution differences are explicitly accounted for.
  4. [§3.3, §4.2] The interpretation of the 6.2/11.2 micron ratio increase as consistent with an unchanged ~75% neutral PAH population needs quantitative reconciliation. The paper reports 6.2/11.2 = 0.77±0.17 in the Spitzer epoch and 1.34±0.04 in the JWST epoch, and 7.7/11.2 increases from 1.59±0.17 to 2.9±0.08. Since these ratios are the primary ionization diagnostics used in §4.2, the paper should state explicitly how such changes map onto the charge-size grid and whether the uncertainties in the grid placement encompass both epochs.
  5. [§4.2, Figure 7] The charge-size inference in §4.2 depends on assumptions that are acknowledged but not quantified. T Cha lies outside the model grid in both ratios, the 75% neutral and N_C<30 values come from extrapolation, the 11.2/3.3 ratio is scaled by a literature-based factor of 0.66, and the 3.3 micron flux is assumed to increase in the JWST epoch because no JWST 3.3 micron measurement exists. Please present the measured ratios with and without the 0.66 correction, include the systematic uncertainty from the grid extrapolation, and label the 75% neutral and N_C<30 values as model-dependent estimates rather than direct measurements.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Abstract; §3.3] The abstract's 'factor of three' should be harmonized with the ~1.75 factor reported in §3.3 for the Spitzer SL to JWST comparison; using the 2004 SH baseline for the abstract is misleading without justification.
  2. [§3.4] The sentence 'the 11.2 µm band flux has increased by a factor of ∼3 compared to the Spitzer SH+LH measurements in 2004 and by a factor of∼1.75' is incomplete; it should state that the second factor is relative to the 2005 SL measurement.
  3. [Figure 4] The Figure 4 caption and the text appear to disagree about which panel shows absolute fluxes and which shows normalized profiles; the text says the left panel reveals the flux increase, while the caption labels the left panel as normalized and the right panel as absolute flux.
  4. [Table 3] The notations '12.7*' and '12.7c' in Table 3 are not both defined; the footnote explains the asterisk but not the superscript 'c', and the 2004 12.7 micron flux appears to have no [Ne II] subtraction indicated.
  5. [§3.2.3] For the first-detection claim in the 2005 SL spectrum, please provide per-band detection significances after continuum subtraction; at R~60 the 6.2 and 7.7 micron features are broad and blended, and the quoted uncertainties in Table 3 suggest only ~4-5σ detections for some bands.
  6. [Throughout] There are numerous typographical errors, including 'T able 1', 'usingJWST', 'ISSAC' for ISAAC, 'an comprehensive', and the title 'When the W all F ell'; a careful proofreading pass is needed.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: measured fluxes and external grids carry the argument.

full rationale

The paper's central claims are epoch-to-epoch flux comparisons and PAH charge/size placement. The 11.2 micron flux increase is computed directly from measured integrated fluxes in Table 3 (JWST 9.15e-13 vs Spitzer 2005 5.40e-13 and 2004 2.85e-13) rather than from any model fitted to those same fluxes. The 'factor of three' language is the paper's own arithmetic, not a prediction generated from an input. The 75% neutral and N_C<30 inference is obtained by placing the measured (11.2+11.0)/7.7 and (11.2+11.0)/3.3 ratios on the externally published Maragkoudakis et al. (2020) diagnostic grid; the 0.66 scaling of the 11.2/3.3 ratio is a literature correction from Mackie et al. (2022) and Lemmens et al. (2023), independent of the present data. Self-citations (Arun et al. 2023, 2025) supply continuum anchor points and comparison-source selection, but they are not load-bearing proof of any result and are paired with non-self references such as Seok & Li (2017). The paper itself flags the limited sensitivity of the 11.2 micron profile to radiation hardness, and the cross-instrument absolute calibration questions raised by the 2004 SH vs 2005 SL flux ratio are validity concerns, not circularity: the derivation does not define its output in terms of its input. No equation or fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction, and no uniqueness claim is imported from the author's own prior work.

Assumptions & free parameters 2 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The paper introduces no new physical entities. It relies on established PAH classification schemes, external diagnostic grids, and a literature-based correction factor. The main load-bearing inputs are the assumed comparability of the multi-epoch spectra and the assumed causal link between inner wall destruction and increased UV illumination.

free parameters (2)
  • 11.2/3.3 flux ratio scaling factor = 0.66
    Applied to the measured 11.2/3.3 ratio to correct for the systematic overestimation of the 3.3 micron band in the Maragkoudakis et al. (2020) grid, as reported by Mackie et al. (2022) and Lemmens et al. (2023). This factor is not fitted to T Cha data but is a literature-derived correction; the final charge-size placement depends on it (Section 4.2).
  • Assumed JWST-epoch 3.3 micron flux increase = not measured; assumed to scale like 11.2 micron
    The 3.3 micron flux from VLT/ISAAC (2006) is used for both epochs. The paper assumes it increased in the JWST epoch in the same way as the 11.2 micron band, which moves the JWST point leftward on the charge-size grid and is used to derive the 75% neutral fraction (Section 4.2).
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption The PAH emission classification scheme (classes A, B, C, D) based on band peak positions and shapes applies to T Cha.
    Used throughout Section 3.5 to classify the 6.2, 7.7, and 11.2 micron features of T Cha; the classification is from Peeters et al. (2002) and van Diedenhoven et al. (2004).
  • domain assumption The Maragkoudakis et al. (2020) PAH charge-size diagnostic grid, computed for a 6 eV photon field, is applicable to T Cha's PAH population, including extrapolation outside the grid.
    Section 4.2 places T Cha on the grid; T Cha lies outside the model tracks, and the paper extrapolates to obtain NC < 30 and 75% neutral.
  • domain assumption The 'seesaw' variability in T Cha is caused by the destruction of the inner dust wall, allowing more UV photons to reach the outer disk.
    This causal interpretation (from Xie et al. 2025) is used to explain the increased PAH fluxes in the JWST epoch (Sections 1, 3.1, 3.4).
  • domain assumption The 6.0 micron feature is attributed to C=O/olefinic C=C bonds, and the 12.7/11.2 ratio traces duo/trio hydrogen modes, with zigzag PAHs dominating 11.2 emission.
    Used to infer carbonyl substitution and zigzag structure (Sections 3.5.1, 3.5.3).

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of When the Wall Fell: Study of Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons in T Chamaeleontis using JWST." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/DLZVCCZN

@misc{pith2026250721639,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: When the Wall Fell: Study of Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons in T Chamaeleontis using JWST},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/DLZVCCZN}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2507.21639}
}
read the original abstract

We investigate the polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon (PAH) emission features of T Cha, a G8-type T Tauri star that has exhibited "seesaw"-type mid-infrared continuum variability over nearly two decades due to the destruction of the disk's inner wall, using JWST/MIRI and Spitzer observations. We report the first detection of weak PAH emission at 6.2, 7.7, and 8.6 microns in the Spitzer/IRS spectrum from 2005. The inner wall destruction in the 2022 JWST epoch allowed more ultraviolet photons to reach the outer disk, increasing the flux levels of PAH bands and enabling their detection well above the continuum. The 11.2 micron PAH flux increases by a factor of three, yet its profile shape remains remarkably stable. The 6.2/11.2 micron flux ratio has increased, but the charge state of the PAH population remains 75% neutral. The PAH features exhibit a "class C" spectral profile, with redshifted peaks and broadened wings consistent with emission from low-mass T Tauri disks. A weak 12.7/11.2 micron ratio points to a lower abundance of duo- and trio-hydrogen modes, implying a predominantly zigzag carbon structure. A faint "class A" sub-component in the 6.2 and 7.7 micron bands may indicate additional PAH processing by ultraviolet radiation from accretion hotspots. Placement on PAH charge-size grids locates T Cha in the low-ionisation, small-size regime (NC <= 30), signifying a largely neutral PAH population across multiple epochs spanning 18 years. Through multi-epoch, high-resolution data from JWST and Spitzer, we identify T Cha as a benchmark source for probing disk evolution and PAH processing, emphasizing the potential of temporal monitoring with JWST.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2507.21639 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Comparison of the JWST/MIRI MRS spectrum of T Cha (red) with two Spitzer/IRS datasets: the 2004 SH module (blue) and the 2005 SL module (black). The 2005 data covers the 5–15 µm range, while the 2004 SH observation starts at 10 µm. The “seesaw” effect is evident, with the JWST continuum showing diminished flux below 10 µm but enhanced emission at longer wavelengths, compared to the 2005 Spitzer spectra. Forbidden li… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Gaussian decomposition of the 6 µm PAH emis￾sion in T Cha. The median-filtered spectrum is shown in black. The coloured lines indicate individual gaussian com￾ponents, and the red line marks the total fitted model. The lower panel plots residuals (data minus model). The primary emission peak at 6.273 µm is significantly shifted relative to the more commonly reported 6.2 µm feature, characteristic of border class B/c… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Continuum-subtracted mid-IR spectra of T Cha from JWST/MIRI (red) and archival Spitzer SL observations (black). Top panel: Continuum-subtracted spectral comparison showing prominent emission features between 5–14 µm in both JWST and Spitzer. Bottom panel: Same spectra normalized to the peak of the 11.2 µm PAH feature, emphasizing the ratios have not changed significantly in 18 year timescale [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figure… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (4 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Comparison of the 11.2 µm PAH feature in T Cha’s continuum-subtracted spectra from different epochs (left) and 11.2 µm PAH feature normalized to its peak amplitude(right).: Spitzer SH (blue ) in 2004, Spitzer SL (black) in 2005, and JWST/MIRI (red) in 2022. (left) All …
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Composite figure showing continuum-subtracted, normalized PAH spectra from T Cha and four reference sources. Top Panel (6.2 µm): Spectra are normalized to unity at their 6.2 µm peak. Shown are the JWST HII PDR template (blue), HD 97300 (black), PDS 144N (green), SR 21A…
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Variation of the 6.2 µm peak position (left) and the 6.0/6.2 (right) ratio with Teff for T Cha and reference stars. class B and Class C, whereas PDS 144N and HD 97300 has a class B and Class A type PAH features respec￾tively. This also shows that with the decrease of U…
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Location of T Cha observed in JWST (black star) and Spitzer (brown triangle) on the PAH charge–size diag￾nostic grid constructed using data from A. Maragkoudakis et al. (2020). The grid shows model tracks for PAH populations with varying neutral-to-cation ratios (color…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

44 extracted references · 16 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    2023, MNRAS, 523, 1601, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad1511

    Arun, R., Mathew, B., Manoj, P., et al. 2023, MNRAS, 523, 1601, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad1511

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stad1511 2023

  2. [2]

    2025, Research in Astronomy and Astrophysics, 25, 095005, doi: 10.1088/1674-4527/ade65c Astropy Collaboration, Robitaille, T

    Arun, R., Mathew, B., Shridharan, B., et al. 2025, Research in Astronomy and Astrophysics, 25, 095005, doi: 10.1088/1674-4527/ade65c Astropy Collaboration, Robitaille, T. P., Tollerud, E. J., et al. 2013, A&A, 558, A33, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201322068 Astropy Collaboration, Price-Whelan, A. M., Sip˝ ocz, B. M., et al. 2018, AJ, 156, 123, doi: 10.3847/153...

    work page doi:10.1088/1674-4527/ade65c 2025

  3. [3]

    S., Pascucci, I., Gorti, U., et al

    Bajaj, N. S., Pascucci, I., Gorti, U., et al. 2024, AJ, 167, 127, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/ad22e1

    doi:10.3847/1538-3881/ad22e1 2024

  4. [4]

    W., Peeters, E., & Allamandola, L

    Bauschlicher, Jr., C. W., Peeters, E., & Allamandola, L. J. 2008, ApJ, 678, 316, doi: 10.1086/533424 Study of PAHs in T Cha using JWST 15 Figure B2. Continuum-subtracted ISAAC L band spectrum of T Cha highlighting 3.3 µm integrated PAH regions taken from V. C. Geers et al. (2007)

    doi:10.1086/533424 2007

  5. [5]

    M., Blake, G

    Brown, J. M., Blake, G. A., Dullemond, C. P., et al. 2007, ApJL, 664, L107, doi: 10.1086/520808

    doi:10.1086/520808 2007

  6. [6]

    T., Hu´ elamo, N., & Alcal´ a, J

    Cahill, E., Whelan, E. T., Hu´ elamo, N., & Alcal´ a, J. 2019, MNRAS, 484, 4315, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stz280

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stz280 2019

  7. [7]

    1998, ApJ, 509, 802, doi: 10.1086/306527

    Calvet, N., & Gullbring, E. 1998, ApJ, 509, 802, doi: 10.1086/306527

    doi:10.1086/306527 1998

  8. [8]

    2024, A&A, 685, A75, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202346662

    Chown, R., Sidhu, A., Peeters, E., et al. 2024, A&A, 685, A75, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202346662

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202346662 2024

Show all 44 references
  1. [9]

    2017, Royal Society Open Science, 4, 170114, doi: 10.1098/rsos.170114

    Ercolano, B., & Pascucci, I. 2017, Royal Society Open Science, 4, 170114, doi: 10.1098/rsos.170114

    2017 doi

  2. [10]

    2011, The Astrophysical Journal, 728, 49

    Espaillat, C., Furlan, E., D’Alessio, P., et al. 2011, The Astrophysical Journal, 728, 49

    2011

  3. [11]

    2014, in Protostars and Planets VI, ed

    Espaillat, C., Muzerolle, J., Najita, J., et al. 2014, in Protostars and Planets VI, ed. H. Beuther, R. S. Klessen, C. P. Dullemond, & T. Henning, 497–520, doi: 10.2458/azu uapress 9780816531240-ch022

    2014 doi

  4. [12]

    C., Thanathibodee, T., Zhu, Z., et al

    Espaillat, C. C., Thanathibodee, T., Zhu, Z., et al. 2024, ApJL, 973, L16, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ad76a5 Fern´ andez, D., Figueras, F., & Torra, J. 2008, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 480, 735

    2024 doi

  5. [13]

    2012, The Astrophysical Journal, 748, 71

    Flaherty, K., Muzerolle, J., Rieke, G., et al. 2012, The Astrophysical Journal, 748, 71

    2012

  6. [14]

    C., van Dishoeck, E

    Geers, V. C., van Dishoeck, E. F., Visser, R., et al. 2007, A&A, 476, 279, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20078466

    2007 doi

  7. [15]

    C., Augereau, J

    Geers, V. C., Augereau, J. C., Pontoppidan, K. M., et al. 2006, A&A, 459, 545, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20064830

    2006 doi

  8. [16]

    2001, A&A, 370, 1030, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20010242

    Hony, S., Van Kerckhoven, C., Peeters, E., et al. 2001, A&A, 370, 1030, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20010242

    2001 doi

  9. [17]

    2016, ApJ, 832, 213, doi: 10.3847/0004-637X/832/2/213 Hu´ elamo, N., de Gregorio-Monsalvo, I., Macias, E., et al

    Hsia, C.-H., Sadjadi, S., Zhang, Y., & Kwok, S. 2016, ApJ, 832, 213, doi: 10.3847/0004-637X/832/2/213 Hu´ elamo, N., de Gregorio-Monsalvo, I., Macias, E., et al. 2015, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 575, L5

    2016 doi

  10. [18]

    P., et al

    Kessler-Silacci, J., Augereau, J.-C., Dullemond, C. P., et al. 2006, ApJ, 639, 275, doi: 10.1086/499330

    2006 doi

  11. [19]

    F., Blake, G

    Lahuis, F., van Dishoeck, E. F., Blake, G. A., et al. 2007, ApJ, 665, 492, doi: 10.1086/518931

    2007 doi

  12. [20]

    2023, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2309.06876, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2309.06876

    Lebouteiller, V. 2023, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2309.06876, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2309.06876

    2023 doi arXiv

  13. [21]

    J., Goes, C., et al

    Lebouteiller, V., Barry, D. J., Goes, C., et al. 2015, ApJS, 218, 21, doi: 10.1088/0067-0049/218/2/21

    2015 doi

  14. [22]

    J., Spoon, H

    Lebouteiller, V., Barry, D. J., Spoon, H. W. W., et al. 2011, ApJS, 196, 8, doi: 10.1088/0067-0049/196/1/8

    2011 doi

  15. [23]

    K., Mackie, C

    Lemmens, A. K., Mackie, C. J., Candian, A., et al. 2023, Faraday Discuss., 245, 380, doi: 10.1039/D2FD00180B

    2023 doi

  16. [24]

    J., Candian, A., Lee, T

    Mackie, C. J., Candian, A., Lee, T. J., & Tielens, A. G. G. M. 2022, The Journal of Physical Chemistry A, 126, 3198, doi: 10.1021/acs.jpca.2c01849

    2022 doi

  17. [25]

    H., Furlan, E., et al

    Manoj, P., Kim, K. H., Furlan, E., et al. 2011, ApJS, 193, 11, doi: 10.1088/0067-0049/193/1/11

    2011 doi

  18. [26]

    2020, MNRAS, 494, 642, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staa681

    Maragkoudakis, A., Peeters, E., & Ricca, A. 2020, MNRAS, 494, 642, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staa681

    2020 doi

  19. [27]

    2014, MNRAS, 439, 1472, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stt2495

    Matsuura, M., Bernard-Salas, J., Lloyd Evans, T., et al. 2014, MNRAS, 439, 1472, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stt2495

    2014 doi

  20. [28]

    L., Hudgins, D

    Mattioda, A. L., Hudgins, D. M., Boersma, C., et al. 2020, ApJS, 251, 22, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/abc2c8

    2020 doi

  21. [29]

    2009, ApJL, 704, L15, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/704/1/L15

    Muzerolle, J., Flaherty, K., Balog, Z., et al. 2009, ApJL, 704, L15, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/704/1/L15

    2009 doi

  22. [30]

    2013, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 552, A4

    Olofsson, J., Benisty, M., Le Bouquin, J.-B., et al. 2013, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 552, A4

    2013

  23. [31]

    Owen, J. E. 2016, PASA, 33, e005, doi: 10.1017/pasa.2016.2

    2016 doi

  24. [32]

    2002, A&A, 390, 1089, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20020773

    Peeters, E., Hony, S., Van Kerckhoven, C., et al. 2002, A&A, 390, 1089, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20020773

    2002 doi

  25. [33]

    2024, A&A, 685, A74, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202348244

    Peeters, E., Habart, E., Bern´ e, O., et al. 2024, A&A, 685, A74, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202348244

    2024 doi

  26. [34]

    D., Duchˆ ene, G., Kalas, P., & Graham, J

    Perrin, M. D., Duchˆ ene, G., Kalas, P., & Graham, J. R. 2006, ApJ, 645, 1272, doi: 10.1086/504510

    2006 doi

  27. [35]

    2017, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 605, A34 16 R

    Pohl, A., Sissa, E., Langlois, M., et al. 2017, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 605, A34 16 R. Arun

    2017

  28. [36]

    2024, ApJ, 968, 128, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad4151

    Maragkoudakis, A. 2024, ApJ, 968, 128, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad4151

    2024 doi

  29. [37]

    2015, ApJ, 801, 31, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/801/1/31

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

    2015 doi

  30. [38]

    2009, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 501, 1013

    Schisano, E., Covino, E., Alcal´ a, J., et al. 2009, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 501, 1013

    2009

  31. [39]

    D., Bajaj, N

    Sellek, A. D., Bajaj, N. S., Pascucci, I., et al. 2024, AJ, 167, 223, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/ad34ae

    2024 doi

  32. [40]

    Y., & Li, A

    Seok, J. Y., & Li, A. 2017, ApJ, 835, 291, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/835/2/291

    2017 doi

  33. [41]

    C., Jura, M., Duley, W

    Sloan, G. C., Jura, M., Duley, W. W., et al. 2007, ApJ, 664, 1144, doi: 10.1086/519236

    2007 doi

  34. [42]

    2011, EAS Publications Series, 46, 3

    Tielens, A. 2011, EAS Publications Series, 46, 3

    2011

  35. [43]

    Tielens, A. G. G. M. 2008, ARA&A, 46, 289, doi: 10.1146/annurev.astro.46.060407.145211 van Diedenhoven, B., Peeters, E., Van Kerckhoven, C., et al. 2004, ApJ, 611, 928, doi: 10.1086/422404

    2008

  36. [44]

    2025, ApJ, 978, 34, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad90a1

    Xie, C., Pascucci, I., Deng, D., et al. 2025, ApJ, 978, 34, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad90a1

    2025 doi

Pith tools

Reviewed August 6, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.