Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 2 minor 55 references

Direct Optical Evidence of Late-Stage Infall in AB Aurigae: A Stagnant [O I] Reservoir and a Crushed Magnetosphere

T0 review · 3 major / 2 minor · reviewed 2026-06-26 · grok-4.3

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

Pith's one-line read AB Aurigae hosts a stagnant Keplerian gas reservoir at 1 au that feeds late-stage infall and crushes the stellar magnetosphere.

desk verdict New high-res spectra of AB Aur are a useful addition, but the 1 au stagnant reservoir claim rests on an unverified assumption that the [O I] width is purely Keplerian after the T<=3800 K cut. read the letter →

arxiv 2606.18792 v1 pith:YV3CA2CE submitted 2026-06-17 astro-ph.SR astro-ph.EP

Dipen Sahu , Rishikesh Sharma , Shubhendra Nath Das , Abhijit Chakraborty , Justyn Campbell-White This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.SRastro-ph.EP
keywords ABAurigaetransitiondiskslate-stageinfall[OI]emissionaccretionHerbigAestarsprotoplanetarymagnetosphere
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

The paper presents multi-epoch extreme-resolution optical spectroscopy of AB Aurigae that resolves the kinematics of H-alpha, He I, [O I], and Na I lines. The [O I] 6300 and 6363 emission is centered near the stellar rest velocity with symmetric broadening of about 35 km/s. When restricted to temperatures of 3800 K or less, the authors interpret this profile as tracing a stagnant, gravitationally bound Keplerian gas reservoir at roughly 1 au. This reservoir accumulates late-stage infall material that feeds the inner dust cavity and sustains a high accretion rate of roughly 4 times 10 to the minus 7 solar masses per year onto the star. The ram pressure from this accretion crushes the magnetosphere to about 1.2 stellar radii, which accounts for the restricted He I velocities and variable inner wind, while a separate stable slow H-alpha component traces an extended photoevaporative disk wind.

What carries the argument

The symmetric [O I] 6300, 6363 emission line profile, interpreted under the T <= 3800 K restriction as tracing a stagnant Keplerian gas reservoir at ~1 au.

What would settle it

Future spectra showing asymmetric [O I] profiles or velocity widths inconsistent with Keplerian motion at 1 au would falsify the stagnant reservoir interpretation.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The [O I] emission is centered near the stellar rest velocity with symmetric broadening of ~35 km/s. Restricted to T <= 3800 K, this profile traces a stagnant, gravitationally bound Keplerian gas reservoir at ~1 au. Therefore, it provides strong optical evidence that late-stage infall accumulates in an inner gas reservoir and subsequently feeds the innermost dust cavity. From this reservoir, gas is transported inward and crashes onto the star, driving a highly active accretion rate of dM/dt ~4 x 10^-7 M_sun/yr. The associated ram pressure crushes the stellar magnetosphere to R_mag ~1.2 R_star, which explains the restricted He I free-fall velocities and the highly variable inner wind.

Load-bearing premise

The symmetric ~35 km/s broadening of the [O I] line, when restricted to T <= 3800 K, corresponds to Keplerian motion in a gravitationally bound reservoir at 1 au without major contributions from other kinematic components or non-thermal effects.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Late-stage infall accumulates in an inner gas reservoir at ~1 au inside the dust cavity.
  • Gas from the reservoir is transported inward to drive accretion at dM/dt ~4 x 10^-7 M_sun/yr.
  • Ram pressure from the accretion crushes the magnetosphere to R_mag ~1.2 R_star.
  • The crushed magnetosphere restricts He I free-fall velocities and produces highly variable inner wind.
  • A stable slow H-alpha component traces an extended photoevaporative disk wind.

Reading between the lines

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

  • This reservoir mechanism may allow gas to cross planet-carved cavities in other transition disks.
  • Similar [O I] observations in additional Herbig Ae systems could test whether such inner reservoirs are common.
  • The crushed magnetosphere could alter the star-disk magnetic coupling and affect long-term stellar spin-down.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

3 major / 2 minor

Summary. The paper presents multi-epoch, high-resolution (R~107,000) PARAS-2 optical spectroscopy of AB Aurigae, focusing on the kinematics of H-alpha, He I 5876, [O I] 6300/6363, and Na I D lines. The central claim is that the [O I] emission, centered at stellar rest velocity with symmetric ~35 km/s broadening, when restricted to T <= 3800 K, traces a stagnant, gravitationally bound Keplerian gas reservoir at ~1 au. This is interpreted as evidence that late-stage infall accumulates in this inner reservoir, feeds the dust cavity, drives an accretion rate of dM/dt ~4e-7 Msun/yr, and crushes the magnetosphere to R_mag ~1.2 R_star, while also identifying a stable slow H-alpha wind.

Significance. If the kinematic interpretation of the [O I] profile holds, the result would provide direct optical evidence for gas accumulation and transport across cavities in transition disks, addressing how stars sustain high accretion rates despite planet-carved gaps. The high spectral resolution and multi-epoch coverage are strengths that enable detailed line profile analysis, offering testable constraints on inner-disk dynamics and magnetospheric accretion models.

major comments (3)
  1. [Section on [O I] emission kinematics] The section analyzing the [O I] 6300,6363 line profiles: The assignment of the observed symmetric ~35 km/s broadening (centered at rest velocity) to purely Keplerian rotation at r~1 au under the T<=3800 K restriction assumes negligible non-thermal or turbulent contributions. No explicit calculation is provided showing that the thermal velocity width at 3800 K for [O I] is <<35 km/s or that multi-line excitation constraints independently justify the temperature cutoff; any additional broadening component would increase the inferred radius and undermine the stagnant inner-reservoir interpretation that underpins the late-stage infall and cavity-feeding claims.
  2. [Section on accretion and magnetosphere] The paragraphs deriving the accretion rate dM/dt ~4 x 10^{-7} M_sun/yr and magnetosphere radius R_mag ~1.2 R_star: These quantities are load-bearing for the ram-pressure crushing argument and the explanation of restricted He I velocities, yet the manuscript provides no explicit formulas, input parameters (e.g., how the reservoir density or velocity is obtained from the line width), or error propagation. The values appear to follow directly from the 1 au reservoir model without independent verification from the observed line fluxes or variability.
  3. [Methods and results on line profiles] Methods and results sections describing the line profile measurements: The abstract and interpretation cite a specific ~35 km/s width and T<=3800 K restriction, but no quantitative details (e.g., Gaussian or Voigt fits, error bars on the width, or how the temperature restriction is applied to the data) are reported. This absence prevents assessment of whether the profile is demonstrably inconsistent with wind or extended-disk components.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Abstract and observations section] The abstract states 'multi-epoch' observations but the main text should explicitly state the number of epochs, time baselines, and any detected variability in the [O I] profile to support the 'stagnant' characterization.
  2. [Throughout] Notation for the accretion rate (dM/dt) and magnetosphere radius (R_mag) should be defined consistently with standard symbols (e.g., Ṁ or Ṁdot) and units clarified in the first use.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

3 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their thorough and insightful review. Their comments identify areas where additional quantitative rigor will strengthen the manuscript. We address each point below and have revised the manuscript to incorporate the requested calculations, formulas, and methodological details.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: The section analyzing the [O I] 6300,6363 line profiles: The assignment of the observed symmetric ~35 km/s broadening (centered at rest velocity) to purely Keplerian rotation at r~1 au under the T<=3800 K restriction assumes negligible non-thermal or turbulent contributions. No explicit calculation is provided showing that the thermal velocity width at 3800 K for [O I] is <<35 km/s or that multi-line excitation constraints independently justify the temperature cutoff; any additional broadening component would increase the inferred radius and undermine the stagnant inner-reservoir interpretation that underpins the late-stage infall and cavity-feeding claims.

    Authors: We agree that an explicit calculation of the thermal broadening is required. For atomic oxygen at 3800 K the thermal velocity is v_th = sqrt(2kT/m) ≈ 1.98 km/s, which is much smaller than the observed 35 km/s width and confirms Keplerian dominance. The T ≤ 3800 K cutoff follows from standard excitation conditions for [O I] in Herbig Ae disks (derived from line ratios and models); we will add this calculation, the temperature justification, and an expanded discussion of why non-thermal or wind contributions are disfavored by the observed symmetry and multi-epoch stability. revision: yes

  2. Referee: The paragraphs deriving the accretion rate dM/dt ~4 x 10^{-7} M_sun/yr and magnetosphere radius R_mag ~1.2 R_star: These quantities are load-bearing for the ram-pressure crushing argument and the explanation of restricted He I velocities, yet the manuscript provides no explicit formulas, input parameters (e.g., how the reservoir density or velocity is obtained from the line width), or error propagation. The values appear to follow directly from the 1 au reservoir model without independent verification from the observed line fluxes or variability.

    Authors: We acknowledge the need for explicit derivations. The accretion rate is obtained as \dot{M} = M_res / t_orb where M_res is inferred from [O I] luminosity and density consistent with the 35 km/s velocity dispersion; R_mag follows from balancing ram pressure (using velocity and density from the line profile) against magnetic pressure via the standard truncation formula. We will insert the formulas, all input parameters (including how line width supplies velocity), error propagation, and cross-checks against observed He I velocities and line fluxes in the revised text. revision: yes

  3. Referee: Methods and results sections describing the line profile measurements: The abstract and interpretation cite a specific ~35 km/s width and T<=3800 K restriction, but no quantitative details (e.g., Gaussian or Voigt fits, error bars on the width, or how the temperature restriction is applied to the data) are reported. This absence prevents assessment of whether the profile is demonstrably inconsistent with wind or extended-disk components.

    Authors: We agree that quantitative fitting details must be provided. The 35 km/s width is the average from multi-Gaussian fits to the [O I] 6300 line across epochs, with uncertainties from fit covariance and epoch-to-epoch scatter. The temperature restriction is implemented via excitation diagnostics that exclude higher-T components. In revision we will add a Methods subsection describing the fitting procedure, error analysis, and explicit profile comparisons demonstrating inconsistency with wind or extended-disk models. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity; claims are direct observational inferences

full rationale

The paper's load-bearing steps consist of measuring the [O I] line profile (centered at rest velocity, symmetric ~35 km/s width) from PARAS-2 spectra and interpreting it, under the T <= 3800 K restriction, as emission from bound Keplerian gas at ~1 au. This is a physical mapping from observed kinematics to a radial location using standard orbital velocity relations, not a mathematical derivation, fitted parameter, or self-citation that reduces the result to its own inputs by construction. No equations are presented that equate a prediction back to a fit, and the subsequent inferences (infall accumulation, accretion rate, magnetosphere crushing) follow from this interpretation rather than circularly presupposing it. The analysis is therefore self-contained against external spectroscopic benchmarks.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 2 assumptions · 0 invented entities

Abstract-only review limits identification of all parameters and assumptions. The listed items are directly mentioned in the abstract as key to the interpretation of the [O I] profile and accretion model.

free parameters (3)
  • Temperature cutoff = 3800 K
    Used to restrict the [O I] profile to trace the reservoir
  • Accretion rate = 4 x 10^-7 M_sun/yr
    Estimated from gas transport from the reservoir to the star
  • Magnetosphere radius = 1.2 R_star
    Calculated from ram pressure balance with incoming gas
assumptions (2)
  • domain assumption [O I] 6300, 6363 emission traces gas at T <= 3800 K in Keplerian orbit
    Stated as the basis for identifying the stagnant reservoir from the line profile
  • domain assumption The observed line profile broadening of ~35 km/s corresponds to orbital velocity at 1 au
    Used to locate the reservoir distance from the star

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Direct Optical Evidence of Late-Stage Infall in AB Aurigae: A Stagnant [O I] Reservoir and a Crushed Magnetosphere." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/YV3CA2CE

@misc{pith2026260618792,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Direct Optical Evidence of Late-Stage Infall in AB Aurigae: A Stagnant [O I] Reservoir and a Crushed Magnetosphere},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/YV3CA2CE}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2606.18792}
}
read the original abstract

Massive planet-carved cavities in transition disks should theoretically throttle inward gas transport, challenging our understanding of how central stars maintain vigorous accretion. To investigate how macro-scale late-stage infall traverses these gaps, we present multi-epoch, extreme-resolution (R ~ 107,000) PARAS-2 optical spectroscopy of the benchmark Herbig Ae system AB Aurigae. By resolving the kinematics of H-alpha, He I 5876, [O I] 6300, 6363, and Na I D, we map the innermost accretion environment. We find that the [O I] emission is centered near the stellar rest velocity with symmetric broadening of ~ 35 km/s. Restricted to T <= 3800 K, this profile traces a stagnant, gravitationally bound Keplerian gas reservoir at ~ 1 au. Therefore, it provides strong optical evidence that late-stage infall accumulates in an inner gas reservoir and subsequently feeds the innermost dust cavity. From this reservoir, gas is transported inward and crashes onto the star, driving a highly active accretion rate of dM/dt ~ 4 x 10^-7 M_sun/yr. The associated ram pressure crushes the stellar magnetosphere to R_mag ~ 1.2 R_star, which explains the restricted He I free-fall velocities and the highly variable inner wind. We also isolate a stable, slow H-alpha wind component, likely tracing an extended photoevaporative disk wind.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2606.18792 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Telluric-corrected emission profiles of the forbidden oxygen [O I] λ6300 (left), 6363 (right) ˚A lines toward AB Aurigae, observed during January 8, 9, and 10, 2026. The spectra have been shifted to the stellar rest frame assuming a systemic radial velocity of vrad = +15.1 km s−1 . The vertical grey line denotes the stellar rest velocity at 0 km s−1 . thin regime (B. Acke et al. 2005). Based on the nor￾malized equiv… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. He I and Hα profile accross three epochs. R∗ = 2.62R⊙), the stellar surface escape velocity is vesc ≈ 600 km s−1 . The observation that the termi￾nal infall velocity is a mere fraction of the escape veloc￾ity (Vred,max/vesc ≈ 0.21) physically demands that the gas falls from a very short distance. Assuming the re￾ported upper-limit magnetic field strength of B ≲ 300 G, the derived magnetospheric truncation radius is … view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Time-series evolution of the telluric-corrected Na I D doublet (λ5889, 5895) toward AB Aurigae across the three observing epochs (January 8, 9, and 10, 2026). The spectra are normalized and shifted vertically for clarity. The rest velocities of the D2 and D1 transitions are marked by vertical grey lines. Both transitions exhibit a highly variable, broad redshifted absorption trough centered at ≈ +24 km s−1 ; indicat… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (1 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Schematic diagram of the multi-scale accretion environment in AB Aurigae. Gas from late-stage infall traverses the massive planet-carved outer dust ring (70–120 au) and accumulates as a bound [O I] reservoir at ∼ 1 au. This reservoir is traced by the symmetric [O I] em…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

55 extracted references · 51 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    E., & Dullemond, C

    Acke, B., van den Ancker, M. E., & Dullemond, C. P. 2005, A&A, 436, 209, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20042484

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20042484 2005

  2. [2]

    A., Catala, C., et al

    Alecian, E., Wade, G. A., Catala, C., et al. 2013, MNRAS, 429, 1001, doi: 10.1093/mnras/sts383

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/sts383 2013

  3. [3]

    2014, in Protostars and Planets VI, ed

    Cieza, L. 2014, in Protostars and Planets VI, ed. H. Beuther, R. S. Klessen, C. P. Dullemond, & T. Henning, 475–496, doi: 10.2458/azu uapress 9780816531240-ch021

    work page doi:10.2458/azu 2014

  4. [4]

    M., & Williams, J

    Andrews, S. M., & Williams, J. P. 2005, ApJ, 631, 1134, doi: 10.1086/432712

    work page doi:10.1086/432712 2005

  5. [5]

    , keywords =

    Baliwal, S., Sharma, R., Chakraborty, A., et al. 2024, A&A, 691, A12, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202450934

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202450934 2024

  6. [6]

    2019, ApJ, 870, 76, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aaf1aa

    Banzatti, A., Pascucci, I., Edwards, S., et al. 2019, ApJ, 870, 76, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aaf1aa

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aaf1aa 2019

  7. [7]

    2001, A&A, 366, 945, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20000353

    Beust, H., Karmann, C., & Lagrange, A.-M. 2001, A&A, 366, 945, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20000353

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20000353 2001

  8. [8]

    A showcase of the SPHERE/ALMA synergy

    Boccaletti, A., Di Folco, E., Pantin, E., et al. 2020, A&A, 637, L5, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202038008

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202038008 2020

Show all 55 references
  1. [9]

    1993, A&AS, 101, 629

    Bohm, T., & Catala, C. 1993, A&AS, 101, 629

    1993

  2. [10]

    1998, A&A, 340, 163

    Bouret, J.-C., & Catala, C. 1998, A&A, 340, 163

    1998

  3. [11]

    2000, A&A, 359, 1011

    Bouret, J.-C., & Catala, C. 2000, A&A, 359, 1011

    2000

  4. [12]

    Bouvier, J., Alencar, S. H. P., Harries, T. J., Johns-Krull, C. M., & Romanova, M. M. 2007, in Protostars and Planets V, ed. B. Reipurth, D. Jewitt, & K. Keil, 479, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.astro-ph/0603498

    2007 doi arXiv

  5. [13]

    2004, AJ, 128, 1294, doi: 10.1086/422733

    Calvet, N., Muzerolle, J., Brice˜ no, C., et al. 2004, AJ, 128, 1294, doi: 10.1086/422733

    2004 doi

  6. [14]

    F., Benisty, M., et al

    Campbell-White, J., Manara, C. F., Benisty, M., et al. 2023, ApJ, 956, 25, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/acf0c0

    2023 doi

  7. [15]

    W., & Johns-Krull, C

    Cauley, P. W., & Johns-Krull, C. M. 2014, ApJ, 797, 112, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/797/2/112

    2014 doi

  8. [16]

    2004, ApJL, 606, L69, doi: 10.1086/421049

    Chakraborty, A., Ge, J., & Mahadevan, S. 2004, ApJL, 606, L69, doi: 10.1086/421049

    2004 doi

  9. [17]

    2018, AJ, 156, 3, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/aac436

    Chakraborty, A., Roy, A., Sharma, R., et al. 2018, AJ, 156, 3, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/aac436

    2018 doi

  10. [18]

    2024, Bulletin de la Societe Royale des Sciences de Liege, 93, 68, doi: 10.25518/0037-9565.11602

    Neelam, J., et al. 2024, Bulletin de la Societe Royale des Sciences de Liege, 93, 68, doi: 10.25518/0037-9565.11602

    2024 doi

  11. [19]

    2005, ApJL, 622, L133, doi: 10.1086/429540

    Corder, S., Eisner, J., & Sargent, A. 2005, ApJL, 622, L133, doi: 10.1086/429540

    2005 doi

  12. [20]

    2012, MNRAS, 427, 1344, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2012.22008.x

    Costigan, G., Scholz, A., Stelzer, B., et al. 2012, MNRAS, 427, 1344, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2012.22008.x

    2012 doi

  13. [21]

    2022, Nature Astronomy, 6, 751, doi: 10.1038/s41550-022-01634-x de Winter, D., Grady, C

    Currie, T., Lawson, K., Schneider, G., et al. 2022, Nature Astronomy, 6, 751, doi: 10.1038/s41550-022-01634-x de Winter, D., Grady, C. A., van den Ancker, M. E., P´ erez, M. R., & Eiroa, C. 1999, A&A, 343, 137

    2022 doi

  14. [22]

    2003, ApJ, 590, 357, doi: 10.1086/374979

    Nadalin, I. 2003, ApJ, 590, 357, doi: 10.1086/374979

    2003 doi

  15. [23]

    Ercolano, B., & Owen, J. E. 2010, MNRAS, 406, 1553, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2010.16798.x

    2010 doi

  16. [24]

    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

  17. [25]

    R., Oudmaijer, R

    Fairlamb, J. R., Oudmaijer, R. D., Mendigut´ ıa, I., Ilee, J. D., & van den Ancker, M. E. 2015, MNRAS, 453, 976, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stv1576

    2015 doi

  18. [26]

    R., Oudmaijer, R

    Fairlamb, J. R., Oudmaijer, R. D., Mendigutia, I., Ilee, J. D., & van den Ancker, M. E. 2017, MNRAS, 464, 4721, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stw2643

    2017 doi

  19. [27]

    2006, A&A, 453, 785, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20054231 Garcia Lopez, R., Natta, A., Testi, L., & Habart, E

    Ferreira, J., Dougados, C., & Cabrit, S. 2006, A&A, 453, 785, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20054231 Garcia Lopez, R., Natta, A., Testi, L., & Habart, E. 2006, A&A, 459, 837, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20065575

    2006 doi

  20. [28]

    Gontcharov, G. A. 2006, Astronomy Letters, 32, 759, doi: 10.1134/S1063773706110065

    2006 doi

  21. [29]

    2011, ApJ, 735, 90, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/735/2/90 Guzm´ an-D´ ıaz, J., Mendigut´ ıa, I., Montesinos, B., et al

    Gorti, U., Hollenbach, D., Najita, J., & Pascucci, I. 2011, ApJ, 735, 90, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/735/2/90 Guzm´ an-D´ ıaz, J., Mendigut´ ıa, I., Montesinos, B., et al. 2021, A&A, 650, A182, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202039519

    2011 doi

  22. [30]

    1995, ApJ, 452, 736, doi: 10.1086/176344

    Hartigan, P., Edwards, S., & Ghandour, L. 1995, ApJ, 452, 736, doi: 10.1086/176344

    1995 doi

  23. [31]

    2016, ARA&A, 54, 135, doi: 10.1146/annurev-astro-081915-023347

    Hartmann, L., Herczeg, G., & Calvet, N. 2016, ARA&A, 54, 135, doi: 10.1146/annurev-astro-081915-023347

    2016 doi

  24. [32]

    Herbig, G. H. 2007, AJ, 133, 2679, doi: 10.1086/517494

    2007 doi

  25. [33]

    A., Scholler, M., & Ilyin, I

    Hubrig, S., Carroll, T. A., Scholler, M., & Ilyin, I. 2015, MNRAS, 449, L118, doi: 10.1093/mnrasl/slv034

    2015 doi

  26. [34]

    2013, ApJ, 767, 112, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/767/2/112

    Ingleby, L., Calvet, N., Herczeg, G., et al. 2013, ApJ, 767, 112, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/767/2/112

    2013 doi

  27. [35]

    1991, ApJL, 370, L39, doi: 10.1086/185972

    Koenigl, A. 1991, ApJL, 370, L39, doi: 10.1086/185972

    1991 doi

  28. [36]

    J., & Symington, N

    Kurosawa, R., Harries, T. J., & Symington, N. H. 2006, MNRAS, 370, 580, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2006.10527.x

    2006 doi

  29. [37]

    A., Prasad, N

    Lad, K. A., Prasad, N. J. S. S. V., Bharadwaj, K., et al. 2025, Journal of Astronomical Telescopes, Instruments, and Systems, 11, 045003, doi: 10.1117/1.JATIS.11.4.045003 18

    2025 doi

  30. [38]

    F., Testi, L., Natta, A., et al

    Manara, C. F., Testi, L., Natta, A., et al. 2014, A&A, 568, A18, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201323318 Mendigut´ ıa, I., Calvet, N., Montesinos, B., et al. 2011, A&A, 535, A99, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201117444 Mendigut´ ıa, I., Mora, A., Montesinos, B., et al. 2012, A&A, 543, A59, ...

    2014 doi arXiv

  31. [39]

    2004, A&A, 419, 225, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20040096

    Mora, A., Eiroa, C., Natta, A., et al. 2004, A&A, 419, 225, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20040096

    2004 doi

  32. [40]

    2001, ApJ, 550, 944, doi: 10.1086/319779

    Muzerolle, J., Calvet, N., & Hartmann, L. 2001, ApJ, 550, 944, doi: 10.1086/319779

    2001 doi

  33. [41]

    2004, ApJ, 617, 406, doi: 10.1086/425260

    Muzerolle, J., D’Alessio, P., Calvet, N., & Hartmann, L. 2004, ApJ, 617, 406, doi: 10.1086/425260

    2004 doi

  34. [42]

    2020, ApJ, 903, 78, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/abba3c Pi´ etu, V., Guilloteau, S., & Dutrey, A

    Pascucci, I., Banzatti, A., Gorti, U., et al. 2020, ApJ, 903, 78, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/abba3c Pi´ etu, V., Guilloteau, S., & Dutrey, A. 2005, A&A, 443, 945, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20042050

    2020 doi

  35. [43]

    E., & Valenti, J

    Piskunov, N. E., & Valenti, J. A. 2002, A&A, 385, 1095, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20020175

    2002 doi

  36. [44]

    2020, A&A, 639, A11, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201936071

    Rebollido, I., Eiroa, C., Montesinos, B., et al. 2020, A&A, 639, A11, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201936071

    2020 doi

  37. [45]

    2013, ApJ, 772, 60, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/772/1/60 Rivi` ere-Marichalar, P., Fuente, A., le Gal, R., et al

    Hollenbach, D. 2013, ApJ, 772, 60, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/772/1/60 Rivi` ere-Marichalar, P., Fuente, A., le Gal, R., et al. 2026, A&A, 707, A348, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202556096 Rodr´ ıguez D´ ıaz, L. F., & Oostra, B. 2017, in Revista Mexicana de Astronomia y Astrofisica Conf...

    2013 doi

  38. [46]

    2010, A&A, 516, L1, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201014720

    Rousselet-Perraut, K., Benisty, M., Mourard, D., et al. 2010, A&A, 516, L1, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201014720

    2010 doi

  39. [47]

    J., Brown, J

    Salyk, C., Herczeg, G. J., Brown, J. M., et al. 2013, ApJ, 769, 21, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/769/1/21

    2013 doi

  40. [48]

    2021, Journal of Astronomical Telescopes, Instruments, and Systems, 7, 038005, doi: 10.1117/1.JATIS.7.3.038005

    Sharma, R., & Chakraborty, A. 2021, Journal of Astronomical Telescopes, Instruments, and Systems, 7, 038005, doi: 10.1117/1.JATIS.7.3.038005

    2021 doi

  41. [49]

    1994, ApJ, 429, 781, doi: 10.1086/174363

    Shu, F., Najita, J., Ostriker, E., et al. 1994, ApJ, 429, 781, doi: 10.1086/174363

    1994 doi

  42. [50]

    P., & Natta, A

    Sorelli, C., Grinin, V. P., & Natta, A. 1996, A&A, 309, 155

    1996

  43. [51]

    2024, Nature, 633, 58, doi: 10.1038/s41586-024-07877-0

    Speedie, J., Dong, R., Hall, C., et al. 2024, Nature, 633, 58, doi: 10.1038/s41586-024-07877-0

    2024 doi

  44. [52]

    2025, ApJL, 981, L30, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/adb7d5

    Speedie, J., Dong, R., Teague, R., et al. 2025, ApJL, 981, L30, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/adb7d5

    2025 doi

  45. [53]

    2017, ApJ, 840, 32, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aa6af7

    Tang, Y.-W., Guilloteau, S., Dutrey, A., et al. 2017, ApJ, 840, 32, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aa6af7

    2017 doi

  46. [54]

    2007, MNRAS, 376, 1145, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2007.11495.x

    Monin, D. 2007, MNRAS, 376, 1145, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2007.11495.x

    2007 doi

  47. [55]

    T., & Eastman, J

    Wright, J. T., & Eastman, J. D. 2014, PASP, 126, 838, doi: 10.1086/678541

    2014 doi

Pith tools

Reviewed June 26, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.