Carbon isotopic fractionation in molecular clouds
Abstract
C-fractionation has been studied from a theoretical point of view with different models of time-dependent chemistry, including both isotope-selective photodissociation and low-temperature isotopic exchange reactions. Recent chemical models predict that the latter may lead to a depletion of C in nitrile-bearing species, with C/C ratios two times higher than the elemental abundance ratio of 68 in the local ISM. Since the carbon isotopic ratio is commonly used to evaluate the N/N ratios with the double-isotope method, it is important to study C-fractionation in detail to avoid incorrect assumptions. In this work we implemented a gas-grain chemical model with new isotopic exchange reactions and investigated their introduction in the context of dense and cold molecular gas. In particular, we investigated the C/C ratios of HNC, HCN, and CN using a grid of models, with temperatures and densities ranging from 10 to 50 K and 210 to 210 cm, respectively. We suggest a possible C exchange through the C + C C +CC reaction, which does not result in dilution, but rather in C enhancement, for molecules formed starting from atomic carbon. This effect is efficient in a range of time between the formation of CO and its freeze-out on grains. Furthermore, we show that the C/C ratios of nitriles are predicted to be a factor 0.8-1.9 different from the local value of 68 for massive star-forming regions. This result also affects the N/N ratio: a value of 330 obtained with the double-isotope method is predicted to be 260-1150, depending on the physical conditions. Finally, we studied the C/C ratios by varying the cosmic-ray ionization rate: the ratios increase with it because of secondary photons and cosmic-ray reactions.
Cite
@article{arxiv.2006.03362,
title = {Carbon isotopic fractionation in molecular clouds},
author = {L. Colzi and O. Sipilä and E. Roueff and P. Caselli and F. Fontani},
journal= {arXiv preprint arXiv:2006.03362},
year = {2020}
}
Comments
The published exponent in the A&A journal of the second rate coefficient of Table 1 is a misprint