![]() | ![]() |
Astron. Astrophys. 352, 574-586 (1999) 3. Parallaxes of TTSs and associated cloudsCTTSs and WTTSs observed by Hipparcos are among the brightest members of their respective classes, although they are some of the faintest stars in the Hipparcos Catalogue. Among the 31 stars with significant parallaxes in Tables 1 and 2, 14 are in the Taurus-Auriga star-forming region, 1 is located in Orion, 6 are associated with the Chameleon and 2 with the Lupus star-forming regions, 3 are within the Scorpius cloud complex, and the other ones are more isolated HAeBe stars and the nearby CTTS TW Hya. 3.1. Data qualityAs a first check on data quality, we consider the standard error of
the parallax measured by Hipparcos. While the derived parallax
accuracy of the sample of young stars measured by Hipparcos depends on
the median
3.2. Mean distances of T associationsIn each T association, stars were grouped according to their positions and common motion. Mean parallaxes of these groups were then derived from the intermediate data (i.e., the abscissae on the Reference Great Circles of the satellite; cf. ESA 1997), using the method developed by Robichon et al. (1999) for computing the mean astrometric parameters of stellar groups. This method explicitly takes into account the fact that the Hipparcos parameters are correlated within a few square degrees. 3.2.1. Taurus-AurigaThe morphology and distance of the several molecular clouds forming
the Taurus-Auriga complex is summarized by Ungerechts & Thaddeus
(1987). They adopted a mean distance of 140 pc from previous
analyses based on star counts, photometric distances of reflecting
nebulae and reddening versus distance diagrams of field stars. Several
of the young stars observed by Hipparcos in that region are located in
the central part of Taurus, the distance of which was determined by
Racine (1968) and Elias (1978) from the photometry of a few bright
stars associated with nebulosity. By chance, all the calibrators used
by Elias (1978) were observed by Hipparcos, and in Table 3 we
give the Hipparcos astrometric parameters of these objects. The
weighted average parallax Table 3. Distance indicators for the Taurus cloud The 17 stars selected in the Taurus-Auriga region were divided into 3 groups of respectively 5, 4 and 5 members. The 3 remaining stars HIP 18117, 20777 and 21852 are too isolated to be included in a group. The astrometric parameters of these stars and their mean values are summarized in Table 4. The term GOF there refers to the goodness-of-fit of the astrometric solution (cf. ESA 1997, p. 112). Table 4. Astrometric parameters of stars in the Taurus-Aurigae complex. For each group, two mean values, with their standard errors and goodness-of-fit (GOF ), are indicated. The first has been computed using all the stars, while the second considers only single stars (i.e., stars with an empty H59 field). Group 1 contains stars around the cloud L 1495. Their proper
motions are quite similar and reinforce the hypothesis they are part
of the same structure. The mean parallax of these 5 stars is
Group 2, in Auriga, contains HIP 22910, 22925, 23143, and
23873. The mean parallax is Group 3, around T Tau itself, contains HIP 20780, 20782, 20990 to
which one could attach HIP 19176 and 20390 which are a few
degrees beside them. Unfortunately, only HIP 19176 and 20390 have
an empty H59 field. HIP 20780 and 20782 form a two-pointing double
system (C in H59) in the Hipparcos Catalogue. HIP 20780 has a
reliable solution while HIP 20782 is 3 magnitudes fainter and has
a very uncertain solution. HIP 20990 is a faint VIM with an
unreliable solution. The mean parallax of these 5 stars is
Putting the 8 single stars (H59 empty) together, we obtain a mean
parallax of the Taurus-Auriga complex of
3.2.2. OrionOrion is a very large complex of molecular clouds with several
distinct regions (cf. Maddalena et al. 1986). The complex has
practically no tangential reflex solar motion so that YSOs are
impossible to separate from field stars using astrometric parameters.
The only star with detected (marginally significant) parallax in the
Table 1 sample is GW Ori. It is associated with molecular clouds
surrounding the HII region excited by the O8 star
In addition to the stars listed in Table 1, 15 presumably
young Orion stars are found in the Hipparcos Catalogue: the HAeBe
stars HIP 24552, 25299, 25546, 26594, 26752 and 27059 (from van den Ancker et al. 1997), and 9 stars detected by ROSAT in the Orion
Nebula cluster (Gagne et al. 1995) - HIP 26220, 26221, 26224,
26233, 26234, 26235, 26237, 26257 and 26258. Only the last of these
stars has a (marginally) significant parallax. Two other Orion stars
detected by Rosat, HIP 26081 and 26926 are foreground stars
according to their Hipparcos parallaxes: respectively
We can nevertheless derive a new, post-Hipparcos estimate of the
distance to the Orion A and B clouds by considering the distance
indicators of Racine (1968), which are members of the Orion R1 and R2
associations. Among the 8 stars studied by Racine, 5 were observed by
Hipparcos. Their parallaxes are given in Table 5. All these stars
are single with empty H59 and H61 fields, except for HD 38087, a
double with published component solution. The mean weighted parallax
of the Orion distance indicators, to which we add the star HIP 26258
discussed above, is Table 5. Distance indicators for the Orion R1 and R2 associations (Racine 1968) 3.2.3. ChamaeleonThe Chamaeleon, Lupus, and Scorpius clouds have spatial velocities
close to that of the Sco OB2 (Scorpius-Centaurus-Lupus-Crux)
association, around The distance of Chamaeleon clouds has been a topic of controversy
for a long time; earlier estimates ranged from 115 to 215 pc for
Cha 1, and from 115 to 400 pc for Cha 2. From a recent
re-investigation of the reddening with distance over a large area
around the clouds, Whittet et al. (1997) conclude that the most
probable distance of Cha 1 is
We can use 10 stars to compute mean parallaxes of groups in the
Chamaeleon region. In Cha 1 there are four CTTSs: HIP 53691,
54365 and the pair HIP 54744 and 54738. The two Herbig Ae/Be
stars HIP 54413 and HIP 54557 are usually associated with
Cha 1 because of their reflecting nebulosities. Inclusion of
HIP 54257 is more speculative, since it is a B star not known as
a Herbig star but detected by ROSAT. On the basis of its Hipparcos
proper motion and parallax, Terranegra et al. (1999) believe that it
is a probable member although Gry et al. (1998) place it just behind
the Cha 1 complex. The mean parallax of these 7 stars is
The other subgroups of the Chamaeleon region have few Hipparcos
stars. There is the WTTS HIP 58285 in Cha 3, the B star
HIP 57192 just in the head of DC 300-17, and the HAeBe star
HIP 58520 at less than 1 degree from the head of DC 300-17 but
connected to Cha 3 in the literature. In addition, the B star
HIP 57192 is placed just behind the DC 300-17 cloud by Gry et al.
(1998). Its parallax is To summarize this section, the only firm evidence concerning the Chamaeleon complex is that Cha 1 is at a distance of about 170 pc, in agreement with recent estimates by Whittet et al. (1997) and Knude & Hog (1998). 3.2.4. LupusRe-assessing association membership from Hipparcos results, de Zeeuw et al. (1999) find a mean distance of 140 pc for the Upper
Centaurus Lupus association. From the angular extent of the
association (about Six stars connected with the Lupus complex can be used for computing mean parallaxes: HIP 77157, 78094, 78317, 79080, 79081 and 78053. HIP 77157, 78094 and 78317 are TTSs in Lupus 1, 2 and 4 respectively. HIP 79080 and 79081 are the brightest stars of a quadruple system (at least) in Lup 3. HIP 79080 is a Herbig Ae star and 79081 a peculiar B star. HIP 78053 is a WTTS in Lupus 3 with a poor Hipparcos solution and a flag C in field H59. We don't include six other WTTSs discovered by ROSAT (Krautter et al. 1997and Wichmann et al. 1997) and discussed by Neuhäuser & Brandner (1998) because they have proper motions not exactly in agreement with CTTSs, so that it is quite impossible to decide whether they are members of the T association, the OB association or are young field stars instead. The mean parallax computed for the 5 stars with an empty H59 field
is 3.2.5. ScorpiusThis is another association studied by de Zeeuw et al. (1999), who
find a mean distance of 145 pc, in agreement with previous work
by Racine (1968). The parallax distribution width is approximately
1 mas, corresponding to distances from 127 to 170 pc. While
the parallax of AK Sco is consistent with this result, the fainter
CTTS V1121 Oph may be located somewhat closer to us. Note that the
quadruple system 3.2.6. The TW Hya associationTW Hya, the closest CTTS, has long been considered to be isolated but is now known to be part of the closest T association (cf. de la Reza et al. 1989, Gregorio-Hetem et al. 1992, Kastner et al. 1997, Jensen et al. 1998, Sterzik et al. 1999and Webb et al. 1999). The most recent list of members reports 13 pre-main sequence systems in the vicinity of TW Hya for a total of at least 20 objects ranging from an A star to a possible brown dwarf (Sterzik et al. 1999). Four of these objects are in the Hipparcos Catalogue: HIP 53911 (TW Hya itself) and the three objects given in Table 6. Their parallaxes lead to a depth of 20 pc, comparable to the angular size of the association. We didn't compute a mean parallax because the method is not suited to such a nearby group where the depth is not small in comparison to the formal parallax errors. Table 6. Hipparcos-detected members of the TW Hya association) 3.2.7. ConclusionIn most cases, we confirmed that the Hipparcos distances to young solar-type stars are comparable to the distances of molecular clouds and/or OB stars with which they appear associated, as anticipated from a large body of earlier work. There are, however, two discrepant individual cases: BP Tau and DF Tau. These are among the most investigated CTTSs, so one may argue that a good part of what we know about the T Tauri phenomenon is based on these stars. On the other hand, there are a few CTTSs that are found outside of molecular clouds, such as RW Aur or, as seen above, TW Hya. Perhaps such cases are not so rare? Before we start to speculate, it appears quite important to convince ourselves that the Hipparcos results for BP Tau and DF Tau are valid. A possible bias can be due to undetected binarity, and we shall examine in the next section the evidence for binarity in Hipparcos data for YSOs. ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() © European Southern Observatory (ESO) 1999 Online publication: December 2, 1999 ![]() |