We present the discovery with the QUIJOTE line survey of the cations HC 5 N + and HC 7 N + in the direction of TMC-1. Seven lines with half-integer quantum numbers from J = 25/2–23/2 to 37/2–35/2 have been assigned to HC 5 N + and eight lines from J = 55/2–53/2 to 71/2–69/2 to HC 7 N + . Both species have inverted 2 Π ground electronic states with very good estimates for their B 0 and A SO constants based on optical observations. The lines with the lowest J of HC 5 N + exhibit multiple components due to the hyperfine structure introduced by the H and N nuclei. However, these different components collapse for the higher J . No hyperfine structure is found for any of the lines of HC 7 N + . The derived effective rotational and distortion constants for HC 5 N + are B eff = 1336.662 ± 0.001 MHz and D eff = 27.4 ± 2.6 Hz, while for HC 7 N + they are B eff = 567.85036 ± 0.00037 MHz and D eff = 4.01 ± 0.19 Hz. From the observed intensities, we derived T rot = 5.5 ± 0.5 K and N = (9.9 ± 1.0) × 10 10 cm −2 for HC 5 N + , while we obtained T rot = 8.5 ± 0.5 K and N = (2.3 ± 0.2) × 10 10 cm −2 for HC 7 N + . The HC 5 N/HC 5 N + , C 5 N/HC 5 N + , C 5 N − /HC 5 N + , HC 7 N/HC 7 N + , HC 5 N + /HC 7 N + , and C 7 N − /HC 7 N + abundance ratios are 670 ± 80, 4.8 ± 0.8, 1.2 ± 0.2, 1000 ± 150, 4.2 ± 0.5, and 2.2 ± 0.2, respectively. We have run chemical modelling calculations to investigate the formation and destruction of these new cations. We find that these species are mainly formed through the reactions of H 2 and the cations C 5 N + and C 7 N + , and by the reactions of H + with HC 5 N and HC 7 N, while they are mostly destroyed through a reaction with H 2 and a dissociative recombination with electrons. Based on the underestimation of the abundances of HC 5 N + and HC 7 N + by the chemical model by a factor ∼20, we suggest that the rate coefficients currently assumed for the reactions of these cations with H 2 could be too high by the same factor, something that will be worth investigating.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Cernicharo et al. (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: