Reveals cluster age distribution in Large Magellanic Cloud, suggesting implications for star formation history.
In the Large Magellanic Cloud (LMC), there have been very few clusters observed with ages between 4 and 11 Gyr. This phenomenon is sometimes referred to as the `LMC age gap'. We constructed a model of the cluster age distribution aimed at reproducing this scenario. We linked the star formation history to the cluster initial mass function via a power-law relation between maximum initial cluster mass and global star formation rate. Using a constant cluster-forming efficiency of 5%, we obtained the cluster formation history. Applying a model of cluster mass loss calibrated using N-body simulations and an observational completeness limit, we computed the observable fraction of initially formed clusters. We were then able to model the cluster age distribution. For a maximum initial cluster mass below 10^5 , our model reproduced the observed lack of clusters with ages between 4 and 11 Gyr. However, our model required a maximum initial mass at 1 of at least 2⋅ 10^5 at a star formation rate of 1 pc^ -2 Gyr^ -1 pc^ -2 Gyr^ -1 to reproduce the population of ancient globular clusters. A linear change between maximum initial cluster mass relations from 8 to 12 Gyr reproduced the age gap to a satisfactory extent. In our model, the age gap is a consequence of the star-forming history and current observational limits. The age gap corresponds to a period characterised by a lower star formation rate, whereby no clusters with an initial mass above approximately 2 to 5⋅ 10^5 were formed. In the present day, these clusters have become so faint that very few of them have been detected. The pattern of both young-and-bright and old-and-massive clusters being more easily detectable than clusters of intermediate ages might reflect a more general phenomenon and not necessarily one specific to the LMC.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Klos et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: