The "True" Column Density Distribution in Star-Forming Molecular Clouds

TL;DR

This study compares three methods of measuring column density in star-forming molecular clouds, highlighting the advantages of dust extinction and the limitations of gas tracers like 13CO due to calibration issues and physical effects.

Contribution

It provides a detailed comparison of dust and gas-based column density measurements in Perseus, emphasizing calibration challenges and the reliability of dust extinction as a tracer.

Findings

Dust-based measures yield consistent, log-normal distributions.

Gas tracers like 13CO have limitations due to depletion and opacity.

Calibration and artifacts significantly affect column density estimates.

Abstract

We use the COMPLETE Survey's observations of the Perseus star-forming region to assess and intercompare three methods for measuring column density in molecular clouds: extinction mapping (NIR); thermal emission mapping (FIR); and mapping the intensity of CO isotopologues. The structures shown by all three tracers are morphologically similar, but important differences exist. Dust-based measures give similar, log-normal, distributions for the full Perseus region, once careful calibration corrections are made. We also compare dust- and gas-based column density distributions for physically-meaningful sub-regions of Perseus, and we find significant variations in the distributions for those regions. Even though we have used 12CO data to estimate excitation temperatures, and we have corrected for opacity, the 13CO maps seem unable to give column distributions that consistently resemble those from dust measures. We have edited out the effects of the shell around the B-star HD 278942. In that shell's interior and in the parts where it overlaps the molecular cloud, there appears to be a dearth of 13CO, likely due either to 13CO not yet having had time to form in this young structure, and/or destruction of 13CO in the molecular cloud. We conclude that the use of either dust or gas measures of column density without extreme attention to calibration and artifacts is more perilous than even experts might normally admit. And, the use of 13CO to trace total column density in detail, even after proper calibration, is unavoidably limited in utility due to threshold, depletion, and opacity effects. If one's main aim is to map column density, then dust extinction seems the best probe. Linear fits amongst column density tracers are given, quantifying the inherent uncertainties in using one tracer (when compared with others). [abridged]