Article in PDF |
"Peremennye Zvezdy", Prilozhenie, vol. 9, N 27 (2009) |
ISSN 2221–0474 |
Received: 24.09.2009; accepted: 20.10.2009
(E-mail for contact: khruslov@bk.ru)
|
Comments:
1. IRAS 00401+3613. J-H = 0.864 (2MASS), B-V = 1.465 (Tycho2). The ROTSE data with photometric correction flags (usually rejected) were kept for the analysis.
2. IRAS F00424+3627. J-H = 0.849 (2MASS). The ROTSE data with photometric correction flags (usually rejected) were kept for the analysis.
3. IRAS 00455+3423. J-H = 0.836 (2MASS). The ROTSE data with photometric correction flags (usually rejected) were kept for the analysis.
4. IRAS F00524+3113. J-H = 0.910 (2MASS), B-V = 2.118 (Tycho2). The ROTSE data with photometric correction flags (usually rejected) were kept for the analysis.
5. J-H = 0.832 (2MASS). The ROTSE data with photometric correction flags (usually rejected) were kept for the analysis.
6. IRAS Z00563+3343. J-H = 0.897 (2MASS), B-V=3.230 (Tycho2).
7. J-H = 0.943 (2MASS).
8. J-H = 0.860 (2MASS). The ROTSE data with photometric correction flags (usually rejected) were kept for the analysis.
9. J-H = 0.924 (2MASS). The ROTSE data with photometric correction flags (usually rejected) were kept for the analysis.
10. IRAS F02440+4005. J-H = 0.802 (2MASS), B-V = 2.304 (Tycho2). The ROTSE data with photometric correction flags (usually rejected) were kept for the analysis.
11. J-H = 1.107 (2MASS). Type SR is not excluded.
12. Probably can be identified with IRAS F03009+3430. J-H = 0.868 (2MASS), B-V = 1.680 (Tycho2). Type SR with the period 56 d is not excluded.
13. J-H = 0.977 (2MASS).
14. IRAS 03119+3219. J-H = 0.784 (2MASS). The ROTSE data with photometric correction flags (usually rejected) were kept for the analysis.
15. Probably can be identified with IRAS F03163+4010. J-H = 0.915 (2MASS).
16. IRAS 03598+5310. J-H = 1.632 (2MASS). CGCS 605 (Alksnis et al. 2001). The ROTSE data with photometric correction flags (usually rejected) were kept for the analysis.
17. IRAS F05435+5320. J-H = 0.956 (2MASS). CGCS 1039 (Alksnis et al. 2001).
18. J-H = 0.949 (2MASS).
19. J-H = 0.965 (2MASS). The ROTSE data with photometric correction flags (usually rejected) were kept for the analysis.
20. J-H = 0.857 (2MASS). The ROTSE data with photometric correction flags (usually rejected) were kept for the analysis.
21. J-H = 0.479 (2MASS). The ROTSE data with photometric correction flags (usually rejected) were kept for the analysis.
22. J-H = 0.573 (2MASS), B-V = 0.964 (Tycho2).
23. J-H = 0.564 (2MASS), B-V = 1.073 (Tycho2).
24. J-H = 0.897 (2MASS). Period 64 d is possible too. The ROTSE data with photometric correction flags (usually rejected) were kept for the analysis.
25. IRAS F13471+4430. J-H = 0.956 (2MASS), B-V = 2.467 (Tycho2). The ROTSE data with photometric correction flags (usually rejected) were kept for the analysis.
26. J-H = 0.881 (2MASS), B-V = 2.613 (Tycho2). The ROTSE data with photometric correction flags (usually rejected) were kept for the analysis.
27. IRAS 14062+3131. J-H = 0.920 (2MASS), B-V = 1.843 (Tycho2). Periods 48 d or 57 d and type SR are possible. The ROTSE data with photometric correction flags (usually rejected) were kept for the analysis.
28. J-H = 0.554 (2MASS), B-V = 1.108 (Tycho2).
29. IRAS 16241+5248. J-H = 0.882 (2MASS), B-V = 1.632 (Tycho2). The ROTSE data with photometric correction flags (usually rejected) were kept for the analysis.
30. J-H = 0.663 (2MASS), B-V = 1.824 (Tycho2). The ROTSE data with photometric correction flags (usually rejected) were kept for the analysis.
31. IRAS Z16281+6144. J-H = 0.906 (2MASS). Period 72 d and type SRB are possible.
32. IRAS 17196+3925. J-H = 0.847 (2MASS), B-V = 1.935 (Tycho2).
33. IRAS F17397+2915. J-H = 0.895 (2MASS). The ROTSE data with photometric correction flags (usually rejected) were kept for the analysis.
34. IRAS F18136+3343. J-H = 0.878 (2MASS).
35. IRAS 18148+3003. J-H = 0.889 (2MASS), B-V = 2.024 (Tycho2). Period 85 d and type SRB are possible. The ROTSE data with photometric correction flags (usually rejected) were kept for the analysis.
36. IRAS 18168+3314. J-H = 0.816 (2MASS), B-V = 2.622 (Tycho2).
37. J-H = 0.845 (2MASS).
38. J-H = 0.904 (2MASS). The ROTSE data with photometric correction flags (usually rejected) were kept for the analysis.
39. IRAS F18346+2958. J-H = 0.903 (2MASS).
40. IRAS F18353+2922. J-H = 0.960 (2MASS). The ROTSE data with photometric correction flags (usually rejected) were kept for the analysis.
41. IRAS F18377+2913. J-H = 0.977 (2MASS). The ROTSE data with photometric correction flags (usually rejected) were kept for the analysis.
42. Probably can be identified with IRAS Z22357+3624. J-H = 0.910 (2MASS).
43. IRAS F22378+3936. J-H = 0.958 (2MASS). Type SRB is not excluded.
44. IRAS F22387+4018. J-H = 0.971 (2MASS).
45. IRAS F22473+3942. J-H = 0.898 (2MASS).
46. Probably can be identified with IRAS F22477+3949. J-H = 0.946 (2MASS).
47. IRAS 22586+3731. J-H = 0.933 (2MASS), B-V = 2.008 (Tycho2). The ROTSE data with photometric correction flags (usually rejected) were kept for the analysis.
48. J-H = 0.880 (2MASS). The ROTSE data with photometric correction flags (usually rejected) were kept for the analysis.
49. IRAS F23068+4027. J-H = 0.915 (2MASS).
50. J-H = 0.921 (2MASS).
51. J-H = 0.892 (2MASS).
52. J-H = 0.941 (2MASS). The ROTSE data with photometric correction flags (usually rejected) were kept for the analysis.
53. IRAS 23220+2912. J-H = 0.919 (2MASS), B-V = 3.547 (Tycho2). The ROTSE data with photometric correction flags (usually rejected) were kept for the analysis.
54. IRAS 23221+3558. J-H = 0.966 (2MASS).Remarks:
I present the discovery of 54 new semiregular (SR, SRB, SRD) and irregular (LB) pulsating variable stars. A search for variables was carried out in the publicly available data of the Northern Sky Variability Survey (NSVS, Wozniak et al., 2004, also see http://skydot.lanl.gov/nsvs). These observations were analyzed using the period-search software developed by Dr. V.P. Goranskij for Windows environment. The coordinates were drawn either from the Tycho-2 or 2MASS catalogs.
In several cases, the ROTSE data with photometric correction flags (usually rejected) were kept for the analysis. The use of these data considerably increases the number of available observations without deteriorating quality and allows us to determine the period more accurately.References:
Alksnis, A., Balklavs, A., Dzervitis, U., et al., 2001, Baltic Astronomy, 10, 1
Wozniak, P.R., Vestrand, W.T., Akerlof, C.W. et al., 2004, Astron. J., 127, 2436