pith. sign in

arxiv: 2607.01155 · v1 · pith:N3RTBL6Rnew · submitted 2026-07-01 · 🌌 astro-ph.GA

Searching for the elusive CH2+ with the James Webb Space Telescope. Another carbocation to constrain astrochemical networks

M. Zannese , L. H. Coudert , E. Dartois , P. Dell'Ova , O. Roncero , P. del Mazo-Sevillano , U. Jacovella , B. Gans
show 9 more authors
J. R. Goicoechea D. Van De Putte C. Boersma E. Habart E. Peeters J. Cami R. Chown I. Schroetter O. Kannavou
This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-07-02 08:32 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.GA
keywords CH2+carbocationsJWSTphotodissociation regionsastrochemistryinterstellar mediumOrioncolumn density upper limits
0
0 comments X

The pith

JWST observations set an upper limit on excited CH2+ close to or below photodissociation region model predictions.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper tries to establish whether CH2+ can be detected alongside already-observed CH+ and CH3+ to tighten constraints on interstellar hydrocarbon chemistry networks. The authors calculate the relevant rovibrational transitions, generate emission spectra at varying excitation temperatures, and compare them directly to JWST mid-infrared data from the d203-506 disk in Orion. This comparison produces excitation-temperature-dependent upper limits on the excited-state column density of CH2+ that sit several times below the limits for the detected ions. When these observational bounds are placed against thermochemical model predictions for photodissociation regions, the upper limit lies either slightly above or below the expected column density under the shared-temperature assumption. A sympathetic reader would care because CH2+ sits at a key branching point in the build-up of larger hydrocarbons, so its abundance directly tests the completeness of current astrochemical networks.

Core claim

The central claim is that the nondetection of CH2+ in JWST spectra of the externally irradiated disk d203-506 yields an upper limit on its excited column density that is either slightly above or below the value predicted by thermochemical models of photodissociation regions, once the model spectra at assumed excitation temperatures are compared to the data.

What carries the argument

Calculated CH2+ rovibrational emission spectra at different excitation temperatures, used to derive observational upper limits by direct comparison to JWST spectra and to thermochemical abundance predictions.

If this is right

  • The abundance of CH2+ in photodissociation regions must lie at or below current thermochemical model values under the shared excitation assumption.
  • A tabulated list of transitions is now available for targeted searches in other sources that show CH3+.
  • Nondetections in additional CH3+-bearing objects can map the conditions under which CH2+ remains below detectable thresholds.
  • Tighter observational bounds on this intermediate will directly limit the allowed rates and branching ratios in hydrocarbon formation pathways.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • If the temperature assumption holds across multiple sources, modelers can reduce the allowed range of ion-neutral reaction rates in irradiated disks.
  • Deeper or higher-resolution spectra of the same target, or observations of regions with higher predicted column densities, would be the next direct test.
  • Similar upper-limit exercises on the next missing carbocation in the sequence would close the observational gap in the network.

Load-bearing premise

CH2+ experiences similar excitation temperatures to the already-detected CH+ and CH3+ in the same region.

What would settle it

A clear detection of one or more tabulated CH2+ lines in the JWST spectrum of d203-506 at a strength implying an excited column density well above the reported upper limit.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.01155 by B. Gans, C. Boersma, D. Van De Putte, E. Dartois, E. Habart, E. Peeters, I. Schroetter, J. Cami, J. R. Goicoechea, L. H. Coudert, M. Zannese, O. Kannavou, O. Roncero, P. Dell'Ova, P. del Mazo-Sevillano, R. Chown, U. Jacovella.

Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Energy-level diagram of the bending levels, with no quanta in either stretching modes, in the two lowest electronic states of CH+ 2 . These states result from the Renner-Teller coupling, which splits the doubly degenerate 2Πu state into two nondegenerate states for nonlin￾ear configurations. The allowed vibrational (black for the fundamental X˜ + 2A1 state, red for the A˜ + 2B1X state) and vibronic (blue) … view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: displays the upper limits, depending on the LTE ex￾citation temperature, we derived. The upper limit varies with the assumed excitation temperature because the levels are more excited at higher temperatures, and thus, the lines are brighter. In addition, more lines can be produced, and the probability in￾creases that the lines fall within a region of possible detection. Except for temperatures well below a… view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Meudon PDR model at nH = 107 cm−3 and G0 = 2 × 104 . (Top panel) Temperature and H2 abundance profile as a function of AV . (Bot￾tom panel) Abundances with respect to the proton density of the main species of the carbon chemical chain. The gray area is defined as the emitting region of rovibrational levels of CH+ and CH+ 3 . RV = 5.5. We updated the photodissociation rate of CH+ 3 using del Mazo-Sevillano … view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Variation in the total column densities and abundances ratio of CH+ , CH+ 2 , and CH+ 3 as a function of AV for a model at nH = 107 cm−3 and G0 = 2 × 104 . The gray area is defined as the emitting region for rovibrational transitions of CH+ and CH+ 3 . abundance to be higher by an order of magnitude than CH+ and CH+ 2 at the dissociation front. CH+ and CH+ 2 have a very sim￾ilar abundance at this position,… view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Energy diagram of the lower electronic states involved in the H2 + CH+ −→ CH+ 2 + H reaction from del Mazo-Sevillano et al. (2024) , including zeropoint energies. distribution at temperatures lower than 1000 K. CH+ 2 might also be formed in very excited ν2 levels in the X state or even in its ˜ first electronic excited state (A˜ + ). The reaction CH+ (X 1Σ) + H2(X 1Σ + ) → CH+ 2 (Xe2A1, Ae2B1) + H(2 S ) (7… view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Carbocations are key species in interstellar chemistry, providing entry points for building larger hydrocarbons. CH+, and more recently, CH3+, have been detected. Other carbocations await detection to provide a comprehensive view of the astrochemical network that is at work in the interstellar medium. We search for CH2+ in objects in which CH3+ was detected and evaluate the most favorable conditions for detecting the elusive CH2+ reactive cation. We calculated the CH2+ rotational and rovibrational transitions expected to contribute in the mid- to far-infrared, focusing on the lower-energy rovibrational levels. We then calculated CH2+ infrared emission spectra at different excitation temperatures and compared them to JWST spectra of the externally irradiated disk d203-506 in Orion, where CH+ and CH3+ have already been detected. We used thermochemical models to predict the abundance and spatial morphology of CH2+ to better understand its nondetection. The comparison to JWST spectra allowed us to provide excitation-temperature-dependent upper limits to the excited column density. These are several times lower than those detected for CH+ and CH3+ in their excited states. Based on model calculations for photodissociation regions and assuming similar excitation temperatures, the upper limit derived from observations and CH2+ model spectrum is either slightly above or below the column density expected from models of photodissociation regions. We provide a list of tabulated transitions to allow the community to search for this carbocation in future observations as CH2+ is key in providing observational constraints on astrochemical models.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript calculates CH2+ rotational and rovibrational transitions in the mid- to far-infrared, generates model emission spectra at varying excitation temperatures, compares these to JWST spectra of the externally irradiated disk d203-506 (where CH+ and CH3+ are detected) to derive Tex-dependent upper limits on the excited-state column density of CH2+, and employs thermochemical PDR models to predict its abundance and morphology. It concludes that the observational upper limit is either slightly above or below the model-predicted column density (assuming similar Tex to CH+ and CH3+), provides a tabulated list of transitions, and discusses prospects for future detection to constrain astrochemical networks.

Significance. If the upper limits hold and the excitation assumption is validated, the work supplies a useful observational constraint on an intermediate carbocation in PDR chemistry and supplies tabulated transitions as a community resource. The direct spectral comparison approach for the nondetection is independent of the models, which is a strength.

major comments (2)
  1. [Abstract and model-comparison section] Abstract and model-comparison section: the headline claim that the JWST-derived upper limit is 'either slightly above or below' the PDR-model column density rests on the assumption that CH2+ shares the same excitation temperature as CH+ and CH3+. No independent steady-state Tex calculation for CH2+ (accounting for its distinct radiative lifetimes or chemical pumping) is reported from the same PDR model, so the numerical comparison's precision is not demonstrated.
  2. [Methods and results on upper-limit derivation] Methods and results on upper-limit derivation: the Tex-dependent upper limits are obtained by scaling the CH2+ model spectrum to the JWST data of d203-506, but the text provides no explicit error budget, description of continuum subtraction, or quantitative criterion for the nondetection threshold. This makes it impossible to verify that the limits are 'several times lower' than the CH+ and CH3+ values at the stated level of precision.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] The abstract states that transitions were calculated 'focusing on the lower-energy rovibrational levels' but does not specify the energy cutoff or list the specific levels retained.
  2. [Results section] Notation for column densities (e.g., N(CH2+)*) should be defined explicitly on first use in the results section.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their constructive comments on our manuscript. We address each major comment point by point below, indicating where revisions will be incorporated.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract and model-comparison section] Abstract and model-comparison section: the headline claim that the JWST-derived upper limit is 'either slightly above or below' the PDR-model column density rests on the assumption that CH2+ shares the same excitation temperature as CH+ and CH3+. No independent steady-state Tex calculation for CH2+ (accounting for its distinct radiative lifetimes or chemical pumping) is reported from the same PDR model, so the numerical comparison's precision is not demonstrated.

    Authors: We acknowledge that the headline comparison relies on the assumption of similar excitation temperatures, which is explicitly stated in the manuscript when comparing to PDR model predictions. The thermochemical PDR models used focus on abundance and morphology and do not output a separate steady-state Tex for CH2+ (owing to its distinct radiative properties and potential chemical pumping effects). We will revise the abstract and model-comparison section to emphasize this assumption more prominently and to note the lack of an independent Tex calculation from the same PDR model, thereby clarifying the precision of the numerical comparison. revision: partial

  2. Referee: [Methods and results on upper-limit derivation] Methods and results on upper-limit derivation: the Tex-dependent upper limits are obtained by scaling the CH2+ model spectrum to the JWST data of d203-506, but the text provides no explicit error budget, description of continuum subtraction, or quantitative criterion for the nondetection threshold. This makes it impossible to verify that the limits are 'several times lower' than the CH+ and CH3+ values at the stated level of precision.

    Authors: We agree that additional methodological details are required for full transparency and verifiability. In the revised manuscript we will add an explicit error budget for the derived upper limits, a description of the continuum subtraction applied to the JWST spectra of d203-506, and the quantitative criterion (e.g., residual noise level or S/N threshold) used to define the nondetection. These additions will enable readers to confirm that the CH2+ upper limits are several times lower than the corresponding values for CH+ and CH3+. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; observational upper limits independent of thermochemical predictions

full rationale

The derivation chain begins with calculation of CH2+ rovibrational transitions and emission spectra at varying Tex, followed by direct comparison to JWST spectra of d203-506 to extract Tex-dependent upper limits on excited column density. These limits are obtained from spectral nondetection and are independent of the PDR thermochemical models. The final statement that the upper limit is 'either slightly above or below' the model-expected column density invokes an explicit assumption of similar Tex to CH+ and CH3+, but this does not reduce the result to a self-definitional equivalence, a fitted parameter renamed as prediction, or a load-bearing self-citation chain. No equations or steps in the provided text exhibit the specific reductions required for circularity scores above 0. The central observational constraint remains externally falsifiable.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

1 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on the accuracy of the computed CH2+ rovibrational transitions and the applicability of existing thermochemical PDR models to the observed source; no new entities are postulated.

free parameters (1)
  • excitation temperature
    Spectra are computed at multiple excitation temperatures to produce temperature-dependent upper limits; the value is not fixed a priori.
axioms (1)
  • domain assumption The calculated rotational and rovibrational transitions accurately represent the CH2+ spectrum in the mid- to far-infrared.
    Invoked to generate the model emission spectra used for comparison with JWST data.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 5913 in / 1374 out tokens · 39501 ms · 2026-07-02T08:32:59.562912+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

61 extracted references

  1. [1]

    Anicich , V. G. 1993, Journal of Physical and Chemical Reference Data, 22, 1469

    1993

  2. [2]

    R., et al

    Argyriou , I., Glasse , A., Law , D. R., et al. 2023, , 675, A111

    2023

  3. [3]

    2022, , 134, 054301

    Bern \'e , O., Habart , \'E ., Peeters , E., et al. 2022, , 134, 054301

    2022

  4. [4]

    2023, , 621, 56

    Bern \'e , O., Martin-Drumel , M.-A., Schroetter , I., et al. 2023, , 621, 56

    2023

  5. [5]

    2025, , 995, 67

    Bhatt , C., Cami , J., Peeters , E., et al. 2025, , 995, 67

    2025

  6. [6]

    O., van Dishoeck , E

    Bruderer , S., Benz , A. O., van Dishoeck , E. F., et al. 2010, , 521, L44

    2010

  7. [7]

    2001, Chemical physics letters, 341, 358

    Bunker, P., Chan, M., Kraemer, W., & Jensen, P. 2001, Chemical physics letters, 341, 358

    2001

  8. [8]

    P., Yurchenko, S

    Bunker, P., Kraemer, W. P., Yurchenko, S. N., et al. 2007, Molecular Physics, 105, 1369

    2007

  9. [9]

    & Handy, N

    Carter, S. & Handy, N. C. 1982, Journal of Molecular Spectroscopy, 95, 9

    1982

  10. [10]

    W., Gonz \'a lez-Alfonso , E., et al

    Cernicharo , J., Liu , X. W., Gonz \'a lez-Alfonso , E., et al. 1997, , 483, L65

    1997

  11. [11]

    B., Chen , N

    Changala , P. B., Chen , N. L., Le , H. L., et al. 2023, , 680, A19

    2023

  12. [12]

    H., Gans, B., Holzmeier, F., et al

    Coudert, L. H., Gans, B., Holzmeier, F., et al. 2018, The Journal of Chemical Physics, 149, 224304

    2018

  13. [13]

    d., Aguado , A., Goicoechea , J

    del Mazo-Sevillano , P. d., Aguado , A., Goicoechea , J. R., & Roncero , O. 2024, , 160, 184307

    2024

  14. [14]

    Douglas , A. E. & Herzberg , G. 1941, , 94, 381

    1941

  15. [15]

    2010, , 521, L15

    Falgarone , E., Godard , B., Cernicharo , J., et al. 2010, , 521, L15

    2010

  16. [16]

    Fitzpatrick , E. L. & Massa , D. 1990, , 72, 163

    1990

  17. [17]

    Geballe , T. R. 2006, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London Series A, 364, 3035

    2006

  18. [18]

    Geballe , T. R. & Oka , T. 1996, , 384, 334

    1996

  19. [19]

    R., Le Bourlot , J., Black , J

    Goicoechea , J. R., Le Bourlot , J., Black , J. H., et al. 2024, , 689, L4

    2024

  20. [20]

    R., Pety , J., Cuadrado , S., et al

    Goicoechea , J. R., Pety , J., Cuadrado , S., et al. 2025 a , , 696, A100

    2025

  21. [21]

    R., Roncero , O., Roueff , E., et al

    Goicoechea , J. R., Roncero , O., Roueff , E., et al. 2025 b , , 703, A189

    2025

  22. [22]

    2008, , 688, 306

    Goto , M., Usuda , T., Nagata , T., et al. 2008, , 688, 306

    2008

  23. [23]

    Gottfried, J. L. & Oka, T. 2004, The Journal of chemical physics, 121, 11527

    2004

  24. [24]

    & Coudert, L

    Gutl\'e , C. & Coudert, L. H. 2012, Journal of Molecular Spectroscopy, 273, 44

    2012

  25. [25]

    2024, , 136, 054302

    Henning , T., Kamp , I., Samland , M., et al. 2024, , 136, 054302

    2024

  26. [26]

    2021, Frontiers in Astronomy and Space Sciences, 8, 207

    Herbst , E. 2021, Frontiers in Astronomy and Space Sciences, 8, 207

    2021

  27. [27]

    1966, Molecular Spectra and Molecular Structure

    Herzberg, G. 1966, Molecular Spectra and Molecular Structure. Vol. III: Electronic Spectra and Electronic Structure of Polyatomic Molecules (Princeton, NJ / New York, USA: D. Van Nostrand Company), volume III of *Molecular Spectra and Molecular Structure*

    1966

  28. [28]

    G., Mazumder, S., & Peterson, K

    Hill, J. G., Mazumder, S., & Peterson, K. A. 2010, The Journal of chemical physics, 132

    2010

  29. [29]

    & McCall , B

    Indriolo , N. & McCall , B. J. 2012, , 745, 91

    2012

  30. [30]

    R., & McCall , B

    Indriolo , N., Oka , T., Geballe , T. R., & McCall , B. J. 2010, , 711, 1338

    2010

  31. [31]

    1995 a , Journal of Molecular Spectroscopy, 172, 194

    Jensen, P., Brumm, M., Kraemer, W., & Bunker, P. 1995 a , Journal of Molecular Spectroscopy, 172, 194

    1995

  32. [32]

    P., & Bunker, P

    Jensen, P., Brumm, M., Kraemer, W. P., & Bunker, P. R. 1995 b , Journal of Molecular Spectroscopy, 171, 31

    1995

  33. [33]

    2019, Journal of Molecular Spectroscopy, 363, 111172

    Jungen, C. 2019, Journal of Molecular Spectroscopy, 363, 111172

    2019

  34. [34]

    1994, Canadian Journal of Physics, 72, 871

    Kraemer, W., Jensen, P., & Bunker, P. 1994, Canadian Journal of Physics, 72, 871

    1994

  35. [35]

    2006, , 164, 506

    Le Petit , F., Nehm \'e , C., Le Bourlot , J., & Roueff , E. 2006, , 164, 506

    2006

  36. [36]

    Marcus, R. A. 1952 a , J. Chem. Phys., 20, 352

    1952

  37. [37]

    Marcus, R. A. 1952 b , J. Chem. Phys., 20, 355

    1952

  38. [38]

    J., Hinkle , K

    McCall , B. J., Hinkle , K. H., Geballe , T. R., et al. 2002, , 567, 391

    2002

  39. [39]

    Miller, W. H. 1987, Chem. Rev., 87, 19

    1987

  40. [40]

    W., Gupta , H., Nagy , Z., et al

    Morris , P. W., Gupta , H., Nagy , Z., et al. 2016, , 829, 15

    2016

  41. [41]

    A., Dartois , E., Habart , E., et al

    Naylor , D. A., Dartois , E., Habart , E., et al. 2010, , 518, L117

    2010

  42. [42]

    R., Jensen , P., & Kraemer , W

    Osmann , G., Bunker , P. R., Jensen , P., & Kraemer , W. P. 1997, Chemical Physics, 225, 33

    1997

  43. [43]

    2024, A&Ap, 685, A74

    Peeters , E., Habart , E., Bern \'e , O., et al. 2024, A&Ap, 685, A74

    2024

  44. [44]

    R., Glenn , J., et al

    Rangwala , N., Maloney , P. R., Glenn , J., et al. 2014, , 788, 147

    2014

  45. [45]

    & Peyerimhoff, S

    Reuter, W. & Peyerimhoff, S. D. 1992, Chemical Physics, 160, 11

    1992

  46. [46]

    1992, Journal of molecular spectroscopy, 153, 738

    R \"o sslein, M., Gabrys, C., Jagod, M.-F., & Oka, T. 1992, Journal of molecular spectroscopy, 153, 738

    1992

  47. [47]

    & Werner, H.-J

    Shiozaki, T. & Werner, H.-J. 2011, The Journal of chemical physics, 134

    2011

  48. [48]

    1992, Chemical Reviews, 92, 1473

    Smith, D. 1992, Chemical Reviews, 92, 1473

    1992

  49. [49]

    & Yachmenev, A

    Solomonik, V. & Yachmenev, A. Y. 2008, Optics and Spectroscopy, 104, 818

    2008

  50. [50]

    2012, , 758, 108

    Spinoglio , L., Pereira-Santaella , M., Busquet , G., et al. 2012, , 758, 108

    2012

  51. [51]

    F., M \'e nard , F., Meeus , G., et al

    Thi , W. F., M \'e nard , F., Meeus , G., et al. 2011, , 530, L2

    2011

  52. [52]

    C., Pittman , C

    Volz , M., Espaillat , C. C., Pittman , C. V., et al. 2026, , 171, 39

    2026

  53. [53]

    W. H. Miller . 1979, J. Am. Chem. Soc., 101

    1979

  54. [54]

    F., Morong , C

    Wang , H., Neese , C. F., Morong , C. P., Kleshcheva , M., & Oka , T. 2013, Journal of Physical Chemistry A, 117, 9908

    2013

  55. [55]

    2012, Mol

    Werner, H., Knowles, P., Knizia, G., Manby, F., & Sch \"u tz, M. 2012, Mol. Sci, 2, 10

    2012

  56. [56]

    & Knowles , P

    Werner , H.-J. & Knowles , P. J. 1988, , 89, 5803

    1988

  57. [57]

    J., et al

    Wesson , R., Cernicharo , J., Barlow , M. J., et al. 2010, , 518, L144

    2010

  58. [58]

    & Merkt, F

    Willitsch, S. & Merkt, F. 2003, The Journal of chemical physics, 118, 2235

    2003

  59. [59]

    Woon, D. E. & Herbst, E. 2009, ApJ. Sup. Series, 185, 273

    2009

  60. [60]

    2025, , 696, A99

    Zannese , M., Tabone , B., Habart , E., et al. 2025, , 696, A99

    2025

  61. [61]

    2024, Nature Astronomy, 8, 577

    Zannese , M., Tabone , B., Habart , E., et al. 2024, Nature Astronomy, 8, 577

    2024