Oxygen-18 captures a proton and keeps it, becoming fluorine-19. This opens the fourth CNO cycle.
Most protons that hit oxygen-18 produce a helium nucleus and nitrogen-15 instead. The small fraction that makes fluorine-19 decides how much material passes into the last CNO cycle and towards neon. The rate also enters the oxygen isotope ratios predicted for giant stars and novae.
Facts
- How well known
- Measured directly down to low energies, which ruled out a large contribution once thought possible; the lowest-energy part still needs study.
- Live evaluation
- No live evaluation yet · Evaluations
- Reaction rates
- Explore the rates →
- Q-value · energy released
- 7.994 MeV
- Kind
- Radiative capture
How it was measured
3 measurements, 2012–2021, 2 at LUNAShow the listHide the list
2012
LENA, TUNLTriangle Universities Nuclear Laboratory
Direct measurement at the surface · 95 keV resonance (proton energy)
Intense beams from an electron-cyclotron-resonance ion source and γγ-coincidence detection on anodised tantalum targets enriched to 99.3% in 18O; a new upper limit for the strength of the 95 keV resonance and rates for cool bottom processing in low-mass AGB stars. [1]
2019
LUNA 400 kVLaboratori Nazionali del Gran Sasso (INFN)
Direct measurement underground · 85–140 keV
First direct measurement in this energy range, with a 4π BGO summing detector. The 90 keV resonance has ωγ = 0.53 ± 0.07 neV, three orders of magnitude below the indirect estimate and a factor of 20 below the previous upper limit, so it does not contribute significantly to the stellar rate. [2]
2021
LUNA 400 kVLaboratori Nazionali del Gran Sasso (INFN)
Direct measurement underground · resonances at 151, 215, 274 and 334 keV (proton energy)
Second LUNA campaign, with a HPGe detector, on the higher-energy resonances; it confirmed the contributions of these resonances to the stellar rate. [3]
Measurements (EXFOR)
Every dataset EXFOR holds for this reaction, drawn by the energies it covers, against the energies a star uses.
46 datasets in 7 EXFOR entries, 1969–2021 · 6 without an energy range, not drawn
- Lowest energy in EXFOR
- 85.2 keV
- Best et al., 2019 · Y · O2457.002
- Distance from the Gamow peak
- 0.52 Gamow widths above
- E₀ = 65.2 keV, window 45.9–84.6 keV
- Rate from energies not in EXFOR
- 87%
- at T₉ = 0.05, smooth estimate · 87% of it lies below the lowest energy in EXFOR
- Gamow window, hatched where no measurement reaches
- Outlined bars are shown but not counted (the rule is under “How these numbers are made”).
- A diamond is a dataset at a single energy. Bars running off the right edge continue to higher energies.
The datasets of the gap map, by quantity
| Quantity | Datasets | E_cm range (keV) |
|---|---|---|
| SS-factor | 1 | 118 keV – 118 keV |
| σ→Eₓpartial | 2 | 1.75 MeV – 1.75 MeV |
| dσ/dΩangular distribution | 32 | 520 keV – 2.09 MeV |
| Yyield | 1 | 85.3 keV – 148 keV |
| ωγresonance strength | 3 | 85.2 keV – 1.83 MeV |
| …other | 1 | 143 keV – 316 keV |
How these numbers are made
Lowest measured energy, everywhere in the data explorer: the lowest centre-of-mass energy at which a dataset in EXFOR measures the reaction itself (cross section, S-factor, angular distribution, yield or resonance strength), judged point by point. A point counts when it is a value, not an upper or lower limit, when it lies at least one standard deviation above zero, and when its energy is physical: at least 1 keV for charged particles, and not below the threshold of an endothermic reaction. Not counted: extrapolated, calculated, evaluated or derived values; superseded, deleted or preliminary data; ratios; a single S-factor value, which in EXFOR is a fit result; and indirect methods (Trojan horse, Coulomb dissociation, ANC, surrogate reactions), recognized from EXFOR's method and analysis codes, their text and the title. Frame and unit errors of EXFOR are corrected first, and values the literature shows to be upper limits are read as limits, from a list that gives the evidence for each. Datasets that reach the same energy within 0.5% are all credited, earliest first. Rate from energies not in EXFOR: the share of the rate integrand at that temperature outside the energy ranges the counted datasets cover (from their lowest measured point to their highest), with a constant S-factor (σ ∝ S(E₀)/E · e^−2πη, so the integrand is e^(−E/kT − 2πη)); for a neutron capture, σ ∝ 1/v. Resonances make the real integrand lumpy, so read it as a smooth baseline.
Details
How well known, in detail: Direct data reach 85 keV and rule out a large 90 keV contribution; the direct-capture component and the 20 keV resonance still need study.
The same 19F states govern 18O(p,γ)19F and 18O(p,α)15N, so the two reactions share resonance energies and total widths and differ in the partial widths. At stellar energies the γ-ray channel is weak compared with the α channel. The low-energy cross section is the sum of direct capture, the tail of the strong resonance at E = 143 keV, the resonance at 90 keV and, at the lowest temperatures, a resonance at 20 keV known only from indirect data.
LUNA measured the 90 keV resonance directly for the first time, with a 4π BGO summing detector deep underground: its strength, 0.53 ± 0.07 neV, is too small to matter for the stellar rate. Solar Fusion III adopts a direct-capture S(0) = 23 ± 3.8 keV b.
Peak energy E0 ± half the 1/e width, centre of mass, from the AME2020 masses.
Evaluations
Compilations that combine the data into a recommended rate.
- —B. Acharya et al., Rev. Mod. Phys. 97, 035002 (2025) [4]
Open questions
- The direct-capture S-factor at low energy, which Solar Fusion III flags for further study.
- The strength of the 20 keV resonance, known only from indirect data.
Related reactions
References
- 1.
M. Q. Buckner, C. Iliadis et al.
Thermonuclear reaction rate of 18O(p,γ)19F
Phys. Rev. C 86, 065804 (2012) · 10.1103/PhysRevC.86.065804 · arXiv:1212.1126
- 2.
A. Best et al. (LUNA Collaboration)
Phys. Lett. B 797, 134900 (2019) · 10.1016/j.physletb.2019.134900LUNA
- 3.
F. R. Pantaleo et al. (LUNA Collaboration)
Low-energy cross section of the 18O(p,γ)19F reaction
Phys. Rev. C 104, 025802 (2021) · 10.1103/PhysRevC.104.025802LUNA
- 4.
B. Acharya et al.
Solar fusion III: New data and theory for hydrogen-burning stars
Rev. Mod. Phys. 97, 035002 (2025) · 10.1103/8lm7-gs18 · arXiv:2405.06470
How to cite this page
J. Skowronski, 18O(p,γ)19F, in Reaction atlas, 2026-10-12, https://jskowron.eu/atlas/18O-pg-19F.
Cite the date you used; it is the last change to this page.
Something wrong or missing? Report an error (opens a new issue on GitHub) · Suggest a reaction (opens a new issue on GitHub)