The reactions 16O(p, α), 20Ne(p, α) and 24Mg(p, α)

Gruhle, Wolfgang; Kober, Bernd

doi:10.1016/0375-9474(77)90601-7

Cited by 25 publications

(18 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Therefore it seems highly unlikely that the decrease in cellular survival probability and larger cellular damage reported by Cirrone et al in Ref. 4 in the presence of BSH is related with the p+ 11 B→3α, or to any other proton-or neutron-induced reaction on boron (being neutrons produced as secondary particles by the proton interaction in tissues). Different explanations have therefore to be looked for, such as, for example, an unreported much higher boron concentration in the cell specimen.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 92%

On the (un)effectiveness of proton boron capture in proton therapy

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We present calculations and simulations on the role of the p+ 11 B→3α reaction in proton therapy. This reaction has been recently suggested to be responsible for a decrease in the survival probability of tumor cells, when they are irradiated with low-energy protons. However, at the concentration levels typical of the proposed boron carrier (sodium borocaptate, Na 2 B 12 H 11 SH, in short BSH), i.e. less than 100 ppm, both calculations and Monte Carlo simulations suggest that the dose related to this reaction is orders of magnitude lower than the dose delivered by the primary proton beam inside the tissues. These calculations cast some doubts on the claim of an important role played by Proton Boron Capture in enhancing the therapeutic effectiveness of proton therapy, and suggest that other mechanisms should be investigated in order to explain the observed decrease in the survival probability.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 92%

On the (un)effectiveness of proton boron capture in proton therapy

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…As can be seen in Fig. 4, the four prominent peaks appear to correspond to the peak energies in the excitation function of the 21 Na(D,p 0 ) 24 Mg reaction, which was measured by the time reverse reaction using the activation method [19], although the correspondences are not perfect in detail.…”

Section: Alpha Induced Reactionsmentioning

confidence: 97%

“…A possible FIGURE 4. The excitation function of elastic scattering of 21 Na + D measured at the angles denoted [19]. They are compared to the excitation function of the 21 Na(D,p 0 ) reaction measured by the time-reverse reaction 24 Mg(p,D) 21 Na using the activation method [20].…”

Section: Alpha Induced Reactionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Experimental challenge to nucleosynthesis in core-collapse supernovae - Very early epoch of type II SNe -

Kubo¹,

Binh²,

Hayakawa³

et al. 2013

AIP Conference Proceedings

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Nucleosynthesis is one of the keys in studying the mechanism of core-collapse supernovae, which is an interesting challenge for modern science. The Qp-process, which is similar to an explosive hydrogen burning process, has been proposed as the most probable process in the very early epoch of type II supernovae. Here, we discuss our experimental efforts for the Qp-process, the first extensive direct measurements of the (D,p) reactions on bottle-neck proto-rich nuclei in light mass regions. Other challenges for the Qp-process study are also discussed. Keywords:The Qp-process, breakout of the pp chain, Dp-process, p-nuclei production, neutron induced stellar reactions, cluster nucleosynthesis, nuclear structure of p-rich nuclei, low-energy RI beams.

show abstract

“…Fig. 6 shows the experimental results of Gruhle et al [30] for the total (p,α) cross section. The TALYS calculation is again able to reproduce the data quite well.…”

Section: Nementioning

confidence: 99%

“…This allows a careful comparison of the experimental results for two nuclei, and in addition a step-by-step extension of the systematics in the 20 ≤ A ≤ 50 mass range [9] towards lighter nuclei is possible. Detailed calculations of the 17 F(α,p) 20 Ne and its reverse 20 Ne(p,α) 17 F reac-tion [30] will be provided in a separate paper [16]. Most experimental data in this work have been taken from the EXFOR database [31]; other sources are given explicitly.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Uncertainty of the astrophysical O17,18(α,n)Ne20,21
Mohr
¹

2017
Phys. Rev. C
9
0
7
0
View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: The (α,n) and (α,γ) reactions on 17,18 O have significant impact on the neutron balance in the astrophysical s-process. In this scenario stellar reaction rates are required for relatively low temperatures below T9 < ∼ 1. Conclusions: The statistical model is able to predict astrophysical reaction rates for temperatures above 1 GK with uncertainties of less than a factor of two for the nuclei under study. An experimental discrepancy for the 17 O(α,n) 20 Ne reaction needs to be resolved.

show abstract

The reactions 16O(p, α), 20Ne(p, α) and 24Mg(p, α)

Cited by 25 publications

References 14 publications

On the (un)effectiveness of proton boron capture in proton therapy

On the (un)effectiveness of proton boron capture in proton therapy

Experimental challenge to nucleosynthesis in core-collapse supernovae - Very early epoch of type II SNe -

Uncertainty of the astrophysical O17,18(α,n)Ne20,21
Mohr
¹

2017
Phys. Rev. C
9
0
7
0
View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

The reactions 16O(p, α), 20Ne(p, α) and 24Mg(p, α)

Cited by 25 publications

References 14 publications

On the (un)effectiveness of proton boron capture in proton therapy

On the (un)effectiveness of proton boron capture in proton therapy

Experimental challenge to nucleosynthesis in core-collapse supernovae - Very early epoch of type II SNe -

Uncertainty of the astrophysical O17,18(α,n)Ne20,21Mohr1 2017Phys. Rev. C9070View full textAdd to dashboardCite

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Uncertainty of the astrophysical O17,18(α,n)Ne20,21
Mohr
¹

2017
Phys. Rev. C
9
0
7
0
View full text Add to dashboard Cite