Berkeley 85
(MWSC 3311; Dolidze 41; OCL 160; OCL 163; FSR 0208; MWSC 3309)
1.0
UTI
1.0
CN
1.0
Cdens
1.0
CC3
1.0
Clit
1.0
Cdup
Stellar density (N50/rad)
43.9 [N/pc2]
- CN 1.0 Very rich
- Cdens 1.0 Very dense
- CC3 1.0 Very high quality
- Clit 1.0 Very well-studied
- Cdup 1.0 Unique
Overview
Berkeley 85 is a very rich, very dense object of very high C3 quality. Its parallax locates it at a moderate distance, above the mid-plane, affected by moderate extinction. It is catalogued as a massive, near-solar metallicity, intermediate-age cluster, but with a large variance across recent sources for the absorption, age, and mass parameters (see Parameters). It is very well-studied in the literature.
Data
| Reference | Year | RA [deg] | DEC [deg] | Plx [mas] | pmRA [mas/yr] | pmDE [mas/yr] | Rv [km/s] |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| UCC | 99999â | 304.697 | 37.744 | 0.243 | -2.937 | -4.678 | -34.091 |
| Almeida et al. | 2025 | 304.694 | 37.75 | â | â | â | â |
| Hunt & Reffert | 2024 | 304.699 | 37.731 | 0.249 | -2.953 | -4.673 | -26.033 |
| Cavallo et al. | 2024 | 304.701 | 37.746 | 0.244 | â | â | â |
| Hunt & Reffert | 2023 | 304.699 | 37.731 | 0.249 | -2.953 | -4.673 | -26.033 |
| Just et al. | 2023 | 304.682 | 37.727 | â | â | â | â |
| Dias et al. | 2021 | 304.694 | 37.75 | 0.216 | -2.947 | -4.677 | -33.478 |
| Cantat-Gaudin et al. | 2020 | 304.692 | 37.744 | 0.22 | -2.94 | -4.677 | â |
| Zhong et al. | 2020 | 304.692 | 37.744 | â | -2.94 | -4.677 | -35.612 |
| Cantat-Gaudin & Anders | 2020 | 304.692 | 37.744 | 0.22 | -2.94 | -4.677 | â |
| Monteiro & Dias | 2019 | 304.704 | 37.75 | â | -2.934 | -4.678 | 2.322 |
| Soubiran et al. | 2018 | 304.692 | 37.744 | â | â | â | -33.72 |
| Bica et al. | 2019 | 304.712 | 37.737 | â | â | â | â |
| Cantat-Gaudin et al. | 2018 | 304.692 | 37.744 | 0.22 | -2.94 | -4.677 | â |
| Loktin & Popova | 2017 | 304.725 | 37.758 | â | -0.945 | -0.945 | -1.0 |
| Kharchenko et al. | 2016 | 304.682 | 37.727 | â | â | â | â |
| Dias et al. | 2014 | 304.729 | 37.759 | â | -1.45 | -1.52 | â |
| Kharchenko et al. | 2013 | 304.687 | 37.73 | â | -3.52 | -2.78 | â |
| Bukowiecki et al. | 2011 | 304.688 | 37.721 | â | â | â | â |
| Dias et al. | 2002 | 304.729 | 37.759 | â | -1.45 | -1.52 | â |
đĄ Note: The UCC values are estimated from its identified members.
| Reference | Year | Dist [kpc] | Av [mag] | DAv [mag] | Age [Myr] | [Fe/H] [dex] | Mass [Msun] | Bfrac | BSS |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| UCC | 99999â | 3.21 | 2.77 | 2.48 | 386 | 0.127 | 3196 | â | â |
| Liu et al. | 2025 | 9.38 | 1.11 | â | 224 | â | â | â | â |
| Almeida et al. | 2025 | 3.00 | 3.07 | â | 242 | â | 3237 | â | â |
| Hunt & Reffert | 2024 | â | â | â | â | â | 8390(1) | â | â |
| Cavallo et al. | 2024 | 3.24 | 3.75 | â | 182 | 0.240 | â | â | â |
| Hunt & Reffert | 2023 | 3.71 | 3.83 | 2.48 | 80 | â | â | â | â |
| Just et al. | 2023 | â | â | â | 1161 | â | 2234 | â | â |
| Dias et al. | 2021 | 3.00 | 3.07 | â | 242 | 0.424 | â | â | â |
| Cantat-Gaudin et al. | 2020 | 3.53 | 2.77 | â | 417 | â | â | â | â |
| Zhong et al. | 2020 | 1.76 | 2.39 | â | 9065 | 0.000 | â | â | â |
| Cantat-Gaudin & Anders | 2020 | 4.02 | â | â | â | â | â | â | â |
| Monteiro & Dias | 2019 | 3.36 | 3.32 | â | 335 | 0.013 | â | â | â |
| Soubiran et al. | 2018 | 4.02 | â | â | â | â | â | â | â |
| Cantat-Gaudin et al. | 2018 | 4.02 | â | â | â | â | â | â | â |
| Loktin & Popova | 2017 | 3.07 | 2.58 | â | 759 | â | â | â | â |
| Kharchenko et al. | 2016 | 1.76 | 2.39 | â | 1161 | â | â | â | â |
| Kharchenko et al. | 2013 | 1.76 | 2.39 | â | 1161 | â | â | â | â |
| Bukowiecki et al. | 2012 | â | â | â | â | â | 3155 | â | â |
| Bukowiecki et al. | 2011 | 3.18(1) | 2.94 | â | 355 | â | â | â | â |
| Dias et al. | 2002 | 1.76 | 2.39 | â | 1000 | â | â | â | â |
(N): Indicates that there are N extra values assigned to this parameter in the corresponding reference.
MOCA


Liu et al. (2025)
Classified as hyperbolic encounter pair 34 along with Gulliver_23.
Palma et al. (2025)
Part of multiple system G94, along with UBC_1100 and Gulliver_23.
Cavallo et al. (2024)
Gold sample.
Almeida et al. (2025)
Mass determination: good fit. Isochrone match: intermediate fit.