NGC 752

(Melotte 12; Collinder 23; MWSC 151; OCL 363; FoF 2380; OCSN 221; LISC 3519; Theia 1214)

Click to load Aladin Lite
0.97 UTI
0.85
CN
1.0
Cdens
1.0
CC3
1.0
Clit
1.0
Cdup
Nm (P>50%) 358
Core radius and density 1.9 [pc], 6.4 [pc-2]
C3 classification AA
  • CN 0.85 Rich
  • Cdens 1.0 Very dense
  • CC3 1.0 Very high quality
  • Clit 1.0 Very well-studied
  • Cdup 1.0 Unique
đŸ“Ĩ Members 📊 Colab đŸ”Ŧ Bayestar19 MOCAMOCA 🔍 CDS 🔍 Simbad 🔍 CDS (Îą, δ) 🔍 Simbad (Îą, δ)

Overview
ℹī¸
NGC 752 is a rich, very dense object of very high C3 quality. Its parallax locates it at a very close distance, below the mid-plane, affected by low extinction. It is catalogued as a near-solar metallicity, old cluster, but with a large variance across recent sources for the absorption, metallicity, and mass parameters (see Parameters). It is very well-studied in the literature.

Note: This object shares a large percentage of members with a later reported entry. See table with shared members information.

Malhotra et al. (2026)
Lowest/Highest stellar mass in the catalogue with a mass-ratio estimate: 0.26/1.51 Msun

Yan et al. (2026)
Number of WDs: expected from single-star evolution N=46, with probability of formation through binary evolution >=0.5 N=3.

Almeida et al. (2025)
Mass determination: worst fit. Isochrone match: good fit.

Cavallo et al. (2024)
Gold sample.

Hunt & Reffert (2024)
Classified as open cluster. CMD class: 0.99 (50th percentile).

Hunt & Reffert (2023)
Classified as open cluster. CMD class: 0.99 (50th percentile).

Hu et al. (2021)
Ellipticities (core, all): e_core=0.3746, e_all=0.6152.

Rain et al. (2021)
This cluster was include in (Dias et al., 2002A&A...389..871D, Cat. B/ocl) however, parameters log(t)=9.17, Av=0.157, [Fe/H]=-0.030 were taken from Bossini et al. (2019A&A...623A.108B, Cat. J/A+A/623/A108). According to Ahumada & Lapasset (2007A&A...463..789A, Cat. J/A+A/463/789), this cluster host a confirmed blue straggler star (Gaia DR2 342856656440790784= BD+36 367) however, according to Cantat-Gaudin et al. (2018A&A...618A..93C, Cat. J/A+A18/A93), it is not a proper-motion member.

Ahumada & Lapasset (2007)
The membership study (1991A&AS...87...69P) gives star 209=BD+36 367 a probab- ility of 99%. The ubvy study (1983ApJ...267..207T) gives star 209 the folowing: v=9.74, (b-y)=0.028, m1=0.153, c1=1.002. Reference (1988AJ.....96..635E) cites star 209 as a blue straggler and star 110 as a `red straggler.' References (1974ApJ...194..657H), (1977IBVS.1293....1H), and (1994AJ....108.1828M) also cite star 209 (spectrum B9.5p?) as a blue straggler. Star 209 is an X-ray source (1996A&A...305..806B), and it is not a photometric variable (2001A&A...375..387V). Stars 32, 271, 309, and 1496 also appear as blue stragglers in the colour-magnitude diagrams of (1963ApJ...138..356E), (1989AJ.....98..888F), and (1953ApJ...117..356J), but they are non-members according to (1991A&AS...87...69P).

Data
🔍 Search references for NGC 752 in: SciX Simbad
ℹī¸
Reference Year RA [deg] DEC [deg] Plx [mas] pmRA [mas/yr] pmDE [mas/yr] Rv [km/s]
UCC 99999– 29.222 37.797 2.268 9.785 -11.844 5.876
Yan et al. 2026 29.16 37.793 2.269 9.772 -11.824 –
Malhotra et al. 2026 29.224 37.752 – – – –
Bijavara Seshashayana et al. 2025 29.492 37.991 – – – –
Otto et al. 2026 29.16 37.793 – 9.81 -11.71 6.1
Li et al. 2025 29.223 37.794 2.239 9.81 -11.713 –
Guerco et al. 2025 29.3 37.8 2.26 9.76 -11.8 6.21
Hu & Soubiran 2025 29.111 37.807 – – – –
Yang et al. 2025 29.16 37.793 – – – –
Wei et al. 2025 29.25 37.811 2.272 9.71 -11.841 –
Almeida et al. 2025 29.241 37.781 – – – –
Alfonso et al. 2024 29.23 37.787 2.234 9.765 -11.845 –
Zhang et al. 2024 29.16 37.793 – – – –
Hunt & Reffert 2024 29.16 37.793 2.269 9.772 -11.824 5.706
Cavallo et al. 2024 29.111 37.807 2.27 – – –
Hunt & Reffert 2023 29.16 37.793 2.269 9.772 -11.824 5.706
Angelo et al. 2023 29.271 37.831 – 9.76 -11.82 –
Qin et al. 2023 29.16 37.78 2.26 9.8 -11.81 6.23
Li et al. 2023 29.404 37.757 2.27 9.68 -11.97 –
Just et al. 2023 29.263 37.788 – – – –
He et al. 2022 29.212 37.773 2.27 9.774 -11.845 –
Tarricq et al. 2022 29.26 37.784 2.279 9.772 -11.844 –
Jadhav & Subramaniam 2021 29.223 37.794 – – – –
Jaehnig et al. 2021 29.231 37.788 2.261 9.86 -11.726 –
Netopil et al. 2022 29.421 37.785 – – – 5.44
Rain et al. 2021 29.223 37.794 2.239 9.81 -11.713 –
Dias et al. 2021 29.241 37.781 2.23 9.808 -11.727 6.229
Spina et al. 2021 29.199 37.801 2.228 9.811 -11.709 –
Cantat-Gaudin et al. 2020 29.223 37.794 2.239 9.81 -11.713 –
Donor et al. 2020 29.273 37.79 – 9.83 -11.9 5.6
Zhong et al. 2020 29.223 37.794 – 9.81 -11.713 -1.304
Cantat-Gaudin & Anders 2020 29.223 37.794 2.239 9.81 -11.713 –
Liu & Pang 2019 29.117 37.8 2.224 9.801 -11.73 –
Bossini et al. 2019 29.223 37.794 – – – –
Soubiran et al. 2018 29.223 37.794 – – – 5.69
Bica et al. 2019 29.368 37.791 – – – –
Cantat-Gaudin et al. 2018 29.223 37.794 2.239 9.81 -11.713 –
Angelo et al. 2019 29.408 37.817 – – – –
Dib et al. 2018 29.272 37.79 – – – –
Loktin & Popova 2017 29.415 37.785 – 0.898 -2.32 4.7
Sampedro et al. 2017 29.421 37.785 – 8.11 -11.78 –
Joshi et al. 2016 29.272 37.79 – – – –
Kharchenko et al. 2016 29.263 37.788 – – – –
Netopil et al. 2016 29.421 37.785 – – – –
Dias et al. 2014 29.421 37.785 – 1.81 -3.9 –
Kharchenko et al. 2013 29.272 37.79 – 8.36 -12.1 4.7
Gozha et al. 2012 29.421 37.785 – – – –
Kharchenko et al. 2012 29.272 37.79 – 8.46 -11.99 4.67
Piskunov et al. 2008 29.413 37.781 – – – –
Kharchenko et al. 2007 29.41 37.78 – 1.45 – 3.52
Piskunov et al. 2007 29.413 37.781 – – – –
Ahumada & Lapasset 2007 29.425 37.783 – – – –
van den Bergh 2006 29.421 37.785 – – – –
Kharchenko et al. 2005 29.41 37.78 – 7.66 -12.15 3.52
Kharchenko et al. 2003 29.43 37.79 – 7.63 -11.87 –
Chen et al. 2003 29.451 37.652 – 8.29 -11.34 5.5
Dias et al. 2002 29.421 37.785 – 7.5 -11.5 5.54
Lynga 1987 29.434 37.672 – – – -3.0
Sulentic et al. 1973 29.448 37.671 – – – –

💡 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 99999– 0.45 0.13 0.2 1380 -0.040 585 0.34 0
Yan et al. 2026 – – – 1174 – – – –
Malhotra et al. 2026 0.44 0.14 – 1754 -0.082 – – –
Bijavara Seshashayana et al. 2025 – 0.07 – 1170 -0.050(14) – – –
Otto et al. 2026 – – – 1175 0.000(15) – – –
Li et al. 2025 0.43 0.15 – 1729 -0.049 – – –
Guerco et al. 2025 – – – 1170 -0.030 – – –
Hu & Soubiran 2025 – – – – -0.240(5) – – –
Yang et al. 2025 – – – 1412 -0.090(3) – – –
Wei et al. 2025 0.34 0.25 – 2460 0.250 456 0.34 –
Almeida et al. 2025 0.44 0.16 – 1521 – 184 – –
Alfonso et al. 2024 0.48 0.07 – 1764 -0.036 – – –
Zhang et al. 2024 – – – – 0.005(1) – – –
Hunt & Reffert 2024 0.41 0.07 0.20 1421 – 319(1) – –
Cavallo et al. 2024 0.43 0.47 – 1175 0.000 – – –
Hunt & Reffert 2023 0.41 0.07 0.20 1419 – – – –
Angelo et al. 2023 0.44 0.19 – 1585 0.050 5(1) – –
Deng & Li 2023 0.46 0.62 – 1200 -0.081 – – –
Qin et al. 2023 0.47 0.19 – 1585 – – – –
Li et al. 2023 0.42 0.00 – 1995 -0.006 – – 1(1)
Just et al. 2023 – – – 1349 – 815 – –
He et al. 2022 – 0.25 – 1413 – – – –
Spina et al. 2022 – – – – -0.040 – – –
Tarricq et al. 2022 0.48 – – 1202 – – – –
Jadhav & Subramaniam 2021 0.48 0.07 – 1175 – 585 – 0(1)
Jaehnig et al. 2021 0.44(1) – – – – – – –
Netopil et al. 2022 0.42(1) – – 1479 -0.040(1) – – –
Rain et al. 2021 0.44 0.09 – 1445 – – – 0
Dias et al. 2021 0.44 0.16 – 1521 -0.037 – – –
Spina et al. 2021 0.45 – – 1175 -0.040(20) – – –
Cantat-Gaudin et al. 2020 0.48 0.07 – 1175 – – – –
Kounkel et al. 2020 0.45 0.13 – 1778 – – – –
Donor et al. 2020 – – – – -0.040 – – –
Zhong et al. 2020 0.44(1) 0.13 – 9130 -0.082 – – –
Cantat-Gaudin & Anders 2020 0.44 – – – – – – –
Liu & Pang 2019 – – – 2460 0.250 – – –
Bossini et al. 2019 0.42 0.16 – 1479 -0.030 – – –
Soubiran et al. 2018 0.44 – – – – – – –
Cantat-Gaudin et al. 2018 0.44 – – – – – – –
Angelo et al. 2019 0.43 – – 1410 – 158 – –
Dib et al. 2018 0.45 – – 1349 – – – –
Loktin & Popova 2017 0.46 0.11 – 1122 – – – –
Joshi et al. 2016 0.45 0.13 – 1349 – 1820 – –
Kharchenko et al. 2016 0.45 0.13 – 1349 – – – –
Netopil et al. 2016 8.28 – – 1690 -0.030(2) – – –
Heiter et al. 2014 – – – – -0.020 – – –
Kharchenko et al. 2013 0.45 0.13 – 1349 -0.088 – – –
Gozha et al. 2012 0.46 – – 1122 -0.090 1820 – –
Kharchenko et al. 2012 0.45 0.13 – 1349 -0.088 – – –
Paunzen et al. 2010 – – – – -0.150 – – –
Piskunov et al. 2008 0.46 0.13 – 1380 – 2754(1) – –
Piskunov et al. 2007 0.46 0.13 – 1380 – 1449 – –
Ahumada & Lapasset 2007 – 0.09 – 1122 – – – 1
van den Bergh 2006 0.46 0.09 – 1122 – – – –
Kharchenko et al. 2005 0.46 0.13 – 1380 – – – –
Kharchenko et al. 2003 0.46 0.09 – – – – – –
Chen et al. 2003 0.46 0.11 – 1120 -0.080(1) – – –
Dias et al. 2002 0.46 0.11 – 1445 0.010 – – –
Lynga 1987 0.40 0.06 – 1096 -0.210 – – –

(N): Indicates that there are N extra values assigned to this parameter in the corresponding reference.

Cluster % RA DEC Plx pmRA pmDE Rv UTI
CWWDL 14529 88.8 29.22 37.8 2.27 9.77 -11.86 5.82 0.0

💡 Note: The % column shows the percentage of members that NGC 752 shares with each listed object.

Visualization
ℹī¸
NGC 752 UCC
NGC 752 HUNT23
NGC 752 CANTAT20
Galactocentric position diagram