Pismis 7

(VDBH 43; MWSC 1532; OCL 734; vdBergh-Hagen 43; ESO 313 09; FSR 1393)

0.77 UTI

0.77

C_N

0.77

C_dens

0.75

C_C3

0.77

C_lit

1.0

C_dup

N_m (P>50%) 166

Core radius and density 2.0 [pc], 3.9 [pc^-2]

C3 classification AB

C_N 0.77 Rich
C_dens 0.77 Dense
C_C3 0.75 High quality
C_lit 0.77 Well-studied
C_dup 1.0 Unique

📥 Members 📊 Colab 🔬 Bayestar19

MOCA 🔍 CDS 🔍 Simbad 🔍 CDS (α, δ) 🔍 Simbad (α, δ)

Overview

ℹ️

Pismis 7 is a rich, dense object of high C3 quality. Its parallax locates it at a large 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 metallicity parameter (see Parameters). It is well-studied in the literature.

Distant Moderate extinction Massive Near-solar metallicity Intermediate age

Almeida et al. (2025)
Mass determination: invalid due to poor quality CMD. Isochrone match: worst fit.

Cavallo et al. (2024)
Gold sample.

Hunt & Reffert (2024)
Classified as open cluster. CMD class: 0.57 (50th percentile).

Hunt & Reffert (2023)
Classified as open cluster. CMD class: 0.57 (50th percentile).

Hu et al. (2021)
Ellipticities (core, all): e_core=0.0981, e_all=0.1689.

Ahumada & Lapasset (2007)
All cluster parameters are from (2005AN....326....3A).

Data

🔍 Search references for Pismis 7 in: SciX Simbad

ℹ️

Reference	Year	RA [deg]	DEC [deg]	Plx [mas]	pmRA [mas/yr]	pmDE [mas/yr]	Rv [km/s]
UCC	99999–	130.282	-38.7	0.167	-3.284	2.823	73.384
Li et al.	2025	130.287	-38.699	0.15	-3.312	2.793	–
Hu & Soubiran	2025	130.295	-38.698	–	–	–	–
Almeida et al.	2025	130.287	-38.696	–	–	–	–
Hunt & Reffert	2024	130.28	-38.703	0.165	-3.271	2.828	71.574
Cavallo et al.	2024	130.295	-38.698	0.172	–	–	–
Hunt & Reffert	2023	130.28	-38.703	0.165	-3.271	2.828	71.574
Just et al.	2023	130.295	-38.704	–	–	–	–
Jadhav & Subramaniam	2021	130.287	-38.699	–	–	–	–
Jaehnig et al.	2021	130.291	-38.695	0.18	-3.319	2.783	–
Rain et al.	2021	130.287	-38.699	0.15	-3.312	2.793	–
Dias et al.	2021	130.287	-38.696	0.15	-3.307	2.789	74.721
Cantat-Gaudin et al.	2020	130.287	-38.699	0.15	-3.312	2.793	–
Cantat-Gaudin & Anders	2020	130.287	-38.699	0.15	-3.312	2.793	–
Soubiran et al.	2018	130.287	-38.699	–	–	–	74.4
Bica et al.	2019	130.277	-38.701	–	–	–	–
Cantat-Gaudin et al.	2018	130.287	-38.699	0.15	-3.312	2.793	–
Dias et al.	2018	–	–	–	-4.89	2.14	–
Sampedro et al.	2017	130.283	-38.7	–	-1.02	1.88	–
Kharchenko et al.	2016	130.295	-38.704	–	–	–	–
Kharchenko et al.	2013	130.3	-38.707	–	-3.54	8.67	–
Bukowiecki et al.	2011	130.292	-38.704	–	–	–	–
Ahumada & Lapasset	2007	130.275	-38.7	–	–	–	–
Dias et al.	2002	130.283	-38.7	–	-0.23	2.86	–
Lynga	1987	130.272	-38.679	–	–	–	–
van den Bergh & Hagen	1975	129.8	-38.5	–	–	–	–

💡 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]	B_frac	BSS
UCC	99999–	4.845	2.18	1.56	516	-0.188	1573	–	0
Li et al.	2025	4.79	2.07	–	597	0.166	–	–	–
Hu & Soubiran	2025	–	–	–	–	-0.150⁽⁵⁾	–	–	–
Almeida et al.	2025	3.84	2.08	–	929	–	1014	–	–
Hunt & Reffert	2024	5.20	2.35	1.56	307	–	2361⁽¹⁾	–	–
Cavallo et al.	2024	4.00	2.29	–	776	-0.280	–	–	–
Hunt & Reffert	2023	5.20	2.35	1.56	307	–	–	–	–
Just et al.	2023	–	–	–	507	–	1387	–	–
Jadhav & Subramaniam	2021	4.61	1.60	–	776	–	1759	–	0⁽¹⁾
Jaehnig et al.	2021	5.47⁽¹⁾	–	–	–	–	–	–	–
Rain et al.	2021	5.57	2.18	–	501	–	–	–	0
Dias et al.	2021	3.84	2.08	–	929	-0.225	–	–	–
Cantat-Gaudin et al.	2020	4.61	1.60	–	776	–	–	–	–
Kounkel et al.	2020	4.67	2.09	–	525	–	–	–	–
Cantat-Gaudin & Anders	2020	5.57	–	–	–	–	–	–	–
Soubiran et al.	2018	5.57	–	–	–	–	–	–	–
Cantat-Gaudin et al.	2018	5.57	–	–	–	–	–	–	–
Kharchenko et al.	2016	4.78	2.96	–	507	–	–	–	–
Kharchenko et al.	2013	4.78	2.96	–	507	–	–	–	–
Bukowiecki et al.	2011	6.69⁽¹⁾	1.14	–	794	–	–	–	–
Ahumada & Lapasset	2007	–	2.18	–	501	–	–	–	3
Dias et al.	2002	4.90	2.18	–	501	–	–	–	–

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

Visualization

ℹ️

1 2 3