İUPress PAR 2, 1–14 (2024) Preprint Arxiv mode 3 January 2025

An Updated Line List for Spectroscopic Investigation of G Stars - II:

Refined Solar Abundances via Extended Wavelength Coverage to
10,000 Å

T. Şahin1*,2 , F. Güney2 , S.A. Şentürk2 , N. Çınar2 , and M. Marışmak2

1 Akdeniz University, Faculty of Science, Department of Space Sciences and Technologies 07058, Antalya, Türkiye
2 Institute of Graduate Studies in Science, Akdeniz University, Türkiye

ABSTRACT
arXiv:2501.00324v1 [astro-ph.SR] 31 Dec 2024

This study introduces a line list for the abundance analysis of F-and G-type stars across the 4 080–9 675 Å wavelength
range. A systematic search employing lower excitation potentials, accurate log 𝑔 𝑓 values, and an updated multiplet
table led to the identification of 592 lines across 33 species (25 elements), including C, O, Mg (ionized), Al, P, S,
Cu, Zr (neutral), and La. To determine the uncertainties in log 𝑔 𝑓 values, we assessed solar abundance using a very
high-resolution (𝑅 ≈1 000 000) disk-integrated solar spectrum. These lines were confirmed to be blend-free in the solar
spectrum. The line list was further validated by analyzing the metal-poor star HD 218209 (G6V), which is notable for its
well-documented and reliable abundance in literature. The abundances were obtained using the equivalent width (EW)
method and further refined by applying the spectrum synthesis method. A comparative analysis with the Gaia-ESO
line list v.6, provided by the Gaia-ESO collaboration, revealed additional neutral and ionized Fe lines. This extensively
refined line list will facilitate precise stellar parameter determinations and accurate abundance analyses of spectra
within the PolarBASE spectral library.

Keywords: Line: identification - Sun: abundances – Sun: fundamental parameters - Stars: individual (HD 218209)

1. INTRODUCTION
Advancements in spectroscopic methodologies for G-type stars have enabled more precise elemental abun-
dance measurements. High-resolution spectroscopic techniques enable researchers to analyze stellar spectra
in detail, providing insights into their atmospheric compositions and the underlying nucleosynthesis pro-
cesses (Sharma et al. 2018; Trevisan et al. 2021). Analysis of G-dwarfs revealed discrepancies between the
observed and predicted abundance patterns, challenging existing galactic chemical evolution models (Woolf
& West 2012). These findings highlights the importance of combining improved modelling techniques with
high-resolution spectroscopic data.
G-type stars, including the Sun, serve as fundamental benchmarks for understanding the stellar evolution
and galactic chemical history (Bensby et al. 2003; Heiter et al. 2015). Their relatively long lifetimes allow
them to retain the chemical signatures of the molecular clouds from which they form (Bensby et al. 2003;
Heiter et al. 2015; Aoki et al. 2022). Solar photospheric abundances, derived from spectroscopic observations,
provide a reference point for abundance determination in metal-poor stars and are essential for understanding
the processes that govern stellar and galactic evolution (Lodders 2003; Pagel & Patchett 1975). Recent
studies have significantly advanced our understanding of solar abundance by incorporating various physical
processes, such as gravitational settling, convective overshooting, solar wind mass loss, pre-main-sequence
disk accretion, opacity, and helium abundance in the solar corona (Wang & Zhao 2013; Zhang et al. 2019;
Karathanou et al. 2020; Asplund et al. 2021; Salmon et al. 2021).

© 2024 Physics and Astronomy Reports

Şahin et. al

Migration complicates the interpretation of their origins because it can result in metal-poor stars being
found in regions where they are not typically expected (Haywood 2008). Zhang et al. (2019) explored the
implications of convective overshoot, solar-wind mass loss, and pre-main-sequence disk accretion on solar
models. Their findings indicate that incorporating additional physical processes significantly improves the
alignment between solar models and helioseismic constraints, effectively addressing the solar abundance
problem. Karathanou et al. (2020) demonstrated how updated abundances can influence the internal solar
structure via critical solar quantities such as temperature and pressure.
Asplund et al. (2021) presented the updated solar photospheric and proto-solar abundances of 83 elements.
Their work highlighted the so-called solar modelling problem, which refers to the persistent discrepancies
between helioseismic observations and solar interior models constructed with low metallicity. This suggests
that there may be shortcomings in the computed opacities or the treatment of mixing processes below the
convection zone in the existing models. The updated abundances are essential for refining our understanding
of the solar structure and evolution, as they provide a more accurate baseline for the solar modelling problem.
Moreover, the variability in helium abundance in the solar corona, as discussed by Ofman et al. (2024),
also plays a role in understanding solar atmospheric processes. This variability is crucial for interpreting
solar observations and for understanding the dynamics of the solar atmosphere. This study presents a three-
dimensional model that illustrates the influence of solar activity and coronal heating processes on helium
abundance.
These updates are essential for addressing the solar modelling problem and refining our understanding of
the solar structure and evolution. Addressing this complex problem requires precise atmospheric modeling
supported by comprehensive and accurate line lists.
The author’s research team has been actively studying G-type stars, particularly those in solar neighbor-
hoods. In our previous work (Şahin et al. 2023, hereafter Paper I), we presented a line list covering the
4 080-6 780 Å wavelength range designed for the spectroscopic analysis of more than 90 G-type metal-poor
stars residing within the solar neighborhood. Previous studies by the research team, such as Marışmak et al.
(2024) and Şentürk et al. (2024), also utilized the line list presented in Paper I. For instance, Marışmak et al.
(2024) employed this line list to analyze two metal-poor high-proper motion stars, HD 8724 and HD 195633,
whereas Şentürk et al. (2024) used it for spectroscopic analysis of a solar analogue star in the optical region.
Building on this foundation, we now extend the wavelength coverage of the line list to 10 000 Å, enabling a
more comprehensive spectroscopic analysis of G-type stars, particularly in the near-infrared region. Şentürk
et al. (2024) presented a line list covering the 10 000-25 000 Å range, which will be valuable for future
spectroscopic studies of G-type stars, including solar analogue and solar twin stars in the 𝐻- and 𝐾-bands.
The remainder of this paper is organized as follows. Section 2 provides the observational data. Section
3 explains the methodology, including line identification and measurement procedures, the determination
of model parameters, and the techniques for chemical abundance analysis of both HD 218209 and the Sun.
Section 4 presents the line list, including details on line identification, measurement, and the atomic data
used in the analysis. Finally, Section 5 summarizes our findings and discusses their implications.

2. OBSERVATIONS
This study analyzes high-resolution spectra of the Sun and HD 218209 to develop and validate a line list.
Compared with Paper I, this study significantly expands the scope of spectral analyses by extending the

2
 An Up to date line list for spectroscopic analysis of F and G Stars

analysis to the near-infrared region. For HD 218209, a high-resolution (𝑅 ≈ 76 000) and high signal-to-noise
ratio (𝑆/𝑁 = 156) PolarBASE1 (Petit et al. 2014) Narval2 spectrum (HJD 2456232.48238; exposure time
of 400 s) obtained from the PolarBASE archive. The characteristics of the HD 218209’s spectrum and KPNO
solar spectrum are displayed in Figure 1.
The spectrum was continuum-normalized and corrected for radial velocity (𝑉Rad ) before line measurements.
The Python interface and synthetic Narval solar spectra, which include atomic transitions in the range of
3 700–10 048 Å were used for RV correction (𝑉Rad = 16.03 km s−1 ), and the renormalization process was
performed using the LIME code developed in the IDL environment (Şahin 2017). Lines with equivalent
widths (EW) below 5 mÅ or above 200 mÅ were excluded from the analysis.

Figure 1. A small region of the KPNO solar spectrum and the PolarBASE spectrum of HD 218209. Identified lines are also
indicated.

The solar spectrum serves as a fundamental reference for stellar astrophysics and analysis of physical
processes in stars (Molaro & Monai 2012). In this study, high-resolution (𝑅 ≈ 700 000) Kitt Peak Fourier
Transform Spectrometer (FTS) data (disk-integrated) obtained by Kurucz et al. (1984), previously utilized
by Şahin et al. (2023), and a very high-resolution (𝑅 ≈ 1 000 000) disk-integrated Göttingen (IAG)3 solar
flux atlas4 obtained by Baker et al. (2020) with Vacuum Vertical Telescope (VVT) were used. However, it
should be noted that an alternative link5 was also provided by Baker et al. (2020). Differences6 were observed
between the two spectra (see Appendix for Figure A1). The KPNO solar spectrum was used for analyses in the
4 000-5 000 Å range, while the telluric-free IAG solar spectrum (BTFS) was preferred for the 5000-10000 Å
range. Hence, both solar spectra have enabled line identification and other classical spectral analysis methods
over the entire 4 000-10 000 Å wavelength range. Although the KPNO spectrum is reliable, it contains telluric
lines within the ELODIE wavelength range; in particular, around 6 000 Å. In the longer wavelength regions,

1 http://polarbase.irap.omp.eu
2 Narval spectropolarimeter is adapted to the 2m Bernard Lyot telescope and provides high-resolution spectral and polarimetric data.
3 IAG: Institute for Astrophysics, Göttingen.
4 BTFS; https://zenodo.org/records/3598136
5 zenodo; https://web.sas.upenn.edu/ashbaker/solar-atlas/
6 Ashley Baker; private communication

3
Şahin et. al

Figure 2. The telluric corrected Göttingen (IAG) Solar Spectrum (BTFS). Telluric spectrum (from https://zenodo.org/
records/3598136) was also included to indicate the positions of the telluric lines. The telluric model shown is typical of the
conditions at Göttingen (precipitable water vapour of ≈10 mm), where the VVT telescope resides.

telluric bands caused by H2 O and molecular O2 are prominent (see Figure 2 for details). In the KPNO solar
spectrum, transitions outside the regions dominated by telluric lines were considered for the line list created
in Paper I of the series, which covered 4 000-6 800 Å range. The 5 000-6 800 Å wavelength region is common
between the KPNO and IAG (BTFS) solar spectra. We compared the equivalent widths (EW) of the lines in
this region and found that the EW measurements of the two spectra were in good agreement [EW(KPNO) =
(0.956±0.011)× EW(IAG)+(2.353±0.839)].

3. THE ABUNDANCE ANALYSIS

The elemental abundances were determined using the local thermodynamic equilibrium (LTE) line analysis
code, MOOG (Sneden 1973)7 . Model atmospheres were generated using ATLAS9 code (Castelli & Kurucz
2003) with the LTE (ODFNEW) approach. Detailed descriptions of the abundance analysis procedure have
been provided by Şahin & Lambert (2009), Şahin et al. (2011), Şahin et al. (2016), Şahin & Bilir (2020), and
Şahin et al. (2023). The atmospheric parameters of the model, such as the effective temperature (𝑇eff ), surface
gravity (log 𝑔), metallicity ([Fe/H]), and microturbulent velocity (𝜉), were determined using neutral (Fe i)
and ionized (Fe ii) iron lines in an iterative process. The 𝑇eff determination employed the excitation balance
method (sensitive to neutral spectral lines with a broad range of excitation potentials) for Fe i. 𝜉 represents
the small-scale gas motion within the stellar atmosphere. 𝜉 was determined by ensuring that the abundance
of Fe atoms (Fe i) remained independent of the reduced equivalent width (EW/𝜆) under the assumption of
LTE. These two conditions were simultaneously applied to a set of Fe i lines (see Figure 3, upper and middle
panels). In addition, 𝜉 is determined using a dispersion test for a given model atmosphere (Figure A2).
This involved computing the dispersion in abundance (Fe, Ti, Cr) over the range of 0.0 to 3.0 km s−1 . By
combining both methods, the measurement uncertainty for 𝜉 was estimated as 0.5 km s−1 (Figure A2). In
the same figure, an example Kiel diagram is included.

7 The source code for MOOG can be accessed at http://www.as.utexas.edu/chris/moog.html

4
 An Up to date line list for spectroscopic analysis of F and G Stars

Surface gravity (log 𝑔) was determined by analyzing Fe abundances calculated with MOOG, ensuring
ionization equilibrium where Fe i and Fe ii lines yield the same abundance. Notably, in the solar spectrum,
ionization equilibrium is achieved between the neutral and ionized atoms of Mg, Sc, Ti, Cr, and Zr. Similarly,
in the spectrum of HD 218209, in addition to Fe, ionization equilibrium is reached for Ti and Cr. Finally,
the metallicity ([Fe/H]) was refined through an iterative process to achieve convergence between the derived
Fe abundance and the initial abundance adopted for the model atmosphere construction. Convergence was
achieved by adjusting 𝑇eff , log 𝑔, and 𝜉 of the model. Figure 3 illustrates a summary of the relationship between
the physical parameters used to determine the stellar model parameters using the classical spectroscopic
method (i.e., ionization and excitation equilibria of the Fe lines) for the Sun (left panel) and HD 218209
(right panel).

Table 1. Model atmosphere parameters for HD 218209, and the Sun.

Star 𝑇eff log 𝑔 [Fe/H] 𝜉

(K) (cgs) (dex) (km s−1 )

HD 218209 5600+177 +0.24 +0.13 +0.50

−177 4.50 −0.24 -0.36 −0.13 0.44 −0.50
+0.19 +0.09
Sun † 5770+130 +0.50
−130 4.40 −0.19 0.00 −0.09 0.66 −0.50
Sun ∗ 5790+45
−45
4.40+0.09 +0.04 +0.50
−0.09 0.00 −0.04 0.66 −0.50

(† ): This study (TS), the solar spectrum was provided by Baker et al. (2020).
(∗ ): The atmospheric parameters from Şahin et al. (2023). The solar spectrum was obtained from Kurucz
et al. (1984).

The uncertainty in the derived 𝑇eff originates from the error associated with the slope of the relationship
between the Fe i abundance and the LEPs of the lines. Additionally, a 1𝜎 difference in abundance ([X/H])
between the Fe i and Fe ii lines corresponds to a change in 0.19 dex in log 𝑔. Table 1 summarizes the resulting
model parameters for HD 218209 and the Sun. The uncertainties in the atomic data (log 𝑔 𝑓 values) were
assessed by deriving solar abundances from the stellar spectral lines. The solar model derived from our
analysis yielded the following atmospheric parameters: 𝑇eff = 5770 K, log 𝑔 = 4.40 cgs, [Fe/H] = 0.00 dex,
and 𝜉 = 0.66 km s−1 . These values are in good agreement with the standard solar models. The abundances
obtained for the solar photosphere as a result of solar analysis were calculated using these model parameters
(Table 1). In Table 1, the solar abundances reported by Asplund et al. (2009, 2021) are also included. In
Table 2, we provide a summary of element abundances based on the model parameters in LTE. log 𝜖 is the
logarithm of abundance. The errors reported in log 𝜖 abundances are represented by 1𝜎 line-to-line scatter
in abundance. [X/H] is the logarithmic abundance ratio of hydrogen to the corresponding solar values and
[X/Fe] is the logarithmic abundance considering the abundance of Fe i. The error in [X/Fe] is the square root
of the sum of the quadratures of the errors in [X/H] and [Fe/H]. Table 2 presents the abundances obtained
using PolarBase spectrum of the star as a function of the [X/Fe] ratio.
An analysis of the chemical abundances of 33 species belonging to 27 elements, as presented in Table 2, was
consistent with the solar chemical abundances established by Asplund et al. (2009, 2021). The abundances
of C, O, Mg, Al, P, S, Sc, Ti, V, Mn, Co, Cu, Zn, Sr, Y, Zr, Ba, La, Ce, Nd, and Sm reported in Table 2 were
determined using both the equivalent width (EW) method and spectrum synthesis techniques. The synthetic
spectra calculated for some sample lines (C i 9 111 Å, O i 7 772 Å, Mg i 5 711 Å, and Cu i 5 105 Å ), whose

5
Şahin et. al

Table 2. The abundances of the observed species for Sun and HD 218209. The solar abundances obtained in this study and those
reported by Asplund et al. (2009, ASP09) and Asplund et al. (2021, ASP21) are also provided. Abundances in bold are those
calculated via the spectrum synthesis method.

HD 218209 Sun
Species[𝑋/Fe]† 𝜎 𝑛 log 𝜖 ⊙ (𝑋 † ) 𝜎 𝑛 log 𝜖 ⊙ (𝑋 ∗ ) 𝜎 𝑛 log 𝜖 ⊙ (𝑋ASP09 ) 𝜎 Δ log 𝜖 ⊙ (𝑋1 )log 𝜖 ⊙ (𝑋ASP21 ) 𝜎 Δ log 𝜖 ⊙ (𝑋2 )
(dex) (dex) (dex) (dex) (dex) (dex) (dex)
Ci 0.14 0.22 2 8.48 0.11 2 – – – 8.43 0.05 0.05 8.46 0.04 0.02
Oi 0.28 0.15 3 8.81 0.03 3 – – – 8.69 0.05 0.12 8.69 0.04 0.12
Na i -0.03 0.20 4 6.22 0.12 4 6.16 0.07 2 6.24 0.04 -0.02 6.22 0.03 0.00
Mg i 0.24 0.16 5 7.62 0.03 5 7.60 0.08 2 7.60 0.04 0.02 7.55 0.03 0.07
Mg ii – – – 7.63 0.00 1 – – – 7.60 0.04 0.03 7.55 0.03 0.08
Al i 0.13 0.16 8 6.43 0.03 8 – – – 6.45 0.03 -0.02 6.43 0.03 0.00
Si i 0.13 0.18 16 7.50 0.09 21 7.50 0.07 12 7.51 0.03 -0.01 7.51 0.03 -0.01
Pi – – – 5.51 0.06 3 – – – 5.41 0.03 0.10 5.41 0.03 0.10
Si – – – 7.15 0.00 2 – – – 7.12 0.03 0.03 7.12 0.03 0.03
Ca i 0.15 0.20 15 6.29 0.09 21 6.34 0.08 18 6.34 0.04 -0.05 6.30 0.03 -0.01
Sc i – – – 3.13 0.00 1 3.12 0.00 1 3.15 0.04 -0.02 3.14 0.04 -0.01
Sc ii 0.06 0.14 2 3.14 0.02 12 3.23 0.08 7 3.15 0.04 -0.01 3.14 0.04 0.00
Ti i 0.21 0.21 44 4.93 0.09 63 4.96 0.09 43 4.95 0.05 -0.02 4.97 0.05 -0.04
Ti ii 0.20 0.21 7 5.01 0.11 11 4.99 0.08 12 4.95 0.05 0.06 4.97 0.05 0.04
Vi 0.01 0.15 3 3.90 0.03 5 3.99 0.05 5 3.93 0.08 -0.03 3.90 0.08 0.00
Cr i -0.02 0.19 17 5.68 0.09 29 5.71 0.07 19 5.64 0.04 0.04 5.62 0.04 0.06
Cr ii 0.01 0.20 3 5.64 0.11 4 5.64 0.14 3 5.64 0.04 0.00 5.62 0.04 0.02
Mn i -0.27 0.18 14 5.45 0.08 14 5.62 0.13 13 5.43 0.05 0.02 5.42 0.06 0.03
Fe i 0.01 0.21152 7.50 0.11252 7.54 0.09132 7.50 0.04 0.00 7.46 0.04 0.04
Fe ii 0.00 0.20 17 7.50 0.09 32 7.51 0.04 17 7.50 0.04 0.00 7.46 0.04 0.04
Co i -0.10 0.17 6 4.95 0.06 8 – – – 4.99 0.07 -0.04 4.94 0.05 0.01
Ni i -0.02 0.20 45 6.25 0.10 66 6.28 0.09 54 6.22 0.04 0.03 6.20 0.04 0.05
Cu i -0.13 0.20 3 4.20 0.06 4 – – – 4.19 0.04 0.01 4.18 0.05 0.02
Zn i 0.20 0.15 2 4.63 0.02 2 4.68 0.03 2 4.56 0.05 0.07 4.56 0.05 0.07
Sr i -0.18 0.14 1 2.84 0.00 1 2.91 0.00 1 2.87 0.07 -0.03 2.83 0.06 0.01
Y ii -0.14 0.15 2 2.28 0.02 2 2.29 0.05 2 2.21 0.05 0.07 2.21 0.05 0.07
Zr i – – – 2.53 0.00 1 – – – 2.58 0.04 -0.05 2.59 0.04 -0.06
Zr ii 0.04 0.14 1 2.61 0.02 2 2.68 0.00 1 2.58 0.04 0.03 2.59 0.04 0.02
Ba ii 0.04 0.14 2 2.32 0.02 2 2.24 0.06 4 2.18 0.09 0.14 2.27 0.05 0.05
La ii 0.03 0.16 2 1.14 0.05 3 – – – 1.10 0.04 0.04 1.11 0.04 0.03
Ce ii 0.26 0.15 1 1.60 0.04 3 1.64 0.02 2 1.58 0.04 0.02 1.58 0.04 0.02
Nd i 0.08 0.15 1 1.36 0.03 3 1.42 0.05 3 1.42 0.04 -0.06 1.42 0.04 -0.06
Sm ii 0.14 0.14 1 0.95 0.02 2 0.96 0.00 1 0.96 0.04 -0.01 0.95 0.04 0.00

(† ): This study, (∗ ): Şahin et al. (2023), Δ log 𝜖 ⊙ (𝑋1 ) = log 𝜖 ⊙ (𝑋 † ) − log 𝜖 ⊙ (𝑋ASP09 ),
Δ log 𝜖 ⊙ (𝑋2 ) = log 𝜖 ⊙ (𝑋 † ) − log 𝜖 ⊙ (𝑋ASP21 )

elemental abundances were checked using the spectrum synthesis technique, are shown in Figure 4. On the
other hand, when compared to the solar abundances reported by Asplund et al. (2009), the scatter among the
elements ranges from -0.07 dex for Na to 0.16 dex for O. For the remaining 31 species, the average scatter
in abundance (log 𝜖 ⊙ (𝑋ASP09 )) is 0.02±0.04 dex. Asplund et al. (2021) presented a revised solar chemical
composition, with notable changes observed in the abundance of elements such as Ba, Mg, Co, Sr, Fe, and
Ca. For instance, the abundance value obtained for Ba is 0.11 dex higher than that reported by Asplund et al.
(2009) but shows better agreement with the values presented by Asplund et al. (2021). Similarly, a lower
scatter was observed for Na compared to the results of Asplund et al. (2009).
The results can be affected by various systematic uncertainties, including those related to the correction of
non-LTE effects on the formation of convection and atomic transitions. To investigate the potential convective
effect, two different mixing length parameters (𝛼) were calculated in this study using equations based on 2D
hydrodynamic models from Ludwig et al. (1999) and 3D hydrodynamic models from Magic et al. (2015).

6
 An Up to date line list for spectroscopic analysis of F and G Stars

The formula by Magic et al. (2015) yielded an 𝛼 value of 1.99, whereas the formula by Ludwig et al. (1999)
yielded an 𝛼 value of 1.60. Two different ATLAS9 models were constructed for the two mixing-length
parameters. The synthetic spectra calculated using these models were compared to the observed spectrum
of HD 218209. Although no significant difference was observed, the synthetic spectrum derived from the
mixing length parameter obtained by Magic et al. (2015) was found to be in slightly better agreement with
the observed spectrum.
Given that the Fe i and Fe ii abundances were used to constrain the model atmospheric parameters in this
study, we must consider the non-LTE effects on Fe. These effects were found to be negligible (0.00 dex)
for both solar and stellar Fe ii lines (Bergemann et al. 2012a; Lind et al. 2012; Bensby et al. 2014). For Fe i
lines with low excitation potentials (<8 eV) and metallicities [Fe/H] > -3.0 dex, the non-LTE deviations were
minimal according to K (Lind et al. 2012). The non-LTE corrections (Bergemann et al. 2012b) for 66 Fe i
lines in the IAG solar spectrum and 56 Fe i lines in HD 218209 were found to be 0.01 dex. Similar trends were
observed for the other elements in both the Sun and Star. For example, the non-LTE corrections (Sun/Star)
for Si i (-0.01/0.00), Ca i (-0.01/-0.01), Ti i (0.10/0.13), Ti ii (-0.01/0.00), Cr i (0.05/0.08), Mn i (0.05/0.12),
and Co i (0.11/0.15) were generally small, with the largest corrections found for Ti and Co

3.1. Notes on the errors for model atmospheric parameters of the Sun
The solar spectrum is used as a standard reference spectrum for the spectroscopic analysis of F-G-K-type
stars, in both the optical and NIR regions (Şahin & Bilir 2020; Şahin et al. 2023; Şentürk et al. 2024).
This is mainly due to the well-characterized atmosphere of the Sun and extensive observational data in
the optical and IR regions. Many published NIR line lists include lines with poorly defined or calibrated
oscillator strengths, often relying on theoretical calculations (e.g., Ryde et al. 2009). In particular, a recent
spectroscopic study of a solar analogue star, HD 76151, in the 𝑌 , 𝐽, 𝐻, and 𝐾 bands by Şentürk et al. (2024)
provides a detailed review of the line libraries published in the infrared region over the last 40 years in terms
of log 𝑔 𝑓 values and atomic data.
In the first paper of the series (Şahin et al. 2023), the effective temperature obtained from the solar
atmosphere analysis differed by 20 K from the effective temperature value obtained in this study. This
difference is consistent with the error values. Similarly, a significant difference in Paper I is the increase
in the reported errors for 𝑇eff , log 𝑔 because of the increase in the error for metallicity (Δ𝜎[Fe/H] = 0.05
dex). For 𝑇eff , Δ𝜎𝑇eff = 85 K and for log 𝑔, Δ𝜎 log 𝑔 = 0.10 cgs. In this study, we obtained an additional 187
atomic transitions in the near-IR region. In addition, two different solar spectra were preferred for the solar
abundance analysis. The KPNO solar spectrum is in the 4 000-5 000 Å region and the IAG solar spectrum is
in the 5 000-10 000 Å region.
The following subsections provide details of the line list and atomic data.

4. LINE LIST: IDENTIFICATION, LINE MEASUREMENT, AND ATOMIC DATA

Initially, the centers of the lines exhibiting Gaussian profiles appropriate for equivalent width analysis within
the range of 4 000-10 000 Å were identified in the KPNO (Kurucz et al. 1984) and IAG solar spectra
(Baker et al. 2020, BTFS). The established line centers for the selected isolated lines were compared
with the wavelengths identified in the laboratory environment within the Revised Multiplet Table (RMT)
(Moore et al. 1966). Subsequently, a multiplet (cf. Moore 1954) analysis technique was applied. The relative

7
Şahin et. al

intensities of the lines within a multiplet are generally insensitive to variations in the excitation conditions
in most spectroscopic sources. A standard approach involves verifying the presence of multiple members
with expected relative intensities. Subsequent analyses focused on identifying lines that exhibited similar
excitation and laboratory strengths.
The common wavelength range of the first article of the series and this study was 4 024-6 772 Å. In this
range, 54 atomic transitions from 19 species of 17 elements were added to the first report on this series. The
distributions of these transitions are Na i (one line), Al i (two lines), Si i (two lines), Ca i (two lines), Sc ii
(five lines), Ti i (four lines), V i (one line), Cr ii (one line), Mn i (one line), Fe i (17 lines), Fe ii (six lines),
Co i (two lines), Cu i (two lines), Zr i (one line), Zr ii (one line), La ii (three lines), Ce ii (one line), Nd ii
(one line) and Sm ii (one line). In the region 6 7728 -9 944 Å, 189 atomic transitions from 27 species of 23
elements were added to the line list. The distributions of these transitions are C i (two lines), O i (three lines),
Na i (two lines), Mg i (three lines), Mg ii (one line), AI i (eight lines), Si i (nine lines), P i (three lines), S i
(two lines), Ca i (six lines), Sc ii (five lines), Ti i (20 lines), V i (one line), Cr i (10 lines), Cr ii (one line), Mn i
(one line), Fe i (123 lines), Fe ii (15 lines), Co i (three lines), Ni i (13 lines), Cu i (four lines), Zr i (one line),
Zr ii (one line), La ii (three lines), Ce ii (one line), Nd i (two lines), and Sm ii (one line). In total, 13 atomic
transitions from seven species of seven elements were included in the first article of the series but were not
included in this study. The statistics of these transitions are as follows: Ca i (three lines), Ti ii (one line), Fe i
(three lines), Co i (two lines), Ni i (one line), Zr ii (one line), and Nd ii (two lines). Lower-level excitation
potential (L.E.P) values for the new line list were obtained from the MOORE catalogue (Moore et al. 1966).
Accurate determination of elemental abundances in stars requires precise knowledge of the atomic transition
probability, quantified by the log 𝑔 𝑓 value. This study utilized a comprehensive compilation of log 𝑔 𝑓 values
from recent literature, including Biemont & Godefroid (1980); Biemont et al. (1981), Hannaford et al.
(1982), Klose et al. (2002), Takeda et al. (2003), Fuhr & Wiese (2006), Kelleher & Podobedova (2008),
Lawler et al. (2009), Den Hartog et al. (2011), Shi et al. (2011), Hansen et al. (2013), Lawler et al. (2006,
2013, 2015, 2017, 2019), Pehlivan Rhodin et al. (2017), and Den Hartog et al. (2021). For transitions not
documented in these sources, data from the NIST9 and VALD10 atomic line databases were used. When
multiple sources were available, the log 𝑔 𝑓 value that yielded the most consistent abundance with solar
abundance values reported by Asplund et al. (2009, 2021) was prioritized. References for the adopted log 𝑔 𝑓
values and corresponding RMT numbers for each line are tabulated in Tables A1, A2, A3, A4, and A5.
Further verification of the log 𝑔 𝑓 values was performed by comparing the log 𝑔 𝑓 values used in this study
with those in the Gaia-ESO line list v.6 provided by GES collaboration (Heiter et al. 2021). Note that the
𝑔 𝑓 values for the chosen lines of Fe i and Fe ii in this study were obtained from Fuhr & Wiese (2006). The
GES line list contains the recommended lines and atomic data (i.e., 𝑔 𝑓 values corrected for the hyperfine
structure) for the analysis of FGK stars. Notably, several lines in the spectra of FGK stars have not yet been
identified (Heiter et al. 2015).
The GES line list (v.6) comprises 141 233 lines spanning a 4 200-9 200Å. A total of 561 lines were analyzed
in this study, of which 548 were common to the GES line list. These 592 atomic transitions involve 30 species
from 26 elements. A total of 40 atomic transitions were included in this study’s line list in the regions outside

8 Upper wavelength limit from Şahin et al. (2023) is 6 780 Å.

9 http://physics.nist.gov/PhysRefData/ASD
10 https://vald.astro.uu.se/

8
 An Up to date line list for spectroscopic analysis of F and G Stars

Table 3. Comparison of log 𝑔 𝑓 values for common lines in GESv6. The number of common lines (n) was also reported. The mean
of the log 𝑔 𝑓 differences (Δ log 𝑔 𝑓 ) for each element is also reported.

Element n Δ log(𝑔 𝑓 ) 𝜎 Element n Δ log(𝑔 𝑓 ) 𝜎

(dex) (dex) (dex) (dex)
Ci 2 -0.02 0.02 Mn i 12 0.68 0.83
Oi 3 0.00 0.00 Fe i 236 0.00 0.16
Na i 4 0.01 0.02 Fe ii 28 0.00 0.07
Mg i 5 0.32 0.54 Co i 7 1.33 1.03
Mg ii 1 -0.01 0.00 Ni i 66 -0.04 0.10
Al i 8 0.29 0.58 Cu i 4 0.27 0.26
Si i 19 -0.01 0.11 Zn i 2 -0.03 0.02
Si 2 -0.29 0.24 Sr i 1 0.00 0.00
Ca i 20 0.00 0.04 Y ii 2 -0.07 0.05
Sc ii 12 0.02 0.06 Zr i 1 0.00 0.00
Ti i 56 0.00 0.03 Ba ii 2 -0.02 0.01
Ti ii 11 0.04 0.11 La ii 2 -0.01 0.01
Vi 5 0.71 0.61 Ce ii 2 0.00 0.00
Cr i 26 0.07 0.49 Nd ii 2 0.00 0.00
Cr ii 4 0.12 0.20 Sm ii 2 0.00 0.00

Δ log(𝑔 𝑓 ) = log(𝑔 𝑓 )This Study - log(𝑔 𝑓 )GESv6

the GES line list boundaries (lower limit: 4 021-4 200 Å and upper limit: 9 200-9 944 Å). In the spectral
region overlapping with the GES line list (4 200-9 200 Å), additional Fe i (8958.88 Å), and Fe ii (6806.85 Å,
6810.28 Å, 6820.43 Å) atomic transitions were found compared to the GES line list. Of the 55 lines identified
in this study within the same wavelength range, 51 were found in the GES line list. This wavelength range
aligns with the PolarBASE spectrum of HD 218209 used in this analysis.
For the 236 common Fe i lines in the GES line list, the difference in the log 𝑔 𝑓 value was 0.00 ± 0.16
dex. For the 28 Fe ii lines, the difference in the log 𝑔 𝑓 values was 0.00 ± 0.07 dex. A detailed comparison
of the log 𝑔 𝑓 values was performed for the 548 lines common to both line lists, as listed in Table 3 which
summarises the mean difference in log 𝑔 𝑓 values and
the corresponding standard deviations for each element with at least two common lines. The results show
overall good agreement between the two line lists, though significant differences were observed for certain
elements, such as Co and Mn. These discrepancies can be attributed to various factors including differences
in the atomic data used to construct the line lists, uncertainties in the line identification process, and the
presence of non-LTE effects.
Figure 5 presents the numerical statistics for the final line list generated in this study are shown in Figure
5. The same figure shows the number of lines in the spectral region of 50 Å each.

5. CONCLUSION
This study presents an expanded line list covering the wavelength range of 4 080–10 000 Å for abundance
analyses of F- and G-type stars. Although Paper I reported 363 atomic transitions, only 592 lines were
reported in this study. The line list was compared with the existing Gaia-ESO v6 line list (Table 3), and a
93% overlap was found, with 548 of the 592 line matches.
Utilizing high-resolution solar spectra from IAG (5 000-10 000 Å, 𝑅 ≈1 000 000) and KPNO (4 000-6 780
Å, R≈700 000), 592 spectral lines belonging to 33 chemical species were identified and included in the

9
Şahin et. al

abundance analysis. Compared to the previous paper in this series, not only has the wavelength range
extended, but elements such as C, O, Al, P, S, Co, Cu, Zr, and La have also been added to the list.
Additionally, the abundances of C, O, Mg, Al, P, S, Sc, V, Mn, Co, Cu, Zn, Sr, Y, Zr, Ba, La, Ce, Nd, and
Sm were determined using the synthesis method. To calculate the reported abundances, it was assumed that
the solar spectrum was disk-integrated11 .
A comparison of the elemental abundances ([X/Fe]) reported in this study for HD 218209 with those
presented by (Şahin et al. 2023) reveals several differences. No significant differences were observed for
Cr ii, Ti i, V i, Sr i, and Zr ii (Δ log 𝜖 = 0.00 dex). Elements exhibiting a difference of -0.01 dex include Fe i,
Ni i, Cr i, Ca i, and Nd ii. A difference of 0.06 dex was observed for Ce ii, Ba ii, and Sc ii. Other notable
differences include -0.02 dex for Na i and Ti ii, 0.01 dex for Si i, 0.07 dex for Y ii, 0.05 dex for Mn i, 0.02 dex
for Zn i, 0.09 dex for Co i, and 0.04 dex for Mg i.
In this study, we employed both equivalent width (EW) measurements and spectrum synthesis techniques
to determine the elemental abundances in the solar and HD 218209 spectra. The resulting abundances
were compared to those reported by Asplund et al. (2009) and Asplund et al. (2021) as well as other solar
abundance values found in the literature (Table A6). Our results are in excellent agreement with those of the
previous studies. Notably, the revision of Ba abundance in Asplund et al. (2021) significantly reduced the
discrepancy between the two studies.
Having accurately determined the solar abundances using a constructed line list, we applied a similar
methodology to the star, HD 218209. Table A7 presents a comparison of the effective temperature, surface
gravity, metallicity, and derived chemical abundances of this star. A thorough examination of the available
abundance data for HD 218209 revealed a scarcity of literature regarding the abundance of several elements
(C, O, Cr, Co, Cu, Zn, Sr, Y, Zr, Ba, La, Ce, Nd, and Sm). This highlights the significant contributions of
our study to this field. A detailed element-by-element literature analysis is provided in Appendix A1.

Peer Review: Externally peer-reviewed.

Author Contribution: Conception/Design of study - T.Ş.; Data Acquisition - T.Ş., F.G., M.M., S.A.Ş; Data
Analysis/Interpretation - T.Ş., F.G., S.A.Ş., M.M., N.Ç.; Drafting Manuscript - T.Ş.; Critical Revision of
Manuscript - T.Ş.; Final Approval and Accountability - T.Ş., F.G., S.A.Ş., M.M., N.Ç.; Technical or Material
- T.Ş., M.M., F.G.; Support Supervision - T.Ş.
Conflict of Interest: Authors declared no conflict of interest.
Financial Disclosure: This study was supported by the Scientific and Technological Research Council of
Turkey (TUBITAK) under Grant Number 121F265. The authors thank TUBITAK for their support.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This study used NASA’s Astrophysics Data System and the SIMBAD database operated at CDS, Strasbourg,
France. The nonpublic data underlying this article will be made available upon reasonable request from the
authors.
Software: LIME (Şahin 2017), SPECTRE (Sneden 1973), MOOG (Sneden 1973)

11 At this point, the flux/int switch in the abfind and synth drivers of the MOOG code, which we used to determine model atmosphere parameters

and abundance calculations under LTE conditions, was set to zero.

10
 An Up to date line list for spectroscopic analysis of F and G Stars

REFERENCES
Abia C., Rebolo R., Beckman J. E., Crivellari L., 1988, A&A, 206, 100
Aoki W., Matsuno T., Parthasarathy M., 2022, PASJ, 74, 1368
Asplund M., Grevesse N., Sauval A. J., Scott P., 2009, ARA&A, 47, 481
Asplund M., Amarsi A. M., Grevesse N., 2021, A&A, 653, A141
Baker A. D., Blake C. H., Reiners A., 2020, ApJS, 247, 24
Bensby T., Feltzing S., Lundström I., 2003, A&A, 410, 527
Bensby T., Feltzing S., Oey M. S., 2014, A&A, 562, A71
Bergemann M., Lind K., Collet R., Magic Z., Asplund M., 2012a, MNRAS, 427, 27
Bergemann M., Kudritzki R.-P., Plez B., Davies B., Lind K., Gazak Z., 2012b, ApJ, 751, 156
Biemont E., Godefroid M., 1980, A&A, 84, 361
Biemont E., Grevesse N., Hannaford P., Lowe R. M., 1981, ApJ, 248, 867
Biemont E., Hibbert A., Godefroid M., Vaeck N., 1993, ApJ, 412, 431
Caffau E., Steffen M., Sbordone L., Ludwig H. G., Bonifacio P., 2007, A&A, 473, L9
Caffau E., Ludwig H. G., Steffen M., Ayres T. R., Bonifacio P., Cayrel R., Freytag B., Plez B., 2008, A&A, 488, 1031
Caffau E., Maiorca E., Bonifacio P., Faraggiana R., Steffen M., Ludwig H. G., Kamp I., Busso M., 2009, A&A, 498, 877
Caffau E., Ludwig H. G., Bonifacio P., Faraggiana R., Steffen M., Freytag B., Kamp I., Ayres T. R., 2010, A&A, 514, A92
Caffau E., Ludwig H. G., Steffen M., Freytag B., Bonifacio P., 2011, Sol. Phys., 268, 255
Caffau E., et al., 2019, A&A, 622, A68
Castelli F., Kurucz R. L., 2003, in Piskunov N., Weiss W. W., Gray D. F., eds, IAU Symposium Vol. 210, Modelling of Stellar
Atmospheres. p. A20 (arXiv:astro-ph/0405087), doi:10.48550/arXiv.astro-ph/0405087
Den Hartog E. A., Lawler J. E., Sobeck J. S., Sneden C., Cowan J. J., 2011, ApJS, 194, 35
Den Hartog E. A., Lawler J. E., Sneden C., Cowan J. J., Roederer I. U., Sobeck J., 2021, ApJS, 255, 27
Fuhr J. R., Wiese W. L., 2006, Journal of Physical and Chemical Reference Data, 35, 1669
Gehren T., Liang Y. C., Shi J. R., Zhang H. W., Zhao G., 2004, A&A, 413, 1045
Grevesse N., Asplund M., Sauval A. J., 2007, Space Sci. Rev., 130, 105
Hannaford P., Lowe R. M., Grevesse N., Biemont E., Whaling W., 1982, ApJ, 261, 736
Hansen C. J., Bergemann M., Cescutti G., François P., Arcones A., Karakas A. I., Lind K., Chiappini C., 2013, A&A, 551, A57
Haywood M., 2008, A&A, 482, 673
Heiter U., et al., 2015, Phys. Scr., 90, 054010
Heiter U., et al., 2021, A&A, 645, A106
Holweger H., 2001, in Wimmer-Schweingruber R. F., ed., American Institute of Physics Conference Series Vol.
598, Joint SOHO/ACE workshop “Solar and Galactic Composition”. AIP, pp 23–30 (arXiv:astro-ph/0107426),
doi:10.1063/1.1433974
Karathanou K., Kemmler L., Lazaratos M., Siemers M., Bondar A.-N., 2020, Biophysical Journal, 118, 179a
Kelleher D. E., Podobedova L. I., 2008, Journal of Physical and Chemical Reference Data, 37, 1285
Klose J. Z., Fuhr J. R., Wiese W. L., 2002, Journal of Physical and Chemical Reference Data, 31, 217
Kurucz R. L., Furenlid I., Brault J., Testerman L., 1984, Solar flux atlas from 296 to 1300 nm
Lambert D. L., 1978, MNRAS, 182, 249
Lawler J. E., Den Hartog E. A., Sneden C., Cowan J. J., 2006, ApJS, 162, 227
Lawler J. E., Sneden C., Cowan J. J., Ivans I. I., Den Hartog E. A., 2009, ApJS, 182, 51
Lawler J. E., Guzman A., Wood M. P., Sneden C., Cowan J. J., 2013, ApJS, 205, 11
Lawler J. E., Sneden C., Cowan J. J., 2015, ApJS, 220, 13
Lawler J. E., Sneden C., Nave G., Den Hartog E. A., Emrahoğlu N., Cowan J. J., 2017, ApJS, 228, 10

11
Şahin et. al

Lawler J. E., Hala Sneden C., Nave G., Wood M. P., Cowan J. J., 2019, ApJS, 241, 21
Lind K., Bergemann M., Asplund M., 2012, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 427, 50
Lodders K., 2003, ApJ, 591, 1220
Lodders K., Palme H., Gail H. P., 2009, Landolt Börnstein, 4B, 712
Luck R. E., 2017, AJ, 153, 21
Ludwig H.-G., Freytag B., Steffen M., 1999, A&A, 346, 111
Magic Z., Weiss A., Asplund M., 2015, A&A, 573, A89
Marışmak M., Şahin T., Güney F., Plevne O., Bilir S., 2024, Astronomische Nachrichten, 345, e20240047
Mishenina T. V., Soubiran C., Kovtyukh V. V., Korotin S. A., 2004, A&A, 418, 551
Mishenina T. V., Gorbaneva T. I., Basak N. Y., Soubiran C., Kovtyukh V. V., 2011, Astronomy Reports, 55, 689
Mishenina T. V., Pignatari M., Korotin S. A., Soubiran C., Charbonnel C., Thielemann F. K., Gorbaneva T. I., Basak N. Y., 2013,
A&A, 552, A128
Molaro P., Monai S., 2012, A&A, 544, A125
Moore C. E., 1954, Science, 119, 449
Moore C. E., Minnaert M. G. J., Houtgast J., 1966, The Solar Spectrum 2935 Å to 8770 Å: Second Revision of Rowland’s Preliminary
Table of Solar Spectrum Wavelengths. Vol. 61, National Bureau of Standards
Ofman L., Yogesh Giordano S., 2024, ApJ, 970, L16
Pagel B. E. J., Patchett B. E., 1975, MNRAS, 172, 13
Pehlivan Rhodin A., Hartman H., Nilsson H., Jönsson P., 2017, A&A, 598, A102
Petit P., Louge T., Théado S., Paletou F., Manset N., Morin J., Marsden S. C., Jeffers S. V., 2014, PASP, 126, 469
Rice M., Brewer J. M., 2020, ApJ, 898, 119
Ryde N., Edvardsson B., Gustafsson B., Eriksson K., Käufl H. U., Siebenmorgen R., Smette A., 2009, A&A, 496, 701
Şahin T., 2017, Turkish Journal of Physics, 41, 367
Şahin T., Bilir S., 2020, ApJ, 899, 41
Şahin T., Lambert D. L., 2009, MNRAS, 398, 1730
Şahin T., Lambert D. L., Klochkova V. G., Tavolganskaya N. S., 2011, MNRAS, 410, 612
Şahin T., Lambert D. L., Klochkova V. G., Panchuk V. E., 2016, MNRAS, 461, 4071
Şahin T., Marismak M., Cinar N., Bilir S., 2023, Physics and Astronomy Reports, 1, 54
Salmon S. J. A. J., Van Grootel V., Buldgen G., Dupret M. A., Eggenberger P., 2021, A&A, 646, A7
Şentürk S. A., Şahin T., Güney F., Bilir S., Marışmak M., 2024, ApJ, 976, 175
Sharma S., et al., 2018, MNRAS, 473, 2004
Shi J. R., Gehren T., Zhao G., 2011, A&A, 534, A103
Sneden C. A., 1973, PhD thesis, University of Texas, Austin
Takeda Y., 2023, Acta Astron., 73, 35
Takeda Y., Zhao G., Takada-Hidai M., Chen Y.-Q., Saito Y.-J., Zhang H.-W., 2003, Chinese J. Astron. Astrophys., 3, 316
Takeda Y., Kawanomoto S., Honda S., Ando H., Sakurai T., 2007, A&A, 468, 663
Trevisan M., Mamon G. A., Thuan T. X., Ferrari F., Pilyugin L. S., Ranjan A., 2021, MNRAS, 502, 4815
Valenti J. A., Fischer D. A., 2005, ApJS, 159, 141
Wang Y., Zhao G., 2013, ApJ, 769, 4
Woolf V. M., West A. A., 2012, MNRAS, 422, 1489
Zhang W. W., et al., 2019, in O’Dell S. L., Pareschi G., eds, Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference
Series Vol. 11119, Optics for EUV, X-Ray, and Gamma-Ray Astronomy IX. p. 1111907, doi:10.1117/12.2530284
da Silva R., Milone A. d. C., Rocha-Pinto H. J., 2015, A&A, 580, A24

12
 An Up to date line list for spectroscopic analysis of F and G Stars

APPENDIX A: APPENDIX

A1. Literature Review for HD 218209

This section presents a comprehensive literature review of the elemental abundances of the star, focusing on
studies conducted over the past four decades. Table A7 summarizes the literature values for each element
and compares our results with those of previous studies.
Carbon abundance for star has been reported in the literature over the last decade by da Silva et al. (2015,
DA15), Rice & Brewer (2020, RI20), and Takeda (2023, TA23). The carbon abundance ([C/Fe]=0.14 dex)
reported in this study is in good agreement with that of Rice & Brewer (2020, RI20) ([C/Fe]=0.18 dex),
differing by only 0.04 dex. The largest discrepancy is found for Takeda (2023, TA23), with a difference of
0.22 dex.
The literature values for [O/Fe] exhibited a scatter of approximately 0.3 dex. Our value (≈ 0.3 dex) agrees
well with Mishenina et al. (2013, MI13) (Δ = 0.06 dex), but shows a larger discrepancy than Takeda (2023,
TA23) (Δ = 0.20 dex) and Rice & Brewer (2020, RI20) (Δ = 0.14 dex).
The [Na/Fe] ratio of -0.03 dex shows good agreement with Mishenina et al. (2011, MI11) (Δ = −0.01
dex), Rice & Brewer (2020, RI20) (Δ = −0.06 dex), Luck (2017, LU17) (Δ = −0.09 dex), and Valenti &
Fischer (2005, VA05) (Δ = −0.13 dex). However, a significant discrepancy (Δ = −0.26 dex) was observed
compared to in that Gehren et al. (2004, GE04).
Moving on to magnesium, our [Mg/Fe] value of 0.24 dex is consistent with the values reported in Mishenina
et al. (2004, MI04), Mishenina et al. (2013, MI13) (Δ = 0.05 dex), da Silva et al. (2015, DA15) (Δ = 0.06
dex), Rice & Brewer (2020, RI20) (Δ = 0.07 dex), and Luck (2017, LU17) (Δ = −0.05 dex). However, a
significant discrepancy of -0.17 dex was observed compared to Gehren et al. (2004, GE04).
The reported [Al/Fe] ratio in this study is consistent with the values reported by Mishenina et al. (2011,
MI11), da Silva et al. (2015, DA15), Luck (2017, LU17), and Rice & Brewer (2020, RI20), except for the
abundance ratio reported by Abia et al. (1988, AB88), which shows a significant discrepancy (Δ = −0.32
dex).
The literature values for [Si/Fe] exhibited a relatively homogeneous distribution. Our value of 0.13 dex
agrees well with da Silva et al. (2015, DA15) and Luck (2017, LU17) (Δ = 0.02 dex). The largest discrepancy
was observed in Takeda et al. (2007, TA07) (Δ = −0.13 dex).
Our [Ca/Fe] value of 0.15 dex is in good agreement with Rice & Brewer (2020, RI20) (Δ = 0.03 dex), da
Silva et al. (2015, DA15) (Δ = 0.02 dex), and Luck (2017, LU17) (Δ = −0.04 dex). A significant discrepancy
is observed with Mishenina et al. (2011, MI11) (Δ = 0.50 dex).
Our [Sc/Fe] value of 0.06 dex shows a discrepancy of 0.09 dex compared to Luck (2017, LU17).
Our [Ti/Fe] value of 0.21 dex agrees well with Luck (2017, LU17) and shows good agreement with da
Silva et al. (2015, DA15) (Δ = 0.01 dex), Valenti & Fischer (2005, VA05) (Δ = −0.02 dex), and Rice &
Brewer (2020, RI20) (Δ = −0.03 dex). A significant discrepancy is observed with Takeda et al. (2007, TA07)
(Δ = 0.18 dex).
Our [V/Fe] value of -0.02 dex aligns well with the findings of Takeda et al. (2007, TA07) (Δ = 0.05 dex)
but shows discrepancies of 0.19 dex, 0.18 dex, and 0.15 dex when compared to Rice & Brewer (2020, RI20),
Luck (2017, LU17), and da Silva et al. (2015, DA15), respectively.

13
Şahin et. al

The [Cr/Fe] value determined in this study agrees well with previous findings, with discrepancies of
approximately ±0.05 dex observed when compared to Rice & Brewer (2020, RI20) and Luck (2017, LU17).
Our [Mn/Fe] value of -0.27 dex precisely matches the value reported by Rice & Brewer (2020, RI20) and
demonstrates good agreement with da Silva et al. (2015, DA15) (Δ = −0.09 dex) and Luck (2017, LU17)
(Δ = −0.03 dex).
The [Co/Fe] value determined in this study exhibits discrepancies of -0.18 dex compared to Luck (2017,
LU17) and -0.23 dex compared to Takeda et al. (2007, TA07).
The [Ni/Fe] value determined in this study aligns well with the literature values, with the exception of a
significant discrepancy (Δ = −0.21 dex) observed in the work of Abia et al. (1988, AB88). The smallest
discrepancy is found with Luck (2017, LU17) (Δ = −0.01 dex), followed by Rice & Brewer (2020, RI20)
(Δ = −0.03 dex), Mishenina et al. (2013, MI13) and Mishenina et al. (2004, MI04) (Δ = −0.06 dex), and
Takeda et al. (2007, TA07) (Δ = −0.02 dex).
The [Cu/Fe] value determined in this study shows discrepancies of -0.10 dex compared to Luck (2017,
LU17), -0.06 dex compared to da Silva et al. (2015, DA15), and -0.11 dex compared to Mishenina et al.
(2011, MI11).
The [Zn/Fe] value determined in this study is in good agreement with literature values, with a difference
of 0.08 dex compared to Luck (2017, LU17) and 0.06 dex compared to Mishenina et al. (2013, MI13).
The [Sr/Fe] value of 0.10 dex determined in this study exhibits a discrepancy of -0.28 dex compared to
Luck (2017, LU17).
The [Y/Fe] value determined in this study shows discrepancies of -0.16 dex compared to Rice & Brewer
(2020, RI20), -0.22 dex compared to Luck (2017, LU17), and -0.10 dex compared to Mishenina et al. (2011,
MI11).
The [Zr/Fe] value determined in this study agrees well with Mishenina et al. (2013, MI13) (Δ = 0.04 dex),
but shows a discrepancy of -0.21 dex compared to Luck (2017, LU17).
The [Ba/Fe] value determined in this study precisely matches that reported by Luck (2017, LU17)
([Ba/Fe]=0.04 dex), while a difference of 0.03 dex is observed compared to Mishenina et al. (2013, MI13).
The [La/Fe] value determined in this study shows a discrepancy of -0.60 dex compared to Luck (2017,
LU17), while a difference of -0.06 dex is observed compared to Mishenina et al. (2013, MI13).
The [Ce/Fe] value determined in this study shows a discrepancy of -0.02 dex compared to Luck (2017,
LU17), while a difference of -0.28 dex is observed compared to Mishenina et al. (2013, MI13).
The difference in neodymium abundance compared to Luck (2017, LU17) is -0.24 dex, while the difference
compared to Mishenina et al. (2013, MI13) is -0.07 dex.
The [Sm/Fe] value determined in this study shows a discrepancy of -0.12 dex compared to Luck (2017,
LU17), while a difference of 0.01 dex is observed compared to Mishenina et al. (2013, MI13).

This paper has been typeset from a TEX / LATEX file prepared by the author.

14
 An Up to date line list for spectroscopic analysis of F and G Stars

Table A1. Fe i and Fe ii lines. The abundances were obtained for a model with 𝑇eff = 5770 K, log 𝑔 = 4.40 cgs, and 𝜉 = 0.66 km
s −1 for the solar spectrum. 𝑇eff =5600 K, log 𝑔 = 4.50 cgs, and 𝜉 = 0.44 km s −1 for the HD 218209 spectrum.
Sun HD 218209 Sun HD 218209
Spec. 𝜆 LEP log(𝑔 𝑓 ) EW log 𝜖(X) EW log 𝜖(X) RMT Ref. Spec. 𝜆 LEP log(𝑔 𝑓 ) EW log 𝜖(X) EW log 𝜖(X) RMT Ref.
(Å) (eV) (dex) (mÅ) (dex) (mÅ) (dex) (Å) (eV) (dex) (mÅ) (dex) (mÅ) (dex)
Fe i 4080.22 3.28 -1.23 80.9 7.32 - - 558 1 Fe i 5501.48 0.96 -3.05 115.3 7.50 104.5 7.08 15 1
Fe i 4082.11 3.42 -1.51 68.2 7.49 - - 698 1 Fe i 5506.79 0.99 -2.80 123.2 7.37 111.4 6.94 15 1
Fe i 4088.56 3.64 -1.50 52.3 7.41 - - 906 1 Fe i 5525.55 4.23 -1.08 53.0 7.35 39.4 6.96 1062 1
Fe i 4090.96 3.37 -1.73 55.8 7.37 - - 695 1 Fe i 5543.94 4.22 -1.11 61.5 7.55 49.1 7.17 1062 1
Fe i 4204.00 2.84 -1.01 125.1 7.50 - - 355 1 Fe i 5546.51 4.37 -1.28 50.8 7.63 35.9 7.21 1145 1
Fe i 4207.13 2.83 -1.41 82.5 7.39 77.3 7.12 352 1 Fe i 5560.22 4.43 -1.16 50.2 7.55 36.4 7.15 1164 1
Fe i 4220.35 3.07 -1.31 83.6 7.46 77.4 7.16 482 1 Fe i 5618.64 4.21 -1.28 50.0 7.47 36.1 7.06 1107 1
Fe i 4365.90 2.99 -2.25 51.4 7.48 40.7 7.09 415 1 Fe i 5624.03 4.39 -1.20 50.4 7.56 37.2 7.18 1160 1
Fe i 4432.58 3.57 -1.56 51.9 7.37 42.9 7.04 797 1 Fe i 5633.95 4.99 -0.32 65.3 7.57 53.3 7.23 1314 1
Fe i 4439.89 2.28 -3.00 52.1 7.56 36.7 7.03 116 1 Fe i 5636.71 3.64 -2.56 20.7 7.53 13.6 7.18 868 1
Fe i 4442.35 2.20 -1.25 187.7 7.52 - - 68 1 Fe i 5638.27 4.22 -0.84 76.6 7.53 67.7 7.23 1087 1
Fe i 4447.14 2.20 -2.73 66.6 7.64 57.3 7.27 69 1 Fe i 5641.45 4.26 -1.15 66.7 7.70 49.0 7.24 1087 1
Fe i 4447.73 2.22 -1.34 171.0 7.52 - - 68 1 Fe i 5662.52 4.18 -0.57 91.2 7.57 81.4 7.25 1087 1
Fe i 4502.60 3.57 -2.31 28.6 7.50 - - 796 1 Fe i 5701.56 2.56 -2.22 84.8 7.61 72.7 7.21 209 1
Fe i 4556.93 3.25 -2.66 26.8 7.49 - - 638 1 Fe i 5705.47 4.30 -1.36 37.8 7.37 25.4 6.98 1087 1
Fe i 4593.53 3.94 -2.03 28.3 7.53 - - 971 1 Fe i 5717.84 4.28 -1.10 62.1 7.58 - - 1107 1
Fe i 4602.01 1.61 -3.15 70.9 7.53 63.9 7.20 39 1 Fe i 5741.86 4.26 -1.67 32.6 7.52 - - 1086 1
Fe i 4602.95 1.48 -2.22 118.8 7.44 110.7 7.06 39 1 Fe i 5778.46 2.59 -3.43 22.4 7.42 15.5 7.06 209 1
Fe i 4619.30 3.60 -1.08 83.9 7.43 68.9 6.98 821 1 Fe i 5806.73 4.61 -1.03 51.6 7.58 41.9 7.28 1180 1
Fe i 4630.13 2.28 -2.59 73.2 7.62 66.5 7.29 115 1 Fe i 5814.80 4.26 -1.94 22.0 7.53 12.2 7.10 1086 1
Fe i 4635.85 2.84 -2.36 54.1 7.50 42.5 7.08 349 1 Fe i 5881.28 4.59 -1.70 14.3 7.35 - - 1178 1
Fe i 4661.54 4.54 -1.26 37.9 7.54 25.1 7.14 1207 1 Fe i 5905.67 4.63 -0.77 57.0 7.44 - - 1181 1
Fe i 4678.85 3.60 -0.83 syn 7.54 syn 7.06 821 1 Fe i 5916.26 2.45 -2.99 54.4 7.60 45.2 7.26 170 1
Fe i 4704.95 3.69 -1.53 62.7 7.56 53.5 7.22 821 1 Fe i 5929.68 4.55 -1.38 39.5 7.65 24.8 7.21 1176 1
Fe i 4728.55 3.65 -1.17 81.3 7.63 - - 822 1 Fe i 5934.67 3.93 -1.12 76.0 7.44 59.8 7.01 982 1
Fe i 4733.60 1.48 -2.99 83.9 7.58 77.8 7.26 38 1 Fe i 5952.73 3.98 -1.39 59.6 7.48 - - 959 1
Fe i 4735.85 4.07 -1.32 64.1 7.77 - - 1042 1 Fe i 5956.71 0.86 -4.61 50.9 7.55 44.4 7.23 14 1
Fe i 4741.53 2.83 -1.76 71.3 7.36 66.0 7.11 346 1 Fe i 5983.70 4.53 -0.49 67.1 7.35 57.5 7.04 1175 3
Fe i 4745.81 3.65 -1.27 73.9 7.59 68.3 7.32 821 1 Fe i 6003.03 3.86 -1.03 81.3 7.38 72.4 7.06 959 2
Fe i 4779.44 3.40 -2.02 40.7 7.34 - - 720 1 Fe i 6005.53 2.58 -3.60 21.8 7.56 15.8 7.23 959 3
Fe i 4788.77 3.24 -1.76 65.4 7.58 - - 588 1 Fe i 6027.06 4.07 -1.09 63.5 7.47 - - 1018 1
Fe i 4793.96 3.03 -3.47 8.7 7.43 - - 512 1 Fe i 6065.49 2.61 -1.53 117.0 7.41 - - 207 1
Fe i 4794.36 2.41 -4.05 11.5 7.55 - - 115 2 Fe i 6078.50 4.77 -0.32 75.9 7.53 62.3 7.16 1259 3
Fe i 4802.89 3.64 -1.51 59.7 7.49 47.6 7.10 888 1 Fe i 6079.02 4.65 -1.10 44.4 7.55 28.9 7.12 1176 1
Fe i 4839.55 3.27 -1.82 61.8 7.57 55.8 7.32 588 1 Fe i 6082.72 2.22 -3.57 34.3 7.48 24.1 7.08 64 1
Fe i 4875.88 3.33 -1.97 61.0 7.58 - - 687 1 Fe i 6096.67 3.98 -1.88 36.9 7.53 24 7.12 959 1
Fe i 4917.23 4.19 -1.16 62.8 7.60 51.9 7.25 1066 1 Fe i 6127.91 4.14 -1.40 47.5 7.49 36.8 7.15 1017 1
Fe i 4918.02 4.23 -1.34 52.0 7.60 40.0 7.23 1070 1 Fe i 6137.70 2.59 -1.40 129.4 7.40 114.3 6.98 207 1
Fe i 4924.78 2.28 -2.11 92.6 7.50 85.5 7.16 114 1 Fe i 6157.73 4.07 -1.22 61.5 7.55 48.8 7.17 1015 1
Fe i 4939.69 0.86 -3.34 98.4 7.53 - - 16 1 Fe i 6165.36 4.14 -1.47 43.9 7.48 30.5 7.07 1018 1
Fe i 4961.92 3.63 -2.25 26.2 7.40 - - 845 1 Fe i 6173.34 2.22 -2.88 67.7 7.57 56.9 7.18 62 1
Fe i 4962.58 4.18 -1.18 53.2 7.48 37.8 7.03 66 1 Fe i 6180.21 2.73 -2.65 53.3 7.50 - - 269 1
Fe i 4973.10 3.96 -0.92 87.3 7.61 - - 173 1 Fe i 6200.32 2.61 -2.44 72.2 7.58 - - 207 1
Fe i 5022.24 3.98 -0.56 97.1 7.40 - - 965 1 Fe i 6213.44 2.22 -2.48 81.0 7.45 - - 62 1
Fe i 5029.62 3.41 -2.00 48.6 7.52 - 718 1 Fe i 6219.29 2.20 -2.43 89.5 7.55 - - 62 1
Fe i 5044.22 2.84 -2.02 71.9 7.39 64.7 7.06 318 1 Fe i 6232.65 3.65 -1.22 81.0 7.58 73.6 7.29 816 1
Fe i 5074.75 4.22 -0.23 113.7 7.43 97.1 7.02 1094 1 Fe i 6240.65 2.22 -3.17 47.6 7.38 38.7 7.03 64 1
Fe i 5083.35 0.96 -2.96 109.7 7.40 - - 16 1 Fe i 6246.33 3.59 -0.88 111.4 7.36 106.6 7.07 816 1
Fe i 5088.16 4.15 -1.75 37.0 7.63 - - 1066 1 Fe i 6252.56 2.40 -1.69 119.2 7.40 106.8 7.00 169 1
Fe i 5141.75 2.42 -2.24 86.1 7.61 75.6 7.21 114 1 Fe i 6265.14 2.18 -2.55 84.0 7.54 76.5 7.22 62 1
Fe i 5145.10 2.20 -3.08 53.8 7.50 42.4 7.09 66 1 Fe i 6270.23 2.86 -2.61 51.0 7.52 42.0 7.19 342 1
Fe i 5198.72 2.22 -2.13 95.1 7.46 - - 66 1 Fe i 6297.80 2.22 -2.74 74.4 7.56 65.5 7.22 62 1
Fe i 5217.40 3.21 -1.16 108.7 7.37 - - 66 1 Fe i 6301.51 3.65 -0.72 113.9 7.57 106.4 7.27 816 1
Fe i 5225.53 0.11 -4.79 73.7 7.63 - - 1 1 Fe i 6315.81 4.07 -1.66 40.3 7.51 24.6 7.03 1014 1
Fe i 5228.38 4.22 -1.26 syn 7.79 syn 7.18 1091 1 Fe i 6322.69 2.59 -2.43 75.3 7.60 64.3 7.22 207 1
Fe i 5242.50 3.63 -0.97 85.3 7.48 75.2 7.13 843 1 Fe i 6330.86 4.71 -0.97 33.2 7.23 21.1 6.85 1254 1
Fe i 5243.78 4.26 -1.12 61.1 7.59 49 7.22 1089 1 Fe i 6335.34 2.20 -2.18 97.0 7.42 85.9 7.03 62 1
Fe i 5247.06 0.09 -4.95 68.1 7.63 57.5 7.19 1 1 Fe i 6336.83 3.69 -0.86 102.2 7.32 93.9 6.99 816 1
Fe i 5250.22 0.12 -4.94 68.2 7.65 60.5 7.29 66 1 Fe i 6344.15 2.43 -2.92 50.2 7.38 - - 169 1
Fe i 5250.65 2.20 -2.18 101.5 7.59 92.4 7.22 66 1 Fe i 6392.53 2.27 -4.03 17.1 7.51 - - 109 3
Fe i 5253.47 3.28 -1.57 75.4 7.36 66.9 7.02 553 1 Fe i 6393.61 2.43 -1.58 130.4 7.42 - - 168 1
Fe i 5288.53 3.69 -1.51 57.3 7.47 44.8 7.07 929 1 Fe i 6408.03 3.69 -1.02 syn 7.65 syn 7.23 816 1
Fe i 5298.78 3.64 -2.02 42.2 7.55 - - 875 1 Fe i 6419.96 4.73 -0.27 80.5 7.41 70.2 7.10 1258 1
Fe i 5307.37 1.61 -2.99 86.0 7.58 76.2 7.19 36 1 Fe i 6430.86 2.18 -2.01 109.5 7.41 101.8 7.08 62 1
Fe i 5322.05 2.28 -2.80 60.3 7.44 - - 112 1 Fe i 6469.19 4.83 -0.81 55.0 7.61 40.5 7.22 1258 1
Fe i 5365.41 3.57 -1.22 76.9 7.49 69.8 7.2 786 1 Fe i 6481.88 2.28 -2.98 63.7 7.59 55.0 7.26 109 1
Fe i 5373.71 4.47 -0.84 61.6 7.47 48.1 7.09 1166 1 Fe i 6498.94 0.96 -4.69 44.7 7.54 37.9 7.22 13 1
Fe i 5379.58 3.69 -1.51 60.8 7.54 44.3 7.04 928 1 Fe i 6518.37 2.83 -2.46 56.0 7.44 49.1 7.16 342 1
Fe i 5398.29 4.44 -0.71 72.5 7.51 59.4 7.13 553 1 Fe i 6593.88 2.43 -2.42 85.0 7.61 79.0 7.32 168 1
Fe i 5461.54 4.43 -1.88 26.0 7.74 - - 1145 1 Fe i 6609.12 2.56 -2.69 64.2 7.57 54.9 7.23 206 1
Fe i 5473.91 4.15 -0.79 76.9 7.45 - - 1062 1 Fe i 6678.00 2.69 -1.42 122.8 7.41 111.7 7.04 268 1
Fe i 5483.11 4.15 -1.41 46.5 7.47 - - 1061 1 Fe i 6703.58 2.76 -3.06 36.6 7.52 26.9 7.16 268 1
Fe i 5487.15 4.41 -1.51 35.6 7.57 24.4 7.21 1143 1 Fe i 6750.16 2.42 -2.62 73.1 7.54 - - 111 1

15
Şahin et. al

Table A2. Fe i and Fe ii lines. The abundances were obtained for a model with 𝑇eff = 5770 K, log 𝑔 = 4.40 cgs, and 𝜉 =0.66 km s −1
for the solar spectrum. 𝑇eff = 5600 K, log 𝑔 = 4.50 cgs, and 𝜉 = 0.44 km s −1 for the HD 218209 spectrum.
Sun HD 218209 Sun HD 218209
Spec. 𝜆 LEP log(𝑔 𝑓 ) EW log 𝜖(X) EW log 𝜖(X) RMT Ref. Spec. 𝜆 LEP log(𝑔 𝑓 ) EW log 𝜖(X) EW log 𝜖(X) RMT Ref.
(Å) (eV) (dex) (mÅ) (dex) (mÅ) (dex) (Å) (eV) (dex) (mÅ) (dex) (mÅ) (dex)
Fe i 6806.85 2.72 -3.21 34.0 7.57 25.2 7.22 268 1 Fe i 8526.68 4.89 -0.76 58.3 7.62 - - 1270 1
Fe i 6810.28 4.59 -0.99 48.7 7.44 38.1 7.12 1197 1 Fe i 8582.27 2.98 -2.13 77.6 7.57 63.0 7.16 401 1
Fe i 6820.43 4.62 -1.29 39.7 7.63 24.6 7.18 1197 2 Fe i 8611.81 2.83 -1.85 98.5 7.41 83.9 7.02 339 1
Fe i 6862.48 4.54 -1.57 29.3 7.57 20.2 7.24 1191 3 Fe i 8613.93 4.97 -1.25 31.5 7.63 - - 1272 3
Fe i 6898.31 4.20 -2.23 16.6 7.55 - - 1078 3 Fe i 8616.27 4.89 -0.71 43.4 7.27 - - 1266 3
Fe i 6916.70 4.14 -1.40 57.1 7.55 45.4 7.20 1052 1 Fe i 8699.43 4.93 -0.38 65.7 7.40 - - 1267 1
Fe i 6977.44 4.57 -1.56 19.9 7.35 - - 1225 3 Fe i 8757.19 2.83 -1.92 92.7 7.39 82.9 7.06 339 1
Fe i 6999.90 4.09 -1.51 54.0 7.56 43.4 7.23 1051 2 Fe i 8793.38 4.59 -0.09 107.9 7.45 98.3 7.16 1172 3
Fe i 7016.07 2.41 -3.21 50.8 7.62 - - 109 3 Fe i 8796.42 4.93 -1.23 27.3 7.46 - - 1266 3
Fe i 7022.98 4.17 -1.20 63.5 7.48 50.6 7.11 1051 1 Fe i 8798.05 4.96 -1.89 8.0 7.47 - - 1286 3
Fe i 7038.25 4.20 -1.25 60.0 7.49 - - 1051 1 Fe i 8834.04 4.20 -2.59 8.0 7.44 - - 1050 3
Fe i 7071.88 4.59 -1.70 26.5 7.67 18.6 7.37 1194 3 Fe i 8838.43 2.85 -1.87 97.5 7.42 83.9 7.04 339 1
Fe i 7090.40 4.21 -1.16 64.5 7.49 50.0 7.10 1051 1 Fe i 8846.82 4.99 -0.78 48.5 7.52 39.3 7.26 1267 3
Fe i 7130.94 4.20 -0.80 87.3 7.46 73.0 7.08 1051 1 Fe i 8878.26 2.98 -3.83 11.7 7.67 - - 401 3
Fe i 7132.99 4.06 -1.63 41.6 7.47 31.3 7.13 1002 1 Fe i 8887.10 4.93 -1.94 4.8 7.25 - - 1265 3
Fe i 7180.02 1.48 -4.78 20.0 7.52 - - 1 3 Fe i 8902.94 4.97 -2.11 8.6 7.73 - - 1266 3
Fe i 7212.47 4.93 -0.83 30.4 7.23 - - 1273 3 Fe i 8922.66 4.97 -1.70 12.9 7.53 - - 1298 3
Fe i 7219.69 4.07 -1.69 45.0 7.61 35.6 7.30 1001 3 Fe i 8945.20 5.01 -0.22 72.2 7.40 49.6 6.91 1301 3
Fe i 7221.22 4.54 -1.18 40.5 7.44 26.1 7.02 1189 3 Fe i 8950.20 4.14 -2.43 13.1 7.46 - - 1050 3
Fe i 7222.88 4.59 -2.04 15.2 7.68 - - 1187 3 Fe i 8959.88 5.00 -1.84 8.9 7.50 - - 1320 3
Fe i 7228.70 2.75 -3.38 27.2 7.58 23.7 7.36 2 3 Fe i 8975.41 2.98 -2.22 77.3 7.60 - - 400 1
Fe i 7284.84 4.12 -1.57 41.6 7.46 27.8 7.04 1004 3 Fe i 8984.87 5.08 -0.92 32.5 7.40 - - 1301 3
Fe i 7306.61 4.16 -1.44 42.0 7.37 30.3 7.00 1077 3 Fe i 9010.55 2.60 -2.95 44.1 7.27 35.2 6.95 202 1
Fe i 7351.16 4.97 -0.84 36.2 7.40 23.0 7.00 1275 3 Fe i 9030.67 2.83 -3.64 25.5 7.77 - - 338 1
Fe i 7351.56 4.93 -0.64 45.5 7.36 34.3 7.04 1275 3 Fe i 9070.42 4.20 -2.05 33.7 7.71 - - 1076 3
Fe i 7396.50 4.97 -1.64 12.6 7.53 - - 1278 3 Fe i 9079.60 4.63 -0.81 54.1 7.31 - - 1172 3
Fe i 7401.69 4.17 -1.35 40.9 7.26 - - 1004 2 Fe i 9089.41 2.94 -1.68 99.8 7.41 88.9 7.09 400 1
Fe i 7411.18 4.26 -0.30 101.9 7.43 - - 4 3 Fe i 9117.10 2.85 -3.46 32.3 7.76 - - 338 3
Fe i 7418.67 4.12 -1.38 48.7 7.41 - - 4 1 Fe i 9156.23 3.00 -3.67 9.3 7.40 - - 400 3
Fe i 7443.03 4.17 -1.82 34.7 7.59 28.0 7.33 1309 1 Fe i 9210.03 2.83 -2.40 65.0 7.37 - - 83 2
Fe i 7447.43 4.93 -0.85 34.1 7.32 24.8 7.02 1273 3 Fe i 9382.93 4.96 -1.59 24.3 7.74 - - 1284 3
Fe i 7454.02 4.17 -2.41 12.0 7.51 - - 5 3 Fe i 9602.07 4.99 -1.74 15.4 7.64 - - 1283 3
Fe i 7473.56 4.59 -1.87 18.2 7.60 - - 1188 3 Fe i 9653.14 4.71 -0.68 68.4 7.46 - - 1247 3
Fe i 7491.68 4.28 -0.90 64.9 7.42 53.1 7.08 1077 3 Fe i 9753.13 4.77 -0.78 56.9 7.40 - - 1247 3
Fe i 7498.56 4.12 -2.25 18.0 7.52 13.5 7.27 1001 3 Fe i 9786.62 4.59 -1.68 18.5 7.28 - - 1171 3
Fe i 7511.05 4.16 0.09 151.6 7.46 141.1 7.14 1077 1 Fe i 9800.34 5.06 -0.45 59.7 7.38 - - 1292 3
Fe i 7540.44 2.72 -3.85 11.5 7.51 - - 266 3 Fe i 9861.79 5.04 -0.14 73.8 7.28 - - 1296 1
Fe i 7551.10 5.06 -1.63 11.0 7.53 - - 1303 3 Fe i 9881.51 4.56 -1.71 18.1 7.26 - - 1209 3
Fe i 7568.93 4.26 -0.77 74.3 7.45 64.4 7.15 1077 3 Fe i 9889.08 5.01 -0.45 75.4 7.59 - - 1296 1
Fe i 7583.80 3.00 -1.89 82.3 7.46 69.1 7.07 402 1 Fe i 9944.13 4.99 -1.34 30.8 7.63 - - 1285 3
Fe i 7586.04 4.29 -0.47 112.3 7.74 106 7.48 1137 3 Fe ii 4178.86 2.58 -2.51 83.8 7.38 67.3 6.99 28 1
Fe i 7620.54 4.71 -0.66 55.4 7.38 - - 1250 3 Fe ii 4491.40 2.84 -2.64 74.8 7.50 - - 37 1
Fe i 7653.78 4.77 -0.89 34.4 7.21 - - 1250 1 Fe ii 4508.29 2.85 -2.44 85.5 7.52 73.7 7.26 38 1
Fe i 7710.39 4.20 -1.11 64.9 7.54 61.0 7.36 1077 1 Fe ii 4576.34 2.84 -2.92 63.8 7.48 - - 38 1
Fe i 7719.05 5.01 -1.15 28.3 7.55 19.2 7.23 1304 3 Fe ii 4582.83 2.84 -3.06 55.9 7.40 - - 37 1
Fe i 7723.20 2.27 -3.62 42.2 7.65 - - 108 2 Fe ii 4620.52 2.83 -3.19 52.0 7.41 37.1 7.03 38 1
Fe i 7745.48 5.06 -1.17 21.7 7.44 - - 1305 3 Fe ii 4993.36 2.79 -3.68 37.7 7.46 - - 36 1
Fe i 7748.28 2.94 -1.75 100.6 7.54 91.9 7.22 402 1 Fe ii 5132.67 2.81 -4.09 25.1 7.53 14.6 7.20 35 1
Fe i 7780.59 4.45 0.03 114.7 7.39 103.4 7.07 1154 3 Fe ii 5197.58 3.23 -2.22 79.8 7.47 - - 49 1
Fe i 7832.22 4.42 0.11 118.0 7.31 112.0 7.06 1154 3 Fe ii 5234.63 3.22 -2.21 82.1 7.49 67.7 7.19 49 1
Fe i 7844.55 4.81 -1.70 12.8 7.43 - - 1250 3 Fe ii 5264.81 3.33 -3.13 45.8 7.63 33.9 7.35 48 1
Fe i 7879.75 5.01 -1.47 10.2 7.27 - - 1306 3 Fe ii 5284.11 2.89 -3.11 syn 7.5 syn 6.98 41 1
Fe i 7912.87 0.86 -4.84 48.3 7.56 36.0 7.12 12 1 Fe ii 5325.56 3.21 -3.26 42.5 7.56 - - 49 1
Fe i 7941.09 3.26 -2.29 41.7 7.28 - - 623 1 Fe ii 5414.07 3.22 -3.58 28.2 7.49 15.7 7.12 48 1
Fe i 7998.97 4.35 0.15 129.7 7.33 - - 1136 3 Fe ii 5425.26 3.20 -3.22 41.8 7.48 26.5 7.09 49 1
Fe i 8028.34 4.45 -0.69 68.2 7.39 64.0 7.20 1154 3 Fe ii 5534.85 3.23 -2.75 57.4 7.46 39.3 7.02 55 1
Fe i 8047.60 0.86 -4.79 60.4 7.77 - - 12 3 Fe ii 6084.11 3.19 -3.88 20.3 7.52 8.9 7.07 46 1
Fe i 8096.87 4.06 -1.78 35.1 7.41 - - 999 1 Fe ii 6149.24 3.87 -2.84 35.9 7.57 23.2 7.25 74 1
Fe i 8204.10 0.91 -6.05 5.8 7.52 - - 12 3 Fe ii 6238.38 3.87 -2.75 42.1 7.64 - - 74 1
Fe i 8207.77 4.43 -0.86 65.4 7.48 47.4 7.02 1136 3 Fe ii 6247.56 3.89 -2.30 52.0 7.46 38.2 7.16 74 1
Fe i 8239.13 2.41 -3.18 44.9 7.38 36.4 7.07 108 3 Fe ii 6432.68 2.89 -3.57 40.3 7.47 24.8 7.07 40 1
Fe i 8248.15 4.35 -0.89 60.5 7.32 50.7 7.03 1136 3 Fe ii 6456.39 3.90 -2.05 62.1 7.45 46.6 7.12 74 1
Fe i 8293.53 3.30 -2.14 57.6 7.50 46.8 7.17 623 1 Fe ii 6516.08 2.89 -3.31 53.4 7.53 40.0 7.22 40 1
Fe i 8360.82 4.45 -1.29 57.2 7.74 45.3 7.41 1153 3 Fe ii 7222.39 3.87 -3.40 18.9 7.60 - - 73 1
Fe i 8365.64 3.24 -1.91 69.0 7.45 55.4 7.06 623 1 Fe ii 7224.51 3.87 -3.36 19.4 7.58 - - 73 1
Fe i 8424.14 4.93 -1.16 33.4 7.56 20.7 7.17 1272 3 Fe ii 7515.88 3.89 -3.39 13.1 7.38 - - 73 1
Fe i 8439.60 4.53 -0.59 73.2 7.41 61.6 7.09 1172 3 Fe ii 7533.42 3.89 -3.60 17.7 7.77 - - 72 3
Fe i 8514.08 2.19 -2.23 116.1 7.46 102.4 7.07 60 1 Fe ii 7655.47 3.87 -3.77 7.1 7.41 - - 73 3
Fe i 8515.08 3.00 -2.07 83.0 7.64 71.4 7.30 401 2 Fe ii 7711.71 3.89 -2.45 44.7 7.36 30.4 7.04 73 1

16
 An Up to date line list for spectroscopic analysis of F and G Stars

Table A3. The abundances were obtained for a model with 𝑇eff = 5770 K, log 𝑔 = 4.40 cgs, and 𝜉 = 0.66 km s −1 for the solar
spectrum. 𝑇eff = 5600 K, log 𝑔 = 4.50 cgs, and 𝜉 = 0.44 km s −1 for the HD 218209 spectrum.
Sun HD 218209 Sun HD 218209
Spec. 𝜆 LEP log(𝑔 𝑓 ) EW log 𝜖(X) EW log 𝜖(X) RMT Ref. Spec. 𝜆 LEP log(𝑔 𝑓 ) EW log 𝜖(X) EW log 𝜖(X) RMT Ref.
(Å) (eV) (dex) (mÅ) (dex) (mÅ) (dex) (Å) (eV) (dex) (mÅ) (dex) (mÅ) (dex)
Ci 8335.19 7.65 -0.44 syn 8.41 syn 8.16 10 2 Sc ii 5526.82 1.77 -0.01 75.3 3.32 68.0 3.13 18 9
Ci 9111.85 7.46 -0.34 syn 8.56 syn 8.34 3 4 Sc ii 5640.99 1.5 -0.99 syn 3.12 syn 2.84 29 9
Oi 7771.96 9.11 0.37 syn 8.83 syn 8.73 1 2 Sc ii 5657.88 1.51 -0.54 67.1 3.39 57.4 3.14 29 9
Oi 7774.18 9.11 0.22 syn 8.83 syn 8.74 1 2 Sc ii 5667.15 1.50 -1.21 32.8 3.24 26.5 3.04 29 9
Oi 7775.40 9.11 0.00 syn 8.77 syn 8.69 1 2 Sc ii 5669.04 1.50 -1.10 34.2 3.16 28.1 2.97 29 9
Na i 5682.65 2.1 -0.7 syn 6.36 syn 5.87 6 2 Sc ii 6245.63 1.50 -1.02 34.0 3.05 30.4 2.92 28 2
Na i 5688.22 2.10 -0.37 122.1 6.11 101.1 5.73 6 4 Sc ii 6279.76 1.49 -1.33 28.6 3.22 21.0 2.97 28 3
Na i 6154.23 2.09 -1.55 36.9 6.27 22.9 5.89 5 2 Sc ii 6300.70 1.50 -1.90 7.1 3.02 – – 28 3
Na i 8183.26 2.09 0.22 201.9 6.13 183.1 5.79 4 3 Sc ii 6320.85 1.49 -1.82 9.0 3.05 – – 28 3
Mg i 4571.10 0.00 -5.40 syn 7.57 syn 7.58 1 5 Sc ii 6604.60 1.35 -1.31 35.3 3.21 30.9 3.06 19 2
Mg i 5711.10 4.34 -1.74 syn 7.63 syn 7.55 8 5 Ti i 4060.27 1.05 -0.69 syn 4.85 syn 4.51 80 10
Mg i 7657.60 5.09 -1.27 syn 7.64 syn 7.45 22 2 Ti i 4186.13 1.5 -0.24 syn 4.89 syn 4.67 129 10
Mg i 7691.57 5.73 -0.78 syn 7.65 syn 7.40 29 2 Ti i 4287.41 0.84 -0.37 68.6 5.02 73.2 4.94 44 10
Mg i 8213.02 5.73 -0.51 syn 7.60 syn 7.47 28 2 Ti i 4453.32 1.43 -0.03 66.6 5.19 64.7 5.00 113 10
Mg ii 7896.37 9.96 0.64 syn 7.63 syn – 8 2 Ti i 4465.81 1.74 -0.13 39.2 4.89 33.9 4.62 146 10
Al i 6695.97 3.13 -1.57 syn 6.48 syn 6.17 5 2 Ti i 4512.74 0.84 -0.40 66.8 4.96 65.8 4.76 42 10
Al i 6698.63 3.13 -1.87 syn 6.44 syn 6.07 5 2 Ti i 4518.03 0.83 -0.25 73.5 4.96 74.6 4.80 42 10
Al i 7362.31 4.00 -0.79 syn 6.38 syn 6.17 11 6 Ti i 4534.79 0.84 0.35 96.4 4.84 100.8 4.65 42 10
Al i 7835.33 4.00 -0.69 syn 6.45 syn 6.19 10 6 Ti i 4548.77 0.83 -0.28 71.5 4.94 76.3 4.86 270 10
Al i 7836.15 4.00 -0.50 syn 6.46 syn 6.19 10 6 Ti i 4555.49 0.85 -0.40 64.1 4.89 66.3 4.78 266 10
Al i 8772.88 4.00 -0.35 syn 6.43 syn 6.28 9 6 Ti i 4617.28 1.75 0.44 62.6 4.89 60.5 4.70 145 10
Al i 8773.91 4.00 -0.16 syn 6.43 syn 6.28 9 6 Ti i 4623.1 1.74 0.16 syn 4.95 syn 4.58 145 10
Al i 8841.26 4.07 -1.50 syn 6.42 syn 6.16 15 2 Ti i 4639.36 1.74 -0.05 syn 4.94 syn 4.58 145 10
Si i 5645.62 4.93 -2.03 35.0 7.49 25.1 7.23 10 7 Ti i 4639.66 1.75 -0.14 syn 5 syn 4.59 145 10
Si i 5665.56 4.92 -1.99 39.7 7.53 28.6 7.25 10 7 Ti i 4656.47 0.00 -1.28 71.3 5.11 71.4 4.94 6 10
Si i 5684.49 4.95 -1.58 60.1 7.51 46.3 7.21 11 7 Ti i 4722.61 1.05 -1.47 19.3 5.03 – – 75 10
Si i 5701.14 4.91 -2.05 38.5 7.55 28.8 7.31 10 2 Ti i 4742.80 2.24 0.21 31.2 4.82 31.4 4.70 233 10
Si i 5708.40 4.95 -1.47 72.1 7.59 60.1 7.33 10 2 Ti i 4758.12 2.25 0.51 42.9 4.81 45.1 4.74 233 10
Si i 5772.15 5.08 -1.62 51.1 7.51 40.7 7.27 17 7 Ti i 4759.28 2.25 0.59 46.3 4.81 44.9 4.65 233 10
Si i 5793.08 4.93 -1.86 43.2 7.47 30.1 7.16 9 7 Ti i 4820.41 1.50 -0.38 41.1 4.92 40.7 4.77 126 10
Si i 5948.54 5.08 -1.09 83.0 7.49 70.9 7.23 16 7 Ti i 4885.09 1.89 0.41 syn 4.93 syn 4.7 231 10
Si i 6125.03 5.61 -1.53 30.6 7.50 23.1 7.30 30 7 Ti i 4913.62 1.87 0.22 49.3 4.86 50.9 4.77 157 10
Si i 6142.49 5.62 -1.48 33.6 7.51 23.8 7.27 30 7 Ti i 4926.15 0.81 -2.17 6.6 4.92 – – 39 2
Si i 6145.02 5.61 -1.39 37.0 7.48 27.8 7.26 29 7 Ti i 4981.74 0.85 0.57 112.8 4.81 – – 38 10
Si i 6237.34 5.59 -0.98 58.7 7.41 46.1 7.16 28 3 Ti i 4999.51 0.83 0.32 103.4 4.90 – – 38 10
Si i 6244.48 5.61 -1.29 44.3 7.51 30.9 7.23 28 7 Ti i 5009.65 0.02 -2.2 syn 4.87 syn 4.63 5 10
Si i 6721.84 5.86 -0.94 42.2 7.32 – – – 2 Ti i 5016.17 0.85 -0.48 64.7 4.92 67.2 4.81 38 10
Si i 7003.58 5.94 -0.59 58.1 7.48 46.8 7.27 60 2 Ti i 5020.03 0.83 -0.33 77.5 5.05 76.6 4.84 38 10
Si i 7005.84 5.96 -0.59 72.8 7.48 67.4 7.35 60 2 Ti i 5022.87 0.83 -0.33 71.3 4.90 72.4 4.75 38 10
Si i 7034.96 5.85 -0.88 63.8 7.59 51.0 7.35 50 3 Ti i 5039.96 0.02 -1.08 76.2 4.97 77.8 4.82 5 10
Si i 7416.00 5.59 -0.75 87.1 7.45 – – 22 3 Ti i 5064.65 0.05 -0.94 85.3 5.08 80.9 4.78 294 10
Si i 7918.38 5.93 -0.61 79.7 7.58 – – 57 6 Ti i 5145.47 1.46 -0.54 36.9 4.92 35.7 4.74 109 10
Si i 9393.40 6.10 -1.53 13.3 7.35 – – 72 3 Ti i 5147.48 0.00 -1.94 37.1 4.87 38.5 4.71 4 10
Si i 9768.27 4.93 -2.68 27.0 7.78 – – 7 3 Ti i 5152.19 0.02 -1.95 36.5 4.88 35.8 4.68 4 10
Pi 9525.78 6.98 -0.12 syn 5.56 syn – – 2 Ti i 5192.98 0.02 -0.95 83.9 5.00 – – 4 10
Pi 9750.73 6.92 -0.20 syn syn – – 2 2 Ti i 5210.39 0.05 -0.82 90.0 5.02 – – 4 10
Pi 9796.79 6.99 0.19 syn 5.51 syn – – 2 Ti i 5219.71 0.02 -2.22 28.1 4.95 – – 4 10
Si 8693.98 7.84 -1.38 syn 7.15 – – 6 2 Ti i 5490.16 1.46 -0.84 22.6 4.84 23.5 4.71 107 10
Si 8694.70 7.84 0.05 syn 7.15 – – 6 2 Ti i 5866.46 1.07 -0.79 47.9 4.98 – – 72 10
Ca i 4512.27 2.52 -1.90 23.6 6.29 – – 24 3 Ti i 5918.55 1.06 -1.47 12.2 4.71 – – 71 2
Ca i 4526.94 2.70 -0.42 85.6 6.14 83.4 5.93 36 2 Ti i 5922.11 1.04 -1.47 20.1 4.96 22.6 4.86 72 2
Ca i 4578.56 2.52 -0.70 82.8 6.27 – – 23 8 Ti i 5978.54 1.87 -0.50 23.9 4.92 24.0 4.78 154 2
Ca i 5260.39 2.52 -1.72 32.7 6.30 25.7 6.03 22 8 Ti i 6126.22 1.07 -1.42 21.6 4.97 24.4 4.88 69 10
Ca i 5261.71 2.52 -0.58 98.6 6.47 90.7 6.18 22 8 Ti i 6258.11 1.44 -0.39 50.3 4.96 49.3 4.79 104 10
Ca i 5512.99 2.93 -0.46 86.2 6.38 81.4 6.15 48 8 Ti i 6261.11 1.43 -0.53 46.5 5.01 46.1 4.85 104 10
Ca i 5581.98 2.52 -0.56 92.9 6.34 – – 21 8 Ti i 6336.11 1.44 -1.69 5.3 4.88 – – 103 10
Ca i 5590.13 2.52 -0.57 92.0 6.34 – – 21 8 Ti i 6743.13 0.90 -1.63 18.4 4.88 – – 32 10
Ca i 6166.44 2.52 -1.14 70.3 6.33 68.2 6.13 20 8 Ti i 7216.20 1.44 -1.20 18.3 4.97 – – 98 10
Ca i 6169.04 2.52 -0.80 91.9 6.30 88.5 6.06 20 8 Ti i 7251.74 1.42 -0.76 33.7 4.89 31.7 4.69 99 10
Ca i 6169.56 2.52 -0.48 108.7 6.19 109.5 5.97 20 8 Ti i 7357.74 1.44 -1.02 22.6 4.90 – – 97 10
Ca i 6439.07 2.51 0.39 160.0 6.07 157.1 5.80 18 2 Ti i 8024.84 1.87 -1.08 10.6 4.94 – – 151 10
Ca i 6455.60 2.52 -1.34 55.4 6.34 48.2 6.10 19 8 Ti i 8364.24 0.83 -1.71 22.1 4.90 26.5 4.85 33 3
Ca i 6471.67 2.52 -0.69 90.5 6.36 88.2 6.17 18 8 Ti i 8396.93 0.81 -1.63 25.2 4.88 27.0 4.76 33 3
Ca i 6493.79 2.52 -0.11 122.7 6.22 124.3 6.03 18 8 Ti i 8412.36 0.81 -1.39 39.7 4.96 36.6 4.74 33 2
Ca i 6499.65 2.52 -0.82 86.1 6.41 80.8 6.18 18 8 Ti i 8426.50 0.82 -1.20 53.0 5.03 54.7 4.91 33 2
Ca i 6572.79 0 -4.32 syn 6.32 syn 6.15 1 8 Ti i 8434.98 0.84 -0.83 71.2 5.07 77.6 5.08 33 2
Ca i 7148.15 2.70 0.11 135.6 6.20 137.4 5.99 30 8 Ti i 8435.68 0.83 -1.02 61.7 5.06 66.0 5.02 33 2
Ca i 7202.19 2.70 -0.26 108.2 6.26 – – 29 3 Ti i 9027.32 1.73 -1.36 7.8 4.87 – – 138 3
Ca i 7326.15 2.92 -0.21 108.2 6.38 104.4 6.15 20 3 Ti i 9675.55 0.83 -0.80 78.6 5.04 70.7 4.76 32 3
Ca i 9663.58 4.71 -0.69 6.5 6.22 – – 55 3 Ti i 9718.96 1.50 -1.18 16.4 4.79 – – 124 3
Sc i 4023.69 0.02 0.38 syn 3.13 – – 7 9 Ti i 9728.36 0.81 -1.21 47.2 4.82 – – 32 3
Sc ii 4246.84 0.31 0.24 157.0 3.17 – – 7 9 Ti i 9770.28 0.84 -1.58 26.7 4.80 – – 32 3
Sc ii 5239.82 1.45 -0.76 syn 3.15 syn 2.82 26 9 Ti i 9787.67 0.82 -1.44 40.3 4.92 – – 32 3

17
Şahin et. al

Table A4. The abundances were obtained for a model with 𝑇eff = 5770 K, log 𝑔 = 4.40 cgs, and 𝜉 = 0.66 km s −1 for the solar
spectrum. 𝑇eff = 5600 K, log 𝑔 = 4.50 cgs, and 𝜉 = 0.44 km s −1 for the HD 218209 spectrum.
Sun HD 218209 Sun HD 218209
Spec. 𝜆 LEP log(𝑔 𝑓 ) EW log 𝜖(X) EW log 𝜖(X) RMT Ref. Spec. 𝜆 LEP log(𝑔 𝑓 ) EW log 𝜖(X) EW log 𝜖(X) RMT Ref.
(Å) (eV) (dex) (mÅ) (dex) (mÅ) (dex) (Å) (eV) (dex) (mÅ) (dex) (mÅ) (dex)
Ti ii 4443.81 1.08 -0.71 146.1 5.09 126.4 4.73 19 10 Ni i 4606.23 3.60 -1.02 syn 6.36 syn 5.89 100 2
Ti ii 4468.50 1.13 -0.63 syn 5.21 syn 4.85 31 10 Ni i 4731.80 3.83 -0.85 42.7 6.28 31.3 5.92 163 2
Ti ii 4493.53 1.08 -2.78 34.7 4.91 – – 18 10 Ni i 4732.47 4.10 -0.55 42.2 6.24 – – 235 2
Ti ii 4568.33 1.22 -2.65 29.7 4.78 – – 60 10 Ni i 4752.43 3.66 -0.69 syn 6.33 syn 5.8 132 2
Ti ii 4583.41 1.16 -2.84 31.3 4.95 – – 39 10 Ni i 4756.52 3.48 -0.34 syn 6.23 syn 5.74 98 2
Ti ii 4708.67 1.24 -2.35 50.7 5.01 46.2 4.87 49 10 Ni i 4806.99 3.68 -0.64 59.4 6.30 47.9 5.93 163 2
Ti ii 4874.01 3.09 -0.86 syn 4.95 syn 4.68 114 10 Ni i 4829.03 3.54 -0.33 77.1 6.17 67.4 5.83 131 2
Ti ii 4911.20 3.12 -0.64 51.2 5.10 46.1 5.00 114 10 Ni i 4852.56 3.54 -1.07 syn 6.29 syn 5.92 130 2
Ti ii 5005.17 1.57 -2.73 23.8 5.01 19.5 4.85 71 10 Ni i 4904.42 3.54 -0.17 84.9 6.14 74.7 5.79 129 2
Ti ii 5336.79 1.58 -1.60 72.0 5.08 – – 69 10 Ni i 4913.98 3.74 -0.62 53.9 6.20 41.5 5.82 132 2
Ti i 5418.77 1.58 -2.13 48.5 5.02 43.8 4.88 69 10 Ni i 4935.83 3.94 -0.36 58.5 6.20 48.9 5.89 177 2
Vi 4437.84 0.29 -0.71 syn 3.89 syn – 21 11 Ni i 4946.03 3.80 -1.29 25.9 6.29 15.2 5.87 148 2
Vi 5727.06 1.08 -0.02 syn 3.89 – – 35 11 Ni i 4953.21 3.74 -0.66 54.8 6.26 44.4 5.92 111 2
Vi 6090.18 1.08 -0.07 syn 3.93 syn 3.52 34 2 Ni i 4998.23 3.61 -0.78 54.8 6.26 – – 111 2
Vi 6119.53 1.06 -0.36 syn 3.94 syn 3.6 34 11 Ni i 5010.94 3.63 -0.87 48.0 6.21 34.2 5.80 144 2
Vi 6243.11 0.30 -0.94 syn 3.88 syn 3.52 19 11 Ni i 5032.73 3.90 -1.27 24.1 6.31 – – 207 2
Cr i 4545.96 0.94 -1.38 83.5 5.70 75.5 5.33 10 2 Ni i 5035.37 3.63 0.29 97.6 5.91 89.5 5.60 143 2
Cr i 4616.13 0.98 -1.18 87.7 5.64 79.4 5.27 21 2 Ni i 5042.19 3.64 -0.57 59.0 6.15 51.0 5.85 131 2
Cr i 4626.18 0.97 -1.32 81.5 5.62 75.7 5.31 21 2 Ni i 5048.85 3.85 -0.37 syn 6.26 syn 5.86 195 2
Cr i 4646.17 1.03 -0.71 syn 5.71 syn 5.16 21 2 Ni i 5082.35 3.66 -0.54 63.6 6.23 – – 130 2
Cr i 4651.29 0.98 -1.46 78.3 5.69 72.9 5.40 21 2 Ni i 5084.10 3.68 0.03 89.1 6.10 – – 162 2
Cr i 4652.17 1.00 -1.03 99.7 5.72 90.5 5.34 21 2 Ni i 5088.54 3.85 -0.91 32.1 6.12 – – 190 2
Cr i 4708.02 3.17 0.11 58.0 5.58 44.0 5.16 186 2 Ni i 5102.97 1.68 -2.62 47.3 6.12 – – 49 2
Cr i 4718.42 3.19 0.10 65.8 5.75 55.0 5.40 186 2 Ni i 5115.40 3.83 -0.11 74.8 6.17 60.6 5.76 177 2
Cr i 4730.72 3.08 -0.19 48.5 5.65 37.1 5.28 145 2 Ni i 5155.13 3.90 -0.66 49.0 6.27 35.2 5.86 206 2
Cr i 4737.35 3.07 -0.10 55.5 5.65 42.7 5.25 145 2 Ni i 5435.87 1.99 -2.60 50.9 6.47 40.7 6.10 70 2
Cr i 4756.12 3.10 0.09 63.2 5.76 54.2 5.44 145 2 Ni i 5587.87 1.93 -2.14 syn 6.23 syn 5.69 70 2
Cr i 4936.34 3.11 -0.34 44.8 5.73 31.8 5.31 166 2 Ni i 5593.75 3.90 -0.84 42.0 6.27 – – 206 2
Cr i 4964.93 0.94 -2.53 38.6 5.65 27.3 5.21 9 2 Ni i 5625.33 4.09 -0.70 39.0 6.25 24.5 5.82 221 2
Cr i 5247.57 0.96 -1.63 83.4 5.79 72.6 5.38 18 2 Ni i 5637.12 4.09 -0.80 33.8 6.23 21.4 5.83 218 2
Cr i 5296.70 0.98 -1.41 93.5 5.77 79.7 5.31 18 2 Ni i 5641.89 4.10 -1.08 23.5 6.27 – – 234 2
Cr i 5300.75 0.98 -2.13 58.4 5.72 45.4 5.26 18 2 Ni i 5682.21 4.10 -0.47 51.5 6.29 37.7 5.90 232 2
Cr i 5345.81 1.00 -0.98 114.5 5.68 – – 18 2 Ni i 5748.36 1.68 -3.26 29.1 6.26 – – 45 2
Cr i 5348.33 1.00 -1.29 99.8 5.77 – – 18 2 Ni i 5805.23 4.17 -0.64 40.4 6.29 24.6 5.83 234 2
Cr i 5787.93 3.32 -0.08 45.2 5.60 31.8 5.19 188 2 Ni i 6007.32 1.68 -3.34 24.9 6.21 17.6 5.85 42 2
Cr i 6925.24 3.43 -0.33 37.9 5.75 – – 222 2 Ni i 6086.29 4.26 -0.51 42.3 6.27 29.4 5.89 249 2
Cr i 6926.04 3.43 -0.62 20.5 5.61 – – 222 3 Ni i 6108.12 1.68 -2.44 65.2 6.27 55.1 5.91 45 2
Cr i 6979.82 3.45 -0.41 34.7 5.74 – – 222 2 Ni i 6128.98 1.68 -3.32 25.3 6.20 17.0 5.81 42 2
Cr i 7400.23 2.89 -0.11 75.4 5.58 – – 93 2 Ni i 6130.14 4.26 -0.96 21.1 6.22 14.6 5.93 248 2
Cr i 8348.28 2.70 -1.87 13.1 5.83 – – 56 3 Ni i 6175.37 4.09 -0.54 47.4 6.24 33.7 5.85 217 2
Cr i 8947.20 3.09 -0.75 28.1 5.49 – – 142 3 Ni i 6176.82 4.09 -0.53 63.1 6.53 – – 228 2
Cr i 8976.88 3.07 -1.03 18.5 5.50 – – 142 3 Ni i 6204.61 4.09 -1.14 20.9 6.23 – – 226 2
Cr i 9290.44 2.53 -0.88 58.6 5.69 – – 29 3 Ni i 6322.17 4.15 -1.17 17.4 6.20 10.3 5.84 249 2
Cr i 9730.32 3.54 -0.77 12.9 5.45 – – 226 3 Ni i 6327.60 1.68 -3.15 41.5 6.40 27.2 5.92 44 2
Cr i 9900.87 2.97 -2.14 5.2 5.81 – – 80 3 Ni i 6378.26 4.15 -0.90 31.7 6.31 – – 247 2
Cr ii 4588.20 4.07 -0.65 70.9 5.67 – – 44 12 Ni i 6414.59 4.15 -1.21 17.2 6.24 – – 244 2
Cr ii 4616.64 4.05 -1.29 45.2 5.65 31.7 5.33 44 2 Ni i 6482.81 1.93 -2.63 41.1 6.11 27.9 5.67 66 2
Cr ii 5237.32 4.07 -1.17 53.2 5.76 35.3 5.33 43 12 Ni i 6598.61 4.23 -0.98 24.3 6.28 15.2 5.92 249 2
Cr ii 5305.87 3.83 -1.91 25.2 5.50 14.4 5.17 24 12 Ni i 6635.14 4.42 -0.83 24.6 6.32 17.6 6.04 264 2
Mn i 4055.55 2.14 -0.08 syn 5.47 syn 4.92 5 13 Ni i 6767.78 1.83 -2.17 77.9 6.41 – – 57 2
Mn i 4082.94 2.18 -0.36 syn 5.55 syn 4.84 5 13 Ni i 6772.32 3.66 -0.99 48.5 6.26 – – 127 4
Mn i 4451.59 2.89 0.28 syn 5.47 syn 4.83 22 13 Ni i 6914.56 1.94 -2.27 77.9 6.56 – – 62 2
Mn i 4470.14 2.94 -0.44 syn 5.49 syn 4.92 22 13 Ni i 7030.06 3.53 -1.83 19.8 6.33 – – 126 3
Mn i 4502.22 2.92 -0.34 syn 5.34 syn 4.74 22 13 Ni i 7110.91 1.93 -2.97 36.2 6.30 24.5 5.88 64 2
Mn i 4709.72 2.89 -0.49 syn 5.36 syn 4.75 21 13 Ni i 7385.24 2.73 -1.96 45.2 6.28 33.5 5.91 84 2
Mn i 4739.11 2.94 -0.61 syn 5.39 syn 4.73 21 13 Ni i 7422.30 3.62 -0.13 90.5 5.99 – – 139 2
Mn i 4765.86 2.94 -0.09 syn 5.45 syn 4.75 21 13 Ni i 7522.78 3.64 -0.47 73.9 6.29 66.6 6.04 126 3
Mn i 4766.42 2.92 0.10 syn 5.41 syn 4.83 21 13 Ni i 7525.14 3.62 -0.43 69.0 6.14 57.7 5.81 139 3
Mn i 4783.42 2.30 0.03 syn 5.60 syn 4.84 16 13 Ni i 7555.60 3.83 0.05 90.3 6.23 77.6 5.88 187 3
Mn i 5117.94 3.13 -1.20 syn 5.45 – – 32 13 Ni i 7574.08 3.82 -0.45 63.5 6.23 49.5 5.84 156 3
Mn i 5432.55 0.00 -3.79 5.33 syn 4.73 1 13 Ni i 7727.66 3.66 -0.17 87.2 6.23 70.5 5.82 156 3
Mn i 6013.50 3.06 -0.25 syn 5.46 syn 4.8 27 2 Ni i 7748.93 3.69 -0.18 84.5 6.22 75.8 5.94 156 3
Mn i 6021.80 3.07 -0.05 syn 5.56 syn 4.94 27 13 Ni i 7797.62 3.88 -0.18 75.1 6.22 63.8 5.90 201 3
Co i 4121.33 0.92 -0.33 syn 5.05 – – 28 14 Ni i 8965.94 4.09 -0.89 39.4 6.30 – – 225 3
Co i 4792.86 3.24 0.00 syn 4.89 syn 4.54 158 3 Cu i 5105.54 1.38 -1.50 syn 4.25 syn 3.8 2 2
Co i 4813.48 3.21 0.12 syn 5.04 syn 4.59 158 14 Cu i 5218.20 3.80 0.26 syn 4.11 syn 3.56 3.57 2
Co i 5352.05 3.58 0.06 syn 4.89 syn 4.40 172 14 Cu i 7933.13 3.77 -0.37 syn 4.21 – – 6 3
Co i 5483.36 1.71 -1.50 syn 4.94 syn 4.54 39 14 Cu i 8092.63 3.80 -0.04 syn 4.23 syn 3.72 6 3
Co i 5647.23 2.27 -1.56 syn 4.94 syn 4.46 112 2 Zn i 4722.16 4.03 -0.39 syn 4.64 syn 4.49 2 15
Co i 6093.15 1.74 -2.40 syn 4.94 – – 37 14 Zn i 4810.54 4.08 -0.17 syn 4.63 syn 4.42 2 15
Co i 8093.93 4.00 0.29 syn 4.94 syn 4.38 189 2 Sr i 4607.34 0.00 0.28 syn 2.84 syn 2.29 2 16
Ni i 4410.52 3.31 -1.08 55.6 6.33 – – 88 2 Y ii 4883.69 1.08 0.07 syn 2.3 syn 1.8 22 17
Ni i 4470.48 3.40 -0.40 80.5 6.24 71.5 5.90 86 2 Y ii 5087.43 1.08 -0.17 syn 2.27 syn 1.74 20 17

18
 An Up to date line list for spectroscopic analysis of F and G Stars

Table A5. The abundances were obtained for a model with 𝑇eff = 5770 K, log 𝑔 = 4.40 cgs, and 𝜉 = 0.66 km s −1 for the solar
spectrum. 𝑇eff = 5600 K, log 𝑔 = 4.50 cgs, and 𝜉 = 0.44 km s −1 for the HD 218209 spectrum.
Sun HD 218209 Sun HD 218209
Spec. 𝜆 LEP log(𝑔 𝑓 ) EW log 𝜖(X) EW log 𝜖(X) RMT Ref. Spec. 𝜆 LEP log(𝑔 𝑓 ) EW log 𝜖(X) EW log 𝜖(X) RMT Ref.
(Å) (eV) (dex) (mÅ) (dex) (mÅ) (dex) (Å) (eV) (dex) (mÅ) (dex) (mÅ) (dex)
Zr i 4772.32 0.62 0.04 syn 2.53 – – 43 3 Ce ii 4042.14 0.50 0.00 syn 1.60 – – 252 2
Zr ii 4208.98 0.71 -0.46 syn 2.6 – – 41 18 Ce ii 4562.37 0.48 0.21 syn 1.63 syn 1.49 1 20
Zr ii 4050.32 0.71 -1.06 syn 2.62 syn 2.29 43 3 Ce ii 4628.16 0.52 0.14 syn 1.56 – – 1 20
Ba ii 4554.04 0.00 0.14 syn 2.3 syn 1.99 1 19 Nd ii 4021.33 0.32 -0.10 syn 1.38 – – 36 3
Ba ii 5853.69 0.60 -0.91 syn 2.33 syn 1.98 2 19 Nd ii 4446.40 0.20 -0.35 syn 1.33 syn 1.07 49 3
La ii 4086.72 0.00 -0.07 syn 1.2 syn 0.76 10 2 Nd ii 4567.61 0.20 -1.31 syn 1.37 – – 49 3
La ii 4662.51 0.00 -1.25 syn 1.13 – – 8 2 Sm ii 4519.63 0.54 -0.35 syn 0.94 syn 0.72 49 21
La ii 4748.73 0.92 -0.54 syn 1.1 syn 0.83 65 2 Sm ii 4577.69 0.25 -0.65 syn 0.96 – – 23 21

References for the adopted 𝑔 𝑓 -values: (1) Fuhr & Wiese (2006), (2) NIST Atomic Spectra Database
(http://physics.nist.gov/PhysRefData/ASD), (3) VALD, (4) Takeda et al. (2003), (5) Pehlivan Rhodin et al. (2017), (6)Kelleher
& Podobedova (2008), (7) Shi et al. (2011), (8) Den Hartog et al. (2021), (9) Lawler et al. (2019), (10) Lawler et al. (2013), (11)
Lawler et al. (2017), (12) Lawler et al. (2017), (13) Den Hartog et al. (2011), (14) Lawler et al. (2015), (15) Biemont & Godefroid
(1980), (16) Hansen et al. (2013), (17) Hannaford et al. (1982), (18) Biemont et al. (1981), (19) Klose et al. (2002), (20) Lawler
et al. (2009), (21) Lawler et al. (2006)

Table A6. Solar abundances from the literature. The abundances for species in bold type face are obtained via spectrum synthesis.

Species log 𝜖 ⊙ (X† ) 𝑛 log 𝜖 ⊙ (X∗ ) 𝑛 ASP09/ASP21 LOD GRE CAF HOL BIE LAM
(dex) (1),(2) (3) (4) (5-10) (11) (12) (13)
Ci 8.50±0.07 2 - - 8.43±0.05 / 8.46±0.04 8.39±0.04 8.39±0.05 8.50±0.06 8.592±0.108 8.60±0.10 8.67±0.10
Oi 8.85±0.04 3 - - 8.69±0.05 / 8.69±0.04 8.73±0.07 8.66±0.05 8.76±0.07 8.736±0.078 - 8.92±0.04
Na i 6.17±0.09 3 6.16±0.07 2 6.24±0.04 / 6.22±0.03 6.30±0.03 6.17±0.04 - - - -
Mg i 7.64±0.06 5 7.60±0.08 2 7.60±0.04 / 7.55±0.03 7.54±0.06 7.53±0.09 - 7.538±0.060 - -
Mg ii 7.67±0.00 1 - - 7.60±0.04/ 7.55±0.03 7.54±0.06 7.53±0.09 - - - -
Al i 6.45±0.02 8 - - 6.45±0.03 / 6.43±0.03 6.47±0.07 6.37±0.06 - - - -
Si i 7.50 ±0.09 21 7.50±0.07 12 7.51±0.03 / 7.51±0.03 7.52±0.06 7.51±0.04 - 7.536±0.049 - -
Pi 5.44±0.00 1 - - 5.41±0.03 / 5.41±0.03 5.46±0.04 5.36±0.04 5.46±0.04 - - -
Si 7.15±0.00 2 - - 7.12±0.03 / 7.12±0.03 7.14±0.01 7.14±0.05 7.16±0.05 - - -
Ca i 6.29±0.10 20 6.34±0.08 18 6.34±0.04 / 6.30±0.03 6.33±0.07 6.31±0.04 - - - -
Sc i 3.13±0.00 1 3.12±0.00 1 3.15±0.04 / 3.14±0.04 3.10±0.10 3.17±0.10 - - - -
Sc ii 3.18±0.11 10 3.23±0.08 7 3.15±0.04 / 3.14±0.04 3.10±0.10 3.17±0.10 - - - -
Ti i 4.92±0.09 56 4.96±0.09 43 4.95±0.05 / 4.97±0.05 4.90±0.06 4.90±0.06 - - - -
Ti ii 4.99±0.10 9 4.99±0.08 12 4.95±0.05 / 4.97±0.05 4.90±0.06 4.90±0.0 - - - -
Vi 3.92±0.02 5 3.99±0.05 5 3.93± 0.08 / 3.90±0.08 4.00±0.02 4.00±0.02 - - - -
Cr i 5.67±0.10 28 5.71±0.07 19 5.64±0.04 / 5.62±0.04 5.64±0.01 5.64±0.10 - - - -
Cr ii 5.64±0.11 4 5.64±0.14 3 5.64±0.04 / 5.62±0.04 5.64±0.01 5.64±0.10 - - - -
Mn i 5.61±0.16 11 5.62±0.13 13 5.43±0.05 / 5.42±0.06 5.37±0.05 5.39±0.03 - - - -
Fe i 7.49±0.11 252 7.54±0.09 132 7.50±0.04 / 7.46±0.04 7.45±0.08 7.45±0.05 7.52±0.12 7.448±0.082 7.54±0.03 7.48±0.09
Fe ii 7.49±0.09 28 7.51±0.04 17 7.50±0.04 / 7.46±0.04 7.45±0.08 7.45±0.05 7.52±0.06 - 7.51±0.01 -
Co i 4.96±0.06 8 - - 4.99±0.07 / 4.94±0.05 4.92±0.08 4.99±0.07 - - 4.92±0.08 4.92±0.08
Ni i 6.24±0.10 60 6 .28±0.09 54 6.22±0.04 / 6.20±0.04 6.23±0.04 6.23±0.04 - - - -
Cu i 4.19±0.06 4 - - 4.19±0.02 / 4.18±0.05 4.21±0.04 4.21±0.04 - - - -
Zn i 4.63±0.00 2 4.68±0.03 2 4.56±0.05 / 4.56±0.05 4.62±0.15 4.60±0.03 - - 4.60±0.03 4.60±0.08
Sr i 2.89±0.00 1 2.91±0.00 1 2.87±0.07 / 2.83±0.06 2.92±0.05 2.92±0.05 - - - -
Y ii 2.28±0.01 2 2.29±0.05 2 2.21±0.05 / 2.21±0.05 2.21±0.02 2.21±0.02 - - - -
Zr ii 2.59±0.08 2 2.68±0.00 1 2.58±0.04 / 2.59±0.04 2.58±0.02 2.58±0.02 - - 2.56±0.05 -
Ba ii 2.29±0.06 2 2.24±0.06 4 2.18±0.09 / 2.27±0.05 2.17±0.07 2.17±0.07 - - - -
La ii 1.11±0.06 3 - - 1.10±0.04 / 1.11±0.04 1.14±0.03 1.13±0.05 - - - -
Ce ii 1.59±0.04 3 1.64±0.02 2 1.58±0.04 / 1.58±0.04 1.61±0.06 1.70±0.10 - - 1.70±0.04 -
Nd ii 1.37±0.01 3 1.42±0.05 3 1.42±0.04 / 1.42±0.04 1.45±0.05 1.45±0.05 - - - -
Sm ii 0.96±0.02 2 0.96±0.00 1 0.96±0.04 / 0.95±0.04 1.00±0.05 1.00±0.03 - - - -

X† : This study (TS), X∗ : Şahin et al. (2023), (1) Asplund et al. (2009), (2) Asplund et al. (2021), (3) Lodders et al. (2009), (4)
Grevesse et al. (2007), (5) Caffau et al. (2007), (6) Caffau et al. (2008), (7) Caffau et al. (2009), (8) Caffau et al. (2010), (9) Caffau
et al. (2011), (10) Caffau et al. (2019), (11) Holweger (2001), (12) Biemont et al. (1993), (13) Lambert (1978).

19
Şahin et. al

Table A7. The elemental abundances of HD 218209 from the literature for respective elements.

Species TS24 TA23 RI20 LU17 DA15 MI11/13 TA07 VA05 MI04 GE04 AB88
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11)
(LTE/NLTE)

Ci 0.14 -0.08 0.18 -0.01

Oi 0.28 0.08 0.42 0.22
Na i -0.03 0.03 0.06 -0.02 0.10 0.23/0.16
Mg i 0.24 0.17 0.29 0.18 0.19 0.19 0.41/0.43
Al i 0.13 0.21 0.26 0.26 0.27/0.47 0.45
Si i 0.13 0.17 0.15 0.15 0.18 0.26 0.20 0.18 0.18
Ca i 0.15 0.12 0.19 0.13 -0.35 0.26
Sc ii 0.06 0.15
Ti i 0.21 0.24 0.21 0.20 0.03 0.23
Vi -0.02 0.17 0.16 0.13 0.03
Cr i -0.02 -0.07 0.03
Cr ii 0.01
Mn i -0.27 -0.27 -0.14 -0.16
Co i -0.10 0.08 0.13
Ni i -0.02 0.01 -0.01 0.04 0.00 0.01 0.04 0.19
Cu i -0.13 -0.03 -0.07 -0.02
Zn i 0.20 0.12 0.14
Sr i -0.18 0.10
Y ii -0.14 0.02 0.08 -0.04
Zr ii 0.05 0.26 0.01
Ba ii 0.04 0.04 -0.01
La ii 0.03 0.63 0.09
Ce ii 0.26 0.28 -0.02
Nd i 0.08 0.32 0.15
Sm ii 0.14 0.26 0.13

(1) This Study, (2) Takeda (2023, TA23), (3) Rice & Brewer (2020, RI20), (4) Luck (2017, LU17), (5) da Silva et al. (2015,
DA15), (6) Mishenina et al. (2011, MI11), (6) Mishenina et al. (2013, MI13), (7) Takeda et al. (2007, TA07), (8) Valenti & Fischer
(2005, VA05), (9) Mishenina et al. (2004, MI04), (10) Gehren et al. (2004, GE04), (11) Abia et al. (1988, AB88).

20
 An Up to date line list for spectroscopic analysis of F and G Stars

Figure 3. An example for the determination of the atmospheric parameters 𝑇eff and 𝜉 using abundance (log 𝜖) as a function of both
lower LEP (panels a and b) and reduced EW (panels c) for the Sun and HD 218209. In all panels, the solid red line represents the
least-squares fit to the data.

21
Şahin et. al

Figure 4. The figure presents observed (filled circles) and computed (full blue line) line profiles for C i 9 111 Å, O i 7 772 Å, Mg i
5 711 Å, and Cu i 5 105 Å in both the Sun (upper panels) and HD 218209 (bottom panels). The computed profiles represent the
synthetic spectra derived from three logarithmic abundances. The red lines depict the spectra computed without considering the
contributions from ionized metal lines.

Figure 5. The figure displays the telluric-free Solar spectrum obtained from Baker et al. (2020), along with the number of identified
lines within each 50 Å region of the spectrum. The 4 000 - 5 000 Å spectral range is based on solar data from Kurucz et al. (1984),
while the 5 000 - 10 000 Å range utilizes the telluric-free Solar spectrum (BTFS) provided by Baker et al. (2020).

22
 An Up to date line list for spectroscopic analysis of F and G Stars

Figure A1. The normalized blue colour spectrum is the IAG spectrum, and the red colour spectrum is the ZENODO spectrum.

Figure A2. The dispersion test for Ti, Cr, and Fe. The standard deviations of Ti, Cr, and Fe abundances for a suite of the Ti i,
Cr i, Fe i, and Fe ii lines as a function of 𝜉 were provided. The stellar parameters reported in the literature for the star exhibit large
variations (the middle panel). The faint blue area in the image represents errors in the model parameters.

23