Astronomy & Astrophysics manuscript no.

main ©ESO 2025

January 7, 2025

Dynamics of the Beta Pictoris planetary system and possibility of

an additional planet
A. Lacquement1 , H. Beust1 , V. Faramaz-Gorka2 , and G. Duchêne1, 3

1
Univ. Grenoble Alpes, CNRS, IPAG, 38000 Grenoble, France
2
Department of Astronomy and Steward Observatory, University of Arizona, 933 N Cherry Ave., Tucson, AZ 85719, USA
3
Department of Astronomy, University of California, Berkeley, CA 94720, USA

Received October 16, 2024 / Accepted December 27, 2024

ABSTRACT
arXiv:2501.03143v1 [astro-ph.EP] 6 Jan 2025

Context. The β Pictoris system is a well-known young planetary system, extensively studied for more than 40 years. It is characterized
by a dusty debris disk, in addition to the presence of two already known planets. This makes it a particularly interesting case for study-
ing the formation and evolution of planetary systems at a stage where giant planets have already formed, most of the protoplanetary
gas has dissipated, and terrestrial planets could emerge.
Aims. Our goal here is to explore the possibility of additional planets orbiting beyond the outermost known one, β Pictoris b. More
specifically, we aim to assess whether additional planets in the system could explain the discrepancy between the predicted cutoff of
the disk inner cavity at ∼28 au with only two planets, and the observed one at ∼50 au.
Methods. We perform an exhaustive dynamical modeling of the debris disk and the carving of its inner edge, by introducing one or
two additional planets beyond β Pictoris b, coplanar with the disk. Guided by theoretical predictions for the parameter space – mass,
semi-major axis, eccentricity – allowed for additional planets, we further carry out a set of N-body simulations, using the symplectic
integrator RMVS3.
Results. Our simulations indicate that an additional planet with a low eccentricity of 0.05, a mass between 0.15 and 1 MJup , and a
semi-major axis between 30 and 36 au, would be consistent with the observations of an inner debris disk edge at 50 au. We have also
explored the hypotheses of a higher eccentricity and the presence of two additional lower mass planets instead of one, which could
also account for these observations.
Conclusions. While we have found that one or even two additional planets could explain the observed location of the disk inner edge,
these hypothetical planets remain in most cases below the current observational limits of high contrast imaging. Future observational
campaigns with improved sensitivity will help lowering these limits and perhaps detect that planet.
Key words. Gravitational dynamics, Symplectic N-body codes, Exoplanets, Planetary systems, Circumstellar matter

1. Introduction ies. These planetesimals serve as a reservoir, capable of sus-

taining dust production throughout the lifetime of stars, either
The star β Pictoris (hereafter β Pic) is a young (18.5+2.0−2.4 Myr, through slow evaporation (Lecavelier Des Etangs et al. 1996) or
Miret-Roig et al. 2020) and nearby (19.63 ± 0.06 pc, Gaia Col- collisions (Backman & Paresce 1993; Artymowicz 1997).
laboration 2020) southern star that has consistently captured the
attention of astronomers since the discovery of its circumstellar By observing the dust and understanding the mechanisms be-
dust disk by Smith & Terrile (1984), the first of its kind ever im- hind particle production and movement, it is possible to deduce
aged. Earlier that same year, the presence of circumstellar dust the structure of the planetesimal reservoir from which the dust
had also been inferred for the first time through infrared obser- originates. However, this connection is rarely straightforward.
vations of Vega (Aumann et al. 1984). Since these groundbreak- Radiation pressure causes small dust particles to deviate from the
ing discoveries, it has been established that at least ∼20% of orbits of their parent bodies, often reaching apoastrons far from
FGK stars host such a circumstellar dust disk (Eiroa et al. 2013; their initial production sites (Lecavelier Des Etangs et al. 1996).
Sibthorpe et al. 2018). Some of these particles have even been observed in scattered
Initially, the observed dust was believed to be of primi- light at significant distances from β Pic (see, e.g., Janson et al.
tive origin. However, Backman & Paresce (1993) demonstrated 2021). To address this complexity in the β Pic’s system, models
that this dust is too short-lived for that paradigm to be valid. have been developed to constrain the distribution of parent bod-
Indeed, the lifetime of dust grains, when considering removal ies based on the observed dust. Several authors have made obser-
mechanisms such as radiation pressure, collisions, and Poynting- vations and/or proposed models suggesting that the inner edge of
Robertson drag (see, e.g., the review by Krivov 2010), is shorter the disk begins at ∼50 au (Augereau et al. 2001; Dent et al. 2014;
by orders of magnitude than the ages of the stars around which Apai et al. 2015; Ballering et al. 2016). However, the edge-on
they are detected. Consequently, this dust is understood to be orientation of β Pic’s disk causes irregularities at its inner edge
second-generation material, widely believed to be continuously in these models due to projection effects, introducing significant
replenished by an underlying population of kilometer-sized bod- uncertainty into the estimates. This problem also occurs at mil-
limetre wavelengths. Millimeter emission is a valuable tool for
Send offprint requests to: A. Lacquement directly revealing the structure of planetesimal disks. It is domi-
Article number, page 1 of 8
 A&A proofs: manuscript no. main

nated by large dust particles, which are only minimally affected this role, and we constrain the characteristics of this hypotheti-
by radiation pressure, follow the same orbits as their parent bod- cal planet. In Sect. 4, we consider alternative scenarios, such as
ies, and remain close to them. However, excellent resolution at a more eccentric planet or the presence of two additional planets
these wavelengths is crucial for obtaining accurate information instead of one. We present our conclusions in Sect. 5.
about the inner edge of the disk in this edge-on configuration.
For example, Matrà et al. (2019) reports observations with at
least twice the resolution of Dent et al. (2014), confirming an 2. Exploration with the two known planets
inner edge of the disk at ∼50 au. Here, we focus on the dynamical effects of the two known plan-
The debris disk around β Pic is one of the most extensively ets in the β Pic system on the debris disk’s inner edge and demon-
studied, offering valuable insights into the dynamical and evo- strate that they are insufficient to create this edge at 50 au.
lutionary processes of disks interacting with planets. To date,
at least one giant planet has been hypothesized to explain var-
ious phenomena observed in the disk. For example, the mis- 2.1. Semi-analytical theory
alignment between its inner and outer regions (Mouillet et al. According to the theory proposed by Wisdom (1980) and Mustill
1997), the asymmetries observed between the two arms of the & Wyatt (2012), a planet can create a gap in a disk when its first-
disk (Kalas & Jewitt 1995; Heap et al. 2000), and the recurring order mean-motion resonances j : j ± 1 overlap. This overlap is
detection of exocomets in the star’s spectrum (Beust & Mor- inevitable for a certain value of j, because as j increases, the res-
bidelli 2000), all suggest the gravitational influence of at least onances are progressively located closer to the planet and closer
one planet (Augereau et al. 2001). Indeed, a planet has been ob- to each other. Wisdom (1980) provides an estimate for the criti-
served. β Pic b, a gas giant with a mass of ∼12 MJup , was detected cal value of j at which this overlap occurs as
using high-contrast imaging techniques (Lagrange et al. 2009).
Its orbit has since been refined through regular monitoring, re- joverlap = 0.51µ−2/7 , (1)
vealing a moderately eccentric orbit with an eccentricity of ∼0.1
at a distance of ∼10 au from the star (Lacour et al. 2021). where µ is the ratio of planetary to stellar mass. The location of
Since then, a number of intriguing features have been identi- this critical resonance provides an estimate of the chaotic zone,
fied in the disk, potentially linked to dynamical gravitational in- and consequently, the size of the gap in terms of semi-major axis,
teractions with planets. Mid-infrared observations have revealed given by
a large dust clump on the western side of the disk (Telesco et al.  δa 
2005). Submillimeter observations by Atacama Large Millime- = 1.3µ2/7 , (2)
ter/submillimeter Array (ALMA) have also detected a concen- a chaos
tration of CO coinciding spatially with this dust clump (Dent
where the full gap size, including both the inner and outer re-
et al. 2014; Matrà et al. 2017). However, its nature remains un-
gions relative to the planet’s orbit, should be about twice this
certain. If the clump is in motion, it could indicate the pres-
value. Mustill & Wyatt (2012) highlight that this result depends
ence of a gas vortex, potentially caused by an unseen planet
on the planet’s eccentricity. Equation (2) remains valid for small
trapping the dust (Skaf et al. 2023). Conversely, a stationary
eccentricities, up to a critical eccentricity estimated to
clump might result from a past massive collision (Han et al.
2023), possibly consistent with the "cat’s tail" recently observed ecrit = 0.21µ3/7 . (3)
by James Webb Space Telescope (JWST), which may represent
debris from a collision between two large planetesimals (Rebol- For larger planet eccentricities, a new regime applies where
lido et al. 2024). It should be noted that these features are located  δa 
much further out in the disk than the region studied in this work, = 1.8e1/5 µ1/5 . (4)
although there may be a link with the dynamical gravitational a chaos
interactions of planets closer to the star.
Let us assume that the inner edge of the planetesimal disk is
Furthermore, a second planet, another gas giant with a mass
shaped by β Pic b, as β Pic c orbits much closer to the star. A
of approximately 8 MJup , β Pic c, has been detected. It was
numerical application using β Pic b’s parameters gives a critical
discovered through radial velocity monitoring (Lagrange et al.
eccentricity of ecrit ≃ 0.02. In this case, the large eccentricity
2019) and subsequently confirmed by high-contrast imaging
regime described by Eq. (4) applies, leading to a chaotic zone
(Nowak et al. 2020). This planet, while slightly less massive than
width of (δa/a)chaos ≃ 0.4. This places the outer edge of the gap
β Pic b, orbits closer to the star at ∼3 au, following a more ec-
at ∼14 au. This implies that the two known planets β Pic b and
centric orbit with an eccentricity of ∼0.3 (Lacour et al. 2021).
β Pic c alone lack the capacity to carve the disk up to 50 au,
Our goal in this paper is to establish a connection between
suggesting the presence of an additional planet.
the β Pic’s planetary system and the structure of the planetesi-
However, this result should be interpreted with caution, as
mal disk, particularly the inner cavity at ∼50 au. We assume this
the formulae used in Wisdom (1980) and Mustill & Wyatt (2012)
cavity is shaped by the gravitational influence of the planets, ne-
are asymptotically valid for large j. Here, due to the high mass of
glecting other dynamical effects that remain poorly constrained
β Pic b, the overlap of the mean-motion resonances near β Pic b
today. We will adopt an age of 20 Myr for the β Pic system and
occurs at joverlap ≃ 2, which is not particularly large.
assume that the inner edge of the disk lies precisely at 50 au.
Another possible semi-analytical prediction that accounts for
However, it is important to recognise the uncertainties associated
the high mass of β Pic b is based on the work of Morrison &
with this model, as the results can be refined with the arrival of
Malhotra (2015). These authors showed that the size of the outer
new, more precise observations. In Sect. 2, we first conduct a nu-
chaotic zone, when the planet-to-star mass ratio µ exceeds 10−4 ,
merical exploration of the gravitational effects of the two known
is described by
planets, concluding that they cannot sculpt the disk up to 50 au.
In Sect. 3, we explore the possibility of an additional, yet-to-  δa 
be-discovered planet orbiting outside β Pic b that could fulfill = 1.7µ0.31 . (5)
a chaos
Article number, page 2 of 8
 A. Lacquement et al.: Dynamics of the β Pictoris planetary system

Fig. 1. Preliminary simulation of the dynamics of the β Pic planetary system with only the two planets known to date, β Pic b (red) and β Pic c
(blue), and the disk of planetesimals (black). The initial orbital parameters of β Pic b and c are taken from Table 1. Left: upper view of the system.
The planetesimals are depicted by small black dots, and the orbits of the planets by colored dashed lines. Middle: view of the system in terms
of semi-major axis and eccentricity. The planets are here represented by colored points. Right: radial profile of the planetesimal disk (solid black
line), superimposed to the models of Augereau et al. (2001) (blue dotted line) and Dent et al. (2014) (red dotted line). Note the clear mismatch in
the location of the inner edge between this simulation and observational models.

Table 1. Orbital solution for β Pic b and β Pic c used in our simulations. to the invariant plane of the two-planets system. The remaining
initial orbital elements of the disk particles, including the lon-
β Pic b β Pic c gitudes of ascending nodes, arguments of periastron, and mean
Mass M [MJup ] 11.90 8.89 longitudes, were also randomly assigned values between 0 and
Semi-major axis a [au] 9.93 2.68 360◦ .
Eccentricity e 0.103 0.32 Calculations were performed using the Regularized Mixed
Inclination i [◦ ] 89.00 88.95 Variable Step Size Symplectic (RMVS3) integrator (Levison &
Arg. of periastron ω [◦ ] 199.3 66.0 Duncan 1994), a modified version of the original Mixed Vari-
Long. of asc. node Ω [◦ ] 31.79 31.06 able Symplectic (MVS) scheme by Wisdom & Holman (1991),
Orbital phase τ 0.719 0.724 which includes a first-order but rapid treatment of close encoun-
ters. This approach is particularly relevant here, as we aim to
Stellar mass M∗ [M⊙ ] 1.75 examine the location of the disk’s inner edge as sculpted by the
planets, specifically focusing on particles near the instability re-
Notes. These values follow the determination and the conventions of gion. The integration was carried out over 20 Myr, correspond-
Lacour et al. (2021). The reference epoch for the initial orbital phase τ ing to the adopted age of the system.
is MJD 59 000 (May 31, 2020). The results are presented in Fig. 1. As shown in the figure,
the planets carve the disk out to ∼28 au. This is inconsistent with
observations that suggest an inner disk cavity extending out to
In the case of β Pic b, with µ = 0.0065, this formula predicts 50 au. There are still far too many particles remaining between
an outer gap edge at ∼13 au. This value is only slightly differ- ∼28 and 50 au. Additional tests, varying the orbits of the planets
ent than the ∼14 au obtained by the theory of Mustill & Wyatt within the uncertainties provided by Lacour et al. (2021), did not
(2012). However, it is important to note that the formalism of alter this outcome.
Morrison & Malhotra (2015) does not account for the planet’s
eccentricity. Given this result, we can therefore conclude that the semi-
analytical theories of Mustill & Wyatt (2012) and Morrison &
Thus, while existing semi-analytical approaches can accu- Malhotra (2015) seem to underestimate the range of gravitational
rately characterize the chaotic zone for planets that are either interactions of β Pic b, which is either too massive or too eccen-
massive or eccentric, none of them simultaneously takes into tric. However, the conclusion remains the same: the inner edge of
account both regimes, nor consider small joverlap values. Given the planetary disk at 50 au cannot be attributed solely to the per-
these limitations, numerical simulations become indispensable turbative action of β Pic b and β Pic c. In the following sections,
for studying such regimes corresponding to the β Pic case. we explore how this could be achieved with the introduction of
a hypothetical additional planet orbiting outside β Pic b’s orbit.
2.2. Simulation
We present a simulation that includes the two known planets and 3. An additional planet
a disk of planetesimals. The physical and orbital parameters of
the planets are taken from the data set presented in Lacour et al. We now hypothesize the presence of an additional planet in the
(2021) and are summarized in Table 1. The initial disk of plan- β Pic system, which we shall refer to as β Pic d. We present
etesimals consists of 400,000 massless particles that do not inter- simulations using the same initial planetesimal disk as before,
act with each other. Their initial semi-major axes were randomly but this time assuming a three-planets system. The initial orbital
selected between 20 and 80 au, with initial eccentricities ranging parameters of β Pic b and β Pic c are still set to the values listed
from 0 to 0.05 and initial inclinations between 0 and 2◦ relative in Table 1.
Article number, page 3 of 8
 A&A proofs: manuscript no. main

3.1. Constraints and initial orbital parameters

Since this planet is proposed to be part of the same planetary sys-
tem as the two known planets, it is reasonable to assume that it is
more or less coplanar with them. Therefore, we will assume that
its inclination relative to the midplane of the two-planet system
does not exceed 2◦ . Angular parameters such as the longitude of
the ascending node, the longitude of periastron, and the initial
mean longitude will be selected randomly, as these are expected
to secularly process under the gravitational influence of β Pic b
and β Pic c and thus play a minor role in the long term.
The most critical parameters to determine for this hypotheti-
cal β Pic d are its mass md , orbital semi-major axis ad , and eccen-
tricity ed . Several constraints must be satisfied for each of these
parameters.
The first constraint is observational. Current observations,
such as those made with Spectro Polarimetric High contrast Ex-
oplanet REsearch (SPHERE), rule out the presence of super-
Jupiter planets exterior to β Pic b (Lagrange et al. 2020). Fig. 2. Accessible semi-major axis of the hypothetical additional planet
Second, based on the semi-analytical theories discussed in β Pic d, prior to simulations, as a function of its eccentricity. Shaded
Sect 2.1, reproducing a disk with an inner edge at 50 au requires areas are not accessible by β Pic d. Its semi-major axis must be smaller
β Pic d to be located at a semi-major axis no greater than ∼40 au. than the inner edge of the disk at 50 au (solid black line) to sculpt it up
Although these semi-analytical theories are not always applica- to this distance, while being greater than the stability limit with β Pic b
ble, this constraint provides an indicative range for the planet’s (dashed black line) to avoid close encounters, based on the criterion of
semi-major axis. Petrovich (2015).
Finally, the planet must remain dynamically stable against
perturbations from other planets. Assuming that β Pic c is too ad for various values of md . As ad depends, to within one trans-
close to the star, we focus solely on the two-planet system com- lation, on the position of the simulated disk inner edge at 50 au,
prising β Pic b and β Pic d. According to Petrovich (2015), a the acceptable range for ad corresponds to the measurement un-
stability criterion between these two planets, with mass ratios certainty of this simulated inner edge. A wide acceptable range
relative to the central star such that 10−2 ≥ µb > µd ≥ 10−4 , can of semi-major axes therefore indicates a very unclear inner edge.
be defined by In addition, Fig. 4 includes an attempt to adapt to a power
! 12 law, similar to that of the semi-analytic theories discussed in sec-
ad (1 − ed ) 1 ad tion 2.1, according to
> 2.4 µb 3 + 1.15 . (6)
ab (1 + eb ) ab !1
δad δad c2
This stability condition between β Pic b and β Pic d directly im- = c 1 µ d c 2 ⇔ md = M∗ . (7)
ad c1 ad
poses a lower limit on β Pic d’s semi-major axis as a function
of its eccentricity. This relationship is depicted in Fig. 2. As the To achieve an inner edge of the disk at 50 au, we set
eccentricity increases, the permissible mass range for β Pic d,
constrained by this stability condition with β Pic b and the in- δad = 50 − ad [au].
ner edge of the disk, narrows progressively. For eccentricities where c1 and c2 are free parameters. For a low eccentricity of
exceeding ∼0.5, no viable solutions remain. 0.05, the resulting c1 ≃ 5.1 is significantly higher than that
Therefore, our study will focus on a planet β Pic d with predicted by the theories discussed in Sect. 2.1. Here again it
a mass md ≤ 1 MJup , a semi-major axis ad between ∼30 and appears that these theories underestimate the amplitude of the
∼40 au, and an eccentricity ed < ∼ 0.5. For the eccentricity, we chaotic zone of β Pic d because its value of joverlap ≃ 7 is still
first assume a moderate value in line with β Pic b and initially relatively small. However, the phenomenon behavior indicated
set it at ed = 0.05. by c2 ≃ 0.27 is reminiscent of the predictions of 0.29 and 0.31
from the theories of Mustill & Wyatt (2012) and Morrison &
3.2. Results Malhotra (2015), respectively.
As expected, a more massive planet must be positioned
Figure 3 illustrates an example of a simulation with three plan- closer to the star. This imposes an independent upper limit on
ets that successfully reproduces the desired disk profile. As op- md . For md exceeding a certain value, β Pic would need to be
posed to the previous simulation, we now find that the inner cav- placed too close to the stability threshold with β Pic b, making it
ity aligns with the observational models. impossible to achieve a stable and suitable configuration. Such
Of course, the solution is not unique. If we assume a more values of md are already excluded here by the observational con-
massive β Pic d, it would likely create a larger gap in the disk, straints established by Lagrange et al. (2020). Nonetheless, this
necessitating its placement closer to the star to reproduce a disk consideration remains crucial for the subsequent analysis.
edge at 50 au. For each assumed value of md , we should be Our study also allows us to derive a lower limit for md . A
able to identify a corresponding ad that yields the desired inner low-mass β Pic d generates a small gap in the disk and must
edge of the disk. To explore suitable combinations of md and ad , therefore be positioned closer to 50 au to effectively carve the
that can reproduce the desired disk profile, we conducted several disk to this distance. However, this simultaneously creates a
dozen simulations. The overall results of this investigation are wider region between β Pic b and β Pic d where planetesimals
summarized in Fig. 4, which displays the acceptable ranges of could potentially orbit safely. This is illustrated in Fig. 5, which
Article number, page 4 of 8
 A. Lacquement et al.: Dynamics of the β Pictoris planetary system

Fig. 3. Example of a simulation of the dynamics of the β Pic planetary system with three planets, β Pic b (red), β Pic c (blue), and an additional
planet β Pic d (green), and the disk of planetesimals (black). The initial orbital parameters of β Pic b and c are taken from Table 1. In this example,
the initial orbital parameters of β Pic d are: md = 0.2 MJup , ad = 35 au, and ed = 0.05. The plotting conventions are identical to Fig. 1.

4. Alternative scenarios
The solutions presented in Sect. 3, which successfully reproduce
the desired inner edge of the planetesimal disk, rely on spe-
cific initial parameter choices. But, other combinations of ini-
tial parameters might also yield acceptable solutions. In Fig. 5,
we demonstrate that a low eccentricity and low mass additional
planet is insufficient to efficiently carve the disk up to 50 au,
resulting in a stable, unperturbed ring of planetesimals around
∼30 au, which is inconsistent with observational models. This
observation leads us to derive a minimum mass of ∼ 0.15 MJup
for β Pic d. This result is directly linked to our consideration of
only one additional planet with low eccentricity. To address this
limitation, in Subsection 4.1, we explore the possibility that the
additional planet could have a higher eccentricity than initially
assumed. Additionally, in Subsection 4.2, we consider the poten-
tial presence of two additional planets instead of just one.

4.1. A more eccentric additional planet

Fig. 4. Combinations of β Pic d’s mass and semi-major axis within ob-
servational constraints that successfully reproduce the disk profile at The simulations presented in Sect. 3 all assumed an initial low
50 au. For several values of md , the corresponding acceptable ranges eccentricity of 0.05 for the additional planet. Although this ec-
of ad are displayed in green. A power-law fit, according to Eq. (7), is centricity undergoes secular evolution due to gravitational per-
overlaid in blue, taking into account the ranges of the semi-major axis. turbations from β Pic b and β Pic c, the simulations indicated
Shaded areas are not accessible by β Pic d. The limits in semi-major that β Pic d’s eccentricity varied only slightly, never exceeding
axis are similarly presented as in Fig. 2. Additionally, above a mass of
1 MJup , corresponding to the observational limit (solid red line), β Pic d
∼0.1. It is therefore of interest to study the potential for larger
would have already been detected in previous observations (Lagrange initial eccentricities of β Pic d.
et al. (2020)). And below 0.15 MJup , corresponding to the ring limit A preliminary estimate of the outcome for such a configura-
(dashed red line), β Pic d does not completely clear the inner zone. tion can be obtained by requiring that the apoastrons of β Pic d
coincide in both scenarios. We anticipate that an eccentric planet
will sculpt the disk in the same way as a low eccentricity planet
with the same apoastron. Since eccentric planets dig the disk in-
shows the output of a simulation similar to that of Fig. 3, but with wards and outwards more efficiently than a non-eccentric planet,
md <∼ 0.15 MJup . In agreement with the overall results shown in this hypothesis suggests that they would have to move closer to
Fig. 4, this combination successfully reproduces the inner edge the star to maintain a similar disk structure.
of the disk at 50 au. However, it leaves enough space between We numerically explored various configurations with in-
β Pic b and β Pic d for an additional ring of stable particles to creasing initial values of β Pic d’s eccentricity, similarly to the
exist around ∼30 au. We indeed recover the stability limit of par- approach presented in Sect. 3. The results are summarized in
ticles at ∼28 au due to β Pic b, as β Pic d is now too far away and Fig. 6, which presents plots similar to the one in Fig. 4 for the
not massive enough to destabilize the planetesimals orbiting in increasing eccentricity regimes of β Pic d. For each eccentricity,
this region. This additional ring of particles is, of course, incom- we again fit the semi-major axis by a power law according to
patible with the observational models of Augereau et al. (2001), Eq. 7.
Dent et al. (2014), and Ballering et al. (2016). Therefore, this As eccentricity increases, the phenomenon evolves, as shown
configuration must be excluded. by the corresponding values of c2 in the Table 2. It remains con-
Article number, page 5 of 8
 A&A proofs: manuscript no. main

Fig. 5. Example of a simulation of the dynamics of the β Pic planetary system with three planets, β Pic b (red), β Pic c (blue) and an additional
planet β Pic d (green), and the disk of planetesimals (black). The initial orbital parameters of β Pic b and c are taken from Table 1. In this example,
the initial orbital parameters of β Pic d are: md = 0.05 MJup , ad = 40 au, and ed = 0.05. The plotting conventions are identical to Fig. 1. This
combination still generates a disk inner edge at 50 au, but there is now enough space between β Pic b and β Pic d to allow an additional ring of
particles to exist at ∼30 au.

Table 2. Values of the fit parameters, according to Eq. (7), for each ditional planet is insufficient. Furthermore, Figs. 6 and 7 show
eccentricities tested. that as the eccentricity of the additional planet increases, the
ed 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25 0.30 0.35 0.40 0.45 0.50 space available for any other additional planets is greatly re-
c1 5.1 4.8 4.7 4.7 4.7 4.7 4.8 4.8 4.9 5.0 duced. Therefore, we worked on a model involving two addi-
c2 0.27 0.25 0.23 0.22 0.21 0.20 0.19 0.18 0.18 0.17 tional planets, both with low mass (≤0.15 MJup ) and a low ec-
centricity of ∼0.05.
Figure 8 illustrates a simulation involving two additional
planets which successfully carves the disk up to 50 au with-
sistent with the predictions of Mustill & Wyatt (2012) but di- out leaving a stable ring at ∼30 au. We explored various similar
verges from those of Morrison & Malhotra (2015). This is ex- configurations by varying the masses and locations of the plan-
pected, as the theory of Mustill & Wyatt (2012) accounts for ets. Considering all requirements, the available parameter space
high eccentricity of ∼0.3, whereas Morrison & Malhotra (2015) around the configuration shown in Fig. 8 is quite limited. No-
does not. However, for extreme eccentricities of ∼0.5, our values tably, it appears that among the two additional planets, the inner
no longer align with either theory, as they do not apply to such one must have a mass at least equal to that of the outer one to
eccentricities. ensure its dynamical stability.
As expected, increasing eccentricity effectively clears the The existence of two additional low-mass, low-eccentricity
remaining dust ring when present, rapidly lowering the lower planets presents therefore an interesting alternative to the model
mass limit and extending the range of acceptable parameters to of a single, more massive planet. However, this hypothesis has
smaller masses. However, with higher eccentricity, β Pic d be- not been explored further, as these planets are relatively small
comes more likely to enter the region of close encounters with and well below current detection limits, making it unnecessary
β Pic b, falling below the stability limit determined in Sect. 3.1. to immediately pursue this avenue.
The higher the eccentricity, the smaller the range of acceptable
masses for β Pic d. Thus, for each eccentricity regime, a maxi-
mum mass is defined, as summarized in Fig. 7. As eccentricity 5. Conclusion and discussion
increases, this maximum mass limit decreases, becoming more
This paper investigates how the β Pic planetary system can dy-
restrictive than the observed mass limit for ed >∼ 0.25, and tends namically clear out the disk of planetesimals up to the ∼50 au
towards zero as eccentricity continues to increase. Beyond an ec-
threshold, as modeled by Augereau et al. (2001), Dent et al.
centricity threshold of ∼0.4, it becomes impossible for a planet,
(2014), and Ballering et al. (2016). This analysis is conducted
regardless of its mass and semi-major axis, to match the obser-
under the assumption that the planetesimal disk initially extends
vational constraints while remaining stable within the system.
from the star to well beyond 80 au, without accounting for po-
tential planetary migration or other dynamical effects.
4.2. Several additional planets The first result is that the currently known planetary system is
unable to clear the disk as needed. With only β Pic b and β Pic c,
In this section, we briefly explore the possibility of having two the disk would not be carved beyond ∼28 au. Therefore, the pres-
additional planets in the β Pic’s planetary system instead of one. ence of additional, yet undiscovered planets, such as β Pic d, at
The available parameter space for such a configuration is sig- greater distances can be hypothesized.
nificantly limited. Clearly, these two planets must remain dy- Our simulations indicate that an additional planet is sufficient
namically stable. Any configurations where a single additional to achieve the desired outcome. Various combinations of mass,
planet is sufficient to efficiently clear the disk up to 50 au should semi-major axis, and eccentricity are possible, but the higher the
not be considered here, as the insertion of an other additional eccentricity, the more restricted the parameter space becomes. In
planet would inevitably lead to instability. We must focus on any case, the planet’s eccentricity cannot exceed ∼0.4. Alterna-
configurations like those illustrated in Fig. 5, where a single ad- tively, we show that a model involving two planets of low mass
Article number, page 6 of 8
 A. Lacquement et al.: Dynamics of the β Pictoris planetary system

Fig. 6. Combinations of β Pic d’s mass and semi-major axis for various eccentricities, within observational constraints that successfully reproduce
the disk profile at 50 au. The plotting conventions are identical to Fig. 4. The ring limit quickly tends to zero as the eccentricity increases. The
minimum semi-major axis stability limit with β Pic b imposes a maximum mass limit (dot-dashed black line), determined by the intersection
(black dot) with the fit’s right extremum of the acceptable range of β Pic d’s semi-major axis. This maximum mass limit decreases as eccentricity
increases, becoming more restrictive than the observational mass limit for ed > ∼ 0.25, and tends towards zero as eccentricity continues to increase
(see Fig. 7).

structure, this approximation introduces uncertainties about the

semi-major axis of the additional planets.
Also, we did not explore specific dynamical configurations,
such as a planet trapped in an outer mean-motion resonance with
β Pic b. In such a case, a phase-protection mechanism could pre-
vent β Pic d from being ejected while still orbiting within the
instability zone of β Pic b, similar to the relationship between
Neptune and Pluto in the Solar System (Greenberg 1977). Fu-
ture modeling efforts should focus on these specific scenarios,
but we emphasize that a more accurate understanding of the ex-
act orbital parameters of β Pic c and β Pic b is necessary first.
Indeed, Beust et al. (2024) demonstrated that these two planets
could be temporarily locked in a 7:1 mean-motion resonance.
If this were the case, any additional planets in resonance with
β Pic b would form a chain of resonances involving three plan-
ets, as discussed for example in the case of HR8799 (Wang et al.
2018). This could lead to a significantly different dynamical re-
sult.
Fig. 7. Accessible mass of the potential β Pic d as a function of its As it stands, the observed disk structure could therefore be
eccentricity ed , based on the results of Fig. 6, whose plot conventions
explained by the presence of at least one additional planet, with a
are similar.
mass still well below the current detection limit for high-contrast
imaging, estimated at ∼1 MJup (Lagrange et al. 2020). Recent ob-
servations with JWST (Kammerer et al. 2024) could potentially
and low eccentricity, instead of a more massive one, could also improve upon this limit. However, as this depends on the pro-
be a viable option. jected separation between the planet and the star, rather than the
However, it is important to note that our dynamical analysis semi-major axis of the orbit, it is difficult to draw definitive con-
could be further refined. We have not attempted to reproduce the clusions about the presence of a planet. In the most favorable
complete radial profile of the disk, and have simplified the prob- scenario, a planet with low eccentricity, and an apparent separa-
lem to a single radius representative of the inner edge, which tion equal to its semi-major axis of 35 au at the time of observa-
is itself uncertain due to the difficulty of deprojecting the ob- tion, should be detectable if it has a mass of at least 0.3 MJup (the
servations. As some of the simulated profiles have a complex equivalent of Saturn). No planet of this type has been observed,
Article number, page 7 of 8
 A&A proofs: manuscript no. main

Fig. 8. Example of a simulation of the dynamics of the β Pic planetary system with four planets, β Pic b (red), β Pic c (blue) and two additional
planets (green and orange), and the disk of planetesimals (black). The initial orbital parameters of β Pic b and c are taken from Table 1. In this
example, the additional planets have a mass of 0.05 MJup , an initial eccentricity of 0.05, and initial semi-major axes of 30 and 40 au respectively.
The plotting conventions are identical to Fig. 1.

but it is possible that the planet is in an unfavourable configura- Kalas, P. & Jewitt, D. 1995, AJ, 110, 794
tion, perhaps occulted by β Pic, or that it is completely absent. Kammerer, J., Lawson, K., Perrin, M. D., et al. 2024, AJ, 168, 51
So far, the available JWST data do not yet allow us to reduce Krivov, A. V. 2010, Research in Astronomy and Astrophysics, 10, 383
Lacour, S. et al. 2021, Astronomy and Astrophysics, 654
the detection limit below the current limit of ∼1 MJup (Lagrange Lagrange, A.-M. et al. 2009, Astronomy and Astrophysics, 493, L21
et al. 2020). We hope that future observations will enable us to Lagrange, A.-M. et al. 2019, Nature Astronomy, 3, 1135–1142
lower this limit and strengthen the constraints on our model, or Lagrange, A.-M. et al. 2020, Astronomy and Astrophysics, 642
even detect the suspected planet directly. Lecavelier Des Etangs, A., Vidal-Madjar, A., & Ferlet, R. 1996, A&A, 307, 542
Levison, H. F. & Duncan, M. J. 1994, Icarus, 108, 18
It would now be interesting to examine the impact of a sys- Matrà, L., Wyatt, M. C., Wilner, D. J., et al. 2019, AJ, 157, 135
tem with 3 or even 4 planets on the disk, in order to try to un- Matrà, L. et al. 2017, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 464,
derstand the dynamical origin of the various intriguing features 1415–1433
observed so far, particularly the asymmetries (Kalas & Jewitt Miret-Roig, N., Galli, P. A. B., Brandner, W., et al. 2020, A&A, 642, A179
Morrison, S. & Malhotra, R. 2015, ApJ, 799, 41
1995; Heap et al. 2000) and the clump (Telesco et al. 2005; Dent Mouillet, D., Larwood, J. D., Papaloizou, J. C. B., & Lagrange, A. M. 1997,
et al. 2014; Matrà et al. 2017), through gravitational interactions MNRAS, 292, 896
with the planets. Mustill, A. & Wyatt, M. 2012, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical So-
ciety, 419, 3074
Acknowledgements. Nowak, M. et al. 2020, Astronomy and Astrophysics, 642
We are grateful to an anonymous referee for feedback that helped us improve
Petrovich, C. 2015, ApJ, 808, 120
this manuscript. All computations presented in this paper were performed using
Rebollido, I., Stark, C. C., Kammerer, J., et al. 2024, AJ, 167, 69
the GRICAD infrastructure (https://gricad.univ-grenoble-alpes.fr),
Sibthorpe, B., Kennedy, G. M., Wyatt, M. C., et al. 2018, MNRAS, 475, 3046
which is supported by Grenoble research communities. This project has re-
Skaf, N., Boccaletti, A., Pantin, E., et al. 2023, A&A, 675, A35
ceived funding from the European Research Council (ERC) under the European
Smith, B. A. & Terrile, R. J. 1984, Science, 226, 1421
Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation program (COBREX; grant agree-
Telesco, C. M., Fisher, R. S., Wyatt, M. C., et al. 2005, Nature, 433, 133
ment n◦ 885593). V. Faramaz acknowledges funding from the National Aeronau-
Wang, J. J., Graham, J. R., Dawson, R., et al. 2018, AJ, 156, 192
tics and Space Administration through the Exoplanet Research Program under
Wisdom, J. 1980, Astronomical Journal, 85, 1122
Grants No. 80NSSC21K0394 (PI: S. Ertel) and No. 80NSSC23K0288 (PI: V.
Wisdom, J. & Holman, M. 1991, Astronomical Journal, 102, 1528
Faramaz).

References
Apai, D., Schneider, G., Grady, C. A., et al. 2015, ApJ, 800, 136
Artymowicz, P. 1997, Annual Review of Earth and Planetary Sciences, 25, 175
Augereau, J.-C. et al. 2001, Astronomy and Astrophysics, 370, 447
Aumann, H. et al. 1984, Astrophysical Journal, 278, L23
Backman, D. E. & Paresce, F. 1993, in Protostars and Planets III, ed. E. H. Levy
& J. I. Lunine, 1253
Ballering, N. P., Su, K. Y. L., Rieke, G. H., & Gáspár, A. 2016, ApJ, 823, 108
Beust, H., Milli, J., Morbidelli, A., et al. 2024, A&A, 683, A89
Beust, H. & Morbidelli, A. 2000, Icarus, 143, 170
Dent, W. R. F., Wyatt, M. C., Roberge, A., et al. 2014, Science, 343, 1490
Eiroa, C., Marshall, J. P., Mora, A., et al. 2013, A&A, 555, A11
Gaia Collaboration. 2020, VizieR Online Data Catalog: Gaia EDR3 (Gaia Col-
laboration, 2020), VizieR On-line Data Catalog: I/350. Originally published
in: 2021A&A...649A...1G; doi:10.5270/esa-1ug
Greenberg, R. 1977, Vistas in Astronomy, 21, 209
Han, Y., Wyatt, M. C., & Dent, W. R. F. 2023, MNRAS, 519, 3257
Heap, S. R., Lindler, D. J., Lanz, T. M., et al. 2000, ApJ, 539, 435
Janson, M., Brandeker, A., Olofsson, G., & Liseau, R. 2021, A&A, 646, A132

Article number, page 8 of 8