4.7 Article

The early-type galaxies NGC 1407 and NGC 1400 - II. Star formation and chemical evolutionary history

Journal

MONTHLY NOTICES OF THE ROYAL ASTRONOMICAL SOCIETY
Volume 385, Issue 2, Pages 675-686

Publisher

BLACKWELL PUBLISHING
DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2008.12892.x

Keywords

galaxies : abundances; galaxies : evolution; galaxies : formation; galaxies : individual : NGC 1407; galaxies : individual : NGC 1400; galaxies : stellar content

Ask authors/readers for more resources

We present a possible star formation and chemical evolutionary history for two early-type galaxies NGC 1407 and NGC 1400. They are the two brightest galaxies of the NGC 1407 (or Eridanus-A) group, one of the 60 groups studied as part of the Group Evolution Multi-wavelength Study. Our analysis is based on new high signal-to-noise ratio spatially resolved integrated spectra obtained at the ESO 3.6-m telescope, out to similar to 0.6 (NGC 1407) and similar to 1.3 (NGC 1400) effective radii. Using Lick/IDS indices, we estimate luminosity-weighted ages, metallicities and alpha-element abundance ratios. Colour radial distributions from HST/ACS and Subaru Suprime-Cam multiband wide-field imaging are compared to colours predicted from spectroscopically determined ages and metallicities using single stellar population (SSP) models. The galaxies formed over half of their mass in a single short-lived burst of star formation (>= 100 M-circle dot yr(-1)) at redshift z >= 5. This likely involved an outside-in mechanism with supernova-driven galactic winds, as suggested by the flatness of the alpha-element radial profiles and the strong negative metallicity gradients. Our results support the predictions of the revised version of the monolithic collapse model for galaxy formation and evolution. We speculate that, since formation, the galaxies have evolved quiescently and that we are witnessing the first infall of NGC 1400 in the group.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available