4.7 Article

The age-metallicity relationship in the Fornax spheroidal dwarf galaxy

Journal

MONTHLY NOTICES OF THE ROYAL ASTRONOMICAL SOCIETY
Volume 443, Issue 2, Pages 1748-1753

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/mnras/stu1254

Keywords

techniques: photometric; galaxies: dwarf; galaxies: individual: Fornax

Funding

  1. Argentinian institutions CONICET
  2. Agencia Nacional de Promocion Cientifica y Tecnologica (ANPCyT).

Ask authors/readers for more resources

w similar to We produce a comprehensive field star age-metallicity relationship (AMR) from the earliest epoch until similar to 1 Gyr ago for three fields in the Fornax dwarf spheroidal galaxy by using VI photometric data obtained with FORS1 at the VLT. We find that the innermost one does not contain dominant very old stars (age > 12 Gyr), whereas the relatively outer field does not account for representative star field populations younger than similar to 3 Gyr. When focusing on the most prominent stellar populations, we find that the derived AMRs are engraved by the evidence of an outside-in star formation process. The studied fields show bimodal metallicity distributions peaked at [Fe/H] = (-0.95 +/- 0.15) dex and (-1.15 or -1.25 +/- 0.05) dex, respectively, but only during the first half of the entire galaxy lifetime. Furthermore, the more metal-rich population appears to be more numerous in the outer fields, while in the innermost Fornax field the contribution of both metallicity populations seems to be similar. We also find that the metallicity spread similar to 6 Gyr ago is remarkable large, while the intrinsic metallicity dispersion at similar to 1-2 Gyr results smaller than that for the relatively older generations of stars. We interpret these outcomes as a result of a possible merger of two galaxies that would have triggered a star formation bursting process that peaked between similar to 6 and 9 Gyr ago, depending on the position of the field in the galaxy.

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