4.7 Article

The XMM-LSS survey: the Class 1 cluster sample over the extended 11 deg2 and its spatial distribution

Journal

MONTHLY NOTICES OF THE ROYAL ASTRONOMICAL SOCIETY
Volume 444, Issue 3, Pages 2723-2753

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/mnras/stu1625

Keywords

galaxies: clusters: general; cosmology: observations; X-rays: galaxies: clusters

Funding

  1. UK Science and Technology Facilities Council (STFC)
  2. Royal Society
  3. STFC
  4. DLR Verbunforschung grant [50 OR 1117]
  5. ESA Member States
  6. NASA
  7. ESO Telescopes at the La Silla and Paranal Observatories [072.A-0312, 074.A-0476, 076.A-0509, 070.A-0283, 072.A-0104, 074.A-0360, 089.A-0666, 191.A-0268]
  8. ESO Very Large Telescope [182.A-0886]
  9. Alfred P. Sloan Foundation
  10. National Science Foundation
  11. US Department of Energy Office of Science
  12. University of Arizona
  13. Brazilian Participation Group
  14. Brookhaven National Laboratory
  15. Carnegie Mellon University
  16. University of Florida
  17. French Participation Group
  18. German Participation Group
  19. Harvard University
  20. Instituto de Astrofisica de Canarias
  21. Michigan State/Notre Dame/JINA Participation Group
  22. Johns Hopkins University
  23. Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory
  24. Max Planck Institute for Astrophysics
  25. Max Planck Institute for Extraterrestrial Physics
  26. New Mexico State University
  27. New York University
  28. Ohio State University
  29. Pennsylvania State University
  30. University of Portsmouth
  31. Princeton University
  32. Spanish Participation Group
  33. University of Tokyo
  34. University of Utah
  35. Vanderbilt University
  36. University of Virginia
  37. University of Washington
  38. Yale University
  39. Science and Technology Facilities Council [ST/K000845/1, ST/J001414/1] Funding Source: researchfish
  40. STFC [ST/J001414/1, ST/K000845/1] Funding Source: UKRI

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This paper presents 52 X-ray bright galaxy clusters selected within the 11 deg(2) XMM-LSS survey. 51 of them have spectroscopic redshifts (0.05 < z < 1.06), one is identified at z(phot) = 1.9, and all together make the high-purity 'Class 1' (C1) cluster sample of the XMM-LSS, the highest density sample of X-ray-selected clusters with amonitored selection function. Their X-ray fluxes, averaged gas temperatures (median T-X = 2 keV), luminosities (median L-X,L-500 = 5 x 10(43) erg s(-1)) and total mass estimates (median 5 x 10(13) h(-1)M(circle dot)) are measured, adapting to the specific signal-to-noise regime of XMM-LSS observations. Particular care is taken in deriving the sample selection function by means of realistic simulations reproducing the main characteristics of XMM observations. The redshift distribution of clusters shows a deficit of sources when compared to the cosmological expectations, regardless of whether Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe-9 or Planck-2013 cosmic microwave background parameters are assumed. This lack of sources is particularly noticeable at 0.4 less than or similar to z less than or similar to 0.9. However, after quantifying uncertainties due to small number statistics and sample variance, we are not able to put firm (i. e. >3 sigma) constraints on the presence of a large void in the cluster distribution. We work out alternative hypotheses and demonstrate that a negative redshift evolution in the normalization of the L-X-T-X relation (with respect to a self-similar evolution) is a plausible explanation for the observed deficit. We confirm this evolutionary trend by directly studying how C1 clusters populate the L-X-T-X-z space, properly accounting for selection biases. We also point out that a systematically evolving, unresolved, central component in clusters and groups (AGN contamination or cool core) can impact the classification as extended sources and be partly responsible for the observed redshift distribution. We provide in a table the catalogue of 52 clusters together with their measured properties.

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