4.7 Article

Comparing star formation on large scales in the c2d legacy clouds: Bolocam 1.1 mm dust continuum surveys of serpens, perseus, and ophiuchus

Journal

ASTROPHYSICAL JOURNAL
Volume 666, Issue 2, Pages 982-1001

Publisher

UNIV CHICAGO PRESS
DOI: 10.1086/520321

Keywords

ISM : clouds; ISM : individual (Serpens, Perseus, Ophiuchus); stars : formation; submillimeter

Ask authors/readers for more resources

We have undertaken an unprecedentedly large 1.1 mm continuum survey of three nearby star-forming clouds using Bolocam at the Caltech Submillimeter Observatory. We mapped the largest areas in each cloud at millimeter or submillimeter wavelengths to date: 7.5 deg(2) in Perseus (Enoch and coworkers), 10.8 deg(2) in Ophiuchus (Young and coworkers), and 1.5 deg(2) in Serpens with a resolution of 3100, detecting 122, 44, and 35 cores, respectively. Here we report on results of the Serpens survey and compare the three clouds. Average measured angular core sizes and their dependence on resolution suggest that many of the observed sources are consistent with power-law density profiles. Tests of the effects of cloud distance reveal that linear resolution strongly affects measured source sizes and densities, but not the shape of the mass distribution. Core mass distribution slopes in Perseus and Ophiuchus ( alpha = 2.1 +/- 0.1 and 2.1 +/- 0.3) are consistent with recent measurements of the stellar IMF, whereas the Serpens distribution is flatter (alpha = 1.6 +/- 0.2). We also compare the relative mass distribution shapes to predictions from turbulent fragmentation simulations. Dense cores constitute less than 10% of the total cloud mass in all three clouds, consistent with other measurements of low star formation efficiencies. Furthermore, most cores are found at high column densities; more than 75% of 1.1 mm cores are associated with AV greater than or similar to 8 mag in Perseus, 15 mag in Serpens, and 20-23 mag in Ophiuchus.

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