4.7 Article

The HI content of elliptical and lenticular galaxies withrecent star formation

Journal

MONTHLY NOTICES OF THE ROYAL ASTRONOMICAL SOCIETY
Volume 379, Issue 3, Pages 1227-1236

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2007.12022.x

Keywords

galaxies : elliptical and lenticular, cD; galaxies : ISM; galaxies : starburst

Ask authors/readers for more resources

As a first step towards constraining the efficiency of the star formation episodes that lead to elliptical (E) and lenticular (S0) K+ A galaxies, a survey for HI within a sample of E and S0 K+ A galaxies and their likely progenitors (i. e. actively star- forming E and S0 galaxies) has been conducted with the NRAO Green Bank Telescope ( GBT). The sample was taken from a larger parent sample drawn from the Sloan Digital Sky Survey (SDSS). Here, the GBT data and initial results are discussed. Over half (19 out of 30) of all observed galaxies have detectable 21-cm emission. It was found that both the K+ A and star-forming early-type (SFE) galaxies were on average more gas poor than disc galaxies at the same luminosity while being more gas rich than more typical E and S0 galaxies with detected 21-cm emission. The gas richness of K+ A galaxies appears to be similar to that of SFE galaxies. The star formation rates and estimated star formation time-scales of the SFE galaxies imply that they are capable of only marginally changing their atomic hydrogen content. Follow- up observations are required to explore these same issues in terms of molecular gas, which is more likely to actively participate in the star formation process. Kinematic data for the HI gas, the warm ionized gas, and the stars within the galaxies combined with the SDSS g- and i-band surface brightness profiles imply that the atomic hydrogen is most likely spatially coincident with the star- forming regions within similar to 1 kpc of the galaxies' centres.

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