4.7 Article

The morphological diversities among star-forming galaxies at high redshifts in the great observatories origins deep survey

Journal

ASTROPHYSICAL JOURNAL
Volume 652, Issue 2, Pages 963-980

Publisher

IOP PUBLISHING LTD
DOI: 10.1086/507016

Keywords

galaxies : evolution; galaxies : formation; galaxies : fundamental parameters; galaxies : structure

Ask authors/readers for more resources

We used the deep, multiwavelength images obtained by the Great Observatories Origins Deep Survey (GOODS) to identify similar to 4700 Lyman break galaxies (LBGs) at z > 2.5, and 292 starburst galaxies at z similar to 1.2. We present the results from morphological analysis based on light profile shape and ellipticity for similar to 1333 of the most luminous LBGs. About 40% of LBGs at z similar to 3 have exponential profiles, similar to 30% of the galaxies have steep (r(1/4)-like) profiles, and similar to 30% of LBGs have multiple cores of disturbed morphologies suggestive of close pairs or mergers. The fraction of spheriod-like LBGs decrease by about 15% from z similar to 5 to 3. A comparison of LBGs with the starburst galaxies at z similar to 1.2 shows that disklike and merger morphologies are dominant, but the fraction of spheroid-like profiles is about 20% higher among LBGs. The ellipticity distribution for LBGs exhibits a pronounced skew toward high ellipticities (epsilon > 0.5), which cannot be explained by morphologies similar to the local disks and spheroids viewed at random orientations. The peak of the distribution evolves toward lower epsilon, from 0.7 at z = 4 to similar to 0.5 at z = 3. The ellipticity distribution for the z similar to 1.2 galaxies is relatively flat, similar to that seen for present-day galaxies. The dominance of elongated morphologies suggests that in a significant fraction of LBGs we may be witnessing star formation in clumps along gas-rich filaments, or the earliest gas-rich bars that encompass essentially the entire visible 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