4.7 Article

The morphology-density relation in z∼1 clusters

Journal

ASTROPHYSICAL JOURNAL
Volume 623, Issue 2, Pages 721-741

Publisher

UNIV CHICAGO PRESS
DOI: 10.1086/428881

Keywords

galaxies : clusters : general; galaxies : evolution; galaxies : formation; galaxies : structure

Ask authors/readers for more resources

We measure the morphology-density relation (MDR) and morphology-radius relation (MRR) for galaxies in seven z similar to 1 clusters that have been observed with the Advanced Camera for Surveys (ACS) on board the Hubble Space Telescope. Simulations and independent comparisons of our visually derived morphologies indicate that ACS allows one to distinguish between E, S0, and spiral morphologies down to z(850) = 24, corresponding to L/L* 0.21 and 0.30 at z = 0.83 and 1.24, respectively. We adopt density and radius estimation methods that match those used at lower redshift in order to study the evolution of the MDR and MRR. We detect a change in the MDR between 0: 8 < z < 1.2 and that observed at z similar to 0, consistent with recent work; specifically, the growth in the bulge-dominated galaxy fraction, f(E+S0), with increasing density proceeds less rapidly at z similar to 1 than it does at z similar to 0. At z similar to 1 and Sigma >= 500 galaxies Mpc(-2), we find < f(E+S0)> = 0.72 +/- 0.10. At z similar to 0, an E + S0 population fraction of this magnitude occurs at densities about 5 times smaller. The evolution in the MDR is confined to densities Sigma greater than or similar to 40 galaxies Mpc(-2) and appears to be primarily due to a deficit of S0 galaxies and an excess of Sp+Irr galaxies relative to the local galaxy population. The f(E)-density relation exhibits no significant evolution between z = 1 and 0. We find mild evidence to suggest that the MDR is dependent on the bolometric X-ray luminosity of the intracluster medium. Implications for the evolution of the disk galaxy population in dense regions are discussed in the context of these observations.

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