4.6 Article

The 0.4 < z < 1.3 star formation history of the Universe as viewed in the far-infrared

Journal

ASTRONOMY & ASTROPHYSICS
Volume 496, Issue 1, Pages 57-75

Publisher

EDP SCIENCES S A
DOI: 10.1051/0004-6361:200811443

Keywords

galaxies: evolution; infrared: galaxies; galaxies: starburst; cosmology: observations

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Aims. We use the deepest existing mid- and far-infrared observations (reaching similar to 3 mJy at 70 mu m) obtained with Spitzer in the Great Observatories Origins Deep Survey (GOODS) and Far Infrared Deep Extragalactic Legacy survey (FIDEL) fields to derive the evolution of the rest-frame 15 mu m, 35 mu m, and total infrared luminosity functions of galaxies spanning z < 1.3. We thereby quantify the fractional contribution of infrared luminous galaxies to the comoving star formation rate density over this redshift range. In comparison with previous studies, the present one takes advantage of deep 70 mu m observations that provide a more robust infrared luminosity indicator than 24 mu m affected by the emission of PAHs at high redshift (z similar to 1), and we use several independent fields to control cosmic variance. Methods. We used a new extraction technique based on the well-determined positions of galaxies at shorter wavelengths to extract the 24 and 70 mu m flux densities of galaxies. It is found that sources separated by a minimum of 0.5 x FWHM are deblended by this technique, which facilitates multi-wavelength associations of counterparts. Using a combination of photometric and spectroscopic redshifts that exist for similar to 80% of the sources in our sample, we are able to estimate the rest-frame luminosities of galaxies at 15 mu m and 35 mu m. By complementing direct detections with a careful stacking analysis, we measured the mid-and far-infrared luminosity functions of galaxies over a factor similar to 100 in luminosity (10(11) L(circle dot)

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available