4.6 Article

X-ray observations of sub-mm LABOCA galaxies in the eCDFS

Journal

ASTRONOMY & ASTROPHYSICS
Volume 526, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

EDP SCIENCES S A
DOI: 10.1051/0004-6361/201015230

Keywords

X-rays: general; X-rays: diffuse background; X-rays: galaxies; astrochemistry

Funding

  1. Marie Curie fellowship [FP7-PEOPLE-IEF-2008 Prop. 235285]
  2. ASI [I/023/05/00, I/88/06]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

We explore the X-ray properties of the 126 sub-mm galaxies (SMGs) of the LABOCA survey in the CDFS and the eCDFS regions. SMGs are believed to experience massive episodes of star formation. Our goal is to examine whether star formation coexists with AGN activity, determine the fraction of highly obscured AGN, and finally to obtain an idea of the dominant power mechanism in these sources. Using Spitzer and radio arcsecond positions for the SMGs, we find 14 sources with significant X-ray detections. For most of these there are only photometric redshifts available, with their median redshift at similar to 2.3. Taking only the CDFS area into account that has the deepest X-ray observations, we estimate an X-ray AGN fraction of <26 +/- 9% among SMGs. The X-ray spectral properties of the majority of the X-ray AGN that are associated with SMGs are consistent with high obscuration, >10(23) cm(-2), but there is no unambiguous evidence of Compton-thick sources. Detailed spectral energy distribution fittings show that the bulk of total IR luminosity originates in star forming processes, although a torus component is usually present. Finally, stacking analysis of the X-ray undetected SMGs reveals a signal in the soft (0.5-2 keV) and marginally in the hard (2-5 keV) X-ray bands. The hardness ratio of the stacked signal is relatively soft (-0.40 +/- 0.10) corresponding to Gamma similar to 1.6. This argues against a high fraction of Compton-thick sources among the X-ray undetected SMGs.

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