4.7 Article

THE EVOLUTION OF THE SPECIFIC STAR FORMATION RATE OF MASSIVE GALAXIES TO z similar to 1.8 IN THE EXTENDED CHANDRA DEEP FIELD SOUTH

Journal

ASTROPHYSICAL JOURNAL
Volume 690, Issue 1, Pages 937-943

Publisher

IOP PUBLISHING LTD
DOI: 10.1088/0004-637X/690/1/937

Keywords

galaxies: evolution; galaxies: formation; galaxies: high-redshift; infrared: galaxies

Funding

  1. Netherlands Foundation for Research (NWO)
  2. Leids Kerkhoven-Bosscha Fonds
  3. National Science Foundation [NSF CAREER AST-0449678]
  4. JET Propulsion Laboratory [1277255, RSA 1282692]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

We study the evolution of the star formation rate (SFR) of mid-infrared selected galaxies in the extended Chandra Deep Field South. We use a combination of UBVRIz' JHK GaBoDS and MUSYC data, deep Infrared Array Camera observations from SIMPLE, and deep MIPS data from FIDEL. This unique multiwavelength data set allows us to investigate the SFR history of massive galaxies out to redshift z similar to 1.8. We determine the SFRs using both the rest-frame ultraviolet luminosity from young, hot stars and the total infrared IR luminosity of obscured star formation obtained from the MIPS 24 mu m flux. We find that at all redshifts the galaxies with higher masses have substantially lower specific SFRs (SSFRs) than lower-mass galaxies. The average SSFRs increase with redshift, and the rate of incline is similar for all galaxies (roughly (1 + z)(n), n = 5.0 +/- 0.4). It does not seem to be a strong function of galaxy mass. Using a subsample of galaxies with masses M-* > 10(11) M-circle dot, we measured the fraction of galaxies whose star formation is quenched. We consider a galaxy to be in quiescent mode when its SSFR does not exceed 1/(3 x t(H)), where t(H) is the Hubble time. The fraction of quiescent galaxies defined as such decreases with redshift out to z similar to 1.8. We find that, at that redshift, 19% +/- 9% of the M-* > 10(11) M-circle dot sources would be considered quiescent according to our criterion.

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