4.7 Article

THE NUV-r VERSUS Mr PLANE AS A TRACER OF EARLY-TYPE GALAXY EVOLUTION IN THE USGC U376 AND LGG 225 GROUPS

Journal

ASTROPHYSICAL JOURNAL
Volume 782, Issue 1, Pages -

Publisher

IOP PUBLISHING LTD
DOI: 10.1088/0004-637X/782/1/53

Keywords

galaxies: elliptical and lenticular, cD; galaxies: evolution; galaxies: fundamental parameters; galaxies: groups: individual (NGC 3607, NGC 3608, NGC 3605, NGC 3599, UGC 06324, NGC 3522, NGC 3457); methods: numerical

Funding

  1. agreement ASI-INAF [I/009/10/0]
  2. Padova University
  3. National Aeronautics and Space Administration

Ask authors/readers for more resources

With the aim of tracing back the evolution of galaxies in nearby groups, we use smooth particle hydrodynamical (SPH) simulations with chemo-photometric implementation. Here, we focus on the evolution of the early-type members (Es and S0s; ETGs hereafter) in two groups, USGC U376 and LGG 225, both in the Leo cloud. We use the near-UV (NUV)-optical rest-frame NUV-r versus M-r color-magnitude diagram to follow their evolution, from the blue cloud (BC) to the red sequence (RS), through the green valley (GV). ETGs brighter than M-r = -21 mag are older than 13 Gyr and spend up to 10 Gyr of their overall evolutionary time in the BC before they reach the RS, migrating through the GV. Fainter ETGs are younger, approximate to 2 Gyr on average, and evolve for about 7-8 Gyr along the BC. The turn-off occurs at z approximate to 0.3-0.4. Therefore, these ETGs spend up to 3-5 Gyr crossing the GV; UGC 06324, the faintest ETG in the sample, still is in the GV. The mechanism driving their evolution is gravitational, due to merging and/or interaction. Our SPH simulations suggest that ETG members of these groups evolved toward the RS before and during the group collapse phase. This result is consistent with the dynamical analysis of both groups showing that they are not yet virialized.

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