4.6 Article

Hubble Space Telescope observations of star clusters in NGC 1023:: Evidence for three cluster populations?

Journal

ASTRONOMICAL JOURNAL
Volume 120, Issue 6, Pages 2938-2949

Publisher

UNIV CHICAGO PRESS
DOI: 10.1086/316847

Keywords

galaxies : elliptical and lenticular, cD; galaxies : individual (NGC 1023); galaxies : star clusters

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Using Hubble Space Telescope images we have carried out a study of cluster populations in the nearby SO galaxy NGC 1023. In two WFPC2 pointings we have identified 221 cluster candidates. The small distance (similar to9 Mpc) combined with deep F555W and F814W images allows us to reach about 2 mag below the expected turnover of the globular cluster luminosity function. NGC 1023 appears to contain at least three identifiable cluster populations: the brighter clusters show a clearly bimodal color distribution with peaks at (V-I)(0) = 0.92 and at (V-I)(0) = 1.15, and in addition there are a number of fainter, more extended objects with predominantly red colors. Among the brighter clusters, we find that the blue clusters have somewhat larger sizes than the red ones with mean effective radii of R-e similar to 2 and R-e similar to 1.7 pc, respectively. These clusters have luminosity functions (LFs) and sizes consistent with what is observed for globular clusters in other galaxies. Fitting Gaussians to the LFs of the blue and red compact clusters, we find turnover magnitudes of M-TO(blue) = -7.58(-7.36)(-7.72) and M-TO(red)= -7.37(-7.09)(-7.50) in V and dispersions of sigma (V)(blue) = 1.12(1.03)(1.33) and sigma (V)(red) = 0.97(0.89)(1.25). The fainter, more extended clusters have effective radii up to R-e similar to 10-15 pc, and their LF appears to rise at least down to M-V similar to -6, few of them being brighter than M-V = -7. We suggest that these fainter objects may have a formation history distinct from that of the brighter GCs.

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