4.7 Article

Emission-line galaxy surveys as probes of the spatial distribution of dwarf galaxies. I. The University of Michigan survey

Journal

ASTROPHYSICAL JOURNAL
Volume 536, Issue 2, Pages 606-622

Publisher

IOP PUBLISHING LTD
DOI: 10.1086/308967

Keywords

galaxies : clusters : general; galaxies : statistics; large-scale structure of universe

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective-prism surveys which select galaxies on the basis of line-emission are extremely effective at detecting low-luminosity galaxies and constitute some of the deepest available samples of dwarfs. In this study, we confirm that emission-line galaxies (ELGs) in the University of Michigan (UM) objective-prism survey are reliable tracers of large-scale structure, and we utilize the depth of the samples to examine the spatial distribution of low-luminosity (M-B > -18.0) dwarfs relative to higher luminosity giant galaxies (M-B less than or equal to -18.0) in the Updated Zwicky Catalog (UZC). New spectroscopic data are presented for 26 UM survey objects. We analyze the relative clustering properties of the overall starbursting ELG and normal galaxy populations, using nearest neighbor and correlation function statistics. This allows us to determine whether the activity in ELGs is primarily caused by gravitational interactions. We conclude that galaxy-galaxy encounters are not the sole cause of activity in ELGs since ELGs tend to be more isolated and are more often found in the voids when compared to their normal galaxy counterparts. Furthermore, statistical analyses performed on low-luminosity dwarf ELGs show that the dwarfs are less clustered when compared to their nonactive giant neighbors. The UM dwarf samples have greater percentages of nearest neighbor separations at large values and lower correlation function amplitudes relative to the UZC giant galaxy samples. These results are consistent with the expectations of galaxy biasing.

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