4.7 Article

Luminous red galaxies in clusters: central occupation, spatial distributions and miscentring

期刊

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/mnras/stv1271

关键词

galaxies: clusters: general

资金

  1. World Premier International Research Center Initiative (WPI Initiative), MEXT, Japan
  2. Department of Energy Early Career Award program
  3. Japan Society for the Promotion of Science (JSPS) [26870140]
  4. Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research [26870140] Funding Source: KAKEN

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Luminous red galaxies (LRG) from the Sloan Digital Sky Survey are among the best understood samples of galaxies and are employed in a broad range of cosmological studies. In this paper, we study how LRGs occupy massive haloes via counts in clusters and reveal several unexpected trends. Using the red-sequence Matched-filter Probabilistic Percolation (redMaPPer) cluster catalogue, we derive the central occupation of LRGs as a function richness. We show that clusters contain a significantly lower fraction of central LRGs than predicted from the two-point correlation function. At halo masses of 10(14.5) M-circle dot, we find N-cen = 0.73 compared to N-cen = 0.89 from correlation studies. Our central occupation function for LRGs converges to 0.95 at large halo masses. A strong anticorrelation between central luminosity and cluster mass at fixed richness is required to reconcile our results with those based on clustering studies. We derive the probability that the brightest cluster member is not the central galaxy. We find P-BNC approximate to 20-30 per cent which is a factor of similar to 2 lower than the value found by Skibba et al. Finally, we study the radial offsets of bright non-central LRGs from cluster centres and show that bright non-central LRGs follow a different radial distribution compared to red cluster members. This work demonstrates that even the most massive clusters do not always have an LRG at the centre, and that the brightest galaxy in a cluster is not always the central galaxy.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据