4.7 Article

On the formation of massive galaxies: a simultaneous study of number density, size and intrinsic colour evolution in GOODS

期刊

出版社

WILEY-BLACKWELL PUBLISHING, INC
DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2009.14828.x

关键词

galaxies: evolution; galaxies: formation; galaxies: high-redshift; galaxies: luminosity function, mass function

资金

  1. German Research Foundation (DFG) through the Heidelberg Graduate School of Fundamental Physics [GSC 129/1]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The evolution of number density, size and intrinsic colour is determined for a volume-limited sample of visually classified early-type galaxies selected from the Hubble Space Telescope/Advanced Camera for Surveys images of the Great Observatories Origins Deep Survey (GOODS) North and South fields (version 2). The sample comprises 457 galaxies over 320 arcmin(2) with stellar masses above 3 x 10(10) M(circle dot) in the redshift range 0.4 < z < 1.2. Our data allow a simultaneous study of number density, intrinsic colour distribution and size. We find that the most massive systems (greater than or similar to 3 x 10(11) M(circle dot)) do not show any appreciable change in comoving number density or size in our data. Furthermore, when including the results from 2dF galaxy redshift survey, we find that the number density of massive early-type galaxies is consistent with no evolution between z = 1.2 and 0, i.e. over an epoch spanning more than half of the current age of the Universe. We find large discrepancies between the predictions of semi-analytic models. Massive galaxies show very homogeneous intrinsic colour distributions, with nearly flat radial colour gradients, but with a significant negative correlation between stellar mass and colour gradient, such that red cores appear predominantly in massive galaxies. The distribution of half-light radii - when compared to z similar to 0 and z > 1 samples - is compatible with the predictions of semi-analytic models relating size evolution to the amount of dissipation during major mergers.

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