4.6 Article

The elliptical galaxy NGC720: An unequal-mass galaxy merger remnant

期刊

ASTRONOMY & ASTROPHYSICS
卷 436, 期 1, 页码 57-65

出版社

EDP SCIENCES S A
DOI: 10.1051/0004-6361:20042464

关键词

galaxies : elliptical and lenticular, cD; galaxies : individual : NGC720; galaxies : kinematics and dynamics; galaxies : tellar content

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The stellar population of the central region of the galaxy NGC720 has been investigated through longslit optical spectroscopy. The velocity dispersion and 13 Lick indices were obtained as a function of the radius along the semimajor axis of the galaxy. The Mg-2 index presents a gradient of dMg(2)/dlogr = -0.079 which behaves similarly to the Fe. lines, indicating no enhancement of Mg-2 in relation to Fe I. The stellar population ages and metallicities were derived by a population synthesis method using available evolutive spectrophotometric models. The synthesis indicates a strong age gradient along the semimajor axis of NGC 720. In the central region a 13 Gyr and solar metallicity stellar population dominates the flux at 5870 A; the contribution of this component vanishes at a radius of 0.73 kpc, where the total flux is accounted for by a younger, 5Gyr and solar metallicity stellar population. For distances larger than 1 kpc a 2.5 Gyr component becomes very important. Moreover, NGC 720 is probably overabundant in CN in the center with respect to the solar abundance. The estimated total mass (3.29 x 10(11) M circle dot) and the Mg-2 gradient values suggest that this galaxy might have undergone a merger event. The correspondence between the J-band brightness profile decomposition and the result of the spectral synthesis shows that this galaxy is formed by an old ( 13 - 5 Gyr), bulge-like, small-scale and massive spheroid and a younger ( 5 - 2.5Gyr), large-scale disk component. We discuss our results in comparison with available numerical simulations and propose that the merger event must have occurred about 4 Gyr ago.

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

4.6
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