4.7 Article

Galaxy Evolution Explorer ultraviolet spectroscopy and deep imaging of luminous infrared galaxies in the European Large-Area ISO Survey S1 field

期刊

ASTROPHYSICAL JOURNAL
卷 619, 期 1, 页码 L63-L66

出版社

IOP PUBLISHING LTD
DOI: 10.1086/423894

关键词

dust, extinction; galaxies : starburst; infrared : galaxies; ultraviolet : galaxies

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The European Large-Area ISO Survey (ELAIS) S1 field was observed by the Galaxy Evolution Explorer (GALEX) in both its Wide Spectroscopic and Deep Imaging Survey modes. This field was previously observed by the Infrared Space Observatory, and we made use of the catalog of multiwavelength data published by the ELAIS consortium to select galaxies common to the two samples. Among the 959 objects with GALEX spectroscopy, 88 are present in the ELAIS catalog and 19 are galaxies with an optical spectroscopic redshift. The distribution of redshifts covers the range 0 < z < 1.6. The selected galaxies have bolometric IR luminosities 10 < log L-IR < 13 (deduced from the 15 mum flux using ISOCAM), which means that we cover a wide range of IR galaxies from normal to ultraluminous IR galaxies. The mean (sigma) UV luminosity (not corrected for extinction) amounts to log lambdaL(1530) = 9.8(0.6)L-. for the low-z (z less than or equal to 0.35) sample. The UV slope beta (assuming f(lambda) proportional to lambda(beta)) correlates with the GALEX FUV - NUV color if the sample is restricted to galaxies below z < 0.1. Taking advantage of the UV and IR data, we estimate the dust attenuation from the IR/UV ratio and compare it to the UV slope beta. We find that it is not possible to uniquely estimate the dust attenuation from beta for our sample of galaxies. These galaxies are highly extinguished with a median value A(FUV) = 2.7 +/- 0.8. Once the dust correction is applied, the UV- and IR-based star formation rates correlate. For the closest galaxy with the best quality spectrum, we see a feature consistent with being produced by a bump near 220 nm in the attenuation curve.

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