4.7 Article

New constraints on the star formation histories and dust attenuation of galaxies in the local universe from GALEX

期刊

ASTROPHYSICAL JOURNAL
卷 619, 期 1, 页码 L39-L42

出版社

IOP PUBLISHING LTD
DOI: 10.1086/424800

关键词

galaxies : evolution; galaxies : fundamental parameters; galaxies : starburst; ultraviolet : galaxies

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We derive a variety of physical parameters including star formation rates (SFRs), dust attenuation, and burst mass fractions for 6472 galaxies observed by the Galaxy Evolution Explorer (GALEX) and present in the Sloan Digital Sky Survey Data Release 1 (SDSS DR1) main spectroscopic sample. Parameters are estimated in a statistical way by comparing each observed broadband spectral energy distribution (SED) ( two GALEX and five SDSS bands) with an extensive library of model galaxy SEDs, which cover a wide range of star formation histories and include stochastic starbursts. We compare the constraints derived using SDSS bands only with those derived using the combination of SDSS and GALEX photometry. We find that the addition of the GALEX bands leads to significant improvement in the estimation of both the dust optical depth and the star formation rate over timescales of 100 Myr to 1 Gyr in a galaxy. We attain sensitivity to SFRs as low as 10(-3) M-. yr(-1), and we find that low levels of star formation (SF) are mostly associated with early-type, red galaxies. The least massive galaxies have ratios of current to past-averaged SF rates (b-parameter) consistent with constant SF over a Hubble time. For late-type galaxies, this ratio on average decreases with mass. We find that b correlates tightly with NUV - r color, implying that the SF history of a galaxy can be constrained on the basis of the NUV - r color alone. The fraction of galaxies that have undergone a significant starburst episode within the last 1 Gyr steeply declines with mass, from similar to20% for galaxies with similar to10(8) M-. to similar to5% for similar to10(11) M-. galaxies.

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