4.7 Article

MID-INFRARED SPECTROSCOPY OF TWO LENSED STAR-FORMING GALAXIES

期刊

ASTROPHYSICAL JOURNAL
卷 723, 期 1, 页码 729-736

出版社

IOP PUBLISHING LTD
DOI: 10.1088/0004-637X/723/1/729

关键词

galaxies: high-redshift; galaxies: individual (J120602.09+514229.5, J090122.37+181432.3); infrared: galaxies

资金

  1. NASA through JPL/Caltech
  2. NASA

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We present low-resolution, rest-frame similar to 5-12 mu m Spitzer/IRS spectra of two lensed z similar to 2 UV-bright star-forming galaxies, SDSS J120602.09+514229.5 and SDSS J090122.37+181432.3. Using the magnification boost from lensing, we are able to study the physical properties of these objects in greater detail than is possible for unlensed systems. In both targets, we detect strong polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon (PAH) emission at 6.2, 7.7, and 11.3 mu m, indicating the presence of vigorous star formation. For J1206, we find a steeply rising continuum and significant [S IV] emission, suggesting that a moderately hard radiation field is powering continuum emission from small dust grains. The strength of the [S IV] emission also implies a sub-solar metallicity of similar to 0.5 Z(circle dot), confirming published rest-frame optical measurements. In J0901, the PAH lines have large rest-frame equivalent widths (>1 mu m) and the continuum rises slowly with wavelength, suggesting that any active galactic nucleus (AGN) contribution to L-IR is insignificant, in contrast to the implications of optical emission-line diagnostics. Using [O III] line flux as a proxy for AGN strength, we estimate that the AGN in J0901 provides only a small fraction of its mid-infrared continuum flux. By combining the detection of [Ar II] with an upper limit on [Ar III] emission, we infer a metallicity of greater than or similar to 1.3 Z(circle dot). This work highlights the importance of combining rest-frame optical and mid-IR spectroscopy in order to understand the detailed properties of star-forming galaxies at high redshift.

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