4.7 Article

CAN MINOR MERGING ACCOUNT FOR THE SIZE GROWTH OF QUIESCENT GALAXIES? NEW RESULTS FROM THE CANDELS SURVEY

期刊

ASTROPHYSICAL JOURNAL
卷 746, 期 2, 页码 -

出版社

IOP PUBLISHING LTD
DOI: 10.1088/0004-637X/746/2/162

关键词

galaxies: evolution; galaxies: formation; galaxies: fundamental parameters; galaxies: structure

资金

  1. NASA [NAS5-26555]
  2. Packard Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The presence of extremely compact galaxies at z similar to 2 and their subsequent growth in physical size has been the cause of much puzzlement. We revisit the question using deep infrared Wide Field Camera 3 data to probe the rest-frame optical structure of 935 galaxies selected with 0.4 < z < 2.5 and stellar masses M-* > 10(10.7) M-circle dot in the UKIRT Ultra Deep Survey and GOODS-South fields of the CANDELS survey. At each redshift, the most compact sources are those with little or no star formation, and the mean size of these systems at fixed stellar mass grows by a factor of 3.5 +/- 0.3 over this redshift interval. The data are sufficiently deep to identify companions to these hosts whose stellar masses are ten times smaller. By searching for these around 404 quiescent hosts within a physical annulus 10 h(-1) kpc < R < 30 h(-1) kpc, we estimate the minor merger rate over 0.4 < z < 2. We find that 13%-18% of quiescent hosts have likely physical companions with stellar mass ratios of 0.1 or greater. Mergers of these companions will typically increase the host mass by 6% +/- 2% per merger timescale. We estimate the minimum growth rate necessary to explain the declining abundance of compact galaxies. Using a simple model motivated by recent numerical simulations, we then assess whether mergers of the faint companions with their hosts are sufficient to explain this minimal rate. We find that mergers may explain most of the size evolution observed at z less than or similar to 1 if a relatively short merger timescale is assumed, but the rapid growth seen at higher redshift likely requires additional physical processes.

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