4.7 Article

A small-area faint KX redshift survey for QSOs in the ESO Imaging Survey Chandra Deep Field South

期刊

出版社

BLACKWELL SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1046/j.1365-8711.2001.04846.x

关键词

surveys; galaxies : active; quasars : general; infrared : galaxies

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In this paper we present preliminary spectroscopic results from a small-area faint K-excess (KX) survey, and compare KX selection against UVX selection. ne aim of the KX method is to produce complete samples of QSOs that are flux-limited in the K band, in order to minimize any selection bias in samples of QSOs from the effects of reddening and extinction. Using the photometric catalogue of the ESO Imaging Survey Chandra Deep Field South (48 arcmin(2)) we have identified compact objects with J - K colours redder than the stellar sequence that are brighter than K = 19.5. We have obtained spectra of 33 candidates, using the LDSS++ spectrograph on the Anglo-Australian Telescope (AAT). Amongst the 11 bluer candidates, with V - J < 3, three are confirmed as QSOs. Identification of the 22 redder candidates with V - J 3 is substantially incomplete, but so far no reddened QSOs have been found. Near-infrared spectroscopy will be more effective in identifying some of these targets, Only two UVX (U - B < -0.2) sources brighter than K = 19.5 are found that are not also KX selected. These are both identified as galactic stars. Thus KX selection appears to select all UVX QSOs. The surface density of QSOs in the blue subsample (V - J < 3) at K less than or equal to 19.5 is 325(-177)(+316) deg(-2). Because identification of the red subsample (V - J greater than or equal to 3) is substantially incomplete, the 2 sigma upper limit on the density of reddened QSOs is large, < 1150 deg(-2). As anticipated, at these faint magnitudes the KX sample includes several compact galaxies. Of the 14 with measured redshifts, there are roughly equal numbers of early- and late-type objects. Nearly all the early-type galaxies are found in a single structure at z = 0.66.

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