Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-ndw9j Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-04T21:27:50.544Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Ages and metallicities of faint red galaxies in the Shapley Supercluster

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 July 2007

Russell J. Smith ,
John R. Lucey  and
Michael J. Hudson
Russell J. Smith
Affiliation:
Department of Physics, University of Durham, Durham, United Kingdom
John R. Lucey
Affiliation:
Department of Physics, University of Durham, Durham, United Kingdom
Michael J. Hudson
Affiliation:
Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, ON, Canada
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

We present results on the stellar populations of 232 quiescent galaxies in the Shapley Supercluster, based on spectroscopy from the AAOmega spectrograph at the AAT. The key characteristic of this survey is its coverage of many low-luminosity objects (σ ~ 50 kms−1), with high signal-to-noise (~45 Å−1). Balmer-line age estimates are recovered with ~25% precision even for the faintest sample members. We summarize the observations and absorption line data, and present correlations of derived ages and metallicities with mass and luminosity. We highlight the strong correlation between age and α-element abundance ratio, and the anti-correlation of age and metallicity at fixed mass, which is shown to extend into the low-luminosity regime.

Type
Contributed Papers
Information
Proceedings of the International Astronomical Union , Volume 3 , Symposium S245: Formation and Evolution of Galaxy Bulges , July 2007 , pp. 411 - 414
Copyright
Copyright © International Astronomical Union 2008

References

Bell, E. F., et al. 2004, ApJ, 608, 752CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bernardi, M., Nichol, R. C., Sheth, R. K., Miller, C. J., & Brinkmann, J. 2006, AJ, 131, 1288CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Caldwell, N., Rose, J. A., & Concannon, K. D. 2003, AJ, 125, 2891CrossRefGoogle Scholar
De Lucia, G., et al. 2007, MNRAS, 374, 809CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Erb, D. K., Shapley, A. E., Pettini, M., et al. 2006, ApJ, 644, 813CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Faber, S. M., et al. 2007, ApJ, 665, 265CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Graves, G. J., Faber, S. M., Schiavon, R. P., & Yan, R. 2007, ApJ, in press, arXiv:0707.1523Google Scholar
Kuntschner, K., Lucey, J. R., Smith, R. J., et al. 2001, MNRAS, 323, 615CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mobasher, B., et al. 2001, ApJS, 137, 279CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nelan, J. E., Smith, R. J., Hudson, M. J., et al. 2005, ApJ, 632, 137CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, R. J., et al. 2004, AJ, 128, 1558CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, R. J., Hudson, M. J., Lucey, J. R., et al. 2006, MNRAS, 369, 1419CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, R. J., Lucey, J. R., & Hudson, M. J. 2007a, MNRAS, in press, arXiv:0707.1695Google Scholar
Stott, J. P., Smail, I., Edge, A. C., et al. 2007, ApJ, 661, 95CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thomas, D., Maraston, C., & Bender, R. 2003, MNRAS, 339, 897CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Trager, S. C., Faber, S. M., Worthey, G., & González, J. J. 2000, AJ, 120, 165CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tran, K.-V. H., Franx, M., Illingworth, , et al. 2003, ApJ, 599, 865CrossRefGoogle Scholar