Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-94fs2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-19T11:34:15.319Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Ages of Globular Cluster Systems and the Relation to Galaxy Morphology

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 December 2011

A. L. Chies-Santos
Affiliation:
Sterrenkundig Instituut, University of Utrecht, The Netherlands email: [email protected]
S. S. Larsen
Affiliation:
Sterrenkundig Instituut, University of Utrecht, The Netherlands email: [email protected]
H. Kuntschner
Affiliation:
ST-ECF/ESO, Germany
P. Anders
Affiliation:
Sterrenkundig Instituut, University of Utrecht, The Netherlands email: [email protected]
E. M. Wehner
Affiliation:
Sterrenkundig Instituut, University of Utrecht, The Netherlands email: [email protected]
J. Strader
Affiliation:
Harvard CfA, USA
J. P. Brodie
Affiliation:
UCO/Lick Observatory, USA
J. F. C. Santos Jr
Affiliation:
UFMG, Brazil
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 investigate the age distributions of GC systems in 14 E/S0 galaxies by carrying out a differential comparison of the (gz) vs. (gK) two-colour diagrams for different GC systems. No significant distinction is detected in the mean ages of GCs among elliptical galaxies. S0 galaxies on the other hand, show evidence for younger GCs. Surprisingly, this appears to be driven by the more metal-poor clusters. This is suggestive of E type galaxies having assembled most of their GCs in a shorter and earlier period than lenticular galaxies. The latter galaxy type, seems to have a more extended period of GC formation/assembly.

Type
Contributed Papers
Copyright
Copyright © International Astronomical Union 2011

References

Brodie, J. P. & Strader, J., 2006, ARA&A, 44, 193Google Scholar
Chies-Santos, A. L., Larsen, S. S., Wehner, E. M., et al. , 2011 A&A, 525, A19Google Scholar
Chies-Santos, A. L., Larsen, S. S., Kuntschner, H., et al. , 2011 A&A, 525, A20Google Scholar
Cohen, J. G., Blakeslee, J. P., & Ryzhov, A., 1998, ApJ, 496, 808CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Côté, P., Marzke, R. O., & West, M. J., 1998, ApJ, 501, 554CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Forbes, D. A., Masters, K. L., Minniti, D., & Barmby, P., 2000, A&A, 358, 471Google Scholar
Forbes, D. A. & Bridges, T., 2010, MNRAS, 404, 1203Google Scholar
Hempel, M., Kissler-Patig, M., Puzia, T. H., & Hilker, M., 2007, A&A, 463, 493Google Scholar
Kotulla, R., Fritze, U., & Anders, P., 2008, MNRAS, 387, 1149CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Larsen, S. S., Brodie, J. P., & Strader, J., 2005, A&A, 443, 413Google Scholar
Muratov, A. L. & Gnedin, O. Y., 2010, ApJ, 718, 1266CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peng, E. W., Jordán, A., Côté, P. et al. , 2006, ApJ, 639, 95CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Puzia, T. H., Zepf, S. E., Kissler-Patig, M., Hilker, , et al. , 2002, A&A, 391, 453Google Scholar
Tolstoy, E., Hill, V., & Tosi, M., 2009, ARA&A, 47, 371Google Scholar