|
arXiv:1001.0005v1 [astro-ph.CO] 30 Dec 2009Astronomy& Astrophysics manuscriptno.akari˙RXJ1716˙v5 c∝circlecopyrtESO 2018 |
|
October30,2018 |
|
Environmentaldependenceof 8 µmluminosityfunctionsof |
|
galaxiesatz ∼0.8 |
|
Comparison between RXJ1716.4 +6708 andthe AKARI NEP deep field.⋆,⋆⋆ |
|
Tomotsugu Goto1,2,⋆⋆⋆, Yusei Koyama3,T.Wada4,C.Pearson5,6,7,H.Matsuhara4,T.Takagi4, H.Shim8, M.Im8, |
|
M.G.Lee8, H.Inami4,9,10,M.Malkan11, S.Okamura3,T.T.Takeuchi12, S.Serjeant7, T.Kodama2, T.Nakagawa4, |
|
S.Oyabu4,Y.Ohyama13, H.M.Lee8, N.Hwang2, H.Hanami14, K.Imai15,and T.Ishigaki16 |
|
1Institute for Astronomy, University of Hawaii,2680 Woodla wnDrive, Honolulu, HI,96822, USA |
|
e-mail:[email protected] |
|
2National Astronomical Observatory, 2-21-1 Osawa,Mitaka, Tokyo, 181-8588,Japan |
|
3Department of Astronomy, School of Science,The University of Tokyo, Tokyo113-0033, Japan |
|
4Institute of Space and Astronautical Science, JapanAerosp ace Exploration Agency, Sagamihara,Kanagawa 229-8510 |
|
5Rutherford Appleton Laboratory, Chilton, Didcot,Oxfords hire OX110QX, UK |
|
6Department of Physics,Universityof Lethbridge, 4401 Univ ersity Drive,Lethbridge, AlbertaT1J 1B1, Canada |
|
7Astrophysics Group, Department of Physics, The OpenUniver sity, MiltonKeynes, MK76AA, UK |
|
8Department of Physics& Astronomy, FPRD,Seoul National Uni versity, Shillim-Dong,Kwanak-Gu, Seoul 151-742, Korea |
|
9Spitzer Science Center,California Institute ofTechnolog y, Pasadena, CA91125 |
|
10Department of Astronomical Science,The Graduate Universi tyfor Advanced Studies |
|
11Department of Physicsand Astronomy, UCLA,Los Angeles, CA, 90095-1547 USA |
|
12Institute for Advanced Research, Nagoya University, Furo- cho, Chikusa-ku, Nagoya 464-8601 |
|
13Academia Sinica,Institute of Astronomyand Astrophysics, Taiwan |
|
14Physics Section,Facultyof Humanities and SocialSciences , Iwate University, Morioka, 020-8550 |
|
15TOMER&D Inc. Kawasaki, Kanagawa 2130012, Japan |
|
16Asahikawa National College of Technology, 2-1-6 2-joShunk ohdai, Asahikawa-shi, Hokkaido 071-8142 |
|
Received September 15, 2009; accepted December 16, 2009 |
|
ABSTRACT |
|
Aims.Weaim to reveal environmental dependence of infraredlumin osity functions (IR LFs)of galaxies at z ∼0.8 using the AKARI |
|
satellite. AKARI’s wide field of view and unique mid-IR filter s help us to construct restframe 8 µm LFs directly without relying on |
|
SEDmodels. |
|
Methods. We construct restframe 8 µm IR LFs in the cluster region RXJ1716.4 +6708 at z=0.81, and compare them with a blank |
|
field using the AKARI North Ecliptic Pole deep field data at the same redshift. AKARI’s wide field of view (10’ ×10’) is suitable to |
|
investigate wide range of galaxy environments. AKARI’s 15 µm filter is advantageous here since it directly probes restfr ame 8µm at |
|
z∼0.8, without relyingona large extrapolation based ona SEDfi t,which was the largestuncertainty inprevious work. |
|
Results. We have found that cluster IR LFsat restframe 8 µm have a factor of 2.4smaller L∗and a steeper faint-end slope than that |
|
of the field. Confirming this trend, we also found that faint-e nd slopes of the cluster LFs becomes flatter and flatter with de creasing |
|
local galaxy density. These changes in LFs cannot be explain ed by a simple infall of field galaxy population into a cluster . Physics |
|
that canpreferentiallysuppress IR luminous galaxies inhi gh density regions is requiredtoexplain the observed resul ts. |
|
Keywords. galaxies: evolution, galaxies:interactions, galaxies:s tarburst, galaxies:peculiar, galaxies:formation |
|
1. Introduction |
|
It hasbeenobservedthat galaxypropertieschangeas a funct ion |
|
of galaxyenvironment;the morphology-densityrelation re ports |
|
that fractionof elliptical galaxiesis largerat highergal axyden- |
|
sity(Gotoetal.,2003);thestarformationrate(SFR)ishig herin |
|
lower galaxy density (G´ omezet al., 2003; Tanakaet al., 200 4) |
|
. However, despite accumulating observational evidence, w e |
|
⋆This research is based on the observations with AKARI, a JAXA |
|
project withthe participationof ESA. |
|
⋆⋆Based on data collected at Subaru Telescope, which is operat ed by |
|
the National Astronomical Observatory ofJapan. |
|
⋆⋆⋆JSPSSPDfellowstill do not fully understand the underlying physics govern ing |
|
environmental-dependentevolutionofgalaxies. |
|
Infrared (IR) emission of galaxies is an important |
|
probe of galaxy activity since at higher redshift, a sig- |
|
nificant fraction of star formation is obscured by dust |
|
(Takeuchi,Buat,&Burgarella, 2005; Gotoetal., 2010). |
|
Although there exist low-z cluster studies (Baiet al., 2006 ; |
|
Shimet al., 2010; Tranetal., 2010), not much attention has |
|
been paid to the infrared properties of high redshift cluste r |
|
galaxies, mainly due to the lack of sensitivity in previous I R |
|
satellites such as ISO and IRAS. Superb sensitivity of recen tly |
|
launched Spitzer and AKARI satellites can revolutionize th e |
|
infraredviewofenvironmentaldependenceofgalaxyevolut ion.2 Gotoet al.:Environemental dependence of 8 µm luminosity functions ofgalaxies atz ∼0.8 |
|
Fig.1.Restframe 8 µm LFs of cluster RXJ1716.4 +6708 at |
|
z=0.81 in the squares, and those of the AKARI NEP deep |
|
field in the triangles. For RXJ1716.4 +6708, only photometric |
|
and spectroscopic cluster member galaxies are used. For the |
|
NEP deep field, galaxies with photo-z/specz in the range of |
|
0.65< z <0.9are used. The dot-dashed lines are 8 µm LFs |
|
of RXJ1716.4 +6708, but scaled down for easier comparison. |
|
Thethindottedlinesarethebest-fitdoublepowerlaws.Vert ical |
|
arrows show the 5 σflux limits of deep/shallow regions of the |
|
cluster (red) and the NEP deep field (blue) in terms of L8µmat |
|
z=0.81. |
|
In this work, we comparerestframe8 µm LFs between clus- |
|
ter and field regions at z=0.8 using data from the AKARI. |
|
Monochromaticrestframe 8 µm luminosity ( L8µm) is important |
|
since it is known to correlate well with the total IR luminosi ty |
|
(Babbedgeet al., 2006; Huanget al., 2007), andhence,with t he |
|
SFR of galaxies (Kennicutt, 1998). This is especially true f or |
|
star-forminggalaxiesbecausethe rest-frame8 µm fluxare dom- |
|
inatedbyprominentPAHfeaturessuchasat6.2,7.7and8.6 µm |
|
(Desert,Boulanger,&Puget, 1990). |
|
ImportantadvantagesbroughtbytheAKARIareasfollows: |
|
(i) At z=0.8, AKARI’s 15 µm filter (L15) covers the redshifted |
|
restframe 8 µm, thus we can estimate 8 µm LFs without using |
|
a large extrapolation based on SED models, which were the |
|
largest uncertainty in previous work. (ii) Large field of vie w of |
|
the AKARI’smid-IRcamera(IRC, 10’ ×10’)allowsustostudy |
|
wider area including cluster outskirts, where important ev olu- |
|
tionary mechanisms are suggested to be at work (Gotoet al., |
|
2004; Kodamaet al., 2004). For example, passive spiral gala x- |
|
ies have been observed in such an environment (Gotoet al., |
|
2003). Unless otherwise stated, we adopt a cosmology with |
|
(h,Ωm,ΩΛ) = (0.7,0.3,0.7)(Komatsuet al., 2009). |
|
2. Data & Analysis |
|
2.1. LFs ofclusterRXJ1716.4 +6708 |
|
The AKARI is a Japanese infrared satellite (Murakamiet al., |
|
2007), which has continuous filter coverage in the mid |
|
IR wavelengths ( N2,N3,N4,S7,S9W,S11,L15,L18Wand |
|
L24). The AKARI has observed a massive galaxy cluster,Fig.2.Restframe 8 µm LFs of cluster RXJ1716.4 +6708 at |
|
z=0.81, divided according to the local galaxy density ( Σ5th). |
|
Thestars,circlesandsquaresareforgalaxieswith logΣ5th≥2, |
|
1.6≤logΣ5th<2,andlogΣ5th<1.6,respectively. |
|
RXJ1716.4 +6708, in N3,S7andL15(Koyamaetal., 2008). |
|
RXJ1716.4 +6708 is at z=0.81 and has σ= 1522+215 |
|
−150km s−1, |
|
LXbol= 13.86±1.04×1044ergs−1,kT= 6.8+1.0 |
|
−0.6keV.Mass |
|
estimate from weak lensing and X-ray are 3.7 ±1.3×1014M⊙ |
|
and 4.35 ±0.83×1014M⊙, respectively (see Koyamaet al., |
|
2007, forreferences). |
|
An important advantage of the AKARI observation is L15 |
|
filter, which corresponds to the restframe 8 µm at z=0.81. With |
|
15 (3) pointings, L15reaches 66.5 (96.5) µJy in deep (shal- |
|
low) regions at 5 σ. Here flux is measured in 11” aperture, |
|
and coverted to total flux using AKARI’s IRC correction table |
|
(2009.5.1)1.ClusterstudieswiththeSpitzerareoftenperformed |
|
in 24µm and thus needed a large extrapolation to estimate ei- |
|
therL8µmor total infrared luminosity ( LTIR,8−1000µm). |
|
Note that we do not claim the L8µmis a better indicator of |
|
thetotalIRluminositythanotherindicators(Brandlet al. ,2006; |
|
Calzetti et al., 2007; Riekeet al., 2009), but it is importan t that |
|
theAKARIcanmeausureredshifted 8µmfluxdirectlyinoneof |
|
thefilters. |
|
Thanks to the AKARI’s wide field of view (10’ ×10’), the |
|
total area coverage around the cluster is 200 arcmin2, which |
|
cover larger area than previous cluster studies with the Spi tzer, |
|
allowingustostudyIRsourcesintheoutskirts,whereimpor tant |
|
galaxyevolutiontakesplace(e.g.,Gotoet al.,2003).Prev iously, |
|
Koyamaet al. (2008) reporteda high fractionof L15sourcesin |
|
the intermediatedensity regionin the cluster,suggesting a pres- |
|
enceofenvironmentaleffectintheintermediatedensityen viron- |
|
ment. |
|
Thissameregionwasimagedwith Suprime-Camin VRi′z′ |
|
and has a good photometric redshift estimate (Koyamaet al., |
|
2007).Usedinthisworkare54 L15-detectedgalaxieswhichare |
|
well identifiedwithopticalsourceswith 0.76≤zphoto≤0.83. |
|
With the L15filter covering the restframe 8 µm, we simply |
|
convert the observed flux to 8 µm monochromatic luminosity |
|
1http://www.ir.isas.jaxa.jp/ASTRO- |
|
F/Observation/DataReduction/IRC/ApertureCorrection 090501.htmlGotoet al.:Environemental dependence of 8 µm luminosity functions ofgalaxies atz ∼0.8 3 |
|
Table 1.Best doublepower-lawfit parametersforLFs |
|
Sample L∗ |
|
8µm(L⊙)φ∗(Mpc−3dex−1)α β |
|
NEPDeepfield 6.1 ±0.5×10100.0010±0.0003 1.1 ±0.3 5.7 ±1.2 |
|
RXJ1716.4 +67082.5±0.1×10100.74±0.04 2.6 ±0.1 5.5 ±0.4 |
|
(L8µm) using a standard cosmology. Completeness was mea- |
|
sured by distributing artificial point sources with varying flux |
|
withinthe field andby examiningwhat fractionofthem wasre- |
|
coveredasafunctionofinputflux.Sincewehavedeepercover - |
|
age at the center of the cluster, the completeness was measur ed |
|
separately in the central deep region and the outer regions o f |
|
the field. More detail of the method is described in Wada et al. |
|
(2008). |
|
Oncethefluxisconvertedtoluminosityandcompletenessis |
|
takenintoaccount,it is straightforwardto construct L8µmLFs, |
|
which we show in the squares in Fig.1. Errors of the LFs are |
|
assumedtofollowPoissondistribution.Here,wetakeanang ular |
|
distance of the most distant source from the cluster center a s |
|
a cluster radius ( Rmax= 6.2Mpc). We assumed4 |
|
3πR3 |
|
maxas |
|
the volume of the cluster to obtain galaxy density ( φ). This is |
|
only one of many ways to define a cluster volume, and thus, a |
|
cautionmustbetakentocompare absolute valuesofourLFsto |
|
other work such as Shimet al. (2010). This cluster is elongat ed |
|
inangulardirection(Koyamaet al.,2007),andthus,thevol ume |
|
mightnotbespherical.Yet,comparisonofthe shapeoftheLFs |
|
isvalid. |
|
2.2. LFs inthe AKARI NEP Deepfield |
|
Our field LFs are based on the AKARI NEP Deep field |
|
data. The AKARI performed deep imaging in the North |
|
Ecliptic Pole Region (NEP) from 2-24 µm, with 4 pointings |
|
in each field over 0.4 deg2(Matsuharaet al., 2006, 2007; |
|
Wada etal., 2008). The 5 σsensitivity in the AKARI IR filters |
|
(N2,N3,N4,S7,S9W,S11,L15,L18WandL24) are 14.2, |
|
11.0, 8.0, 48, 58, 71, 117, 121 and 275 µJy (Wada etal., 2008). |
|
Flux is measured in 3 pix radius aperture (=7”), then correct ed |
|
tototal flux. |
|
AsubregionoftheNEP-Deepfield(0.25deg2)hasancillary |
|
datafromSubaru BVRi′z′(Imaiet al.,2007;Wada etal.,2008), |
|
CFHTu′(Serjeant et al. in prep.), KPNO2m/FLAMINGOs J |
|
andKs(Imaietal., 2007), GALEX FUVandNUV(Malkan |
|
et al. in prep.). For the optical identification of MIR source s, |
|
we adopt the likelihood ratio method (Sutherland&Saunders , |
|
1992).Usingthesedata,weestimatephotometricredshifto fL15 |
|
detectedsourcesintheregionwiththe LePhare (Ilbertet al., |
|
2006; Arnoutset al., 2007).Themeasurederrorsonthephoto -z |
|
against 293 spec-z galaxies from Keck/DEIMOS (Takagi et al. |
|
in prep.) are∆z |
|
1+z=0.036 at z≤0.8. We have excluded those |
|
sourcesbetterfit with QSO templatesfromtheLFs. |
|
To construct field LFs, we have selected L15sources at |
|
0.65< zphotoz<0.9. There remained 289 IR galaxies with |
|
a median redshift of 0.76. L15flux is converted to L8µmus- |
|
ing the photometric redshift of each galaxy. LFs are com- |
|
puted using the 1/ Vmaxmethod. We used the SED templates |
|
(Lagache,Dole,&Puget, 2003) for k-corrections to obtain the |
|
maximumobservableredshiftfromthefluxlimit.Completene ss |
|
of theL15detection is corrected using Pearsonet al. (2009b). |
|
Thiscorrectionis25%atmaximum,sincewe onlyusethesam- |
|
plewherethecompletenessisgreaterthan80%. |
|
The resulting field LFs are shown in the dotted line and tri- |
|
angles in Fig.1. Errors of the LFs are computed using a 1000Monte Caro simulation with varying zand flux within their er- |
|
rors. These estimated errors are added to the Poisson errors in |
|
eachLFbinin quadrature. |
|
We performed a detaild comparison of restframe 8 µm |
|
LFs to those in the literature in Gotoetal. (2010). Briefly, |
|
there is an oder of difference between Caputiet al. (2007) an d |
|
Babbedgeetal. (2006), reflecting difficulty in estimating L8µm |
|
dominatedbyPAHemissionsusingSpitzer24 µmflux.Ourfield |
|
8µm LF lies between Caputi etal. (2007) and Babbedgeet al. |
|
(2006). Compared with these work, we have directly observed |
|
restframe 8 µm using the AKARI L15filter, eliminating the un- |
|
certaintlyinfluxconversionbasedonSEDmodels.Moredetai ls |
|
andevolutionoffieldIRLFsaredescribedinGotoet al.(2010 ). |
|
3. Results& Discussion |
|
3.1. 8µmIRLFs |
|
In Fig.1, we show restframe 8 µm LFs of cluster |
|
RXJ1716.4 +6708 in the squares, and LFs of the field re- |
|
gion in the triangles. First of all, cluster LFs have by a fact or |
|
of∼700 higher density than the field LFs, reflecting the fact |
|
the galaxy clusters is indeed high density regions in terms o f |
|
infraredsources. |
|
Next, to compare the shape of the LFs, we normalized the |
|
cluster LF to match the field LFs at the faintest end, and show |
|
in the dash-dottedline. In contrast to the field LFs, which sh ow |
|
flattening of the slope at log L8µm<10.8L⊙, the cluster LF |
|
maintainsthesteepslopeintherangeof 10.0L⊙<logL8µm< |
|
10.6L⊙.Thedifferenceissignificant,consideringthesizeofer- |
|
rorsoneachLF. |
|
Wefitadouble-powerlawtobothclusterandfieldLFsusing |
|
thefollowingformulae. |
|
Φ(L)dL/L∗= Φ∗/parenleftbiggL |
|
L∗/parenrightbigg1−α |
|
dL/L∗,(L < L∗) (1) |
|
Φ(L)dL/L∗= Φ∗/parenleftbiggL |
|
L∗/parenrightbigg1−β |
|
dL/L∗,(L > L∗) (2) |
|
Free parameters are: L∗(characteristic luminosity, L⊙),φ∗ |
|
(normalization, Mpc−3),αandβ(faint and bright end slopes), |
|
respectively.ThebestfitvaluesforfieldandclusterLFsare sum- |
|
marisedinTable1andshowninthedottedlinesinFig.1. |
|
The bright-end slopes are not very different, but L∗of the |
|
cluster LF is smaller than the field by a factor of 2.4, and the |
|
faint-endtailofclusterLF issteeperthanthatoffieldLF. |
|
To further examine the difference at the faint end of the |
|
LFs, we divide the cluster LF using the local galaxy density |
|
(Σ5th) measuredbyKoyamaet al. (2008). Thisdensityis based |
|
on the distance to the 5th nearest neighbor in the transverse di- |
|
rection using all the optical photo-z members, and thus, is a |
|
surface galaxy density. We separate LFs using similar crite ria, |
|
logΣ5th≥2(dense),1.6≤logΣ5th<2(intermediate), and |
|
logΣ5th<1.6(sparse), then plot LFs of each region in the4 Gotoet al.:Environemental dependence of 8 µm luminosity functions ofgalaxies atz ∼0.8 |
|
stars, circles, and squares in Fig.2. A fraction of the total vol- |
|
umeofthe clusteris assignedto eachdensitygroupin invers ely |
|
proportionaltothe sumof Σ3/2 |
|
5thofeachgroup. |
|
Interestingly, the faint-end slope becomes flatter and flatt er |
|
with decreasing local galaxy density. This result is consis tent |
|
with our comparison with the field in Fig.1. In fact, the lowes t |
|
densityLF(squares)hasaflatfaint-endtailsimilartothat ofthe |
|
fieldLF.SincetheseLFsarebasedonthesamedata,changesin |
|
the faint-end slope are not likely due to the errors in comple te- |
|
ness correction nor calibration problems. The completenes s of |
|
the deep and shallow regions of the cluster are measured sep- |
|
arately. The changes in the slope is much larger than the maxi - |
|
mumcompletenesscorrectionof25%.Wealsocheckedtheclus - |
|
ter LFs as a function of cluster centric radius, to find no sign ifi- |
|
cantdifference,perhapsduetotheelongatedmorphologyof this |
|
cluster. At the same time, assuming the same cluster volume, |
|
Fig.2 shows that a possible contamination from the field gala x- |
|
ies to cluster LFs is only ∼0.1% in the dense region and ∼1% |
|
eveninthe sparseregion. |
|
It is interesting that not just the change in the scale of the |
|
LFs, but there is a change in the L∗and the faint-end slope ( α) |
|
of the LFs, resulting in the deficit in the 10.2L⊙<logL8µm< |
|
10.8L⊙for cluster LFs. One might imaginea change just in L∗ |
|
might explain the difference in Fig.1. However, in Fig.2, th ere |
|
clearlyisachangein theslopeasafunctionof Σ5th. |
|
However,interpretationis rathercomplicated;a shapeofL F |
|
would not change if field galaxies infall into cluster unifor mly |
|
withoutchangingtheirstar-formationactivity.Although inclus- |
|
ter environment,a fractionof MIR luminousgalaxiesis smal ler |
|
than field (Koyamaet al., 2008), uniformand instant quenchi ng |
|
of star-formation activity of field galaxies can only shift a LF, |
|
butcannotaccountforachangein L∗andαoftheLFs. |
|
Two important findings in this work are; (i) L∗is smaller |
|
in the cluster. (ii) the faint-end slopes become steeper tow ard |
|
higher-density regions. To explain these changes in LFs, IR - |
|
luminousgalaxiesneedtobepreferentiallyreduced,witha rela- |
|
tive increase of IR-faint galaxies. However, an environmen tal- |
|
driven physical process such as the ram-pressure stripping or |
|
galaxy-merging would quench star-formation not only in mas - |
|
sivegalaxiesbutinlessmassivegalaxiesaswell,andthusi snot |
|
abletoexplaintheobservedchangesinLFs. |
|
Ontheotherhand,ithasbeenfrequentlyobservedthatmore |
|
massive galaxies formed earlier in the Universe. This downs iz- |
|
ing scenario also depends on the environment,in the sense th at |
|
galaxieswith same mass are moreevolvedin higherdensityen - |
|
vironmentsthangalaxisin less denseenvironments(Gotoet al., |
|
2005; Tanakaet al., 2005, 2008). Statistically, a good corr ela- |
|
tionhasbeenfoundbetween LTIRandstellarmass(Elbazet al., |
|
2007). Our finding of the relative lack of IR-luminous galaxi es |
|
in the cluster environmentmay be consistent with the downsi z- |
|
ing scenario, where higher density regions have more evolve d |
|
galaxies and lacks massive star-forming galaxies. In contr ast, |
|
in lower density regions more massive galaxies are still sta r- |
|
forming. However, since the data we have shown is in IR lumi- |
|
nosity, to conclude on this, we need good stellar mass estima te |
|
basedondeepernear-IRdata. |
|
Although a specific mechanism is unclear, the steep faint- |
|
end could also result from the enhanced star-formation in le ss |
|
massive galaxies. In the above scenario, massive galaxies h ave |
|
already ceased their star-formation in the cluster, but les s mas- |
|
sive galaxiesare still formingstars. These less massive ga laxies |
|
may stop star-formation soon to join the faint-end of the red - |
|
sequence(Koyamaet al., 2007).Fig.3.TotalinfraredLFsofclusterRXJ1716.4 +6708atz=0.81 |
|
in the solid line, and those of the AKARI NEP deep field in the |
|
dashed line. Overplottedare the LFs of MS1054 from Bai et al. |
|
(2007). |
|
3.2. Total IRLFs |
|
To compare the L8µmLF in Fig.1 to those in the literature, we |
|
needtoconvert L8µmtoLTIR.Weusethethefollowingrelation |
|
byCaputiet al.(2007); |
|
LTIR= 1.91×(νLν8µm)1.06(±55%) (3) |
|
Thisis better tunedfor a similar luminosityrange used here |
|
than the originalrelationby Bavouzetetal. (2008). The con ver- |
|
sion, however, has been the largest source of errors in estim at- |
|
ingLTIRfromL8µm.Caputi etal.(2007)report55%ofdisper- |
|
sion around the relation. It should be kept in mind that the re st- |
|
frame8µm is sensitive to the star-formation activity, but at the |
|
same time, it is where the SED models have strongest discrep- |
|
anciesduetothecomplicatedPAHemissionlines(seeFig.12 of |
|
Caputiet al.,2007; Gotoetal., 2010). |
|
Theestimated LTIRcanbe,then,convertedtoSFRusingthe |
|
followingrelationfor a Salpeter IMF, φ(m)∝m−2.35between |
|
0.1−100M⊙(Kennicutt, 1998). |
|
SFR(M⊙yr−1) = 1.72×10−10LTIR(L⊙) (4) |
|
In Fig.3, we show the LTIRLFs. Symbols are the same as |
|
Fig.1. Inthe topaxis,we showcorrespondingSFR. Overplott ed |
|
asterisks are cluster LF of MS1054 at z=0.83 with ×2 larger |
|
mass by Bai et al. (2007), which show good agreement with |
|
ourLFsofRXJ1716.4 +6708in thesquares.Notethat Bai et al. |
|
(2007) covered only the central region of MS1054 due to the |
|
smaller field of view of the Spitzer. The shape of their LF look s |
|
more similar to our LFs in the highest density bin in Fig.2. A |
|
shift in scale is perhaps due to difference in esimating clus ter |
|
volumes. |
|
Amajordifferenceofourworktothat ofBai etal. (2007)is |
|
that they were not able to compare in detail on the shape of the |
|
LFs between field and cluster regions, due mainly to a smaller |
|
fieldcoverageandlargererrorsonLFs.Theyhadtofixthefain t- |
|
end slope with a local value. The largest source of errors is i nGotoet al.:Environemental dependence of 8 µm luminosity functions ofgalaxies atz ∼0.8 5 |
|
converting Spitzer 24 µm flux into 8 µm. Both cluster and field |
|
LFs of this work use L15filter, which measures restframe 8 µm |
|
fluxdirectly,eliminatingthelargestsourceoferrors.Ina ddition, |
|
bothclusterandfiledLFsaremeasuredwithanessentiallysa me |
|
methodology,allowingusa faircomparisonofLFs. |
|
4. Summary |
|
We constructed restframe 8 µm LFs of a massive galaxy cluster |
|
(RXJ1716.4 +6708) and a rarefied field region (the NEP deep |
|
field)at z ∼0.8usingessentially thesame methodanddata from |
|
the AKARI telescope. AKARI’s 15 µm filter nicely covers rest- |
|
frame8µm at z∼0.8,and thuswe do not needa large interpola- |
|
tion based on SED models. AKARI’s wide field of view allows |
|
ustoinvestigatevarietyofclusterenvironmentswith2ord ersof |
|
differenceinlocal galaxydensity. |
|
We found that L∗of the cluster 8 µm LF is smaller than the |
|
field by a factor of 2.4, and the faint-end tail of cluster IR LF s |
|
becomesteeperandsteeperwithincreasinglocalgalaxyden sity. |
|
This difference cannot be explained by a simple infall of fiel d |
|
galaxies into a cluster. Physics that preferentially supre sses IR |
|
luminous galaxes in higer density regions is needed to expla in |
|
theobservedresults. |
|
Acknowledgments |
|
Wethanktheanonymousrefereeformanyinsightfulcomments , |
|
which significantly improved the paper. We are greateful to |
|
MasayukiTanakaforusefuldiscussion.WethankL.Baiforpr o- |
|
vidingdataforcomparison. |
|
T.G.,Y.K. and H.I. acknowledgesfinancial support from the |
|
JapanSocietyforthePromotionofScience(JSPS)throughJS PS |
|
ResearchFellowshipsforYoungScientists.MIwassupporte dby |
|
the Korea Science and Engineering Foundation(KOSEF) grant |
|
No. 2009-0063616, funded by the Korea government(MEST)” |
|
HML acknowledgesthe supportfrom KASI throughits cooper- |
|
ativefundin2008. |
|
This research is based on the observations with AKARI, a |
|
JAXA projectwiththe participationofESA. |
|
Theauthorswishtorecognizeandacknowledgetheverysig- |
|
nificant cultural role and reverence that the summit of Mauna |
|
Kea has always had within the indigenous Hawaiian commu- |
|
nity. We are most fortunate to have the opportunity to conduc t |
|
observationsfromthissacredmountain. |
|
References |
|
Arnouts S.,et al., 2007, A&A,476, 137 |
|
Babbedge T.S.R.,et al., 2006, MNRAS,370, 1159 |
|
Bai L.,Rieke G.H.,Rieke M. J.,Christlein D.,Zabludoff A.I .,2009, ApJ,693, |
|
1840 |
|
Bai L.,Marcillac D.,Rieke G.H.,etal., 2007, ApJ,664, 181 |
|
Bai L.,Rieke G.H.,Rieke M.J.,etal., 2006, ApJ,639, 827 |
|
Bavouzet N., Dole H., Le Floc’h E., Caputi K. I., Lagache G., K ochanek C. S., |
|
2008, A&A,479, 83 |
|
Brandl B. R.,Bernard-Salas J.,Spoon H.W.W.,et al., 2006, A pJ,653, 1129 |
|
Calzetti D.,Kennicutt R.C.,Engelbracht C.W.,etal., 2007 , ApJ,666, 870 |
|
Caputi K.I.,etal., 2007, ApJ,660, 97 |
|
Dale D.A.,Helou G.,2002, ApJ,576, 159 |
|
Desert F.-X.,Boulanger F.,Puget J.L.,1990, A&A,237, 215 |
|
Elbaz D.,DaddiE.,LeBorgneD.,et al., 2007, A&A,468, 33 |
|
G´ omezP.L.,Nichol R.C., Miller C. J.,et al., 2003, ApJ,584 , 210 |
|
Goto, T.,Takagi, T.,Matsuhara, H.,etal., 2010, submitted to A&A |
|
Goto T.,2005, MNRAS,360, 322 |
|
Goto T.,Postman M.,Cross N.J.G.,et al.,2005, ApJ, 621,188 |
|
Goto T.,Yagi M.,Tanaka M.,Okamura S.,2004, MNRAS,348, 515 |
|
Goto T.,Yamauchi C.,Fujita Y.,etal., 2003, MNRAS,346, 601Goto T.,Okamura S.,Sekiguchi M.,etal., 2003, PASJ,55,757 |
|
Huang J.-S.,et al.,2007, ApJ, 664,840 |
|
Ilbert O.,et al., 2006, A&A,457, 841 |
|
ImaiK.,Matsuhara H.,Oyabu S.et al., 2007, AJ,133,2418 |
|
Kennicutt R.C.,Jr., 1998, ARA&A,36,189 |
|
Kodama T., Balogh M. L., Smail I., Bower R. G., Nakata F., 2004 , MNRAS, |
|
354, 1103 |
|
Komatsu E.,Dunkley J.,Nolta M.R.,et al.,2009, ApJS, 180,3 30 |
|
Koyama Y.,KodamaT.,Shimasaku K.,et al., 2008, MNRAS,391, 1758 |
|
KoyamaY.,KodamaT.,TanakaM.,Shimasaku K.,OkamuraS.,20 07,MNRAS, |
|
382, 1719 |
|
Lagache G.,Dole H.,Puget J.-L.,2003, MNRAS, 338, 555 |
|
Matsuhara H.,etal., 2007, PASJ,59,543 |
|
Matsuhara H.,etal., 2006, PASJ,58,673 |
|
Murakami H.,et al.,2007, PASJ,59, 369 |
|
Pearson C.,et al. 2009, A&A,submitted |
|
Rieke G.H.,Alonso-Herrero A.,Weiner B. J.,etal., 2009, Ap J,692, 556 |
|
Shim H.,etal. 2010, ApJ, submitted |
|
Sutherland W.,Saunders W.,1992, MNRAS, 259, 413 |
|
Takeuchi T.T.,Buat V.,Burgarella D.,2005, A&A,440, L17 |
|
Tanaka M.,Finoguenov A.,Kodama T.,et al.,2008, A&A,489, 5 71 |
|
Tanaka M.,KodamaT.,Arimoto N.,etal., 2005, MNRAS, 362,26 8 |
|
Tanaka M., Goto T., Okamura S., Shimasaku K., Brinkmann J., 2 004, AJ, 128, |
|
2677 |
|
Tran,K.,et al. 2010, ApJin press,arXiv:0909.4079 |
|
WadaT.,etal., 2008, PASJ,60,517 |