Larger sizes of massive quiescent early-type galaxies in clusters than in the field at 0.8 < z < 1.5
Larger sizes of massive quiescent early-type galaxies in clusters than in the field at 0.8 < z < 1.5
We analyse the mass–size relation of ∼400 quiescent massive ETGs (M*/M⊙ > 3 × 1010) hosted by massive clusters (M200 ∼ 2–7 × 1014M⊙) at 0.8 < z < 1.5, compared to those found in the field at the same epoch. Size is parametrized using the mass-normalized B-band rest-frame size,
γ=Re/M0.5711
. We find that the γ distributions in both environments peak at the same position, but the distributions in clusters are more skewed towards larger sizes. This tail induces average sizes ∼30–40 per cent larger for cluster galaxies than for field galaxies of similar stellar mass, while the median sizes are statistically the same with a difference of ∼10 ± 10 per cent. Since this size difference is not observed in the local Universe, the evolution of average galaxy size at fixed stellar mass from z ∼ 1.5 for cluster galaxies is less steep at more than 3σ (∝(1 + z)−0.53 ± 0.04) than the evolution of field galaxies (∝(1 + z)−0.92 ± 0.04). The difference in evolution is not measured when the median values of γ are considered: ∝(1 + z)−0.84 ± 0.04 in the field versus ∝(1 + z)−0.71 ± 0.05 in clusters. In our sample, the tail of large galaxies is dominated by galaxies with 3 × 1010 < M*/M⊙ < 1011. At this low-mass end, the difference in the average size is better explained by the accretion of new galaxies that are quenched more efficiently in clusters and/or by different morphological mixing in the cluster and field environments. If part of the size evolution would be due to mergers, the difference that we see between cluster and field galaxies could be caused by higher merger rates in clusters at higher redshift, when galaxy velocities are lower.
203-223
Delaye, L.
3932a6a8-0f92-463e-a4c0-2470074ee5b7
Huertas-Company, M.
0a864d45-6e9b-43cc-9db8-c25b0bb633ea
Mei, S.
c1740766-1315-4422-a6f4-3eecc76db20a
Lidman, C.
70c80609-d55e-4ca6-b057-aed4a00b4b89
Licitra, R.
cec599b0-5f18-47ec-bb7d-0fcdfc691eda
Newman, A.
b7c7eab8-d772-4501-97f9-aa6d7d52af25
Raichoor, A.
3b536563-460f-464e-bc70-62931caa819d
Shankar, F.
b10c91e4-85cd-4394-a18a-d4f049fd9cdb
Barrientos, F.
f4f00568-480e-4f19-b1eb-cdd39148231a
Bernardi, M.
8408e06c-ce0c-4052-a938-f42c3ad17627
Cerulo, P.
fd1d01fe-5642-4bdb-8b39-ee1ea0557e80
Couch, W.
705631f5-c5bb-4c27-acee-76054e71d19e
Demarco, R.
99c292c4-93a7-4822-98b5-2169a7c2446b
Munoz, R.
479d9540-0d63-4d1a-bd4a-5f47fb5c0cb1
Sanchez-Janssen, R.
60abdc9c-5041-4459-89fa-f644b969a60c
Tanaka, M.
42a9c699-60c8-4542-b272-c34ea0643a25
11 June 2014
Delaye, L.
3932a6a8-0f92-463e-a4c0-2470074ee5b7
Huertas-Company, M.
0a864d45-6e9b-43cc-9db8-c25b0bb633ea
Mei, S.
c1740766-1315-4422-a6f4-3eecc76db20a
Lidman, C.
70c80609-d55e-4ca6-b057-aed4a00b4b89
Licitra, R.
cec599b0-5f18-47ec-bb7d-0fcdfc691eda
Newman, A.
b7c7eab8-d772-4501-97f9-aa6d7d52af25
Raichoor, A.
3b536563-460f-464e-bc70-62931caa819d
Shankar, F.
b10c91e4-85cd-4394-a18a-d4f049fd9cdb
Barrientos, F.
f4f00568-480e-4f19-b1eb-cdd39148231a
Bernardi, M.
8408e06c-ce0c-4052-a938-f42c3ad17627
Cerulo, P.
fd1d01fe-5642-4bdb-8b39-ee1ea0557e80
Couch, W.
705631f5-c5bb-4c27-acee-76054e71d19e
Demarco, R.
99c292c4-93a7-4822-98b5-2169a7c2446b
Munoz, R.
479d9540-0d63-4d1a-bd4a-5f47fb5c0cb1
Sanchez-Janssen, R.
60abdc9c-5041-4459-89fa-f644b969a60c
Tanaka, M.
42a9c699-60c8-4542-b272-c34ea0643a25
Delaye, L., Huertas-Company, M., Mei, S., Lidman, C., Licitra, R., Newman, A., Raichoor, A., Shankar, F., Barrientos, F., Bernardi, M., Cerulo, P., Couch, W., Demarco, R., Munoz, R., Sanchez-Janssen, R. and Tanaka, M.
(2014)
Larger sizes of massive quiescent early-type galaxies in clusters than in the field at 0.8 < z < 1.5.
Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 441 (1), .
(doi:10.1093/mnras/stu496).
Abstract
We analyse the mass–size relation of ∼400 quiescent massive ETGs (M*/M⊙ > 3 × 1010) hosted by massive clusters (M200 ∼ 2–7 × 1014M⊙) at 0.8 < z < 1.5, compared to those found in the field at the same epoch. Size is parametrized using the mass-normalized B-band rest-frame size,
γ=Re/M0.5711
. We find that the γ distributions in both environments peak at the same position, but the distributions in clusters are more skewed towards larger sizes. This tail induces average sizes ∼30–40 per cent larger for cluster galaxies than for field galaxies of similar stellar mass, while the median sizes are statistically the same with a difference of ∼10 ± 10 per cent. Since this size difference is not observed in the local Universe, the evolution of average galaxy size at fixed stellar mass from z ∼ 1.5 for cluster galaxies is less steep at more than 3σ (∝(1 + z)−0.53 ± 0.04) than the evolution of field galaxies (∝(1 + z)−0.92 ± 0.04). The difference in evolution is not measured when the median values of γ are considered: ∝(1 + z)−0.84 ± 0.04 in the field versus ∝(1 + z)−0.71 ± 0.05 in clusters. In our sample, the tail of large galaxies is dominated by galaxies with 3 × 1010 < M*/M⊙ < 1011. At this low-mass end, the difference in the average size is better explained by the accretion of new galaxies that are quenched more efficiently in clusters and/or by different morphological mixing in the cluster and field environments. If part of the size evolution would be due to mergers, the difference that we see between cluster and field galaxies could be caused by higher merger rates in clusters at higher redshift, when galaxy velocities are lower.
Text
Larger sizes of massive quiescent early-type galaxies in
- Accepted Manuscript
More information
Accepted/In Press date: 9 March 2014
e-pub ahead of print date: 21 April 2014
Published date: 11 June 2014
Organisations:
Astronomy Group
Identifiers
Local EPrints ID: 411966
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/411966
ISSN: 1365-2966
PURE UUID: 0d059636-a9d6-4b48-adad-55b658c8f759
Catalogue record
Date deposited: 03 Jul 2017 16:31
Last modified: 15 Mar 2024 14:56
Export record
Altmetrics
Contributors
Author:
L. Delaye
Author:
M. Huertas-Company
Author:
S. Mei
Author:
C. Lidman
Author:
R. Licitra
Author:
A. Newman
Author:
A. Raichoor
Author:
F. Barrientos
Author:
M. Bernardi
Author:
P. Cerulo
Author:
W. Couch
Author:
R. Demarco
Author:
R. Munoz
Author:
R. Sanchez-Janssen
Author:
M. Tanaka
Download statistics
Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.
View more statistics