Galaxy halo masses and satellite fractions from galaxy–galaxy lensing in the Sloan Digital Sky Survey: stellar mass, luminosity, morphology and environment dependencies

By Rachel Mandelbaum, Uros Seljak, G. Kauffmann, C. Hirata, J. Brinkmann. 2005

583 citations recorded by the source corpus.

The relationship between galaxies and dark matter (DM) can be characterized by the halo mass of the central galaxy and the fraction of galaxies that are satellites. Here, we present observational constraints from the Sloan Digital Sky Survey on these quantities as a function of r-band luminosity and stellar mass using galaxy-galaxy weak lensing, with a total of 351 507 lenses. We use stellar masses derived from spectroscopy and virial halo masses derived from weak gravitational lensing to determine the efficiency with which baryons in the halo of the central galaxy have been converted into stars. We find that an L* galaxy with a stellar mass of 6 x 1010 M ⊙ is hosted by a halo with mass of 1.4 x 10 12 h -1 M ⊙ , independent of morphology, yielding baryon conversion efficiencies of 17 +10 -5 per cent (early-types) and 16 +15 -6 per cent (late-types) at the 95 per cent confidence level (statistical, not including systematic uncertainty due to assumption of a universal initial mass function). We find that for a given stellar mass, the halo mass is independent of morphology below M stellar = 10 11 M ⊙ , in contrast to typically a factor of 2 difference in halo mass between ellipticals and spirals at a fixed luminosity. This suggests that stellar mass is a good proxy for halo mass in this range and should be used preferentially whenever a halo mass selected sample is needed. For higher stellar masses, the conversion efficiency is a declining function of stellar mass, and the differences in halo mass between early- and late-types become larger, reflecting the fact that most group and cluster haloes with masses above 10 13 M ⊙ host ellipticals at the centre, while even the brightest central spirals are hosted by haloes of mass below 10 13 M ⊙ We find that the fraction of spirals that are satellites is roughly 10-15 per cent independent of stellar mass or luminosity, while for ellipticals this fraction decreases with stellar mass from 50 per cent at 10 10 M ⊙ to 10 per cent at 3 x 10 11 M ⊙ or 20 per cent at the maximum luminosity considered. We split the elliptical sample by local density, and find that at a given luminosity there is no difference in the signal on scales below 100 h -1 kpc between high- and low-density regions, suggesting that tidal stripping inside large haloes does not remove most of the DM from the early-type satellites. This result is dominated by haloes in the mass range 10 13 -10 14 h -1 M ⊙ , and is an average over all separations from the group or cluster centre.

Subfields: Astronomy and Astrophysics, Atomic and Molecular Physics, and Optics, Instrumentation

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/02259e7e0dbc4a1b5a10768a9443ddc44683f303

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Astronomy and Astrophysics

In Atomic and Molecular Physics, and Optics

In Instrumentation

Citations in the corpus

THE GALAXY CONTENT OF SDSS CLUSTERS AND GROUPS (2007, background): “…al. 1964; Tonry 1987; Schombert 1988; Gonzalez et al. 2000, 2003), larger size at fixed luminosity than other early types (Bernardi et al. 2007, and references therein) and may contain a larger fraction of dark matter than typical galaxies (e.g., Mandelbaum et al. 2006; von der Linden et al. 2007).”
Density profiles of galaxy groups and clusters from SDSS galaxy–galaxy weak lensing (2006, background): “Correlations between intrinsic ellipticity and density have been demonstrated robustly using bright, red galaxies on large scales (Mandelbaum et al. 2006) and on small scales (Mandelbaum et al. 2005c; Donoso et al. 2006; Yang et al. 2006), with the effect being more controversial for the gen- c©…”
GALAXIES IN ΛCDM WITH HALO ABUNDANCE MATCHING: LUMINOSITY–VELOCITY RELATION, BARYONIC MASS–VELOCITY RELATION, VELOCITY FUNCTION, AND CLUSTERING (2010, methodology): “When abundance matching is used for the observed stellar mass function (Li & White 2009), it gives a reasonably good fit to the lensing results (Mandelbaum et al. 2006) on the relation between the stellar mass and the virial mass (Guo et al. 2010).”
Introducing the Illustris Project: the evolution of galaxy populations across cosmic time (2014, unknown): “This relation can be probed by direct observations of individual systems, using techniques such as weak lensing (Mandelbaum et al. 2006), cluster atmosphere modelling (Gonzalez et al. 2013) or satellite kinematics (Conroy et al. 2007), and it can also be inferred with indirect methods employing…”
MERGERS AND BULGE FORMATION IN ΛCDM: WHICH MERGERS MATTER? (2009, methodology): “We compare empirical constraints from clustering (Wang et al. 2006), weak lensing (Mandelbaum et al. 2006), and abundance matching (‘monotonic’; Conroyet al. 2006).”
Galaxy Masses: A Review (2013, methodology): “The analysis of SDSS data by Mandelbaum et al. (2006a) did not detect an azimuthal variation in the lensing signal when considering the full sample of lens galaxies.”
GRAVITATIONAL HEATING HELPS MAKE MASSIVE GALAXIES RED AND DEAD (2009, result): “Furthermore, the baryon/DM fraction in our simulated galaxies is a factor of two too high for their mass compared to predictions from recent lensing data (Mandelbaum et al. 2006).”
The behaviour of dark matter associated with four bright cluster galaxies in the 10 kpc core of Abell 3827 (2015, background): “Observations have shown that, as L* galaxies enter a galaxy cluster from the field, tidal gravitational stripping of their dark matter (Mandelbaum et al. 2006; Parker et al. 2007; Gillis et al. 2013) reduces their masses by ∼1013 M to ∼1012 M from a radius of 5 Mpc to 1 Mpc (Limousin et al. 2007,…”
MINOR MERGERS AND THE SIZE EVOLUTION OF ELLIPTICAL GALAXIES (2009, result): “The ratio of central stellar mass to halo mass is about a factor of two larger than predicted from gravitational lensing studies (Mandelbaum et al. 2006), however, it is comparable to some recent predictions derived for the Milky Way halo ( e.g. Xue et al. 2008, see however Li & White 2008).”
Are Brightest Halo Galaxies Central Galaxies (2010, methodology): “…of galaxies of luminosity L in a halo of mass M , and is constrained to accurately match the SDSS r-band luminosity function (Blanton et al. 2003), the clustering strength of SDSS galaxies as a function of luminosity (Wang et al. 2007), and the galaxygalaxy lensing data of Mandelbaum et al. (2006).”
Mapping stellar content to dark matter haloes using galaxy clustering and galaxy–galaxy lensing in the SDSS DR7 (2015, methodology): “…Zheng & Weinberg (2007), and Yoo et al. (2006), with improved treatment c© 0000 RAS, MNRAS 000, 000–000 of the scale–dependent bias, halo exclusion effect, over/underconcentrated satellite distributions from earlier works (e.g. Berlind & Weinberg 2002; Guzik & Seljak 2002; Mandelbaum et al. 2006).”
REPRODUCING THE STELLAR MASS/HALO MASS RELATION IN SIMULATED ΛCDM GALAXIES: THEORY VERSUS OBSERVATIONAL ESTIMATES (2012, methodology): “Recently, Moster et al. (2012, hereafter M12) and other groups (Vale & Ostriker 2004; Conroy et al. 2006; Mandelbaum et al. 2006; More et al. 2009; Guo et al. 2010; Trujillo-Gomez et al. 2011; Behroozi et al. 2012) used the Abundance Matching Technique (AMT) and its variations (Yang et al. 2012) to…”