The 2dF galaxy redshift survey: near-infrared galaxy luminosity functions

By Shaun Cole, P. Norberg, C. Baugh, Carlos S. Frenk, Joss Bland-Hawthorn, T. Bridges, R. Cannon, M. Colless, C. Collins, W. Couch and 17 more. 2000

783 citations recorded by the source corpus.

We combine the Two Micron All Sky Survey (2MASS) Extended Source Catalogue and the 2dF Galaxy Redshift Survey to produce an infrared selected galaxy catalogue with 17 173 measured redshifts. We use this extensive data set to estimate the galaxy luminosity functions in the J- and K-S-bands. The luminosity functions are fairly well fitted by Schechter functions with parameters M-J(*) - 5 log h = -22.36 +/-0.02, alpha (J) = -0.93 +/-0.04, Phi (*)(J)= 0.0104 +/-0.0016 h(3) Mpc(-3) in the J-band and M-K s(*) - 5 log h = -23.44 +/-0.03, alphaK(S) = -0.96 +/-0.05, PhiK(S)(*) = 0.0108 +/-0.0016 h(3) Mpc(-3) in the K-S-band (2MASS Kron magnitudes). These parameters are derived assuming a cosmological model with Omega (0) = 0.3 and Lambda (0) = 0.7. With data sets of this size, systematic rather than random errors are the dominant source of uncertainty in the determination of the luminosity function. We carry out a careful investigation of possible systematic effects in our data. The surface brightness distribution of the sample shows no evidence that significant numbers of low surface brightness or compact galaxies are missed by the survey. We estimate the present-day distributions of b(J) - Ks and J- Ks colours as a function of the absolute magnitude and use models of the galaxy stellar populations, constrained by the observed optical and infrared colours, to infer the galaxy stellar mass function. Integrated over all galaxy masses, this yields a total mass fraction in stars (in units of the critical mass density) of Omega (stars)h = (1.6 +/-0.24) x 10(-3) for a Kennicutt initial mass function (IMF) and Omega (stars)h = (2.9 +/-0.43) x 10(-3) for a Salpeter IMF. These values are consistent with those inferred from observational estimates of the total star formation history of the Universe provided that dust extinction corrections are modest.

Subfields: Astronomy and Astrophysics, Instrumentation

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/1361f807c9ac26af43500dde1ebb886b21591c86

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 Instrumentation

Citations in the corpus

The Host Galaxy of GRB 031203: Implications of Its Low Metallicity, Low Redshift, and Starburst Nature (2004, background): “The resulting K ′ luminosity is +1.9 mag fainter than M(K)∗ at z = 0 (Cole et al. 2001), i.e., the galaxy has a low luminosity (L ≈ L∗K/5) and presumably a low total mass.”
Reconciling the local galaxy population with damped Lyman α cross-sections and metal abundances (2005, positive): “For the value ofL∗ we adopted the recent measurement ofM∗B − 5 log h75 = −20.3 from Norberg et al. (2002),M∗R − 5 log h75 = −21.1 from Lin et al. (1996), and M∗K − 5 log h75 = −24.1 from Cole et al. (2001).”
A new measurement of the evolving near-infrared galaxy luminosity function out to z≃ 4: a continuing challenge to theoretical models of galaxy formation (2008, result): “the value of φ0(z = 0) we obtain is in excellent agreement with the local value of 0.0039 Mpc−3 and 0.0037 Mpc−3, derived by Kochanek et al (2001) and Cole et al. (2001), respectively.”
Formation of Early-Type Galaxies from Cosmological Initial Conditions (2005, methodology): “From this sample we have selected three systems with final stellar masses of M for elliptical galaxies in the range of 9:6 ; 1010 M < M < 1:6 ; 1011 M (Cole et al. 2001; Kochanek et al. 2001; Bell et al. 2003) for the cosmology chosen here.”
Cosmological simulations of intergalactic medium enrichment from galactic outflows (2006, background): “…of galaxy formation and evolution (Dekel & Silk 1986), as observations such as the shallow faint-end slope of the galaxy stellar mass function (Cole et al. 2001) versus the halo mass function (Jenkins et al. 2001), the galaxy mass- c© 2006 RAS metallicity relation (Tremonti et al. 2004; Erb…”
The K20 survey. VI. The distribution of the stellar masses in galaxies up to z 2 (2004, methodology): “At each redshift, the resulting GSMFs are compared to the local one by Cole et al. (2001) for the same Salpeter IMF, as well as to the one “rescaled” to our BF estimates (see appendix A5, Fig.”
The Relation between Quasar and Merging Galaxy Luminosity Functions and the Merger-driven Star Formation History of the Universe (2006, methodology): “…show the total (integrated over all morphological types), extinction-corrected SFR density estimated in Hopkins & Beacom (2006) (similar to, e.g., Cole et al. 2001; Hopkins 2004; or predictions of cosmological simulations, e.g., Springel & Hernquist 2003b; Hernquist & Springel 2003) as the…”
What Shapes the Luminosity Function of Galaxies? (2003, methodology): “While the slope is not as flat as that measured by Cole et al. (2001) or Blanton et al. (2003), it is in good agreement with the steeper slope reported by Huang et al. (2003).”
The faint end of the galaxy luminosity function (2002, background): “…ranging from rich clusters (Lugger 1986; Oegerle & Hoessel 1989; Secker 1996; Lobo et al. 1997; Smith, Driver & Phillipps 1997; Trentham 1998 and references therein; Boyce et al. 2001) to the field (Lin et al. 1996; Ellis et al. 1996; Cowie et al. 1996; Blanton et al. 2001; Cole et al. 2001).”
The 2dF Galaxy Redshift Survey: The bJ-band galaxy luminosity function and survey selection function (2001, methodology): “Cole et al. (2001) compared 2MASS magnitudes with Kron magnitudes measured for the same objects by Loveday (2000) and found that only a 0.06-mag correction was needed to bring them into agreement.”
The Stellar Mass Assembly of Galaxies from z = 0 to z = 4: Analysis of a Sample Selected in the Rest-Frame Near-Infrared with Spitzer (2007, background): “Our estimation of the local stellar mass function is in good agreement with previous estimations based on 2MASS data (Cole et al. 2001; Bell et al. 2003).”
How do galaxies get their gas (2002, result): “…our simulations appear reasonably consistent with the observationally inferred history of cosmic star formation (Fardal et al., in preparation), they overpredict the z = 0 baryonic mass function relative to the observational estimates of, for example, Cole et al. (2001) or Bell et al. (2003).”
Galaxy formation theory (2010, background): “The total mass density in stars isΩ⋆ = (2.3± 0.34)× 10−3 (Cole et al. 2001), much less than the total baryonic mass density of the UniverseΩb = 0.0462± 0.0015 (Dunkley et al. 2009).”
On the galaxy stellar mass function, the mass-metallicity relation, and the implied baryonic mass function (2008, methodology): “By estimating stellar M/L for galaxies, it is possible to calculate the equivalent of a luminosity function, for the total stellar mass of galaxies, known as the GSMF (Cole et al. 2001).”
Spitzer Observations of Massive, Red Galaxies at High Redshift (2005, result): “Figure 14 shows the specific SFR integrated over all galaxies by taking the ratio of the cosmic SFR density to the integrated SFR density from Cole et al. (2001), i.e., ¼ ̇ / R ̇ dt, and also from the predictions from Hernquist & Springel (2003).”
The Millennium Galaxy Catalogue: the B-band attenuation of bulge and disc light and the implied cosmic dust and stellar mass densities (2007, background): “We note that Cole et al. (2001) cite their values as dust-free but acknowledge that if dust attenuation is severe this could impact upon their estimates.”
An analytical model for the history of cosmic star formation (2002, result): “…with our direct simulation result of 9.3 per cent, and consistent with observational constraints (Fukugita, Hogan & Peebles 1998; Balogh et al. 2001; Cole et al. 2001) once the baryons in the warm to hot intergalactic medium (IGM) (Cen & Ostriker 1999; Davé et al. 1999, 2001) are taken into…”
The Herschel view of the dominant mode of galaxy growth from z = 4 to the present day (2014, result): “Integrating it to z = 0 gives ρ∗(z = 0) = (5.3 ± 0.1) × 108 M Mpc−3, consistent with the value reported by Cole et al. (2001) and Bell et al. (2003; our error estimate being purely statistical).”
CONNECTING THE GAMMA RAY BURST RATE AND THE COSMIC STAR FORMATION HISTORY: IMPLICATIONS FOR REIONIZATION AND GALAXY EVOLUTION (2011, methodology): “The star formation histories in these models have been parameterized using the formula ρ̇⋆(z) = a + b ( z/c ) f 1+ ( z/c )d + g, (17) which is the Robertson et al. (2010) generalization of the model by Cole et al. (2001) to include a floor in the star formation rate.”