Characterizing Bars at z ~ 0 in the Optical and NIR: Implications for the Evolution of Barred Disks with Redshift

By I. Marinova, S. Jogee. 2006

212 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Critical insights on galaxy evolution stem from the study of bars. With the advent of HST surveys that trace bars in the rest-frame optical out to z ~ 1, it is critical to provide a reference baseline for bars at z ~ 0 in the optical band. We present results on bars at z ~ 0 in the optical and NIR based on 180 spirals from OSUBSGS. (1) The deprojected bar fraction at z ~ 0 is ~60% ± 7% in the NIR and ~44% ± 7% in the optical. (2) The results before and after deprojection are similar, which is encouraging for high-redshift studies that forego deprojection. (3) Studies of bars at z ~ 0.2-1.0 (look-back time 3-8 Gyr) report an optical bar fraction of 30% ± 6%, after applying cutoffs in absolute magnitude (MV < -19.3), bar size (abar ≥ 1.5 kpc), and bar ellipticity (ebar ≥ 0.4). Applying these exact cutoffs to the OSUBSGS data yields a comparable optical bar fraction at z ~ 0 of ~34% ± 7%. This rules out scenarios in which the optical bar fraction in bright disks declines strongly with redshift. (4) Most (~70%) bars have moderate to high ellipticity. There is no bimodality in the distribution of ebar. The H-band bar fraction and ebar show no substantial variation across RC3 Hubble types Sa to Scd. (5) RC3 bar types should be used with caution. Many galaxies with RC3 types AB are unbarred, and RC3 bar classes B and AB have a significant overlap in ebar. (6) Most bars have sizes below 5 kpc. Bar and disk sizes correlate, and most bars have abar/R25 in the range ~0.1-0.5. This suggests that the growths of bars and disks are intimately tied.

Subfields: Astronomy and Astrophysics, Instrumentation

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/7c26996735c4545e9c3c188bd02713a7c3e568c5

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

1. P. Hopkins
2. L. Hernquist
3. Thomas J. Cox
4. M. Cappellari
5. A. Dekel
6. R. Somerville
7. J. Kormendy
8. R. Dav'e

In Instrumentation

1. P. Hopkins
2. L. Hernquist
3. M. Cappellari
4. Thomas J. Cox
5. A. Dekel
6. R. Somerville
7. J. Kormendy
8. T. Naab

Citations in the corpus

• HOW DO DISKS SURVIVE MERGERS? (2008, background): “…(see e.g. Christodoulou et al. 1995a; Sheth et al. 2003; Mayer & Wadsley 2004; Debattista et al. 2004; Jogee et al. 2004; Kormendy & Kennicutt 2004; Marinova & Jogee 2007), and may even be related (albeit through longer timescales of “isolated,” post-merger evolution and different physics) to…”
• BULGES OF NEARBY GALAXIES WITH SPITZER: SCALING RELATIONS IN PSEUDOBULGES AND CLASSICAL BULGES (2010, methodology): “We are often helped to identify bars by the structure of the ellipticity profile, as described in Jogee et al. (2004) and also Marinova & Jogee (2007).”
• The Tully-Fisher relations of early-type spiral and S0 galaxies (2010, background): “The fraction of galaxies with boxy bulges in the sample (≈ 75 per cent) is not in any case significantly different to the fraction of barred galaxies in the local universe (≈ 65 per cent; see, e.g. Eskridge et al. 2000; Whyte et al. 2002; Marinova & Jogee 2007).”
• BULGE n AND B/T IN HIGH-MASS GALAXIES: CONSTRAINTS ON THE ORIGIN OF BULGES IN HIERARCHICAL MODELS (2008, background): “%) bright spiral galaxies are barred in the NIR (Eskridge et al. 2000; Laurikainen et al. 2004; Marinova & Jogee 2007, hereafter MJ07; Menendez-Delmestre et al. 2007), the inclusion of the bar is quite important.”
• Galaxy Zoo:bars in disc galaxies (2010, background): “…per cent for nearby disc galaxies (Barazza, Jogee & Marinova 2008; Aguerri, Méndez-Abreu & Corsini 2009), which is consistent with near-infrared (NIR) studies that find that a majority (at least 60 per cent) of disc galaxies appear to have a bar (e.g. Mulchaey & Regan 1997; Marinova & Jogee 2007).”
• The population of barred galaxies in the local universe - I. Detection and characterisation of bars (2009, methodology): “A similar correlation was found by Marinova & Jogee (2007), although a quantitative comparison with them is not possible due to the different band-passes and different definition of the galaxy radius they adopted.”
• The impact of gas inflows on star formation rates and metallicities in barred galaxies (2011, methodology): “In summary, we use the frequently used procedure based on fitting ellipses to isophotes (Friedli et al. 1996; Jogee, Abraham et al. 1999; Kenney & Smith 1999; Abraham & Merrifield 2000; Sheth et al. 2003, 2008; Jogee et al. 2004; Marinova & Jogee 2007; MenendezDelmestre et al. 2007).”
• Bar formation and evolution in disc galaxies with gas and a triaxial halo: morphology, bar strength and halo properties (2012, background): “…majority of present-day disc galaxies (e.g. de Vaucouleurs et al. 1991; Eskridge et al. 2000; Knapen, Shlosman & Peletier 2000; Whyte et al. 2002; Marinova & Jogee 2007; Menéndez-Delmestre et al. 2007; Barazza, Jogee & Marinova 2008; Aguerri, Méndez-Abreu & Corsini 2009; Marinova E-mail:…”
• Image decomposition of barred galaxies and AGN hosts (2007, background): “For instance, Marinova & Jogee (2007) measured the bar ellipticity via ellipse fits in a sample of 180 barred galaxies.”
• Physical properties and environments of nearby galaxies (2009, methodology): “The most widely adopted quantitative technique for identifying bars is the ellipse-fitting method, in which a bar must exhibit a characteristic signature in both the ellipticity and position angle profiles (Marinova & Jogee 2007; Barazza, Jogee & Marinova 2008; Sheth et al. 2008).”
• Bars in Disk-dominated and Bulge-dominated Galaxies at z ~ 0: New Insights from ~3600 SDSS Galaxies (2007, methodology): “Comparing the results of quantitative bar studies conducted in the optical and in the near-infrared, shows that the near-IR bar fraction can be a factor of 1.3 higher than in the optical (e.g., Marinova & Jogee 2007;Menéndez-Delmestre et al. 2007).”
• AINUR: Atlas of Images of NUclear Rings (2009, background): “The canonical estimate of the fraction of bars is around two-thirds (Mulchaey & Regan 1997; Menéndez-Delmestre et al. 2007; Marinova & Jogee 2007) among luminous, normal galaxies.”
• A DIVERSITY OF PROGENITORS AND HISTORIES FOR ISOLATED SPIRAL GALAXIES (2012, background): “8 The bar content of our galaxies also appears roughly consistent with observations: 70% of our galaxies host a bar, to be compared to values of 60–70% for local galaxies when observed in the near-infrared (Eskridge et al. 2000; Marinova & Jogee 2007).”
• A CLASSICAL MORPHOLOGICAL ANALYSIS OF GALAXIES IN THE SPITZER SURVEY OF STELLAR STRUCTURE IN GALAXIES (S4G) (2015, result): “Over the type range S0− to Im, f(F ≥ 0.5) is about 2/3, similar to previous studies such as de Vaucouleurs (1963), Eskridge et al. (2000), and Marinova & Jogee (2007), although the latter two studies are based on the Ohio State University Bright Spiral Galaxy Survey (Eskridge et al. 2002) which did…”
• Fundamental Planes and the Barless MBH-σ Relation for Supermassive Black Holes (2008, background): “If 75% of disk galaxies have bars (e.g., Eskridge et al. 2000; see also Knapen et al. 2000 and Marinova & Jogee 2007), then the observed distribution has less than a one in ten thousand likelihood of occurring by chance.”