Red Galaxy Growth and the Halo Occupation Distribution

By Michael J. I. Brown, Zheng Zheng, M. White, A. Dey, B. Jannuzi, A. Benson, K. Brand, M. Brodwin, Darren Croton. 2008

147 citations recorded by the source corpus.

We have traced the past 7 Gyr of red galaxy stellar mass growth within dark matter halos. We have determined the halo occupation distribution, which describes how galaxies reside within dark matter halos, using the observed luminosity function and clustering of 40,696 0.2 < z < 1.0 red galaxies in Boötes. Half of ≃1011.9 h−1 M☉ halos host a red central galaxy, and this fraction increases with increasing halo mass. We do not observe any evolution of the relationship between red galaxy stellar mass and host halo mass, although we expect both galaxy stellar masses and halo masses to evolve over cosmic time. We find that the stellar mass contained within the red population has doubled since z = 1, with the stellar mass within red satellite galaxies tripling over this redshift range. In cluster mass halos (>1014 h−1 M☉) most of the stellar mass resides within satellite galaxies and the intracluster light, with a minority of the stellar mass residing within central galaxies. The stellar masses of the most luminous red central galaxies are proportional to halo mass to the power of ≃0.35. We thus conclude that halo mergers do not always lead to rapid growth of central galaxies. While very massive halos often double in mass over the past 7 Gyr, the stellar masses of their central galaxies typically grow by only ≃30%.

Subfields: Astronomy and Astrophysics, Instrumentation

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/80d63659cf1c8eb304236b389a38b300f979cd6c

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 VIMOS Public Extragalactic Redshift Survey (VIPERS) - Galaxy clustering and redshift-space distortions at z ≃ 0.8 in the first data release (2013, background): “In order to interpolate between the different redshifts we assume a global luminosity evolution proportional to redshift, so that the magnitude threshold values scale linearly with redshift (Brown et al. 2008; Coupon et al. 2012).”
GALAXY GROUPS IN THE SDSS DR4. III. THE LUMINOSITY AND STELLAR MASS FUNCTIONS (2008, background): “…(e.g. Jing, Mo & Börner 1998; Peacock & Smith 2000; Seljak 2000; Scoccimarro et al. 2001; Jing, Börner & Suto 2002; Berlind & Weinberg 2002; Bullock, Wechsler & Somerville 2002; Scranton 2002; Zehavi et al. 2004, 2005; Zheng et al. 2005; Tinker et al. 2005; Skibba et al. 2007; Brown et al. 2008).”
EMERGE – an empirical model for the formation of galaxies since z ∼ 10 (2017, background): “…main haloes of a given mass is constrained using galaxy abundance and clustering statistics (Peacock & Smith 2000; Seljak 2000; White 2001; Berlind &Weinberg 2002; Yang, Mo & van den Bosch 2003; Zehavi et al., 2004; Zheng et al., 2005; Tinker et al. 2005; Brown et al. 2008; Leauthaud et al. 2012).”
There's no place like home? Statistics of Milky Way-mass dark matter haloes (2009, background): “This “abundance matching” assumption (Vale & Ostriker 2004) can reproduce observed galaxy clustering and its evolution with redshift (Conroy et al. 2006; Brown et al. 2008; Conroy & Wechsler 2009; Wetzel & White 2010; Guo et al. 2010).”
THE GROWTH OF MASSIVE GALAXIES SINCE z = 2 (2009, methodology): “At low redshift galaxies with this number density have a stellar mass of 3× 1011M⊙ and live in halos of mean mass∼ 5× 1013M⊙ (e.g., Wake et al. 2008; Brown et al. 2008), i.e., massive groups.”
Galaxy luminosities, stellar masses, sizes, velocity dispersions as a function of morphological type (2009, result): “…of the most massive galaxies which are based on clustering (which predict some merging, and so some increase in stellar mass; Wake et al. 2008; Brown et al. 2008) and those based on abundances (for which comparison of high redshift measurements with the previous z ∼ 0 measurements indicated…”
Galactic star formation and accretion histories from matching galaxies to dark matter haloes (2012, background): “…or type) within main haloes of a given mass is constrained using galaxy abundance and clustering statistics (e.g. Peacock & Smith 2000; White 2001; Berlind & Weinberg 2002; Zehavi et al. 2004; Tinker et al. 2005; Brown et al. 2008; Zehavi et al. 2011; Wake et al. 2011; Leauthaud et al. 2012).”
HALO OCCUPATION DISTRIBUTION MODELING OF CLUSTERING OF LUMINOUS RED GALAXIES (2008, result): “This is also in line with the results of LRG evolution in Brown et al. (2008) from HOD modeling of their clustering from z ∼ 0.2 to z ∼ 1.0 in the NOAO Deep Wide-Field Survey.”
Galaxy clustering in the CFHTLS-Wide: the changing relationship between galaxies and haloes since z ~ 1.2 (2011, methodology): “Brown et al. (2008) has interpreted clustering measurements in the framework of the halo model of slightly larger redshift baseline, although their survey only covered ∼7 deg2 and used five-band photometric redshifts.”
NEW CONSTRAINTS ON THE EVOLUTION OF THE STELLAR-TO-DARK MATTER CONNECTION: A COMBINED ANALYSIS OF GALAXY–GALAXY LENSING, CLUSTERING, AND STELLAR MASS FUNCTIONS FROM z = 0.2 to z = 1 (2011, unknown): “…mass (e.g., Seljak 2000; Peacock & Smith 2000; Scoccimarro et al. 2001; Berlind & Weinberg 2002; Bullock et al. 2002; Zehavi et al. 2002, 2005, 2011b; Zheng et al. 2005, 2007; Tinker et al. 2007; Skibba & Sheth 2009; Brown et al. 2008; Wake et al. 2011; Foucaud et al. 2010; White et al. 2011).”
DISSIPATION AND EXTRA LIGHT IN GALACTIC NUCLEI. IV. EVOLUTION IN THE SCALING RELATIONS OF SPHEROIDS (2008, background): “…comparisons and other directm asurements (see e.g. Yan et al. 2003; Cooray 2005; Conroy et al. 2006; Heymans et al. 2006; Conroy et al. 2007; Brown et al. 2008) imply that the evolution inM∗(Mhalo) with redshift is weak (and only significant at the highest masses, where number densities…”
The colours of satellite galaxies in groups and clusters (2008, background): “…observational results for the luminosity functions are not able to separate contributions of satellite and central galaxies accurately over this range of luminosity due to the difficulty of robustly identifying faint central galaxies (However, see the recent HOD analysis of Brown et al. 2008).”
AN ATLAS OF GALAXY SPECTRAL ENERGY DISTRIBUTIONS FROM THE ULTRAVIOLET TO THE MID-INFRARED (2013, methodology): “The Boötes photometric catalogues are described in Brown et al. (2008) and we use a magnitude dependent aperture size to capture the vast majority of the galaxy light.”
Galaxy and Mass Assembly (GAMA): ugriz galaxy luminosity functions (2011, background): “One should be cautious in interpreting this as the upturn predicted by halo occupation distribution models (e.g. Brown et al. 2008) and the Peng et al. (2010) quenching model, since the faint end of our red galaxy LF contains a significant fraction of edge-on disc systems, which are likely to be…”
EVOLUTION OF THE GALAXY–DARK MATTER CONNECTION AND THE ASSEMBLY OF GALAXIES IN DARK MATTER HALOS (2011, background): “…of different masses (e.g. Jing et al. 1998; Peacock & Smith 2000; Yang et al. 2003; van den Bosch et al. 2003a, 2007; Zheng et al. 2005; Tinker et al. 2005; Mandelbaum et al. 2006; Brown et al. 2008; More et al. 2009, 2011; Cacciato et al. 2009; Neistein et al. 2011a,b; Avila-Reese & Firmani 2011).”
MERGERS AND BULGE FORMATION IN ΛCDM: WHICH MERGERS MATTER? (2009, background): “…in extended galaxy halos, intra-group and intra-cluster light can constrain satellite disruption (see e.g. Lin & Mohr 2004; Cypriano et al. 2006; Brown et al. 2008; Laganá et al. 2008), and observations of high redshift disk+bulge systems that may represent recent re-forming or relaxing merger…”
GALAXY CLUSTERING IN THE COMPLETED SDSS REDSHIFT SURVEY: THE DEPENDENCE ON COLOR AND LUMINOSITY (2010, background): “…HOD constraints provide informative tests of galaxy formation models, a low redshift baseline for evolutionary studies (e.g., Zheng et al. 2007; Brown et al. 2008), and a description that can be used to create realistic mock catalogs from simulations (Scoccimarro & Sheth 2002; Wechsler 2004;…”
MERGERS IN ΛCDM: UNCERTAINTIES IN THEORETICAL PREDICTIONS AND INTERPRETATIONS OF THE MERGER RATE (2010, background): “…growth, star formation histories, and merger rates (Zheng et al. 2007; Yan et al. 2003; Conroy et al. 2007; Conroy & Wechsler 2009; Pérez-González et al. 2008a; Tinker et al. 2005; Cooray 2006; Brown et al. 2008; Wetzel et al. 2009; Stewart et al. 2009a; Hopkins et al. 2010; Moster et al. 2010b).”