A fundamental plane for field star-forming galaxies

By M. Lara-López, J. Cepa, A. Bongiovanni, A. P. Garćıa, A. Ederoclite, H. Castaneda, M. F. Lorenzo, M. Pović, M. S'anchez-Portal. 2010

306 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Star formation rate (SFR), metallicity and stellar mass are within the important parameters of star--forming galaxies that characterize their formation and evolution. They are known to be related to each other at low and high redshift in the mass--metallicity, mass--SFR, and metallicity--SFR relations. In this work we demonstrate the existence of a plane in the 3D space defined by the axes SFR [log(SFR)(M_sun yr^-1)], gas metallicity [12+log(O/H)], and stellar mass [log(M_star/M_sun)] of star-forming galaxies. We used star--forming galaxies from the "main galaxy sample" of the Sloan Digital Sky Survey--Data Release 7 (SDSS-DR7) in the redshift range 0.04 < z < 0.1 and r-magnitudes between 14.5 and 17.77. Metallicities, SFRs, and stellar masses were taken from the Max-Planck-Institute for Astrophysics-John Hopkins University (MPA-JHU) emission line analysis database. From a final sample of 44214 galaxies, we find for the first time a fundamental plane for field galaxies relating the SFR, gas metallicity, and stellar mass for star--forming galaxies in the local universe. One of the applications of this plane would be estimating stellar masses from SFR and metallicity. High redshift data from the literature at redshift ~2.2 and 3.5, do not show evidence for evolution in this fundamental plane.

Subfields: Astronomy and Astrophysics, Instrumentation

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/a1c36caf60fb38d3e543d338e833138b9aa0a68c

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 impact of gas inflows on star formation rates and metallicities in barred galaxies (2011, background): “Mannucci et al. (2010) and Lara-Lopez et al. (2010b) have even suggested a fundamental relation between SFR, mass and metallicity in star-forming galaxies that can be fitted with a plane.”
The relation between metallicity, stellar mass and star formation in galaxies: an analysis of observational and model data (2011, methodology): “When fixing stellar mass as the principle axis, and using the optimum projection determined by Lara-López et al. (2010b), we find a mean dispersion of 0.74 dex and a 1σ scatter of 0.24 dex around M∗ from residuals.”
Ionization state of inter-stellar medium in galaxies: evolution, SFR-M * -Z dependence, and ionizing photon escape (2013, background): “Recently, Mannucci et al. (2010) and Lara-López et al. (2010) identify that the M∗–”
THE UNIVERSAL RELATION OF GALACTIC CHEMICAL EVOLUTION: THE ORIGIN OF THE MASS–METALLICITY RELATION (2014, background): “A relation between stellar mass, metallicity and star formation rate (SFR) is observed in local (Mannucci et al. 2010; Lara-López et al. 2010; Yates et al. 2012; Andrews & Martini 2013) and high redshift galaxies (Zahid et al. 2013b; Yabe et al. 2014; Troncoso et al. 2014).”
THE EVOLVING INTERSTELLAR MEDIUM OF STAR-FORMING GALAXIES SINCE z = 2 AS PROBED BY THEIR INFRARED SPECTRAL ENERGY DISTRIBUTIONS (2012, methodology): “…which form the basis for computing αCO for an ISM experiencing “normal” star-formation activity, vary smoothly as a function of stellar mass and star formation rate according to the calibration of the fundamental metallicity plane given in Mannucci et al. (2010; see also Lara-Lopez et al. 2010).”
The neutral hydrogen content of galaxies in cosmological hydrodynamic simulations (2013, background): “Such a trend has been observed (Lara-López et al. 2010; Mannucci et al. 2010), and is known as the fundamental metallicity relation; our simulations naturally predict this (Davé, Finlator, & Oppenheimer 2011).”
Deriving model-based Te-consistent chemical abundances in ionized gaseous nebulae (2014, background): “The importance of these mechanisms should not be neglected as these are thought to be behind the empirical law found between metallicity and star formation rate (e.g. Lara-López et al. 2010; Mannucci et al. 2010; PérezMontero et al. 2013).”
Galaxy Evolution in Cosmological Simulations with Outflows II: Metallicities and Gas Fractions (2011, background): “Lara-López et al. (2010) independently found a similar relation.”
An analytic model for the evolution of the stellar, gas and metal content of galaxies (2011, result): “These trends are qualitatively consistent with observations (Ellison et al. 2008; Lara-López et al. 2010; Mannucci et al. 2010; Peeples & Shankar 2010).”
A fundamental relation between the metallicity, gas content, and stellar mass of local galaxies (2013, background): “The recent papers that defined the FMR (Lara-López et al. 2010; Mannucci et al. 2010) defined the relation as a distribution of galaxies in a three-dimensional parameter space defined by stellar mass, metallicity and SFR.”
The evolution of the dust and gas content in galaxies (2013, background): “According to the FMR, the gas metallicity only depends on the SFR and the stellar mass, and does not evolve with redshift (see also Lara-López et al. 2010).”
simba: Cosmological simulations with black hole growth and feedback (2019, methodology): “This has been noted observationally as the Fundamental Metallicity Relation (FMR; Mannucci et al. 2010; Lara-López et al. 2010).”
Constraints on star formation driven galaxy winds from the mass–metallicity relation at z= 0 (2010, background): “Observationally, Mannucci et al. (2010) and Lara-López et al. (2010) have recntly shown thatZg has less scatter at fixedM⋆ andṀSFR than at just fixedM⋆ (i.e., the mass-metallicity relation); there is no evidence for evolution of this surface up toz ∼ 2.5.”
JWST Census for the Mass–Metallicity Star Formation Relations at z = 4–10 with Self-consistent Flux Calibration and Proper Metallicity Calibrators (2023, background): “There are several expressions to describe the mutual dependencies between the three quantities ( Mannucci et al. 2010; Lara-López et al. 2010; Andrews & Martini 2013; Sanders et al. 2017; Curti et al. 2020; Sanders et al. 2021 ) .”
Physical Models of Galaxy Formation in a Cosmological Framework (2014, methodology): “The mass dependence of the sSFR also poses interesting challenges to models.”
Eliminating error in the chemical abundance scale for extragalactic H ii regions (2012, background): “…deep physical connection between metallicities, masses and starformation rate (e.g. Tremonti et al. 2004; Brinchmann et al. 2004; Kewley & Ellison 2008; Lara-López et al. 2010a,b), although these results are mainly based on trends of the chemical abundances and not on their absolute metallicities.”
THE EMISSION BY DUST AND STARS OF NEARBY GALAXIES IN THE HERSCHEL KINGFISH SURVEY (2011, background): “4b and 5b), considering that some authors have recently argued for a ‘fundamental plane’ relating stellar mass, SFR, and metallicity of emission-line galaxies (Mannucci et al. 2010; Lara-López et al. 2010).”