The Tully-Fisher relations of early-type spiral and S0 galaxies
By Michael J. Williams, M. Bureau, M. Cappellari. 2010
163 citations recorded by the source corpus.
We demonstrate that the comparison of Tully-Fisher relations (TFRs) derived from global H I line widths to TFRs derived from the circular velocity profiles of dynamical models (or stellar kinematic observations corrected for asymmetric drift) is vulnerable to systematic and uncertain biases introduced by the different measures of rotation used. We therefore argue that to constrain the relative locations of the TFRs of spiral and S0 galaxies, the same tracer and measure must be used for both samples. Using detailed near-infrared imaging and the circular velocities of axisymmetric Jeans models of 14 nearby edge-on Sa‐Sb spirals and 14 nearby edge-on S0s drawn from a range of environments, we find that S0s lie on a TFR with the same slope as the spirals, but are on average 0:53 0:15 mag fainter at KS-band at a given rotational velocity. This is a significantly smaller offset than that measured in earlier studies of the S0 TFR, which we attribute to our elimination of the bias associated with using different rotation measures and our use of earlier type spirals as a reference. Since our measurement of the offset avoids systematic biases, it should be preferred to previous estimates. A spiral stellar population in which star formation is truncated would take 1 Gyr to fade by 0.53 mag at KS-band. If S0s are the products of a simple truncation of star formation in spirals, then this finding is difficult to reconcile with the observed evolution of the spiral/S0 fraction with redshift. Recent star formation could explain the observed lack of fading in S0s, but the offset of the S0 TFR persists as a function of both stellar and dynamical mass. We show that the offset of the S0 TFR could therefore be explained by a systematic difference between the total mass distributions of S0s and spirals, in the sense that S0s need to be smaller or more concentrated than spirals.
Subfields: Astronomy and Astrophysics, Global and Planetary Change
View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/c24d924b86f2ae29bfd68a039a6ef69ce84d8f5c
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 Global and Planetary Change
- C. Conroy
- Joel R. Primack
- C. Steidel
- Naveen A. Reddy
- A. Dutton
- Benjamin D. Johnson
- Robert C. Kennicutt Jr.
- A. Dekel
Citations in the corpus
- VLT/VIMOS integral field spectroscopy of luminous and ultraluminous infrared galaxies: 2D kinematic properties (2013, unknown): “In particular, we included the “asymmetric drift”term, which represents an extra component due to the dispersion ofthe gas around the disk of the galaxy, following the prescriptions by Epinat et al. (2009) and Williams et al. (2010).”
- Nebular Emission Line Ratios in z ≃ 2–3 Star-forming Galaxies with KBSS-MOSFIRE: Exploring the Impact of Ionization, Excitation, and Nitrogen-to-Oxygen Ratio (2016, methodology): “We calculate a linear fit to the locus of z ∼ 2.3 KBSSMOSFIRE star-forming galaxies in Figure 7 using the MPFITEXY IDL routine9 (Williams et al. 2010), and it has the form: log([O III]/Hβ) = 0.52− 0.29× [log(M∗/M⊙)− 10], (4) with σRMS = 0.19 dex scatter about the best-fit relation and an implied…”
- The ATLAS3D project – XX. Mass–size and mass–σ distributions of early-type galaxies: bulge fraction drives kinematics, mass-to-light ratio, molecular gas fraction and stellar initial mass function (2012, background): “…in different samples of nearby galaxies by Valentinuzzi et al. (2010) and Napolitano, Romanowsky & Tortora (2010), and a similar trend, with star-forming galaxies being larger than passive ones was found in place from redshift z ∼ 2.5 (Williams et al. 2010b; Wuyts et al. 2011; Newman et al. 2012).”
- Dark halo response and the stellar initial mass function in early-type and late-type galaxies (2010, background): “In the meantime we note that earlier type spirals have higher rotation velocities at fixed K-band luminosity and stellar mass than spiral galaxies in general (Noordermeer & Verheijen 2007; Williams et al. 2010).”
- REVISITING THE SCALING RELATIONS OF BLACK HOLE MASSES AND HOST GALAXY PROPERTIES (2012, unknown): “MPFITEXY is a least-squares estimator by Williams et al. (2010).”
- GALAXIES IN ΛCDM WITH HALO ABUNDANCE MATCHING: LUMINOSITY–VELOCITY RELATION, BARYONIC MASS–VELOCITY RELATION, VELOCITY FUNCTION, AND CLUSTERING (2010, result): “Other authors have come to the same conclusions (e.g., Williams et al. 2010; Dutton et al. 2010, 2011).”
- The ATLAS3D project – IV. The molecular gas content of early-type galaxies (2011, methodology): “In ‘TF model 2’, a similar procedure is followed except that Vc is generated from the galaxy’s dynamical mass, again using the relations of Williams et al. (2010), and in this case only the CO detections are used.”
- ANGULAR MOMENTUM AND GALAXY FORMATION REVISITED (2012, background): “We can thus think of these lenticulars as faded spirals, or of the spirals as rejuvenated lenticulars, although they differ in average B/T values, and more nuanced comparisons will require analysis of Υ⋆ (cf. Williams et al. 2010).”
- The relation between velocity dispersion and mass in simulated clusters of galaxies: dependence on the tracer and the baryonic physics (2013, background): “In order to understand the nature of the scatter, that is whether it is intrinsic or statistical, we have tried to compute the intrinsic scatter following Williams et al. (2010).”
- A REVISED PARALLEL-SEQUENCE MORPHOLOGICAL CLASSIFICATION OF GALAXIES: STRUCTURE AND FORMATION OF S0 AND SPHEROIDAL GALAXIES (2011, background): “The Tully-Fisher (1977) relation for S0 galaxies tells us that Vcirc = 104 km s −1 at MV ≃ −17 to −18 (Neistein et al. 1999; Hinz, et al. 2003; Bedregal et al. 2006; Williams et al. 2010).”
- DIRECT OXYGEN ABUNDANCES FOR LOW-LUMINOSITY LVL GALAXIES (2012, methodology): “Taking into consideration the errors on both quantities (c.f., Press et al. 1992), we determine the most likely linear fit to the data using the MPFITEXY routine (Williams et al. 2010), which depends, in turn, on the MPFIT package (Markwardt 2009).”