Galaxies in clusters and their progenitors
Pieter van Dokkum (Yale)
General properties of cluster galaxies
• Morphology-density relation• In core approx. 80% are E and S0 galaxies
(Dressler 1980)
General properties of cluster galaxies
• Cluster galaxies follow tight scaling relations:
– Color-magnitude relation
– Fundamental Plane (Djorgovski & Davis 1987, Dressler et al 1987)
– relation (Faber 1973)
bMg
(e.g., Bower, Lucey, Ellis 1992)
Terlevich, Caldwell,Bower 2001
Motivation for studying cluster galaxies
• Early-type galaxies are massive and old:
Constrain galaxy formation theories
or ?
Motivation for studying cluster galaxies
• Descendants Ly-break galaxies?– Ly-break galaxies already clustered (Giavalisco et al
1998)
– In hierarchical models end up in groups and clusters
Baugh et al. 1998
Ly-break descendants
• Study the evolution of galaxies in the densest environments– Determine when/how galaxies and LSS formed– Test predictions from CDM models
• Such programs require the resolution of HST and collecting area of large ground-based telescopes
Observational programs
Meza etal. 2003
Observational programs
• Several 100 clusters known at 0.2<z<1.0(best selected by SZ-effect, lensing, or X-rays)
Stanford etal. 2001
Observational programs
• Several 100 clusters known at 0.2<z<1.5(best selected by SZ-effect, lensing, or X-rays)
(Lensing NOT effective method beyond z~0.7)
Observational programs
• Several 100 clusters known at 0.2<z<1.0(best selected by SZ-effect, lensing, or X-rays)
• Many (50+) observed with HST (eg ACS GTO team)
Abell 2218 (z=0.18; Ellis et al 04) RX0848 (z=1.27; van D & Stanford 03)
Observational programs
• Several 100 clusters known at 0.2<z<1.0(best selected by SZ-effect, lensing, or X-rays)
• Many (50+) observed with HST (eg ACS GTO team)
• … but only handful outside the inner Mpc
CL1358+62 MS2053-04 MS1054-03 (z=0.33) (z=0.58) (z=0.83)
What have we learned ?
• Early-type galaxies appear to evolve slowly and gradually -> stars formed at high redshift
z=10
z=3z=1.5
Fundamental Plane:van Dokkum/Franx/Kelson/Illingworth/Stanford/vdMarel 96-04
Studies of colors, line strengths, etc:Ellis et al. 1997, Bernardi et al 98,Stanford et al 95/98, vD et al 98,00,Treu et al 99,02, Poggianti et al 03,Blakeslee et al 03, Kodama et al 04
What have we learned ?
RDCS1252 (z=1.24; Blakeslee et al 03; Lidman et al 03)
What have we learned ?
• At the same time, morphological mix evolves
Andreon et al. 1997 Fabricant et al 98Dressler et al. 1997 van D et al 00,01Lubin et al. 1998
Smith et al 04
What have we learned ?
• At the same time, morphological mix evolves• This may affect age estimates of early-type
galaxies (“progenitor bias”; vDF01)• Current idea: evolution driven by infall from the
field
Kodama et al 01(z=0.41; Subaru)
Field spirals andgroups fall in
MORPHS
- Interaction hot gas: “ram pressure stripping” spiral -> S0 galaxy (Gunn & Gott 1972)
- Encounters: “galaxy harassment” spiral -> early-type (Moore et al 98)
Kenney
- Mergers may take place in infalling groups groups -> ellipticals (van Dokkum et al 1999)
Cluster evolution at 0.5<z<1.5
• Need to sample to the virial radius: R~10’• Very inefficient with HST (even with ACS/WF3)
CL0024 at z=0.39Treu et al. 2003 30 arcmin
Surveying clusters at 0.5<z<1.5
• Need to sample to the virial radius: R~10’• Very inefficient with HST (even with ACS/WF3)• Requirements:
– Field of 20-30 arcmin– Near-IR capability to study clusters beyond z=1
• Good match to SNAPlike mission (expect 10-20 clusters in 15 sq degrees of deep survey areas!)
Progenitors at z>2
• Overdensities of young objects found out to z~5
Venemans et al 02; also: Francis et al 97, Steidel et al 00, …
Progenitors at z>2
• Overdensities of young objects found out to z~4• However, rest-UV selection may give biased view
Optical: Palomar digital sky survey UV: GALEX
• L* Sb/c galaxy at z=3: K 23, R 28• Would not be selected by any current method!
Typical Lyman-break galaxyand typical nearby spiral
Selecting “mature” galaxies at z>2
• Use redshifted Balmer- or 4000Å-break
• Adopted criterion: J – K > 2.3 (restframe U – V > 0)
MUSYC Deep(Ryan Quadri)
FIRES Wide(NataschaForster Schreiber)
FIRES Deep(Ivo Labbe)
10 arcmin
Red galaxies at z>2
• Substantial surface density:~ 0.6/arcmin to K=21 (from FIRES/MUSYC)~ 2/arcmin to K=22 (from FIRES)~ 3/arcmin to K=23 (from FIRES)
2
2
2
2
Red galaxies at z>2
• Substantial surface density: ~ 0.6/arcmin to K=21 (from FIRES/MUSYC)~ 2/arcmin to K=22 (from FIRES)~ 3/arcmin to K=23 (from FIRES)
• SEDs very different from Lyman breaks
2
2
2
Förster Schreiber et al., ApJ, submitted
Red galaxies at z>2
• Substantial surface density: ~ 0.8/arcmin to K=21 (from both fields)~ 2/arcmin to K=22 (from HDF-S)~ 3/arcmin to K=23 (from HDF-S)
• SEDs very different from Lyman breaks• Rest-frame optical spectroscopy + SED fits:
massive, dusty, star-forming galaxies
2
2
2
vD et al, ApJ, in press; Foerster Schreiber et al, ApJ, subm.
Red galaxy at z=2.43
Keck/NIRSPEC, 1½ hrsvD et al, ApJ, in press (astro-ph/0404471)
• Best constrained parameter: stellar (and dyn) mass
vD et al, ApJ, in press(astro-ph/0404471)
Correlations with linewidth
• Combining z=3 LBGs and z=2.6 DRGs: linewidth correlates with color and stellar mass
astro-ph/0404471
Evolution of massive galaxies
astro-ph/0404471
Evolution of massive galaxies
?
ERO
Early-type
DRG?
Spiral
LBG
Evolution of massive galaxies
ERO
Early-type
DRG
Spiral
LBG
Mapping matter at z=2-3
• Galaxies highly clustered -> need large fields– Map stellar mass using near-IR selected
galaxies– Map halo mass using Tully-Fisher type
correlations and clustering
HDF-South10’x10’RJK composite
K<21.5, J-K>2.3
MUSYC project(Ryan Quadri)
30’x30’ field(1/60 of SNAPdeep survey!)
Mapping matter at z=2-3
• Galaxies highly clustered -> need large fields– Map stellar mass using near-IR selected
galaxies– Map halo mass using Tully-Fisher type
correlations and clustering• Morphologies
– Fully formed galaxies or mergers?– Sizes: bulges or ellipticals?– Star formation in disks or clumps?– Density? Central point sources?
Red galaxy in Ultra Deep Field:ACS B,V,I,z + NICMOS J,H
B V I z J H
In near-IR, JDEM could be >1000 x more efficient than HST!
Mapping matter at z=2-3
• Galaxies highly clustered -> need large fields– Map stellar mass using near-IR selected
galaxies– Map halo mass using Tully-Fisher type
correlations and clustering• Morphologies
– Sizes / densities– Star formation in disks or clumps?
• How far to the red ?– Current selection: J–K -> z=2-4– In practice: break almost always between J and
H
Quadri etal., in prep
Mapping matter at z=2-3
• Galaxies highly clustered -> need large fields– Map stellar mass using near-IR selected galaxies– Map halo mass using Tully-Fisher type correlations
and clustering• Morphologies
– Sizes / densities– Star formation in disks or clumps?
• How far to the red ?– Current selection: J–K -> z=2-4– In practice: break almost always between J and H– Cutoff at 1.7 micron OK for z=2-3 (need filter!)
• There are exceptions:
• Overlap with ground-based K or IRAC needed to select red z>3 galaxies, and to fit the SEDs
K = 20.1phot z = 3.7
Mapping matter at z=2-3
• Galaxies highly clustered -> need large fields– Map stellar mass using near-IR selected galaxies– Map halo mass using Tully-Fisher type correlations
and clustering• Morphologies
– Sizes / densities– Star formation in disks or clumps?
• How far to the red ?– Current selection: J–K -> z=2-4– In practice: break almost always between J and H– Cutoff at 1.7 micron OK for z=2-3 (need filter!)
Blue: data for K-bright LBGs(Shapley et al; astro-ph/0405187)
Comparison to other star forming galaxies