Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dzt6s Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T05:30:29.415Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Revealing infrared populations of nearby galaxies using the Spitzer Space Telescope

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  13 April 2010

Mikako Matsuura*
Affiliation:
UCL-Institute of Origins, Department of Physics and Astronomy, University College London, Gower Street, London WC1E 6BT, United Kingdom email: [email protected] UCL-Institute of Origins, Mullard Space Science Laboratory, University College London, Holmbury St. Mary, Dorking, Surrey RH5 6NT, United Kingdom
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Due to their brightness in infrared, asymptotic giant branch (AGB) stars are in important evolutionary stage to be understood at this wavelength. In particular, in next decades, when the infrared optimised telescopes, such as the JWST and the ELT are in operation, it will be essential to include the AGB phase more precisely into the population synthesis models. However, the AGB phase is still one of the remaining major problems in the stellar evolution. This is because the AGB stellar evolution is strongly affected by the mass-loss process from the stars. It is important to describe mass loss more accurately so as to incorporate it into stellar evolutionary models. Recent observations using the Spitzer Space Telescope (SST) enabled us to make a significant progress in understanding the mass loss from AGB stars. Moreover, the SST large surveys contributed to our understanding of the role of AGB stars in chemical enrichment process in galaxies. Here we present the summary of our recent progress.

Type
Contributed Papers
Copyright
Copyright © International Astronomical Union 2010

References

Bowen, G. H. & Willson, L. A. 1991, ApJ 375, L53CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bruzual, G. 2009, IAU S262, this volumeGoogle Scholar
Cioni, M. L., Girardi, L., Marigo, P., & Habing, H. J. 2006, A&A 448, 77Google Scholar
Feast, M. W., Glass, I. S., Whitelock, P. A., & Catchpole, R. M., 1989, MNRAS 241, 375CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Groenewegen, M. A. T. et al. , 2007, MNRAS 376, 313CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gruendl, R. A. et al. 2008, ApJ 688, L9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harris, J. & Zaritsky, D. 2009, AJ, in press (arXiv0908.1422)Google Scholar
Houck, J.R. et al. 2004, ApJS 154, 18Google Scholar
Kemper, F. et al. 2009, AJ submittedGoogle Scholar
Lagadec, E. et al. 2007, MNRAS 376, 1270CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marigo, et al. 2008, A&A 482, 883Google Scholar
Matsuura, et al. 2002, ApJ 580, L133CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Matsuura, M. et al. , 2005, A&A 434, 691Google Scholar
Matsuura, M. et al. 2007, MNRAS, 382, 1889CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Matsuura, M. et al. 2009, MNRAS 396, 918CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meixner, M. et al. 2006, AJ 132, 2268Google Scholar
Sloan, G. C. et al. 2009, Science 323, 353CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Valiante, R., Schneider, R., Bianchi, S., & Andersen, A. C. 2009, MNRAS 397, 1661CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wachter, A., Winters, J. M., Schröder, K.-P., & Sedlmayr, E. 2008, A&A 486, 497Google Scholar
Werner, M. W. et al. 2004, ApJS 154, 1Google Scholar
Zijlstra, A. A. et al. 2006, MNRAS 370, 1961CrossRefGoogle Scholar