Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gxg78 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-12T08:44:20.297Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Relationship between Stellar and Halo Masses of Disk Galaxies at z = 0.2 − 1.2

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 May 2016

Christopher J. Conselice ,
Kevin Bundy ,
Richard S. Ellis ,
Jarle Brinchmann  and
Nicole Vogt
Christopher J. Conselice
Affiliation:
California Institute of Technology
Kevin Bundy
Affiliation:
California Institute of Technology
Richard S. Ellis
Affiliation:
California Institute of Technology
Jarle Brinchmann
Affiliation:
Max Planck Institute for Astrophysics
Nicole Vogt
Affiliation:
New Mexico State University

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.

We present the results of a study to determine the co-evolution of the virial and stellar masses for a sample of 83 disk galaxies between redshifts z = 0.2 − 1.2. the virial masses of these disks are computed using measured maximum rotational velocities from Keck spectroscopy and scale lengths from Hubble Space Telescope imaging. We compute stellar masses based on stellar population synthesis model fits to spectral energy distributions including K(2.2μm) band magnitudes. We find no apparent evolution with redshift from z = 0.2 − 1.2 in the relationship between stellar masses and maximum rotational velocities through the stellar mass Tully-Fisher relationship. We also find no evolution when comparing disk stellar and virial masses. Massive disk galaxies therefore appear to be already in place, in terms of their virial and stellar masses, out to the highest redshifts where they can be morphologically identified.

Type
Part 12: Dark and Visible Matter Scaling Relations
Information
Symposium - International Astronomical Union , Volume 220: Dark Matter in Galaxies , 2004 , pp. 399 - 404
Copyright
Copyright © Astronomical Society of the Pacific 2004 

References

Abadi, M.G., Navarro, J.F., Steinmetz, M., & Eke, V.R. 2003, ApJ, 591, 499.Google Scholar
Bell, E.F., & de Jong, R.S. 2001, ApJ, 550, 212.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Benson, A.J., et al. 2002, MNRAS, 333, 156.Google Scholar
Böhm, A., et al. 2003, astro-ph/0309263.Google Scholar
Brinchmann, J., & Ellis, R.S. 2000, ApJ, 536, L77.Google Scholar
Bruzual, G., & Charlot, S. 2003, MNRAS, 344, 1000.Google Scholar
Conselice, C.J., et al. 2003, ApJ, in press (astro-ph/0309039).Google Scholar
Madau, P., Pozzetti, L., & Dickinson, M. 1998, ApJ, 498, 106.Google Scholar
van den Bosch, F.C. 2002, MNRAS, 332, 456.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Verheijen, M.A.W. 2001, ApJ, 563, 694.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vogt, N.P., et al. 1996, ApJ, 465, L15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vogt, N.P., et al. 1997, ApJ, 479, L121.Google Scholar
Ziegler, B.L., et al. 2002, ApJ, 564, L69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar