4.7 Article

Minor versus major mergers: the stellar mass growth of massive galaxies from z=3 using number density selection techniques

Journal

MONTHLY NOTICES OF THE ROYAL ASTRONOMICAL SOCIETY
Volume 445, Issue 3, Pages 2198-2213

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/mnras/stu1802

Keywords

galaxies: evolution; galaxies: high-redshift; galaxies: interactions; galaxies: star formation; galaxies: structure; infrared: galaxies

Funding

  1. STFC
  2. Leverhulme trust
  3. European Research Council Consolidator Grant
  4. STFC [ST/L000695/1, ST/I505856/1, ST/I001212/1] Funding Source: UKRI
  5. Science and Technology Facilities Council [ST/L000695/1, ST/I505856/1, ST/I001212/1] Funding Source: researchfish

Ask authors/readers for more resources

We present a study on the stellar mass growth of the progenitors of local massive galaxies with a variety of number density selections with n <= 1 x 10(-4) Mpc(-3) (corresponding to M-* = 10(11.24) M-circle dot at z = 0.3) in the redshift range 0.3 < z < 3.0. We select the progenitors of massive galaxies using a constant number density selection, and one which is adjusted to account for major mergers. We find that the progenitors of massive galaxies grow by a factor of 4 in total stellar mass over this redshift range. On average the stellar mass added via the processes of star formation, major and minor mergers account for 24 +/- 8, 17 +/- 15 and 34 +/- 14 per cent, respectively, of the total galaxy stellar mass at z = 0.3. Therefore 51 +/- 20 per cent of the total stellar mass in massive galaxies at z = 0.3 is created externally to their z = 3 progenitors. We explore the implication of these results on the cold gas accretion rate and size evolution of the progenitors of most massive galaxies over the same redshift range. We find an average gas accretion rate of similar to 66 +/- 32 M-circle dot yr(-1) over the redshift range of 1.5 < z < 3.0. We find that the size evolution of a galaxy sample selected this way is on average lower than the findings of other investigations.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available