4.7 Article

A photometric analysis of Abell 1689: two-dimensional multistructure decomposition, morphological classification and the Fundamental Plane

期刊

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/mnras/stx2477

关键词

galaxies: clusters: individual: Abell 1689; galaxies: elliptical and lenticular, cD; galaxies: fundamental parameters; galaxies: photometry; galaxies: spiral

资金

  1. Padua University [60A02-5857/13, 60A02-5833/14, 60A02-4434/15, CPDA133894]
  2. MINECO [AYA2013-43188-P]
  3. Science and Technology Facilities Council (STFC) [ST/H002456/1, ST/K00106X/1, ST/J002216/1]
  4. NASA [NAS5-26555]
  5. STFC [ST/K00106X/1, ST/N000919/1] Funding Source: UKRI
  6. Science and Technology Facilities Council [ST/N000919/1, ST/K00106X/1] Funding Source: researchfish

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We present a photometric analysis of 65 galaxies in the rich cluster Abell 1689 at z = 0.183, using the Hubble Space Telescope Advanced Camera for Surveys archive images in the rest-frame V band. We perform two-dimensional multicomponent photometric decomposition of each galaxy adopting different models of the surface-brightness distribution. We present an accurate morphological classification for each of the sample galaxies. For 50 early-type galaxies, we fit both a de Vaucouleurs law and a Sersic law; S0s are modelled by also including a disc component described by an exponential law. Bars of SB0s are described by the profile of a Ferrers ellipsoid. For the 15 spirals, we model a Sersic bulge, exponential disc and, when required, a Ferrers bar component. We derive the Fundamental Plane (FP) by fitting 40 early-type galaxies in the sample, using different surface-brightness distributions. We find that the tightest plane is that derived by Sersic bulges. We find that bulges of spirals lie on the same relation. The FP is better defined by the bulges alone rather than the entire galaxies. Comparison with local samples shows both an offset and rotation in the FP of Abell 1689.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据