Galaxy And Mass Assembly (GAMA): the mass-metallicity relationship
Galaxy And Mass Assembly (GAMA): the mass-metallicity relationship
复制标题
DOI：
10.1051/0004-6361/201220050
复制
发表时间：
2012-09
影响因子：
6.5
通讯作者：
C. Foster;A. Hopkins;M. Gunawardhana;M. Lara-López;R. Sharp;O. Steele;E. Taylor;S. Driver;I. K. Baldryi;S. Bamford;J. Liske;J. Loveday;P. Norberg;J. Peacock;M. Alpaslan;A. Bauer;J. Bland-Hawthorn;S. Brough;E. Cameron;M. Colless;C. Conselice;S. Croom;C. Frenk;D. Hill;D. Jones;L. Kelvin;K. Kuijken;R. Nichol;M. Owers;H. Parkinson;K. Pimbblet;C. Popescu;M. Prescott;A. Robotham;Á. López-Sánchez;W. Sutherland;D. Thomas;R. Tuffs;E. V. Kampen;D. Wijesinghe
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
C. Foster;A. Hopkins;M. Gunawardhana;M. Lara-López;R. Sharp;O. Steele;E. Taylor;S. Driver;I. K. Baldryi;S. Bamford;J. Liske;J. Loveday;P. Norberg;J. Peacock;M. Alpaslan;A. Bauer;J. Bland-Hawthorn;S. Brough;E. Cameron;M. Colless;C. Conselice;S. Croom;C. Frenk;D. Hill;D. Jones;L. Kelvin;K. Kuijken;R. Nichol;M. Owers;H. Parkinson;K. Pimbblet;C. Popescu;M. Prescott;A. Robotham;Á. López-Sánchez;W. Sutherland;D. Thomas;R. Tuffs;E. V. Kampen;D. Wijesinghe
上下文恒星形成星系的质量-金属丰度关系（MMR）是公认的，但对于它的确切形状及其对其他观测值的可能依赖性仍然存在一些分歧。目标。我们在星系和质量大会（GAMA）调查中测量MMR。我们比较我们测得的MMR斯隆数字巡天（SDSS）中测得的，并研究MMR对各种选择标准的依赖性，以确定文献中看到的差异的潜在原因。方法.我们使用强发射线比诊断，以获得氧丰度。然后，我们应用一系列的选择标准，在各种发射线的最小信号噪声，以及表观和绝对的幅度，研究推断MMR的变化。结果MMR的形状和位置可以根据所使用的金属丰度校准和选择而显著不同。在这些测试中选择了一个强大的金属丰度校准后，我们发现，尽管探测的光度范围不同，但GAMA中红移0.061 μ z ≤ 0.35的质量-金属丰度关系与SDSS中发现的质量-金属丰度关系是合理一致的。结论.鉴于抽样准则和方法的合理改变会导致产妇死亡率出现重大差异，我们建议在直接比较不同调查和研究的产妇死亡率时应谨慎。我们还得出结论，在GAMA样本中，可能存在超过0.06 ≤ z ≤ 0.35的适度进化水平。
Context. The mass-metallicity relationship (MMR) of star-forming galaxies is well-established, however there is still some disagreement with respect to its exact shape and its possible dependence on other observables. Aims. We measure the MMR in the Galaxy And Mass Assembly (GAMA) survey. We compare our measured MMR to that measured in the Sloan Digital Sky Survey (SDSS) and study the dependence of the MMR on various selection criteria to identify potential causes for disparities seen in the literature. Methods. We use strong emission line ratio diagnostics to derive oxygen abundances. We then apply a range of selection criteria for the minimum signal-to-noise in various emission lines, as well as the apparent and absolute magnitude to study variations in the inferred MMR. Results. The shape and position of the MMR can differ significantly depending on the metallicity calibration and selection used. After selecting a robust metallicity calibration amongst those tested, we find that the mass-metallicity relation for redshifts 0.061 ≲ z ≲ 0.35 in GAMA is in reasonable agreement with that found in the SDSS despite the difference in the luminosity range probed. Conclusions. In view of the significant variations of the MMR brought about by reasonable changes in the sample selection criteria and method, we recommend that care be taken when comparing the MMR from different surveys and studies directly. We also conclude that there could be a modest level of evolution over 0.06 ≤ z ≤ 0.35 within the GAMA sample.