J/A+A/616/A157 Probing star formation and ISM properties. II (Leslie+, 2018)
Probing star formation and ISM properties using galaxy disk inclination.
II. Testing typical FUV attenuation corrections out to z∼0.7.
Leslie S.K., Schinnerer E., Groves B., Sargent M.T., Zamorani G., Lang P.,
Vardoulaki E.
<Astron. Astrophys. 616, A157 (2018)>
=2018A&A...616A.157L 2018A&A...616A.157L (SIMBAD/NED BibCode)
ADC_Keywords: Combined data; Galaxies, photometry
Keywords: galaxies: star formation - ultraviolet: galaxies -
galaxies: evolution - galaxies: ISM
Abstract:
We evaluate dust-corrected far-ultraviolet (FUV) star formation rates
(SFRs) for samples of star-forming galaxies at z∼0 and z∼0.7 and find
significant differences between values obtained through corrections
based on UV colour, from a hybrid mid-infrared (MIR) plus FUV
relation, and from a radiative transfer based attenuation correction
method. The performances of the attenuation correction methods are
assessed by their ability to remove the dependency of the corrected
SFR on inclination, as well as returning, on average, the expected
population mean SFR. We find that combining MIR (rest-frame ∼13um) and
FUV luminosities gives the most inclination-independent SFRs and
reduces the intrinsic SFR scatter of the methods we tested. However,
applying the radiative transfer based method gives corrections to the
FUV SFR that are inclination independent and in agreement with the
expected SFRs at both z∼0 and z∼0.7. SFR corrections based on the
UV-slope perform worse than the other two methods we tested. For our
local sample, the UV-slope method works on average, but does not
remove inclination biases. At z∼0.7, we find that the UV-slope
correction we used locally flattens the inclination dependence
compared to the raw FUV measurements, but was not sufficient to correct
for the large attenuation observed at z∼0.7.
Description:
FUV SFRs for our full samples at z∼0 (from SDSS) and z∼0.7 (from
COSMOS) and other information used to derive the SFR - inclination
relations reported in in Table 1. The restricted sample can be
re-constructed by selecting ncorr<1.2 and r50corr>4. (see equation
2 and Table 2 in Leslie et al., 2018A&A...615A...7L 2018A&A...615A...7L). For the local
sample, the half light radius and sersic index come from Simard et al.
(2011, Cat. J/ApJS/196/11), and for the COSMOS sample the
morphological parameters come from the Zurich Structure and Morphology
Catalog (COSMOS). Stellar masses are from the MPA/JHU catalog (SDSS)
or the Laigle et al. (2016ApJS..224...24L 2016ApJS..224...24L) catalog (COSMOS). For more
information, please refer to Paper I (Leslie et al.,
2018A&A...615A...7L 2018A&A...615A...7L) and Paper II (this paper). The SFR FUV given in
these tables have been corrected for galactic reddening. The hybrid
SFR_UV+IR make use of Wuyts et al. 2008 SED and the SFR_beta use the
Boquien et al. (2012A&A...539A.145B 2012A&A...539A.145B) relationship between AFUV and
UV-slope beta. We also use the best fit tau and F (from a fit to the
full sample) from the Tuffs et al. (2004A&A...419..821T 2004A&A...419..821T) radiative
transfer (RT) models to correct the SFR.
File Summary:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FileName Lrecl Records Explanations
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ReadMe 80 . This file
localsfr.dat 304 3521 SFRs of local galaxy sample
cosmosfr.dat 282 578 SFRs of intermediate redshift galaxy sample
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Byte-by-byte Description of file: localsfr.dat
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bytes Format Units Label Explanations
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1- 20 F20.18 --- z Redshift
22- 39 F18.15 [Msun] logM Stellar mass (log10)
41- 59 F19.17 [Msun] e_logM Error on stellar mass
61- 80 F20.18 --- 1-cosi ? 1-cos(inclination)
82-101 F20.18 --- e_1-cosi ?=0 Error on 1-cos(inclination)
103-122 F20.17 kpc r50 Half-light radius g-band
124-141 F18.16 --- n Sersic index g-band
143-165 F23.20 [Msun/yr] logSFRFUVobs FUV star formation rate, log(SFRFUV)
166-186 F21.19 [Msun/yr] e_logSFRFUVobs Error on log(SFRFUV)
188-210 F23.20 [Msun/yr] logSFRFUVb log(SFRFUV) corrected with beta
211-231 F21.19 [Msun/yr] e_logSFRFUVb Error on log(SFRFUVb)
233-255 F23.19 [Msun/yr] logSFRFUVIR ? log(SFRFUV) corrected by UV+IR
257-276 F20.18 [Msun/yr] e_logSFRFUVIR ? Error on log(SFRFUVIR)
278-299 F22.19 [Msun/yr] logSFRFUVRT ? log(SFRFUV) corrected using RT
301-304 F4.2 [Msun/yr] e_logSFRFUVRT ? Error on log(SFRFUVRT)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Byte-by-byte Description of file: cosmosfr.dat
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bytes Format Units Label Explanations
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1- 18 F18.16 --- z Redshift
20- 37 F18.15 [Msun] logM Stellar mass (log10)
39- 58 F20.18 [Msun] e_logM Error on stellar mass
60- 78 F19.17 --- 1-cosi 1-cos(inclination)
80-100 F21.19 --- e_1-cosi Error on 1-cos(inclination)
102-120 F19.16 kpc r50 half-light radius I-band
122-128 F7.5 --- n Sersic index I-band
130-151 F22.19 [Msun/yr] logSFRUVobs FUV star formation rate, log(SFRFUV)
153-172 F20.18 [Msun/yr] e_logSFRUVobs Error on log(SFRFUV)
174-194 F21.18 [Msun/yr] logSFRUVb ? log(SFRFUV) corrected using beta
196-215 F20.18 [Msun/yr] e_logSFRUVb ? Error on log(SFRUVb)
217-235 F19.17 [Msun/yr] logSFRUVIR ? log(SFRFUV) corrected by UV+IR
237-257 F21.18 [Msun/yr] e_logSFRUVIR []? Error on log(SFRUVIR)
259-277 F19.17 [Msun/yr] logSFRUVRT ? log(SFRFUV) corrected using RT
279-282 F4.2 [Msun/yr] e_logSFRUVRT ? Error on log(SFRUVRT)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Acknowledgements:
Sarah Leslie, leslie(at)mpia.de
References:
Leslie et al., Paper I 2018A&A...615A...7L 2018A&A...615A...7L
(End) Patricia Vannier [CDS] 28-Aug-2018