J/MNRAS/427/1666    Massive galaxies in CANDELS-UDS field    (Bruce+, 2012)
The morphologies of massive galaxies at 1 < z < 3 in the CANDELS-UDS field:
compact bulges, and the rise and fall of massive discs.
    Bruce V.A., Dunlop J.S., Cirasuolo M., McLure R.J., Targett T.A.,
    Bell E.F., Croton D.J., Dekel A., Faber S.M., Ferguson H.C., Grogin N.A.,
    Kocevski D.D., Koekemoer A.M., Koo D.C., Lai K., Lotz J.M., McGrath E.J.,
    Newman J.A., van der Wel A.
   <Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc., 427, 1666-1701 (2012)>
   =2012MNRAS.427.1666B 2012MNRAS.427.1666B
ADC_Keywords: Galaxy catalogs ; Morphology
Keywords: galaxies: elliptical and lenticular, cD - galaxies: evolution -
          galaxies: high-redshift - galaxies: spiral - galaxies: structure
Abstract:
    We have used high-resolution, Hubble Space Telescope, near-infrared
    imaging to conduct a detailed analysis of the morphological properties
    of the most massive galaxies at high redshift, modelling the WFC3/IR
    H160-band images of the ≃200 galaxies in the CANDELS-UDS field with
    photometric redshifts 1<z<3, and stellar masses M*>1011M☉.
    We have explored the results of fitting single-Sersic and bulge+disc
    models, and have investigated the additional errors and potential
    biases introduced by uncertainties in the background and the on-image
    point spread function.
Description:
    The main aim of this paper is to present a comprehensive and robust
    analysis of the morphological properties of a significant sample of
    the most massive galaxies in the redshift range 1<z<3. In order to
    achieve this we have focused our study on the UKIDSS Ultra Deep Survey
    (UDS; Lawrence et al. 2007, Cat. II/314), the central region of which
    has been imaged with HST WFC3/IR as part of the CANDELS multicycle
    treasury programme (Grogin et al. 2011ApJS..197...35G 2011ApJS..197...35G; Koekemoer et
    al. 2011ApJS..197...36K 2011ApJS..197...36K).
    In addition to the near-infrared imaging provided by HST, the data
    sets we make use of for sample selection (i.e. photometric redshifts,
    stellar mass determination, SFRs and star formation histories)
    include: deep optical imaging in the B-, V-, R-, i'- and z'-band
    filters from the Subaru XMM-Newton Deep Survey (SXDS; Sekiguchi et
    al. 2005, in Renzini A., Bender R., eds, Multiwavelength Mapping of
    Galaxy Formation and Evolution. Springer, Berlin, p. 82; Furusawa et
    al. 2008, Cat. J/ApJS/176/301); U-band imaging obtained with MegaCam
    on Canada-France-Hawaii Telescope; J-, H- and K-band United
    Kingdom Infrared Telescope (UKIRT) WFCAM imaging from Data Release 8
    (DR8) of the UKIDSS UDS; and Spitzer 3.6-, 4.5-, 5.8- and 8.0-um IRAC
    and 24-um MIPS imaging from the SpUDS legacy programme (PI Dunlop).
File Summary:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 FileName   Lrecl  Records   Explanations
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ReadMe         80        .   This file
tables1.dat   113      215   Physical properties and best-fitting parameters
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
See also:
           II/314 : UKIDSS-DR8 LAS, GCS and DXS Surveys (Lawrence+ 2012)
   J/ApJS/176/301 : Subaru/XMM-Newton deep survey IV. (SXDS) (Ouchi+, 2008)
Byte-by-byte Description of file: tables1.dat
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
   Bytes Format Units    Label   Explanations
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
   1-  6  I6    ---      ID      [100222/123457] Galaxy identification number
   8-  9  I2    h        RAh     Right ascension (J2000)
  11- 12  I2    min      RAm     Right ascension (J2000)
  14- 18  F5.2  s        RAs     Right ascension (J2000)
      20  A1    ---      DE-     Declination sign (J2000)
  21- 22  I2    deg      DEd     Declination (J2000)
  24- 25  I2    arcmin   DEm     Declination (J2000)
  27- 30  F4.1  arcsec   DEs     Declination (J2000)
  32- 35  F4.2 10+11Msun M*      Stellar mass (1)
  37- 40  F4.2  ---      zph     [1/3] Photometric redshift (2)
  42- 46  F5.2  mag      Hmag    HST/WFC3 IR H160 total magnitude (3)
  48- 51  F4.1  ---      n       [0/20] Single Sersic index (4)
  53- 56  F4.1  kpc      re      Single Sersic effective radius (4)
  58- 61  F4.2  ---      b/a     [0/1] Single Sersic axial ratio (4)
  63- 66  F4.2  ---      PSFn    [0/1] Single Sersic PSF fraction (4)
      68  I1    ---      F       [0/1] unacceptable single component model (4)
  70- 72  F3.1  ---      Mod     [0/4] Model type (0.0, 1.0 or 4.0;
                                       not explained in the paper)
  74- 77  F4.1  kpc      reB     ?=- Bulge effective radius
  79- 82  F4.2  ---      b/aB    ?=- Bulge axial ratio
  84- 87  F4.1  kpc      reD     ?=- Disc effective radius
  89- 92  F4.2  ---      b/aD    [0/1]? Disc axial ratio
  94- 97  F4.2  ---      Bulge   [0/1] Bulge fraction
  99-102  F4.2  ---      Disc    [0/1] Disc fraction
 104-107  F4.2  ---      PSF     [0/1] PSF fraction
     109  I1    ---      F0      [0/1] Flag original
     111  I1    ---      F1      [0/1] Flag first refinement
     113  I1    ---      F2      [0/1] Flag final refinement
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note (1): Errors on photometric redshifts are of the order of
   δz/(1+zsp)=0.05, from Cirasuolo et al. (in preparation).
Note (2): We quote errors on our stellar mass estimates of a factor of 2
   (Michalowski et al., 2012A&A...541A..85M 2012A&A...541A..85M), where these are driven by
   uncertainties in the photometry from the IRAC bands and from photometric
   redshifts.
Note (3): We estimate errors on our total magnitudes of order ±0.05mag, as
   our sample of galaxies are at the extreme bright end (>10σ) so their
   errors are limited to uncertainties in photometric zero-points.
Note (4): Obtaining individual uncertainties for all the parameters of
   multiple-component fits listed here is impractical as the degree of
   systematic and correlated errors varies on an object-by-object basis.
   However, from the detailed parameter space search conducted for our
   single-Sersic models, we determined errors of the order of 10% for
   effective radii and 5% for Sersic indices, with errors being somewhat
   smaller for better constrained parameters such as axial ratios.
   Therefore, we estimate that the multiple-component errors will be a
   factor of sqrt(2) larger, giving errors on fitted parameters up to
   15%. However, we note that in the case of weak secondary components
   the errors can potentially be much larger, but as our science plots
   use only parameters from significant components the errors should be
   similar to those of the single component models.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
History:
    From electronic version of the journal
(End)                                      Patricia Vannier [CDS]    09-Aug-2013