Paper detail

Galaxy stellar mass functions of different morphological types in clusters, and their evolution between z=0.8 and z=0

We present the galaxy stellar mass function (MF) and its evolution in clusters from z~0.8 to the current epoch, based on the WIde-field Nearby Galaxy-cluster Survey (WINGS) (0.04<z<0.07), and the ESO Distant Cluster Survey (EDisCS) (0.4<z <0.8). We investigate the total MF and find it evolves noticeably with redshift. The shape at M*>10^11 M&#39; does not evolve, but below M*~10^10.8 M&#39; the MF at high redshift is flat, while in the Local Universe it flattens out at lower masses. The population of M* = 10^10.2 - 10^10.8 M&#39; galaxies must have grown significantly between z=0.8 and z=0. We analyze the MF of different morphological types (ellipticals, S0s and late-types), and find that also each of them evolves with redshift. All types have proportionally more massive galaxies at high- than at low-z, and the strongest evolution occurs among S0 galaxies. Examining the morphology-mass relation (the way the proportion of galaxies of different morphological types changes with galaxy mass), we find it strongly depends on redshift. At both redshifts, ~40% of the stellar mass is in elliptical galaxies. Another ~43% of the mass is in S0 galaxies in local clusters, while it is in spirals in distant clusters. To explain the observed trends, we discuss the importance of those mechanisms that could shape the MF. We conclude that mass growth due to star formation plays a crucial role in driving the evolution. It has to be accompanied by infall of galaxies onto clusters, and the mass distribution of infalling galaxies might be different from that of cluster galaxies. However, comparing with high-z field samples, we do not find conclusive evidence for such an environmental mass segregation. Our results suggest that star formation and infall change directly the MF of late-type galaxies in clusters and, indirectly, that of early-type galaxies through subsequent morphological transformations.

preprint2010arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.