Paper detail

How tidal erosion has shaped the relation between globular cluster specific frequency and galaxy luminosity

We quantify to what extent tidal erosion of globular clusters (GCs) has contributed to the observed u-shaped relation between GC specific frequencies S_N and host galaxy luminosity M_V. We used our MUESLI code to calculate GC survival rates for typical early-type galaxy potentials covering a wide range of observed galaxy properties. We do this for isotropic and radially anisotropic GC velocity distributions. We find that the calculated GC survival fraction, f_s, depends linearly on the logarithm of the 3D mass density, rho_3D, within the galaxy's half light radius, with f_s proportional to (rho_3D)^(-0.17). For a given galaxy, survival rates are lower for radially anisotropic configurations than for the isotropic GC cases. We apply these relations to a literature sample of 219 early-type galaxies from Harris et al. (2013) in the range M_V=[-24.5:-15.5] mag. The expected GC survival fraction ranges from ~50% for the most massive galaxies with the largest radii to ~10% for the most compact galaxies. We find that intermediate luminosity galaxies M_V=[-20.5:-17.5] mag have the strongest expected GC erosion. Within the considered literature sample, the predicted GC survival fraction therefore defines a u-shaped relation with M_V, similar to the relation between specific frequency S_N and M_V. As a consequence, the u-shape of S_N vs. M_V gets erased almost entirely when correcting the S_N values for the effect of GC erosion. We conclude that tidal erosion is an important contributor to the u-shaped relation between GC specific frequency and host galaxy luminosity. It must be taken into account when inferring primordial star cluster formation efficiencies from observations of GC systems in the nearby universe.

preprint2014arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access3 authors2 topics

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.

Institutions

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 map preview

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.