Paper detail

Interpreting the Clustering of Distant Red Galaxies

We analyze the angular clustering of z~2.3 distant red galaxies (DRGs) measured by Quadri et al 2008. We find that, with robust estimates of the measurement errors and realistic halo occupation distribution modeling, the measured clustering can be well fit within standard halo occupation models, in contrast to previous results. However, in order to fit the strong break in w(theta) at theta=10 arcsec, nearly all satellite galaxies in the DRG luminosity range are required to be DRGs. Within this luminosity-threshold sample, the fraction of galaxies that are DRGs is ~44%, implying that the formation of DRGs is more efficient for satellite galaxies than for central galaxies. Despite the evolved stellar populations contained within DRGs at z=2.3, 90% of satellite galaxies in the DRG luminosity range have been accreted within 500 Myr. Thus, satellite DRGs must have known they would become satellites well before the time of their accretion. This implies that the formation of DRGs correlates with large-scale environment at fixed halo mass, although the large-scale bias of DRGs can be well fit without such assumptions. Further data are required to resolve this issue. Using the observational estimate that ~30% of DRGs have no ongoing star formation, we infer a timescale for star formation quenching for satellite galaxies of 450 Myr, although the uncertainty on this number is large. However, unless all non-star forming satellite DRGs were quenched before accretion, the quenching timescale is significantly shorter than z~0 estimates. Down to the completeness limit of the Quadri et al sample, we find that the halo masses of central DRGs are ~50% higher than non-DRGs in the same luminosity range, but at the highest halo masses the central galaxies are DRGs only ~2/3 of the time.

preprint2009arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access3 authors1 topic

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.