Paper detail

Kinematic classifications of local interacting galaxies: implications for the merger/disk classifications at high-z

The classification of galaxy mergers and isolated disks is key for understanding the relative importance of galaxy interactions and secular evolution during the assembly of galaxies. The kinematic properties of galaxies as traced by emission lines have been used to suggest the existence of a significant population of high-z star-forming galaxies consistent with isolated rotating disks. However, recent studies have cautioned that post-coalescence mergers may also display disk-like kinematics. To further investigate the robustness of merger/disk classifications based on kinematic properties, we carry out a systematic classification of 24 local (U)LIRGs spanning a range of galaxy morphologies: from isolated spiral galaxies, ongoing interacting systems, to fully merged remnants. We artificially redshift the WiFeS observations of these local (U)LIRGs to z=1.5 to make a realistic comparison with observations at high-z, and also to ensure that all galaxies have the same spatial sampling of ~900 pc. Using both kinemetry-based and visual classifications, we find that the reliability of kinematic classification shows a strong trend with the interaction stage of galaxies. Mergers with two nuclei and tidal tails have the most distinct kinematic properties compared to isolated disks, whereas a significant population of the interacting disks and merger remnants are indistinguishable from isolated disks. The high fraction of late-stage mergers showing disk-like kinematics reflects the complexity of the dynamics during galaxy interactions. However, the exact fractions of misidentified disks and mergers depend on the definition of kinematic asymmetries and the classification threshold when using kinemetry-based classifications. Our results suggest that additional indicators such as morphologies traced by stars or molecular gas are required to further constrain the merger/disk classifications at high-z.

preprint2015arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access9 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.

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.