Paper detail

Larger sizes of massive quiescent early-type galaxies in clusters than in the field at 0.8 < z < 1.5

[abridged] The mass-size relation of early-type galaxies (ETGs) has been largely studied in the last years to probe the mass assembly of the most massive objects in the Universe. In this paper, we focus on the mass-size relation of quiescent massive ETGs (Mstar/Msol > 3*10^10) living in massive clusters (M200 ~ 10^14 Mstar) at 0.8< z <1.5, as compared to those living in the field at the same epoch. Our sample contains ~ 400 ETGs in clusters and the same number in the field. Therefore, our sample is approximately an order of magnitude larger than previous studies in the same redshift range for galaxy clusters. We find that ETGs living in clusters are between ~30-50% larger than galaxies with the same stellar mass residing in the field. We parametrize the size using the mass-normalized size, gamma=Re/Mstar^0.57. The gamma distributions in both environments peak at the same position but the distributions in clusters are more skewed towards larger sizes. Since this size difference is not observed in the local Universe, the size evolution at fixed stellar mass from z~1.5 of cluster galaxies is less steep ((1+z)-0.53pm0.04) than the evolution of field galaxies ((1+z)-0.92pm0.04). The size difference seems to be essentially driven by the galaxies residing in the clusters cores (R<0.5*R200). If part of the size evolution is due to mergers, the difference we see between cluster and field galaxies could be due to higher merger rates in clusters at higher redshift, probably during the formation phase of the clusters when velocity dispersions are lower. We cannot exclude however that the difference is driven by newly quenched galaxies which are quenched more efficiently in clusters. The implications of these results for the hierarchical growth of ETGs will be discussed in a companion paper.

preprint2013arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access16 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.