Paper detail

Lyman Break Galaxies at z~5: Rest-Frame UV Spectra. III

We present results of optical spectroscopic observations of candidates of Lyman Break Galaxies (LBGs) at $z \sim 5$ in the region including the GOODS-N and the J0053+1234 region by using GMOS-N and GMOS-S, respectively. Among 25 candidates, five objects are identified to be at $z \sim 5$ (two of them were already identified by an earlier study) and one object very close to the color-selection window turned out to be a foreground galaxy. With this spectroscopically identified sample and those from previous studies, we derived the lower limits on the number density of bright ($M_{UV}<-22.0$ mag) LBGs at $z \sim 5$. These lower limits are comparable to or slightly smaller than the number densities of UV luminosity functions (UVLFs) that show the smaller number density among $z \sim 5$ UVLFs in literature. However, by considering that there remain many LBG candidates without spectroscopic observations, the number density of bright LBGs is expected to increase by a factor of two or more. The evidence for the deficiency of UV luminous LBGs with large Ly$α$ equivalent widths was reinforced. We discuss possible causes for the deficiency and prefer the interpretation of dust absorption.

preprint2009arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access9 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.