Paper detail

On the distribution of stellar masses in gamma-ray burst host galaxies

We analyse Spitzer images of 30 long-duration gamma-ray burst (GRB) host galaxies. We estimate their total stellar masses (M*) based on the rest-frame K-band luminosities (L_Krest) and constrain their star formation rates (SFRs, not corrected for dust extinction) based on the rest-frame UV continua. Further, we compute a mean M*/L_Krest = 0.45 Msun/Lsun. We find that the hosts are low M*, star-forming systems. The median M* in our sample (<M*> = 10^9.7 Msun) is lower than that of "field" galaxies (e.g., Gemini Deep Deep Survey). The range spanned by M* is 10^7 Msun < M* < 10^11 Msun, while the range spanned by the dust-uncorrected UV SFR is 10^-2 Msun yr^-1 < SFR < 10 Msun yr^-1. There is no evidence for intrinsic evolution in the distribution of M* with redshift. We show that extinction by dust must be present in at least 25% of the GRB hosts in our sample and suggest that this is a way to reconcile our finding of a relatively lower UV-based, specific SFR (PHI = SFR/M*) with previous claims that GRBs have some of the highest PHI values. We also examine the effect that the inability to resolve the star-forming regions in the hosts has on PHI.

preprint2010arXivOpen 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.

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.