Paper detail

Quenching and Morphological Transformation in Semi-Analytic Models and CANDELS

We examine the spheroid growth and star formation quenching experienced by galaxies from z~3 to the present by studying the evolution with redshift of the quiescent and spheroid-dominated fractions of galaxies from the CANDELS and GAMA surveys. We compare the observed fractions with predictions from a semi-analytic model which includes prescriptions for bulge growth and AGN feedback due to mergers and disk instabilities. We facilitate direct morphological comparison by converting our model bulge-to-total stellar mass ratios to Sersic indices. We then subdivide our population into the four quadrants of the sSFR-Sersic index plane and study the buildup of each of these subpopulations. We find that the fraction of star forming disks declines steadily, while the fraction of quiescent spheroids builds up over cosmic time. The fractions of star forming spheroids and quiescent disks are both non-negligible, and stay nearly constant over the period we have studied, at about 10% and 15-20% respectively. Our model is qualitatively successful at reproducing the evolution of the two "main" populations (star forming disk-dominated galaxies and quiescent spheroid-dominated galaxies), and approximately reproduces the relative fractions of all four types, but predicts a stronger decline in star forming spheroids, and increase in quiescent disks, than seen in the observations. A model with an additional channel for bulge growth via disk instabilities agrees better overall with the observations than a model in which bulges may grow only through mergers. We study evolutionary tracks of some individual galaxies as they experience morphological transformation and quenching, and examine the importance of different physical drivers of this transformation (major and minor mergers and disk instabilities). We find that complex histories with multiple transformative events are the norm.

preprint2015arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

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 graph slice

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.