Paper detail

Reconstructing the Assembly of Massive Galaxies. I: The Importance of the Progenitor Effect in the Observed Properties of Quiescent Galaxies at $z\approx 2$

We study the relationship between the morphology and star formation history (SFH) of 361 quiescent galaxies (QGs) at redshift $\langle z_{obs}\rangle\approx 2$, with stellar mass $\log M_*\ge10.3$, selected with the UVJ technique. Taking advantage of panchromatic photometry covering the rest-frame UV-to-NIR spectral range ($\approx40$ bands), we reconstruct the non-parametric SFH of the galaxies with the fully Bayesian SED fitting code Prospector. We find that the half-light radius $R_e$, observed at $z_{obs}$, depends on the formation redshift of the galaxies, $z_{form}$, and that this relationship depends on stellar mass. At $\log M_*<11$, the relationship is consistent with $R_e\propto(1+z_{form})^{-1}$, in line with the expectation that the galaxies' central density depends on the cosmic density at the time of their formation, i.e. the "progenitor effect". At $\log M_*>11$, the relationship between $R_e$ and $z_{form}$ flattens, suggesting that mergers become increasingly important for the size growth of more massive galaxies after they quenched. We also find that the relationship between $z_{form}$ and galaxy compactness similarly depends on stellar mass. While no clear trend is observed for QGs with $\log M_*>11$, lower-mass QGs that formed earlier, i.e. with larger $z_{form}$, have larger central stellar mass surface densities, both within the $R_e$ ($Σ_e$) and central 1 kpc ($Σ_{1kpc}$), and also larger $M_{1kpc}/M_*$, the fractional mass within the central 1 kpc. These trends between $z_{form}$ and compactness, however, essentially disappear, if the progenitor effect is removed by normalizing the stellar density with the cosmic density at $z_{form}$. Our findings highlight the importance of reconstructing the SFH of galaxies before attempting to infer their intrinsic structural evolution.

preprint2022arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access2 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.