Paper detail

Resolving the Discrepancy of Galaxy Merger Fraction Measurements at z ~ 0 - 3

We measure the merger fraction of massive galaxies using the UltraVISTA/COSMOS $Ks$-band selected catalog, complemented with the deeper, higher resolution 3DHST+CANDELS catalog selected in the HST/WFC3 $H$-band, presenting the largest mass-complete photometric merger sample up to $z\sim3$. We find that selecting mergers using the $H_{160}$-band flux ratio leads to an increasing merger fraction with redshift, while selecting mergers using the stellar mass ratio causes a diminishing redshift dependence. Defining major and minor mergers as having stellar mass ratios of 1:1 - 4:1 and 4:1 - 10:1 respectively, the results imply $\sim$1 major and $\lesssim$1 minor merger for an average massive (log$(M_{\star}/M_{\odot}) \geqslant 10.8$) galaxy during $z=0.1-2.5$. There may be an additional $\sim 0.5(0.3)$ major (minor) merger if we use the $H$-band flux ratio selection. The observed amount of major merging alone is sufficient to explain the observed number density evolution for the very massive (log$(M_{\star}/M_{\odot}) \geqslant 11.1$) galaxies. We argue that these very massive galaxies can put on a maximum of $6\%$ of stellar mass in addition to major and minor merging, so that their number density evolution remains consistent with observations. The observed number of major and minor mergers can increase the size of a massive quiescent galaxy by a factor of two at most. This amount of merging is enough to bring the compact quiescent galaxies formed at $z>2$ to lie at $1σ$ below the mean of the stellar mass-size relation as measured in some works (e.g. Newman et al. 2012), but additional mechanisms are needed to fully explain the evolution, and to be consistent with works suggesting stronger evolution (e.g. van der Wel et al. 2014).

preprint2014arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access3 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.