Paper detail

Submillimetre galaxies in a hierarchical universe: number counts, redshift distribution, and implications for the IMF

High-redshift submillimetre galaxies (SMGs) are some of the most rapidly star-forming galaxies in the Universe. Historically, galaxy formation models have had difficulty explaining the observed number counts of SMGs. We combine a semi-empirical model with 3-D hydrodynamical simulations and 3-D dust radiative transfer to predict the number counts of unlensed SMGs. Because the stellar mass functions, gas and dust masses, and sizes of our galaxies are constrained to match observations, we can isolate uncertainties related to the dynamical evolution of galaxy mergers and the dust radiative transfer. The number counts and redshift distributions predicted by our model agree well with observations. Isolated disc galaxies dominate the faint (S_1.1 < ~1 mJy, or S_850 < ~2 mJy) population. The brighter sources are a mix of merger-induced starbursts and galaxy-pair SMGs; the latter subpopulation accounts for ~30 - 50 per cent of all SMGs at all S_1.1 > ~0.5 mJy (S_850 > ~1 mJy). The mean redshifts are ~3.0 - 3.5, depending on the flux cut, and the brightest sources tend to be at higher redshifts. Because the galaxy-pair SMGs will be resolved into multiple fainter sources by ALMA, the bright ALMA counts should be as much as 2 times less than those observed using single-dish telescopes. The agreement between our model, which uses a Kroupa IMF, and observations suggests that the IMF in high-redshifts starbursts need not be top-heavy; if the IMF were top-heavy, our model would over-predict the number counts. We conclude that the difficulty some models have reproducing the observed SMG counts is likely indicative of more general problems -- such as an under-prediction of the abundance of massive galaxies or a star formation rate--stellar mass relation normalisation lower than that observed -- rather than a problem specific to the SMG population.

preprint2012arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access7 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.