Paper detail

The effect of metal enrichment and galactic winds on galaxy formation in cosmological zoom simulations

We investigate the differential effects of metal cooling and galactic stellar winds on the cosmological formation of individual galaxies with three sets of cosmological, hydrodynamical zoom simulations of 45 halos in the mass range 10^11<M_halo<10^13M_sun. Models including both galactic winds and metal cooling (i) suppress early star formation at z>1 and predict reasonable star formation histories, (ii) produce galaxies with high cold gas fractions (30-60 per cent) at high redshift, (iii) significantly reduce the galaxy formation efficiencies for halos (M_halo<10^12M_sun) at all redshifts in agreement with observational and abundance matching constraints, (iv) result in high-redshift galaxies with reduced circular velocities matching the observed Tully-Fisher relation at z~2, and (v) significantly increase the sizes of low-mass galaxies (M_stellar<3x10^10M_sun) at high redshift resulting in a weak size evolution - a trend in agreement with observations. However, the low redshift (z<0.5) star formation rates of massive galaxies are higher than observed (up to ten times). No tested model predicts the observed size evolution for low-mass and high-mass galaxies simultaneously. Due to the delayed onset of star formation in the wind models, the metal enrichment of gas and stars is delayed and agrees well with observational constraints. Metal cooling and stellar winds are both found to increase the ratio of in situ formed to accreted stars - the relative importance of dissipative vs. dissipationless assembly. For halo masses below ~10^12M_sun, this is mainly caused by less stellar accretion and compares well to predictions from semi-analytical models but still differs from abundance matching models. For higher masses, the fraction of in situ stars is over-predicted due to the unrealistically high star formation rates at low redshifts.

preprint2013arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access12 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.

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.