Paper detail

The environmental dependence of the stellar mass function at z~1: Comparing cluster and field between the GCLASS and UltraVISTA surveys

We present the stellar mass functions (SMFs) of star-forming and quiescent galaxies from observations of 10 rich clusters in the Gemini Cluster Astrophysics Spectroscopic Survey (GCLASS) in the redshift range 0.86<z<1.34. We compare our results with field measurements at similar redshifts using data from a Ks-band selected catalogue of the COSMOS/UltraVISTA field. We construct a Ks-band selected multi-colour catalogue for the clusters in 11 photometric bands covering u-8um, and estimate photometric redshifts and stellar masses using SED fitting techniques. To correct for interlopers in our cluster sample, we use the deep spectroscopic component of GCLASS, which contains spectra for 1282 identified cluster and field galaxies taken with Gemini/GMOS. Both the photometric and spectroscopic samples are sufficiently deep that we can probe the SMF down to masses of 10^10 Msun. We distinguish between star-forming and quiescent galaxies using the rest-frame U-V versus V-J diagram, and find that the best-fitting Schechter parameters alpha and M* are similar within the uncertainties for these galaxy types within the different environments. However, there is a significant difference in the shape and normalisation of the total SMF between the clusters and the field sample. This difference in the total SMF is primarily a reflection of the increased fraction of quiescent galaxies in high-density environments. We apply a simple quenching model that includes components of mass- and environment-driven quenching, and find that in this picture 45% of the star-forming galaxies, which normally would be forming stars in the field, are quenched by the cluster. If galaxies in clusters and the field quench their star formation via different mechanisms, these processes have to conspire in such a way that the shapes of the quiescent and star-forming SMF remain similar in these different environments.

preprint2013arXivOpen 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.