Paper detail

The evolution of the stellar mass-size relation of bulges and disks since $z = 1$

We explore the evolution of the stellar mass-size relation of galaxies of different morphological types and specifically bulge and disk components. We use a sample of $\sim35,000$ galaxies within a redshift range $0 < z < 1$, and stellar mass $\log_{10}(\mathrm{M}_*/\mathrm{M}_\odot) \geq 9.5$ volume-limited sample drawn from the combined DEVILS and HST-COSMOS region for which we presented a morphological classification into sub-classes of double-component (BD), pure-disk (pD), elliptical (E), and compact (C) in Paper-I and a structural decomposition into disk (D), diffuse bulge (dB), and compact bulge (cB) in Paper-II. We find that compared to disks, ellipticals and bulges follow steeper $M_*-R_e$ relations, likely indicating distinct evolutionary mechanisms. Ellipticals and disk structures follow consistently unchanged slopes of $\sim0.5$ and $\sim0.3$, respectively, at all redshifts. We quantify that disks follow a redshift independent $M_*-R_e$ slope regardless of the presence or absence of a bulge component (i.e., BD or pD) suggesting a similar origin and evolutionary pathway for all disks. Since $z = 1$ compact-bulges present a steepening relation which do not follow that of Es whilst diffuse-bulges experience a modest flattening. Overall, we find a close-to-no variation in the $M_*-R_e$ relations over the last $\sim8$ Gyr suggesting that despite ongoing although declining star-formation, mass evolution, morphological transitions and mergers, evolution moves galaxies along their $M_*-R_e$ trails. This seems to be consistent with an inside-out growth and evolution picture in which galaxies grow in size as they do in stellar mass. Besides, minor mergers are likely to be responsible for the growth of Es, at least in $z < 1$.

preprint2022arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access1 author3 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.