The Gas Phase Mass Metallicity Relation for Dwarf Galaxies: Dependence on Star Formation Rate and HI Gas Mass

preprint2015arXivOpen access

Abstract

Using a sample of dwarf galaxies observed using the VIMOS IFU on the VLT, we investigate the mass-metallicity relation (MZR) as a function of star formation rate (FMRSFR_{\text{SFR}}) as well as HI-gas mass (FMRHI_{\text{HI}}). We combine our IFU data with a subsample of galaxies from the ALFALFA HI survey crossmatched to the Sloan Digital Sky Survey to study the FMRSFR_{\text{SFR}} and FMRHI_{\text{HI}} across the stellar mass range 106.6^{6.6} to 108.8^{8.8} M⊙_\odot, with metallicities as low as 12+log(O/H) = 7.67. We find the 1σσ mean scatter in the MZR to be 0.05 dex. The 1σσ mean scatter in the FMRSFR_{\text{SFR}} (0.02 dex) is significantly lower than that of the MZR. The FMRSFR_{\text{SFR}} is not consistent between the IFU observed galaxies and the ALFALFA/SDSS galaxies for SFRs lower than 10−2.4^{-2.4} M⊙_\odot yr−1^{-1}, however this could be the result of limitations of our measurements in that regime. The lowest mean scatter (0.01 dex) is found in the FMRHI_{\text{HI}}. We also find that the FMRHI_{\text{HI}} is consistent between the IFU observed dwarf galaxies and the ALFALFA/SDSS crossmatched sample. We introduce the fundamental metallicity luminosity counterpart to the FMR, again characterized in terms of SFR (FMLSFR_{\text{SFR}}) and HI-gas mass (FMLHI_{\text{HI}}). We find that the FMLHI_{\text{HI}} relation is consistent between the IFU observed dwarf galaxy sample and the larger ALFALFA/SDSS sample. However the 1σσ scatter for the FMLHI_{\text{HI}} relation is not improved over the FMRHI_{\text{HI}} scenario. This leads us to conclude that the FMRHI_{\text{HI}} is the best candidate for a physically motivated fundamental metallicity relation.

Explore this paper’s authors, topics and related work.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Reviews 0

Write a reviewWrite

No reviews yet.

Discussion 0

Add a commentWrite

No comments yet.