Paper detail

The stellar masses and specific star-formation rates of submillimetre galaxies

Establishing the stellar masses (M*), and hence specific star-formation rates (sSFRs) of submillimetre galaxies (SMGs) is crucial for determining their role in the cosmic galaxy/star formation. However, there is as yet no consensus over the typical M* of SMGs. Specifically, even for the same set of SMGs, the reported average M* have ranged over an order of magnitude, from ~5x10^10 Mo to ~5x10^11 Mo. Here we study how different methods of analysis can lead to such widely varying results. We find that, contrary to recent claims in the literature, potential contamination of IRAC 3-8 um photometry from hot dust associated with an active nucleus is not the origin of the published discrepancies in derived M*. Instead, we expose in detail how inferred M* depends on assumptions made in the photometric fitting, and quantify the individual and cumulative effects of different choices of initial mass function, different brands of evolutionary synthesis models, and different forms of assumed star-formation history. We review current observational evidence for and against these alternatives as well as clues from the hydrodynamical simulations, and conclude that, for the most justifiable choices of these model inputs, the average M* of SMGs is ~2x10^11 Mo. We also confirm that this number is perfectly reasonable in the light of the latest measurements of their dynamical masses, and the evolving M* function of the overall galaxy population. M* of this order imply that the average sSFR of SMGs is comparable to that of other star-forming galaxies at z>2, at 2-3 Gyr^-1. This supports the view that, while rare outliers may be found at any M*, most SMGs simply form the top end of the main-sequence of star-forming galaxies at these redshifts. Conversely, this argues strongly against the viewpoint that SMGs are extreme pathological objects, of little relevance in the cosmic history of star-formation.

preprint2012arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access6 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.