Paper detail

What does (not) drive the variation of the low-mass end of the stellar initial mass function of early-type galaxies

The stellar initial mass function (IMF) seems to be variable and not universal, as argued in the literature in the last three decades. Several relations among the low-mass end of the IMF slope and other stellar population, photometric or kinematic parameters of massive early-type galaxies (ETGs) have been proposed, but a consolidated agreement on a factual cause of the observed variations has not been reached yet. We investigate the relations between the IMF and other stellar population parameters in NGC 3311, the central galaxy of the Hydra I cluster. NGC 3311 is characterized by old and metal-rich stars, like other massive ETGs, but has unusual increasing stellar velocity dispersion and [$α/$Fe] profiles. We use spatially resolved MUSE observations to obtain stellar population properties using Bayesian full-spectrum fitting in the central part of NGC 3311 to compare the IMF slope against other stellar parameters with the goal of assessing their relations/dependencies. For NGC 3311, we unambiguously invalidate the previously observed direct correlation between the IMF slope and the local stellar velocity dispersion, confirming some doubts already raised in the literature. This relation may arise as a spatial coincidence only, between the region with the largest stellar velocity dispersion, with that where the oldest, $\textit{in situ}$ population is found and dominates. We also show robust evidence that the proposed IMF-metallicity relation is contaminated by the degeneracy between these two parameters. The tightest correlations we found are those between stellar age and IMF and between galactocentric radius and IMF. The variation of the IMF is not due to kinematical, dynamical, or global properties in NGC 3311. We speculate that IMF might be dwarf-dominated in the "red-nuggets" formed at high redshifts that ended up being the central cores of today's giant ellipticals. [Abridged]

preprint2020arXivOpen 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.