Paper detail

Young, Star-forming Galaxies and their local Counterparts: the Evolving Relationship of Mass-SFR-Metallicity since z ~ 2.1

We explore the evolution of the Stellar Mass-Star Formation Rate-Metallicity Relation using a set of 256 COSMOS and GOODS galaxies in the redshift range 1.90 < z < 2.35. We present the galaxies' rest-frame optical emission-line fluxes derived from IR-grism spectroscopy with the Hubble Space Telescope and combine these data with star formation rates and stellar masses obtained from deep, multi-wavelength (rest-frame UV to IR) photometry. We then compare these measurements to those for a local sample of galaxies carefully matched in stellar mass (7.5 < log(M*/Msol) < 10.5) and star formation rate (-0.5 < log(SFR) < 2.5 in Msol yr^-1). We find that the distribution of z ~ 2.1 galaxies in stellar mass-SFR-metallicity space is clearly different from that derived for our sample of similarly bright (L_H\b{eta} > 3 . 10^40 ergs s^-1) local galaxies, and this offset cannot be explained by simple systematic offsets in the derived quantities. At stellar masses above ~10^9 Msol and star formation rates above ~10 Msol yr^-1, the z ~ 2.1 galaxies have higher oxygen abundances than their local counterparts, while the opposite is true for lower-mass, lower-SFR systems.

preprint2015arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access8 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.

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.