1: %20/3/07:B
2: %6/3/07:FRF
3: %2/3/07: B
4: %19/12/06: Barbara (only small changes)
5: %18/12/06: rtr (only small changes)
6: %15/12/06: Barbara
7: %03/12/06 rtr
8: %27/11/06: Barbara
9: %-------------------------------------------------------
10: % modulo di distanza: \mu=14.37 (F99) ==> dist=7.48 Kpc
11: % best-fit mono-mass King core radius: 27 arcsec
12: % ==> core radius in pc: 0.98 pc
13: % col multi-massa: rc = 29 arcsec = 1.05 pc
14: %-------------------------------------------------------
15: \documentclass[12pt,preprint]{aastex}
16: %\documentclass[preprint2]{aastex}
17: %\documentstyle[emulateapj,apjfonts,epsf,versioncopy]{article}
18: %\def\versionnumber{9} % <-- here the version number
19: %
20: % modified FRF Jan05
21: % modified AP May05
22: % modified RTR 23 June 05
23: % few more mods rtr 24 June
24: \newcommand{\gras}[1]{\mbox{\boldmath $#1$}}
25: \def\etal{{et al.~}}
26: \def\ltsima{$\; \buildrel < \over \sim \;$}
27: \def\gtsima{$\; \buildrel > \over \sim \;$}
28: \def\lsim{\lower.5ex\hbox{\ltsima}}
29: \def\gsim{\lower.5ex\hbox{\gtsima}}
30: \def\lapp{\ifmmode\stackrel{<}{_{\sim}}\else$\stackrel{<}{_{\sim}}$\fi}
31: \def\gapp{\ifmmode\stackrel{>}{_{\sim}}\else$\stackrel{<}{_{\sim}}$\fi}
32:
33: \newdimen\minuswidth %define @ width of minus sign for tables
34: \setbox0=\hbox{$-$}
35: \minuswidth=\wd0
36: \catcode`@=\active
37: \def@{\kern\minuswidth}
38: %\newdimen\digitwidth %define ! a one digit width for tables
39: \setbox0=\hbox{\rm0}
40: %\digitwidth=\wd0
41: %\catcode`!=\active
42: %\def!{\kern\digitwidth}
43:
44: \shorttitle{Blue Stragglers in M5}
45: \shortauthors{Lanzoni et al.}
46:
47: \begin{document}
48:
49: \title{The Blue Straggler Population of the Globular Cluster M5
50: \footnote{Based on observations with the NASA/ESA HST, obtained at the Space
51: Telescope Science Institute, which is operated by AURA, Inc., under NASA
52: contract NAS5-26555. Also based on WFI observations collected at the European
53: Southern Observatory, La Silla, Chile, within the observing programs
54: 62.L-0354 and 64.L-0439.} }
55:
56:
57: \author{
58: %
59: B. Lanzoni\altaffilmark{1,2},
60: %
61: E. Dalessandro\altaffilmark{1,2},
62: %
63: F.R. Ferraro\altaffilmark{1},
64: %
65: C. Mancini\altaffilmark{3},
66: %
67: G. Beccari\altaffilmark{2,4,5},
68: %
69: R.T. Rood\altaffilmark{6},
70: %
71: M. Mapelli\altaffilmark{7},
72: %
73: S. Sigurdsson\altaffilmark{8}
74: }
75: %
76: \affil{\altaffilmark{1} Dipartimento di Astronomia, Universit\`a degli Studi
77: di Bologna, via Ranzani 1, I--40127 Bologna, Italy}
78: %
79: \affil{\altaffilmark{2} INAF--Osservatorio Astronomico di Bologna, via
80: Ranzani 1, I--40127 Bologna, Italy} %, {\tt barbara.lanzoni@bo.astro.it}}
81: %
82: \affil{\altaffilmark{3} Dipartimento di Astronomia e Scienza dello Spazio,
83: Universit\`a degli Studi di Firenze, Largo Enrico Fermi 2, I-- 50125
84: Firenze, Italy}
85: %
86: \affil{\altaffilmark{4} Dipartimento di Scienze della Comunicazione,
87: Universit\`a degli Studi di Teramo, Italy}
88: %
89: \affil{\altaffilmark{5} INAF--Osservatorio Astronomico
90: di Collurania, Via Mentore Maggini, I--64100 Teramo, Italy}
91: %
92: \affil{\altaffilmark{6} Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics, The
93: Pennsylvania State University, 525 Davey Lab, University Park, PA~16802}
94: %
95: \affil{\altaffilmark{7} S.I.S.S.A., Via Beirut 2 - 4, I--34014 Trieste, Italy}
96: %
97: \affil{\altaffilmark{8} Astronomy Department, University of Virginia,
98: P.O. Box 400325, Charlottesville, VA, 22904}
99:
100: \date{20 March, 07}
101:
102: \keywords{Globular clusters: individual (M5); stars: evolution -- binaries:
103: general - blue stragglers}
104:
105: \begin{abstract}
106: By combining high-resolution HST and wide-field ground based observations, in
107: ultraviolet and optical bands, we study the Blue Stragglers Star (BSS)
108: population of the galactic globular cluster M5 (NGC 5904) from its very
109: central regions up to its periphery. The BSS distribution is highly peaked
110: in the cluster center, decreases at intermediate radii and rises again
111: outward. Such a bimodal distribution is similar to those previously observed
112: in other globular clusters (M3, 47~Tucanae, NGC~6752). As for these
113: clusters, dynamical simulations suggest that, while the majority of BSS in M5
114: could be originated by stellar collisions, a significant fraction (20-40\%)
115: of BSS generated by mass transfer processes in primordial binaries is
116: required to reproduce the observed radial distribution. A candidate BSS has
117: been detected beyond the cluster tidal radius. If confirmed, this could
118: represent an interesting case of an "evaporating" BSS.
119: \end{abstract}
120:
121: \section{INTRODUCTION}
122:
123: In globular cluster (GC) color-magnitude diagrams (CMD) blue straggler stars
124: (BSS) appear to be brighter and bluer than the Turn-Off (TO) stars and lie
125: along an extension of the Main Sequence. Since BSS mimic a rejuvenated
126: stellar population with masses larger than the normal cluster stars (this is
127: also confirmed by direct mass measurements; e.g. Shara et al. 1997), they are
128: thought to be objects that have increased their initial mass during their
129: evolution by means of some process. Two main scenarios have been proposed
130: for their formation: the {\it collisional scenario} suggests that BSS are the
131: end-products of stellar mergers induced by collisions (COL-BSS), while in the
132: \emph{mass-transfer} scenario BSS form by the mass-transfer activity between
133: two companions in a binary system (MT-BSS), possibly up to the complete
134: coalescence of the two stars. Hence, understanding the origin of BSS in
135: stellar clusters provides valuable insight both on the binary evolution
136: processes and on the effects of dynamical interactions on the (otherwise
137: normal) stellar evolution.
138: %
139:
140: The relative efficiency of the two formation mechanisms is thought to depend
141: on the environment \citep{fp92, fe99a, bel02, fe03}. COL-BSS are expected to
142: be formed preferentially in high-density environments (i.e., the GC central
143: regions), where stellar collisions are most probable, and MT-BSS should
144: mainly populate lower density environments (the cluster peripheries), where
145: binary systems can more easily evolve in isolation without suffering
146: exchanges or ionization due to gravitational encounters. The overall
147: scenario is complicated by the fact that primordial binaries can also sink to
148: the core due to mass segregation processes, and ``new'' binaries can be
149: formed in the cluster centers by gravitational encounters. The two formation
150: mechanisms are likely to be at work simultaneously in every GC (see the case
151: of M3 as an example; Ferraro et al. 1993, 1997), but the identification of
152: the cluster properties that mainly affect their relative efficiency is still
153: an open issue.
154: %
155:
156: One possibility for distinguishing between the two types of BSS is offered by
157: high-resolution spectroscopic studies. Anomalous chemical abundances are
158: expected at the surface of BSS resulting from MT activity \citep{sarna96},
159: while they are not predicted in case of a collisional formation
160: \citep{lomb95}. Such studies have just become feasible, and the results
161: found in the case of 47~Tucanae \citep[47~Tuc;][]{fe06a} are encouraging.
162: %
163: The detection of unexpected properties of stars along standard
164: evolutionary sequences (e.g., variability, anomalous population
165: fractions, or peculiar radial distributions) can help estimating the
166: fraction of binaries within a cluster \citep[see, e.g.,][]{bail94,
167: albr01, bel02, bec06}, but such evidence does not directly allow the
168: determination of the relative efficiency of the two BSS formation
169: processes.
170:
171: %
172: The most widely applicable tool to probe the origin of BSS is their radial
173: distribution within the clusters \citep[see][for a review]{fe06}. This has
174: been observed to be \emph{bimodal} (i.e., highly peaked in the cluster
175: centers and peripheries, and significantly lower at intermediate radii) in at
176: least 4 GCs: M3 \citep{fe97}, 47~Tuc \citep{fe04}, NGC~6752 \citep{sab04},
177: and M5 \citep[][hereafter W06]{w06}. Preliminary evidence of bimodality has
178: also been found in M55 \citep{zag97}. Dynamical simulations suggest that the
179: bimodal radial distributions observed in M3, 47~Tuc and NGC~6752 \citep{ma04,
180: ma06} result from $\sim 40-50\%$ of MT-BSS with the balance being COL-BSS.
181: In this context, the case of $\omega~$Cen is atypical: the BSS radial
182: distribution in this cluster is flat \citep{fe06b}, and mass segregation
183: processes have not yet played a major role, thus implying that this system is
184: populated by a vast majority of MT-BSS \citep{ma06}. These results
185: demonstrate that detailed studies of the BSS radial distribution within GCs
186: are very powerful tools for better understanding the complex interplay
187: between dynamics and stellar evolution in dense stellar systems.
188:
189: In the present paper we extend this kind of investigation to M5 (NGC 5904).
190: With HST-WFPC2 and -ACS ultraviolet and optical high-resolution images of the
191: core we have been able to efficiently detect the BSS population even in the
192: severely crowded central regions. Moreover, with wide-field optical
193: observations performed with ESO-WFI we sampled the entire cluster extension.
194: The combination of these two data sets allowed us to study the dynamical
195: properties of M5, accurately redetermining its center of gravity, its surface
196: density profile, and the BSS radial distribution over the entire cluster.
197: The BSS population of M5 has been recently studied by W06, but we have
198: extended the analysis to larger distances from the cluster center, and we
199: have used Monte-Carlo dynamical simulations to interpret the observational
200: results.
201:
202: \section{OBSERVATIONS AND DATA ANALYSIS}
203:
204: \subsection{The data sets}
205: The present study is based on a combination of two different
206: photometric data sets:
207:
208: \emph{1. The high-resolution set} -- It consists of a series of ultraviolet
209: (UV) and optical images of the cluster center obtained with HST-WFPC2
210: (Prop. 6607, P.I. Ferraro). To efficiently resolve the stars in the highly
211: crowded central regions, the Planetary Camera (PC, being the highest
212: resolution instrument: $0\farcs 046/$pixel) has been pointed approximately on
213: the cluster center, while the three Wide Field Cameras (WF, having a lower
214: resolution: $0\farcs 1/$pixel) have been used to sample the surrounding
215: regions. Observations have been performed through filter F255W (medium UV)
216: in order to efficiently select the BSS and horizontal branch (HB)
217: populations, and through filters F336W (approximately corresponding to an $U$
218: filter) and F555W ($V$) for the red giant branch (RGB) population and to
219: guarantee a proper combination with the ground-based data set (see below).
220: %
221: The photometric reduction of the high-resolution images was carried out using
222: ROMAFOT (Buonanno et al. 1983), a package developed to perform accurate
223: photometry in crowded fields and specifically optimized to handle
224: under-sampled Point Spread Functions (PSFs; Buonanno $\&$ Iannicola 1989), as
225: in the case of the HST-WF chips.
226:
227: To obtain a better coverage of the innermost regions of the cluster, we have
228: also used a set of public HST-WFPC2 and HST-ACS observations. The HST-WFPC2
229: data set has been obtained through filters F439W ($B$) and F555W ($V$) by
230: \citet{pio02}, and because of the different orientation of the camera, it is
231: complementary to ours. Additional HST-ACS data in filters F435W ($B$), F606W
232: ($V$), and F814W ($I$) have been retrieved from the ESO-STECF Science
233: Archive, and have been used to sample the central area not covered by the
234: WFPC2 observations. All the ACS images were properly corrected for geometric
235: distortions and effective flux (over the pixel area) following the
236: prescriptions of \citet{si05}. The photometric analysis was performed
237: independently in the three drizzled images by using the aperture photometry
238: code SExtractor \citep[{\it Source-Extractor};] []{be96}, and adopting a
239: fixed aperture radius of 2.5 pixels ($0.125\arcsec$). The magnitude lists
240: were finally cross-correlated in order to obtain a combined catalog. The
241: adopted combination of the three HST data sets is sketched in Figure
242: \ref{fig:HST} and provided a good coverage of the cluster up to $r
243: =115\arcsec$.
244: %To obtain a better coverage of the cluster, we have also used a set of public
245: %HST-WFPC2 data obtained through filters F439W ($B$) and F555W ($V$) by
246: %\citet{pio02}. Because of the different orientation of the four cameras,
247: %these two data sets are complementary and their combination provided us with
248: %a reasonably good coverage of the cluster up to $r\le110\arcsec$ (see Figure
249: %\ref{fig:HST}).
250:
251: \emph{2. The wide-field set} - A complementary set of wide-field $B$ and $V$
252: images was secured by using the Wide Field Imager (WFI) at the 2.2m ESO-MPI
253: telescope during an observing run in April 2000.
254: Thanks to the exceptional imaging capabilities of WFI (each image consists of
255: a mosaic of 8 CCDs, for a global field of view of $34\arcmin\times
256: 34\arcmin$), these data cover the entire cluster extension (see Figure
257: \ref{fig:WFI}, where the cluster is roughly centered on CCD $\# 7$).
258: %
259: The raw WFI images were corrected for bias and flat field, and the overscan
260: regions were trimmed using IRAF\footnote{IRAF is distributed by the National
261: Optical Astronomy Observatory, which is operated by the Association of
262: Universities for Research in Astronomy, Inc., under cooperative agreement
263: with the National Science Foundation.} tools. The PSF fitting procedure was
264: performed independently on each image using DoPhot \citep{dophot}. All
265: the uncertain detections, usually caused by photometric blends, stars near
266: the CCD gaps or saturated stars, have been checked one by one using ROMAFOT
267: (Buonanno et al. 1983).
268:
269: \subsection{Astrometry and center of gravity}
270: %
271: The HST+WFI catalog has been placed on the absolute astrometric system by
272: adopting the procedure already described in Ferraro et al. (2001, 2003). The
273: new astrometric Guide Star Catalog (GSC-II\footnote{Available at {\tt
274: http://www-gsss.stsci.edu/Catalogs/GSC/GSC2/GSC2.htm}.}) was used to search
275: for astrometric standard stars in the WFI field of view (FoV), and a
276: cross-correlation tool specifically developed at the Bologna Observatory
277: (Montegriffo et al. 2003, private communication) has been employed to obtain
278: an astrometric solution for each of the 8 CCDs. Several hundred GSC-II
279: reference stars were found in each chip, thus allowing an accurate absolute
280: positioning of the stars. Then, a few hundred stars in common between the
281: WFI and the HST FoVs have been used as secondary standards to place the HST
282: catalog on the same absolute astrometric system. At the end of the procedure
283: the global uncertainties in the astrometric solution are of the order of $\sim
284: 0\farcs 2$, both in right ascension ($\alpha$) and declination ($\delta$).
285:
286: Given the absolute positions of individual stars in the innermost regions of
287: the cluster, the center of gravity $C_{\rm grav}$ has been determined by
288: averaging coordinates $\alpha$ and $\delta$ of all stars lying in the PC FoV
289: following the iterative procedure described in Montegriffo et al. (1995; see
290: also Ferraro et al. 2003, 2004). In order to correct for spurious effects
291: due to incompleteness in the very inner regions of the cluster, we considered
292: two samples with different limiting magnitudes ($m_{555}<19.5$ and
293: $m_{555}<20$), and we computed the barycenter of stars for each sample. The
294: two estimates agree within $\sim 1\arcsec$, giving $C_{\rm grav}$ at
295: $\alpha({\rm J2000}) = 15^{\rm h}\, 18^{\rm m}\, 33\fs 53$, $\delta ({\rm
296: J2000})= +2^{\rm o}\, 4\arcmin\, 57\farcs 06$, with a 1$\sigma$ uncertainty
297: of $0\farcs 5$ in both $\alpha$ and $\delta$, corresponding to about 10
298: pixels in the PC image. This value of $C_{\rm grav}$ is located at $\sim
299: 4\arcsec$ south-west ($\Delta\alpha = -4\arcsec$, $\Delta\delta=-0\farcs 9$)
300: from that previously derived by \citet{har96} on the basis of the surface
301: brightness distribution.
302: %$\alpha ({\rm J2000})= 15^{\rm h}\, 18^{\rm m}\, 33\fs 8$,
303: %$\delta({\rm J2000}) = +2^{\rm o}\, 4\arcmin\, 58\arcsec$.
304:
305: \subsection{Photometric calibration and definition of the catalogs}
306:
307: The optical HST magnitudes (i.e., those obtained through the WFPC2 filters
308: F439W and F555W, and through ACS filters F435W, F606W, F814W), as well as the
309: WFI $B$ and $V$ magnitudes have been all calibrated on the catalog of
310: \citet{sand96}. The UV magnitudes $m_{160}$ and $m_{255}$ have been
311: calibrated to the \citet{holtz95} zero-points following \citet[][2001]{fe97},
312: while the U magnitude $m_{336}$ has been calibrated to \citet{dolph00}.
313:
314: In order to reduce spurious effects due to the low resolution of the
315: ground-based observations in the most crowded regions of the cluster, we use
316: only the HST data for the inner $115\arcsec$, this value being imposed by the
317: FoV of the WFPC2 and ACS cameras (see Figure \ref{fig:HST}). In particular,
318: we define as \emph{HST sample} the ensemble of all the stars in the WFPC2 and
319: ACS combined catalog having $r\le115\arcsec$ from the center, and as
320: \emph{WFI sample} all stars detected with WFI at $r>115\arcsec$ (see Figure
321: \ref{fig:WFI}). The CMDs of the HST and WFI samples in the $(V,~U-V)$ and
322: $(V,~B-V)$ planes are shown in Figure \ref{fig:CMD}.
323:
324: \subsection{Density profile}
325: \label{sec:dens_prof}
326: We have determined the projected density profile over the entire cluster
327: extension, from $C_{\rm grav}$ out to $\sim 1400\arcsec\sim23\farcm 3$, by
328: direct star counts, considering only stars brighter than $V= 20$ (see Figure
329: \ref{fig:CMD}) in order to avoid incompleteness biases. The brightest RGB
330: stars that are strongly saturated in the ACS data set have been excluded from
331: the analysis, but since they are few in number, the effect on the resulting
332: density profile is completely negligible. Following the procedure already
333: described in Ferraro et al. (1999a, 2004), we have divided the entire HST+WFI
334: sample in 27 concentric annuli, each centered on $C_{\rm grav}$ and split in
335: an adequate number of sub-sectors. The number of stars lying within each
336: sub-sector was counted, and the star density was obtained by dividing these
337: values by the corresponding sub-sector areas. The stellar density in each
338: annulus was then obtained as the average of the sub-sector densities, and its
339: standard deviation was estimated from the variance among the sub-sectors.
340: %Errors in the number counts can also be estimated from Poisson statistics and
341: %are consistent with the empirically determined values.
342:
343: The radial density profile thus derived is plotted in Figure \ref{fig:prof},
344: where we also show the best-fit mono-mass King model and the corresponding
345: values of the core radius and concentration: $r_c=27\arcsec$ (with a typical
346: error of $\sim \pm 2\arcsec$) and $c=1.68$, respectively. These values
347: confirm that M5 has not yet experienced core collapse, and they are in good
348: agreement with those quoted by \citet[][$r_c=26\farcs 3$ and
349: $c=1.71$]{mcL05}, and marginally consistent with those listed by
350: \citet[][$r_c=25\farcs 2$ and $c=1.83$]{har96}, both derived from the surface
351: brightness profile. Our value of $r_c$ corresponds to $\sim 1$ pc assuming
352: the distance modulus $(m-M)_0=14.37$ \citep[$d\sim 7.5$ Kpc,][]{fe99b}.
353:
354: \section{DEFINITION OF THE SAMPLES}
355: \label{sec:samples}
356: In order to study the BSS radial distribution and detect possible
357: peculiarities, both the BSS and a reference population must be properly
358: defined. Since the HST and the WFI data sets have been observed in different
359: photometric bands, different selection boxes are needed to separate the
360: samples in the CMDs. The adopted strategy is described in the following
361: sections (see also Ferraro et al. 2004 for a detailed discussion of this
362: issue).
363:
364: \subsection{The BSS selection}
365: At UV wavelengths BSS are among the brightest objects in a GC, and RGB stars
366: are particularly faint. By combining these advantages with the
367: high-resolution capability of HST, the usual problems
368: associated with photometric blends and crowding in the high density central
369: regions of GCs are minimized, and BSS can be most reliably recognized and
370: separated from the other populations in the UV CMDs.
371: %
372: For these reasons our primary criterion for the definition of the BSS sample
373: is based on the position of stars in the ($m_{255},~m_{255}-U$) plane. In
374: order to avoid incompleteness bias and the possible contamination from TO and
375: sub-giant branch stars, we have adopted a limiting magnitude $m_{255}=18.35$,
376: roughly corresponding to 1 magnitude brighter than the cluster TO. This is
377: also the limiting magnitude used by W06, facilitating the comparison with
378: their study. The resulting BSS selection box in the UV CMD is shown in Figure
379: \ref{fig:UVsel}.
380: %
381: Once selected in the UV CMD, the bulk of the BSS lying in the field in common
382: with the optical-HST sample has been used to define the selection box and the
383: limiting magnitude in the ($B,~B-V$) plane. The latter turns out to be
384: $B\simeq 17.85$, and the adopted BSS selection box in the optical CMD is
385: shown in Figure \ref{fig:Optsel}. The two stars lying outside the selection
386: box (namely BSS-19 and BSS-20 in Table \ref{tab:BSS}) have been identified
387: as BSS from the ($m_{255},~m_{255}-U$) CMD. Indeed, they are typical
388: examples of how the optical magnitudes are prone to blend/crowding problems,
389: while the BSS selection in UV bands is much more secure and reliable. An
390: additional BSS (BSS-47 in Table \ref{tab:BSS}) lies near the edge of the ACS
391: FoV and has only $V$ and $I$ observations; thus it was selected in the
392: $(V,~V-I)$ plane (see Figure \ref{fig:ACSsel}, where this BSS is shown
393: together with the other 5 identified in the ACS complementary sample).
394:
395: With these criteria we have identified 60 BSS: 47 BSS in the HST sample
396: ($r\le 115\arcsec$) and 13 in the WFI one. Their coordinates and magnitudes
397: are listed in Table \ref{tab:BSS}. Out of the 47 BSS identified in the HST
398: sample, 41 are from the WFPC2 data set, and 6 from the ACS catalog. As shown
399: in Figure \ref{fig:HST} their projected distribution is quite asymmetric with
400: the N-E sector seemingly underpopulated. The statistical significance of such
401: an asymmetry appears even higher if only the BSS outside the core are
402: considered. However a quantitative discussion of this topic is not warranted
403: unless additional evidences supporting this anomalous spatial distribution
404: are collected. One of the inner BSS (BSS-29 in Table \ref{tab:BSS}) lying at
405: $21\farcs 76$ from the center, corresponds to the low-amplitude variable
406: HST-V28 identified by \citet{dris98}\footnote{The observations presented here
407: do not have the time coverage needed to properly search for BSS
408: variability.}. In the WFI sample ($r >115\arcsec$) we find 13 BSS, with a
409: more symmetric spatial distribution (see Figure \ref{fig:WFI}). The most
410: distant BSS (BSS-60 in Table \ref{tab:BSS}, marked with an empty triangle in
411: Fig.\ref{fig:Optsel}) lies at $\sim 24\arcmin$ from the center, i.e., beyond
412: the cluster tidal radius. Hence, it might be an evaporating BSS previously
413: belonging to the cluster. However, further investigations are needed before
414: firmly assessing this issue.
415:
416: In order to perform a proper comparison with W06 study, we have transformed
417: their BSS catalog in our astrometric system, and we have found that 50 BSS of
418: their bright sample lie at $r\le 115\arcsec$: 35 are from the HST sample, 13
419: from the Canada France Hawaii Telescope (CFHT) data set, and 2 from the Cerro
420: Tololo Inter-American Observatory (CTIO) sample; in the outer regions
421: ($115\arcsec < r \lsim 425\arcsec$) 9 BSS are identified, all from the CTIO
422: data set.
423:
424: By cross correlating W06 bright sample with our catalog we have found 43 BSS
425: in common (see Table \ref{tab:BSS}), 37 at $r\le 115\arcsec$ and 6 outward.
426: In particular, 33 BSS out of the 41 (i.e., 80\% of the total) that we have
427: identified in the WFPC2-HST sample\footnote{Note that the WFPC2-HST
428: observations used in W06 and in the present study are the same.} are found in
429: both catalogs, while 3 of our BSS belong 5 to their faint BSS sample (namely,
430: BSS-27, 34, and 40, corresponding to their Core BSS 70, 79, and 76,
431: respectively), 5 of our BSS have been missed in W06 paper, and 2 objects in
432: their sample are classified as HB stars in our study. This is probably due
433: to different selection criteria, and/or small differences in the measured
434: magnitudes, caused by the different data reduction procedures and photometric
435: analysis. For example, W06 identify the BSS on the basis of both the UV and
436: the optical observations, while we select the BSS only in the UV plane
437: whenever possible. Out of the other 15 BSS found at $r\le115\arcsec$ in the
438: ground-based CFHT/CTIO sample of W06, 8 BSS (Core BSS 38--45 in their Table
439: 2) clearly are false identifications. They are arranged in a very unlikely
440: ring around a strongly saturated star, as can be seen in Figure
441: \ref{fig:satura}, where the position in the sky of the 8 spurious BSS are
442: overplotted on the CFHT image. Though they clearly are spurious
443: identifications, they still define a clean sequence in the $(B,~B-I)$ CMD,
444: nicely mimicking the BSS magnitudes and colors. As already discussed in
445: previous papers, this once again demonstrates how automatic procedures for
446: the search of peculiar objects are prone to errors, especially when using
447: ground-based observations to probe very crowded stellar regions. We
448: emphasize that all the candidate BSS listed in our Table \ref{tab:BSS} have
449: been visually inspected evaluating the quality and the precision of the PSF
450: fitting. This procedure significantly reduces the possibility of introducing
451: spurious objects in the sample. Out of the remaining 7 BSS, 4 objects
452: (namely their Core BSS 32, 30, 37 and 28) are also confirmed by our ACS
453: observations (BSS-42, 43, 44, and 45 respectively), while 2 others (their
454: Core BSS 27 and Ground BSS 6) are not found in the ACS data set, and the
455: remaining one (their Ground BSS 7) is not included in our observation FoV. In
456: turn, two BSS identified in our ACS data set (BSS 46 and 47) are missed in
457: their sample. Concerning the BSS lying at $115\arcsec < r < 450\arcsec$, 6
458: objects (out of 9 found in both samples) are in common between the two
459: catalogs (see Table \ref{tab:BSS}), one (BSS-55) belongs to W06 faint sample
460: (their Ground BSS 23), while the remaining 2 do not coincide. Moreover, 4
461: additional BSS have been identified at $r > 450\arcsec$ in our study.
462:
463: \subsection{The reference population}
464: \label{sec:HB}
465: Since the HB sequence is bright and well separable in the UV and optical
466: CMDs, we chose these stars as the primary representative population of normal
467: cluster stars to be used for the comparison with the BSS data set. As with
468: the BSS, the HB sample was first defined in the ($m_{255},~m_{255}-U$) plane,
469: and the corresponding selection box in ($B,~B-V$) has then been determined by
470: using the stars in common between the UV and the optical samples. The
471: resulting selection boxes in both diagrams are shown in Figures
472: \ref{fig:UVsel} and \ref{fig:Optsel}, and are designed to include the bulk of
473: HB stars\footnote{The large dispersion in the redder HB stars arises because
474: RR Lyrae variables are included.}. Slightly different selection boxes would
475: include or exclude a few stars only without affecting the results.
476:
477: We have used WFI observations to roughly estimate the impact of possible
478: foreground field stars contamination on the cluster population selection. As
479: shown in the right-hand panel of Figure \ref{fig:Optsel}, field stars appear
480: to define an almost vertical sequence at $0.4 < B-V < 1$ in the ($B,~B-V$)
481: CMD. Hence, they do not affect the BSS selection box, but marginally
482: contaminate the reddest end of the HB. In particular, 5 objects have been
483: found to lie within the adopted HB box in the region at $r>r_t$ sample by our
484: observations ($\sim 194$ arcmin$^2$); this corresponds to $0.026$ spurious HB
485: stars per arcmin$^2$. On the basis of this, 11 field stars are expected to
486: "contaminate" the HB population over the sampled cluster region ($r<r_t$).
487:
488: \section{THE BSS RADIAL DISTRIBUTION}
489: \label{sec:radist}
490: The radial distribution of BSS in M5 has been studied following the
491: same procedure previously adopted for other clusters (see references
492: in Ferraro 2006; Beccari et al. 2006).
493:
494: First, we have compared the BSS cumulative radial distribution to that of HB
495: stars. A Kolmogorov-Smirnov test gives a $\sim 10^{-4}$ probability that they
496: are extracted from the same population (see Figure \ref{fig:KS}). BSS are
497: more centrally concentrated than HB stars at $\sim 4\sigma$ level.
498:
499: For a more quantitative analysis, the surveyed area has been divided into 8
500: concentric annuli, with radii listed in Table \ref{tab:annuli}. The number
501: of BSS ($N_{\rm BSS}$) and HB stars ($N_{\rm HB}$), as well as the fraction
502: of sampled luminosity ($L^{\rm samp}$) have been measured in the 8 annuli and
503: the obtained values are listed in Table \ref{tab:annuli}. Note that HB star
504: counts listed in the table are already decontaminated from field stars,
505: according to the procedure described in Section \ref{sec:HB} (1, 2, and 8 HB
506: stars in the three outer annuli have been estimated to be field stars). The
507: listed values have been used to compute the specific frequency $F_{\rm
508: BSS}^{\rm HB}\equiv N_{\rm BSS}/N_{\rm HB}$, and the double normalized ratio
509: (see Ferraro et al. 1993):
510: \begin{equation}
511: R_{\rm pop}=\frac{(N_{\rm pop}/N_{\rm pop}^{\rm tot})}{(L^{\rm samp}/L_{\rm
512: tot}^{\rm samp})},
513: \label{eq:spec_freq}
514: \end{equation}
515: with ${\rm pop} =$ BSS, HB.
516:
517: In the present study luminosities have been calculated from the surface
518: density profile shown in Figure \ref{fig:prof}. The surface density has been
519: transformed into luminosity by means of a normalization factor obtained by
520: assuming that the value obtained in the core ($r\le 27\arcsec$) is equal to
521: the sum of the luminosities of all the stars with $V\le 20$ lying in this
522: region. The distance modulus quoted in Section \ref{sec:dens_prof} and a
523: reddening $E(B-V)=0.03$ have been adopted \citep[][]{fe99b}. The fraction of
524: area sampled by the observations in each annulus has been carefully computed,
525: and the sampled luminosity in each annulus has been corrected for incomplete
526: spatial coverage (in the case of annuli 3 and 8; see Figures \ref{fig:HST}
527: and \ref{fig:WFI}).
528:
529: The resulting radial trend of $R_{\rm HB}$ is essentially constant with a
530: value close to unity over the surveyed area (see Figure \ref{fig:Rpop}). This
531: is just what expected on the basis of the stellar evolution theory, which
532: predicts that the fraction of stars in any post-main sequence evolutionary
533: stage is strictly proportional to the fraction of the sampled luminosity
534: (Renzini \& Fusi Pecci 1988). Conversely, BSS follow a completely different
535: radial distribution. As shown in Figure \ref{fig:Rpop} the specific
536: frequency $R_{\rm BSS}$ is highly peaked at the cluster center (a factor of
537: $\sim 3$ higher than $R_{\rm HB}$ in the innermost bin), decreases to a
538: minimum\footnote{Note that no BSS have been found between $3.\arcmin 5$ and
539: $5\arcmin$.} at $r\simeq 10\, r_c$, and rises again outward. The same
540: behavior is clearly visible also in Figure \ref{fig:simu}, where the
541: population ratio $N_{\rm BSS}/N_{\rm HB}$ is plotted as a function of
542: $r/r_c$.
543:
544: Note that the region between $800\arcsec$ and $r_t\simeq 1290\arcsec$ (and
545: thus also BSS-59, that lies at $r\simeq 995\farcs 5$) has not been considered
546: in the analysis, since our observations provide a poor sampling of this
547: annulus: only 35\% of its area, corresponding to $\sim 0.4\%$ of the total
548: sampled light, is covered by the WFI pointing. However, for sake of
549: completeness, we have plotted in Figure \ref{fig:cfr_radist} the
550: corresponding value of $F_{\rm BSS}^{\rm HB}$ even for this annulus (empty
551: circle in the upper panel): as can be seen, there is a hint for a flattening
552: of the BSS radial distribution in the cluster outskirts.
553:
554:
555: \subsection{Dynamical simulations}
556: \label{sec:simu}
557: Following the same approach as \citet[][2006]{ma04}, we now exploit dynamical
558: simulations to derive some clues about the BSS formation mechanisms from
559: their observed radial distribution. We use the Monte-Carlo simulation code
560: originally developed by Sigurdsson \& Phinney (1995) and upgraded in
561: \citet[][2006]{ma04}. In any simulation run we follow the dynamical
562: evolution of $N$ BSS within a background cluster, taking into account the
563: effects of both dynamical friction and distant encounters. We identify as
564: COL-BSS those objects having initial positions $r_i \lsim r_c$, and as MT-BSS
565: stars initially lying at $r_i \gg r_c$ (this because stellar collisions are
566: most probable in the central high-density regions of the cluster, while
567: primordial binaries most likely evolve in isolation in the periphery).
568: Within these two radial ranges, all initial positions are randomly generated
569: following the probability distribution appropriate for a King model. The BSS
570: initial velocities are randomly extracted from the cluster velocity
571: distribution illustrated in Sigurdsson \& Phinney (1995), and an additional
572: natal kick is assigned to the COL-BSS in order to account for the recoil
573: induced by the encounters. Each BSS has characteristic mass $M$ and lifetime
574: $t_{\rm last}$. We follow their dynamical evolution in the cluster (fixed)
575: gravitational potential for a time $t_i$ ($i=1,N$), where each $t_i$ is a
576: randomly chosen fraction of $t_{\rm last}$. At the end of the simulation we
577: register the final positions of BSS, and we compare their radial distribution
578: with the observed one. We repeat the procedure until a reasonable agreement
579: between the simulated and the observed distributions is reached; then, we
580: infer the percentage of collisional and mass-transfer BSS from the
581: distribution of the adopted initial positions in the simulation.
582:
583: For a detailed discussion of the ranges of values appropriate for these
584: quantities and their effects on the final results we refer to \citet{ma06}.
585: Here we only list the assumptions made in the present
586: study:
587: \begin{itemize}
588: \item[--]the background cluster is approximated with a multi-mass King model,
589: determined as the best fit to the observed profile\footnote{By adopting the
590: same mass groups as those of \citet{ma06}, the resulting value of the King
591: dimensionless central potential is $W_0=9.7$}. The cluster central velocity
592: dispersion is set to $\sigma= 6.5\,{\rm km\,s^{-1}}$ (Dubath et al. 1997),
593: and, assuming $0.5 M_\odot$ as the average mass of the cluster stars, the
594: central stellar density is $n_c=2\times 10^4$ pc$^{-3}$ (Pryor \& Meylan
595: 1993);
596: %
597: \item[--]the COL-BSS are distributed with initial positions $r_i\le r_c$ and
598: are given a natal kick velocity of $1\times\sigma$;
599: %
600: \item[--]initial positions ranging between $5\,r_c$ and $r_t$ (with the tidal
601: radius $r_t\simeq 48\, r_c$) have been considered for MT-BSS in different
602: runs;
603: %
604: \item[--]BSS masses have been fixed to $M=1.2\, M_\odot$ \citep{fe06a}, and
605: their characteristic lifetime to $t_{last}=2$ Gyr;
606: %
607: \item[--]in each simulation run we have followed the evolution of $N=10,000$
608: BSS.
609: \end{itemize}
610:
611: The simulated radial distribution that best reproduces the observed one (with
612: a reduced $\chi^2\simeq 0.6$) is shown in Figure~\ref{fig:simu} (solid line)
613: and is obtained by assuming that $\sim 80\%$ of the BSS population was formed
614: in the core through stellar collisions, while only $\sim 20\%$ is made of
615: MT-BSS. A higher fraction ($\gsim 40\%$) of MT-BSS does not correctly
616: reproduce the steep decrease of the distribution and seriously overpredict
617: the number of BSS at $r\sim 10\, r_c$, where no BSS at all are found, but it
618: nicely matches the observed upturning point at $r\simeq 13\,r_c$ (see the
619: dashed line in Figure~\ref{fig:simu}). On the other hand, a population of
620: only COL-BSS is unable to properly reproduce the external upturn of the
621: distribution (see the dotted line in Figure~\ref{fig:simu}), and 100\% of
622: MT-BSS is also totally excluded. Assuming heavier BSS (up to $M=1.5\,
623: M_\odot$) or different lifetimes $t_{last}$ (between 1 and 4 Gyr) does not
624: significantly change these conclusions, since both these parameters mainly
625: affect the external part of the simulated BSS distribution. Thus, an
626: appreciable effect can be seen only in the case of a relevant upturn, and
627: negligible variations are found in the best-fit case and when assuming 100\%
628: COL-BSS. The effect starts to be relevant in the simulations with 40\% or
629: more MT-BSS, which are however inconsistent with the observations at
630: intermediate radii (see above).
631:
632: By using the simulations and the dynamical friction timescale \citep[from,
633: e.g.,][]{ma06}, we have also computed the radius of avoidance of M5. This is
634: defined as the characteristic radial distance within which all MT-BSS are
635: expected to have already sunk to the cluster core, because of mass
636: segregation processes. Assuming 12 Gyr for the age of M5 (Sandquist et
637: al. 1996) and $1.2\,M_\odot$ for the BSS mass, we find that $r_{\rm
638: avoid}\simeq 10\,r_c$. This nicely corresponds to the position of the
639: minimum in the observed BSS radial distribution, in agreement with the
640: findings of Mapelli et al. (2004, 2006).
641:
642: \section{SUMMARY AND DISCUSSION}
643: In this paper we have used a combination of HST UV and optical images of the
644: cluster center and wide-field ground-based observations covering the entire
645: cluster extension to derive the main structural parameters and to study the
646: BSS population of the galactic globular cluster M5.
647:
648: The accurate determination of the cluster center of gravity from the
649: high-resolution data gives $\alpha({\rm J2000}) = 15^{\rm h}\, 18^{\rm m}\,
650: 33\fs 53$, $\delta({\rm J2000}) = +2^{\rm o}\, 4\arcmin\, 57\farcs 06$, with
651: a 1$\sigma$ uncertainty of $0\farcs 5$ in both $\alpha$ and
652: $\delta$. The cluster density profile, determined from
653: direct star counts, is well fit by a King model with core radius
654: $r_c=27\arcsec$ and concentration $c=1.68$, thus suggesting that M5 has not
655: yet suffered the core collapse.
656:
657: The BSS population of M5 amounts to a total of 59 objects, with a quite
658: asymmetric projected distribution (see Figure \ref{fig:HST}) and a high
659: degree of segregation in the cluster center. With respect to the sampled
660: luminosity and to HB stars, the BSS radial distribution is bimodal: highly
661: peaked at $r\lsim r_c$, decreasing to a minimum at $r\simeq 10\, r_c$, and
662: rising again outward (see Figures \ref{fig:Rpop} and \ref{fig:simu}).
663:
664: The comparison with results of W06 has revealed that 43 (out of 59) bright
665: BSS identified by these authors at $r\lsim 450\arcsec$ are in common with our
666: sample. Moreover, 4 additional stars classified as faint BSS in their study
667: are in common with our BSS sample at $r\lsim 450\arcsec$. Considering that we
668: find 56 BSS within the same radial distance from the center, this corresponds
669: to 84\% matching of our catalogue. The discrepancies are explained by
670: different data reduction procedures, photometric analysis, and adopted
671: selection criteria, other than the spurious identification of 8 BSS by W06,
672: due a strongly saturated star in their sample. The central peak of the
673: $R_{\rm BSS}$ distribution in our study is slightly higher (but compatible
674: within the error bar) compared to that of W06, and we extend the analysis to
675: larger distance from the center (out to $r > 800\arcsec$), thus unveiling the
676: external upturn and the possible flattening of the BSS distribution in the
677: cluster outskirts.
678:
679: Moreover, we have compared the BSS radial distribution of M5 with that
680: observed in other GCs studied in a similar way. In Figure
681: \ref{fig:cfr_radist} we plot the specific frequency $F_{\rm BSS}^{\rm HB}$ as
682: a function of $(r/r_c)$ for M5, M3, 47~Tuc, and NGC~6752. Such a comparison
683: shows that the BSS radial distributions in these clusters are only
684: \emph{qualitatively} similar, with a high concentration at the center and an
685: upturn outward. However, significant quantitative differences are apparent:
686: (1) the $F_{\rm BSS}^{\rm HB}$ peak value, (2) the steepness of the
687: decreasing branch of the distribution, (3) the radial position of the minimum
688: (marked by arrows in the figure), and (4) the extension of the ``zone of
689: avoidance,'' i.e., the intermediate region poorly populated by BSS. In
690: particular M5 shows the smallest $F_{\rm BSS}^{\rm HB}$ peak value: it turns
691: out to be $\sim 0.24$, versus a typical value $\gsim 0.4$ in all the other
692: cases. It also shows the mildest decreasing slope: at $r\approx 2\,r_c$ the
693: specific frequency in M5 is about a half of the peak value, while it
694: decreases by a factor of 4 in all the other clusters. Conversely, it is
695: interesting to note that the value reached by $F_{\rm BSS}^{\rm HB}$ in the
696: external regions is $\sim$ 50-60\% of the central peak in all the studied
697: clusters. Another difference between M5 and the other systems concerns the
698: ratio between the radius of avoidance and the tidal radius: $r_{\rm
699: avoid}\simeq 0.2\,r_t$ for M5, while $r_{\rm avoid}\lsim 0.13\,r_t$ for
700: 47~Tuc, M3, and NGC~6752 (see Tables 1 and 2 in Mapelli et al. 2006).
701:
702: The dynamical simulations discussed in Section \ref{sec:simu} suggest that
703: the majority of BSS in M5 are collisional, with a content of MT-BSS ranging
704: between 20\% and 40\% of the overall population. This fraction seems to be
705: smaller than that (40-50\%) derived for M3, 47~Tuc and NGC~6752 by
706: \citet{ma06}, in qualitative agreement with the smaller value of $r_{\rm
707: avoid}/r_t$ estimated for M5, which indicates that the fraction of cluster
708: currently depopulated of BSS is larger in this system than in the other
709: cases. More in general, the results shown in Figure \ref{fig:simu} exclude a
710: pure collisional BSS content for M5.
711:
712: Our study has also revealed the presence of a candidate BSS at $\sim
713: 24\arcmin$ from the center, i.e., beyond the cluster tidal radius (see
714: Figures \ref{fig:WFI} and \ref{fig:Optsel} and BSS-59 in Table
715: \ref{tab:BSS}). If confirmed, this could represent a very interesting case of
716: a BSS previously belonging to M5 and then evaporating from the cluster (a BSS
717: kicked off from the core the because of dynamical interactions?).
718:
719: \acknowledgements{This research was supported by Agenzia Spaziale Italiana
720: under contract ASI-INAF I/023/05/0, by the Istituto Nazionale di Astrofisica
721: under contract PRIN/INAF 2006, and by the Ministero dell'Istruzione,
722: dell'Universit\`a e della Ricerca. RTR is partially funded by NASA through
723: grant number GO-10524 from the Space Telescope Science Institute. We thank
724: the referee E. Sandquist for the careful reading of the manuscript and the
725: useful comments and suggestions that significantly improved the presentation
726: of the paper.}
727:
728: \begin{thebibliography}{}
729:
730: \bibitem[Albrow et al.(2001)]{albr01} Albrow, M.~D., et al. \ 2001, \apj, 559,
731: 1060
732:
733: \bibitem[Bailyn (1994)]{bail94} Bailyn, C.~D.\ 1994, \aj, 107, 1073
734:
735: %\bibitem[Bailyn \& Pinsonneault (1995)]{ba95} Bailyn, C.~D., \& Pinsonneault,
736: %M.~H.\ 1995, \apj, 439, 705
737:
738: \bibitem[Beccari et al.(2006)]{bec06} Beccari, G., Ferraro, F.~R., Lanzoni,
739: B., \& Bellazzini, M., 2006, \apj, 652, L121
740:
741: % \bibitem[Bedin et al.(2005)]{bed05} Bedin, L.~R., Cassisi, S., Castelli, F.,
742: % Piotto, G., Anderson, J., Salaris, M., Momany, Y., \& Pietrinferni, A.\ 2005,
743: % \mnras, 357, 1038
744:
745: \bibitem[Bellazzini et al.(2002)]{bel02} Bellazzini, M., Fusi
746: Pecci, F., Messineo, M., Monaco, L., \& Rood, R.~T.\ 2002, \aj, 123, 1509
747:
748: \bibitem[Bertin \& Arnouts(1996)]{be96} Bertin, E., \&
749: Arnouts, S.\ 1996, \aaps, 117, 393
750:
751: \bibitem[Buonanno et al. (1983)]{buon83} Buonanno, R., Buscema, G., Corsi,
752: C.~E., Ferraro, I., \& Iannicola, G.\ 1983, A\&A, 126, 278
753:
754: \bibitem[Buonanno \& Iannicola (1989)]{buon89}Buonanno, R., Iannicola, G. \
755: 1989, PASP, 101, 294
756:
757: %\bibitem[Camilo et al. (2000)]{cam00} Camilo, F., Lorimer, D.~R., Freire, P.,
758: %Lyne, A.~G., \& Manchester, R.~N.\ 2000, \apj, 535, 975
759:
760: %\bibitem[Castellani et al. (1991)]{cast91}Castellani, V.,
761: %Chieffi, A., \& Pulone, L.\ 1991, \apjs, 76, 911
762:
763: %\bibitem[Cool \& Bolton (2002)]{co02}Cool A. M., Bolton A. S., 2002, in ASP Conf.
764: %Ser. 263, Stellar Collisions, Mergers and their Consequences. Astron. Soc. Pac.,
765: %San Francisco, p. 163
766:
767: \bibitem[Dolphin (2000)]{dolph00}Dolphin, A.~E.\ 2000, PASP, 112, 1383
768:
769: \bibitem[Drissen \& Shara (1998)]{dris98} Drissen, L., \& Shara, M.~M. \
770: 1998, AJ, 115, 725
771:
772: \bibitem[Dubath et al. (1997)]{dub97} Dubath P., Meylan G., Mayor M., 1997,
773: A\&A, 324, 505
774:
775: %\bibitem[Ferraro et al.(1992)]{fe92} Ferraro, F.~R., Clementini, G., Fusi
776: %Pecci, F., Sortino, R., Buonanno, R.\ 1992, \mnras 256, 391
777:
778: \bibitem[Ferraro et al.(1993)]{fe93} Ferraro, F.~R., Fusi Pecci, F.,
779: Cacciari, C., Corsi, C., Buonanno, R., Fahlman, G.~G., \& Richer, H.~B.\
780: 1993, \aj, 106, 2324
781:
782: \bibitem[Ferraro et al.(1997)]{fe97} Ferraro, F.~R., Paltrinieri, B., Fusi
783: Pecci, F., Cacciari, C., Dorman, B., Rood, R.~T., Buonanno, R., Corsi, C.~E.,
784: Burgarella, D., \& Laget, M., 1997, A\&A, 324, 915
785:
786: \bibitem[Ferraro et al.(1999a)]{fe99a} Ferraro, F.~R., Paltrinieri, B., Rood,
787: R.~T., Dorman, B.\ 1999a, ApJ 522, 983
788:
789: \bibitem[Ferraro et al.(1999b)]{fe99b} Ferraro F. R., Messineo M., Fusi Pecci
790: F., De Palo M. A., Straniero O., Chieffi A., Limongi M.\ 1999b, \aj, 118, 1738
791:
792: \bibitem[Ferraro et al.(2001)]{fe01} Ferraro, F.~R., D'Amico, N., Possenti,
793: A., Mignani, R.~P., \& Paltrinieri, B.\ 2001, \apj, 561, 337
794:
795: \bibitem[Ferraro et al.(2003)]{fe03} Ferraro, F.~R., Sills, A., Rood, R.~T.,
796: Paltrinieri, B., \& Buonanno, R. \ 2003, \apj, 588, 464
797:
798: \bibitem[Ferraro et al.(2004)]{fe04} Ferraro, F.~R.,
799: Beccari, G., Rood, R.~T., Bellazzini, M., Sills, A., \& Sabbi, E.\ 2004,
800: \apj, 603, 127
801:
802: \bibitem[Ferraro (2006)]{fe06} Ferraro, F.~R., 2006, in Resolved Stellar
803: Populations, ASP Conference Series, 2005, D. Valls-Gabaud \& M. Chaves Eds.,
804: astro-ph/0601217
805:
806: \bibitem[Ferraro et al.(2006a)]{fe06a} Ferraro, F.~R., et al.\ 2006a, \apj,
807: 647, L53
808: %Sabbi, E., Gratton, R., Piotto, G., Lanzoni, B., Carretta, E., Rood, R.~T.,
809: %Sills, A., Fusi Pecci, F., Moehler, S., \& 3 coauthors
810:
811: \bibitem[Ferraro et al.(2006b)]{fe06b} Ferraro, F.~R., Sollima, A., Rood,
812: R.~T., Origlia, L., Pancino, E., \& Bellazzini, M. \ 2006b, \apj, 638, 433
813:
814: \bibitem[Fusi Pecci et al. (1992)]{fp92}Fusi Pecci, F., Ferraro, F.~R.,
815: Corsi, C.~E., Cacciari, C., Buonanno, R.\ 1992, AJ, 104, 1831
816:
817: %\bibitem[Guhathakurta et al.(1992)]{gu92} Guhathakurta, P., Yanny, B,,
818: %Schneider, D.~P., \& Bahcall, J.~N.\ 1992, \aj, 104, 1790
819:
820: %\bibitem[Grindlay et al.(2001)]{g01} Grindlay, J.~E.,
821: %Heinke, C., Edmonds, P.~D., \& Murray, S.~S.\ 2001, Science, 292, 2290
822:
823: \bibitem[Harris (1996)]{har96} Harris, W.E. 1996, AJ, 112, 1487
824:
825: \bibitem[Holtzman et al. (1995)]{holtz95} Holtzman, J.~A., Burrows, C.~J.,
826: Casertano, S., Hester, J.~J., Trauger, J.~T., Watson, A.~M., \& Worthey, G. \
827: 1995, PASP, 107, 1065
828:
829: %\bibitem[Ivanova et al.(2005)]{iv05} Ivanova, N.,
830: %Belczynski, K., Fregeau, J.~M., \& Rasio, F.~A.\ 2005, \mnras, 358, 572
831:
832: %\bibitem[Knigge et al.(2002)]{k02} Knigge, C., Zurek,
833: %D.~R., Shara, M.~M., \& Long, K.~S.\ 2002, \apj, 579, 752
834:
835: \bibitem[Lombardi, Rasio \& Shapiro (1995)]{lomb95} Lombardi, J.~C.~Jr., Rasio,
836: F.~A., Shapiro, S.~L.\ 1995, ApJ, 445, L117
837:
838: \bibitem[Mapelli et al.(2004)]{ma04} Mapelli, M.,
839: Sigurdsson, S., Colpi, M., Ferraro, F.~R., Possenti, A., Rood, R.~T.,
840: Sills, A., \& Beccari, G.\ 2004, \apj, 605, L29
841:
842: \bibitem[Mapelli et al.(2006)]{ma06} Mapelli, M., Sigurdsson, S., Ferraro,
843: F.~R., Colpi, M., Possenti, A., \& Lanzoni, B.\ 2006, \mnras, 373, 361
844:
845: \bibitem[McLaughlin \& van der Marel(2005)]{mcL05} McLaughlin, D.~E., \& van
846: der Marel, R.~P. \ 2005, \apjs, 161, 304
847:
848: \bibitem[Montegriffo et al. (1995)]{mont95}Montegriffo, P., Ferraro, F.~R.,
849: Fusi Pecci, F., \& Origlia, L.\ 1995, \mnras, 276, 739
850:
851: %\bibitem[Paresce et al.(1991)]{par91} Paresce, F., Meylan, G., Shara, M.,
852: %Baxter, D., \& Greenfield, P.\ 1991, Nature, 352, 297
853:
854: %\bibitem[Pietrinferni et al.(2006)]{p06} Pietrinferni, A.,
855: %Cassisi, S., Salaris, M., \& Castelli, F.\ 2006, \apj, 642, 797
856:
857: \bibitem[Piotto et al. (2002)]{pio02} Piotto, G.,
858: %King, I. R.; Djorgovski, S. G.; Sosin, C.; Zoccali, M.; Saviane, I.; De
859: %Angeli, F.; Riello, M.; Recio-Blanco, A.; Rich, R. M.; and 2 coauthors
860: et al.\ 2002, A\&A, 391, 945
861:
862: \bibitem[Pryor \& Meylan (1993)]{pry93} Pryor C., \& Meylan G., 1993,
863: Structure and Dynamics of Globular Clusters. Proceedings of a Workshop held
864: in Berkeley, California, July 15-17, 1992, to Honor the 65th Birthday of Ivan
865: King. Editors, S.G. Djorgovski and G. Meylan; Publisher, Astronomical Society
866: of the Pacific, Vol. 50, 357
867:
868: \bibitem[Renzini \& Fusi Pecci(1988)]{rf88} Renzini, A., \& Fusi Pecci, F.\
869: 1988, ARA\&A, 26, 199
870:
871: %\bibitem[Rubenstein \& Bailyn(1997)]{ru97} Rubenstein,
872: %E.~P., \& Bailyn, C.~D.\ 1997, \apj, 474, 701
873:
874: \bibitem[Sabbi et al.(2004)]{sab04} Sabbi, E., Ferraro, F.~R., Sills, A.,
875: Rood, R.~T., 2004, ApJ 617, 1296
876:
877: \bibitem[Sandquist et al. (1996)]{sand96} Sandquist, E.~L., Bolte, M.,
878: Stetson, P.~B.; Hesser, J.~E. \ 1996, \apj, 470, 910
879:
880: \bibitem[Sarna \& de Greve (1996)]{sarna96} Sarna, M.~J., \& de Greve, J.~P.\
881: 1996, QJRAS, 37, 11
882:
883: \bibitem[Schechter, Mateo \& Saha (1993)]{dophot} Schechter, P. L., Mateo, M.,
884: \& Saha, A.\ 1993, PASP, 105, 1342
885:
886: \bibitem[Shara et al. (1997)]{sha97} Shara, M.~M., Saffer, R.~A., \& Livio,
887: M.\ 1997, \apj, 489, L59
888:
889: \bibitem[Sigurdsson \& Phinney (1995)]{sigu95} Sigurdsson S., Phinney, E.~S.,
890: 1995, ApJS, 99, 609
891:
892: \bibitem[Sirianni et al.(2005)]{si05} Sirianni, M., et al.\
893: 2005, \pasp, 117, 1049
894:
895: % \bibitem[Sollima et al.(2006)]{soll06} Sollima, A., et al.\
896: % 2006, ApJL IN PREPARATION
897:
898: \bibitem[Warren, Sandquist \& Bolte (2006)]{w06} Warren, S.~R., Sandquist,
899: E.~L., \& Bolte, M., 2006, ApJ 648, 1026 (W06)
900:
901: %\bibitem[Wylie et al.(2006)]{wy06} Wylie, E.~C., Cottrell,
902: %P.~L., Sneden, C.~A., \& Lattanzio, J.~C.\ 2006, astro-ph/0605538
903:
904: \bibitem[Zaggia, Piotto \& Capaccioli(1997)]{zag97} Zaggia, S.~R., Piotto,
905: G., \& Capaccioli, M., 1997, A\&A, 327, 1004
906:
907: \end{thebibliography}
908:
909: %--Fig.1
910: \begin{figure}[!hp]
911: \begin{center}
912: \includegraphics[scale=0.7]{f1.eps}
913: \caption{Map of the HST sample. The heavy solid line delimits the HST-WFPC2
914: FoV of our UV observations (Prop. 6607), the dashed line bounds the FoV of
915: the optical HST-WFPC2 observations by Piotto et al. (2002), and the dotted
916: line marks the edge of the complementary ACS data set. The derived center of
917: gravity $C_{\rm grav}$ is marked with a cross. BSS (heavy dots) and the
918: concentric annuli used to study their radial distribution (cfr. Table
919: \ref{tab:annuli}) are also shown. The inner and outer annuli correspond to
920: $r=r_c=27\arcsec$ and $r=115\arcsec$, respectively.}
921: \label{fig:HST}
922: \end{center}
923: \end{figure}
924:
925: %--Fig.2
926: \begin{center}
927: \begin{figure}[!p]
928: \includegraphics[scale=0.7]{f2.eps}
929: \caption{Map of the WFI sample. All BSS detected in the WFI sample are
930: marked as heavy dots, and the concentric annuli used to study their radial
931: distribution are shown as solid lines, with the inner and outer annuli
932: corresponding to $r=115\arcsec$ and $r=800\arcsec$, respectively (cfr. Table
933: \ref{tab:annuli}). The circle corresponding to the tidal radius ($r_t\simeq
934: 21\farcm 5$) is also shown as dashed-dotted line. The BSS lying beyond $r_t$
935: might represent a BSS previously belonging to M5 and now evaporating from the
936: cluster.}
937: \label{fig:WFI}
938: \end{figure}
939: \end{center}
940:
941: %--Fig.3
942: \begin{figure}[!p]
943: \begin{center}
944: \includegraphics[scale=0.7]{f3.eps}
945: \caption{Optical CMDs of the WFPC2-HST and the WFI samples. The hatched
946: regions indicate the magnitude limit ($V\le 20$) adopted for selecting the
947: stars used to construct the cluster surface density profile.}
948: \label{fig:CMD}
949: \end{center}
950: \end{figure}
951:
952: %--Fig.4
953: \begin{figure}[!p]
954: \begin{center}
955: \includegraphics[scale=0.7]{f4.eps}
956: \caption{Observed surface density profile (dots and error bars) and best-fit
957: King model (solid line). The radial profile is in units of number of stars
958: per square arcseconds. The dotted line indicates the adopted level of the
959: background, and the model characteristic parameters (core radius $r_c$,
960: concentration $c$, dimensionless central potential $W_0$) are marked in the
961: figure. The lower panel shows the residuals between the observations and the
962: fitted profile at each radial coordinate.}
963: \label{fig:prof}
964: \end{center}
965: \end{figure}
966:
967: %--Fig.5
968: \begin{center}
969: \begin{figure}[!p]
970: \includegraphics[scale=0.7]{f5.eps}
971: \caption{CMD of the ultraviolet HST sample. The adopted magnitude limit and
972: selection box used for the definition of the BSS population are shown. The
973: resulting fiducial BSS are marked with empty circles. The open square
974: corresponds to the variable BSS identified by \citet{dris98}. The box adopted
975: for the selection of HB stars is also shown.}
976: \label{fig:UVsel}
977: \end{figure}
978: \end{center}
979:
980: %--Fig.6
981: \begin{center}
982: \begin{figure}[!p]
983: \includegraphics[scale=0.7]{f6.eps}
984: \caption{CMD of the optical HST-WFPC2 and WFI samples. The adopted BSS and
985: HB selection boxes are shown, and all the BSS identified in these samples are
986: marked with the empty circles. The two BSS not included in the box in the
987: left-hand panel lie well within the selection box in the UV plane and are
988: therefore considered as fiducial BSS. The empty triangle in the right-hand
989: panel corresponds to the BSS identified beyond the cluster tidal radius, at
990: $r\simeq 24\arcmin$.}
991: \label{fig:Optsel}
992: \end{figure}
993: \end{center}
994:
995: %--Fig.7
996: \begin{center}
997: \begin{figure}[!p]
998: \includegraphics[scale=0.7]{f7.eps}
999: \caption{CMD of the ACS complementary sample. The BSS selection box is
1000: shown, and the resulting fiducial BSS are marked with empty circles.}
1001: \label{fig:ACSsel}
1002: \end{figure}
1003: \end{center}
1004:
1005: %--Fig.8
1006: \begin{figure}[!p]
1007: \begin{center}
1008: \includegraphics[scale=1.]{f8.eps}
1009: \caption{{\it Left-hand panel}: position of the 8 false BSS (marked with
1010: white circles) as derived from Table 2 of W06, overplotted to the CFHT image
1011: (units are the same as in their Figure 1). As can be seen, a heavily
1012: saturated star is responsible for the false identification. {\it Right-hand
1013: panel}: location of the 8 false BSS (empty circles) in the $(B,\, B-I)$
1014: plane, as derived from Table 2 of W06 (cfr. to their Fig. 2).}
1015: \label{fig:satura}
1016: \end{center}
1017: \end{figure}
1018:
1019: %--Fig.9
1020: \begin{figure}[!p]
1021: \begin{center}
1022: \includegraphics[scale=0.7]{f9.eps}
1023: \caption{Cumulative radial distribution of BSS (solid line) and HB stars
1024: (dashed line) as a function of the projected distance from the cluster center
1025: for the combined HST+WFI sample. The two distributions differ at $\sim 4
1026: \sigma$ level.}
1027: \label{fig:KS}
1028: \end{center}
1029: \end{figure}
1030:
1031: %--Fig.10
1032: \begin{figure}[!p]
1033: \begin{center}
1034: \includegraphics[scale=0.7]{f10.eps}
1035: \caption{Radial distribution of the BSS and HB double normalized ratios, as
1036: defined in equation~(\ref{eq:spec_freq}), plotted as a function of the radial
1037: coordinate expressed in units of the core radius. $R_{\rm HB}$ (with the size
1038: of the rectangles corresponding to the error bars computed as described in
1039: Sabbi et al. 2004) is almost constant around unity over the entire cluster
1040: extension, as expected for any normal, non-segregated cluster
1041: population. Instead, the radial trend of $R_{\rm BSS}$ (dots with error bars)
1042: is completely different: highly peaked in the center (a factor of $\sim$ 3
1043: higher than $R_{\rm HB}$), decreasing at intermediate radii, and rising again
1044: outward.}
1045: \label{fig:Rpop}
1046: \end{center}
1047: \end{figure}
1048:
1049: %--Fig.11
1050: \begin{figure}[!p]
1051: \begin{center}
1052: \includegraphics[scale=0.8]{f11.eps}
1053: \caption{Observed radial distribution of the specific frequency $N_{\rm
1054: BSS}/N_{\rm HB}$ (filled circles with error bars), as a function of $r/r_c$.
1055: The simulated distribution that best reproduces the observed one is shown as
1056: a solid line and is obtained by assuming $80\%$ of COL-BSS and $20\%$ of
1057: MT-BSS. The simulated distributions obtained by assuming $40\%$ of MT-BSS
1058: (dashed line) and $100\%$ COL-BSS (dotted line) are also shown.
1059: %The error bar of observed point at $r\simeq 9 r_c$ (that corresponds to
1060: %$N_{\rm BSS}=0$), has been arbitrarily computed assuming an uncertainty of 1
1061: %BSS. }
1062: }
1063: \label{fig:simu}
1064: \end{center}
1065: \end{figure}
1066:
1067: %--Fig.12
1068: \begin{figure}[!p]
1069: \begin{center}
1070: \includegraphics[scale=0.8]{f12.eps}
1071: \caption{Radial distribution of the population ratio $N_{\rm BSS}/N_{\rm HB}$
1072: for M5, M3, 47~Tuc, and NGC~6752, plotted as a function of the radial
1073: distance from the cluster center, normalized to the core radius $r_c$ (from
1074: Mapelli et al. 2006, $r_c\simeq 30\arcsec, 21\arcsec, 28\arcsec$ for M3,
1075: 47~Tuc, and NGC~6752, respectively). The arrows indicate the position of the
1076: minimum of the distribution in each case. The outermost point shown for M5
1077: (empty circle) corresponds to BSS-58, lying at $r\simeq 995\arcsec$. This
1078: star has not been considered in the quantitative study of the BSS radial
1079: distribution since only a negligible fraction of the annuls between
1080: $800\arcsec$ and $r_t$ is sampled by our observations.}
1081: \label{fig:cfr_radist}
1082: \end{center}
1083: \end{figure}
1084:
1085: %--Table 1
1086: \begin{deluxetable}{lcccccccl}
1087: \footnotesize
1088: \tablewidth{15cm}
1089: \tablecaption{The BSS population of M5}
1090: \startdata \\
1091: \hline \hline
1092: Name & RA & DEC &$m_{255}$& U & B & V & I & W06 \\
1093: & [degree] & [degree] & & & & & & \\
1094: \hline
1095: BSS-1 & 229.6354506 & 2.0841090 & 16.52 & 16.15 & 15.88 & 15.71 & - & CR2 \\
1096: BSS-2 & 229.6388102 & 2.0849660 & 17.95 & 17.38 & 17.40 & 17.04 & - & CR4 \\
1097: BSS-3 & 229.6383433 & 2.0842640 & 18.21 & 17.63 & 17.64 & 17.32 & - & CR3 \\
1098: BSS-4 & 229.6416234 & 2.0851791 & 17.59 & 17.22 & 17.05 & 16.90 & - & CR5 \\
1099: BSS-5 & 229.6416518 & 2.0836794 & 16.28 & 15.99 & 15.79 & 15.70 & - & CR1 \\
1100: BSS-6 & 229.6381953 & 2.0810119 & 17.36 & 16.99 & 16.81 & 16.65 & - & CR21 \\
1101: BSS-7 & 229.6403657 & 2.0824062 & 17.40 & 17.07 & 16.97 & 16.76 & - & CR12 \\
1102: BSS-8 & 229.6412279 & 2.0823768 & 17.91 & 17.47 & 17.41 & 17.15 & - & CR13 \\
1103: BSS-9 & 229.6376256 & 2.0793288 & 17.84 & 17.12 & 16.99 & 16.77 & - & CR23 \\
1104: BSS-10 & 229.6401139 & 2.0794858 & 17.57 & 16.98 & 16.87 & 16.62 & - & CR22 \\
1105: BSS-11 & 229.6396566 & 2.0784944 & 17.51 & 17.20 & 17.12 & 16.92 & - & CR24 \\
1106: BSS-12 & 229.6432834 & 2.0797197 & 18.12 & 17.64 & 17.78 & 17.54 & - & - \\
1107: BSS-13 & 229.6384406 & 2.0776614 & 17.36 & 16.88 & 16.88 & 16.59 & - & CR25 \\
1108: BSS-14 & 229.6274500 & 2.0864896 & 18.07 & 17.63 & 17.64 & 17.33 & - & CR8 \\
1109: BSS-15 & 229.6204246 & 2.0879629 & 18.33 & 17.61 & 17.75 & 17.36 & - & CR11 \\
1110: BSS-16 & 229.6209379 & 2.0917858 & 17.80 & 17.28 & 17.26 & 16.98 & - & CR18 \\
1111: BSS-17 & 229.6264834 & 2.0960870 & 16.32 & 16.22 & 16.20 & 16.13 & - & CR20 \\
1112: BSS-18 & 229.6368731 & 2.0896002 & 16.56 & 16.30 & 16.11 & 16.01 & - & CR14 \\
1113: BSS-19 & 229.6367309 & 2.0917639 & 18.27 & 17.35 & 17.58 & 17.07 & - & CR17 \\
1114: BSS-20 & 229.6345837 & 2.0906438 & 17.88 & 16.81 & 16.96 & 16.43 & - & CR16 \\
1115: BSS-21 & 229.6382677 & 2.0934706 & 18.25 & 17.58 & 17.71 & 17.35 & - & CR19 \\
1116: BSS-22 & 229.6340227 & 2.0853879 & 17.67 & 17.32 & 17.22 & 17.03 & - & CR7 \\
1117: BSS-23 & 229.6332685 & 2.0875294 & 17.69 & 17.34 & 17.21 & 17.08 & - & CR10 \\
1118: BSS-24 & 229.6366685 & 2.0807168 & 18.23 & 17.78 & 17.67 & 17.37 & - & - \\
1119: BSS-25 & 229.6393544 & 2.0762832 & 18.11 & 17.79 & 17.72 & 17.50 & - & - \\
1120: BSS-26 & 229.6378381 & 2.0779999 & 17.86 & 17.52 & 17.43 & 17.27 & - & - \\
1121: BSS-27 & 229.6349851 & 2.0807202 & 18.17 & 17.51 & 17.74 & 17.30 & - & CR70 \\
1122: BSS-28 & 229.6397645 & 2.0736403 & 18.19 & 17.60 & 17.69 & 17.28 & - & CR33 \\
1123: BSS-29 & 229.6370495 & 2.0770798 & 16.83 & 16.56 & 16.57 & 17.75 & - & CR26 \\
1124: BSS-30 & 229.6358816 & 2.0747883 & 18.25 & 17.81 & 17.79 & 17.51 & - & CR31 \\
1125: BSS-31 & 229.6361653 & 2.0720147 & 18.29 & 17.77 & 17.81 & 17.47 & - & CR36 \\
1126: BSS-32 & 229.6339822 & 2.0723032 & 16.73 & 16.10 & 16.16 & 15.95 & - & CR35 \\
1127: BSS-33 & 229.6281392 & 2.0756490 & 17.74 & 17.41 & 17.22 & 17.09 & - & CR29 \\
1128: BSS-34 & 229.6241278 & 2.0750261 & 18.21 & 17.50 & 17.65 & 17.27 & - & CR79 \\
1129: BSS-35 & 229.6332759 & 2.0603761 & 17.48 & 17.17 & 16.95 & 16.86 & - & CR48 \\
1130: BSS-36 & 229.6270877 & 2.0662947 & 17.33 & 17.18 & 17.06 & 16.95 & - & CR47 \\
1131: BSS-37 & 229.6244175 & 2.0693612 & 16.89 & 16.41 & 16.51 & 15.71 & - & CR46 \\
1132: BSS-38 & 229.6180419 & 2.0724090 & 17.37 & 17.23 & 17.12 & 17.00 & - & CR34 \\
1133: BSS-39 & 229.6311963 & 2.0857800 & 18.31 & 17.33 & 17.40 & 16.76 & - & - \\
1134: BSS-40 & 229.6297499 & 2.0664961 & 18.16 & 17.58 & - & 17.27 & - & CR76 \\
1135: BSS-41 & 229.6443367 & 2.0872809 & - & - & 17.50 & 17.23 & - & CR9 \\
1136: BSS-42 & 229.6448646 & 2.0738335 & - & - & 16.53 & 16.06 & 15.95 & CR32 \\
1137: BSS-43 & 229.6460645 & 2.0748695 & - & - & 16.64 & 16.44 & 16.66 & CR30 \\
1138: BSS-44 & 229.6481631 & 2.0718829 & - & - & 16.72 & 16.61 & 16.87 & CR37 \\
1139: BSS-45 & 229.6433942 & 2.0760163 & - & - & 17.03 & 16.79 & 16.91 & CR28 \\
1140: BSS-46 & 229.6439884 & 2.0775670 & - & - & 17.44 & 16.99 & 16.81 & - \\
1141: BSS-47 & 229.6180420 & 2.0598328 & - & - & - & 17.18 & 17.12 & - \\
1142: BSS-48 & 229.6092873 & 2.1680914 & - & - & 16.85 & 16.68 & - & OR2 \\
1143: BSS-49 & 229.6723094 & 2.0882827 & - & - & 16.94 & 16.64 & - & OR9 \\
1144: BSS-50 & 229.6006551 & 2.0814678 & - & - & 17.00 & 16.74 & - & OR10 \\
1145: BSS-51 & 229.6669956 & 1.9781808 & - & - & 17.20 & 16.74 & - & OR1 \\
1146: BSS-52 & 229.5949935 & 2.0469325 & - & - & 17.69 & 17.46 & - & OR4 \\
1147: BSS-53 & 229.6706625 & 2.0695464 & - & - & 17.82 & 17.50 & - & - \\
1148: BSS-54 & 229.6667908 & 2.1149550 & - & - & 17.82 & 17.72 & - & - \\
1149: BSS-55 & 229.7370667 & 2.0323392 & - & - & 17.80 & 17.42 & - & OR23 \\
1150: BSS-56 & 229.5476990 & 2.0112610 & - & - & 16.88 & 16.60 & - & OR5 \\
1151: BSS-57 & 229.6711255 & 1.9415566 & - & - & 16.98 & 16.64 & - & - \\
1152: BSS-58 & 229.4381714 & 2.0302088 & - & - & 17.75 & 17.33 & - & - \\
1153: BSS-59 & 229.7408412 & 2.3399166 & - & - & 17.49 & 17.08 & - & - \\
1154: BSS-60 & 229.3218200 & 2.3271022 & - & - & 16.34 & 16.09 & - & - \\
1155: \hline
1156: \enddata
1157: \tablecomments{The first 41 BSS have been identified in the WFPC2 sample;
1158: BSS-42--46 are from the complementary ACS observations; BSS-47--59 are from
1159: the WFI data-set. BSS-59 lies beyond the cluster tidal radius, at $\sim
1160: 24\arcmin$ from the center. The last column list the corresponding BSS in
1161: W06 sample, with "CR" indicating their "Core BSS" and "OR" their "Outer
1162: Region BSS".}
1163: \label{tab:BSS}
1164: \end{deluxetable}
1165:
1166: \begin{deluxetable}{rrrcc}
1167: \tablecaption{Number counts of BSS and HB stars}
1168: \scriptsize
1169: \tablewidth{7.5cm}
1170: \startdata \\
1171: \hline \hline
1172: $r_i\arcsec$ & $r_e\arcsec$ & $N_{\rm BSS}$ & $N_{\rm HB}$ & $L^{\rm samp}/L_{\rm tot}^{\rm samp}$ \\
1173: \hline
1174: 0 & 27 & 22 & 94 & 0.14 \\
1175: 27 & 50 & 15 & 94 & 0.16 \\
1176: 50 & 115 & 10 &135 & 0.26 \\
1177: 115 & 150 & 3 & 46 & 0.09 \\
1178: 150 & 210 & 2 & 52 & 0.10 \\
1179: 210 & 300 & 0 & 45$^\dag$ & 0.10 \\
1180: 300 & 450 & 4 & 42$^\dag$ & 0.09 \\
1181: 450 & 800 & 2 & 38$^\dag$ & 0.06 \\
1182: \hline
1183: \enddata
1184: \tablecomments{$^\dag$~The $N_{\rm HB}$ values listed here are those
1185: corrected for field contamination (i.e., 1, 2 and 8 stars have been
1186: subtracted to the observed number counts in these three external annuli,
1187: respectively).}
1188: \label{tab:annuli}
1189: \end{deluxetable}
1190:
1191: \end{document}
1192: