1: %%
2: %% Beginning of file 'sample.tex'
3: %%
4: %% Modified 2004 January 9
5: %%
6: %% This is a sample manuscript marked up using the
7: %% AASTeX v5.x LaTeX 2e macros.
8:
9: %% The first piece of markup in an AASTeX v5.x document
10: %% is the \documentclass command. LaTeX will ignore
11: %% any data that comes before this command.
12:
13: %% The command below calls the preprint style
14: %% which will produce a one-column, single-spaced document.
15: %% Examples of commands for other substyles follow. Use
16: %% whichever is most appropriate for your purposes.
17: %%
18: \documentclass[12pt,preprint]{aastex}
19:
20: %% manuscript produces a one-column, double-spaced document:
21:
22: %\documentclass[manuscript]{aastex}
23:
24: \def\lea{\mathrel{<\kern-1.0em\lower0.9ex\hbox{$\sim$}}}
25: \def\gea{\mathrel{>\kern-1.0em\lower0.9ex\hbox{$\sim$}}}
26:
27: %% preprint2 produces a double-column, single-spaced document:
28:
29: %\documentclass[preprint2]{aastex}
30:
31: %% Sometimes a paper's abstract is too long to fit on the
32: %% title page in preprint2 mode. When that is the case,
33: %% use the longabstract style option.
34:
35: %% \documentclass[preprint2,longabstract]{aastex}
36:
37: %% If you want to create your own macros, you can do so
38: %% using \newcommand. Your macros should appear before
39: %% the \begin{document} command.
40: %%
41: %% If you are submitting to a journal that translates manuscripts
42: %% into SGML, you need to follow certain guidelines when preparing
43: %% your macros. See the AASTeX v5.x Author Guide
44: %% for information.
45:
46: \newcommand{\myemail}{ata@astro.ufl.edu}
47:
48: %% You can insert a short comment on the title page using the command below.
49:
50: \slugcomment{Accepted for publication in The Astronomical Journal}
51:
52: %% If you wish, you may supply running head information, although
53: %% this information may be modified by the editorial offices.
54: %% The left head contains a list of authors,
55: %% usually a maximum of three (otherwise use et al.). The right
56: %% head is a modified title of up to roughly 44 characters.
57: %% Running heads will not print in the manuscript style.
58:
59: \shorttitle{M33 Star Cluster Catalog}
60: \shortauthors{Sarajedini & Mancone}
61:
62: %% This is the end of the preamble. Indicate the beginning of the
63: %% paper itself with \begin{document}.
64:
65: \begin{document}
66:
67: %% LaTeX will automatically break titles if they run longer than
68: %% one line. However, you may use \\ to force a line break if
69: %% you desire.
70:
71: \title{A Catalog of Star Cluster Candidates in M33}
72: %% Use \author, \affil, and the \and command to format
73: %% author and affiliation information.
74: %% Note that \email has replaced the old \authoremail command
75: %% from AASTeX v4.0. You can use \email to mark an email address
76: %% anywhere in the paper, not just in the front matter.
77: %% As in the title, use \\ to force line breaks.
78:
79: \author{Ata Sarajedini and Conor L. Mancone}
80: \affil{Department of Astronomy, University of Florida, 211 Bryant Space
81: Science Center, Gainesville, FL 32611-2055}
82:
83: %% Notice that each of these authors has alternate affiliations, which
84: %% are identified by the \altaffilmark after each name. Specify alternate
85: %% affiliation information with \altaffiltext, with one command per each
86: %% affiliation.
87:
88: %% Mark off your abstract in the ``abstract'' environment. In the manuscript
89: %% style, abstract will output a Received/Accepted line after the
90: %% title and affiliation information. No date will appear since the author
91: %% does not have this information. The dates will be filled in by the
92: %% editorial office after submission.
93:
94: \begin{abstract}
95: We present a new catalog of star cluster candidates in the nearby spiral
96: galaxy M33. It is based on eight existing catalogs wherein we
97: have cross-referenced identifications and endeavored to resolve inconsistencies
98: between them. Our catalog contains 451 candidates of which 255
99: are confirmed clusters based on HST and high resolution
100: ground-based imaging. The catalog contains precise cluster positions (RA and Dec),
101: magnitudes and colors in the UBVRIJHK$_S$ filters, metallicities, radial velocities,
102: masses and ages, where available, and galactocentric distances for each
103: cluster. The color distribution of the M33 clusters appears to be similar to those in the
104: Large Magellanic Cloud with major peaks at $(B-V)_{0}$$\sim$0.15, and
105: $(B-V)_{0}$$\sim$0.65. The intrinsic colors are correlated with cluster ages, which
106: range from $10^{7.5}$ to $10^{10.3}$ years. The age distribution of the star clusters
107: supports the notion of rapid cluster disruption with a slope of
108: $\alpha$=--1.09$\pm$0.07 in the $dN_{cluster}/d$$\tau$~$\propto$~$\tau$$^{\alpha}$
109: relation. In addition, comparison to theoretical
110: single stellar population models suggests the presence of an age-metallicity
111: relation among these clusters with younger clusters being more metal-rich.
112: Analysis of the radial distribution of the clusters yields some evidence that younger clusters
113: (age $\lea$ 1 Gyr) may be more concentrated toward the center of M33
114: than older ones. A similar comparison
115: with the radial profile of the M33 field stars shows the clusters to be
116: more centrally concentrated at the greater than 99.9\% confidence level. Possible
117: reasons for this are presented and discussed; however, the overwhelming conclusion
118: seems to be that a more complete and thorough cluster search is needed covering at
119: least 4 square degrees centered on M33.
120: \end{abstract}
121:
122: %% Keywords should appear after the \end{abstract} command. The uncommented
123: %% example has been keyed in ApJ style. See the instructions to authors
124: %% for the journal to which you are submitting your paper to determine
125: %% what keyword punctuation is appropriate.
126:
127: \keywords{galaxies: spiral -- galaxies: individual (M33) }
128:
129: \section{Introduction}
130:
131: %The star cluster system of the late-type spiral M33 has been studied for almost
132: %50 years. Beginning with the first catalog constructed by Hiltner (1960), there have
133: %been 8 distinct compilations of cluster positions; in addition to Hiltner
134: %(1960, hereafter Hilt), these include Melnick \& D'Odorico (1978, hereafter MD),
135: %Christian \& Schommer (1982; 1988, hereafter CS), Mochejska et al. (1998,
136: %hereafter MKKSS), Chandar, Bianchi, \& Ford (1999, hereafter CBF99),
137: %Chandar, Bianchi, \& Ford (2001, hereafter CBF01), Bedin et al. (2005,
138: %hereafter BEA), and Sarajedini et al. (2006, hereafter SBGHS). The first
139: %four studies are based on ground-based observations, while the last
140: %four make use of Hubble Space Telescope (HST) imaging data.
141: %On ground-based
142: %images with a typical seeing of 1 arcsec FWHM for point sources, star clusters at
143: %the distance of M33 appear as marginally resolved sources with typical FWHM
144: %values of a few arcseconds. Without radial velocity information,
145: %these cluster candidates can easily be confused with background galaxies.
146: %In contrast, when considering HST imaging, star clusters are resolved into
147: %individual stars making their identification as genuine star clusters
148: %essentially unequivocal.
149:
150: The identification of star clusters in M33 can be traced back to the pioneering work
151: of Hiltner (1960, hereafter Hilt), who used photographic plates taken with the Mt. Wilson
152: 100-inch telescope to photometer 23 cluster candidates in the UBV passbands.
153: He concluded that the clusters in M33 are generally bluer and fainter than those in M31.
154: The next major catalog was published by Melnick \& D'Odorico (1978,
155: hereafter MD) adding 33
156: more objects to the census of star cluster candidates. Their assertion that
157: M33 seemed to contain too many globular clusters for its luminosity led them
158: to conclude that some of the cluster candidates are associated with the
159: disk of M33. The most comprehensive catalog of non-stellar objects in M33
160: was compiled by Christian \& Schommer (1982, hereafter CS) using
161: a single photographic plate taken at the Ritchey-Chr\'{e}tien focus of
162: the 4m telescope at Kitt Peak National Observatory. Additional supporting
163: observational material was used to arrive at the final list of 250 objects in
164: the catalog. Subsequent papers analyzed the photometric, spectroscopic, and
165: kinematical properties of these clusters (Christian \& Schommer 1983; 1988;
166: Schommer et al. 1991). The most recent attempt to compile a catalog of
167: M33 clusters using ground-based facilities is that of Mochejska et al. (1998, hereafter
168: MKKSS),
169: wherein 35 new cluster candidates were cataloged and 16 previously known
170: ones were confirmed. In addition to the cluster census, MKKSS
171: also presented an analysis of the M33 cluster color-magnitude diagram, color-color
172: diagram, and luminosity function as compared with the Milky Way.
173:
174: The era of using space-based telescopes such as the Hubble Space
175: Telescope (HST) to identify M33 clusters began with the work
176: of Chandar, Bianchi, \& Ford (1999, hereafter CBF99). They used images taken
177: with the Wide
178: Field Planetary Camera 2 (WFPC2) aboard HST to identify 60 star clusters, 11 of which
179: were previously cataloged as nonstellar objects from ground-based
180: surveys. This was augmented by an additional set of 102 star clusters, 82 of
181: which were previously unknown,
182: presented by Chandar, Bianchi, \& Ford (2001, hereafter CBF01) again using the
183: WFPC2
184: instrument. Both studies present positions for the clusters as well as integrated
185: photometry in a variety of filters. Most recently, demonstrating the power of
186: the Advanced Camera for Surveys (ACS) Wide Field Channel
187: on HST for studies such as this, Bedin
188: et al. (2005, hereafter BEA) detect 33 star clusters and 51 candidates in one M33 field.
189: Sarajedini et al. (2007, hereafter SBGHS) have also used the
190: resolving power of ACS on HST to identify 24 star clusters of which 12 are previously
191: uncataloged. They demonstrate that the construction of cluster color-magnitude
192: diagrams provides powerful inputs into the interpretation of the
193: integrated-light properties.
194:
195: Alongside these catalogs, a number of papers led by Jun Ma have
196: been published on the properties of M33 clusters in the above-mentioned
197: catalogs (Ma et al. 2001, 2002a, 2002b, 2002c,
198: 2004a, 2004b) including integrated magnitudes, colors, ages, masses,
199: and metallicities. Using the Beijing-Arizona-Taiwan-Connecticut (BATC)
200: filter system, the series of papers by
201: Ma et al. construct spectral energy distributions (SED) of known M33 cluster candidates
202: and use the shape of the SEDs to estimate cluster properties.
203:
204: While the proliferation of M33 cluster catalogs and the supporting work
205: by Ma et al. have been quite valuable, it is clear that a single master catalog
206: incorporating the entries in all of the individual catalogs including all
207: known properties of each cluster would be an important step forward.
208: Constructing such a catalog of M33 star
209: clusters has a number of advantages. First, it provides a standard
210: positional reference frame and photometric zeropoint for future catalogs.
211: Second, having a catalog that contains ALL previous catalogs plus cluster
212: properties is important in helping us to better understand the M33 cluster
213: system and M33 itself.
214:
215: Throughout this paper, we make a distinction between
216: the full version of our catalog available via the world wide web
217: \footnote{http://www.astro.ufl.edu/$\sim$ata/cgi-bin/m33\_cluster\_catalog/}
218: (FC for full catalog) and the cluster catalog of adopted values included in
219: the present work (AC for adopted catalog). The former contains
220: the properties of each cluster as quoted in all of the referenced works. The
221: latter, which is analyzed in this manuscript, contains only our adopted values for
222: such parameters as the cluster photometry, age, and mass.
223: The next section is a brief overview of the catalogs
224: that we have used. Section 3 describes in detail the construction of this
225: new catalog and Section 4 includes an analysis of the cluster properties.
226: Lastly, our conclusions are presented in Section 5.
227:
228: \section{Existing Catalogs}
229:
230: In Sec. 1, we noted the 8 cluster catalogs (Hilt, MD, CS, MKKSS, CBF99, CBF01, BEA,
231: and SBGHS) and 6 papers containing cluster properties (Ma01, Ma02a, Ma02b, Ma02c,
232: Ma04a, Ma04b) that we plan to integrate into our new catalog of M33 cluster data. Table 1
233: lists the bibliographic citation of each source along with the abbreviation we will
234: use in the present paper. Table 1 also lists the information contained in each of these sources.
235: Our primary sources for cluster identifications are Hilt, MD, CS, MKKSS, CBF99, CBF01,
236: BEA, and SBGHS. Some of these papers also provide photometric measurements.
237: Cluster properties such as ages, masses, and metallicities are taken from the
238: Ma et al. series of papers. In particular, Ma01 and Ma02b present properties
239: for CBF99 and CBF01 clusters, Ma02a and Ma04b provide additional data for the MD
240: clusters, Ma02c presents ages for clusters identified by MKKSS, and Ma04a gives
241: metallicities for the old star clusters in M33.
242:
243: \section{New Catalog}
244:
245: \subsection{Cluster Positions}
246:
247: All of the input catalogs provide right ascensions and declinations for the clusters
248: except for Hilt and MD, which only provide finder charts.
249: The positions of the clusters were transformed to
250: the J2000 epoch and refined using the Local Group Survey (LGS, Massey et al. 2006)
251: images of M33 available from their ftp site
252: \footnote{ftp://ftp.lowell.edu/pub/massey/lgsurvey/datarelease/}. These are NOAO
253: MOSAIC frames of 3 overlapping fields in M33 that have been registered and stacked
254: to yield combined UBVRI images. The IRAF task
255: \verb/imexamine/ was used to determine the cluster positions on the V frames
256: and \verb/wcstran/ was used to reference them to the World Coordinate System of each image.
257: The positions
258: are relative to the USNO-A2.0 catalog and have a rms error of $\sim$0.25 arcsec. These
259: are the positions that are used in the FC and AC versions of the catalog.
260: We note that three clusters (SM 442, SM 450, and SM 451)
261: fell outside of the region covered by the LGS images. In these cases,
262: we measure the cluster positions on images taken from the Digitized Sky Survey.
263: In most cases, the position listed for a given cluster in the original catalog was of sufficient
264: accuracy to make the cluster location easily discernable.
265: In crowded regions or for faint clusters, the cluster's location on the LGS image was confirmed by
266: referring to the images used in the original paper - typically HST/WFPC2 frames as
267: in the work of CBF99 and CBF01. In the case of the Hilt and MD catalogs,
268: the finder charts were used exclusively to locate the clusters.
269:
270: The Christian \& Schommer (1982) cluster positions and identifications deserve further
271: discussion. Their right ascensions and declinations are only accurate to about 20 arc seconds,
272: so the CS charts were used in most cases to confirm the identity of the clusters. Furthermore,
273: in their original catalog
274: CS listed 18 miscellaneous objects but did not include positions for them. Three of these objects
275: (M9, M11, M12) were labeled on their finding chart and have been included in the present catalog.
276: Eight of these objects (M1, M2, M4, M5, M6, M8, M10, M15) were listed with cross-identifications to
277: MD. These cross-identifications were assumed to be correct and the CS identifications have been
278: added to our catalog.
279: The remaining objects (M3, M7, M13, M14, M16, M17, M18) are currently unidentified and were
280: not included in our catalog.
281:
282: Figure 1 shows the offsets in right ascension and declination between our positions
283: derived from the LGS images and the positions listed in each individual catalog. The
284: sense of the difference is given as (This work -- Others). It is clear from Fig. 1 that the
285: root-mean-square deviations of the offsets are all quite small - less than $\sim$1 arcsec, with
286: the exception of CS, which is closer to $\sim$10 arcsec. This is consistent with the astrometric
287: precision claimed by CS for their positions.
288:
289: \subsection{Cross Identifications}
290:
291: Using the measured positions from the Local Group Survey images, we cross-identified the
292: various catalogs with each other. Any two clusters located within
293: 0.25 arc seconds of each other were assumed to be the same cluster.
294: When two or more matching clusters were found, they were considered one entry in
295: the catalog with one position but the photometry and other cluster properties from
296: all available sources are kept and stored as part of the FC entry. The original papers
297: listed a total of 608 clusters. When these are combined into one catalog, 451 unique
298: objects emerge. Of these 451 cluster candidates, 105 of them appeared in more than
299: one catalog source, not including
300: the Ma et al. papers, which give cluster properties rather than newly identified clusters.
301: In addition, there are 4 clusters in the CBF compilation that appear to be duplicates
302: based on our position-matching algorithm: CBF99-22 = CBF01-91, CBF99-15 = CBF99-45,
303: CBF99-56 = CBF01-156, CBF99-60 = CBF01-94. These have also been noted in the FC
304: version of our database.
305:
306: Of the 451 objects in our final catalog only 203 of these have been imaged with HST and
307: can be confidently declared clusters. These represent a combination of WFPC2 images
308: used in CBF99 and CBF01, ACS observations used by BEA, and Near-Infrared Camera
309: Multi-Object Spectrograph (NICMOS) and Space Telescope Imaging Spectrograph
310: (STIS) images we extracted from the HST archive to classify candidates in our
311: catalog.
312: %Note also that three candidates have been confirmed not to be clusters by HST.
313: The remaining 248 objects are likely a
314: combination of clusters, galaxies, HII regions, and perhaps other stellar aggregates. In order to
315: minimize this possibly significant source of contamination in our catalog, we made use
316: of archival M33 images taken with the MegaPrime/MegaCam instrument
317: on the Canada-France-Hawaii Telescope (CFHT)
318: under excellent seeing conditions ($\sim$0.5"). Every object that wasn't observed with
319: HST was visually inspected on the CFHT images. Objects were divided into
320: 5 categories: clusters, galaxies, stars, unknown, and
321: objects that fell in a gap between the CCD chips that constitute the MegaPrime imager.
322: Of the 248 objects without HST imaging, only 52 were classified as clusters. Combined, the
323: 203 HST clusters and 52 ground based clusters form the high confidence set of 255 clusters used
324: in the discussion section below.
325:
326: \subsection{Photometric Standardization}
327:
328: The photometry from the various original catalogs are all on different zeropoints. As such,
329: we have adopted one of the catalogs as our photometric standard and offset all
330: of the other catalogs to this standard. Because it contains an extensive set of CCD
331: photometry in multiple filters, we have decided to use the CBF photometric scale
332: as our standard. The photometry from each catalog was compared with that of CBF
333: and an offset was calculated using a 2-$\sigma$ rejection algorithm. Table 2 gives
334: the values of these offsets, in the sense (Catalog--CBF), along with the standard
335: deviations and standard errors of the means.
336: Note that only the CS catalog contained R magnitudes so these were not
337: transformed in any way. In addition, the U magnitudes are almost exclusively from CBF
338: because although Hiltner provides U mags, there
339: is only one cluster in common between them. There are no clusters in common between
340: CBF and Hiltner which have B mags, and all but two of the clusters were measured by
341: MD. As a result, we have ignored the U and B photometry from Hiltner.
342:
343: Figures 2 through 4 illustrate the magnitude differences in B, V,
344: and I as a function of V and B--V or V--I between each input catalog with photometry and that
345: of CBF. Inspection of these plots reveals no apparent systematic trends in the
346: magnitude differences with magnitude or color. In addition, the scatter about the
347: mean is generally similar for all of the catalogs except for the Ma et al. photometry,
348: which displays the greatest dispersion about the mean as shown in Table 2.
349: This is probably due to the fact that the original photometry presented in the
350: Ma et al. series of papers was obtained in the proprietary BATC filters
351: and transformed to the BVI system using standard stars from Landolt (1983;
352: 1992) as described by Ma02a and Ma02b.
353: However, it is important to note that the standard error of the means for the Ma et al.
354: photometry is not significantly higher than for the other catalogs.
355: %possible exception of
356: %the Ma et al. work wherein the B and V photometry shows a dispersion of
357: %$\sim$0.30 mag and $\sim$0.25 mag in B and V, respectively,
358: %as compared with $\lea$0.1 mag for the other catalogs.
359:
360: Our final adopted magnitudes are the average of all corrected measurements excluding
361: the Ma et al. values. When other photometry was available, the Ma et al. values were excluded
362: from our final results because of their apparently larger errors. In 6 cases
363: (MD 2, MD 18, MD 32, MD 33, MD 41, MD 44) only Ma et al. provide V magnitudes, so we
364: adopted their corrected photometry for these clusters.
365: We have supplemented these optical magnitudes with near-infrared $JHK_S$ photometry
366: from the point source catalog of the Two Micron All Sky Survey (2MASS)
367: \footnote{See http://irsa.ipac.caltech.edu/}. Eighty-five of the cluster candidates in our
368: catalog possess 2MASS photometry.
369:
370: The adopted catalog of cluster properties is given in Table 3. For each cluster, we
371: list the identification number, RA and Dec in the J2000 epoch, V, B--V, V--I on the
372: CBF photometric system, the logarithms of the age in years and mass in solar masses,
373: along with a classification - cluster, stellar, unknown, galaxy - and alternate bibliographic
374: sources where the cluster appears. The properties of the confirmed clusters in
375: this sample are analyzed and discussed in the next section.
376:
377: \section{Results and Discussion}
378:
379: Now that we have assembled our cluster compilation, we are in a position to analyze the properties
380: of the clusters themselves. The two panels of Fig. 5 show the color-magnitude
381: diagrams (CMDs) for the 255 high-confidence star clusters in M33 and 501 star
382: clusters in the Large Magellanic Cloud (LMC) from Bica et al. (1999).
383: Note that we have not included the entries in the Bica et al.
384: (1999) catalog identified as `associations.' All colors have been dereddened with a uniform
385: value of E(B--V)=0.1, as typical of the published values for the line-of-sight reddenings to
386: M33 and the LMC.
387: %, and the relations E(V--I)/E(B--V)=1.3 and E(U--B)/E(B--V)=0.72
388: %(Schlegel et al. 1998).
389: We adopt a distance modulus of $(m-M)_0 = 24.69$
390: (Galleti et al. 2004) for M33 and $(m-M)_0 = 18.40$ (Grocholski et al. 2007) for the LMC.
391:
392: The most striking difference between the M33 and LMC cluster CMDs is that
393: the latter population extends to as faint as $M_V$$\sim$--4.0 while the M33 clusters
394: terminate at a point 1.5 mag brighter. This may suggest that our M33 cluster catalog represents a
395: photometrically incomplete sample. However, this possibility
396: can only be addressed with a deeper and more extensive
397: homogeneous imaging survey of M33.
398: % underscoring the need for deeper more extensive imaging
399: %surveys searching for previously uncataloged clusters in M33.
400: %An alternative explanation could be that M33's greater distance ($\sim$17 times more distant
401: %than the LMC) makes the faintest star clusters too small for even HST's resolution to resolve
402: %into individual stars.
403: The lower panel of Fig. 5 illustrates the color distribution of the
404: M33 and LMC clusters scaled to unit area. We see that both galaxies exhibit distinct
405: cluster populations with $(B-V)_{0}^{peak}$$\sim$0.15, and $(B-V)_{0}^{peak}$$\sim$0.65.
406: %In
407: %addition, the LMC displays a bluer peak with $(B-V)_{0}^{peak}$$\sim$--0.25, which is not as clearly
408: %seen in the M33 distribution.
409:
410: The colors of the clusters appear to be strongly correlated with their ages as illustrated in
411: Fig. 6. We begin by noting that Fig. 6a plots the absolute magnitudes of the M33 clusters
412: as a function of their ages all of which come from the Ma et al. series of papers. The
413: solid lines represent single stellar population models with Z = 0.004 and
414: masses of 10\textsuperscript{2}, 10\textsuperscript{3}, 10\textsuperscript{4},
415: 10\textsuperscript{5}, and 10\textsuperscript{6}$M_{\odot}$ from Girardi et al. (2002)
416: adopting a mass-to-light ratio of unity. We can use these model loci to calculate a mass for
417: each cluster and compare that with their ages. This is shown in Fig. 6b.
418: %shows this correlation for
419: %the clusters in our catalog along with the solid line which was derived by
420: %fitting to the Ma04b mass\~age data exclusively.
421: We see that there is a tight correlation between cluster mass and age with older clusters
422: having preferentially higher masses. This is highly reminiscent of what is seen
423: among the star clusters in the Large and Small Magellanic Clouds (Hunter et al. 2003).
424: %In addition, the solid line matches the data points quite well giving us
425: %confidence that we have performed this comparison in a manner consistent
426: %with that of Ma04b.
427: We note that the lower mass envelope of this relation is undoubtedly due to the
428: fading of clusters over time. In fact, the solid line
429: represents the fading line predicted by the Bruzual \& Charlot (2003) models for Z=0.008
430: shifted to match the lower envelope of points. The upper envelope of the points in Fig. 6b
431: is likely a result of the so-called `size-of-sample' effect as described in Hunter et al. (2003) and
432: Whitmore, Chandar, \& Fall (2007). Figure 6c illustrates the
433: relation between dereddened color and cluster age. Once again, there is a good correlation
434: between cluster color and age with older clusters being redder.
435: The lines represent single stellar
436: population models from Girardi et al. (2002) for a low metallicity (Z=0.0004, dashed)
437: and the solar value (Z=0.019, solid). We see that at old ages, the data points are
438: more consistent with the metal-poor model while at younger ages, they are closer
439: to the solar abundance model. This suggests the presence of a significant
440: age-metallicity relation among the M33 clusters.
441:
442: We plot the age distribution of star clusters in M33 in Figure 7. The number of
443: clusters appears to decline with age with no obvious breaks or abrupt changes.
444: Following Fall et al. (2005) and Chandar et al. (2006), we fit a power law of the form
445: $dN_{cluster}/d$$\tau$~$\propto$~$\tau$$^{\alpha}$, and find $\alpha$=--1.09$\pm$0.07.
446: Although the completeness of the M33 cluster sample is likely quite complicated, Figure 6b
447: suggests that our sample is approximately luminosity limited. The results are similar
448: to the slope of $\sim-1.1$ found by Rafelski \& Zaritsky (2005) for clusters in the SMC.
449:
450: %As far as the cluster age distribution is concerned, we follow the spirit of the
451: %discussion presented by Chandar et al. (2007) with respect to the time evolution of
452: %the number of clusters in galaxies. They present fits to the
453: %$dN_{cluster}/d$$\tau$~$\propto$~$\tau$$^{\alpha}$ relation for the SMC and the
454: %Antennae galaxies and show that the value of $\alpha$ is consistent with --1
455: %for the star cluster populations of both galaxies. In the case of the M33 clusters
456: %in the present catalog, we find $\alpha$=-1.09$\pm$0.07 as displayed in Fig. 7, which
457: %agrees with the values for the SMC and The Antennae galaxies (Chandar et al.
458: %2007) to within the errors.
459:
460: Next, we explore the radial variation of the cluster ages. The top and bottom panels of
461: Fig. 8 display the dereddened color and age of each cluster, respectively,
462: as a function of deprojected galactocentric radius. We have adopted
463: $\alpha_{J2000}$=23$^h$ 27$^m$ 45$^s$,
464: $\delta_{J2000}$ = 30$^o$ 39' 36" for the center of M33, and the
465: deprojection has been calculated
466: using the position angle (23$^o$) and inclination (56$^o$) provided by Regan \& Vogel (1994).
467: Both panels of Fig. 8 suggest that bluer (younger) clusters are more centrally
468: concentrated as compared with redder (older) clusters. This difference is better
469: investigated using the cumulative radial distributions of the two populations as
470: illustrated in Fig. 9 and an application of the Kolmogorov-Smirnov (K-S) test.
471: The solid lines in Fig. 9 show the cumulative radial positions of
472: the 255 confirmed clusters in our catalog with the black line representing all clusters,
473: the blue line showing just the blue clusters [$(B-V)_0$$<$0.5], and the red line for the
474: red clusters [$(B-V)_0$$>$0.5]. Division of the clusters at a color of $(B-V)_0$$=$0.5
475: represents an age of $\sim$1 Gyr (see Fig. 6). There is no reason to believe that the completeness
476: of our catalog varies with cluster color, so we proceed to apply the K-S test to
477: the solid red and blue distributions in Fig. 9. We see that the blue clusters are more
478: centrally concentrated than the red clusters
479: at the 88\% significance level. Though not significant at the $>$95\% level, this
480: result is suggestive and worthy of rexamination once a larger sample of M33 clusters
481: becomes available.
482:
483: We now seek to examine the radial density distribution of our cluster sample. The
484: filled circles in Fig. 10 show the cluster density profile with the upper panel plotting deprojected
485: radius and the lower panel showing projected radius. Radii in arcminutes and kiloparsecs
486: are given using our adopted distance modulus of $(m-M)_0=24.69$. Inside $\sim$10
487: arcmin, the cluster profile exhibits a flat density distribution with occasional dips that
488: probably suggest some level of incompleteness. Outside of $\sim$10 arcmin, the behavior
489: is essentially a power law with the most distant clusters located at a distance of
490: $\sim$29 arcmin or $\sim$7.2 kpc from the center of M33 in projected distance.
491: This decrease could
492: represent the genuine `edge' of the cluster distribution or it could be a result of
493: radial incompleteness in all previous M33 cluster censuses. For the discussion
494: below, we proceed under the assumption that this decrease in cluster density
495: at large radii has not been adversely affected by the shortcomings of previous
496: cluster catalogs.
497:
498: It is important to place the cluster density distribution within the context of the
499: field stars in M33. To expedite this, we make use of the stellar catalog provided by
500: the ``M33 CFHT Variability Survey" of Hartman et al. (2006). This catalog contains
501: multi-color photometry for 4.7 million point sources in a 1 square degree field centered
502: on M33 from the MegaPrime/MegaCam instrument on the CFHT.
503: The color-magnitude diagrams published by Hartman et al. (2006) extend to a
504: magnitude limit of i'$\sim$24.5 with photometry in the Sloan g', r', and i' filters.
505: The solid lines in Fig. 10 represent the radial density distribution of the field stars
506: from the Hartman et al. (2006) survey compared to the high-confidence M33 star clusters in the
507: present catalog. The stellar density distribution has been scaled to match the cluster
508: density in the inner-most radial bin.
509:
510: Figure 10 shows that the stars in M33 exhibit a much larger radial extent
511: than the clusters. At a given cluster density, the stars extend between 2 and 5 kpc
512: beyond the clusters in deprojected distance. This impression is borne out by the
513: application of the K-S test to the two distributions (Fig. 9); there is a greater than 99.9\%
514: chance that the stars and clusters are drawn from different parent populations.
515: However, we need to be cognizant of
516: the possibility that the cluster and stellar samples may have different completeness
517: properties. For example, both the stellar and cluster distributions show signs of
518: incompleteness toward the center of M33. The cluster profile flattens out and shows
519: uncharacteristic dips inside of 10 arcmin from the galaxy's center while the stellar density
520: profile actually decreases and exhibits a negative radial slope inside 10 arcmin. In order
521: to minimize the influence of potential incompleteness in these samples, we can
522: limit the comparisons to objects outside of 10 arcmin from the center of M33. At these
523: radii, the cluster and stellar distributions have a better chance of possessing similar
524: completeness properties. However, even when we limit our comparison
525: to these subsamples, there is still a greater than 99.9\% chance that the stars
526: and clusters are drawn from different populations.
527:
528: If this difference between the stellar and cluster radial profiles is a genuine astrophysical
529: phenomenon and not the result of observational biases in the samples,
530: then there are a number of possible explanations for it. First, there is the process of
531: orbital diffusion which, over time, increases the mean galactocentric distance of a
532: population as a result of gravitational interactions with more massive objects such as
533: giant molecular clouds (Wielen 1977; Wielen, Fuchs, \& Dettbarn 1996).
534: In this scenario, individual stars, being much less massive than
535: star clusters, are more susceptible to orbital diffusion so that they are more
536: likely to be located at larger galactocentric distances as compared with clusters.
537: In fact, the work of Carraro \& Chiosi (1994) suggests that even low mass
538: stellar systems such as Milky Way open clusters are minimally affected by
539: orbital diffusion. To test the effect of orbital diffusion, we have divided up the
540: stellar sample into two age groups -
541: those with colors representative of young main sequence stars (age$\lea$300 Myr)
542: and those on the first ascent red giant branch (age$\gea$3 Gyr). Figure 9 shows
543: a comparison of the cumulative radial distributions of these groups. We find a
544: K-S probability of greater than 99.9\% that the blue (younger) stars are more centrally
545: concentrated than the red (older) stars. This could be the result of orbital diffusion,
546: which will affect the older stars to a greater degree than the younger stars, but
547: this difference could simply be
548: due to the fact that that the higher gas densities at smaller radii have resulted in more
549: recent star formation. As a result, whether the process of orbital diffusion is largely
550: or partially responsible for the greater radial extent of the stars as compared to
551: the clusters in still an open question.
552:
553: Another possible explanation for the difference between the cluster and stellar
554: profiles in Fig. 10 is that at the lower gas densities of the outer regions of M33, stars
555: or small groups of stars are more likely to form than larger more massive clusters
556: (Tasker \& Bryan 2006, 2007).
557: In this case, we should be able to detect a radial gradient in the mean masses
558: of the clusters with lower mass clusters being present at larger galactocentric radii.
559: Such a diagram has been constructed using our cluster catalog, but no significant
560: trend is apparent. In any case, if the result that the field stars in M33 exhibit a
561: significantly greater radial extent than the clusters holds up to further scrutiny,
562: it could have important consequences for our understanding of M33's
563: star formation and dynamical history.
564:
565: \section{Summary}
566:
567: We have combined eight published catalogs of star clusters in M33 into one
568: coherent database with accurate right ascensions and declinations measured
569: from the Local Group Survey images of Massey et al. (2006). This catalog contains
570: 451 cluster candidates of which 255 are confirmed based on HST and high resolution
571: ground-based imaging. The catalog also contains magnitudes and colors in the
572: UBVRIJHK$_S$ filters on a consistent photometric system. In addition, we have included such
573: information as cluster metallicitiies, radial velocities, masses and ages as well as
574: galactocentric distances in the catalog.
575:
576: The color-magnitude diagram of the M33 star clusters shows integrated magnitudes
577: in the range --9$\lea$$M_V$$\lea$--4.5 and colors of --0.5$\lea$$(B-V)_0$$\lea$1.0.
578: The color distribution of the M33 clusters appears to be similar to those in the
579: LMC with major peaks at $(B-V)_{0}$$\sim$0.15, and $(B-V)_{0}$$\sim$0.65.
580: The intrinsic colors of the M33 clusters are correlated with their ages, which
581: range from $10^{7.5}$ to $10^{10.3}$ years. In addition, comparison to theoretical
582: single stellar population models suggests the presence of an age-metallicity
583: relation among these clusters with younger clusters being more metal-rich.
584:
585: Analysis of the radial distribution of the clusters suggests that younger clusters
586: (age $\lea$ 1 Gyr) may be more centrally concentrated than older ones, though the
587: statistical significance of this result is only at the 88\% level. A similar comparison
588: with the radial profile of the M33 field stars however shows the clusters to be
589: more centrally concentrated at the greater than 99.9\% confidence level. Possible
590: reasons for this are presented and discussed; however, the overwhelming conclusion
591: seems to be that a more complete and thorough cluster search is needed covering at
592: least 4 square degrees centered on M33.
593:
594: \acknowledgments
595: The authors wish to thank Mike Barker for assisting with some of the data
596: gathering for this project as well as many stimulating discussions.
597: Michael Fall, Jonathan Tan and Elizabeth Tasker provided a number of intriguing
598: ideas in the process of interpreting these data. In addition, we are grateful to
599: Rupali Chandar for a number suggestions that greatly improved the catalog and
600: this manuscript. This research was funded by NSF CAREER grant AST-0094048 to A.S.
601:
602: \begin{thebibliography}{}
603: \bibitem[]{595} Bedin, L. R., Piotto, G., Baume, G., Momany, Y., Carraro, G., Anderson, J.,
604: Messineo, M., \& Ortolani, S. 2005, \aap, 444, 831 (BEA)
605: \bibitem[]{597} Bica, E. L. D., Schmitt, H. R., Dutra, C. M., \& Oliveira, H. L. 1999, \aj, 117, 238
606: \bibitem[]{598} Bruzual, G., \& Charlot, S. 2003, \mnras, 344, 1000
607: \bibitem[]{599} Carraro, G., \& Chiosi, C. 1994, \aap, 288, 751
608: \bibitem[]{600} Chandar, R., Bianchi, L., \& Ford, H. C. 1999, \apjs, 122, 431 (CBF99)
609: \bibitem[]{601} Chandar, R., Bianchi, L., \& Ford, H. C. 2001, \aap, 366, 498 (CBF01)
610: \bibitem[]{602} Chandar, R., Bianchi, L., Ford, H. C., \& Sarajedini, A. 2002, \apj, 564,
611: 712
612: \bibitem[]{604} Chandar, R., Fall, S. M., \& Whitmore, B. 2006, \apj, 650, L111
613: \bibitem[]{605} Christian, C. A. \& Schommer, R. C. 1982, \apjs, 49, 405 (CS)
614: \bibitem[]{606} Christian, C. A. \& Schommer, R. C. 1983, \apj, 275, 92
615: \bibitem[]{607} Christian, C. A. \& Schommer, R. C. 1988, \aj, 95, 704
616: \bibitem[]{608} Fall, S. M., Chandar, R., \& Whitmore, B. C. 2005, \apj, 631, L133
617: \bibitem[]{609} Fan, X. et al. 1996, \aj, 112, 628
618: \bibitem[]{610} Galleti, S., Bellazzini, M., \& Ferraro, F. R. 2004, \aap, 423, 925
619: \bibitem[]{611} Girardi, L., Bressan, A., Bertelli, G., \& Chiosi, C. 2000, \aaps, 141, 371
620: \bibitem[]{612} Girardi, L., Bertelli, G., Bressan, A., Chiosi, C., Groenewegen, M. A. T.,
621: Marigo, P., Salasnich, B., \& Weiss, A. 2002, \aap, 391, 195
622: \bibitem[]{614} Grocholski, A. J., Sarajedini, A., Olsen, K. A. G., \&
623: Tiede, G. P. 2007, \aj, submitted
624: \bibitem[]{616} Hartman, J. D., Bersier, D., Stanek, K. Z., Beaulieu, J. -P.,
625: Kaluzny, J., Marquette, J. -B., Stetson, P. B., \& Schwarzenberg-Czerny, A. 2006,
626: \mnras, 371, 1405
627: \bibitem[]{619} Hiltner, W. A. 1960, \apj, 131, 161 (Hilt)
628: \bibitem[]{620} Hunter, D. A., Elmegreen, B. G., Dupuy, T. J., \& Mortonsn, M., 2003,
629: \aj, 126, 1836
630: \bibitem[]{622} Kim, M., Kim, E., Lee, M. G., Sarajedini, A., \& Geisler, D. 2002, \aj,
631: 123, 244
632: \bibitem[]{} Landolt, A. U. 1983, AJ, 88, 439
633: \bibitem[]{} Landolt, A. U. 1992, AJ, 104, 340
634: \bibitem[]{624} Ma, J., Zhuo, X., Wu, H., Chen, J., Jiang, Z., Zhu, J., \& Xue, S.
635: 2001, \aj, 122, 1796 (Ma01)
636: \bibitem[]{626} Ma, J., Zhou, X., Chen, J. -S., Wu, H., Jiang, Z. -J., Xue, S. -J.,
637: \& Zhu, J. 2002a, ChJAAp, 2, 197 (Ma02a)
638: \bibitem[]{628} Ma, J., Zhou, X., Chen, J., Wu, H., Jiang, Z., Xue, S., \& Zhu, J.
639: 2002b, \aj, 123, 3141 (Ma02b)
640: \bibitem[]{630} Ma, J., Zhou, X., Chen, J., Wu, H., Kong, X., Jiang, Z., Zhu, J., \&
641: Xue, S. 2002, AcA, 52, 453 (Ma02c)
642: \bibitem[]{632} Ma, J., Zhou, X., Chen, J. 2004, \aap, 413, 563 (Ma04a)
643: \bibitem[]{633} Ma, J., Zhou, X., \& Chen, J. -S. 2004, ChJAAp, 4, 125 (Ma04b)
644: \bibitem[]{634} Massey, P., Olsen, K. A. G., Hodge, P. W., Strong, S. B.,
645: Jacoby, G. H., Schlingman, W., \& Smith, R. C. 2006, AJ, 131, 2478
646: \bibitem[]{636} Melnick, J., \& D'odorico, S. 1978, \aaps, 34, 249 (MD)
647: \bibitem[]{637} Mochejska, B. J., Kaluzny, J., Krockenberger, M., Sasselov, D. D.,
648: \& Stanek, K. 1998, AcA, 48, 455 (MKKSS)
649: \bibitem[]{639} Rafelski, M., \& Zaritsky, D. 2005, \aj, 129, 2701
650: \bibitem[]{640} Regan, M. W. \& Vogel, S. N. 1994, \apj, 434, 536
651: \bibitem[]{641} Reiss, A. 2003, ACS-ISR 2003-09
652: %\bibitem[]{642} Sarajedini, A., Geisler, D., Harding, P., \& Schommer, R. 1998, \apj,
653: %508, L37
654: %\bibitem[]{644} Sarajedini, A., Geisler, D., Schommer, R., \& Harding, P. 2000, \aj,
655: %120, 2437
656: \bibitem[]{646} Sarajedini, A., Barker, M. K., Geisler, D., Harding, P., \&
657: Schommer, R. 2007, AJ, 133, 290 (SBGHS)
658: \bibitem[]{648} Schommer, R. A., Christian, C. A., Caldwell, N., Bothun, G. D.,
659: \& Huchra, J. 1991, \aj, 101, 873
660: \bibitem[]{650} Tasker, E. J., \& Bryan, G. L. 2006, \apj, 641, 878
661: \bibitem[]{651} Tasker, E. J., \& Bryan, G. L. 2007, in preparation
662: \bibitem[]{652} Whitmore, B. C., Chandar, R. \& Fall, S. M. 2007, \aj, 133, 1067
663: \bibitem[]{653} Wielen, R. 1977, \aap, 60, 263
664: \bibitem[]{654} Wielen, R., Fuchs, B., \& Dettbarn, C. 1996, \aap, 314, 438
665: \end{thebibliography}
666:
667: \clearpage
668:
669: %\begin{deluxetable}{lc}
670: %\tablecaption{Bibliographic Sources}
671: %\tablewidth{0pt}
672: %\tablehead{
673: %\colhead{Source} & \colhead{Abbreviation}
674: %}
675: %\startdata
676: %Sarajedini et al. (2006)&SBGHS\\
677: %Chandar, Bianchi, \& Ford&CBF\\
678: %Mochejska et al. (1998)&MKKSS\\
679: %Bedin et al. (2005)&BEA\\
680: %Christian and Schommer (1982)&CS\\
681: %Hiltner (1960)&Hilt\\
682: %Melnick and D'Odorico (1978)&MD\\
683: %Ma et. al (2001)&Ma 2001\\
684: %Ma et. al (2002a)&Ma 2002a\\
685: %Ma et. al (2002b)&Ma 2002b\\
686: %Ma et. al (2002c)&Ma 2002c\\
687: %Ma et. al (2004a)&Ma 2004a\\
688: %Ma et. al (2004b)&Ma 2004b\\
689: %Ma et. al (04-2002)&Ma 2002a\\
690: %Ma et. al (06-2002)&Ma 2002b\\
691: %Ma et. al (06-2002)&Ma 2002c\\
692: %Ma et. al (01-2004)&Ma 2004a\\
693: %Ma et. al (06-2004)&Ma 2004b\\
694: %\enddata
695: %\end{deluxetable}
696:
697: \begin{center}
698: \tabletypesize{\tiny}
699: \begin{deluxetable}{lcccccccccccccc}
700: %\tabletypesize{\small}
701: \rotate
702: \tablewidth{0pt}
703: \tablecaption{Bibliographic Sources and their Contents}
704: \tablehead{
705: \colhead{Source} & \colhead{Abbreviation} & \colhead{Position} &
706: \colhead{V} & \colhead{B} &
707: \colhead{I} & \colhead{F775W} &
708: \colhead{B--V} & \colhead{U--B} &
709: \colhead{U--V} & \colhead{V--I} &
710: \colhead{V--R} & \colhead{Age} &
711: \colhead{Mass} & \colhead{[Fe/H]}}
712: \startdata
713: Hiltner (1960)& Hilt & \nodata &x& \nodata & \nodata & \nodata &x&x& \nodata & \nodata & \nodata & \nodata & \nodata & \nodata \\
714: Melnick and D'Odorico (1978)& MD & \nodata & \nodata &x& \nodata & \nodata & \nodata & \nodata & \nodata & \nodata & \nodata & \nodata & \nodata & \nodata \\
715: Christian \& Schommer (1982)& CS& x&x& \nodata & \nodata & \nodata &x& \nodata & \nodata & &x& \nodata & \nodata & \nodata \\
716: Christian \& Schommer (1988)& \nodata & \nodata &x& \nodata & \nodata & \nodata &x& \nodata & &x& \nodata & \nodata & \nodata & \nodata \\
717: Mochejska et al. (1998)& MKKSS &x&x&x&x& \nodata &x& \nodata & \nodata &x& \nodata & \nodata & \nodata & \nodata \\
718: Chandar, Bianchi, \& Ford (1999)& CBF99 &x&x& \nodata & \nodata & \nodata &x&x&x& \nodata & \nodata & \nodata & \nodata & \nodata \\
719: Chandar, Bianchi, \& Ford (2001)& CBF01 &x&x& \nodata & \nodata & \nodata & \nodata & \nodata & &x& \nodata & \nodata & \nodata & \nodata \\
720: Bedin et al. (2005)& BEA &x& \nodata & \nodata & \nodata &x& \nodata & \nodata & \nodata & \nodata & \nodata & \nodata & \nodata & \nodata \\
721: Sarajedini et al. (2006)& SBGHS &x&x& \nodata & \nodata & \nodata & \nodata & \nodata & \nodata &x& \nodata & \nodata & \nodata & \nodata \\
722: Ma et. al (2001)& Ma01 & \nodata &x& \nodata & \nodata & \nodata &x& \nodata & \nodata & \nodata & \nodata &x& \nodata &x\\
723: Ma et. al (2002a)& Ma02a &x&x& \nodata & \nodata & \nodata &x& \nodata & \nodata & \nodata & \nodata & \nodata & \nodata & \nodata \\
724: Ma et. al (2002b)& Ma02b & \nodata &x& \nodata & \nodata & \nodata & \nodata & \nodata & \nodata & \nodata & \nodata &x& \nodata &x\\
725: Ma et. al (2002c)& Ma02c & \nodata &x& \nodata & \nodata & \nodata &x& \nodata & \nodata & \nodata & \nodata &x& \nodata &x\\
726: Ma et. al (2004a)& Ma04a & \nodata & \nodata & \nodata & \nodata & \nodata & \nodata & \nodata & \nodata & \nodata & \nodata &x& \nodata &x\\
727: Ma et. al (2004b)& Ma04b & \nodata & \nodata & \nodata & \nodata & \nodata & \nodata & \nodata & \nodata & \nodata & \nodata &x&x& \nodata \\
728: \enddata
729: \end{deluxetable}
730: \end{center}
731:
732: \clearpage
733:
734:
735: \begin{deluxetable}{lcccccccccc}
736: \tablecaption{Photometric Offsets Relative to CBF}
737: \tablewidth{0pt}
738: %\tabletypesize{\scriptsize}
739: \tablehead{
740: \colhead{Source} &
741: \colhead{$\Delta$B} & $\sigma$ & $\sigma$/$\sqrt{N}$ &
742: \colhead{$\Delta$V} & $\sigma$ & $\sigma$/$\sqrt{N}$ &
743: \colhead{$\Delta$I} & $\sigma$ & $\sigma$/$\sqrt{N}$ }
744: \startdata
745: SBGHS& \nodata & \nodata & \nodata & 0.031 & 0.233 & 0.070 & --0.020 & 0.294 & 0.088\\
746: MKKSS&--0.116 & 0.096 & 0.036 & --0.093 & 0.202 & 0.050 & 0.022 & 0.174 & 0.071 \\
747: CS& --0.177 & 0.165 & 0.096 & --0.015 & 0.208 & 0.043 &--0.030 & 0.632 & 0.316 \\
748: Hilt& \nodata & \nodata & \nodata & --0.073 & 0.078 & 0.029 & \nodata & \nodata & \nodata \\
749: MD& --0.023 & 0.083 & 0.041 & \nodata & \nodata & \nodata & \nodata & \nodata & \nodata \\
750: Ma& --0.060 & 0.249 & 0.038 & 0.043 & 0.306 & 0.027 & \nodata & \nodata & \nodata \\
751: \enddata
752: \end{deluxetable}
753:
754: \clearpage
755: \input{tab3.tex}
756:
757: %\begin{deluxetable}{cccccc}
758: %\tablecaption{K-S Probabilities}
759: %\tablewidth{0pt}
760: %\tabletypesize{\scriptsize}
761: %\tablehead{
762: %\colhead{} & \colhead{All Stars} & \colhead{Blue Stars} & \colhead{Red Stars} & \colhead{All Clusters} & \colhead{Red Clusters} \\
763: %\colhead{} & \colhead{R$>$10'} & \colhead{R$>$10'} & \colhead{R$>$10'} & \colhead{R$>$10'} & \colhead{R$>$10'} }
764: %\startdata
765: %Blue Stars & 0.000 & \nodata & \nodata & \nodata & \nodata \\
766: %R$>$10' & \nodata & \nodata & \nodata & \nodata & \nodata \\
767: % & & & & & \\
768: %Red Stars & 0.000 & 0.000 & \nodata & \nodata & \nodata \\
769: %R$>$10' & \nodata & \nodata & \nodata & \nodata & \nodata \\
770: % & & & & & \\
771: %All Clusters & 0.000 & 0.000 & 0.000 & \nodata & \nodata \\
772: %R$>$10' & 0.000 & 0.007 & 0.000 & \nodata & \nodata \\
773: % & & & & & \\
774: %Red Clusters & 0.001 & 0.302 & 0.000 & 0.621 & \nodata \\
775: %R$>$10' & 0.061 & 0.464 & 0.011 & \nodata & \nodata \\
776: % & & & & & \\
777: %Blue Clusters & 0.000 & 0.000 & 0.000 & 0.089 & 0.159 \\
778: %R$>$10' & 0.102 & 0.491 & 0.016 & \nodata & \nodata \\
779: % & & & & & \\
780: %\enddata
781: %\end{deluxetable}
782:
783:
784:
785: %\input{table.tex}
786: \clearpage
787:
788: % Position offsets
789: \clearpage
790: % Fig 1
791: \begin{figure}
792: \epsscale{0.7}
793: %\plotone{posshift.ps}
794: \plotone{f1.ps}
795: \caption{Right ascension (left) and declination (right) differences between each
796: catalog and those measured from the Local Group Survey (Massey et al. 2006)
797: images used in the present study.}
798: \end{figure}
799:
800: % Mag offsets
801: \clearpage
802: % Fig 2
803: \begin{figure}
804: \epsscale{0.8}
805: %\plotone{magshift0.ps}
806: \plotone{f2.ps}
807: \caption{The difference in B magnitude versus B (left) and B--V (right) for all papers with B and V photometry in common with CBF.}
808: \end{figure}
809: %
810: \clearpage
811: % Fig 3
812: \begin{figure}
813: \epsscale{0.8}
814: %\plotone{magshift1.ps}
815: \plotone{f3.ps}
816: \caption{The difference in V magnitude versus V (left) and V--I (right) for all papers with V and I photometry in common with CBF.}
817: \end{figure}
818: %
819: \clearpage
820: % Fig 4
821: \begin{figure}
822: \epsscale{0.8}
823: %\plotone{magshift2.ps}
824: \plotone{f4.ps}
825: \caption{The difference in I magnitude versus V (left) and V--I (right) for all papers with V and I photometry in common with CBF.}
826: \end{figure}
827:
828: %CMDs and TCD
829: \clearpage
830: % Fig 5
831: \begin{figure}
832: \epsscale{0.8}
833: %\plotone{cmds.ps}
834: \plotone{f5.ps}
835: \caption{The top panels show the cluster color-magnitude diagrams for M33 (left) using our
836: catalog and the Large Magellanic Cloud (right) from the catalog of Bica et al. (1999).
837: A constant reddening correction of E(B--V)=0.1 has been applied to all clusters. The lower panel
838: displays the color histograms of these populations scaled to unit area.}
839: \end{figure}
840:
841: %Mass vs age
842: \clearpage
843: % Fig 6
844: \begin{figure}
845: \epsscale{0.75}
846: %\plotone{mass0.ps}
847: \plotone{f6.ps}
848: \caption{(a) The absolute V magnitude for high confidence clusters as a function of their ages
849: as tabulated in our catalog. Overplotted are theoretical lines corresponding to masses of
850: 10\textsuperscript{2}, 10\textsuperscript{3}, 10\textsuperscript{4},
851: 10\textsuperscript{5}, and 10\textsuperscript{6}$M_{\odot}$ from Girardi et al. (2002) assuming
852: a $M/L$ ratio of unity. (b) Age versus Mass for high
853: confidence clusters. The masses are interpolated from the diagram above. The solid line
854: represents the fading line predicted by the Bruzual \& Charlot (2003) models for Z=0.008
855: shifted to match the lower envelope of points.
856: (c) Dereddened color as a function of age for high
857: confidence clusters in our catalog. Overplotted are theoretical models for single
858: stellar populations from Girardi et al. (2002) for Z=0.0004 and Z=0.019.}
859: \end{figure}
860:
861: %dn/dt plot
862: \clearpage
863: %Fig. 7
864: \begin{figure}
865: \epsscale{0.9}
866: %\plotone{dndt.ps}
867: \plotone{f7.ps}
868: \caption{The age distribution of star clusters in M33. This figure has been constructed
869: following the precepts of Chandar et al. (2007). The dashed line represents a
870: power law of the form $dN_{cluster}/d$$\tau$~$\propto$~$\tau$$^{\alpha}$
871: with a slope of --1.09$\pm$0.07.}
872: \end{figure}
873:
874: %Dist vs age and Color
875: \clearpage
876: % Fig 8
877: \begin{figure}
878: \epsscale{0.8}
879: %\plotone{radshift0.ps}
880: \plotone{f8.ps}
881: \caption{The dereddened color (top) and cluster age (bottom) are plotted versus deprojected galactocentric radius for the 255 high confidence clusters.}
882: \end{figure}
883:
884: %Dist vs filling fraction
885: \clearpage
886: % Fig 9
887: \begin{figure}
888: \epsscale{0.8}
889: %\plotone{radshift1.ps}
890: \plotone{f9.ps}
891: \caption{Cumulative radial distributions for the star clusters and field stars in M33.
892: A Kolmogorov-Smirnov (K-S) statistical analysis has been applied to these profiles.
893: See text for details.}
894: \end{figure}
895:
896: %Dist vs Radial Density
897: \clearpage
898: % Fig 10
899: \begin{figure}
900: \epsscale{0.8}
901: %\plotone{radshift2.ps}
902: \plotone{f10.ps}
903: \caption{Radial density profile of high confidence M33 clusters (filled circles) and field stars
904: (solid line) from the
905: ``M33 CFHT Variability Survey" of Hartman et al. (2006). The upper panel shows the
906: deprojected radius while the lower panel displays the projected radius.}
907: \end{figure}
908:
909:
910: \clearpage
911: %% Use the figure environment and \plotone or \plottwo to include
912: %% figures and captions in your electronic submission.
913: %% To embed the sample graphics in
914: %% the file, uncomment the \plotone, \plottwo, and
915: %% \includegraphics commands
916: %%
917: %% If you need a layout that cannot be achieved with \plotone or
918: %% \plottwo, you can invoke the graphicx package directly with the
919: %% \includegraphics command or use \plotfiddle. For more information,
920: %% please see the tutorial on "Using Electronic Art with AASTeX" in the
921: %% documentation section at the AASTeX Web site,
922: %% http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/AAS/AASTeX.
923: %%
924: %% The examples below also include sample markup for submission of
925: %% supplemental electronic materials. As always, be sure to check
926: %% the instructions to authors for the journal you are submitting to
927: %% for specific submissions guidelines as they vary from
928: %% journal to journal.
929:
930:
931: %% This example uses \plotone to include an EPS file scaled to
932: %% 80% of its natural size with \epsscale. Its caption
933: %% has been written to indicate that additional figure parts will be
934: %% available in the electronic journal.
935:
936: %\clearpage
937: %\begin{figure}[t]
938: %Fig. 1
939: %\epsscale{1.0}
940: %\plotone{f1.ps}
941: %\plotone{finder_chart.ps}
942: %\caption{The location of our observed ACS fields overplotted on
943: %the DSS-II image of M33. The field is approximately 20 arcmin a side;
944: %North is up and east is to the left.}
945: %\end{figure}
946:
947:
948: \end{document}
949:
950: %%
951: %% End of file `sample.tex'.
952: