1: \documentclass{emulateapj}
2:
3: \begin{document}
4:
5: \title{Spitzer Observations of Low Luminosity Isolated and Low Surface Brightness Galaxies}
6:
7: \author{J. L. Hinz, M. J. Rieke, G. H. Rieke, C. N. A. Willmer, K. Misselt,
8: C. W. Engelbracht, M. Blaylock}
9: \affil{Steward Observatory, University of Arizona, 933 N. Cherry Ave., Tucson,
10: AZ 85721
11: \\email: jhinz, mrieke, grieke, cnaw, kmisselt, cengelbracht, blaylock@as.arizona.edu}
12:
13: \author{T. E. Pickering}
14:
15: \affil{MMT Observatory, Smithsonian Institution and University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ 85721
16: \\email: tim@mmto.org}
17:
18: \begin{abstract}
19:
20: We examine the infrared properties of five low surface brightness galaxies
21: (LSBGs) and compare them with related but higher surface brightness
22: galaxies, using {\it Spitzer Space Telescope} images and spectra.
23: All the LSBGs are detected in the 3.6 and 4.5\,$\micron$ bands,
24: representing the
25: stellar population. All but one are detected at 5.8 and 8.0\,$\micron$,
26: revealing emission from hot dust and aromatic molecules, though many are
27: faint or point-like at these wavelengths. Detections of LSBGs
28: at the far-infrared wavelengths, 24, 70, and 160\,$\micron$, are varied in
29: morphology and brightness, with only two detections at 160\,$\micron$,
30: resulting in highly varied spectral energy distributions.
31: Consistent with previous expectations for these galaxies, we find that
32: detectable dust
33: components exist for only some LSBGs, with the strength of dust emission
34: dependent on the existence of bright star forming regions. However, the
35: far-infrared emission may be relatively weak compared with normal
36: star-forming galaxies.
37:
38: \end{abstract}
39:
40: \keywords{galaxies: evolution - galaxies: photometry}
41:
42: \section{INTRODUCTION}
43: Low surface brightness galaxies (LSBGs), defined as those with $B$-band
44: central surface brightnesses, $\mu_{0, B}$, fainter
45: than 23.0 mag arcsec$^{-2}$, appear to have
46: followed a very different evolutionary history from high surface brightness
47: galaxies (e.g., McGaugh 1992; Knezek 1993). Their
48: stellar populations, stellar masses, current star formation rates, and
49: other properties appear to differ significantly from their high surface
50: brightness counterparts, and little is known about their corresponding dust
51: properties. A better understanding of these differences is needed to
52: understand how they evolved to their present state.
53:
54: It has been generally assumed, even though a population of red LSBGs has
55: been discovered (O'Neil et al. 1997a), that they contain little
56: dust, and dust reddening has not been considered an
57: important effect (e.g., Bothun et al. 1997; Bell et al. 2000).
58: LSBGs have low star formation rates, with
59: suspected modest bursts in the
60: range 10$^{-3}$-10$^{-2}$\,M$_{\odot}$\,yr$^{-1}$ (e.g.,
61: Vallenari et al. 2005) and low metallicities, with almost all LSBGs at
62: or less than about one-third solar (McGaugh 1994; Ronnback \& Bergvall
63: 1995). Their low metallicities imply that the dust to gas ratios should
64: be systematically lower than in their high surface brightness galaxy
65: counterparts, and the fact that the
66: {\it Infrared Astronomical Satellite} ({\it IRAS}; Neugebauer et al.\ 1984)
67: and the {\it Infrared Space Observatory} ({\it ISO}; Kessler et al.\ 1996) were
68: only able to detect two of these galaxies seems to indicate that dust
69: is much less important in LSBGs. Furthermore, any data acquired with these
70: observatories would not have been adequate to characterize dust temperatures or
71: spatial distributions.
72:
73: That dust plays a relatively minor role in the evolution of LSBGs
74: is further reinforced by observations of highly transparent galaxies
75: that appear to have multiple distant galaxies seen through their
76: disks (O'Neil et al.\ 1997b; P.\ Knezek, private communication). This
77: has been confirmed by a more detailed analysis of the dust opacity of LSBG
78: disks
79: in comparison to those of high surface brightness galaxies, where LSBGs appear
80: effectively transparent (Holwerda et al.\ 2005).
81:
82: Additionally,
83: Pickering \& van der Hulst (1999) attempted to detect dust in LSBGs using
84: submillimeter observations from the JCMT with SCUBA. Ten galaxies were
85: observed, two of which were detected at 850\,$\micron$ with only one
86: detected at 450\,$\micron$. They combined their submillimeter data with
87: existing {\it IRAS} data, finding dust temperatures in the range 15-20\,K.
88: None of their very LSB ($\mu_B \le 23.5$) galaxies were detected, and
89: they concluded that the lack of detection in the lowest surface brightness
90: galaxies was consistent with previous lines of evidence that only
91: modest amounts of dust could exist.
92:
93: {\it Spitzer} opens the opportunity to study any dust that may exist
94: at low levels in LSBGs. The increased sensitivity relative to previous
95: observations
96: gives a higher likelihood of the detection of diffuse dust emission that
97: echoes the LSBGs' diffuse optical appearance. In addition, the resolution
98: of the {\it Spitzer} imaging instruments allows for analysis of dust
99: temperature, mass, and spatial distribution in LSBGs not possible before,
100: making it feasible to address crucial issues regarding chemical evolution
101: and dust production. We present here the infrared properties
102: of a small sample of LSBGs with the full suite of {\it Spitzer} instruments.
103:
104: \section{OBSERVATIONS}
105: All {\it Spitzer} observations presented here are part of the Dust
106: in Low Surface Brightness Galaxies Guaranteed Time Observation
107: Program (P.I.D. 62) whose Principal Investigator is M. J. Rieke.
108:
109: \subsection{Sample}
110: The galaxies in this sample were selected to be some of the
111: brightest and closest known LSBGs, many taken from the work
112: of Pickering (1998). Two galaxies are high surface brightness, low metallicity
113: isolated late-type spirals that are included for the purpose of
114: comparison with the LSBGs. Table 1 summarizes general
115: information for each galaxy, with the LSBGs and high surface brightness
116: galaxies separated by a line. The objects were
117: chosen such that the infrared background cirrus was low, improving
118: the chances of detection of the faintest emission associated with each
119: galaxy, and with sufficiently large angular diameters for resolution
120: with the {\it Spitzer} instruments. Here we briefly outline their main
121: properties and unique characteristics.
122:
123: \subsubsection{Low Surface Brightness Galaxies}
124:
125: {\it Malin\,1} is one of the best known LSBGs (Bothun et al.
126: 1987; see Barth 2007 for a more recent view) and the largest gas-rich
127: galaxy found to date. Its optical disk
128: is six times bigger than that of the Milky Way. Its spectrum is
129: dominated by its old, metal-rich stellar population, with a smaller
130: contribution from hot, young stars (Impey \& Bothun 1989). This LSBG
131: is the most distant object in our sample.
132:
133: {\it UGC\,5675}: This Magellanic dwarf spiral (e.g., Schneider
134: et al. 1990; McGaugh et al. 1995) has a very low surface brightness disk
135: (Schombert \& Bothun 1988) and has the faintest $M_B$ of our sample.
136: It does not have any regions of distinct star formation or
137: an extended H\,{\sc i} envelope (van Zee et al. 1995).
138:
139: {\it UGC\,6151} is another Magellanic spiral with a small
140: core of optical emission surrounded by faint diffuse emission with little
141: structure. McGaugh et al. (1995) note that the galaxy contains ``quite
142: a few faint H\,{\sc ii} regions''.
143:
144: {\it UGC\,6614} has a star-forming distinctive ring and
145: has a particularly extended disk that
146: can be traced to at least 130$\arcsec$ (van der Hulst et al. 1993). It
147: is the most metal-rich LSBG known and
148: is considered to be a ``cousin'' to Malin 1 due to their similar properties.
149: The H\,{\sc i} data show that there is a central depression
150: in the gas distribution, which has led to discordant flux measurements in the
151: literature (Bothun et al. 1985; Giovanelli \& Haynes 1989; Pickering et al.
152: 1997; Matthews et al. 2001), although the most recent of these works agree.
153:
154: {\it UGC\,9024}: This galaxy has a very low surface brightness disk
155: coupled with a normal bulge. It has been suggested that the large
156: disk plus bulge indicates that it is a transition object between average
157: sized LSBGs with no bulge and giant Malin 1 type galaxies (McGaugh et al.
158: 1995).
159:
160: \subsubsection{High Surface Brightness Galaxies}
161:
162: {\it UGC\,6879}: This object, while in the Impey et al. (1996) catalogue
163: of low surface brightness galaxies, does not qualify as an LSBG,
164: due to its bright central surface brightness. (It is possible that
165: it was either a candidate LSBG, later observed and found to be too
166: bright, or that it qualified as a type of LSB disk using a ``diffuseness''
167: index involving the disk scale length; see Sprayberry et al. 1995 for
168: details). This galaxy is one of the few in the program to have been detected
169: by {\it IRAS}, with photometry measurements at 60 and 100\,$\micron$ and
170: upper limits at 12 and 25\,$\micron$. It also has a detection at
171: 850\,$\micron$ by SCUBA (Pickering \& van der Hulst 1999), making it an
172: excellent
173: candidate for further study in the mid- and far-IR at the higher sensitivity
174: and resolution of {\it Spitzer}.
175:
176: {\it UGC\,10445} is a nearby starbursting dwarf spiral.
177: The {\it Spitzer} images of this object have been
178: examined in detail in Hinz et al.\ (2006). It also has available {\it IRAS}
179: and {\it ISO} measurements.
180:
181: \subsection{Data}
182:
183: Each galaxy was observed with the Infrared Array Camera (IRAC; Fazio et al.\
184: 2004) at all four wavelengths
185: (3.6, 4.5, 5.8, and 8.0\,$\micron$), in one 5$\arcmin \times 5\arcmin$ field
186: with a frame time of
187: 30\,s and with a dither of five positions Gaussian, for a total integration
188: time of 150\,s per object per wavelength.
189: IRAC data were reduced at the
190: {\it Spitzer} Science Center (SSC) with the S14.0.0 pipeline.
191: The IRAC spatial resolution
192: is $\sim$\,2$\arcsec$ in all bands.
193:
194: The Multiband Imaging Photometer for {\it Spitzer} (MIPS; Rieke et al.\ 2004)
195: data for the sample were observed in photometry mode at 24, 70,
196: and 160\,$\micron$. The integration times on all galaxies were 690\,s at
197: 24\,$\micron$, 252\,s at 70\,$\micron$, and 42\,s at 160\,$\micron$. The MIPS
198: data were reduced using the Data Analysis Tool version
199: 3.00 (DAT; Gordon et al.
200: 2005), the same techniques that are used to calibrate the instrument itself.
201: Two independent reductions were carried out to test for systematic
202: errors on these faint sources; the results agreed closely for both reductions.
203: The MIPS spatial resolutions are 6$\arcsec$, 18$\arcsec$,
204: and 40$\arcsec$ at 24, 70, and 160\,$\micron$, respectively.
205: Dates for the IRAC and MIPS observations are given in Table 1.
206: The MIPS 24\,$\micron$ observations for UGC\,5675 appear to be corrupted.
207: The observations performed by {\it Spitzer} just prior to this object
208: were deep, high-redshift observations and unlikely to introduce saturated
209: objects that might have effected our data set. However, the southwestern
210: corner of almost all the 24\,$\micron$ data collection events have highly
211: saturated pixels marked as NaN. Further processing and mosaicing of the image
212: was impossible, and no information could be recovered.
213:
214: Infrared Spectrograph (IRS; Houck et al.\ 2004) staring-mode
215: observations were scheduled for only three of the targets in this
216: program: Malin\,1, UGC\,6879, and UGC\,10445.
217: Galaxies were observed in the low resolution 5.2-8.7\,$\micron$ (SL2) and
218: 7.4-14.5\,$\micron$ (SL1) modes and in the low resolution
219: 14.0-21.3\,$\micron$ (LL2) and 19.5-38\,$\micron$ channels (LL1).
220: Details of the observations, including dates, integration times and
221: slit position angles, are given in Table 2.
222: The faint, diffuse, and complex nature of these
223: sources makes such observations difficult. {\it Spitzer's} onboard
224: peak-up algorithm centroided on a source considered far from the intended
225: target position for UGC\,10445 and centroided on a bad pixel rather
226: than Malin 1. Data were reduced with
227: version S13.2.0 of the SSC data pipeline, with extractions using the
228: pipeline developed by the Formation and Evolution of Planetary Systems (FEPS)
229: Legacy team (Hines et al.\ 2006).
230: %5.2-8.7 ramp dur 60 # cycles 14
231: %7.4-14.5 ramp dur 60 # cycles 14
232: %14-21.3 ram dur 30 # cycles 6
233: %19.5-38 ramp dur 30 # cycles
234:
235: Additional data are available for UGC\,6879. These include the far
236: and near-ultraviolet (1350-1750\,\AA, $\lambda_{eff}=1516$\,\AA, and
237: 1750-2750\,\AA, $\lambda_{eff}=2267$\,\AA, respectively)
238: images from {\it Galaxy Evolution Explorer} ({\it GALEX}; Martin et al. 2005)
239: made available through the NASA Extragalactic Database (NED).
240:
241: \section{ANALYSIS}
242:
243: \subsection{Morphology}
244:
245: Figure 1 shows an image of each galaxy in the sample at all the
246: {\it Spitzer} wavelengths, with the exception of UGC\,10445, which
247: was presented by Hinz et al.\ (2006).
248:
249: IRAC detects all galaxies in the sample at 3.6 and 4.5\,$\micron$ and
250: all except for UGC\,5675 at
251: 5.8 and 8.0\,$\micron$. In general, the LSBGs are easily detected
252: at the two shorter wavelength bands, representing the old stellar
253: population, and difficult to image at 5.8 and 8.0\,$\micron$,
254: with many having only point-like detections at the longer wavelengths.
255:
256: The MIPS observations of the LSBGs are varied.
257: There are clear detections of all LSBGs
258: at 24\,$\micron$ (with the exception of the corrupted data of UGC\,5675,
259: as explained above), three detections
260: at 70\,$\micron$, and two at 160\,$\micron$. Of these
261: detections, two have extended emission at 24\,$\micron$ while two have
262: point-like morphologies. At 70\,$\micron$, two are extended, with one
263: point-like, and at 160\,$\micron$ two are extended, with no point-like
264: detections. A summary of this rough classification is given in Table 3,
265: with LSBGs listed above the solid line and HSBGs listed below the solid
266: line.
267:
268: The difficulty of detecting emission at the longer wavelengths for the
269: LSBGs is not simply a result of the decreased resolution. Figure 2
270: shows the three MIPS images of UGC\,6614, with both the 24 and
271: 70\,$\micron$ images
272: convolved with a kernel that transforms them to the resolution of the
273: 160\,$\micron$ data. The kernel was created using a Fourier technique
274: on the MIPS PSFs generated by STinyTim (Gordon et al.\ in preparation).
275: The galaxy seems to be more extended at 70\,$\micron$ than at 24\,$\micron$,
276: consistent with the star forming ring becoming more prominent as shown
277: in Figure 1. The signal to noise is too low at 160\,$\micron$ to confirm
278: this trend, but the image does show that the peak remains on the galaxy
279: center, as defined at 24 and 70\,$\micron$.
280: The changing brightness and morphology of the galaxy does not seem to
281: be related to the resolution differences.
282:
283: \subsection{Photometry}
284:
285: Aperture photometry was conducted on all {\it Spitzer} images.
286: Additional image processing in the form
287: of background subtraction was first completed by subtracting a constant value
288: from
289: each image. The value of this constant was determined by masking stars
290: in the foreground, then taking an average
291: of all pixel values outside the aperture used for the galaxy photometry.
292: For galaxies where the foreground contamination was particularly high,
293: we used a large region surrounding the galaxy to determine a background
294: value that included a sampling of foreground stars.
295: Table 3 shows the MIPS flux density values and their associated errors,
296: along with the radii of apertures used.
297: Table 4 shows the corresponding IRAC photometry values.
298: Galaxies that are undetected
299: at the various wavelengths have 3\,$\sigma$ upper limits listed in Tables 3
300: and 4. Upper limits were calculated from the images themselves, using
301: the mean value of the sky counts and adding three times the value of the
302: standard deviation of the sky counts.
303:
304: The photometric uncertainties are estimated to be 10\% at 3.6 and
305: 4.5\,$\micron$ and 15\% at 5.8 and 8.0\,$\micron$. These values include
306: a 3\% absolute calibration uncertainty (Reach et al.\ 2005),
307: a contribution for scattered light in an extended source
308: (W. Reach, private communication), and an uncertainty due to the sensitivity
309: of the measurements to the background subtraction. The contribution of
310: the scattered light is higher at 5.8 and 8.0\,$\micron$. We do not
311: perform aperture corrections on the IRAC photometry, which in certain
312: limiting cases can be up to 25-30\% for the 5.8 and 8.0\,$\micron$ bands.
313: In our case, it is difficult to determine this correction for the mixture of
314: point and extended sources seen in the IRAC images. We mainly use the
315: 8.0\,$\micron$ images to establish the presence of aromatic feature emission
316: in our galaxies, so uncertainties of
317: this magnitude have no effect on our conclusions.
318: The MIPS flux calibration
319: uncertainties are 4\% at 24\,$\micron$, 7\% at 70\,$\micron$, and 12\% at
320: 160\,$\micron$ (Engelbracht et al.\ 2007; Gordon et al.\ 2007; Stansberry
321: et al.\ 2007). Photometric uncertainties bring these values to total errors of
322: 10\% at 24\,$\micron$, 20\% at 70\,$\micron$, and 20\% at 160\,$\micron$.
323:
324: \subsection{Dust Modeling for UGC\,6879}
325:
326: UGC\,6879, with its bright detections at all IR wavelengths,
327: can be analyzed in detail based on the mid-infrared and submillimeter
328: photometry.
329: Figure 3 shows the spectral energy distribution (SED) for this galaxy,
330: including {\it GALEX}, 2MASS, IRAC, {\it IRAS}, {\it Spitzer}, and
331: SCUBA data points.
332: The emission by dust at the longer wavelengths can be modeled by an equation
333: of the form
334:
335: \begin{equation}
336: F_{dust}(\lambda) = \sum C_{i} \kappa_{i}(\lambda)
337: B_{\lambda}(T_{D,i})
338: \label{eq:dustfit}
339: \end{equation}
340:
341: \noindent
342: where $C_{i}=M_{dust,i}/D^{2}$ ($D\sim$\,32\,Mpc), $\kappa_i$ is the mass
343: absorption coefficient, $B_{\lambda}$ is the Planck
344: function, $M_{dust,i}$ is the dust mass, and the sum extends
345: over the number of dust components. We adopt a two-component dust
346: model consisting of warm and cool silicate grains ($a\sim0.1\,\micron$).
347: Further details regarding model assumptions and the fitting process
348: can be found in
349: Hinz et al. (2006). The data set is best fitted by a model consisting of a
350: warm silicate component at T$=51.51^{+1.41}_{-1.28}$\,K
351: and a cool silicate component at $14.94^{+0.53}_{-0.49}$\,K,
352: shown in Figure 3, where the quoted error bars are 1 $\sigma$. We estimate
353: the dust masses of UGC\,6879 to be $8753^{+2469}_{-2017}$\,M$_{\odot}$
354: for the warm component and
355: $3.50^{+0.63}_{-0.54}\times10^7$\,M$_{\odot}$ for the cool dust, where
356: the quoted error bars are again 1 $\sigma$. As
357: shown in Hinz et al. (2006), choosing carbonaceous grains in place of
358: silicate grains only modestly affects these values.
359:
360: \subsection{Spectroscopy}
361:
362: Figure 4 shows the full IRS spectra for UGC\,6879, Malin\,1, UGC\,10445.
363: We identify emission lines clearly detected
364: in UGC\,6879 and UGC\,10445: [S\,{\sc iv}], [Ne\,{\sc ii}], and
365: [S\,{\sc iii}] (see, e.g., Smith et al. 2004).
366: Additionally, we see the broad emission features usually attributed to
367: polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs). The data show the four main
368: aromatic bands at 6.2, 7.7, 8.6, and 11.3\,$\micron$. The aromatic feature at
369: 12.7\,$\micron$ is likely to be contaminated by the [Ne {\sc ii}]
370: 12.8\,$\micron$ line.
371:
372: There are no spectral features detected in the Malin 1 spectrum.
373: Despite the
374: fact that {\it Spitzer} was not aligned on the coordinates given as
375: the central nucleus of the galaxy, the large extent of Malin 1 ensures
376: that IRS took data on some portion of the disk, and the exposure time is long.
377: Also, our photometry (Tables 3 and 4) shows the mid-IR excess to be very
378: weak. It is likely that no aromatic features in Malin 1 are detectable
379: with IRS in reasonable exposure times.
380:
381: The spectra for UGC\,6879 and UGC\,10445 were fitted with the publicly
382: available IDL tool PAHFIT, which was developed to decompose IRS spectra
383: of PAH emission sources, with a special emphasis on the careful recovery
384: of ambiguous silicate absorption, and weak, blended dust emission features
385: (Smith et al. 2006).\footnote{Available at http://turtle.as.arizona.edu/jdsmith/pahfit.php.}
386: The spectra were first prepared for
387: PAHFIT by eliminating points with negative flux or with low ratios ($\le 2$)
388: of signal-to-noise. Table 5 shows the fluxes or equivalent widths (EW) for the
389: various features as given by PAHFIT. The 7.7\,$\micron$ complex is a
390: sum of the 7.4, 7.6
391: and 7.9\,$\micron$ features. PAHFIT does not calculate uncertainties on
392: equivalent widths because it is difficult to compute uncertainities on
393: the continuum of the spectrum. The errors given in Table 5
394: assume that the fractional errors on the equivalent widths are the same
395: as on the integrated features, and thus are lower limits.
396:
397: \section{DISCUSSION}
398:
399: \subsection{Comparison of UGC\,6879 and UGC\,10445}
400:
401: The temperature of the cool dust, T$\sim15$\,K, found for UGC\,6879,
402: a high surface brightness spiral,
403: coincides with that found for the starbursting dwarf galaxy UGC\,10445
404: (Hinz et al.\ 2006) using similar data and modeling techniques.
405: It is also in agreement with the submillimeter temperature estimates
406: of such dust in LSBGs by Pickering \& van der Hulst (1999) and with
407: infrared and submillimeter estimates of the temperatures of other low
408: metallicity environments such as dwarf galaxies (Popescu et al.\ 2002;
409: Lisenfeld et al.\ 2002; Bottner et al.\ 2003). Additionally,
410: observations of normal-sized high surface brightness galaxies, including
411: the Milky Way (Reach et al.\ 1995; Lagache et al.\ 1998),
412: show that cool dust components exist, and it is becoming apparent that
413: such a cool component is fairly ubiquitous across galaxy types
414: (see review by Tuffs \& Popescu 2005).
415:
416: The total calculated dust mass of UGC\,6879 of
417: $\sim3.5\times10^7$\,M$_{\odot}$ falls
418: within the range found for normal high surface brightness spiral galaxies of
419: $10^6-10^8$\,M$_{\odot}$ (e.g., Sodroski et al.\ 1997; Bendo et al.\ 2003) and
420: is a factor of ten higher than the mass values for UGC\,10445
421: (Hinz et al.\ 2006). The cool dust mass value for UGC\,10445 is considered
422: a lower limit due to the fact that MIPS data are insensitive to
423: dust colder than T=15-20\,K. The SCUBA 850\,$\micron$ detection of
424: UGC\,6879 allows us to better estimate the turnover of the SED.
425: The better constrained fit puts somewhat tighter constraints on the dust
426: mass.
427: %This
428: %may account for the factor of 10 difference found in the cool dust masses
429: %of UGC\,6879 and UGC\,10445.
430:
431: %The star formation rate for UGC\,6879 is lower than that for UGC\,10445,
432: %at 0.01\,M$_{\odot}$ yr$^{-1}$ (Burkholder et al. 2001) versus
433: %0.25\,M$_{\odot}$ yr$^{-1}$ (Hinz et al. 2006). More here...
434:
435: The H\,{\sc i} gas mass to dust mass ratio found for UGC\,10445 was
436: $\sim$\,500 (Hinz et al. 2006). This was found to be inconsistent with the mean value
437: of the ratio for normal spiral galaxies ($71\pm49$; Stevens et al.\
438: 2005), although the uncertainty in the dust mass value was large.
439: The total H\,{\sc i} mass for UGC\,6879 is $1.10\times10^9$\,$M_{\odot}$
440: (Sauty et al. 2003), giving a H\,{\sc i} gas mass to dust mass ratio
441: %of $\sim$\,30. This value is consistent with the Stevens et al. (2005)
442: of $31_{-5}^{+6}$. This value is consistent with the Stevens et al.\ (2005)
443: mean value.
444:
445: \subsection{Comparison Between Low and High Surface Brightness Galaxies}
446:
447: Popescu et al. (2002) propose that cool dust in galaxies is heated by the
448: diffuse non-ionizing ultraviolet radiation produced by young stars, with a
449: small contribution from the optical radiation produced by old stars. This
450: appears to be borne out for the high surface brightness galaxies,
451: UGC\,6879 and UGC\,10445, where the {\it GALEX} and
452: 24\,$\micron$ images pinpoint the active star formation sites, and the
453: corresponding 160\,$\micron$ emission traces the detectable cool dust.
454: Figure 5 shows the central $B$-band surface brightnesses for the sample
455: versus the ratio of 24\,$\micron$ to 160\,$\micron$ flux density. The lower
456: the
457: central optical surface brightness for each object, the
458: lower the this ratio appears to be. This implies that there are not
459: large amounts of dust extinction; no
460: highly obscured star formation is uncovered
461: at 24\,$\micron$, and those galaxies with the lowest surface
462: brightnesses, i.e., without bright star-forming regions, are not detected at
463: 160\,$\micron$.
464: %The outlier
465: %in both panels of Figure 4 is UGC\,6614; this galaxy is the most metal-rich
466: %LSBG known (consistent with its ``normal'' H\,{\sc i} mass to dust mass
467: %ratio), has a distinct star forming ring (again, unusual for
468: %LSBGs), and also has odd radio properties, including a central
469: %depression in its H\,{\sc i} emission (Pickering 1998).
470:
471: The appearance of broad aromatic emission spectral features in the isolated
472: star-bursting galaxies confirms the presence of dust grains indicated
473: by the IRAC, MIPS, {\it IRAS} and SCUBA images and photometry and our dust
474: modeling. Aromatic emission is believed to originate mostly from
475: photodissociation envelopes at the edges of star-forming regions that
476: are bathed in ultraviolet photons, with some suggestion that B stars no
477: longer associated with H\,{\sc ii} regions can also contribute to the
478: heating (Spoon 2003; Calzetti et al.\ 2005). In the cases of UGC\,6879 and
479: UGC\,10445, the high surface brightness galaxies for which we have IRS
480: spectra, we clearly see star formation
481: regions indicated by bright clumpy regions in the 24\,$\micron$ images
482: and the corresponding 8\,$\micron$ emission that presumably accounts for
483: the aromatic features.
484:
485: In contrast, we see that the LSBG Malin\,1 does not have dust
486: emission at far-IR wavelengths, nor aromatic emission, which is
487: not surprising, given the Popescu et al.\ (2002) model and explanation.
488: Malin 1 exhibits no active star-forming regions detectable at any of the
489: wavelengths that indicate such activity. Without those regions,
490: UV photons cannot heat any existing dust to emit at long wavelengths,
491: nor can the envelopes believed to be the site of aromatics exist.
492: That is not to say that dust cannot exist in such an object, but simply
493: that any such dust will not be heated and will not be detectable in far-IR
494: images. This appears to be consistent with results for
495: irregular dwarf galaxies, where aromatic emission is found only in the
496: brightest H\,{\sc ii} regions or where there is widespread, intense star
497: formation (Hunter et al.\ 2006).
498: Braine et al.\ (2000) calculated an average star formation
499: rate over a lifetime of $10^{10}$\,yr
500: for Malin\,1 of $5 M_{\odot}$ yr$^{-1}$ based on its $V$-band
501: luminosity. From this value they used Scoville \& Young (1983) to
502: derive a far-IR luminosity and translated this to an expected flux density of
503: $\sim$\,100\,mJy at the {\it IRAS} 100\,$\micron$ band. This was below the
504: detection limit of {\it IRAS} and indeed was not detected.
505: The longer integration times with MIPS now place that one-sigma
506: upper limit at 160\,$\micron$ of $\sim$\,10\,mJy, with Malin 1 still invisible.
507: One explanation for this low IR luminosity is that the current star
508: formation rate is far below the average over the life of the galaxy.
509:
510: Additionally, simply scaling the two-component dust model for high surface
511: brightness galaxy UGC\,6879
512: down to the 24\,$\micron$ flux density values for the LSBGs does not
513: appear to fit their SEDs. A scaled model that fits, for instance, a
514: 24\,$\micron$ flux density of 0.018\,Jy, would predict a 70\,$\micron$
515: flux density of $\sim$\,0.4\,Jy and a 160\,$\micron$ flux density of
516: $\sim$\,1.5\,Jy. Comparing with the measurements of UGC\,6614 shows 70 and
517: 160\,$\micron$ outputs only $\sim$\,25\% of these predictions. The
518: 160\,$\micron$ output of UGC\,6151 also appears to be somewhat below the
519: expected value. Therefore, it appears that the emission
520: at the longer wavelengths for at least some LSBGs is fundamentally different
521: from that of high surface brightness galaxies and that they are not simply
522: low-luminosity versions of normal galaxies. Either LSBGs do not produce
523: or maintain dust in the same quantities as other galaxies, or the dust
524: is much colder and, therefore, undetectable in the far-IR.
525:
526: Comparisons of the {\it Spitzer} data for different LSBGs may also reveal
527: differences in evolutionary history. Figure 6 shows the IR SEDs of all the
528: galaxies in the sample. While the two high surface brightness galaxies have
529: similar SEDs from 3.6 to 160\,$\micron$, the LSBGs show a variety of
530: steepnesses between wavelengths. Some have steepnesses from 24 to
531: 160\,$\micron$ that are similar to the high surface brightness galaxies,
532: while others are shallower (UGC\,6614), and some appear to turn over after
533: 70\,$\micron$ (UGC\,9024). For instance, UGC\,6151 and UGC\,6614
534: have very similar far-IR flux densities, yet UGC\,6614 is much brighter
535: in red giant light, as represented by the 3.6\,$\micron$ flux density,
536: compared with UGC\,6151. This may imply that UGC\,6614 formed stars at
537: a much greater rate in the past, accumulating an old stellar population,
538: while UGC\,6151 may have formed stars at a more constant rate over its
539: lifetime. The relatively high metallicity of UGC\,6614 supports the
540: hypothesis that its star formation was more vigorous in the past.
541:
542: \subsection{Metallicities and IR Properties of LSBGs}
543:
544: LSBGs are generally metal-poor, consistent with the well-known
545: luminosity-metallicity ($L-Z$) relation for other galaxies (e.g.,
546: de Naray et al. 2004). In Figure 7 we show the metallicities of
547: the entire HSBG plus LSBG sample versus the absolute magnitude at
548: 24\,$\micron$.
549: Absolute magnitudes are calculated using the MIPS 24\,$\micron$ magnitude
550: zero point of $7.17\pm0.0815$ calculated by Engelbracht et al. (2007).
551: Average metallicities
552: are taken from a variety of sources in the literature (de Naray
553: et al. 2004; McGaugh 1994). Others are calculated using the
554: Sloan Digital Sky Survey - Sky Server.\footnote{Available at http://cas.sdss.org/dr5/en/.}
555: Equivalent widths of optical emission lines such as [N {\sc ii}]
556: and [O {\sc iii}] are available online, and we use those values in
557: conjunction with the rough metallicity formulations of
558: Wegner et al. (2003) and Salzer et al. (2005) to obtain metallicities.
559: Metallicities are
560: notoriously difficult to determine for LSBGs, and the variety of
561: sources used to obtain them for this sample may inflate errors.
562: However, Figure 7 shows a weak correlation in the expected direction that
563: higher metallicity galaxies have brighter absolute magnitudes at 24\,$\micron$.
564: %between these two quantities is consistent with non-correlations
565: %of metallicity and central surface brightness seen previously (McGaugh
566: %et al. 1994).
567:
568: To probe the physical properties of galaxies that may contribute to
569: the lack of aromatic emission features, we calculate $R_1$, a comparison
570: of the contribution of 8\,$\micron$ flux with the shorter IRAC
571: wavelengths defined as
572: $(F_\nu(4.5\,\micron) - \alpha F_\nu(3.6\,\micron))/F_\nu(8\,\micron)$,
573: and $R_2$, which is the ratio of the 8 and 24\,$\micron$
574: flux densities, for all galaxies
575: that are detected at those wavelengths (see Engelbracht et al. 2005
576: and their Figures 1 and 2). We show $R_1$ versus $R_2$ and
577: $R_2$ versus the metallicity of each galaxy in Figure 8.
578: The data points have large error bars associated with the photometry so
579: that trends are difficult to determine.
580: We see that the values for the LSBGs are consistent with
581: those found for normal galaxies by Engelbracht et al. (2005),
582: occupying similar parameter space as their high surface brightness
583: counterparts in both plots. Most of our sample have
584: relatively high 8-to-24\,$\micron$ flux ratios, so that the correlation
585: of increasing $R_2$ with decreasing $R_1$ is not sampled by our
586: galaxies. In fact, all the galaxies in our sample that are detected at
587: both 8 and 24\,$\micron$ have $R_2$ larger than 0.2,
588: and all of the galaxies in the Engelbracht et al. (2005) with $R_2$ greater
589: than this value have detected aromatic features.
590: We see the same general metallicity trend as
591: Engelbracht et al. (2005), with lower metallicity galaxies displaying
592: weak aromatic emission, that is, diminishing 8\,$\micron$ flux density relative
593: to 24\,$\micron$ flux density. One explanation for this trend
594: is that harsh radiation fields in low-metallicity galaxies destroy PAH
595: molecules (Galliano et al. 2003, 2005; Madden et al. 2006).
596: This is unlikely to be the case for LSBGs, where the radiation
597: fields are presumably not strong enough to destroy aromatics. Another
598: explanation is that there are not enough carbon-rich asymptotic red-giant
599: branch stars necessary to create large amounts of aromatic molecules in
600: low-metallicity galaxies.
601:
602: \section{SUMMARY}
603:
604: {\it Spitzer} data on five low surface
605: brightness galaxies indicate that a fraction of these
606: objects contains modest amounts of dust, despite their
607: low metallicities and apparent transparency. The LSBGs are detected
608: at all IRAC wavelengths, and two are detected at all of the MIPS
609: wavelengths. Those LSBGs and late-type
610: high surface brightness counterparts
611: that have detectable dust appear to be the same galaxies that have
612: the largest amounts of star formation, while those that do not have
613: detectable dust are the most diffuse, least star-forming galaxies (e.g.,
614: Malin 1).
615: One explanation for this is that any dust existing in galaxies has to
616: be heated to temperatures in the range 15-20\,K by ultraviolet photons escaping
617: from star-forming regions before being detectable at far-IR and
618: submillimeter wavelengths. The gathering evidence shows that modest
619: amounts of dust can be created and maintained in a variety of environments
620: and in galaxies of widely varying apparent formation histories.
621: We also find that LSBGs exhibit less far-IR
622: emission and greater variety in far-IR properties than is predicted by scaling
623: related but higher surface brightness galaxy SEDs.
624:
625: \acknowledgments
626:
627: We thank Dean Hines and Jeroen Bouwman for
628: allowing us to use the FEPS data reduction pipeline.
629: This work is based on observations made with the Spitzer Space
630: Telescope, which is operated by the Jet Propulsion Laboratory,
631: California Institute of Technology under a contract with NASA.
632: Support for this work was provided by NASA through an award
633: issued by JPL/Caltech.
634: This research has made use of the NASA/IPAC Extragalactic Database (NED)
635: which is operated by the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of
636: Technology, under contract with the National Aeronautics and Space
637: Administration.
638:
639: \begin{references}
640:
641: \reference{}Barth, A.\ 2007, accepted to \apjl, astro-ph/0701018
642: \reference{}Bell, E.~F., Barnaby, D., Bower, R.~G., de Jong, R.~S., Harper, D.~A., Hereld, M., Loewenstein, R.~F., \& Rauscher, B.~J.\ 2000, \mnras, 312, 470
643: \reference{}Bendo, G.~J., et al.\ 2003, \aj, 125, 2361
644: \reference{}Bothun G.~D., Impey, C.~D., Malin, D.~F., \& Mould, J.~R.\ 1987, \aj, 94, 23
645: \reference{}B{\"o}ttner, C., Klein, U., \& Heithausen, A.\ 2003, \aap, 408, 493
646: \reference{}Braine, J., Herpin, F., \& Radford, S.~J.~E.\ 2000, \aap, 358, 494
647: %\reference{}Burkholder, V., Impey, C., \& Sprayberry, D.\ 2001, \aj, 122, 2318
648: \reference{}Calzetti, D., et al. 2005, \apj, 633, 871
649: \reference{}de Naray R.~K., McGaugh, S.~S., \& de Blok, W.~J.~G.\ 2004, \mnras, 355, 887
650: \reference{}Engelbracht, C.~W., Gordon, K.~D., Rieke, G.~H., Werner, M.~W., Dale, D.~A., \& Latter, W.~B.\ 2005, \apjl, 628, L29
651: \reference{}Engelbracht, C.~W., et al.\ 2007, accepted to \pasp
652: \reference{}Fazio, G.~G., et al.\ 2004, \apjs, 154, 10
653: \reference{}Galliano, F., Madden, S.~C., Jones, A.~P., Wilson, D.~D., \& Le Peintre, F.\ 2003, \aap, 407, 159
654: \reference{}Galliano, F., Madden, S.~C., Jones, A.~P., Wilson, C.~D., \& Bernard, J.-P.\ 2005, \aap, 434, 867
655: \reference{}Giovanelli, R., \& Haynes, M.~P.\ 1989, \aj, 97, 633
656: \reference{}Gordon, K.~D., et al.\ 2005, \pasp, 117, 503
657: \reference{}Gordon, K.~D., et al.\ 2007, submitted to \pasp
658: \reference{}Hines, D.~C., et al.\ 2006, \apj, 638, 1070
659: \reference{}Hinz, J.~L., Misselt, K., Rieke, M.~J., Rieke, G.~H., Smith, P.~S., Blaylock, M., \& Gordon, K.~D.\ 2006, \apj, 651, 874
660: %\reference{}Holland, W.~S., et al.\ 1999, \mnras, 303, 659
661: \reference{}Holwerda, B.~W., Gonzalez, R.~A., Allen, R.~J., \& van der Kruit, P.~C.\ 2005, \aj, 129, 1396
662: \reference{}Houck, J.~R., et al.\ 2004, \apjs, 154, 18
663: \reference{}Hunter, D.~A, Elmegreen, B.~G., \& Martin, E.\ 2006, \aj, 132, 801
664: \reference{}Impey, C., \& Bothun, G.\ 1989, \apj, 341, 89
665: \reference{}Impey, C.~D., Sprayberry, D., Irwin, M.~J., \& Bothun, G.~D.\ 1996, \apjs, 105, 209
666: \reference{}Kessler, M. F., et al. 1996, \aap, 315, L27
667: \reference{}Knezek, P.~M.\ 1993, Ph.D.~Thesis
668: \reference{}Lagache, G., Abergel, A., Boulanger, F., \& Puget, J.-L.\ 1998, \aap, 333, 709
669: \reference{}Lisenfeld, U., Israel, F.~P., Stil, J.~M., \& Siever, A.\ 2002, \aap, 382, 860
670: \reference{}Madden, S.~C., Galliano, F., Jones, A.~P., \& Sauvage, M.\ 2006, \aap, 446, 877
671: \reference{}Martin, D.~C., et al.\ 2005, \apjl, 619, L1
672: \reference{}Matthews L.~D., van Driel, W., \& Monnier-Ragaigne, D.\ 2001, \aap, 365, 1
673: \reference{}McGaugh, S.~S.\ 1992, Ph.D.~Thesis
674: \reference{}McGaugh, S.~S.\ 1994, \apj, 426, 135
675: \reference{}McGaugh, S.~S. \& Bothun, G.~D.\ 1994, \aj, 107, 530
676: \reference{}McGaugh, S.~S., Schombert, J.~M., \& Bothun, G.~D.\ 1995, \aj, 109, 2019
677: \reference{}Neugebauer, G., et al.\ 1984, \apjl, 278, L1
678: \reference{}O'Neil, K., Bothun, G.~D., Schombert, J., Cornell, M.~E., \& Impey, C.~D.\ 1997a, \aj, 114, 2448
679: \reference{}O'Neil, K., Bothun, G.~D., \& Impey, C.~D.\ 1997b, Bulletin of the American Astronomical Society, 29, 1398
680: \reference{}Patterson, R.~J. \& Thuan, T.~X. 1996, \apjs, 107, 103
681: \reference{}Pickering, T.~E., Impey, C.~D., van Gorkom, J.~H., \& Bothun, G.~D.\ 1997, \aj, 114, 1858
682: \reference{}Pickering, T.~E.\ 1998, Ph.D.~Thesis
683: \reference{}Pickering, T.~E., \& van der Hulst, J.~M.\ 1999, Astronomische Gesellschaft Meeting Abstracts, 15, 2
684: \reference{}Popescu, C.~C., Tuff, R.~J., V{\"o}lk, H.~J., Pierini, D., \& Madore, B.~F.\ 2002, \apj, 567, 221
685: \reference{}Reach, W.~T., etal.\ 1995, \apj, 451, 188
686: \reference{}Rieke, G.~H., et al.\ 2004, \apjs, 154, 25
687: \reference{}Roennback, J., \& Bergvall, N.\ 1995, \aap, 302, 353
688: \reference{}Salzer, J.~J., Lee, J.~C., Melbourne, J., Hinz, J.~L., Alonso-Herrero, A., \& Jangren, A.\ 2005, \apj, 624, 661
689: \reference{}Sauty, S., et al.\ 2003, \aap, 411, 381
690: \reference{}Scoville, N., \& Young, J.~S.\ 1983, \apj, 265, 148
691: \reference{}Smith, J.~D.~T., et al.\ 2004, \apjs, 154, 199
692: \reference{}Smith, J.~D.~T., et al.\ 2006, \apj, accepted, astro-ph/0610913
693: \reference{}Sodroski, T.~J., Odegard, N., Arendt, R.~G., Dwek, E., Weiland, J.~L., Hauser, M.~G., \& Kelsall, T.\ 1997, \apj, 480, 173
694: \reference{}Sprayberry, D., Impey, C.~D., Bothun, G.~D., \& Irwin, M.~J.\ 1995, \aj, 109, 558
695: \reference{}Spoon, H.~W.~W.\ 2003, Ph.D. thesis, Rijksuniversiteit Groningen
696: \reference{}Stansberry, J., et al.\ 2007, submitted to\apj
697: \reference{}Stevens, J.~A., Amure, M., \& Gear, W.~K. 2005, \mnras, 357, 361
698: \reference{}Tuffs, R.~J. \& Popescu, C.~C.\ 2005, AIR Conf.~Proc.~761: The Spectral Energy Distributions of Gas-Rich Galaxies, 761, 344
699: \reference{}Vallenari, A., Schmidtobreick, L., \& Bomans, D.~J.\ 2005, \aap, 435, 821
700: \reference{}van der Hulst, J.~M., Skillman, E.~D., Smith, T.~R., Bothun, G.~D., McGaugh, S.~S., \& de Blok, W.~J.~G.\ 1993, \aj, 106, 548
701: \reference{}van Zee, L., Haynes, M.~P., \& Giovanelli, R.\ 1995, \aj, 109, 990
702: \reference{}van Zee, L.\ 2000, \aj, 199, 2757
703: \reference{}Wegner, G., Salzer, J.~J., Jangren, A., Gronwall, C., \& Melbourne, J.\ 2003, \aj, 125, 2373
704:
705: \end{references}
706:
707: \clearpage
708:
709: \begin{deluxetable}{lllcccc}
710: \tabletypesize{\small}
711: \tablecaption{Galaxy Properties and Imaging Observation Dates}
712: \tablewidth{450pt}
713: \tablehead{
714: \colhead{Galaxy} & \colhead{Morph.} & \colhead{Distance} & \colhead{$\mu_{0,\rm B}$} & \colhead{M$_B$} & \colhead{Date} & \colhead{Date} \\
715: \linebreak & Type & (km s$^{-1}$) & (mag arcsec$^{-2}$) & & IRAC & MIPS }
716: \startdata
717: Malin\,1 & S & 24750 & 25.50\tablenotemark{a}& -22.50 & 2004 Jun 9 & 2005 Jan 30 \\
718: UGC\,5675 & Sm: & 1102 & 23.70\tablenotemark{b} & -12.95 & 2004 Apr 26 & 2004 Jun 2 \\
719: UGC\,6151 & Sm: & 1331 & 23.51\tablenotemark{c} & -17.21 & 2004 May 18 & 2004 Jun 4 \\
720: UGC\,6614 & (R)SA(r)a & 6351 & 24.30\tablenotemark{d} & -20.00 & 2003 Dec 19 & 2004 Jun 4 \\
721: UGC\,9024 & S & 2323 & 24.71\tablenotemark{e} & -16.58 & 2004 Jan 20 & 2004 Jul 10 \\
722: \hline
723: UGC\,6879 & SAB(r)d & 2383 & 20.40\tablenotemark{f} & -18.20 & 2004 Jun 9 & 2004 Jun 4 \\
724: UGC\,10445 & SBc & 963 & 21.79\tablenotemark{g} & -17.53 & 2004 Mar 8 & 2004 Mar 21\\
725: \enddata
726: \tablenotetext{a}{Bothun et al.\ (1987)}
727: \tablenotetext{b}{McGaugh \& Bothun (1994)}
728: \tablenotetext{c}{Patterson \& Thuan (1996)}
729: \tablenotetext{d}{van der Hulst et al.\ (1993)}
730: \tablenotetext{e}{McGaugh et al.\ (1995)}
731: \tablenotetext{f}{Impey et al.\ (1996)}
732: \tablenotetext{g}{van Zee (2000)}
733: \end{deluxetable}
734:
735: \begin{deluxetable}{lcccccc}
736: \tabletypesize{\small}
737: \tablecaption{IRS Observation Details}
738: \tablewidth{350pt}
739: \tablehead{
740: \colhead{Galaxy} & \colhead{Date} & IRS Mode & \colhead{Integration Time} & \colhead{P.A.} \\
741: \linebreak & & & (s) & (deg) }
742: \startdata
743: Malin\,1 & 2005 Jan 4 & SL & 1707 & -160.92 \\
744: & & LL & 377.5 & 115.55 \\
745: UGC\,6879 & 2004 Jun 27 & SL & 1707 & 19.01 \\
746: & & LL & 377.5 & -64.50 \\
747: UGC\,10445 & 2004 Jul 14 & SL & 1707 & 42.37 \\
748: & & LL & 377.5 & -41.15 \\
749: \enddata
750: \tablecomments{Complete details of observations can retrieved via the SSC's
751: Leopard database software.}
752: \end{deluxetable}
753:
754: \begin{deluxetable}{lcccccccccc}
755: \tabletypesize{\tiny}
756: \tablecaption{MIPS LSBG Morphologies and Flux Densities}
757: \tablewidth{460pt}
758: \tablehead{
759: \colhead{Galaxy} & \colhead{Morph.} & \colhead{Morph.} & \colhead{Morph.} & \colhead{F$_{\nu}$ (Jy)} & \colhead{Radius} & \colhead{F$_{\nu}$ (Jy)} & \colhead{Radius} & \colhead{F$_{\nu}$ (Jy)} & \colhead{Radius} \\
760: \linebreak & \colhead{24\,$\micron$} & \colhead{70\,$\micron$} & \colhead{160\,$\micron$} & \colhead{24\,$\micron$} & \colhead{($\arcsec$)} & \colhead{70\,$\micron$} & \colhead{($\arcsec$)} & \colhead{160\,$\micron$} & \colhead{($\arcsec$)}}
761: \startdata
762: Malin 1 & point-like & no detection & no detection & $4.3$E-4$\pm$4.3E-5 & 24.90 & $< 0.004$ & \nodata & $< 0.01$ & \nodata\\
763: UGC\,5675 & \nodata & no detection & no detection &\nodata & \nodata & $< 0.009$ & \nodata & $< 0.02$ & \nodata\\
764: UGC\,6151 & extended & extended & extended & $0.005\pm5.0$E-4 & 62.25 & $0.08\pm0.02$ & 49.25 & $0.29\pm0.06$ & 80 \\
765: UGC\,6614 & extended & extended & extended & $0.018\pm2.0$E-3 & 62.25 & $0.08\pm0.02$ & 54.18 & $0.38\pm0.08$ & 56 \\
766: UGC\,9024 & point-like & point-like & no detection & $0.001\pm1.0$E-4 & 24.90 & $0.04\pm0.01$ & 24.63 & $< 0.02$ & \nodata\\
767: \hline
768: UGC\,6879 & extended & extended & extended & $0.027\pm3.0$E-3 & 62.25 & $0.44\pm0.09$ & 54.18 & $1.47\pm0.29$ & 56 \\
769: UGC\,10445 & extended & extended & extended & $0.025\pm2.0$E-3 & 105.8 & $0.55\pm0.11$ & 98.50 & $2.50\pm0.50$ & 120 \\
770: \enddata
771: \end{deluxetable}
772:
773:
774: \begin{deluxetable}{lcccccccccc}
775: \tabletypesize{\small}
776: \tablecaption{IRAC Flux Densities}
777: \tablewidth{525pt}
778: \tablehead{
779: \colhead{Galaxy} & \colhead{F$_{\nu}$ (Jy)} & \colhead{F$_{\nu}$ (Jy)} & \colhead{Radius} & \colhead{F$_{\nu}$ (Jy)} & \colhead{F${\nu}$ (Jy)} & \colhead{Radius}\\
780: \linebreak & \colhead{3.6\,$\micron$} & \colhead{4.5\,$\micron$} & \colhead{($\arcsec$)} & \colhead{5.8\,$\micron$} & \colhead{8.0\,$\micron$} & \colhead{($\arcsec$) }}
781: \startdata
782: Malin 1 & 1.74E-3$\pm$1.74E-4 & 1.20E-3$\pm$1.20E-4 & 18 & 6.87E-4$\pm$1.03E-4 & 1.03E-3$\pm$1.55E-4 & 18 \\
783: UGC\,5675 & 1.22E-3$\pm$1.22E-4 & 7.47E-4$\pm$7.47E-5 & 30 & $< 2.03$E-5 & $< 1.18$E-4 & \nodata \\
784: UGC\,6151 & 4.60E-3$\pm$4.60E-4 & 2.87E-3$\pm$2.87E-4 & 60 & 2.47E-3$\pm$3.71E-4 & 4.15E-3$\pm$6.23E-4 & 60 \\
785: UGC\,6614 & 2.45E-2$\pm$2.45E-3 & 1.43E-2$\pm$1.43E-3 & 108 & 1.66E-2$\pm$2.49E-3 & 2.43E-2$\pm$3.65E-3 & 60 \\
786: UGC\,9024 & 3.10E-3$\pm$3.10E-4 & 2.00E-3$\pm$2.00E-4 & 60 & 9.00E-4$\pm$1.35E-4 & 2.00E-3$\pm$3.00E-4 & 24 \\
787: \hline
788: UGC\,6879 & 2.15E-2$\pm$2.15E-3 & 1.39E-2$\pm$1.39E-3 & 108 & 2.05E-2$\pm$3.08E-3 & 4.71E-2$\pm$7.07E-3 & 60 \\
789: UGC\,10445 & 2.00E-2$\pm$2.00E-3 & 1.60E-2$\pm$1.60E-3 & 78 & 2.10E-2$\pm$3.15E-3 & 3.40E-2$\pm$5.10E-3 & 78 \\
790: \enddata
791: \end{deluxetable}
792:
793: \begin{deluxetable}{lcccccccccc}
794: \tabletypesize{\small}
795: \tablecaption{IRS Fluxes or EWs from PAHFIT}
796: \tablewidth{220pt}
797: \tablehead{
798: \colhead{Feature} & \colhead{Flux}\\
799: \linebreak & \colhead{(erg s$^{-1}$ cm$^{-2}$)}}
800: \startdata
801: UGC\,6879 & & \\
802: \hline
803: [S \sc{iv}] & 4.89E-16$\pm$3.86E-16 \\
804: $[$Ne \sc{ii}$]$ & 4.98E-15$\pm$4.74E-16 \\
805: $[$S \sc{iii}$]$ & 7.14E-15$\pm$1.45E-15 \\
806: \hline
807: 7.7\,$\micron$ complex EW & 13.57$\pm$0.68\,$\micron$ \\
808: \hline
809: & & \\
810: UGC\,10445 & & \\
811: \hline
812: [S \sc{iv}] & 2.36E-15$\pm$3.75E-16 \\
813: $[$Ne \sc{ii}$]$ & 4.20E-15$\pm$4.30E-16 \\
814: $[$S {\sc iii}$]$ & 2.39E-15$\pm$1.63E-15 \\
815: \hline
816: 7.7\,$\micron$ complex EW & 5.69$\pm$1.83\,$\micron$ \\
817: \enddata
818: \end{deluxetable}
819:
820:
821: \clearpage
822:
823: \begin{figure}
824: \plotone{f1a.eps}
825: \end{figure}
826:
827: \begin{figure}
828: \plotone{f1b.eps}
829: \end{figure}
830:
831: \begin{figure}
832: \plotone{f1c.eps}
833: \end{figure}
834:
835: \begin{figure}
836: \plotone{f1d.eps}
837: \end{figure}
838:
839: \begin{figure}
840: \plotone{f1e.eps}
841: \end{figure}
842:
843: \begin{figure}
844: \plotone{f1f.eps}
845: \caption{Multi-wavelength views of the galaxy sample. North is up and
846: east is to the left. The field of view of each panel is
847: $\sim4\farcm5\times4\farcm5$. The panels, from right to left, starting
848: on the top row: Digitized Sky Survey (DSS), the four IRAC bands, the three MIPS bands.
849: The exception to this is UGC\,6879 which has: {\it GALEX} far-UV, {\it GALEX}
850: near-UV, DSS, IRAC, MIPS, and SCUBA 850\,$\micron$. The scale for the DSS
851: image is 1$\farcs$7 and for {\it GALEX} it is 5$\arcsec$.
852: Pixel scales for all IRAC images are
853: 1$\farcs$2. Pixels scales for the MIPS images are 1$\farcs$245 for
854: 24\,$\micron$, 4$\farcs$925 for 70\,$\micron$, and 8$\farcs$0 for
855: 160\,$\micron$. The SCUBA image has been rebinned to 1$\arcsec$ pixels
856: from an original beamwidth of 15$\arcsec$.}
857: \end{figure}
858:
859: \begin{figure}
860: \plotone{f2.eps}
861: \caption{UGC\,6614 at 24, 70, and 160\,$\micron$. The 24 and 70\,$\micron$
862: images are convolved to the 160\,$\micron$ resolution. The changing
863: morphology and brightness of the galaxy at far-IR wavelengths does not
864: appear to be a result of the resolution differences. North is up and east
865: is to the left. The field of view of each panel is
866: $\sim4\farcm0\times4\farcm8$.}
867: \end{figure}
868:
869: \begin{figure}
870: \plotone{f3.eps}
871: \caption{Spectral energy distribution of UGC\,6879 showing {\it GALEX},
872: 2MASS, IRAC, {\it IRAS}, MIPS, and SCUBA data points. The {\it IRAS}
873: data points at
874: 12 and 25\,$\micron$ are upper limits only. The solid line is a
875: two-component dust model fitted to the four IRAC data points, two {\it IRAS}
876: points, and three MIPS points. This model consists of a warm silicate
877: component at $T=52$\,K ({\it dashed line}) and a cool silicate
878: component at $T=15$\,K ({\it dashed-dotted line}).}
879: \end{figure}
880:
881: \begin{figure}
882: \plotone{f4.eps}
883: \caption{IRS spectra, rest wavelength versus flux density,
884: for UGC\,6879, UGC\,10445, and Malin 1.
885: The broad aromatic features and emission lines are indicated on the top
886: and middle panels panel on both the UGC\,6879 and UGC\,10445 spectra.
887: The Malin 1 spectrum is consistent with noise.}
888: \end{figure}
889:
890: \begin{figure}
891: \plotone{f5.eps}
892: \caption{$B$-band central surface brightnesses of the galaxy sample
893: versus the ratio of the flux densities at 24 and 160\,$\micron$. All
894: objects are included except UGC\,5675, which does not have data at
895: 24\,$\micron$. Lower limits are given for Malin\,1 and UGC\,9024,
896: which are not detected at 160\,$\micron$.}
897: \end{figure}
898:
899: \begin{figure}
900: \plotone{f6.eps}
901: \caption{Spectral energy distributions of all the galaxies showing
902: the IRAC and MIPS data points. The high surface brightness galaxy data
903: are shown in solid points while the LSBG data are shown in open points.
904: The arrows represent 3\,$\sigma$ upper limits at 70 and 160\,$\micron$.}
905: \end{figure}
906:
907: \begin{figure}
908: \plotone{f7.eps}
909: \caption{Metallicity and absolute magnitude at 24\,$\micron$ for
910: all the galaxies except UGC\,5675, where 24\,$\micron$ data are
911: not available. While it would
912: be expected for the galaxies to follow the $L-Z$ trend, the difficulty
913: in determining metallicities seems to have weakened the correlation.}
914: \end{figure}
915:
916: \begin{figure}
917: \plottwo{f8a.eps}{f8b.eps}
918: \caption{On the left, mid-infrared colors of the galaxy sample, with $R_1$ and
919: $R_2$ defined as in Engelbracht et al. (2005), and, on the right,
920: galaxy metallicity as a function of the 8-to-24\,$\micron$
921: color, $R_2$. Solid circles represent
922: LSBGs, the solid square represents UGC\,10445, and the solid triangle
923: represents UGC\,6879. The data points from Engelbracht et al. (2005) are
924: shown as crosses. There is a slight upward trend of increasing aromatic
925: strength with increasing metallicity.}
926: \end{figure}
927:
928: \end{document}
929: