1: % Paper ``Optical Imaging and HI Synthesis Observations of the Dwarf
2: % Irregular Galaxy ESO~364-G029'', by Kouwenhoven, M.B.N., Bureau, M.,
3: % Kim, S., & de Zeeuw, P.T. .
4: %
5: % Observations obtained by M. Bureau in 1997 during his PhD thesis
6: % (MSSSO, ANU, supervisor K.C. Freeman). Data reduced and analyzed by
7: % M.B.N. Kouwenhoven in 2000-2001 in partial fulfillment of his
8: % undergraduate diploma (Sterrewacht Leiden, Universiteit Leiden,
9: % supervisor P.T. de Zeeuw).
10: %
11: % LaTeX template file for Astronomy & Astrophysics, v5.3
12: %
13:
14:
15:
16: \newcommand{\hi}{\ion{H}{i}}
17: \newcommand{\halpha}{H$\alpha$}
18: \newcommand{\msun}{{\rm M}_\odot}
19: \newcommand{\lsunblue}{{\rm L}_{B,\odot}}
20: \newcommand{\vsun}{V_\odot}
21: \newcommand{\eso}{\object{ESO\,364-G029}}
22: \newcommand{\lmc}{\object{LMC}}
23: \newcommand{\rtf}{R_{25}}
24: \newcommand{\rhi}{R_{\rm\hi}}
25: \newcommand{\rhol}{R_{\rm Ho}}
26: \newcommand{\kms}{km\,s$^{-1}$}
27: \newcommand{\jykms}{Jy\,km\,s$^{-1}$}
28: \newcommand{\rotcur}{{\tt ROTCUR}}
29:
30: \documentclass[]{aa}
31: %\documentclass[referee]{aa}
32: \usepackage{txfonts,natbib,graphicx}
33: \def\reference{\parskip 0pt\par\noindent\hangindent 0.5 truecm}
34: \begin{document}
35: %
36: % Title
37: %
38: \title{Optical $BVI$ Imaging and \hi{} Synthesis Observations\\
39: of the Dwarf Irregular Galaxy \eso{}}
40: \titlerunning{Optical and \hi{} Observations of
41: \eso{}}
42: %
43: % Authors
44: %
45: \author{M.\ B.\ N.\ Kouwenhoven\inst{1,2,3} \and
46: M.\ Bureau\inst{4} \and
47: S.\ Kim\inst{5} \and
48: P.\ T.\ de Zeeuw\inst{2}}
49: %
50: \authorrunning{M.\ B.\ N.\ Kouwenhoven et al.}
51: %
52: % Institutions
53: %
54: \institute{Department of Physics and Astrophysics, University of Sheffield,
55: Hicks Building, Hounsfield Road, Sheffield S3 7RH, United Kingdom
56: (t.kouwenhoven@sheffield.ac.uk)
57: \and
58: Sterrewacht Leiden, Leiden University, Niels Bohrweg 2, 2333~CA Leiden, Netherlands
59: (tim@strw.leidenuniv.nl)
60: \and
61: Astronomical Institute Anton Pannekoek, Kruislaan 403, 1098~SJ, Amsterdam,
62: The Netherlands
63: \and
64: Department of Physics, University of Oxford, Denys Wilkinson Building,
65: Keble Road, Oxford OX1~3RH, United Kingdom
66: (bureau@astro.ox.ac.uk)
67: \and
68: Astronomy \& Space Science Department, Sejong University, 98
69: Kwangjin-gu, Kunja-dong, Seoul, 143-747, Korea
70: (sek@sejong.ac.kr)}
71: %
72: \offprints{Thijs Kouwenhoven, \email{t.kouwenhoven@sheffield.ac.uk}}
73: \date{Received / Accepted}
74: %
75: % Abstract
76: %
77: \abstract{As part of an effort to enlarge the number of well-studied
78: Magellanic-type galaxies, we obtained broadband optical imaging and neutral
79: hydrogen radio synthesis observations of the dwarf irregular galaxy
80: \eso{}. The optical morphology
81: characteristically shows a bar-like main body with a one-sided spiral
82: arm, an approximately exponential light distribution, and offset
83: photometric and kinematic centers. The \hi{} distribution is mildly
84: asymmetric
85: and, although slightly offset from the photometric center, roughly follows
86: the optical
87: brightness distribution, extending to over $1.2$ Holmberg radii (where
88: $\mu_B=26.5$~mag~arcsec$^{-2}$). In particular, the highest \hi{}
89: column densities closely follow the bar, one-arm spiral, and a third
90: optical extension. The rotation is solid-body in the inner parts but
91: flattens outside of the optical extent. The total \hi{} flux
92: $F_\hi=23.1\pm1.2$~\jykms{}, yielding a total \hi{}
93: mass $M_\hi=(6.4\pm1.7)\times10^8$~$\msun$ (for a distance
94: $D=10.8\pm1.4$~Mpc) and a total \hi{} mass-to-blue-luminosity
95: ratio $M_\hi/L_B=(0.96\pm0.14)$~$\msun / \lsunblue$\ (distance
96: independent). The \hi{} data suggest a very complex small-scale
97: \hi{} structure, with evidence of large shells and/or holes,
98: but deeper observations are required for a detailed
99: study. Follow-up observations are also desirable for a proper
100: comparison with the Large Magellanic Cloud, where despite an optical
101: morphology very similar to \eso{} the \hi{} bears
102: little resemblance to the optical.
103: %
104: \keywords{Galaxies: individual: \eso{} -- Galaxies:
105: irregular -- Galaxies: photometry -- Galaxies: kinematics and dynamics
106: -- Galaxies: structure -- Galaxies: ISM}}
107: %
108: \maketitle
109: %
110: % Introduction
111: %
112: \section{Introduction\label{sec:intro}}
113:
114: In the currently popular bottom-up galaxy and structure formation
115: scenarios, studies of gas-rich low-metallicity dwarf galaxies are
116: invaluable, as these objects must have dominated the Universe in the
117: past (e.g.\ \citealt{wf91,kwg93,cole1994}; but see also \citealt{cgo01}).
118: They
119: are also expected to be more uniformly distributed than their larger
120: counterparts (e.g.\ \citealt{ds86}) and may in fact still be the most
121: common type of object in the Universe (e.g.\
122: \citealt{mateo1998,ietal99,d99}).
123:
124: The Magellanic-type spirals (Sm; with rotational symmetry and some
125: spiral structure) and Magellanic irregulars (Im; asymmetric with no
126: spiral structure) are at the transition between fully fledged spirals
127: and true dwarf irregulars (\citealt{v56,v59}). With respect to the latter
128: two groups of galaxies, Sm and Im galaxies have intermediate
129: physical properties such as rotation velocity, nuclear concentration,
130: colour, and neutral hydrogen content. Although the prototype of the
131: class, the \object{Large Magellanic Cloud} (\lmc{}; classified
132: as SB(s)m in NED\footnote{NASA/IPAC Extragalactic Database.}), is
133: amongst the best studied galaxies (e.g.\
134: \citealt{w97,mahs02,ketal03,bruns2005,marel2006}
135: and references therein), the general properties of Magellanic systems
136: are surprisingly poorly known. The classical reference on the subject
137: remains that of \citet{vf72}. \citet{o91,o94} provides more modern
138: studies and argues that it is a misconception to consider the
139: \lmc{} and other galaxies like it as irregular. Magellanic-type
140: galaxies are characterized by an asymmetric spiral arm connected at
141: one end to a high surface brightness bar. The bar center is often
142: offset from the center of the galaxy as defined by the outer optical
143: isophotes, and the arm normally has a clumpy appearance, presumably
144: due to triggered star formation. The arm can sometimes be followed
145: completely around the galaxy and, in some cases, small ``embryonic''
146: arms are present at the ends of the bar (\citealt{v55}).
147:
148: Various simulations have shown a that one-armed morphology can develop from
149: a
150: strong tidal encounter with a companion (e.g.\
151: \citealt{bsv86,hb90}). The models generally predict only a short-lived
152: one-armed spiral structure, implying that a companion galaxy should
153: generally be present close to any Magellanic galaxy. Using a sample
154: from the Third Reference Catalog of Bright Galaxies
155: (\citealt*{vetal91}, hereafter \citeauthor{vetal91}), \citet{o94}
156: demonstrated that close companions are indeed observed in almost every
157: case. As for the \lmc{} itself, its interaction with both the
158: Milky Way and the \object{Small Magellanic Cloud} (\object{SMC}) is
159: most likely at the origin of its one-arm structure and large-scale
160: disturbed morphology (e.g.\ \citealt{puetal98,psfgb03} and references
161: therein).
162:
163: % Physical parameters of ESO~364-G029
164: %
165: \begin{table}[tb]
166: \caption{Basic properties of the dwarf irregular galaxy \eso{}. The left
167: and middle columns list the different quantities and their values; the right
168: column lists corresponding references -- (1) NED; (2) HyperLEDA; (3) This
169: paper; (4) \cite{kkhm04}. }
170: \label{tab:phys_par}
171: \centering
172: \begin{tabular}{p{39mm}p{36mm}p{1mm}}
173: \hline
174: \hline
175: Quantity & Value
176: & R.\\
177: \hline
178: Morphological type & IB(s)m
179: & 1\\
180: Right ascension (J2000) & $\alpha=06^{\rm h}05^{\rm
181: m}45\fs2$ & 1\\
182: Declination (J2000) &
183: $\delta=-33\degr04\arcmin51\arcsec$ & 1\\
184: Galactic longitude & $l=239\fdg47$
185: & 1\\
186: Galactic latitude & $b=-23\fdg36$
187: & 1\\
188: \hline
189: Heliocentric radial velocity & $\vsun=786 \pm 11$~\kms{}
190: & 2\\
191: \quad (from \hi{} measurements) & $\vsun=784 \pm 2$~\kms{}
192: & 3\\
193: \hline
194: Scale length ($B$) & $h_B = 50\arcsec \pm
195: 5\arcsec$ & 3\\
196: Radius\,($25$\,$B$\,mag\,${\rm arcsec}^{-2}$) & $\rtf=1\farcm29 \pm
197: 0\farcm09$ & 2\\
198: & $\rtf=1\farcm27 \pm
199: 0\farcm03$ & 3\\
200: Radius\,($26.5$\,$B$\,mag\,${\rm arcsec}^{-2}$) & $\rhol=2\farcm30 \pm
201: 0\farcm08$ & 3\\
202: \hline
203: Inclination & $i=70\fdg5$
204: & 2\\
205: Axial\,ratio\,($25$\,$B$\,mag\,${\rm arcsec}^{-2}$) & $q_{25} = 0.51 \pm 0.06$
206: & 2\\
207: & $q_{25} = 0.54 \pm 0.04$
208: & 3\\
209: Asymmetry & $Q_{\rm asym} = 1.7\%$
210: & 3\\
211: \mbox{Position\,angle\,($25$\,$B$\,mag\,${\rm arcsec}^{-2}$)} & PA $= 55.4\degr$
212: & 2\\
213: & PA $= 62\degr \pm 4\degr$
214: & 3\\
215: \hline
216: Central surface brightness & $\mu_B(0) = 23.3$~mag~${\rm
217: arcsec}^{-2}$ & 3\\
218: Apparent total $B$ mag & $B_{\rm T}=13.81 \pm
219: 0.22$~mag & 2\\
220: & $B_{\rm T}=13.8 \pm
221: 0.1$~mag & 3\\
222: Corrected apparent $B$ mag & $B_{\rm c}=13.8 \pm
223: 0.22$~mag & 2\\
224: & $B_{\rm c}=13.6 \pm
225: 0.1$~mag & 3\\
226: Corrected absolute $B$ mag & $M_B=-16.44$~mag
227: & 2\\
228: & $M_B=-16.6 \pm 0.3 $~mag
229: & 3\\
230: \hline
231: Distance & $D=8.02$~Mpc
232: & 2\\
233: & $D=10.8\pm 1.4$~Mpc
234: & 3\\
235: & $D=7.7$~Mpc
236: & 4\\
237: Scale & $1\arcmin=2.3$~kpc
238: & 2\\
239: & $1\arcmin=3.1\pm0.4$~kpc
240: & 3\\
241: & $1\arcmin=2.2$~kpc
242: & 4\\
243: \hline
244: Total \hi{} mass & $M_{\rm
245: HI}=(6.4\pm1.7)\times10^8$~$\msun$ & 3\\
246: \mbox{\hi{}\,mass-to-blue-luminosity\,ratio} &
247: \mbox{$M_\hi/L_B=0.96\pm0.14\msun/\lsunblue$} & 3\\
248: \hline
249: \hline
250: \end{tabular}\\
251: \end{table}
252: %
253:
254: The kinematics of the warp in the \hi{} distribution of the Magellanic-type
255: galaxy \object{NGC~3109} and the nearby Antlia dwarf galaxy also suggests that the
256: galaxies had a mild interaction about 1~Gyr ago (\citealt{barnes2001}).
257: Based on the morphology and kinematics, \cite{bush2004} draw a similar
258: conclusion for the neighbours \object{NGC~4618} and \object{NGC~4625}.
259: %
260: However, not all Magellanic-type galaxies have an obvious neighbour for a
261: recent interaction. \cite{bekki2006} suggest that the morphologies of these
262: apparently isolated galaxies may be explained by a recent interaction with
263: an (optically) invisible companion. The \hi{} survey performed by
264: \cite{doyle2005}, however, shows that evidence for the existence of these
265: ``dark galaxies'' is marginal.
266:
267: In order to address the asymmetry issue,
268: \cite{wilcots2004} performed an \hi{} survey of a sample of 13~Magellanic
269: spiral galaxies with apparent optical companions. In their study, they find
270: that only four of these have confirmed \hi{}-detected neighbours. Their
271: study also indicates
272: that the presence of companions near \object{NGC~2537} and \object{UGC~5391} has no effect on
273: the morphology of these galaxies, and that Magellanic spirals are no more
274: asymmetric than a random sample in the field. The latter conclusion is
275: supported by \hi{} observations of the interacting Magellanic spirals
276: \object{NGC~4618} and \object{NGC~4625} (\citealt{bush2004}).
277: On the other hand, in their \hi{} study of (possibly) interacting Magellanic
278: galaxies in the
279: \object{M81} group, \cite{bureau2004} find no large-scale tidal feature
280: and no intergalactic \hi{} cloud near the Magellanic dwarf \object{M81dwA}, and
281: remark
282: that this galaxy could be a tidal dwarf galaxy (rather than a perturbed
283: ``regular'' dwarf),
284: resulting from the debris of a past encounter with \object{Holmberg~II}.
285:
286:
287: Magellanic dwarf galaxies are also known to contain a large number
288: of shells and holes in their interstellar medium. These structures are
289: created by winds and supernova explosions of the most massive stars
290: in star forming regions. Unlike in spiral systems, these structures
291: are long-lived in dwarf galaxies,
292: due to solid-body rotation and a lack density of waves.
293: Well-known dwarfs exhibiting shells and holes include the \lmc{}
294: (SB(s)m; \citealt{ketal98}), \object{IC~2574} (SAB(s)m;
295: \citealt{wb99}) and \object{Holmberg~II} (Im; \citealt{pwbr92}; but
296: see also \citealt{rswr99,bc02}).
297:
298:
299: A significant amount of neutral hydrogen is known to be present beyond the
300: optical extent of Magellanic-type galaxies, often up to 2--3 Holmberg radii
301: (e.g. \object{NGC~925}; \citealt{pisano1998,pisano2000}; \object{DDO~43};
302: \citealt{simpson2005}), occasionally reaching up to 6~Holmberg radii
303: (\object{NGC~4449}; \citealt{hunter1998}).
304: %
305: The \hi{} distribution of several Magellanic dwarfs is known to exhibit
306: further irregularities, such as \hi{} loops surrounding the galaxy
307: (\object{NGC~4618}; \citealt{bush2004}) and external spurs or blobs (e.g. \object{NGC~5169};
308: \citealt{muhle2005}; \object{UGCA~98}; \citealt{stil2005}). An S-shaped distortion in
309: the \hi{} velocity field, possibly indicating counterrotation, has been
310: observed in \object{NGC~4449} (\citealt{hunter1998}) and \object{DDO~43}
311: (\citealt{simpson2005}).
312:
313: The asymmetries and irregularities in the \hi{} distribution of
314: Magellanic-type galaxies are often associated with a high star formation
315: rate, such as for \object{IC~10} (e.g. \citealt{wilcots1998}; see also
316: \citealt{thurow2005}).
317: Using \halpha{} observations, \cite{wilcots2001} find that, in several
318: regions of the Magellanic spiral \object{NGC~4214}, the velocity of the ionized gas
319: is $50-100$~\kms{} higher than that of the \hi{}, indicating massive star
320: formation. The study of \object{NGC~4449} by \cite{hunter2000} compares \halpha{},
321: H$_2$, \hi{} and near-infrared emission, and suggests that the different
322: regions of this galaxies are in different stages of star formation.
323:
324:
325:
326: As part of an effort to increase the number of Magellanic dwarfs with
327: detailed observations, we focus in this paper on the relatively nearby
328: Magellanic dwarf irregular galaxy \eso{}
329: (\object{PGC~018396}).
330: \eso{} was first reported by \cite{holmberg1978}, who classified it as a
331: ``dwarf irregular or emission nebulae'' using the ESO~(B) Atlas.
332: By combining optical data from the UK~Schmidt plates with Parkes \hi{}
333: observations, \cite{lhgmw82} concluded that \eso{} is a dwarf irregular
334: galaxy, although \cite{kk00} designate the object as ``dwarf irregular or
335: reflection nebula'' in their optical search for nearby dwarf galaxy
336: candidates in the Southern hemisphere.
337: \eso{} was identified (and rejected) as a possible companion of
338: the nearby dwarf galaxy \object{NGC~2188} by \cite{ddd96}.
339: \cite{zimmermann2001} reported a possible X-ray counterpart to \eso{} using
340: ROSAT data.
341: \eso{} appears in a handful of other surveys, such as the Nearby Optical
342: Galaxies Catalogue (\citealt{gmcp00}), the Catalog of Nearby Galaxies
343: (\citealt{kkhm04}), the HIPASS\footnote{\hi{} Parkes
344: All-Sky Survey:\\
345: http://www.atnf.csiro.au/research/multibeam/release/~.} catalogue
346: (\citealt{hkk01,metal04,ketal04}), and the surveys for optical/\hi{}
347: counterparts of \cite{paturel2005} and \cite{doyle2005}.
348: Although the general properties (such as luminosity and \hi{} content) of
349: \eso{} are reasonably well constrained by the above-mentioned surveys, the
350: detailed morphology and kinematics of the galaxy were not studied in detail
351: previously.
352: General properties of \eso{} are listed in Table~\ref{tab:phys_par} and an
353: optical image from the Digitized Sky Survey (DSS) is shown in
354: Figure~\ref{fig:dss}.
355:
356: %
357: \begin{figure}[tb]
358: \resizebox{0.9\hsize}{!}{\includegraphics{ps/fig1.eps}}
359: \caption{Optical image of \eso{} from the Digitized Sky Survey (DSS); cf.
360: our $BVI$~images in Figure~\ref{fig:opt_images}. }
361: % HST phase 2 GSCI IIIaJ GG395 SERC-J/EJ
362: % HST Phase2(GSC1) = Pal-QV (North), SERC-J (South), SERC-QV (Selected
363: % crowded southern galactic plane), various SERC-V/PAL-V supplemental plates
364: % angstrom - profile
365: % 3450 0.000
366: % 3500 0.001
367: % 3600 0.105
368: % 3700 0.279
369: % 3800 0.497
370: % 3900 0.737
371: % 4000 0.920
372: % 4100 0.995
373: % 4200 0.997
374: % 4300 0.965
375: % 4400 0.920
376: % 4500 0.839
377: % 4600 0.731
378: % 4700 0.630
379: % 4800 0.569
380: % 4900 0.559
381: % 5000 0.595
382: % 5100 0.776
383: % 5200 0.880
384: % 5300 0.819
385: % 5400 0.415
386: % 5500 0.124
387: % 5600 0.025
388: % 5700 0.006
389: % 5800 0.002
390: % 5900 0.001
391: % 6000 0.000
392: \label{fig:dss}
393: \end{figure}
394: %
395:
396: This paper is organized as follows.
397: Optical observations and surface photometry of \eso{}
398: are presented in \S~\ref{sec:optical} while \hi{} spectral
399: line-imaging is discussed in \S~\ref{sec:hi}. In \S~\ref{sec:dist_fluxes}
400: we constrain the distance to \eso{}. The
401: discussion in \S~\ref{sec:discussion} focuses on a comparison with the
402: \lmc{}, the importance of interactions, and the possible presence
403: of \hi{} shells and holes in \eso{}. Finally, our main conclusions
404: are briefly summarized in \S~\ref{sec:summary}.
405: %
406: % Optical Data
407: %
408: %
409: \begin{figure*}[tb]
410: \begin{tabular}{ccc}
411: \includegraphics[width=0.32\textwidth,height=!]{ps/fig2a.eps} &
412: \includegraphics[width=0.32\textwidth,height=!]{ps/fig2b.eps} &
413: \includegraphics[width=0.32\textwidth,height=!]{ps/fig2c.eps} \\
414: \end{tabular}
415: \caption{Logarithmic grayscale images of \eso{} in the
416: Cousins $B$ ({\em left}), $V$ ({\em middle}) and $I$ ({\em right})
417: filters.The central bar and one spiral arm characterize \eso{} as a
418: Magellanic-type dwarf galaxy. }
419: \label{fig:opt_images}
420: \end{figure*}
421: %
422: \section{Optical Data\label{sec:optical}}
423: %
424: % Optical Observations and Data Reduction
425: %
426: \subsection{Observations and Data Reduction\label{sec:opt_datared}}
427:
428: Optical imaging observations were obtained on the nights of 9--11 April 1997
429: using
430: the 1-m telescope of Siding Spring Observatory (SSO) in Australia. A
431: total of $30$ broadband images combining short and long exposures were
432: obtained in the $B$, $V$ and $I$ Cousins filter bands. A $2048\times2048$
433: thinned TEK CCD with 15~$\mu$m pixels was used in direct imaging,
434: yielding a spatial sampling of $0\farcs61$~pix$^{-1}$. A
435: $1644\times1000$ CCD subsection with $100$~pixels virtual overscan was
436: read, for a total field-of-view of $15\farcm5\times10\farcm0$. The
437: seeing was moderate ($1\farcs7$--$2\farcs4$) but sufficient for basic
438: photometry and comparison with our \hi{} observations.
439:
440: The data reduction was carried out using standard procedures in {\tt
441: IRAF}\footnote{{\tt IRAF} is distributed by the National Optical
442: Astronomy Observatories (NOAO), which are operated by the Association
443: of Universities for Research in Astronomy (AURA), Inc., under
444: cooperative agreement with the National Science Foundation (NSF).}
445: (\citealt{t86,t93}). All the images were overscan-subtracted,
446: bias-subtracted using bias scans obtained every night, and flatfielded
447: using twilight flatfields.
448: Dark current corrections were not necessary due to the low dark
449: current levels and the relatively short exposure times.
450: The cosmetic of the CCD is good, with only one bad column
451: and few bad pixels. All target images in a given filter were then
452: registered and combined using a pixel rejection algorithm, convolving
453: all images to a common (largest) seeing in each filter. Because
454: \eso{} is faint but lies in a region with many bright
455: foreground stars, all pixels with counts above $20\%$ of the
456: saturation level were rejected in the long exposure images, to prevent
457: excessive bleeding. Short exposures fill in the rejected regions,
458: easing the masking and interpolation of bright foreground stars (see
459: below).
460:
461: Three sets of carefully selected and corrected Landolt $UBVRI$
462: standards (\citealt{l92,b95}) were used for photometric
463: calibration.
464: Since we do not require precise photometry, we adopted
465: the averaged extinction coefficients for the SSO 1-m telescope.
466: The resulting combined and
467: calibrated images are shown in Figure~\ref{fig:opt_images}.
468:
469:
470:
471: %
472: % Surface Photometry
473: %
474: \subsection{Surface Photometry} \label{sec:surf_phot}
475:
476: Standard ellipse fitting using the {\tt Ellipse} and {\tt Isophote}
477: packages in {\tt IRAF} (see \citealt{j87}) was used to derive the
478: azimuthally-averaged surface brightness profile of
479: \eso{} in each filter. For each semi-major axis $a$,
480: the ellipses are characterized by the central coordinates
481: ($x_0$,$y_0$), the ellipticity $\epsilon$
482: (defined as $\epsilon \equiv 1-b/a$, where $a$ and $b$ are the semi-major
483: and semi-minor axis, respectively) and the position angle PA, measured from
484: North to East.
485:
486: The derived surface brightness profiles should be used with caution,
487: for the following reasons.
488: %
489: First, \eso{}'s irregular and lopsided morphology renders any
490: azimuthally-averaged profile at best a modest representation of its
491: two-dimensional light distribution.
492: %
493: Second, many bright foreground stars are present in the field of
494: \eso{}. Particularly troublesome is the bright
495: star \object{TYC\,7075-383-1} located near the North-East edge of the
496: central
497: bar at ($\alpha=06^{\rm h}05^{\rm m}47\fs6$,
498: $\delta=-33\degr04\arcmin41\farcs5$; J2000),
499: which has $B=12.1\pm 0.1$ and $V=11.4\pm 0.1$~mag (\citealt{k01}).
500: %
501: The most elegant way to remove the foreground stars is to subtract
502: the stellar profiles from the image.
503: However, the brightest stars in the field are saturated and
504: show bleeding effects even in our shortest exposures,
505: so we masked out the brightest foreground stars, and interpolated
506: the surface brightness in the masked regions.
507: As the images in each of the three filters have a comparable resolution, the
508: same
509: regions were used for all filters.
510:
511: Mainly because of \eso{}'s irregular morphology, it was difficult to
512: obtain reliable and stable fits for the whole range of possible semi-major
513: axes
514: ($3\arcsec$ to $155\arcsec$). Our results are shown in
515: Figures~\ref{fig:opt_sbp}--\ref{fig:opt_color}.
516: The $I$-band images are less deep because of the relatively bright
517: background.
518: In order to get meaningful colors, the ellipses were fitted on
519: the $B$ image only and imposed on the $V$ and $I$ band images. One can see
520: that the
521: ellipticity and position angle of the ellipses were successfully
522: fitted over a limited range of semi-major axes only, $15\arcsec\la a
523: \la83\arcsec$. For lack of a better prescription, they are assumed
524: constant outside of those limits.
525:
526: %
527: \begin{figure}[tb]
528: \resizebox{0.9\hsize}{!}{\includegraphics{ps/fig3.eps}}
529: \caption{The azimuthally-averaged surface brightness profiles of
530: \eso{} in the $B$ band ({\em solid curve}), the $V$ band ({\em dashed
531: curve}) and the $I$ band ({\em dotted curve}).
532: The error bars indicate the $1\sigma$ formal errors.
533: Systematic errors due to the irregular morphology of \eso{} are probably
534: much larger.
535: The dotted lines indicate the semi-major axis of \eso{}
536: at the $B=25$ and $26.5$~mag\,arcsec$^{-2}$ isophotes, respectively:
537: $\rtf = 1\farcm27 \pm 0\farcm03$ and $\rhol = 2\farcm30 \pm 0\farcm08$. }
538: \label{fig:opt_sbp}
539: \end{figure}
540: %
541: %
542: \begin{figure}[tb]
543: \resizebox{0.9\hsize}{!}{\includegraphics{ps/fig4.eps}}
544: \caption{Ellipticity $\epsilon$ ({\em top}) and position angle PA ({\em
545: bottom})
546: profiles of \eso{}, derived with the azimuthally-averaged
547: $B$ surface brightness profile shown in
548: Figure~\ref{fig:opt_sbp}.
549: Due to the irregular morphology of \eso{} it was not possible to
550: successfully fit ellipses at radii larger than $83\arcsec$.
551: $\epsilon$ and PA are assumed
552: to be constant for radii larger than this value.
553: The error bars indicate $1\sigma$ formal errors.
554: Systematic errors due to the irregular morphology of \eso{} are probably
555: much larger.
556: The dotted lines in both panels indicate the ellipticity and position
557: angle at radii $\rtf$ and $\rhol$.
558: }
559: \label{fig:opt_epa}
560: \end{figure}
561: %
562: %
563: \begin{figure}[tb]
564: \resizebox{0.9\hsize}{!}{\includegraphics{ps/fig5.eps}}
565: \caption{Color profiles of \eso{}, derived from the
566: azimuthally-averaged surface brightness profiles shown in
567: Figure~\ref{fig:opt_sbp}: $B-V$ ({\em solid curve}), $V-I$ ({\em dashed
568: curve}) and $B-I$ ({\em dotted curve}). The error bars indicate the
569: $1\sigma$ formal errors.
570: Systematic errors due to the irregular morphology of \eso{} are probably
571: much larger.
572: Vertical dotted lines are plotted at radii $\rtf$ and $\rhol$.}
573: \label{fig:opt_color}
574: \end{figure}
575: %
576:
577: The light profiles are approximately exponential over most of the
578: optical extent ($a \la 135\arcsec$), falling off
579: with roughly 1.38 mag\,arcmin$^{-1}$.
580: A break to a steeper fall-off is seen at $a\approx135\arcsec$.
581: A fit to the $B$ profile within that region
582: yields a radial scale length $h_B=50\arcsec \pm 5\arcsec$ and an
583: (uncorrected)
584: extrapolated central surface brightness $\mu_B(0)=23.3$~mag~${\rm
585: arcsec}^{-2}$. The standard criterion for defining low surface
586: brightness galaxies is for the extrapolated central surface brightness
587: (based on the outer exponential disk) to be equal or fainter than
588: $23.0$~mag~${\rm arcsec}^{-2}$ in $B$ (\citealt{impey1997}).
589: Following this definition, \eso{} would qualify as a low surface brightness
590: galaxy.
591: The $B$ surface brightness profile also suggests a radius at
592: the $25$~mag~${\rm arcsec}^{-2}$ isophote of $\rtf=1\farcm27 \pm 0.03$,
593: identical to the values listed in HyperLEDA\footnote{HyperLEDA:
594: http://leda.univ-lyon1.fr~.} and the \citeauthor{vetal91}. The
595: Holmberg radius (defined at the $26.5$~mag~${\rm arcsec}^{-2}$
596: isophote in $B$; see \citealt{holmberg1958}) is $\rhol=2\farcm30 \pm
597: 0\farcm08$.
598:
599: Over most of the disk $B-V =0.4 \pm 0.08$~mag, slightly bluer in the very
600: inner and outer parts. This is marginally bluer than the \lmc{}
601: ($B-V=0.51$~mag; HyperLEDA) but similar to \object{NGC~4618} (SBm;
602: \citealt{o91}). The $V-I$ color increases from $0.85 \pm 0.08$~mag in the
603: inner parts
604: to $1.3 \pm 0.1$~mag in the outer parts, again similar to \object{NGC~4618}.
605:
606: Constructing growth curves from the surface brightness profiles shown
607: in Figure~\ref{fig:opt_sbp}, the extrapolated total apparent magnitudes
608: are $B_{\rm T}=13.8 \pm 0.1$, $V_{\rm T}=13.5 \pm 0.1$ and $I_{\rm T} = 12.4
609: \pm 0.15$~mag, in good
610: agreement with the values listed in the \citeauthor{vetal91}
611: ($B_{\rm T}=13.58\pm0.21$~mag), HyperLEDA ($B_{\rm T}=13.81\pm0.22$~mag) and
612: The Surface
613: Photometry Catalogue of the ESO-Uppsala Galaxies ($B_{\rm
614: T}=13.6\pm0.1$~mag;
615: \citealt{lv89}). Correcting for Galactic extinction following
616: \citet{sfd98}, but neglecting the inclination-dependent internal
617: absorption, we obtain the following corrected total apparent magnitudes:
618: $B_{\rm c}\approx13.6\pm 0.1$, $V_{\rm c}\approx13.4$ and $I_{\rm
619: c}\approx12.3$~mag.
620: %
621: % HI Data
622: %
623: \section{\hi{} Radio Synthesis Data\label{sec:hi}}
624: %
625: % HI Observations and Data Reduction
626: %
627: \subsection{Observations and Data Reduction\label{sec:hi_datared}}
628:
629: Radio synthesis data of \eso{} were obtained with four
630: different configurations of the Australia Telescope Compact Array
631: (ATCA). Full $12$~hour syntheses were obtained with the 375, 750C and
632: 750E arrays, while shorter observations ($3$--$4$~hour on-source) were
633: also obtained twice in the 1.5D array. Antenna CA06, providing the
634: longest possible baselines, was not used in the 375, 750C and 750E
635: arrays. Both \hi{} line and continuum data (centered at
636: $1380$~MHz) were obtained simultaneously in two polarizations, but
637: only the line data will be discussed here. In the 375, 750C and 750E
638: configurations, $512$~channels in each polarization were used, each
639: $1.65$~\kms{} wide, for a total bandwidth of
640: $844$~\kms{}. In the 1.5D configuration, $256$~channels of
641: $6.60$~\kms{} width were used in each polarization for a total
642: coverage of $1689$~\kms{}. These and other relevant observing
643: parameters are listed in Table~\ref{tab:radio_par}.
644:
645: %
646: \begin{table}[tb]
647: \caption{Parameters of the ATCA \hi{} observations. Observations were
648: obtained in four different configurations, and combined (see
649: \S~\ref{tab:radio_datasets}) for analysis.}
650: \label{tab:radio_par}
651: \begin{tabular}{p{2.2cm}p{2.5cm}p{3cm}}
652: \hline
653: \hline
654: ATCA~array & Date of obs. & Maximum baseline \\
655: \hline
656: 375 & 1997 Oct~3--4 & $459$~m\\
657: 750C & 1997 Oct~25--26 & $750$~m\\
658: 750E & 1998 May~30 & $643$~m\\
659: 1.5D & 1997 Mar~8, 10 & $3000$~m\\
660: \hline
661: \hline
662: \\
663: \hline
664: \hline
665: Property & 1.5D array & 375, 750C,
666: 750E arrays \\
667: \hline
668: Primary~beam & HPBW$\approx33\arcmin$ &
669: HPBW$\approx33\arcmin$ \\
670: Correlator & FULL\_8\_512-128 &
671: FULL\_4\_1024-128 \\
672: Channel width & $31.3$~kHz & $7.8$~kHz
673: \\
674: & ($6.60$~\kms{}) &
675: ($1.65$~\kms{}) \\
676: Bandwidth & $8.00$~MHz & $4.00$~MHz
677: \\
678: & ($1689$~\kms{}) &
679: ($844$~\kms{}) \\
680: Flux~calibrator & \object{PKS~1934-638} &
681: \object{PKS~1934-638} \\
682: Phase~calibrator & \object{PKS~0614-349} &
683: \object{PKS~0614-349} \\
684: \hline
685: \hline
686: \end{tabular}\\
687: Note: Antenna CA06 was not used with the 375, 750C and 750E arrays.\\
688: \end{table}
689: %
690:
691: The data were reduced using standard procedures in {\tt
692: MIRIAD}\footnote{{\tt MIRIAD} was developed by the Australia Telescope
693: National Facility (ATNF) which is part of the Commonwealth Scientific
694: and Industrial Research Organization (CSIRO) of Australia.}
695: (\citealt{stw95}) and visualized with {\tt KARMA} (\citealt{g95}). The
696: strong source \object{PKS~1934-638} (\citealt{reynolds1994}) was observed once
697: briefly in each
698: configuration for use as a flux calibrator. \object{PKS~0614-349},
699: located $1\degr26\arcmin$ to the South-East of
700: \eso{}, was observed roughly every $50$~minutes for use as
701: a complex gain and bandpass calibrator.
702:
703: The (ATCA-specific) self-interference channels were first removed, after
704: which
705: the line data were transformed to heliocentric rest frame and Hanning
706: smoothed. Bad data, mostly due to short duration interference, was
707: then masked out manually and the flux density, complex gains, and bandpass
708: were calibrated. The continuum emission was subtracted in the $uv$ plane
709: using a linear fit to line-free channels on each side of
710: \eso{}'s emission (excluding bandpass-affected
711: channels), and the $uv$ data were then imaged to create dirty
712: cubes.
713:
714: Both uniform- and natural-weighted cubes were created and
715: a $33\arcmin\times33\arcmin$ box (equal to the primary beam
716: diameter) was imaged. In each case the pixel size was chosen to sample the
717: synthesized beam with 2 to 3~pixels.
718: %
719: The four datacubes used in our analysis are listed in
720: Table~\ref{tab:radio_datasets},
721: and are hereafter abbreviated as NH (naturally-weighted, high-sensitivity
722: datacube),
723: UH (uniformly weighted, high-sensitivity datacube), NL (naturally weighted,
724: low-sensitivity
725: datacube) and UL (uniformly weighted, low-sensitivity datacube).
726: %
727: For datacubes UH and NH we merge the 375, 750C and 750E arrays only, while
728: for
729: datacubes UL and NL we combine the data for all arrays.
730: Note that the low-sensitivity datasets (NL and UL) have a significantly
731: higher spatial resolution. In the analysis below we use the
732: the high-sensitivity datasets for global properties
733: and the high-resolution datasets for the small-scale morphology.
734: %
735: Table~\ref{tab:radio_datasets} lists
736: the root-mean-square (rms) noise
737: per channel and synthesized beam for each dataset.
738: When considering the noise levels reached, one
739: should remember that the channel width for the 1.5D observations was
740: four times as large as that for the other arrays, although these
741: observations were regridded onto the narrower $1.65$~\kms{}
742: channels when combined with the shorter arrays.
743:
744: %
745: \begin{table*}[tb]
746: \caption{Properties of the four datacubes used in our analysis. For the
747: analysis of the detailed morphology of \eso{} we use the long-baseline
748: datacubes NL and UL, which have a high spatial resolution. For the
749: derivation of the global structure of \eso{} we use the datacubes~NH and UH,
750: which contain only the short baseline observations. The latter datasets are
751: therefore deeper than the former, but have lower spatial resolutions. }
752: \label{tab:radio_datasets}
753: \begin{tabular}{lllclccr}
754: \hline
755: \hline
756: Datacube & Properties & Arrays used & Pixel & Weighting & rms
757: noise & \multicolumn{2}{l}{Beam properties} \\
758: & & & size & & per channel & FWHM &
759: \multicolumn{1}{c}{$\varphi$} \\
760: & & & (arcsec) & & (mJy beam$^{-1}$) & (arcsec) &
761: \multicolumn{1}{c}{(deg)} \\
762: \hline
763: Datacube NH & high sensitivity, low resolution & 375, 750C and 750E &
764: $16\times16$ & natural & $2.0$ & $132\times70$ & $ -1$ \\
765: Datacube UH & high sensitivity, low resolution & 375, 750C and 750E &
766: $16\times16$ & uniform & $3.3$ & $72\times45$ & $ 0$ \\
767: Datacube NL & low sensitivity, high resolution & All arrays &
768: $4\times4$ & natural & $1.5$ & $58\times38$ & $ +8$ \\
769: Datacube UL & low sensitivity, high resolution & All arrays &
770: $4\times4$ & uniform & $2.6$ & $21\times10$ & $+30$ \\
771: \hline
772: \end{tabular}
773: \end{table*}
774: %
775:
776: The Clark Clean algorithm (\citealt{c80}) was used for the
777: deconvolution, cleaning an area tightly encompassing the emission in
778: each channel. The maps were cleaned until the total cleaned flux
779: stopped increasing, typically at a depth of $2.5$ times the rms noise
780: per channel, which was sufficient to remove all sidelobes. The clean
781: components were then restored and added to the residuals using a
782: Gaussian clean beam as listed in Table~\ref{tab:radio_datasets} (and
783: resulting from a fit to the inner parts of the dirty beam). Channel
784: maps of datacube~UL (with the best spatial resolution)
785: are shown in Figure~\ref{fig:chan_maps}, where each
786: map displayed is the average of $5$ channels to increase
787: sensitivity.
788:
789: %
790: \begin{figure*}[tb]
791: \centering
792: \includegraphics[width=17cm]{ps/fig6.eps}
793: \caption{\hi{} channel maps of \eso{} for datacube~UL
794: (see Table~\ref{tab:radio_datasets}).
795: Each map is the average of
796: $5$ channels to increase the sensitivity ($8.25$~\kms{} per
797: map). Contour levels are at $3$, $6$, $9$ and $12$ times the rms
798: noise in each map ($1.2$~mJy~beam). The
799: heliocentric velocity range of each map is indicated in the top-left
800: corner. The synthesized beam is $21\arcsec\times10\arcsec$ with a
801: position angle of $30\degr$, and is indicated in the bottom-right panel. }
802: \label{fig:chan_maps}
803: \end{figure*}
804: %
805:
806:
807: %
808: % Global HI Profile
809: %
810: \subsection{Global \hi{} Profile\label{sec:glob_hi}}
811:
812: To maximize the flux recovered, the (masked) NH~datacube
813: was used to derive the global profile of
814: \eso{}, which is shown in Figure~\ref{fig:hi_glob_prof}. The
815: linewidth (uncorrected for instrumental broadening) at $20\%$ of the
816: peak is $\Delta V^{\rm obs}_{20}=89 \pm 2$~\kms{}, while that at $50\%$
817: $\Delta V^{\rm obs}_{50}=73 \pm 2$~\kms{}. We adopt a systemic velocity,
818: taken
819: to be the midpoint of the velocities at $20\%$ of the peak, of $V_{\rm
820: sys}=784 \pm 2$~\kms{}. An intensity-weighted mean of the entire
821: profile gives $\langle V \rangle=785 \pm 2$~\kms{},
822: consistent with the former value.
823: %
824: \citet{lhgmw82} obtained $\langle V\rangle=790\pm5$~\kms{} and $\Delta
825: V_{50}=85\pm10$~\kms{}
826: from Parkes Telescope data (HPBW$=15\arcmin$). Both values are in good
827: agreement
828: with our observations, especially considering that the slightly lower
829: spectral resolution
830: of \citet{lhgmw82} may have led to a mild overestimation of $\Delta V_{50}$.
831: %
832: \citet{hkk01} list $\langle V \rangle=787\pm3$~\kms{} and
833: $\Delta V_{50}=65$~\kms{} from HIPASS, also using Parkes.
834:
835: %
836: \begin{figure}[tb]
837: \includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth,height=!]{ps/fig7.eps}
838: \caption{The global \hi{} profile of \eso{}
839: ({\em solid line}), obtained from
840: datacube~NH by integrating the individual channel maps over the area
841: containing emission. The total \hi{} flux is $F_\hi=23.1\pm
842: 1.2$~\jykms{}.
843: The HIPASS global profile summed over
844: a $40\arcmin\times40\arcmin$ area is overplotted ({\em dotted line}).
845: For clarity, the error bars for our ATCA data are only plotted for each
846: fourth channel.
847: }
848: \label{fig:hi_glob_prof}
849: \end{figure}
850: %
851:
852: After integration over the full profile in Figure~\ref{fig:hi_glob_prof}, we
853: find a total \hi{} flux $F_\hi=23.1\pm1.2$~\jykms{}.
854: %
855: \citet{lhgmw82} obtained
856: $36\pm4$~\jykms{} but \citet{hkk01} list $13.7$~\jykms{},
857: while \citet{ketal04} and \citet{metal04} respectively quote
858: $17.6\pm2.5$ and $17.2$~\jykms{} from HIPASS data
859: (the latter HIPASS measurements were obtained under the assumption that
860: \eso{} is a point source).
861: It is thus unclear from those if our synthesis
862: observations are missing any short spacing flux or not. We reanalyzed
863: the HIPASS archive observations ourselves, summing the data in a
864: $40\arcmin\times40\arcmin$ box, and we find a total \hi{} flux of
865: $21.8\pm1.0$~\jykms{}, still lower than the result of
866: \citet{lhgmw82} but consistent with our own ATCA measurement. This
867: HIPASS global profile is also shown in Figure~\ref{fig:hi_glob_prof}.
868:
869: Additional uncertainties in the \hi{} flux include the
870: possibility of \hi{} self-absorption and the existence of dense
871: gas clumps associated with the apparently diffuse \hi{} gas
872: (\citealt{grenier2005}). Given that $N_\hi/\tau \approx T_s~\Delta~v)$,
873: where $N_\hi$ is the column density, $\tau$ the opacity, $T_s$ the spin
874: temperature, and $\tau$ and $T_s$ are correlated (\citealt{dickey1990}),
875: it is not easy to calculate a definite upper limit for $N_\hi$
876: even from the line analysis. Simplifications can however be made using
877: the isophotal axis ratio as a measure of the disk inclination
878: (\citealt{giovanelli1994}). The correction factor, $(a/b)^{0.12}$, for
879: the disk of \eso{} is about $1.1$, so this effect is likely
880: small; we have not corrected for \hi{} self-absorption above.
881:
882: The ATCA global profile shown in Figure~\ref{fig:hi_glob_prof} appears
883: asymmetric, with more \hi{} at higher velocities. This
884: behaviour is common among late-type dwarfs (e.g.\
885: \citealt{rs94,sahs02}). \cite{schoenmakers1997} have developed
886: a complex algorithm to quantify asymmetry using Fourier techniques.
887: In our analysis, however, we restrict ourselves to the
888: standard moment maps, and
889: quantify the importance of the asymmetry with the parameter
890: %
891: \begin{equation}
892: \label{eq:hi_asym}
893: Q_{\rm asym}\equiv\frac{\left|\,\int_{-\infty}^{V_{\rm
894: sys}}I(v)\,dv-\int_{V_{\rm sys}}^{\infty}I(v)\,dv\,\right|}
895: {\int_{-\infty}^{\infty}I(v)\,dv}=1.7\% \,,
896: \end{equation}
897: %
898: where $I(\nu)$ is the flux as a function of frequency $\nu$.
899: In the expression above, we adopted integration limits of $720$ and
900: $860$~\kms{}, respectively (as for the mean velocity and total
901: fluxes above). The global profile asymmetry of \eso{}
902: is thus mild and the HIPASS data show an even milder asymmetry.
903: %
904: % HI Moments and Rotation Curve
905: %
906: \subsection{\hi{} Moments and Rotation Curve\label{sec:rot_cur}}
907:
908: Moment maps were derived in the standard manner from the cleaned cubes
909: of the datasets listed in Table~\ref{tab:radio_datasets}.
910: Figures~\ref{fig:hi_mom0}--\ref{fig:hi_mom2} show the total
911: \hi{} map, the velocity field and the velocity dispersion
912: field for the high-resolution dataset, both uniform and
913: natural-weighted. All significant emission is contiguous so a mask was
914: derived from the zeroth moments and applied to the others.
915:
916: %
917: \begin{figure}[tb]
918: \resizebox{0.9\hsize}{!}{\includegraphics{ps/fig8a.eps}}
919: \vspace*{0.25cm}\\
920: \resizebox{0.9\hsize}{!}{\includegraphics{ps/fig8b.eps}}
921: \caption{Total \hi{} maps of \eso{} for
922: the low sensitivity (high resolution) datacubes.
923: {\em Top:} UL isodensity contours
924: overlaid on a grayscale representation. The contours represent $1$,
925: $2$ and $4$ times the faintest contour of
926: $50$~mJy~beam$^{-1}$~\kms{} or $2.65\times10^{20}$~cm$^{-2}$.
927: {\em Bottom:}
928: NL contours overlaid on a DSS image. The
929: contours represent $1$, $5$, $10$, $15$, $20$, $25$ and $30$ times the
930: faintest contour of $80$~mJy~beam$^{-1}$~\kms{} or
931: $0.4\times10^{20}$~cm$^{-2}$. The contours generally increase toward
932: the center and the synthesized beam is indicated in the bottom-left
933: corner of each map.
934: }
935: \label{fig:hi_mom0}
936: \end{figure}
937: %
938: %
939: \begin{figure}[tb]
940: \resizebox{0.9\hsize}{!}{\includegraphics{ps/fig9a.eps}}
941: \vspace*{0.25cm}\\
942: \resizebox{0.9\hsize}{!}{\includegraphics{ps/fig9b.eps}}
943: \caption{Same as Figure~\ref{fig:hi_mom0} but for the velocity fields of
944: \eso{}. The isovelocity contours increase toward the North-East
945: and cover the velocity range $750$--$820$~\kms{} in both
946: panels. The contours are spaced by $10$~\kms{} ({\em top}) and
947: $5$~\kms{} ({\em bottom}).}
948: \label{fig:hi_mom1}
949: \end{figure}
950: %
951: %
952: \begin{figure}[tb]
953: \resizebox{0.9\hsize}{!}{\includegraphics{ps/fig10a.eps}}
954: \vspace*{0.25cm}\\
955: \resizebox{0.9\hsize}{!}{\includegraphics{ps/fig10b.eps}}
956: \caption{Same as Figure~\ref{fig:hi_mom0} but for the velocity
957: dispersion fields of \eso{}. The contours generally
958: increase toward the center and represent $2$ and $6$~\kms{}
959: ({\em top}) (unreliable) and $8$ and $12$~\kms{} ({\em bottom}).}
960: \label{fig:hi_mom2}
961: \end{figure}
962: %
963:
964: The total \hi{} maps (Figure~\ref{fig:hi_mom0}) show that the
965: \hi{} roughly follows the optical light, although slightly offset
966: to the North-East, and has the same asymmetries. The map from datacube~UL
967: shows very well that the \hi{} is
968: concentrated along the main bar and the one-arm spiral, although there
969: is a third component intermediate between those two in terms of
970: position, length, and mass. While this third component has a stellar
971: counterpart where it joins with the bar, this does not appear to be
972: the case over its entire length. The velocity fields
973: (Figure~\ref{fig:hi_mom1}) reveal solid-body rotation over the entire
974: optical extent, a common feature among dwarf irregular galaxies (e.g.\
975: \citealt{bmh96,s99}). Interestingly, no kinematic lopsidedness is
976: present and the one-arm spiral has no obvious influence on the
977: kinematics, although this may simply be related to the poor spatial
978: resolution of most maps. The rotation curve appears to flatten at the
979: largest radii and a kink in the kinematic major-axis suggests the
980: presence of a warp in the outer parts. The velocity dispersion is
981: $8$--$16$~\kms{}
982: over most of the galaxy
983: (Figure~\ref{fig:hi_mom2}), the higher values being reached over the
984: optical bar and the third component.
985:
986: The {\tt GIPSY}\footnote{Groningen Image Processing System.}
987: (\citealt{htbzr92,vt01}) implementation of \rotcur{}
988: (\citealt{b87}) was used for rotation curve fitting. The target was
989: divided into concentric tilted rings, each approximately half a
990: beam width wide, and at first all six parameters describing each ring
991: were left free: the center coordinates ($x_0$,$y_0$), systemic velocity
992: $V_{\rm sys}$,
993: inclination $i$, position angle of the kinematic major-axis
994: $\phi$ and rotation velocity $V_{\rm rot}$. After a few trials with
995: the velocity field of the NL~datacube, the systemic
996: velocity was fixed to $V_{\rm sys}=784$~\kms{},
997: and the center coordinates were fixed at
998: $(\alpha=6^{\rm h}05^{\rm m}43\fs4, \delta=-33\degr04\arcmin31\arcsec$;
999: J2000).
1000:
1001: As the inclination is only loosely constrained by the observations,
1002: we fixed it at the HyperLEDA value of $i=70\fdg5$. This value for the
1003: inclination
1004: depends on the assumed thickness of \eso{}, but is consistent with the
1005: values returned by \rotcur{} in our first trials, and
1006: is likely a good approximation of the true inclination of \eso{}.
1007: %
1008: For an oblate galaxy with semi-major axis $a$ and semi-minor axis $c$, the
1009: relation between
1010: the intrinsic thickness $q_0 \equiv c/a$ and the projected axis ratio $q$
1011: is given by
1012: %
1013: \begin{equation}
1014: \cos^2 i = \frac{q^2-q_0^2}{1-q_0^2}
1015: \end{equation}
1016: %
1017: (e.g. \citealt{bgpv83}).
1018: For an intrinsic thickness $q_0=0.2$ (\citealt{holmberg1946}),
1019: an inclination $i=70\fdg5$ implies a projected
1020: axis ratio $q=0.38$, consistent with our observations at large radii
1021: (e.g.\ Figures~\ref{fig:opt_epa} and \ref{fig:hi_mom0}). In any case,
1022: the rotation velocities can easily be scaled for other inclination
1023: values.
1024:
1025:
1026: %
1027: \begin{figure}[tb]
1028: \includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{ps/fig11.eps}
1029: \caption{The rotation curve of \eso{} as derived from the
1030: tilted-ring model described in the text, overlaid on a grayscale of
1031: the major-axis position-velocity diagram
1032: (datacube~NL; beam size $58\arcsec \times 38\arcsec$).
1033: The data points at radii larger than $2\farcm3$ are obtained from
1034: datacube~NH (beam size $132\arcsec \times 70\arcsec$), which has
1035: a higher sensitivity.
1036: The solid curve shows the fit to the whole
1037: velocity field, while the crosses show the fit
1038: to the approaching side ({\em left}) and receding side ({\em right})
1039: of the galaxy only.
1040: Contour levels are overlaid at 7.5, 20, 40, 60 and 80~mJy beam$^{-1}$.
1041: Rotational velocities are {\it not} corrected for the uncertain
1042: inclination. For an inclination $i=70\fdg5$ (HyperLEDA),
1043: the rotation curve must be scaled up by $6\%$.
1044: }
1045: \label{fig:vrot}
1046: \end{figure}
1047: %
1048:
1049: With the values of $(x_0,y_0)$, $V_{\rm sys}$ and $i$ are fixed,
1050: we fit for the kinematic position angle $\phi$ and
1051: rotation velocity $V_{\rm rot}$ as a function of semi-major axis position
1052: $a$ using datacube NL.
1053: The fitted position angle
1054: is consistent with $\phi = 60\degr \pm 5\degr$ over the whole semi-major
1055: axis range.
1056: The resulting rotation curve is shown
1057: in Figure~\ref{fig:vrot}, overlaid on a position-velocity diagram taken
1058: along the major-axis. As the \hi{} column density decreases rapidly at large
1059: radii ($a \ga 2\farcm3$), we obtain
1060: our data points at these radii from the high-sensitivity datacube~NH.
1061: The rotation curve is typical of late-type systems, rising in an almost
1062: solid-body manner in the central parts. The maximum rotational
1063: velocity of $V_{\rm rot}\sin i \approx 40$~\kms{} is reached
1064: at $a\approx 2\arcmin$ (the optical extent), corresponding to a
1065: projected distance of $6.3\pm 0.8 $~kpc, and the rotation curve
1066: flattens out at larger radii.
1067: The data hint at a decline in the rotational velocity at radii
1068: $a \ga 2\farcm7$, though deeper \hi{} observations are necessary
1069: to confirm this.
1070: One should however remember that \rotcur{}
1071: assumes axisymmetry (like {\tt Ellipse} for the surface
1072: photometry; see \S~\ref{sec:surf_phot}), which may not be the case in
1073: \eso{}. Our
1074: results may thus be systematically biased.
1075:
1076: %
1077: % Distance Determination and Total Fluxes
1078: %
1079: \section{Distance Determination and Total Fluxes\label{sec:dist_fluxes}}
1080:
1081: No precise determination of the distance to \eso{} is
1082: available in the literature (e.g.\ through Cepheids or the tip of the
1083: red-giant branch), but it can be estimated in several ways.
1084: %
1085: Adopting $H_0=70$~\kms{} and a Local Group infall toward the Virgo cluster
1086: of $208$~\kms{}, HyperLEDA lists a distance of $8.02$~Mpc.
1087: %
1088: For our analysis we adopt the slightly more refined linear Virgocentric flow
1089: model of
1090: \citet{s80}. We derive a distance to \eso{} of $D=10.8\pm1.4$~Mpc
1091: (random errors only), adopting a Virgo distance of $D_{\rm
1092: Virgo}=16.1\pm1.2$~Mpc
1093: (random errors only; \citealt{ketal00}), an observed Virgo redshift
1094: of $V_{\rm Virgo}=1079$~\kms{} (\citealt{eetal98}), a Local Group
1095: Virgocentric infall velocity of $257\pm32$~\kms{},
1096: (\citealt{ahmst82}) and a Virgocentric density contrast $\gamma=2$
1097: (representative of Abell clusters; \citealt{p76}).
1098: An angular separation of
1099: $1\arcmin$ then corresponds to a projected distance $3.1\pm0.4$~kpc.
1100:
1101: At this adopted distance, the total \hi{} flux $F_{\rm
1102: HI}=23.1\pm1.2$~\jykms{}
1103: (see \S~\ref{sec:hi_datared})
1104: corresponds to a total \hi{} mass $M_{\rm HI}=(6.4\pm1.7)\times10^8$~$\msun$.
1105: > From the corrected total apparent
1106: magnitudes listed in \S~\ref{sec:surf_phot} (corrected for Galactic
1107: extinction but not internal absorption), we derive the following
1108: corrected absolute magnitudes: $M_B=-16.6\pm0.3$, $M_V=-16.8\pm0.3$
1109: and $M_I=-17.9\pm0.3$~mag. This is more than a magnitude fainter than the
1110: absolute magnitude of the \lmc{} listed in HyperLEDA
1111: ($M_B=-17.9$~mag). Combining the optical and \hi{} measurements,
1112: we obtain a (distance independent) total \hi{} mass-to-blue-luminosity ratio
1113: $M_\hi/L_B=(0.96\pm0.14)$~$\msun$/$\lsunblue$,
1114: roughly five times larger than that of the \lmc{}
1115: based on HyperLEDA's entries
1116: ($M_\hi/L_B=0.18$~$\msun$/$\lsunblue$). This is consistent with
1117: \eso{} being of later type than the \lmc{}, although the total
1118: \hi{} flux of the \lmc{} is highly dependent on the
1119: area considered, given the presence of the Magellanic bridge
1120: (e.g.\ \citealt{puetal98,bruns2005}).
1121: %
1122: % Discussion
1123: %
1124: \section{Discussion\label{sec:discussion}}
1125: %
1126: % Structure of ESO364-G029
1127: %
1128: \subsection{Structure of \eso{} and a Comparison to the
1129: \lmc{}\label{sec:structure}}
1130:
1131: Figures~\ref{fig:dss}--\ref{fig:opt_images} reveal an irregular but
1132: characteristic optical morphology for Magellanic-type dwarf
1133: galaxies. Indeed, the main body of \eso{} exhibits a
1134: bar-like morphology, from which protrudes a one-arm spiral circling
1135: the galaxy by at least $90\degr$, possibly more. This structure is
1136: sharpest in the bluer bands, suggesting that it is associated with
1137: relatively young stars and possibly ongoing star
1138: formation. Narrow-band \halpha{} imaging would be particularly useful
1139: to confirm this latter point. Despite the irregular morphology,
1140: however, the azimuthally-averaged optical profiles are approximately
1141: exponential up to $a\approx135\arcsec$, after which they fall off more
1142: rapidly (see Figure~\ref{fig:opt_sbp}).
1143:
1144: In our total \hi{} map of datacube UL, the \hi{} distribution has a
1145: radial extent of at least $2\farcm8$ (corresponding to a column
1146: density of $0.4\times10^{20}$~cm$^{-2}$; see Figure~\ref{fig:hi_mom0}),
1147: thus extending to at least $2.2~\rtf$ or $1.2~\rhol$. This
1148: is fairly typical of dwarf irregular galaxies (e.g. \citealt{h97}).
1149: The \hi{} is also asymmetric, the column density
1150: falling off more steeply to the South-East than the North-West, and the
1151: absolute
1152: peak being slightly offset to the North-East. Both
1153: effects are common in late-type dwarf galaxies (see, e.g.,
1154: \citealt{sahs02}).
1155:
1156: The \hi{} distribution is also slightly offset compared to the
1157: optical in all our maps, being shifted toward the North-East, and the
1158: \hi{} kinematic center does not correspond to the optical center as
1159: defined by the surface photometry. The latter displacement is about
1160: $23\arcsec$, corresponding to a projected distance of $1.2 \pm 0.2$~kpc.
1161: This effect is present in a number of Magellanic-type
1162: galaxies (e.g.\ \citealt{vf72}). In particular, there are strong
1163: indications in the \lmc{} that the kinematic center derived from
1164: the \hi{} (e.g.\ \citealt{ketal98}) is very different from that
1165: of the main disk, as traced by the distribution of red giant branch
1166: (RGB) and asymptotic giant branch (AGB) stars (\citealt{m01}) or the
1167: kinematics of intermediate-age carbon stars (\citealt{mahs02};
1168: \citealt{olsen2007}), while
1169: the morphological centers derived from those latter tracers are in
1170: rough agreement with each other (\citealt{wn01}). Evidence is also
1171: gathering that the \lmc{} is intrinsically elongated
1172: (\citealt{mc01}; \citealt{marel2006}), presumably due to the tidal force
1173: from the Milky Way
1174: (\citealt{m01}; \citealt{mastropietro2005}).
1175: For a distant galaxy, this would translate in
1176: different kinematic and photometric major axes.
1177: Given the uncertainties in the position angle, however, no significant
1178: difference is seen between the photometric and kinematic position
1179: angle profiles of \eso{} (Figures~\ref{fig:opt_epa} and
1180: \ref{fig:hi_mom1}).
1181:
1182: The rotation curve of \eso{} rises smoothly and reaches
1183: a value of about $V_{\rm rot} \sin i = 40$~\kms{} in the outer parts
1184: (Figure~\ref{fig:vrot}). In comparison, the rotation of the \lmc{}
1185: shows a sudden decline after its peak velocity $V_{\rm rot}
1186: \approx63$~\kms{}
1187: at $a=2.4$~kpc (\citealt{ketal98}).
1188: An inclination of about $40\degr$ is expected if
1189: \eso{} is to have the same rotation as the
1190: \lmc{}. This however appears unlikely given the relatively high apparent
1191: ellipticity observed (Figures~\ref{fig:opt_epa} and
1192: \ref{fig:hi_mom0}). Even the lowest optical ellipticity measured
1193: ($\epsilon_{\rm min}=0.4$; see Figure~\ref{fig:opt_epa}) is inconsistent
1194: with such a low inclination, for any intrinsic disk thickness (e.g.\
1195: \citealt{bgpv83}). As a disk with an intrinsically high ellipticity is
1196: unlikely, it is almost certain that \eso{}
1197: is less massive than the \lmc{} over the range of radii probed.
1198: Interestingly however, the total \hi{} mass of
1199: \eso{} is about a third higher than that of the
1200: \lmc{} ($\approx (4.8\pm0.2)\times10^8$~$\msun$;
1201: \citealt{skchk03}), resulting in a significantly larger
1202: \hi{} mass-to-blue-luminosity ratio
1203: $M_\hi/L_B=(0.96\pm0.14)$~$\msun$/$\lsunblue$
1204: for \eso{} (see \S~\ref{sec:dist_fluxes}).
1205:
1206: Despite a number of similarities between the optical and \hi{}
1207: content of \eso{} and the \lmc{}, one large
1208: and surprising difference exists. The medium- and large-scale
1209: \hi{} structure of the \lmc{} is very regular, bearing
1210: little resemblance to the optical structure and lacking any obvious trace of
1211: the
1212: main bar (e.g.\ \citealt{puetal98,ketal03}). As stated above, however,
1213: the \hi{} distribution of \eso{} is highly
1214: asymmetric and roughly follows its optical morphology. In particular,
1215: and as best shown in the \hi{} map (Figure~\ref{fig:hi_mom0}), the \hi{} is
1216: concentrated along the main bar and appears to follow the one-arm
1217: spiral to the North-West, in addition to a third intermediate component
1218: (also
1219: with an optical counterpart, at least partially). We have no
1220: explanation for these differences in the \hi{} morphology; further
1221: observations
1222: in ATCA $1.5$~km configurations are needed to characterize the
1223: \hi{} morphology of \eso{} better. In this
1224: respect, it would be interesting to see if the optical morphology of
1225: \eso{} remains the same at longer wavelengths or if,
1226: like the \lmc{}, the preponderance of the bar decreases and the
1227: smoothness of the disk increases in the near-infrared (e.g.\
1228: \citealt{m01}, \citealt{meixner2006}). Also of interest is
1229: whether the \hi{} differences arise
1230: from internal processes (e.g.\ supernovae feedback) or from external
1231: factors (e.g.\ tidal interactions). The former appears to dominate the
1232: \hi{} structure of the \lmc{} on small scales
1233: (\citealt{ketal98}; \citealt{ketal03}) and the latter on large scales
1234: (\citealt{puetal98}; \citealt{skchk03}). However, this could be different
1235: for \eso{}.
1236:
1237: Interestingly, the velocity dispersion maps of \eso{}
1238: and the \lmc{} are also somewhat different. In
1239: \eso{}, the highest \hi{} velocity
1240: dispersions are observed along the bar and the third component. In the
1241: \lmc{}, the \hi{} velocity dispersion is higher
1242: along the Eastern edge of the \object{30~Doradus} region and near the dense
1243: molecular clouds extending to the South (\citealt{ketal03}). Both regions
1244: are turbulent due to the combined effects of shocks from ram pressure
1245: on the Galactic halo and the very active star formation near
1246: \object{30~Doradus}. Star formation is probably also at the origin of the high
1247: \hi{} velocity dispersions observed near the North-West end of
1248: the \lmc{} bar and Constellation III (e.g. \ \citealt{efremov1998}).
1249:
1250: %
1251: % Comparison to other galaxies
1252: %
1253: \subsection{Comparison to Other Dwarf Irregulars\label{sec:dirrs}}
1254:
1255: %While the \lmc{} is very similar to \eso{}
1256: %optically, a comparison with other Magellanic spirals and dwarf
1257: %irregular galaxies is of great importance.
1258: %
1259: The optical and \hi{} distributions of \eso{} are typical of those of a
1260: Magellanic dwarf galaxy: a prominent bar and a pronounced single spiral arm
1261: in the optical, an \hi{} distribution extending to about 1.2~Holmberg radii
1262: and a kinematic center offset from the photometric center. Furthermore, our
1263: \hi{} data suggest the presence of numerous shells and holes (see
1264: \S~\ref{sec:shells}).
1265:
1266:
1267: The \hi{} kinematic center of \eso{} is offset by a projected distance of
1268: $1.2\pm 0.2$~kpc from the optical center (as derived from surface
1269: photometry). This offset is known to be present in other Magellanic-type
1270: systems (e.g.\ \citealt{vf72}) such as \object{NGC~925}, which has an offset of
1271: $\approx 1$~kpc (\citealt{pisano1998}), and the \lmc{} (see
1272: \S~\ref{sec:structure}).
1273: %
1274: Additional features in the \hi{} distribution have been detected in
1275: Magellanic dwarfs, such as loops surrounding the galaxy (\object{NGC~4618};
1276: \citealt{bush2004}), external spurs or blobs (e.g. \object{NGC~5169};
1277: \citealt{muhle2005}; \object{UGCA~98}; \citealt{stil2005}) and S-shaped distortions
1278: in the \hi{} velocity field (e.g. \object{NGC~4449}; \citealt{hunter1998}; \object{DDO~43};
1279: \citealt{simpson2005}). Such features, often associated with a recent or
1280: ongoing interaction, are not apparent in the \hi{} distribution of \eso{}.
1281: The origin of the third component identified in \hi{} between the optical
1282: bar and one-arm spiral also remains unclear.
1283: %
1284: Shell- and hole-like structures in the \hi{} distribution, as observed in
1285: \eso{} (see \S~\ref{sec:shells}), are observed in practically all dwarfs.
1286: These structures are commonly thought to be the result of stellar winds and
1287: supernova explosions (e.g. \citealt{weaver1977,mccray1987,pwbr92,ketal99};
1288: but see also \citealt{rswr99,bc02,dib2005}).
1289:
1290:
1291: We find no significant difference between the photometric and kinematic
1292: position angle of \eso{}. \cite{hunter2000} find a similar result in their
1293: \hi{} study of \object{UGC~199}. Many other Magellanic dwarfs, however, show a
1294: significant disagreement between the morphological and kinematic axes, such
1295: as \object{NGC~1156} (\citealt{hetal2002}) and \object{DDO~26} (\citealt{hw02}). \object{DDO~43} even
1296: has a kinematic axis nearly perpendicular to its morphological axis
1297: (\citealt{simpson2005}). \cite{hetal2002} suggest that such apparent
1298: inconsistencies may be explained by the presence of an inclined bar.
1299:
1300: The asymmetry we observe in the global \hi{} profile of \eso{}
1301: is a common characteristic of Magellanic-type galaxies,
1302: often attributed to a recent or ongoing interaction.
1303: \cite{bush2004}, for example, analyse the \hi{} morphology
1304: of the interacting Magellanic spiral galaxies
1305: \object{NGC~4618} and \object{NGC~4625}, particularly in relation to the interaction between
1306: them.
1307: Their \hi{} observations show a loop-like structure around \object{NGC~4618} (the
1308: most
1309: massive of the two), indicating that the outer gas of this galaxy
1310: is strongly perturbed by the recent interaction.
1311: \object{NGC~4625} and the inner part of \object{NGC~4618}, however, appear unaffected by the
1312: interaction.
1313: They find an asymmetry ratio $A=1.0$ for the \hi{} profile of \object{NGC~4618}
1314: and $A=1.29$ for \object{NGC~4625}, where $A$ is defined as the ratio between
1315: the areas under the \hi{} profile at velocities smaller and greater
1316: than the systemic velocity (\citealt{haynes1998}).
1317: Using the same algorithm,
1318: we find an asymmetry ratio $A=1.1$ for \eso{}, which is bracketed by the
1319: values for \object{NGC~4618} and \object{NGC~4625}. However, a similar amount of asymmetry
1320: is detected in non-interacting Magellanic spirals (\citealt{wilcots2004});
1321: an asymmetry measurement alone cannot confirm or reject the hypothesis of
1322: a recent interaction.
1323:
1324: \eso{} exhibits solid-body rotation at small radii, reaches its maximum
1325: rotational velocity of $V_{\rm rot} \sin i \approx 40$~\kms{} at a projected
1326: distance of $\approx 6.4$~kpc from its center, and flattens out at large
1327: radii. This behaviour is similar to that of other Magellanic dwarfs, e.g.
1328: \object{IC~10} ($\approx 35$~\kms{} at 1~kpc; \citealt{wilcots1998}), \object{DDO~43}
1329: ($\approx 30$~\kms{} at 2~kpc; \citealt{simpson2005}) and \object{NGC~4618} ($\approx
1330: 50$~\kms{} at 5~kpc; \citealt{bush2004}), though variations in these
1331: parameters clearly exist.
1332: %
1333: The \hi{} velocity dispersion of \eso{} is $8$--$16$~\kms{}
1334: over most of the galaxy (Figure~\ref{fig:hi_mom2}), which is very similar to
1335: that of other dwarfs.
1336: The Magellanic dwarfs mentioned above exhibit a somewhat higher
1337: velocity dispersion at several locations (including the bar), indicating
1338: recent or
1339: ongoing star formation. For \eso{}, the largest velocity
1340: dispersion is reached over the optical bar and the third component,
1341: which also likely indicates recent star formation in these regions.
1342: %
1343:
1344: \cite{doyle2005} present a search for optical counterparts of HIPASS
1345: sources. Out of the 3618 optical counterparts found, 151~are galaxies with
1346: morphological type IB(s)m, including \eso{}. From their (total) \hi{} fluxes
1347: and $B$-band magnitudes we calculated the \hi{} mass-to-blue-luminosity
1348: ratio $M_\hi/L_B$ for each galaxy. Magellanic dwarf irregular galaxies have
1349: a median value $\langle M_\hi/L_B \rangle =0.97$~$\msun / \lsunblue$, with a
1350: standard deviation of $0.74$~$\msun / \lsunblue$. Thus, \eso{} (with
1351: $M_\hi/L_B=(0.96\pm0.14)$~$\msun / \lsunblue$) is a fairly typical Magellanic
1352: dwarf galaxy in this respect as well.
1353:
1354:
1355: % Group membership
1356: %
1357: \subsection{Group Membership and Origin of the
1358: Asymmetries\label{sec:group_m=1}}
1359:
1360: Tidal interactions in disk galaxies are known to lead to strongly
1361: asymmetric spiral features (e.g.\ \citealt{bsv86,ok90}). The structure of
1362: \object{M51}-like
1363: systems, for example, is often explained by tidal interactions with
1364: a close neighbour (e.g.\ \citealt{hb90,hkbb93,sl00}). While this
1365: mechanism need not be unique, it is interesting to question whether the
1366: large-scale morphology of \eso{} is consistent with a
1367: (trans)formation through tidal interactions, or whether another mechanism
1368: needs to be invoked. Certainly, the break in \eso{}'s light
1369: profile seen at $a\approx135\arcsec$ is consistent with an
1370: interaction, since tidal features typically have sharp boundaries.
1371:
1372: \citet{t88} lists \eso{} as being part of a small group
1373: of $3$ galaxies in the Dorado Cloud, which also includes \object{NGC~2090}
1374: and \object{NGC~2188}. Table~\ref{tab:group} lists all galaxies
1375: with a known redshift within a radius of $5\degr$ of \eso{},
1376: and with a relative radial velocity less than $500$~\kms{},
1377: as found in NED. Only one additional galaxy is
1378: found, \object{AM~0605-341}, although a number of galaxies without
1379: redshift are also present in the $5\degr$ region.
1380: There are thus a number of candidates for
1381: interaction with \eso{}.
1382:
1383: %
1384: \begin{table}[tb]
1385: \caption{Basic properties of galaxies near \eso{}. This table lists
1386: all galaxies with a projected distance differing by less than $5\degr$ and
1387: a redshift differing by less than 500~\kms{} from \eso{}. Only galaxies
1388: with
1389: a known redshift are included.
1390: From left to right, the
1391: columns list the galaxy name, spectral type, total apparent $B$ magnitude
1392: and the angular separation, projected separation
1393: (assuming a distance of 10.8~Mpc), and relative radial velocity from
1394: \eso{}. }
1395: \label{tab:group}
1396: \begin{tabular}{llcrcc}
1397: \hline
1398: \hline
1399: Name & Type & $B_{\rm T}$ & $\Delta\theta$ & $\Delta R$ & $\Delta V_{\rm
1400: sys}$ \\
1401: & & (mag) & & (kpc) & (\kms{}) \\
1402: \hline
1403: \eso{} & IB(s)m & $13.8$ & --- & --- & ---
1404: \\
1405: \object{AM~0605-341} & SBdm & $14.1$ & $70\farcm2$ & $221$ & $-19$
1406: \\
1407: \object{NGC~2188} & SB(s)m & $12.1$ & $82\farcm5$ & $259$ & $-37$
1408: \\
1409: \object{NGC~2090} & SA(rs)b & $12.0$ & $244\farcm0$ & $768$ & $+137$
1410: \\
1411: \hline
1412: \end{tabular}\\
1413: \end{table}
1414: %
1415:
1416: \object{NGC~2090} is the least certain and most distant
1417: member of the group containing \eso{} (among the galaxies
1418: with a measured redshift). Its distance was measured using the Hubble
1419: Space Telescope (HST) and the Cepheid period-luminosity relation,
1420: yielding a distance of $12.3\pm0.9\pm0.9$~Mpc (random and
1421: systematic errors, respectively; \citealt{peetal98}). Although slightly
1422: higher, this
1423: is consistent within the errors with our adopted distance for
1424: \eso{}, a comforting fact given that our estimate for \eso{} was
1425: itself higher than other published values (see
1426: \S~\ref{sec:dist_fluxes}).
1427:
1428: The edge-on galaxy \object{NGC~2188} is rather peculiar, both the
1429: \hi{} and \halpha{} emission bending away from the disk,
1430: leading to a crescent shape not unlike that expected from ram pressure
1431: stripping (\citealt{ddd96}). The \hi{} distribution is
1432: also highly asymmetric with respect to the equatorial plane. The
1433: velocity field shows many peculiarities, with apparent rotation about
1434: two axes. Although not bullet-proof evidence for
1435: interaction, these properties hint at least to a disturbed past. Given
1436: the large separation between \eso{} and \object{NGC~2188}, however, any
1437: interaction with
1438: \eso{} would have occurred a very long time ago
1439: ($>1.25$~Gyr for a relative velocity of $200$~\kms{}). The
1440: evidence for a recent interaction involving \eso{} thus
1441: remains marginal.
1442: %
1443: % Shells and Holes
1444: %
1445: \subsection{\hi{} Shells and Holes\label{sec:shells}}
1446:
1447: Although the current observations are best suited to study the medium
1448: and large-scale structure of the \hi{}, studies of the
1449: small-scale structure in the interstellar medium (ISM) are also of
1450: interest. In particular, the radiation and mechanical energy produced
1451: by stellar winds and supernova explosions are generally thought to
1452: give rise to a very dynamic multi-phase ISM, through the interacting
1453: and continually evolving cavities created. For recent work on the latter
1454: topic,
1455: see, e.g., \cite{kbstn99} and \cite{ab01}. Such shells and holes have indeed
1456: been
1457: observed in nearby large spiral galaxies such as \object{M31} (e.g.\
1458: \citealt{bb86}) and M33 (\citealt{dh90}). Dwarf galaxies
1459: are however better targets for studying these phenomena.
1460: The low gravitational potential well of dwarf
1461: galaxies, the lack of shear due to solid-body rotation and the absence
1462: of density waves all facilitate the expansion and survival of
1463: the shells created. Some of the best examples include the \lmc{}
1464: (SB(s)m; \citealt{ketal98}), \object{IC~2574} (SAB(s)m;
1465: \citealt{wb99}) and \object{Holmberg~II} (Im; \citealt{pwbr92}; but
1466: see also \citealt{rswr99,bc02}).
1467:
1468: The channel maps of datacube~UL
1469: (Figure~\ref{fig:chan_maps}) and the corresponding moment maps
1470: (Figures~\ref{fig:hi_mom0}--\ref{fig:hi_mom2}) of \eso{}
1471: reveal much small-scale structure, suggesting that expanding
1472: shells or holes may be present in \eso{}. Most obvious are the two large
1473: \hi{}
1474: gaps, the first one between the main bar and the so-called
1475: third component, centered at ($\alpha=06^{\rm h}05^{\rm m}44\fs5$,
1476: $\delta=-33\degr04\arcmin10\arcsec$; J2000), and the second one
1477: between the third component and the one-arm spiral, itself perhaps
1478: composed of two smaller holes centered respectively at
1479: ($\alpha=06^{\rm h}05^{\rm m}38\fs7$,
1480: $\delta=-33\degr04\arcmin50\arcsec$) and ($\alpha=06^{\rm h}05^{\rm
1481: m}39\fs9$, $\delta=-33\degr05\arcmin20\arcsec$). These holes raise the
1482: interesting possibility that the third component and the one-arm
1483: spiral may not be caused by large-scale dynamical processes, but may
1484: instead simply represent gas concentrations at the edges of large
1485: cavities, emptied by the supernova explosions and stellar winds
1486: associated with past bursts of star formation. Their optical
1487: counterparts would then trace the location of secondary (i.e.\
1488: triggered and more recent) star formation.
1489:
1490: Despite its relatively large distance, \eso{} is thus a
1491: prime target for studies of star formation feedback and
1492: self-propagating star formation. However, due to the short
1493: integrations with the 1.5D array and the shallowness of the
1494: high-resolution maps, it is hard to convincingly argue that any single
1495: structure is surely due to a (centrally-located) localized energetic
1496: phenomenon. Better quality maps and longer observations with $1.5$~km
1497: or longer arrays are necessary for a proper study of the small-scale
1498: structure of the ISM.
1499: As mentioned before, narrow-band \halpha{} imaging
1500: would be useful to see how current and recent sites of star formation
1501: relate to the \hi{} morphology and kinematics.
1502: %
1503: % Summary
1504: %
1505: \section{Summary and Conclusions\label{sec:summary}}
1506:
1507: We presented the analysis of optical imaging observations and \hi{} radio
1508: synthesis observations of the
1509: dwarf irregular galaxy \eso{}. The optical $BVI$ imaging data reveal a
1510: morphology characteristic
1511: of Magellanic-type spirals
1512: and irregulars, with a large dominant bar and a one-sided spiral or
1513: tidal arm, although the absolute magnitude of \eso{} (for a distance
1514: $D=10.8\pm1.4$~Mpc) is more than a magnitude
1515: fainter than that of the \lmc{}. While poorly-defined, the
1516: azimuthally-averaged
1517: surface brightness profiles show an exponential disk with a possible
1518: break at large radii and colors typical of late-type disk galaxies.
1519:
1520: The radio synthesis observations reveal
1521: an \hi{} disk extending well outside of the optical
1522: extent. The total \hi{} mass is $M_\hi=(6.4\pm 1.7)\times10^8$~$\msun$,
1523: yielding
1524: a (distance independent) \hi{} mass-to-blue-luminosity ratio
1525: $M_\hi/L_B=(0.96\pm0.14)$~$\msun$/$\lsunblue$,
1526: significantly more \hi{}-rich than the \lmc{}. The latter
1527: value is at the high end of the distribution for late-type spirals
1528: (Sc--Sd), but is typical of late-type dwarfs
1529: (\citealt{rh94,sahs02,doyle2005}). The large-scale \hi{}
1530: distribution is also asymmetric and roughly follows the optical light
1531: distribution,
1532: although slightly offset from it. The \hi{} distribution
1533: thus appears consistent with that expected from tidal interactions,
1534: but most evidence for a past encounter is circumstantial. Our highest
1535: spatial resolution maps show that the highest column densities and velocity
1536: dispersions
1537: are reached over the central bar,
1538: the one-arm spiral, and over a third component which also has an
1539: optical counterpart (at least partially). Despite a similar optical
1540: morphology, this is opposite to what is observed in the \lmc{},
1541: where the \hi{} distribution bears little resemblance to that of the
1542: stars. The two galaxies may thus have formed differently, or may
1543: simply be in a different evolutionary stage. The rotation curve of
1544: \eso{} is solid-body over the optical extent but
1545: flattens out at large radii, reaching $V_{\rm rot}\sin i \approx 40$~\kms{}.
1546: The inclination remains poorly constrained by observations, but is
1547: consistent
1548: with the HyperLEDA value $i \approx 70\fdg5$.
1549: Our high-resolution observations also hint at a complex \hi{}
1550: structure, reminiscent of that expected from stellar winds and
1551: supernova explosions. Deeper and higher-resolution
1552: optical and \hi{} observations, as well as \halpha{} observations,
1553: are however necessary to properly characterize the small-scale \hi{}
1554: morphology
1555: and kinematics, and to establish any relationship to star formation.
1556:
1557: The observations presented in this paper provide important information on
1558: the
1559: large-scale optical and \hi{} structure of
1560: \eso{}, and provide a solid foundation for further
1561: investigation of its small-scale structure, particularly in
1562: \hi{} with longer baseline observations. The ultimate
1563: goal is that studies of individual nearby Magellanic galaxies will
1564: yield information on their formation and evolution as a class, but
1565: will also strengthen our understanding of the \lmc{} itself.
1566:
1567: %
1568: % Acknowledgments
1569: %
1570: \begin{acknowledgements}
1571: It is a pleasure to thank Claude Carignan and Ken Freeman
1572: for their support in the initial phase of the work reported here.
1573: TK was supported by NWO under project number 614.041.006 and by
1574: PPARC under grant number PP/D002036/1.
1575: MB acknowledges support from NASA through Hubble Fellowship grant
1576: HST-HF-01136.01 awarded by Space Telescope Science Institute, which is
1577: operated by the Association of Universities for Research in Astronomy,
1578: Inc., for NASA, under contract NAS~5-26555, during much of this
1579: work. MB also acknowledges support from the Astrophysical Research
1580: Center for the Structure and Evolution of the Cosmos (ARCSEC) at
1581: Sejong University while this manuscript was prepared.
1582: SK was supported in part by Korea Science \& Engineering Foundation (KOSEF)
1583: under a cooperative agreement with the Astrophysical Research Center of the
1584: Structure and Evolution of the Cosmos (ARCSEC).
1585: The NASA/IPAC
1586: Extragalactic Database (NED) is operated by the Jet Propulsion
1587: Laboratory, California Institute of Technology, under contract with
1588: the National Aeronautics and Space Administration.
1589: This research made
1590: use of HyperLEDA: http://leda.univ-lyon1.fr\,. The Digitized Sky
1591: Surveys were produced at the Space Telescope Science Institute under
1592: U.S. Government grant NAG W-2166. The images of these surveys are
1593: based on photographic data obtained using the Oschin Schmidt Telescope
1594: on Palomar Mountain and the UK Schmidt Telescope.
1595: \end{acknowledgements}
1596: %
1597: % References
1598: %
1599: \begin{thebibliography}{}
1600: %
1601: \bibitem[Aaronson et al.(1982)]{ahmst82}
1602: Aaronson, M., Huchra, J., Mould, J., Schechter, P.\ L., \& Tully, R.\
1603: B.\ 1982, ApJ, 258, 64
1604: \bibitem[de Avillez \& Berry(2001)]{ab01}
1605: de Avillez, M.\ A., \& Berry, D.\ L.\ 2001, MNRAS, 328, 708
1606: \bibitem[Barnes \& de Blok(2001)]{barnes2001} Barnes, D.~G., \& de
1607: Blok, W.~J.~G.\ 2001, \aj, 122, 825
1608: \bibitem[Begeman(1987)]{b87}
1609: Begeman, K.\ 1987, Ph.D.\ Thesis, Rijksuniversiteit Groningen
1610: \bibitem[Bekki \& Chiba(2006)]{bekki2006} Bekki, K., \& Chiba,
1611: M.\ 2006, astro-ph/0603812
1612: \bibitem[Bessell(1995)]{b95}
1613: Bessell, M.\ S.\ 1995, PASP, 107, 672
1614: \bibitem[de Blok et al.(1996)]{bmh96}
1615: de Blok, W.\ J.\ G., McGaugh, S.\ S., \& van der Hulst, J.\ M.\ 1996,
1616: MNRAS, 283, 18
1617: \bibitem[Bottinelli et al.(1983)]{bgpv83}
1618: Bottinelli, L., Gouguenheim, L., Paturel, G., \& de Vaucouleurs, G.\
1619: 1983, A\&A, 118, 4
1620: \bibitem[Brinks \& Bajaja(1986)]{bb86}
1621: Brinks, E., \& Bajaja, E.\ 1986, A\&A, 169, 14
1622: \bibitem[Br{\"u}ns et al.(2005)]{bruns2005} Br{\"u}ns, C., et
1623: al.\ 2005, \aap, 432, 45
1624: \bibitem[Bureau \& Carignan(2002)]{bc02}
1625: Bureau, M., \& Carignan, C.\ 2002, AJ, 123, 1316
1626: \bibitem[Bureau et al.(2004)]{bureau2004} Bureau, M., Walter, F.,
1627: van Gorkom, J., \& Carignan, C.\ 2004, IAU Symposium, 217, 452
1628: \bibitem[Bush \& Wilcots(2004)]{bush2004} Bush, S.~J., \&
1629: Wilcots, E.~M.\ 2004, \aj, 128, 2789
1630: \bibitem[Byrd et al.(1986)]{bsv86}
1631: Byrd, G., Saarinen, S., \& Valtonen, M.\ 1986, MNRAS, 220, 619
1632: %\bibitem[Caputi et al.(2005)]{caputi2005} Caputi, K.~I., Dunlop,
1633: %J.~S., McLure, R.~J., \& Roche, N.~D.\ 2005, \mnras, 361, 607
1634: \bibitem[Chiu et al.(2001)]{cgo01}
1635: Chiu, W.\ A., Gnedin, N.\ Y., \& Ostriker, J.\ P.\ 2001, ApJ, 563, 21
1636: \bibitem[Clark(1980)]{c80}
1637: Clark, B.\ G.\ 1980, A\&A, 89, 377
1638: \bibitem[Cole et al.(1994)]{cole1994} Cole, S.,
1639: Aragon-Salamanca, A., Frenk, C.~S., Navarro, J.~F., \& Zepf, S.~E.\ 1994,
1640: \mnras, 271, 781
1641: \bibitem[Dekel \& Silk(1986)]{ds86}
1642: Dekel, A., \& Silk, J.\ 1986, ApJ, 303, 39
1643: \bibitem[Deul \& den Hartog(1990)]{dh90}
1644: Deul, E.\ R., \& den Hartog, R.\ H.\ 1990, A\&A, 229, 362
1645: \bibitem[Dib \& Burkert(2005)]{dib2005} Dib, S., \& Burkert,
1646: A.\ 2005, \apj, 630, 238
1647: \bibitem[Dickey \& Lockman(1990)]{dickey1990} Dickey, J.~M., \&
1648: Lockman, F.~J.\ 1990, \araa, 28, 215
1649: \bibitem[Domg\"{o}rgen et al.(1996)]{ddd96}
1650: Domg\"{o}rgen, H., Dahlem, M., \& Dettmar, R.-J.\ 1996, A\&A, 313, 96
1651: \bibitem[Doyle et al.(2005)]{doyle2005} Doyle, M.~T., et al.\
1652: 2005, \mnras, 361, 34
1653: \bibitem[Driver(1999)]{d99}
1654: Driver, S.\ P.\ 1999, ApJL, 526, 69
1655: \bibitem[Ebeling et al.(1998)]{eetal98}
1656: Ebeling, H., Edge, A.\ C., Bohringer, H., et al.\ 1998, MNRAS, 301, 881
1657: \bibitem[Efremov \& Elmegreen(1998)]{efremov1998} Efremov, Y.~N.,
1658: \& Elmegreen, B.~G.\ 1998, \mnras, 299, 643
1659: \bibitem[Giovanelli et al.(1994)]{giovanelli1994} Giovanelli, R.,
1660: Haynes, M.~P., Salzer, J.~J., Wegner, G., da Costa, L.~N., \& Freudling,
1661: W.\ 1994, \aj, 107, 2036
1662: \bibitem[Giuricin et al.(2000)]{gmcp00}
1663: Giuricin, G., Marinoni, C., Ceriani, L., \& Pisani, A.\ 2000, ApJ,
1664: 543, 178
1665: \bibitem[Grenier et al.(2005)]{grenier2005} Grenier, I.~A.,
1666: Casandjian, J.-M., \& Terrier, R.\ 2005, Science, 307, 1292
1667: \bibitem[Gooch(1995)]{g95}
1668: Gooch, R.\ 1995, in Astronomical Data Analysis Software and Systems
1669: IV, eds.\ R.\ A.\ Shaw, H.\ E.\ Payne, \& J.\ J.\ E.\ Hayes (San
1670: Francisco: ASP), 144
1671: \bibitem[Haynes et al.(1998)]{haynes1998} Haynes, M.~P., van Zee,
1672: L., Hogg, D.~E., Roberts, M.~S., \& Maddalena, R.~J.\ 1998, \aj, 115, 62
1673: \bibitem[Holmberg(1946)]{holmberg1946} Holmberg, E.\ 1946,
1674: Medd. Lund. Ast. Obs. Serie~VI, 117
1675: \bibitem[Holmberg(1958)]{holmberg1958} Holmberg, E.\ 1958,
1676: Medd. Lund. Ast. Obs. Serie~II, 136, 1
1677: \bibitem[Holmberg et al.(1978)]{holmberg1978} Holmberg, E.~B.,
1678: Lauberts, A., Schuster, H.~E., \& West, R.~M.\ 1978, \aaps, 34, 285
1679: \bibitem[Howard \& Byrd(1990)]{hb90}
1680: Howard, S., \& Byrd, G.\ 1990, AJ, 99, 1798
1681: \bibitem[Howard et al.(1993)]{hkbb93}
1682: Howard, S., Keel, W.\ C., Byrd, G., \& Burkey, J.\ 1993, ApJ, 417, 502
1683: \bibitem[Huchtmeier et al.(2001)]{hkk01}
1684: Huchtmeier, W.\ K., Karachentsev, I.\ D., \& Karachentseva, V.\
1685: E. 2001, A\&A, 377, 801
1686: \bibitem[van der Hulst et al.(1992)]{htbzr92}
1687: van der Hulst, J.\ M., Terlouw, J.\ P., Begeman, K.\ G., Zwitser, W.,
1688: \& Roelfsema, P.\ R.\ 1992, in Astronomical Data Analysis Software
1689: and Systems I, eds.\ D.\ M.\ Worrall, C.\ Biemesderfer, \& J.\ Barnes
1690: (San Francisco: ASP), 131
1691: \bibitem[Hunter(1997)]{h97}
1692: Hunter, D.\ A.\ 1997, PASP, 109, 937
1693: \bibitem[Hunter et al.(1998)]{hunter1998} Hunter, D.~A., Wilcots,
1694: E.~M., van Woerden, H., Gallagher, J.~S., \& Kohle, S.\ 1998, \apjl, 495,
1695: L47
1696: \bibitem[Hunter et al.(2000)]{hunter2000} Hunter, D.~A., Walker,
1697: C.~E., \& Wilcots, E.~M.\ 2000, \aj, 119, 668
1698: \bibitem[Hunter \& Wilcots(2002)]{hw02}
1699: Hunter, D.\ A., \& Wilcots, E.\ M.\ 2002, AJ, 123, 2449
1700: \bibitem[Hunter et al.(2002)]{hetal2002} Hunter, D.~A., Rubin,
1701: V.~C., Swaters, R.~A., Sparke, L.~S., \& Levine, S.~E.\ 2002, \apj, 580,
1702: 194
1703: \bibitem[Im et al.(1999)]{ietal99}
1704: Im, M., Griffiths, R.\ E., Naim, A., et al.\ 1999, ApJ, 510, 82
1705: \bibitem[Impey \& Bothun(1997)]{impey1997} Impey, C., \& Bothun,
1706: G.\ 1997, \araa, 35, 267
1707: \bibitem[Jedrzejewski(1987)]{j87}
1708: Jedrzejewski, R.\ I.\ 1987, MNRAS, 226, 747
1709: \bibitem[Karachentsev et al.(2004)]{kkhm04}
1710: Karachentsev, I.\ D., Karachentseva, V.\ E., Huchtmeier, W.\ K., \&
1711: Makarov, D.\ I.\ 2004, AJ, 127, 2031
1712: \bibitem[Karachentseva \& Karachentsev(2000)]{kk00}
1713: Karachentseva, V.\ E., \& Karachentsev, I.\ D.\ 2000, A\&AS, 146, 359
1714: \bibitem[Kharchenko(2001)]{k01}
1715: Kharchenko, N.\ V.\ 2001, Kinematika Fiz.\ Nebesn.\ Tel., 17, 409
1716: \bibitem[Kauffmann et al.(1993)]{kwg93}
1717: Kauffmann, G., White, S.\ D.\ M., \& Guiderdoni, B.\ 1993, MNRAS,
1718: 264, 201
1719: \bibitem[Kelson et al.(2000)]{ketal00}
1720: Kelson, D.\ D., Illingworth, G.\ D., Tonry, J.\ L., et al.\ 2000,
1721: ApJ, 529, 768
1722: \bibitem[Kim et al.(1998)]{ketal98}
1723: Kim, S., Staveley-Smith, L., Dopita, M.\ A., et al.\ 1998, ApJ, 503, 674
1724: \bibitem[Kim et al.(1999)]{ketal99} Kim, S., Dopita, M.~A.,
1725: Staveley-Smith, L., \& Bessell, M.~S.\ 1999, \aj, 118, 2797
1726: \bibitem[Kim et al.(2003)]{ketal03}
1727: Kim, S., Staveley-Smith L., Dopita, M.\ A., et al.\ 2003, ApJS, 148, 473
1728: \bibitem[Koribalski et al.(2004)]{ketal04}
1729: Koribalski, B.\ S., Staveley-Smith, L., Kilborn, V.\ A., et al.\
1730: 2004, AJ, 128, 16
1731: \bibitem[Korpi et al.(1999)]{kbstn99}
1732: Korpi, M.\ J., Brandenburg, A., Shukurov, A., Tuominen, I., \&
1733: Nordlund, \AA.\ 1999, ApJ, 514, L99
1734: \bibitem[Landolt(1992)]{l92}
1735: Landolt, A.\ U.\ 1992, AJ, 104, 372
1736: \bibitem[Lauberts \& Valentijn(1989)]{lv89}
1737: Lauberts, A., \& Valentijn, E.\ A.\ 1989, The Surface Photometry
1738: Catalogue of the Eso-Uppsala Galaxies (Garching bei Munchen: ESO~)
1739: \bibitem[Longmore et al.(1982)]{lhgmw82}
1740: Longmore, A.\ J., Hawarden, T.\ G., Goss, W.\ M., Mebold, U., \&
1741: Webster, B.\ L.\ 1982, MNRAS, 200, 325
1742: \bibitem[van der Marel(2001)]{m01}
1743: van der Marel, R.\ P.\ 2001, AJ, 122, 1827
1744: \bibitem[van der Marel \& Cioni(2001)]{mc01}
1745: van der Marel, R.\ P., \& Cioni, M.-R.\ L.\ 2001, AJ, 122, 1807
1746: \bibitem[van der Marel et al.(2002)]{mahs02}
1747: van der Marel, R.\ P., Alves, D.\ R., Hardy, E., \& Suntzeff, N.\ B.\
1748: 2002, AJ, 124, 2639
1749: \bibitem[van der Marel(2006)]{marel2006} van der Marel, R.~P.\
1750: 2006, The Local Group as an Astrophysical Laboratory, 47
1751: \bibitem[Mastropietro et al.(2005)]{mastropietro2005} Mastropietro, C.,
1752: Moore, B., Mayer, L., Wadsley, J., \& Stadel, J.\ 2005, \mnras, 363, 509
1753: \bibitem[Mateo(1998)]{mateo1998} Mateo, M.~L.\ 1998, \araa, 36,
1754: 435
1755: \bibitem[McCray \& Kafatos(1987)]{mccray1987} McCray, R., \&
1756: Kafatos, M.\ 1987, \apj, 317, 190
1757: \bibitem[Meixner et al.(2006)]{meixner2006} Meixner, M., et al.\
1758: 2006, \aj, 132, 2268
1759: \bibitem[Meyer et al.(2004)]{metal04}
1760: Meyer, M.\ J., Zwaan, M.\ A., Webster, R.\ L., et al.\ 2004, MNRAS,
1761: 350, 1195
1762: \bibitem[M{\"u}hle et al.(2005)]{muhle2005} M{\"u}hle, S., Klein,
1763: U., Wilcots, E.~M., H\"{u}ttemeister, S.\ 2005, \aj, 130, 524
1764: \bibitem[Odewahn(1991)]{o91}
1765: Odewahn, S.\ C.\ 1991, AJ, 101, 829
1766: \bibitem[Odewahn(1994)]{o94}
1767: Odewahn, S.\ C.\ 1994, AJ, 107, 1320
1768: \bibitem[Olson \& Kwan(1990)]{ok90}
1769: Olson, K.\ M., \& Kwan, J.\ 1990, ApJ, 361, 426
1770: \bibitem[Olsen \& Massey(2007)]{olsen2007} Olsen, K.~A.~G., \&
1771: Massey, P.\ 2007, astro-ph/0701500
1772: \bibitem[Paturel et al.(2005)]{paturel2005} Paturel, G., Vauglin,
1773: I., Petit, C., Borsenberger, J., Epchtein, N., Fouqu{\'e}, P., \& Mamon,
1774: G.\ 2005, \aap, 430, 751
1775: \bibitem[Peebles(1976)]{p76}
1776: Peebles, P.\ J.\ E.\ 1976, ApJ, 205, 318
1777: \bibitem[Phelps et al.(1998)]{peetal98}
1778: Phelps, R.\ L., Sakai, S., Freedman, W.\ L., et al.\ 1998, ApJ, 500, 763
1779: \bibitem[Pisano et al.(1998)]{pisano1998} Pisano, D.~J., Wilcots,
1780: E.~M., \& Elmegreen, B.~G.\ 1998, \aj, 115, 975
1781: \bibitem[Pisano \& Wilcots(2000)]{pisano2000} Pisano, D.~J., \&
1782: Wilcots, E.~M.\ 2000, \mnras, 319, 821
1783: \bibitem[Puche et al.(1992)]{pwbr92}
1784: Puche, D., Westpfahl, D., Brinks, E., \& Roy, J.-R.\ 1992, AJ, 103, 1841
1785: \bibitem[Putman et al.(1998)]{puetal98}
1786: Putman, M.\ E., et al.\ 1998, Nature, 394, 752
1787: \bibitem[Putman et al.(2003)]{psfgb03}
1788: Putman, M.\ E., Staveley-Smith, L., Freeman, K.\ C., Gibson, B.\ K.,
1789: \& Barnes, D.\ G.\ 2003, ApJ, 586, 170
1790: \bibitem[Reynolds(1994)]{reynolds1994}
1791: Reynolds, J.\ 1994, ATNF Technical Document Series 39.3040
1792: \bibitem[Richter \& Sancisi(1994)]{rs94}
1793: Richter, O.-G., \& Sancisi, R.\ 1994, A\&A, 290, L9
1794: \bibitem[Roberts \& Haynes(1994)]{rh94}
1795: Roberts, M.\ S., \& Haynes, M.\ P.\ 1994, ARA\&A, 32, 115
1796: \bibitem[Rhode et al.(1999)]{rswr99}
1797: Rhode, K.\ L., Salzer, J.\ J., Westpfahl, D.\ J., \& Radice, L.\ A.\
1798: 1999, AJ, 118, 323
1799: \bibitem[Salo \& Laurikainen(2000)]{sl00}
1800: Salo, H., \& Laurikainen, E.\ 2000, MNRAS, 319, 377
1801: \bibitem[Sault et al.(1995)]{stw95}
1802: Sault, R.\ J., Teuben, P.\ J., \& Wright, M.\ C.\ H.\ 1995, in
1803: Astronomical Data Analysis Software and Systems IV, eds.\ R.\ A.\
1804: Shaw, H.\ E.\ Payne, \& J.\ J.\ E.\ Hayes (San Francisco: ASP), 433
1805: \bibitem[Schechter(1980)]{s80}
1806: Schechter, P.\ L.\ 1980, AJ, 85, 801
1807: \bibitem[Schlegel et al.(1998)]{sfd98}
1808: Schlegel, D.\ J., Finkbeiner, D.\ P., \& Davis, M.\ 1998, ApJ, 500, 525
1809: \bibitem[Schoenmakers et al.(1997)]{schoenmakers1997} Schoenmakers,
1810: R.~H.~M., Franx, M., \& de Zeeuw, P.~T.\ 1997, \mnras, 292, 349
1811: \bibitem[Simpson et al.(2005)]{simpson2005} Simpson, C.~E., Hunter,
1812: D.~A., \& Nordgren, T.~E.\ 2005, \aj, 130, 1049
1813: \bibitem[Staveley-Smith et al.(2003)]{skchk03}
1814: Staveley-Smith, L., Kim, S., Calabretta, M.\ R., Haynes, R.\ F., \&
1815: Kesteven, M.\ J.\ 2003, MNRAS, 339, 87
1816: \bibitem[Stil et al.(2005)]{stil2005} Stil, J.~M., Gray, A.~D.,
1817: \& Harnett, J.~I.\ 2005, \apj, 625, 130
1818: \bibitem[Swaters(1999)]{s99}
1819: Swaters, R.\ A.\ 1999, Ph.D.\ Thesis, Rijksuniversiteit Groningen
1820: \bibitem[Swaters et al.(2002)]{sahs02}
1821: Swaters, R.\ A., van Albada, T.\ S., van der Hulst, J.\ M., \&
1822: Sancisi, R.\ 2002, A\&A, 390, 829
1823: \bibitem[Thurow \& Wilcots(2005)]{thurow2005} Thurow, J.~C., \&
1824: Wilcots, E.~M.\ 2005, \aj, 129, 745
1825: \bibitem[Tody(1986)]{t86}
1826: Tody, D.\ 1986, Proc.\ SPIE, 627, 733
1827: \bibitem[Tody(1993)]{t93}
1828: Tody, D.\ 1993, in Astronomical Data Analysis Software and Systems
1829: II, eds.\ J.\ Hanisch, R.\ J.\ V.\ Brissenden, \& J.\ Barnes (San
1830: Francisco: ASP), 173
1831: \bibitem[Tully(1988)]{t88}
1832: Tully, R.\ B.\ 1988, Nearby Galaxies Catalog (Cambridge University Press)
1833: \bibitem[de Vaucouleurs(1955)]{v55}
1834: de Vaucouleurs, G.\ 1955, AJ, 60, 126
1835: \bibitem[de Vaucouleurs(1956)]{v56}
1836: de Vaucouleurs, G.\ 1956, Memoirs Mt.\ Stromlo Obs., III, 13
1837: \bibitem[de Vaucouleurs(1959)]{v59}
1838: de Vaucouleurs, G.\ 1959, Classification and Morphology of External
1839: Galaxies, in Hand.\ d.\ Phys. (Springer-Verlag:
1840: Berlin-G\"{o}ttingen), 53, 275
1841: \bibitem[de Vaucouleurs \& Freeman(1972)]{vf72}
1842: de Vaucouleurs, G., \& Freeman, K.\ C.\ 1972, Vistas in Astronomy, 14, 163
1843: \bibitem[RC3(1991)de Vaucouleurs et al.]{vetal91}
1844: de Vaucouleurs, G., de Vaucouleurs, A., Corwin, H.\ G.\ Jr., et al.\
1845: 1991, Third Reference Catalogue of Bright Galaxies (Springer-Verlag:
1846: Berlin)
1847: \bibitem[Vogelaar \& Terlouw(2001)]{vt01}
1848: Vogelaar, M.\ G.\ R., \& Terlouw, J.\ P.\ 2001, in Astronomical Data
1849: Analysis Software and Systems X, eds.\ F.\ R.\ Harnden, Jr., F.\ A.\
1850: Primini, \& H.\ E.\ Payne (San Francisco: ASP), 358
1851: \bibitem[Walter \& Brinks(1999)]{wb99}
1852: Walter, F., \& Brinks, E.\ 1999, AJ, 118, 273
1853: \bibitem[Weaver et al.(1977)]{weaver1977} Weaver, R., McCray, R.,
1854: Castor, J., Shapiro, P., \& Moore, R.\ 1977, \apj, 218, 377
1855: \bibitem[Weinberg \& Nikolaev(2001)]{wn01}
1856: Weinberg, M.\ D., \& Nikolaev, S.\ 2001, ApJ, 548, 712
1857: \bibitem[Westerlund(1997)]{w97}
1858: Westerlund, B.\ E.\ 1997, The Magellanic Clouds (Cambridge: CUP)
1859: \bibitem[White \& Frenk(1991)]{wf91}
1860: White, S.\ D.\ M., \& Frenk, C.\ S.\ 1991, ApJ, 379, 52
1861: \bibitem[Wilcots \& Miller(1998)]{wilcots1998} Wilcots, E.~M., \&
1862: Miller, B.~W.\ 1998, \aj, 116, 2363
1863: \bibitem[Wilcots \& Thurow(2001)]{wilcots2001} Wilcots, E.~M., \&
1864: Thurow, J.~C.\ 2001, \apj, 555, 758
1865: \bibitem[Wilcots \& Prescott(2004)]{wilcots2004} Wilcots, E.~M., \&
1866: Prescott, M.~K.~M.\ 2004, \aj, 127, 1900 %
1867: \bibitem[Zimmermann et al.(2001)]{zimmermann2001} Zimmermann, H.-U.,
1868: Boller, T., D{\"o}bereiner, S., \& Pietsch, W.\ 2001, \aap, 378, 30
1869: \end{thebibliography}
1870:
1871:
1872: \end{document}
1873:
1874: % LocalWords: cgo ds mateo ietal mahs ketal bruns vf bsv hb Catalog vetal IB
1875: % LocalWords: puetal psfgb SAB wb pwbr rswr bc lhgmw gmcp kk zimmermann hkk GG
1876: % LocalWords: kkhm paturel doyle SERC EJ GSC QV lv
1877: