1: \documentclass{emulateapj}
2: \slugcomment{Accepted in ApJ}
3:
4: \begin{document}
5:
6: \title{ Stellar Velocity Dispersion of the Leo A Dwarf Galaxy }
7:
8: \author{Warren R.\ Brown,
9: Margaret J.\ Geller,
10: Scott J.\ Kenyon,
11: Michael J.\ Kurtz}
12:
13: \affil{Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory, 60 Garden St, Cambridge, MA 02138}
14: \email{wbrown@cfa.harvard.edu}
15:
16: \shorttitle{ Stellar Velocity Dispersion of Leo A }
17: \shortauthors{Brown et al.}
18:
19: \begin{abstract}
20:
21: We measure the first stellar velocity dispersion of the Leo A dwarf galaxy,
22: $\sigma = 9.3 \pm 1.3$ km s$^{-1}$. We derive the velocity dispersion from the
23: radial velocities of ten young B supergiants and two H{\sc ii} regions in the
24: central region of Leo A. We estimate a projected mass of $8\pm2.7\times10^7
25: ~M_{\sun}$ within a radius of $2\arcmin$, and a mass to light ratio of at least
26: $20\pm6 ~M_{\sun}/L_{\sun}$. These results imply Leo A is at least $\sim$80\% dark
27: matter by mass.
28:
29: \end{abstract}
30:
31: \keywords{
32: galaxies: individual (Leo A)
33: }
34:
35:
36:
37: \section{INTRODUCTION}
38:
39: The Leo A dwarf galaxy was discovered by \citet{zwicky42} and is one of the
40: most remote galaxies in the Local Group. Leo A is gas rich, with an H {\sc i}
41: velocity dispersion of 3.5 to 9 km s$^{-1}$ and with no observed rotation
42: \citep{allsopp78, lo93, young96}. Leo A is also extremely metal poor, with an
43: abundance of $12+\log{\rm O/H} = 7.3$ to 7.4 measured from H {\sc ii} regions
44: \citep{skillman89, vanzee06}.
45:
46: Photometric studies of Leo A reveal both a red and blue plume of stars in
47: its color-magnitude diagram indicating recent star formation \citep{demers84,
48: sandage86, tolstoy96}. {\it Hubble Space Telescope} observations have resolved the
49: stellar population of Leo A, which shows evidence for numerous epochs of star
50: formation spanning billions of years \citep{tolstoy98, schulte02, cole07} as well as
51: an old stellar ``halo'' \citep{vansevicius04}. RR Lyrae variables confirm the
52: presence of an $\sim11$ Gyr old population, and place Leo A at a distance of $800
53: \pm 40$ kpc \citep{dolphin02}. Recently, \citet{brown06b} reported the first
54: spectroscopy of stars in Leo A: two B supergiants stars observed serendipitously as
55: part of their hypervelocity star survey. The B supergiants provide spectroscopic
56: proof of star formation as recently as $\sim$30 Myr ago in Leo A.
57:
58: Inspired by the B supergiant observations, we have obtained spectroscopy for
59: ten additional blue-plume objects in Leo A. There is no a-priori reason to expect
60: that Leo A's steller and H {\sc i} gas velocity dispersions are identical.
61: Detailed H {\sc i} maps show velocity structure, which suggests that the gas may be
62: affected by cooling or may not yet be relaxed \citep{young96}. Our observations
63: allow us to measure the stellar velocity dispersion, and thus estimate the mass of
64: Leo A's dark matter halo. In \S 2 we discuss our target selection, observations,
65: and stellar radial velocity determinations. In \S 3 we present the resulting
66: velocity dispersion and mass-to-light ratio of Leo A. We conclude in \S 4.
67:
68: \section{DATA}
69:
70: \subsection{Target Selection}
71:
72: We use Sloan Digital Sky Survey \citep[SDSS,][]{adelman07} photometry to
73: select candidate Leo A blue plume stars by color.
74: We illustrate our target selection in Figure \ref{fig:ugr}, a color-color
75: diagram of every star in SDSS Data Release 5 with $g'<21$ and within $9\arcmin$ of
76: Leo A (see also Figure \ref{fig:radec}). We compute de-reddened colors using
77: extinction values obtained from \citet{schlegel98}; the adopted extinction values
78: are $E(u'-g')=0.029$ and $E(g'-r')=0.022$.
79: Objects with $(g'-r')_0<0$ and $(u'-g')_0<1.1$ are objects in the blue
80: plume. The blue plume can contain massive main sequence stars, blue supergiant
81: stars, and blue-loop stars \citep[e.g.][]{schulte02}. We target the 12 blue plume
82: objects with $g'<21$ (solid squares and triangles).
83:
84: Objects with $(g'-r')_0>0$ in Figure \ref{fig:ugr} have colors consistent
85: with foreground stars, ranging from F-type stars at the main sequence turn-off
86: $(g'-r')_0\sim0.2$ to late M dwarfs $(g'-r')_0>1$. Stars with $(g'-r')_0\sim1.4$
87: may include some asymptotic giant branch stars in Leo A.
88:
89: Figure \ref{fig:radec} plots the position of every star in Figure
90: \ref{fig:ugr}. For reference, the ellipses follow Leo A's observed H {\sc i}
91: profile, with center $9^{\rm h} 59^{\rm m} 23\fs92$ $+30\arcdeg 44\arcmin
92: 47\farcs69$ (J2000), semiminor to semimajor axis ratio 0.6, and position angle
93: $104\arcdeg$ \citep{young96}. The solid ellipse marks Leo A's Holmberg radius
94: $a=3\farcm5$ \citep{mateo98}, and the dotted ellipse with $a=8\farcm0$ marks the
95: extent of Leo A's H {\sc i} gas \citep{young96} and stellar ``halo''
96: \citep{vansevicius04}. All twelve blue plume candidates are located within
97: $2\arcmin$ of the center of Leo A; probable foreground objects are distributed more
98: uniformly across the field.
99:
100: \subsection{Observations}
101:
102: We obtained spectroscopy of the twelve blue plume objects with the 6.5m MMT
103: telescope and the Blue Channel spectrograph. Observations occurred during the
104: course of our hypervelocity star survey program on the nights of 2005 Dec 5-6, 2006
105: May 24-25, 2006 June 20, 2006 Dec 27, and 2007 Mar 18. We operated the Blue Channel
106: spectrograph with the 832 line mm$^{-1}$ grating in 2nd order and with a
107: 1.25$\arcsec$ slit. These settings provided a wavelength coverage of 3650 \AA\ to
108: 4500 \AA\ and a spectral resolution of 1.2 \AA. One object (an H {\sc ii} region)
109: was re-observed with the 300 line mm$^{-1}$ grating and a 1 $\arcsec$ slit,
110: providing wavelength coverage from 3400 \AA\ to 8600 \AA\ with a spectral resolution
111: of 6.2 \AA. Exposure times were 30 minutes. We obtained comparison lamp exposures
112: after every exposure. The wavelength solutions are determined from 44 lines with
113: typical root-mean-square residuals of $\pm0.05$ \AA, or $\pm4$ km s$^{-1}$. We note
114: that the single slit spectrograph is a compact instrument with minimal flexure:
115: wavelength solutions shift by less than 1 pixel (0.355 \AA) during a night, easily
116: measured from individual comparison lamp exposures.
117:
118: \begin{figure} % FIGURE 1: COLOR-COLOR PLOT
119: % \includegraphics[width=6.5in]{/home/wbrown/HS/Obs/ObsM6/Leoa/ugr.ps}
120: \plotone{f1.eps}
121: \caption{ \label{fig:ugr}
122: Color-color diagram of every star in SDSS with $g'<21$ and within $9\arcmin$
123: of Leo A (centered at $9^{\rm h} 59^{\rm m} 23\fs92$ $+30\arcdeg 44\arcmin
124: 47\farcs69$ J2000). We target the twelve blue plume candidates with $(g'-r')_0<0$.
125: We identify ten B supergiants ({\it solid squares}) and two H {\sc ii} regions ({\it
126: solid triangles}). }
127: \end{figure}
128:
129: \subsection{Spectroscopic Identifications}
130:
131: Ten blue plume objects are stars of B spectral type and two are H {\sc ii}
132: regions. Figure \ref{fig:spectra} plots the spectra of the ten stars and the two H
133: {\sc ii} regions, summed and shifted to the rest frame. The signal-to-noise ratios
134: ($S/N$) of the individual spectra range from $S/N=6$ to 15 per pixel at 4000 \AA,
135: and depend on target's apparent magnitude and the seeing conditions of the observation.
136:
137: The ten B-type stars have visibly narrower Balmer lines and thus lower
138: surface gravity than the other B-type stars in the \citet{brown06b, brown07a}
139: hypervelocity star survey. Cross-correlation with MK spectral standards
140: \citep{gray03} indicates that the stars are probably luminosity class I or II B
141: supergiants, consistent with the stars' inferred luminosities.
142:
143: At the distance modulus of Leo A $(m-M)_0 = 24.51 \pm 0.12$
144: \citep{dolphin02}, the ten B-type stars have absolute magnitudes ranging from $M_V =
145: -5.3$ to $-3.4$. For comparison, \citet{corbally84} give absolute magnitudes
146: $M_V=-5.5$ for a B9 Ib star and $M_V=-3.1$ for a B9 II star. We conclude the ten
147: stars are likely B supergiants in Leo A. Such B supergiants have ages ranging from
148: $\sim$30 Myr for the most luminous stars to $\sim$200 Myr for the least luminous
149: stars \citep{schaller92}.
150:
151: \begin{figure} % FIGURE 2: RA DEC PLOT
152: % \includegraphics[width=6.5in]{/home/wbrown/HS/Obs/ObsM6/Leoa/radec.ps}
153: \plotone{f2.eps}
154: \caption{ \label{fig:radec}
155: Location of objects in Figure \ref{fig:ugr}, where the symbols are the same
156: as before. For reference, the solid ellipse marks Leo A's Holmberg radius
157: $a=3\farcm5$ \citep{mateo98} and the dotted ellipse marks the extent of Leo A's
158: stellar ``halo'' \citep{vansevicius04} and H {\sc i} gas \citep{young96}.}
159: \end{figure}
160:
161: \subsection{Radial Velocities}
162:
163: We measure radial velocities with the cross-correlation package RVSAO
164: \citep{kurtz98}. We begin by observing the B9 II star $\gamma$ Lyr by quickly
165: scanning the star across the spectrograph slit. This procedure provides us with a
166: very high signal-to-noise ratio cross-correlation template with a known velocity
167: \citep{evans67, gray03}. The accuracy of the velocity zero-point comes from the
168: error on the mean of the 44 comparison lamp lines used to determine the template's
169: wavelength solution, $\pm0.6$ km s$^{-1}$.
170:
171: Is is important that we maximize velocity precision for our velocity
172: dispersion measurement, and we achieve the best precision by cross-correlating the
173: stars with themselves. Thus, after measuring the stars' velocities with the
174: $\gamma$ Lyr template, we shift the spectra to the rest frame and sum them together
175: to create a second template (shown in Figure \ref{fig:spectra}). We then
176: cross-correlate the ten stars with this second template of themselves. Table
177: \ref{tab:obs} lists the resulting heliocentric radial velocities and errors. The
178: mean cross-correlation precision is $\pm3.7$ km s$^{-1}$.
179:
180: We also measure the radial velocities of the H {\sc ii} regions with RVSAO,
181: but this time using Gaussian fits to the emission lines. The final velocity of SDSS
182: J095927.532+304457.75 comes from a weighted mean of the 3727 [O{\sc ii}] doublet
183: (resolved in our spectra), H$\delta$, and H$\gamma$ emission lines. A
184: low-dispersion spectrum of SDSS J095933.320+304439.21 provides additional line
185: measurements from H$\beta$, [O{\sc iii}], and H$\alpha$ for that object. The
186: velocity of SDSS J095933.320+304439.21 is the weighted average of all of its
187: observed lines. The mean emission-line velocity error is $\pm3.9$ km s$^{-1}$.
188:
189:
190: \section{RESULTS}
191:
192: \subsection{Stellar Velocity Dispersion}
193:
194: The average velocity of our twelve Leo A objects is $22.3 \pm 2.9$ km
195: s$^{-1}$ (see Figure \ref{fig:vel}), statistically identical with the $23 \pm 3$ km
196: s$^{-1}$ systemic H {\sc i} velocity measured by \citet{allsopp78} and the 23.2 -
197: 24.0 km s$^{-1}$ systemic H {\sc i} velocities measured by \citet{young96}. Thus
198: the velocities of our twelve objects are all consistent with membership in Leo A.
199:
200: The root-mean-square velocity dispersion of our twelve objects is 10.0 km
201: s$^{-1}$. We derive the intrinsic velocity dispersion by subtracting in quadrature
202: the average 3.8 km s$^{-1}$ uncertainty of the observations. Thus we measure an
203: intrinsic stellar velocity dispersion of $\sigma = 9.3 \pm 1.3$ km s$^{-1}$.
204:
205: \begin{figure} % FIGURE 3: SPECTRA
206: % \includegraphics[width=6.5in]{/home/wbrown/Bcand/LeoA/spectra.ps}
207: \plotone{f3.eps}
208: \caption{ \label{fig:spectra}
209: MMT spectra of the ten B supergiants ({\it upper panel}) and the two H {\sc
210: ii} regions ({\it lower panel}), summed together and shifted to rest frame. The
211: continuum fluxes are arbitrarily normalized. }
212: \end{figure}
213:
214: We estimate the robustness of the velocity dispersion measurement by
215: comparing the cumulative distribution of velocities to a Gaussian distribution (see
216: Figure \ref{fig:vel}). A Kolmogorov-Smirnov test finds a 0.5 likelihood of drawing
217: the twelve objects from a Gaussian distribution with the observed velocity
218: dispersion. Greater number statistics are always desirable, but it appears that the
219: twelve blue plume objects provide a statistically sound measurement of Leo A's
220: stellar velocity dispersion.
221:
222: Our stellar velocity dispersion measurement is identical to the H {\sc i}
223: gas velocity dispersion measured by \citet{young96}: $9.3 \pm 1.4$ km s$^{-1}$.
224: \citet{young96} also observe an H {\sc i} component with $3.5 \pm 1.0$ km s$^{-1}$
225: dispersion localized in high column-density regions. If we remove the two H {\sc
226: ii} regions from our own analysis, the B-type stars have a mean velocity of $21.5
227: \pm 3.4$ km s$^{-1}$ and an intrinsic velocity dispersion of $\sigma_{B} = 10.1 \pm
228: 1.3$ km s$^{-1}$. This dispersion is statistically identical to our original value.
229:
230: There is no evidence for rotation of the stellar component of Leo A; the
231: high- and low-velocity blue plume objects appear inter-mixed on the sky. This
232: result is consistent with absence of rotation seen in the H {\sc i} gas \citep{lo93,
233: young96}. Given that detailed H {\sc i} maps show velocity structure in Leo A
234: \citep{young96}, it is possible that additional observations may reveal structure in
235: the stellar radial velocity distribution.
236:
237: \begin{figure} % FIGURE 4: VELOCITY DISTRIBUTION
238: % \includegraphics[width=6.5in]{/home/wbrown/Bcand/LeoA/cvel.ps}
239: \plotone{f4.eps}
240: \caption{ \label{fig:vel}
241: Cumulative distribution of the observed velocities ({\it histogram})
242: compared to a Gaussian distribution ({\it curve}) with dispersion 10.0 km s$^{-1}$
243: and mean velocity 22.3 km s$^{-1}$.}
244: \end{figure}
245:
246:
247: \begin{deluxetable*}{lrcccccl} % TABLE OF BLUE PLUME OBJECTS
248: \tablewidth{0pt}
249: \tablecaption{LEO A BLUE PLUME OBJECTS\label{tab:obs}}
250: \tablecolumns{7}
251: \tablehead{
252: \colhead{RA} & \colhead{Dec} & \colhead{type} & \colhead{$v_{helio}$} &
253: \colhead{$g'$} & \colhead{$(u'-g')_0$} & \colhead{$(g'-r')_0$} \\
254: \colhead{J2000} & \colhead{J2000} & \colhead{} & \colhead{{\small km s$^{-1}$}} &
255: \colhead{mag} & \colhead{mag} & \colhead{mag}
256: }
257: \startdata
258: 9:59:15.124 & 30:44:10.40 & B & $23.0 \pm 2.5$ & 19.896 & 0.761 & -0.279 \\
259: 9:59:16.940 & 30:43:48.22 & B & $21.7 \pm 5.2$ & 19.050 & -0.021 & -0.353 \\
260: 9:59:20.223 & 30:43:52.71 & B & $34.0 \pm 2.8$ & 19.435 & 0.458 & -0.375 \\
261: 9:59:23.220 & 30:45:06.23 & B & $ 7.4 \pm 3.8$ & 20.026 & 0.584 & -0.347 \\
262: 9:59:24.909 & 30:44:36.69 & B & $30.9 \pm 3.4$ & 19.797 & 1.004 & -0.257 \\
263: 9:59:25.980 & 30:46:10.44 & B & $ 9.5 \pm 5.0$ & 20.964 & 0.652 & -0.397 \\
264: 9:59:26.351 & 30:45:26.09 & B & $37.6 \pm 2.3$ & 19.131 & 0.412 & -0.300 \\
265: 9:59:27.058 & 30:45:38.79 & B & $21.9 \pm 4.7$ & 20.267 & 0.982 & -0.388 \\
266: 9:59:27.326 & 30:45:44.69 & B & $ 7.6 \pm 4.9$ & 20.661 & 1.082 & -0.420 \\
267: 9:59:27.532 & 30:44:57.75 & H{\sc ii} & $30.0 \pm 3.6$ & 19.984 & -0.238 & -0.607 \\
268: 9:59:32.129 & 30:43:48.55 & B & $22.0 \pm 2.6$ & 20.471 & 0.383 & -0.360 \\
269: 9:59:33.320 & 30:44:39.21 & H{\sc ii} & $22.2 \pm 4.2$ & 19.520 & -0.288 & -0.252 \\
270: \enddata
271: \end{deluxetable*}
272:
273:
274: \subsection{Mass-to-Light Ratio}
275:
276: We now estimate the kinematic mass of Leo A. Because there is no evidence
277: for rotation, we assume that the galaxy is in pressure equilibrium and apply two
278: simple mass estimators: the virial theorem, and the projected mass estimator of
279: \citet{heisler85}. The virial mass is given by $M_{vir} = 696 R_e \sigma_z^2 ~
280: M_{\sun}$, where $R_e$ is the effective radius in pc and $\sigma_z$ is the
281: one-dimensional velocity dispersion in km s$^{-1}$. Our objects are located inside
282: a radius of $2\arcmin = 500$ pc, while Leo A's observed stellar distribution extends
283: to a radius of $8\arcmin = 2000$ pc. If we choose $R_e=500$ pc, Leo A's virial mass
284: is $M_{vir}\sim3\times10^7 ~M_{\sun}$.
285:
286: The virial theorem, however, is both more biased and less stable for small
287: numbers of test particles than is the projected mass estimator \citep{bahcall81}.
288: Thus we use the \citet{heisler85} projected mass estimator to obtain a more accurate
289: estimate of Leo A's mass:
290: \begin{equation}
291: M_{proj} = \frac{f}{G(N-\alpha)} \sum_{i=1}^{N} V_{z,i}^2 R_{\bot,i}
292: \end{equation} where $G$ is the gravitational constant, $N$ is the number of
293: stars, $\alpha$ is an empirical correction to the center of mass (Heisler et al.\
294: use $\alpha=1.5$), $V_z$ is the velocity relative to the mean, $R_\bot$ is the
295: projected separation from the center of the galaxy, and $f$ is a constant that
296: depends on the eccentricity of the stellar orbits. For purely isotropic orbits
297: $f=32/\pi$, while for purely radial orbits$f=64/\pi$.
298: Using the velocities and positions in Table \ref{tab:obs}, Leo A has a
299: kinematic mass of $5.3\pm1.3\times10^7 ~M_{\sun}$ for purely isotropic orbits and
300: $10.6\pm2.6\times10^7 ~M_{\sun}$ for purely radial orbits. Heisler et al.\ prefer
301: using the smaller mass derived from isotropic orbits, but for purposes of
302: discussion, we will assume that Leo A's mass is the average of the two projected
303: mass estimates: $8\times10^7~M_{\sun}$.
304: This mass is derived from objects inside a radius of $2\arcmin = 500$ pc.
305:
306: By comparison, \citet{vansevicius04} estimate that Leo A's stellar mass is
307: $M_{stars}=4\pm2\times10^6$ M$_{\sun}$, consistent with the galaxy's optical
308: luminosity. More recently, \citet{lee06} use {\it Spitzer} 4.5\micron\ imaging to
309: estimate that Leo A's total stellar mass is $M_{stars}=0.8\times10^6$ M$_{\sun}$
310: with an uncertainty of 0.5 dex. These stellar mass estimates are factors of 20 -
311: 100 times smaller than our kinematic mass estimate.
312:
313: Leo A's total $V$-band luminosity is $M_V=-11.7$, which comes from the
314: apparent magnitude $V_{tot} =12.8 \pm 0.2$ \citep{mateo98} and the distance modulus
315: $(m-M)_0 = 24.51 \pm 0.12$ \citep{dolphin02}. Assuming the Sun has $M_{V, \sun} =
316: +4.8$, Leo A's total luminosity in solar units is $4\times10^6 ~L_{\sun}$.
317: Thus the mass-to-light ratio of Leo A is $M/L_{tot} = 20\pm6
318: ~M_{\sun}/L_{\sun}$ for a mass of $8\times10^7 ~M_{\sun}$. Because our
319: spectroscopic targets do not sample the full extent of Leo A, this mass-to-light
320: ratio is a lower limit to Leo A's true mass-to-light ratio.
321:
322: A mass-to-light ratio of 20 suggests that Leo A is dominated by dark matter.
323: \citet{young96} reach the opposite conclusion from their H {\sc i} velocity
324: dispersion, but their result is explained by the revision of Leo A's distance from
325: 2.2 Mpc to 800 kpc. Leo A's total H {\sc i} mass within $a=8\arcmin$ is
326: $M_{HI}=1.0\pm0.2\times10^7 ~M_{\sun}$ \citep{allsopp78, young96} at a distance of
327: 800 kpc. The gas mass includes the 10\% correction for helium gas. Thus baryonic
328: matter -- stars plus gas -- accounts for at most $\sim$20\% of Leo A's total mass.
329:
330:
331: \section{DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS}
332:
333: We have obtained spectroscopy for twelve blue plume objects in the central
334: $2\arcmin$ of Leo A. Ten of these objects are young B supergiants. We measure a
335: stellar velocity dispersion of $\sigma = 9.3 \pm 1.3$ km s$^{-1}$, identical to Leo
336: A's H {\sc i} gas dispersion \citep{young96}. From this we estimate a projected
337: mass of $8\pm2.7\times10^7 ~M_{\sun}$, which implies that Leo A's mass is at least
338: $\sim$80\% dark matter.
339:
340: Dwarf galaxies are thought to be the smallest bodies containing dynamically
341: significant amounts of dark matter, and so it is interesting to place Leo A in the
342: context of cosmological simulations. \citet{evrard07} show that the velocity
343: dispersion of dark matter halos follow a tight correlation with total mass,
344: $\sigma_{\rm DM} = (1084\pm13 ~{\rm km s^{-1}}) (h(z) M_{200}/10^{15}
345: ~M_{\sun})^{0.3359\pm0.0045}$, where $M_{200}$ is the mass within a sphere with mean
346: interior density 200 times the critical density. Leo A's mass, $8\times10^7
347: ~M_{\sun}$, would fill such a sphere with a radius of $r_{200}=9$ kpc. The halo
348: virial relation is derived from $\sim10^{15} ~M_{\sun}$ dark matter halos, but
349: Evrard et al.\ show it is valid down to $\sim10^{10} ~M_{\sun}$ halos. If we simply
350: equate Leo A's mass to $M_{200}$, the halo virial relation predicts $\sigma_{DM}=4$
351: km s$^{-1}$ for $h(z)=0.70$. This prediction is less than half of the observed
352: velocity dispersion. One possible explanation for the discrepancy is that Leo A has
353: not reached dynamical equilibrium, and thus its velocity dispersion is inflated
354: \citep{young96}. Or, perhaps the discrepancy suggests that dwarfs like Leo A
355: experience a different evolutionary path than a purely hierarchical growth of dark
356: matter halos.
357:
358: Remarkably, Leo A's stellar velocity dispersion is very similar to that of
359: Local Group dwarf spheroidals (dSphs), which have central velocity dispersions of 8
360: to 10 km s$^{-1}$ \citep{mateo98}. One explanation for the common central velocity
361: dispersion is that all Local Group dwarfs are enclosed in dark matter halos of
362: similar total mass \citep{mateo93}. Galaxies with smaller velocity dispersions
363: (total mass $\lesssim10^8 ~M_{\sun}$) are possibly re-ionized and thus never form
364: stars \citep[e.g.][]{navarro97}. If this picture is correct, then the total mass to
365: light ratio of a dwarf is a function of its luminosity $(M/L)_{tot} = M_{DM}/L +
366: (M/L)_*$, where $M_{DM}$ is the fixed dark matter halo mass, $L$ is the total
367: $V$-band luminosity, and $(M/L)_*$ is the stellar mass to light ratio.
368:
369: \begin{figure} % FIGURE 5: MASS_TO_LIGHT
370: % \includegraphics[width=6.5in]{/home/wbrown/Bcand/LeoA/ml2.ps}
371: \plotone{f5.eps}
372: \caption{ \label{fig:ml}
373: Mass-to-light ratio of Local Group dSph galaxies with masses determined from
374: central velocity dispersions ({\it solid squares}), adapted from \citet{mateo98} and
375: \citet{koch07}. The dashed line is the $(M/L)_{tot}$ relation for a galaxy in a
376: dark matter halo of constant mass $3\times10^7 M_{\sun}$. We estimate $M/L=20\pm6$
377: for Leo A ({\it star}), which falls near the fixed halo mass relation. The arrow
378: indicates what happens if Leo A stops forming stars and fades to a dSph-like color.
379: The Phoenix transition dwarf ({\it open square}) also agrees with the fixed halo
380: mass relation.}
381: \end{figure}
382:
383: In Figure \ref{fig:ml} we plot the $(M/L)_{tot}$ versus $V$-band luminosity
384: for Local Group dSphs with central velocity dispersion measurements. We note that
385: Leo A has a central velocity dispersion and no observed rotation, thus its dynamical
386: mass is directly comparable with dSphs. Dwarf irregulars have masses determined
387: from rotation and are not directly comparable. We base Figure \ref{fig:ml} on the
388: \citet{koch07} version of \citet{mateo98}'s plot. The solid squares are And II
389: \citep{cote99}, And IX \citep{chapman05}, Bo\"otes \citep{belokurov06a, munoz06a},
390: Carina and Sextans \citep{wilkinson06}, Draco and Ursa Minor \citep{wilkinson04},
391: Fornax \citep{wang05}, Leo I \citep{koch07}, Leo II and Sculptor \citep{mateo98},
392: and Ursa Major \citep{willman05, kleyna05}. The dashed line shows the $(M/L)_{tot}$
393: relation for a fixed dark matter halo mass $M_{DM}=3\times10^7 ~M_{\sun}$ and
394: stellar $(M/L)_*=1.5 ~M_{\sun}/L_{\sun}$ \citep{koch07}. Leo A, plotted as a star,
395: falls very near the fixed halo mass relation for dSphs.
396:
397: However, Leo A's stellar population is quite different from that of the
398: dSphs. Integrated colors provide a quantitative measure of the difference: Leo A
399: has $(\bv)=0.15$, systematically bluer than the average dSph with $(\bv)=0.8\pm0.25$
400: \citep{mateo98}. As its stellar population ages, Leo A's luminosity will decrease
401: and its mass to light ratio will increase. We estimate this change using
402: Starburst99 \citep{leitherer99, vazquez05} with $Z=0.0004$ Padova tracks. We find
403: that in a couple of Gyr, assuming Leo A has no further star formation, it will reach
404: $(\bv)=0.8$ and will have faded $\sim1.5$ magnitudes in $M_V$. We indicate this
405: evolution with the arrow in Figure \ref{fig:ml}. Leo A still falls well within the
406: observed scatter around the $(M/L)_{tot}$ relation.
407:
408: Comparing Leo A with ``transition dwarfs'' may be more fair than comparing
409: with dSphs. Transition dwarfs have old stellar populations like dSphs, but also
410: contain gas and young stars like Leo A.
411: A central velocity dispersion is available for the Phoenix transition dwarf
412: \citep{mateo98} (the open square in Figure \ref{fig:ml}), which places it squarely
413: on the $(M/L)_{tot}$ relation. Thus, despite their different star formation
414: histories, Leo A, Phoenix, and the dSphs appear to share remarkably similar
415: kinematics and dark matter halo mass.
416:
417: If transition dwarfs represent the stage between gas-rich dwarf irregulars
418: and gas-poor dSphs, this evolution must involve some amount of galaxy interaction.
419: Most dSphs in the Local Group are located near the major spirals, so the
420: dSphs' lack of gas and young stars likely results from repeated gravitational and/or
421: hydrodynamic interactions with the spirals.
422: In a comprehensive study of minor galaxy interactions in the SDSS,
423: \citet{freedman07} find that the lowest luminosity galaxies in close pairs
424: experience the largest fractional boosts in their specific star formation rates.
425: Perhaps Leo A's episodic star formation history is a history of its interactions
426: with objects in the Local Group.
427:
428: One clue to the evolution of transition dwarfs in the Local Group may come
429: from comparison of the rotation velocity and central velocity dispersion. A wide
430: variety of studies demonstrate the relation between these kinematic measures and the
431: formation history of galaxies \citep[e.g.][]{pizzella05, jesseit05, derijcke05,
432: derijcke06}. Multi-slit spectrographs can now provide radial velocities for
433: hundreds of stars in nearby dwarfs, making such studies possible for the first time.
434:
435:
436: \acknowledgements
437:
438: We thank K.\ Rines for helpful discussions and thank the referee for
439: comments that improved this paper.
440: We thank M.\ Alegria, J.\ McAfee, and A.\ Milone for their assistance with
441: observations obtained at the MMT Observatory, a joint facility of the Smithsonian
442: Institution and the University of Arizona.
443: This project made use of data products from the Sloan Digital Sky Survey,
444: which is managed by the Astrophysical Research Consortium for the Participating
445: Institutions.
446: This research made use of the Smithsonian/NASA Astrophysics Data System
447: Bibliographic Services.
448: This work was supported in part by W.\ Brown's Clay Fellowship and by the
449: Smithsonian Institution.
450:
451:
452: {\it Facilities:} \facility{MMT (Blue Channel Spectrograph)}
453:
454: % REFERENCES
455:
456: % \bibliographystyle{/home/wbrown/lib/apj} \bibliography{/home/wbrown/text/RefHS}
457: \begin{thebibliography}{47}
458: \expandafter\ifx\csname natexlab\endcsname\relax\def\natexlab#1{#1}\fi
459:
460: \bibitem[{{Adelman-McCarthy} {et~al.}(2007)}]{adelman07}
461: {Adelman-McCarthy}, J.~K. {et~al.} 2007, \apjs, in press
462:
463: \bibitem[{{Allsopp}(1978)}]{allsopp78}
464: {Allsopp}, N.~J. 1978, \mnras, 184, 397
465:
466: \bibitem[{{Bahcall} \& {Tremaine}(1981)}]{bahcall81}
467: {Bahcall}, J.~N. \& {Tremaine}, S. 1981, \apj, 244, 805
468:
469: \bibitem[{{Belokurov} {et~al.}(2006)}]{belokurov06a}
470: {Belokurov}, V. {et~al.} 2006, \apjl, 647, L111
471:
472: \bibitem[{{Brown} {et~al.}(2006){Brown}, {Geller}, {Kenyon}, \&
473: {Kurtz}}]{brown06b}
474: {Brown}, W.~R., {Geller}, M.~J., {Kenyon}, S.~J., \& {Kurtz}, M.~J. 2006, \apj,
475: 647, 303
476:
477: \bibitem[{{Brown} {et~al.}(2007){Brown}, {Geller}, {Kenyon}, {Kurtz}, \&
478: {Bromley}}]{brown07a}
479: {Brown}, W.~R., {Geller}, M.~J., {Kenyon}, S.~J., {Kurtz}, M.~J., \& {Bromley},
480: B.~C. 2007, \apj, 660, 311
481:
482: \bibitem[{{Chapman} {et~al.}(2005){Chapman}, {Ibata}, {Lewis}, {Ferguson},
483: {Irwin}, {McConnachie}, \& {Tanvir}}]{chapman05}
484: {Chapman}, S.~C., {Ibata}, R., {Lewis}, G.~F., {Ferguson}, A.~M.~N., {Irwin},
485: M., {McConnachie}, A., \& {Tanvir}, N. 2005, \apjl, 632, L87
486:
487: \bibitem[{{Cole} {et~al.}(2007)}]{cole07}
488: {Cole}, A. {et~al.} 2007, pre-print astro-ph/0702646
489:
490: \bibitem[{{Corbally} \& {Garrison}(1984)}]{corbally84}
491: {Corbally}, C.~J. \& {Garrison}, R.~F. 1984, in The MK Process and Stellar
492: Classification, ed. R.~F. {Garrison}, 277
493:
494: \bibitem[{{C{\^o}t{\'e}} {et~al.}(1999){C{\^o}t{\'e}}, {Mateo}, {Olszewski}, \&
495: {Cook}}]{cote99}
496: {C{\^o}t{\'e}}, P., {Mateo}, M., {Olszewski}, E.~W., \& {Cook}, K.~H. 1999,
497: \apj, 526, 147
498:
499: \bibitem[{{de Rijcke} {et~al.}(2005){de Rijcke}, {Michielsen}, {Dejonghe},
500: {Zeilinger}, \& {Hau}}]{derijcke05}
501: {de Rijcke}, S., {Michielsen}, D., {Dejonghe}, H., {Zeilinger}, W.~W., \&
502: {Hau}, G.~K.~T. 2005, \aap, 438, 491
503:
504: \bibitem[{{De Rijcke} {et~al.}(2006){De Rijcke}, {Prugniel}, {Simien}, \&
505: {Dejonghe}}]{derijcke06}
506: {De Rijcke}, S., {Prugniel}, P., {Simien}, F., \& {Dejonghe}, H. 2006, \mnras,
507: 369, 1321
508:
509: \bibitem[{{Demers} {et~al.}(1984){Demers}, {Kibblewhite}, {Irwin}, {Bunclark},
510: \& {Bridgeland}}]{demers84}
511: {Demers}, S., {Kibblewhite}, E.~J., {Irwin}, M.~J., {Bunclark}, P.~S., \&
512: {Bridgeland}, M.~T. 1984, \aj, 89, 1160
513:
514: \bibitem[{{Dolphin} {et~al.}(2002){Dolphin}, {Saha}, {Claver}, {Skillman},
515: {Cole}, {Gallagher}, {Tolstoy}, {Dohm-Palmer}, \& {Mateo}}]{dolphin02}
516: {Dolphin}, A.~E., {Saha}, A., {Claver}, J., {Skillman}, E.~D., {Cole}, A.~A.,
517: {Gallagher}, J.~S., {Tolstoy}, E., {Dohm-Palmer}, R.~C., \& {Mateo}, M. 2002,
518: \aj, 123, 3154
519:
520: \bibitem[{{Evans}(1967)}]{evans67}
521: {Evans}, D.~S. 1967, in IAU Symp. 30: Determination of Radial Velocities and
522: their Applications, ed. A.~H. {Batten} \& J.~F. {Heard}, 57
523:
524: \bibitem[{{Evrard} {et~al.}(2007)}]{evrard07}
525: {Evrard}, A.~E. {et~al.} 2007, preprint astro-ph/0702241
526:
527: \bibitem[{{Freedman Woods} \& {Geller}(2007)}]{freedman07}
528: {Freedman Woods}, D. \& {Geller}, M.~J. 2007, \aj, submitted
529:
530: \bibitem[{{Gray} {et~al.}(2003){Gray}, {Corbally}, {Garrison}, {McFadden}, \&
531: {Robinson}}]{gray03}
532: {Gray}, R.~O., {Corbally}, C.~J., {Garrison}, R.~F., {McFadden}, M.~T., \&
533: {Robinson}, P.~E. 2003, \aj, 126, 2048
534:
535: \bibitem[{{Heisler} {et~al.}(1985){Heisler}, {Tremaine}, \&
536: {Bahcall}}]{heisler85}
537: {Heisler}, J., {Tremaine}, S., \& {Bahcall}, J.~N. 1985, \apj, 298, 8
538:
539: \bibitem[{{Jesseit} {et~al.}(2005){Jesseit}, {Naab}, \& {Burkert}}]{jesseit05}
540: {Jesseit}, R., {Naab}, T., \& {Burkert}, A. 2005, \mnras, 360, 1185
541:
542: \bibitem[{{Kleyna} {et~al.}(2005){Kleyna}, {Wilkinson}, {Evans}, \&
543: {Gilmore}}]{kleyna05}
544: {Kleyna}, J.~T., {Wilkinson}, M.~I., {Evans}, N.~W., \& {Gilmore}, G. 2005,
545: \apjl, 630, L141
546:
547: \bibitem[{{Koch} {et~al.}(2007){Koch}, {Wilkinson}, {Kleyna}, {Gilmore},
548: {Grebel}, {Mackey}, {Evans}, \& {Wyse}}]{koch07}
549: {Koch}, A., {Wilkinson}, M.~I., {Kleyna}, J.~T., {Gilmore}, G.~F., {Grebel},
550: E.~K., {Mackey}, A.~D., {Evans}, N.~W., \& {Wyse}, R.~F.~G. 2007, \apj, 657,
551: 241
552:
553: \bibitem[{{Kurtz} \& {Mink}(1998)}]{kurtz98}
554: {Kurtz}, M.~J. \& {Mink}, D.~J. 1998, \pasp, 110, 934
555:
556: \bibitem[{{Lee} {et~al.}(2006){Lee}, {Skillman}, {Cannon}, {Jackson}, {Gehrz},
557: {Polomski}, \& {Woodward}}]{lee06}
558: {Lee}, H., {Skillman}, E.~D., {Cannon}, J.~M., {Jackson}, D.~C., {Gehrz},
559: R.~D., {Polomski}, E.~F., \& {Woodward}, C.~E. 2006, \apj, 647, 970
560:
561: \bibitem[{{Leitherer} {et~al.}(1999){Leitherer}, {Schaerer}, {Goldader},
562: {Delgado}, {Robert}, {Kune}, {de Mello}, {Devost}, \&
563: {Heckman}}]{leitherer99}
564: {Leitherer}, C., {Schaerer}, D., {Goldader}, J.~D., {Delgado}, R.~M.~G.,
565: {Robert}, C., {Kune}, D.~F., {de Mello}, D.~F., {Devost}, D., \& {Heckman},
566: T.~M. 1999, \apjs, 123, 3
567:
568: \bibitem[{{Lo} {et~al.}(1993){Lo}, {Sargent}, \& {Young}}]{lo93}
569: {Lo}, K.~Y., {Sargent}, W.~L.~W., \& {Young}, K. 1993, \aj, 106, 507
570:
571: \bibitem[{{Mateo} {et~al.}(1993){Mateo}, {Olszewski}, {Pryor}, {Welch}, \&
572: {Fischer}}]{mateo93}
573: {Mateo}, M., {Olszewski}, E.~W., {Pryor}, C., {Welch}, D.~L., \& {Fischer}, P.
574: 1993, \aj, 105, 510
575:
576: \bibitem[{{Mateo}(1998)}]{mateo98}
577: {Mateo}, M.~L. 1998, \araa, 36, 435
578:
579: \bibitem[{{Mu{\~n}oz} {et~al.}(2006){Mu{\~n}oz}, {Carlin}, {Frinchaboy},
580: {Nidever}, {Majewski}, \& {Patterson}}]{munoz06a}
581: {Mu{\~n}oz}, R.~R., {Carlin}, J.~L., {Frinchaboy}, P.~M., {Nidever}, D.~L.,
582: {Majewski}, S.~R., \& {Patterson}, R.~J. 2006, \apjl, 650, L51
583:
584: \bibitem[{{Navarro} \& {Steinmetz}(1997)}]{navarro97}
585: {Navarro}, J.~F. \& {Steinmetz}, M. 1997, \apj, 478, 13
586:
587: \bibitem[{{Pizzella} {et~al.}(2005){Pizzella}, {Corsini}, {Dalla Bont{\`a}},
588: {Sarzi}, {Coccato}, \& {Bertola}}]{pizzella05}
589: {Pizzella}, A., {Corsini}, E.~M., {Dalla Bont{\`a}}, E., {Sarzi}, M.,
590: {Coccato}, L., \& {Bertola}, F. 2005, \apj, 631, 785
591:
592: \bibitem[{{Sandage}(1986)}]{sandage86}
593: {Sandage}, A. 1986, \aj, 91, 496
594:
595: \bibitem[{{Schaller} {et~al.}(1992){Schaller}, {Schaerer}, {Meynet}, \&
596: {Maeder}}]{schaller92}
597: {Schaller}, G., {Schaerer}, D., {Meynet}, G., \& {Maeder}, A. 1992, \aaps, 96,
598: 269
599:
600: \bibitem[{{Schlegel} {et~al.}(1998){Schlegel}, {Finkbeiner}, \&
601: {Davis}}]{schlegel98}
602: {Schlegel}, D.~J., {Finkbeiner}, D.~P., \& {Davis}, M. 1998, \apj, 500, 525
603:
604: \bibitem[{{Schulte-Ladbeck} {et~al.}(2002){Schulte-Ladbeck}, {Hopp},
605: {Drozdovsky}, {Greggio}, \& {Crone}}]{schulte02}
606: {Schulte-Ladbeck}, R.~E., {Hopp}, U., {Drozdovsky}, I.~O., {Greggio}, L., \&
607: {Crone}, M.~M. 2002, \aj, 124, 896
608:
609: \bibitem[{{Skillman} {et~al.}(1989){Skillman}, {Kennicutt}, \&
610: {Hodge}}]{skillman89}
611: {Skillman}, E.~D., {Kennicutt}, R.~C., \& {Hodge}, P.~W. 1989, \apj, 347, 875
612:
613: \bibitem[{{Tolstoy}(1996)}]{tolstoy96}
614: {Tolstoy}, E. 1996, \apj, 462, 684
615:
616: \bibitem[{{Tolstoy} {et~al.}(1998)}]{tolstoy98}
617: {Tolstoy}, E. {et~al.} 1998, \aj, 116, 1244
618:
619: \bibitem[{{van Zee} {et~al.}(2006){van Zee}, {Skillman}, \&
620: {Haynes}}]{vanzee06}
621: {van Zee}, L., {Skillman}, E.~D., \& {Haynes}, M.~P. 2006, \apj, 637, 269
622:
623: \bibitem[{{Vansevi{\v c}ius} {et~al.}(2004)}]{vansevicius04}
624: {Vansevi{\v c}ius}, V. {et~al.} 2004, \apjl, 611, L93
625:
626: \bibitem[{{V{\'a}zquez} \& {Leitherer}(2005)}]{vazquez05}
627: {V{\'a}zquez}, G.~A. \& {Leitherer}, C. 2005, \apj, 621, 695
628:
629: \bibitem[{{Wang} {et~al.}(2005){Wang}, {Woodroofe}, {Walker}, {Mateo}, \&
630: {Olszewski}}]{wang05}
631: {Wang}, X., {Woodroofe}, M., {Walker}, M.~G., {Mateo}, M., \& {Olszewski}, E.
632: 2005, \apj, 626, 145
633:
634: \bibitem[{{Wilkinson} {et~al.}(2004){Wilkinson}, {Kleyna}, {Evans}, {Gilmore},
635: {Irwin}, \& {Grebel}}]{wilkinson04}
636: {Wilkinson}, M.~I., {Kleyna}, J.~T., {Evans}, N.~W., {Gilmore}, G.~F., {Irwin},
637: M.~J., \& {Grebel}, E.~K. 2004, \apjl, 611, L21
638:
639: \bibitem[{{Wilkinson} {et~al.}(2006){Wilkinson}, {Kleyna}, {Wyn Evans},
640: {Gilmore}, {Read}, {Koch}, {Grebel}, \& {Irwin}}]{wilkinson06}
641: {Wilkinson}, M.~I., {Kleyna}, J.~T., {Wyn Evans}, N., {Gilmore}, G.~F., {Read},
642: J.~I., {Koch}, A., {Grebel}, E.~K., \& {Irwin}, M.~J. 2006, in EAS
643: Publications Series, ed. G.~A. {Mamon}, F.~{Combes}, C.~{Deffayet}, \&
644: B.~{Fort}, 105--112
645:
646: \bibitem[{{Willman} {et~al.}(2005)}]{willman05}
647: {Willman}, B. {et~al.} 2005, \apjl, 626, L85
648:
649: \bibitem[{{Young} \& {Lo}(1996)}]{young96}
650: {Young}, L.~M. \& {Lo}, K.~Y. 1996, \apj, 462, 203
651:
652: \bibitem[{{Zwicky}(1942)}]{zwicky42}
653: {Zwicky}, I.~F. 1942, Phys.\ Rev., 61, 489
654:
655: \end{thebibliography}
656:
657:
658: % TABLES
659:
660: % FIGURES
661:
662: \end{document}
663: