1: \documentclass[preprint,12pt]{aastex}
2:
3: %change
4: %\received{}
5: %\accepted{}
6: %\journalid{}{}
7: %\articleid{}{}
8:
9: %\slugcomment{for submission to the Astrophysical Journal Letters}
10:
11: \shorttitle{The Overdensity in Virgo and Sagittarius Debris}
12: \shortauthors{Newberg, Yanny et al.}
13:
14: \begin{document}
15:
16: \title{The Overdensity in Virgo, Sagittarius Debris, and the Asymmetric Spheroid}
17:
18: \author{
19: Heidi Jo Newberg\altaffilmark{\ref{RPI}},
20: Brian Yanny\altaffilmark{\ref{FNAL}},
21: Nate Cole\altaffilmark{\ref{RPI}},
22: Timothy C. Beers\altaffilmark{\ref{msu}},
23: Paola Re Fiorentin\altaffilmark{\ref{MPH}},
24: Donald P. Schneider\altaffilmark{\ref{PSU}},
25: Ron Wilhelm\altaffilmark{\ref{TTech}}
26: }
27:
28: \altaffiltext{1}{Dept. of Physics, Applied Physics and Astronomy, Rensselaer
29: Polytechnic Institute Troy, NY 12180; heidi@rpi.edu\label{RPI}}
30:
31: \altaffiltext{2}{Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory, P.O. Box 500, Batavia,
32: IL 60510; yanny@fnal.gov\label{FNAL}}
33:
34: \altaffiltext{3}{Department of Physics and Astronomy, Center for the Study of Cosmic Evolution, and Joint Institute for Nuclear Astrophysics, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI 48824\label{msu}}
35:
36: \altaffiltext{4}{Max-Planck-Institute f\"ur Astronomy, K\"onigstuhl 17, D-69117 Heidelberg, Germany \label{MPH}}
37:
38: \altaffiltext{5}{Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA 16802\label{PSU}}
39:
40: \altaffiltext{6}{Department of Physics, Texas Tech University, Lubbock, TX \label{TTech}}
41:
42:
43: \begin{abstract}
44:
45: We investigate the relationship between several previously identified Galactic halo stellar
46: structures in the direction of Virgo using imaging and spectroscopic observations
47: of F turnoff stars and blue horizontal branch stars
48: from the Sloan Digital Sky Survey (SDSS) and the Sloan Extension for Galactic
49: Understanding and Exploration (SEGUE).
50: We show that the Sagittarius dwarf leading tidal tail
51: does not pass through the solar neighborhood; it misses the Sun by more than
52: 15 kpc, passing through the Galactic plane outside the Solar Circle. It also
53: is not spatially coincident with the large stellar overdensity S297+63-20.5 in
54: the Virgo constellation. S297+63-20.5 has a distinct turnoff
55: color and kinematics. Faint ($g_0\sim 20.3$) turnoff stars
56: in S297+63-20.5 have line-of-sight, Galactic standard of rest
57: velocities $V_{gsr}=130\pm 10 \>\rm km\>s^{-1}$, opposite in sign
58: to infalling Sgr tail stars. The path of the Sgr leading tidal tail
59: is also inconsistent with the positions of some of the nearer stars with
60: which it has been associated, and whose velocities have favored
61: models with prolate Milky Way potentials. We additionally show that the
62: number densities of brighter ($g_0 \sim 19.8$) F turnoff stars are
63: not symmetric about the Galactic center, and that
64: this discrepancy is not primarily due to the S297+63-20.5 moving group.
65: Either the spheroid is asymmetric about the Galactic center,
66: or there are additional substructures that
67: conspire to be on the same side of the Galaxy as S297+63-20.5.
68: The S297+63-20.5 overdensity in Virgo is likely
69: associated with two other previously identified Virgo substructures: the
70: Virgo Stellar Stream (VSS) and the Virgo Overdensity (VOD). However,
71: the velocity difference between the VSS and S297+63-20.5 and the
72: difference in distance estimates between the VOD and S297+63-20.5 must be reconciled.
73: \end{abstract}
74:
75: \keywords{Galaxy: structure --- Galaxy: halo --- galaxies: individual -- Sagittarius}
76:
77: \section{Introduction\label{intro}}
78:
79: A number of studies have noted that there are more spheroid stars in the Virgo constellation
80: than were expected from smooth spatial models of the spheroid star density. The first
81: indication of spheroid substructure in this region of the sky came
82: from the \citet{vetal01} discovery of five excess RR Lyrae stars from Quasar Equatorial
83: Survey Team (QUEST) survey data. Although
84: a small number, it was a significant overdensity in a small area. The QUEST collaboration later
85: identified an excess of 23 RR Lyrae variables with this clump. These RR Lyrae
86: stars have apparent magnitudes $16.5<V_0<17.5$, and are within the Galactic coordinates
87: $279^\circ<l<317^\circ$, $60^\circ<b<63^\circ$.
88: The collaboration later dubbed this feature the ``$12^{\rm h}.4$ Clump" \citep{zvgw04}.
89: Subsequent spectra of the
90: RR Lyraes and BHB stars in this clump \citep{detal06} revealed a moving group at (RA, DEC)
91: $=(186^\circ,-1^\circ)$ with a line-of-sight,
92: Galactic standard of rest velocity of $V_{gsr}=99.8\rm \>km\>s^{-1}$ and a distance of 19
93: kpc from the Sun. They suggest that this moving group
94: be called the Virgo Stellar Stream (VSS).
95:
96: The existence of an overdensity of stars in the stellar spheroid near
97: $(l,b)=(297^\circ,63^\circ)$ was
98: independently confirmed by \citet{nyetal02} using measurements of blue turnoff stars from the Sloan
99: Digital Sky Survey (SDSS; York et al. 2000), and identified as S297+63-20.5.\footnote{In \citet{nyetal02} this structure
100: was incorrectly labeled 297+63-20. The ``S" signifies stream (or substructure), followed by the Galactic longitude, then
101: Galactic latitude, and the apparent magnitude of the reddening corrected $g_0$ turnoff.
102: In the present paper we correct the name to be S297+63-20.5; both names will refer to
103: the same overdensity of stars.}
104: The estimated distance of this structure
105: from the Sun, calculated from $g_0 = 20.5$ turnoff stars, is $r_{\rm Sun} = 18$ kpc, but the
106: color-magnitude diagram of this region does not have a tight main
107: sequence, indicating that the structure is likely to be dispersed in distance.
108: This overdensity appears to match the position of the ``$12^{\rm h}.4$ Clump", but is somewhat
109: offset from the VSS, which is at $(l,b)=(288^\circ,62^\circ)$.
110:
111: Because the mapping between the physical structure on the sky and
112: its nomenclature in the literature for the apparent excess in the number of
113: spheroid stars in the Virgo constellation is unclear,
114: we will refrain for now from identifying the S297+63-20.5 stars with the VSS,
115: though they are at about the same distance and position in the sky.
116: We will return to the question of which named spheroid structures are related to each other
117: in the discussion section of this paper.
118:
119: \citet{mswo03} also identify a structure in Virgo using the stellar catalogs from the 2MASS
120: survey, and connect it to ``M giants tens of kiloparsecs above the Galactic plane that are
121: in the heart of the descending, foreshortened northern loop," which is their
122: terminology for the leading tidal tail of the Sgr dwarf galaxy. Any overdensity in this
123: part of the sky is close to the orbital plane of the Sgr dwarf galaxy, and might be related to
124: the Sgr dwarf tidal debris. Later papers, for example \citet{ljm05}, show both the
125: leading and trailing tidal tails of the Sgr dwarf looping around through a similar
126: position on the sky, near the identified overdensities in Virgo, before passing through
127: the Galactic plane very close to the Sun. Since the Sagittarius tidal
128: tails are quite prominent in the spheroid, and the observed overdensity or
129: overdensities in the Virgo region are near the orbital plane of the Sagittarius dwarf, a
130: connection between these structures is worthy of exploration.
131:
132: \citet{jetal06} identify a large overdensity (the Virgo Overdensity, VOD) in the Virgo
133: constellation, which may or may not be related to the previously named substructures. Using
134: photometric parallaxes for a large number of SDSS stars, they show that this large overdensity
135: is $\approx 5-15$ kpc above the plane and covers $1000$ sq. deg. of sky. They detect no
136: downturn in the star counts toward lower Galactic latitudes, indicating that the structure
137: could continue further into the Galactic plane than the SDSS observations probe. At that time
138: the SDSS had not yet probed Galactic latitudes lower than about $60^\circ$ near $l=300^\circ$.
139: \citet{jetal06} interpret the overdensity as a significant spheroid substructure that might be an
140: invading dwarf galaxy. The estimated distance to the VOD is smaller than the distance to the
141: VSS or S297+63-20.5. It is unclear whether the nearer distance is real, or if distance
142: uncertainties are large enough that the VOD, VSS, and S297+63-20.5 could describe the same
143: physical structure. In \S 2 and \S 3 of this paper we will discuss S297+63-20.5 only; the relationship
144: of this overdensity to the VOD and VSS will be deferred to the discussion.
145:
146: More recently, \citet{mpjai06} suggest that the invading dwarf galaxy might be the Sgr
147: dwarf galaxy leading tidal tail, and show that the \citet{ljm05} model passes through the observed
148: location of the VOD, and that the stellar density of the VOD is similar to the model
149: predictions. They suggest that if the Sgr dwarf tidal stream
150: passes through the solar neighborhood, it will be detected as an excess of stars with
151: negative radial velocities in the northern Galactic hemisphere. This paper treats the
152: VOD as a separate entity from the VSS, but located in a similar position in space. The
153: VOD is described by these authors as likely to be associated with the Sgr leading arm, and
154: therefore infalling, and the VSS is a group of stars nearly coincident in sky position, but
155: with a different vertical and kinematic structure.
156:
157: Because the Sgr dwarf galaxy tidal tails can help constrain the shape of gravitational
158: potential of the Milky Way and its dark matter halo, they are the topic of
159: considerable study, independent from their possible connection with the observed
160: overdensity in Virgo. One can in principle, by building ever more sophisticated equipment,
161: know the position and velocity of every star in the Milky Way. Stars in tidal streams are
162: the only stars which one can even in principle know about their positions and velocities in
163: the past. Stars in tidal streams all resided, at one time in the past, in the progenitor
164: satellite dwarf galaxy or star cluster. It is this property of tidal streams that allows
165: us to use them to constrain the Milky Way potential.
166:
167: Because the Sgr dwarf tidal tails are the most prominent tidal debris in the spheroid, and
168: because the Sgr dwarf orbital plane is approximately perpendicular to the Galactic plane,
169: observations of the Sgr tidal debris potentially provide a strong indication of the shape of the gravitational
170: potential surrounding the Milky Way. Interestingly, a comparison of disruption models with stellar
171: positions and velocities in the Sgr tidal tails has produced a contradictory result.
172: The leading and trailing Sgr tidal tails do not lie on the
173: same plane \citep{nyetal03}; they are tilted in opposite directions with respect to the
174: orbital plane of the Sgr dwarf galaxy. Their tilt suggests that the Galactic potential is
175: oblate \citep{mgac04,jlm05,ljm05}. However, the radial velocities of
176: what appear to be some leading tidal tail stars
177: can only be fit to disruption models with prolate Galactic potentials \citep{h04,ljm05}.
178: The leading tidal tail stars that are not compatible with oblate Galactic potentials
179: are near the various identified substructures in Virgo.
180:
181: One must consider the possibility that the Milky Way potential is more complex than the models, or
182: that some Sgr leading tidal tail stars might be misidentified. \citet{metal06} seems to suggest
183: the latter. Figure 3 of their paper shows radial velocities for leading tidal tail debris
184: that has $V_{gsr}$ measurements like those of an oblate dark matter halo, and stars with
185: $V_{gsr}\approx -75$ km s$^{-1}$ that they interpret as arising from an ancient episode of
186: tidal stripping. \citet{ljm05}, however, show the leading tidal stream from Sgr
187: transitioning seamlessly into a clump of stars with $V_{gsr}\approx -100$ km s$^{-1}$. It
188: is this latter clump of Sgr leading tidal tail stars that can only be fit with a prolate halo
189: model. The data in both papers come from 2MASS selected M giants, and the velocity dispersions of
190: the stars in the vicinity of the Virgo constellation, with
191: $V_{gsr}\approx -100$ km s$^{-1}$, are much larger than other places along the tidal debris
192: stream.
193:
194:
195: Another complication that potentially blurs our understanding of the nature and extent of
196: the overdensity (or overdensities) in Virgo is the suggestion that the smooth population of stars in the
197: spheroid might be triaxial \citep{ny05,ny06,snfg06}. A triaxial spheroid can produce a stellar
198: density that is not symmetric around the center of the Galaxy, as viewed from our vantage point
199: near the Sun. This idea was proposed because
200: several authors see more spheroid stars in quadrant IV ($270^\circ<l<360^\circ$) than we
201: see in quadrant I ($0^\circ<l<90^\circ$), and because the lowest density of spheroid stars
202: appears to be at a Galactic longitude slightly less than $180^\circ$ \citep{ny06}. A triaxial spheroid
203: might explain how an overdensity could cover a large region of the sky and not immediately
204: disperse; the overdensity in Virgo might be partially composed of an increased
205: density of spheroid stars from the smooth component. Figure 3 of \citet{ny06} shows that
206: no model has been found that completely accounts for the observed overdensity of stars near
207: S297+63-20.5, so
208: although a triaxial spheroid might fit the tails of an overdensity in Virgo, we would still
209: expect to find a more spatially concentrated component of tidal debris with coherent velocities.
210:
211: A key distinction between explaining an asymmetry with a `local' stream vs. a `global' structure
212: such as a triaxial spheroid is the difference in observed velocity dispersion of member stars.
213: Stars in a stream must have a relatively small velocity dispersion ($\sigma < 30 \rm \> km\>s^{-1}$),
214: given the origin of the stream and given the fact that stream remains coherent as it moves
215: through the Galaxy's potential. On the other hand, a triaxial spheroid structure in the halo
216: may have a very large velocity dispersion ($\sigma \sim 100 \rm \> km\> s^{-1}$), but
217: evidence for its member stars will be spread around the whole of the halo.
218:
219: In this paper we attempt to disentangle the components of the spheroid substructure in
220: Virgo using SDSS photometry of Blue Horizontal Branch (BHB) and F turnoff stars to build
221: density maps of the tidal streams and the stellar spheroid itself. We show that the Sgr
222: dwarf leading tidal tail, which is in the North Galactic Cap, arcs over (farther from the
223: Galactic plane) the S297+63-20.5 overdensity, and over the position of the Sun in the
224: Galactic plane. If one extrapolates the path of the Sgr leading tidal tail below $b=30^\circ$,
225: it passes through the Galactic plane 15 kpc or more outside the Solar Circle. This calls into
226: question both the identification of S297+63-20.5 stars with the Sgr leading tidal tail and
227: the identity of the M giant stars identified with the leading tidal tail of Sagittarius
228: that have velocities in conflict with oblate models of the Galactic potential.
229:
230: We show that there is a clear peak in the density of $20<g_0<21$ F turnoff stars near
231: $(l,b)=(300^\circ,60^\circ)$ that is at least $20^\circ$ across, but the total extent on
232: the sky and distance range cannot be constrained by photometry alone.
233: The densities of F turnoff stars over a four magnitude range ($18.5 < g_0 < 22.5$) are not consistent with
234: an axisymmetric spheroid. If the absolute magnitude range of the F turnoff
235: stars is 1.5 magnitudes, the spread in distance is a factor of 3, or in this
236: case 10-32 kpc. In every direction that we probe at these implied distances, there are more stars in
237: quadrants III \& IV than there are in the symmetric position (with the same Galactic latitude
238: but with longitude $l_{symmetric} = 360^\circ-l$) in quadrants II \& I. If the spheroid is axisymmetric,
239: then the number counts should differ only where there is a significant tidal substructure. Either
240: there is an enormous substructure centered in Virgo but covering a large fraction of the
241: Galaxy or the smooth portion of the spheroid is not axisymmetric.
242:
243: We then measure the velocities of the F turnoff stars associated with S297+63-20.5 and find
244: that their line-of-sight, Galactic center of rest velocity is $V_{gsr}=130\pm 10\rm \>km\>s^{-1}$.
245: Throughout this paper, the symbol $V_{gsr}$ will refer to the line-of-sight component of the
246: velocity, as determined from radial velocity, transformed to the Galactic standard of rest,
247: using a Solar motion of $(v_X, v_Y, v_Z) = (10, 225, 7)$ km s$^{-1}$ \citep{db98}.
248: The measured $V_{gsr}$ is
249: not consistent with the leading tidal tail of Sgr, which has negative $V_{gsr}$, in support
250: of our claim that S297+63-20.5 is not spatially coincident with the Sgr stream. This velocity
251: is significantly higher than the measured $V_{gsr}$ for the VSS, but not so different that
252: the two structures could not be related in some way.
253:
254: In the direction $(l,b)=(300^\circ,55^\circ)$,
255: we see evidence for peaks with $V_{gsr}=-76\pm10\rm \>km\>s^{-1}$ and
256: $V_{gsr}=-168\pm10\rm \>km\>s^{-1}$. The first of the
257: two peaks appears to have a bluer turnoff than the latter peak, and could potentially be related to
258: the 2MASS M giant stars that have previously been assigned to the Sgr leading tidal tail.
259:
260:
261: \section{Spheroid Substructure from SDSS Photometry}
262:
263: \cite{ynetal00}, \citet{nyetal02}, and \cite{nyetal03} show that both the leading and
264: trailing tails of the Sgr dwarf spheroidal galaxy can be traced in SDSS color-selected BHB and
265: F turnoff stars. Since this work, much more SDSS data have become available, covering nearly
266: the entire North Galactic Cap. We will use the BHB and F turnoff stars in these data to
267: trace the Sagittarius dwarf galaxy tidal tails, and explore their connection with the S297+63-20.5
268: overdensity in Virgo. The data presented in this paper come from the SDSS DR5 \citep{yetal00,dr5} plus about
269: 200 square degrees of imaging data from SDSS II that fills in the gap in DR5 photometry
270: near the Galactic pole (to be released as part of SDSS-II DR6). We will be analyzing
271: $ugriz$ photometry \citep{figdss96, setal02} of 8500 sq. degrees in the North Galactic
272: Cap. Details of the SDSS survey geometry may be found in \cite{setal01} and
273: \cite{aetal03}. Other SDSS technical information can be found in: \citet{getal98},
274: \citet{hfsg01}, \citet{pmhhkli03}, \citet{ietal04}, \citet{getal06}, and \citet{tetal06}.
275:
276: \subsection{BHB stars - Tracing the Sgr Tidal Tails}
277:
278: Blue Horizontal Branch (BHB) stars are important for tracing spheroid structure because
279: they are intrinsically bright and because they are all approximately the same absolute magnitude
280: so their distances can be estimated from apparent magnitudes to create a three dimensional
281: picture of the spheroid. BHB stars are typically found in older stellar populations such as
282: are found in the spheroid, but are not found in all old populations. Even in the spheroid,
283: there are a significant number of high surface gravity stars with colors that suggest a
284: spectral type of A. These stars are either blue stragglers or young stars that have been
285: stripped from a star-forming region such as a dwarf galaxy, and are approximately two magnitudes
286: fainter than BHB stars. From SDSS photometry we can select stars with colors consistent
287: with spectral type A, and then we further divide this sample into
288: the stars whose photometry is more consistent with high surface gravity and the stars
289: whose photometry is more consistent with a BHB star. The photometric separation of A stars
290: by surface gravity is not perfect, but is good enough to reveal important spheroid substructures.
291:
292: Photometrically selected A-colored stars were chosen from the SDSS database in
293: a similar manner to \citet{ynetal00}. The stars were selected by the
294: criteria: ``PRIMARY," which eliminates duplicates, classified
295: as ``STAR" because the point-spread
296: function was consistent with a point source, and
297: having colors $-0.3 < (g-r)_0 < 0.0$, and $0.8 < (u-g)_0 < 1.5$. The
298: subscript `0' indicates that the magnitudes were corrected by the
299: \cite{sfd98} reddening as implemented for SDSS Data Release 5 (DR5; Adelman et al. 2007).
300: This correction is appropriate given the large distance of the BHB stars. We further
301: separate higher surface gravity blue straggler (BS) stars from the
302: lower surface gravity blue horizontal branch stars using the color
303: selection criteria of Figure 10 in \citet{ynetal00}.
304:
305: Fig.~\ref{sagxy} shows the spatial positions of the BHB stars in the plane of the Sgr
306: dwarf orbit, under the assumption that all of the stars have absolute magnitude
307: $M_{g_0} =0.7$ \citep{ynetal00}. We selected only BHB stars whose
308: projected position was within 15 kpc of the Sgr dwarf orbital plane, as defined in \citet{mswo03},
309: and rejected all stars within $0.2^\circ$ of the globular clusters M53, NGC 5053, NGC 4147,
310: and NGC 5466. The $X_{SGR,GC}$ and $Y_{SGR,GC}$ coordinates are in the Sgr orbital plane,
311: and the Galactic plane is at $Y_{SGR,GC}=0$. One can faintly see the newly discovered
312: Bootes dwarf galaxy (Belokurov et al. 2006b) near $(X_{SGR,GC}, Y_{SGR,GC}) = (10,-55)$ kpc.
313: This figure can be compared with Figure 11 of \citet{mswo03}, which is reproduced in
314: Fig.~\ref{f11} of this paper, and shows the positions of
315: 2MASS selected M giant stars in the Sgr tidal tails.
316:
317: In Fig.~\ref{sagxy}, one can clearly see the leading tidal tail of the Sgr dwarf tidal stream,
318: 30-40 kpc above the Galactic plane. A piece of the trailing tidal tail is in the upper left
319: corner. The center of the leading tidal tail appears to arc over the
320: solar position, and to descend outside the solar circle if one extrapolates the
321: trajectory down toward the plane. The stars in Sgr stream directly over the Sun in
322: Fig.~\ref{sagxy} appear to be in a very broad region of the sky, which is not consistent with results of
323: models of Sgr tidal debris, for example those of \citet{ljm05}. Since we have not
324: surveyed the entire volume within 15 kpc of the Sgr dwarf orbital plane, there are non-trivial
325: selection effects near the edges of the data, which in particular make it difficult to study
326: the structure within 20 kpc of the Sun in this figure. The leading tidal tail appears unexpectedly
327: broad in this projection as it arcs over the Sun, and the extrapolation of the leading
328: tidal tail toward the Galactic plane is somewhat ambiguous.
329:
330: Since viewing the data in the observed (magnitude) rather the derived (distance)
331: space often yields higher contrast on any structures present in the halo, we show in
332: Figure \ref{glambda} the $g_0$ magnitude vs. $\Lambda_\odot$ angular position along the
333: Sgr tidal stream, separately for BHB and BS stars within 15 kpc of the Sgr dwarf orbital plane.
334: The left panel contains the same stars as Fig.~\ref{sagxy}, but in apparent magnitude
335: versus angle along the Sgr orbit. The angle $\Lambda_\odot$ is measured from the center
336: of the Sgr dwarf galaxy, as viewed from the Sun, back along the direction of the trailing tidal
337: tail, as defined by \cite{mswo03}. This is the longitude part of a $(\Lambda_\odot,B_\odot)$
338: system in which the equator is rotated to line up with the Sgr dwarf orbital plane.
339:
340: A comparison of the left and right panels shows that the BHB/BS separation is quite
341: good but not perfect. Very few of the BHB stars in the leading tidal tail of Sgr are present
342: in the right panel showing high surface gravity (blue straggler) stars. We
343: have not analyzed the concentration of stars brighter than $g_0=15.5$.
344: These stars are saturated in the SDSS images, and more care is required to
345: determine how well color separation works with the interpolated
346: magnitudes of these stars. This figure can be compared with
347: the 2MASS M giant stars in the Sgr tidal tails of Figure 8
348: in \cite{mswo03} and Figure 2 of \citet{nyetal03}. The $\Lambda_\odot$ axis is flipped from
349: previous papers, but matches the orientation of the stream in Figure \ref{sagxy}.
350:
351: There is a density peak in the left panel of Figure~\ref{glambda}, centered at
352: $(\Lambda_\odot, g_0) = (240^\circ, 16.7)$, which we initially thought was related
353: to at least one of the previously discovered overdensities in
354: Virgo. However, Figure \ref{glambda2} shows that this overdensity
355: is on the wrong side of the Galaxy for it to be in Virgo.
356: Figure \ref{glambda2} splits the data from the left panel of Figure \ref{glambda} into two pieces:
357: the left panel of Figure \ref{glambda2} shows stars with $Z_{\rm SGR,GC} < 0$ and to the right
358: shows that with $Z_{\rm SGR,GC} > 0$. Since $Z_{\rm SGR,GC}$ is in approximately the same direction
359: as the solar motion (Galactic $Y$), the left panel shows primarily stars in quadrants
360: III and IV, and the right panel shows primarily stars in quadrants I and II.
361: The overdensity at $(\Lambda_\odot, g_0) = (240^\circ, 16.7)$ is in the right panel in Fig. \ref{glambda2}, which contains
362: primarily stars with $0^\circ<l<180^\circ$. The origin of this overdensity is
363: still uncertain (but see Belokurov et al. 2007b). It could be a single debris structure or a
364: superposition of separate streams. It is notable that several known globular clusters
365: conspire to be in approximately the same position in this diagram; possibly there is
366: debris associated with these globular clusters that is as yet unidentified.
367:
368: Note from Figures \ref{glambda} and \ref{glambda2} that the trailing tidal tail shifts from positive
369: $Z_{SGR,GC}$ to negative $Z_{SGR,GC}$ with increasing $\Lambda_\odot$. In the left panel of
370: Figure \ref{glambda2}, one notes a low contrast faint extension of this tidal tail down to
371: $(\Lambda_\odot, g_0) = (250^\circ, 17.3)$. In the right panel of Figure \ref{glambda2}
372: one sees the leading tidal tail at positive $Z_{SGR,GC}$. This also decreases substantially in density
373: as one proceeds along it to the left, and appears to be close to $Z_{SGR,GC}=0$ so it is split between
374: the left and right panels in Figure \ref{glambda2}. In both the leading and trailing tidal tails, we
375: see the pile-up
376: of debris near apogalacticon. In this projection, since the Sagittarius dwarf galaxy is $14^\circ$
377: below the Galactic plane, material falling down on us from close to the North Galactic Pole
378: in this orbital plane would fall toward us at $\Lambda_\odot = 270^\circ - 14^\circ = 256^\circ$.
379: Since the leading tidal tail arcs past
380: this angle, it likely passes through the Galactic plane outside the solar circle.
381:
382: \subsection{F turnoff Stars - Separating Sgr from S297+63-20.5}
383:
384: Since there are many more F turnoff stars in any stellar population than there are BHB stars, these F stars
385: are in principle better tracers of substructure.
386: The disadvantages of using
387: F turnoff stars is that they are 3 or 4 magnitudes
388: fainter than the horizontal branch, and have a broader spread in absolute magnitude (so they are less accurate distance indicators). The Sagittarius dwarf galaxy and tidal stream have a particularly blue
389: turnoff which makes them easy to separate from other Galactic populations. In this section we present data which follows
390: the leading tidal tail from the Sagittarius dwarf galaxy and shows that it misses the position of
391: the S297+63-20.5 overdensity and also passes over the position of the Sun before
392: falling down on the
393: Galactic plane outside the solar circle. We then present polar plots of F star density in the North Galactic
394: Cap in the magnitude ranges $19<g_0<20$, $20<g_0<21$, and $21<g_0<22$. The polar plots show that the
395: Sagittarius leading tidal tail is fainter and offset from the S297+63-20.5 overdensity, and also show
396: the extent of the S297+63-20.5 overdensity.
397:
398: Fig.~\ref{f11} shows our detections of Sagittarius dwarf tidal debris from F turnoff stars in SDSS
399: stripes 13 and 15-23,
400: along with the previous detections of Sgr debris from BHB stars (Figure 3 of Newberg et al. 2003)
401: and 2MASS M giants \citep{mswo03}.
402: The new Sgr debris positions were determined by selecting by eye the center of the highest density peak
403: in a histogram of $g_0$ versus angle along the SDSS stripe for blue F stars ($0.0 < (g-r)_0 < 0.3$).
404: These positions were then converted to $(X_{SGR,GC},Y_{SGR,GC},Z_{SGR,GC})$, assuming $M_{g_0}=4.2$.
405: This absolute magnitude was determined in \citet{nyetal02} by comparison with the Sgr BHB stars, so the SDSS BHB
406: star distances should be on the same scale as the SDSS F turnoff star distances, though there could be
407: an overall scale error. Note that the Sagittarius M giants have systematically smaller heliocentric
408: distances than either the A stars or the F stars \citep{chouetal06}.
409:
410: The debris was identified as Sgr tidal debris because it was contiguous with the overdensity in
411: the adjacent stripe. There was some freedom in choosing the stream positions, as the profile
412: of the overdensity was often asymmetric or bifurcated (Belokurov et al. 2006a). The larger open
413: squares in Figure~\ref{f11} show the positions of the higher density tidal debris. If there was a
414: second piece of tidal debris near the main Sgr leading tidal
415: tail in any stripe, it is shown in Figure~\ref{f11} as a smaller open square. The positions of the
416: Sgr F turnoff star detections are presented in Table 1.
417:
418: Fig.~\ref{f11} clearly demonstrates that the leading tidal tail of the Sagittarius dwarf will
419: pierce the Galactic plane outside the solar circle. This is in contrast to the 2MASS M star observations
420: shown on the same figure.
421: It is known that the stellar population in
422: the tidal tails is more metal poor and older than the stars in the core of the Sgr dwarf galaxy \citep{betal06}, so
423: it is reasonable to expect that the stellar populations would differ as a function of distance along
424: the stream. However, one doesn't expect that stellar population differences would produce this much of a distance
425: difference between estimates from F turnoff stars and M giants. Another possibility that should be
426: considered is that the M giants near the end of the leading tidal tail are not all related to Sgr.
427:
428: Fig. \ref{f11} also shows that although S297+63-20.5,
429: indicated with a large cross, is close to the plane of the Sagittarius dwarf orbit, S297+63-20.5 is much
430: closer to the Sun than the Sgr leading tidal debris.
431: Any debris that is in the Sgr dwarf orbit is plausibly connected to this dwarf galaxy, but
432: this significant overdensity in Virgo is not an extension of the Sgr leading tidal tail, and there is
433: no obvious connection with Sgr.
434:
435: The distance discrepancy between S297+63-20.5 and the Sgr leading tidal tail
436: is demonstrated in another way by looking at polar plots of F star densities in
437: the North Galactic Cap at different apparent magnitudes. We selected the stellar data from SDSS DR6
438: with $0.2<(g-r)_0<0.3$ and $(u-g)_0>0.4$. The $(g-r)_0$ range was selected to be centered on the
439: turnoff color of S297+63-20.5, which is measured as 0.26 in \citet{nyetal02}.
440: By excluding stars
441: stars redder than $(g-r)_0=0.3$, one avoids thick disk turnoff stars, even if they exist at
442: these faint magnitudes. Fig.~\ref{polarplot} (lower panel) shows F stars with $20<g_0<21$; this magnitude
443: range brackets the estimated apparent magnitude of the turnoff of S297+63-20.5.
444: The figure includes photometric data from SDSS, as well as some extra photometric data obtained
445: as part of the Sloan Extension for Galactic Understanding and Evolution (SEGUE), which consists of
446: $2.5^\circ$-wide scans at constant Galactic longitude which appear as radial extensions to our
447: sky coverage of the North Galactic Cap in this figure.
448:
449: The stars in Fig.~\ref{polarplot} trace structure in
450: the spheroid of the Milky Way at distances $\sim 14.5 - 23$ kpc from the Sun. A larger density
451: of F stars is represented by a darker shading in the equal-area polar plot, centered on the
452: North Galactic cap. The Sagittarius leading arm is clearly visible running from
453: $(l,b) = (205^\circ,25^\circ)$ to $(305^\circ,65^\circ)$. More prominent is the S297+63-20.5 overdensity,
454: centered near $l=300^\circ$, and hugging the lower edge of the data. Note that although there could be some
455: overlap in the spatial positions of some of the stars, the denser portions of the Sgr stream are separate from S297+63-20.5.
456: While most of the stars in
457: the S297+63-20.5 are contained within an area of the sky 15$^\circ$ in diameter, the tails of the distribution
458: could cover half of the North Galactic Cap.
459:
460: In order to show conclusively that the polar plot cuts through S297+63-20.5, we perform the mathematical
461: equivalent of folding the data from the top half of the lower panel in Fig.~\ref{polarplot} down over the
462: line described by $l=0^\circ$, $l=180^\circ$, and subtracting it from the data on the bottom half. In
463: other words, data between $l = 0^\circ$ and $l = 180^\circ$ is subtracted from
464: the symmetrical point with the identical $b$ at $l' = 360^\circ-l$ and the residual is binned and plotted.
465: The result, displayed in the top panel in Fig.~\ref{polarplot}, shows a localized structure near
466: $(l,b)=(300^\circ,64^\circ)$, which is at the same position as S297+63-20.5, within the errors of each
467: measurement. This folding of the data should leave zero residual (except where there are streams or other halo substructure) if the spheroid is axisymmetric. If the spheroid is
468: asymmetric, then more stars should have been subtracted over a wide area of
469: the upper panel, but it is difficult to make a smooth spheroid density function
470: that would include a strong peak like the one we see at $l=300^\circ$.
471:
472: To clarify the relationship between S297+63-20.5 and Sgr, we show in Fig.~\ref{polarplot2} the F
473: star polar plots for stars selected with $19<g_0<20$ and $21<g_0<22$. The upper panel shows the
474: brighter stars.
475: There is still a clear excess of stars at $l>180^\circ$ compared to the position in the sky that is symmetric
476: with respect to the Galactic center. For example, there are many more stars at $(l,b)=(285^\circ,60^\circ)$
477: than there are at $(l,b)=(75^\circ,60^\circ)$. However, there is not a clear peak in the star counts.
478: The asymmetry in star counts could either be an asymmetry in a smooth distribution of
479: stars or a dispersed stream over a large area of sky.
480:
481: The lower panel is dominated by a more distant piece
482: of the Sagittarius dwarf leading tidal tail, crossed at $b\sim 50^\circ$ with the much fainter Orphan
483: Stream \citep{betal07a}. There are excess stars near $(l,b)=(300^\circ,60^\circ)$, but they are confused
484: with and overwhelmed by stars from the Sgr tidal tails at this magnitude. A connection
485: between the Sgr tidal tail and S297+63-20.5 cannot be completely ruled out, but the bulk of the turnoff stars in the
486: Sgr stream are at least a magnitude fainter ($g_0 \sim 21.5$) than the bulk of the
487: turnoff of S297+63-20.5 ($g_0 \sim 20.5$).
488: Models of Sgr debris such as that of \citet{ljm05} show some debris
489: stars near the position of S297+63-20.5, but not a strong peak of debris. Either the models do not
490: adequately match the stellar debris, or S297+63-20.5 was not stripped from Sgr.
491:
492: The polar plots show in a compelling way that the Sgr leading tidal tail intersects neither the
493: Sun nor the S297+63-20.5 overdensity in Virgo. The turnoff stars in the Sgr dwarf tidal stream are
494: fainter than $g_0 = 21.0$ near $(l,b)=(297^\circ,63^\circ)$ - they show up only in the faintest polar
495: plot on the lower panel of Fig.~\ref{polarplot2}. The Sgr leading tidal tail is also
496: separated from S297+63-20.5 by about ten degrees in the sky (with significant overlap).
497: As the leading tidal tail descends closer to the Sun we see the stream moving
498: toward the anticenter (Fig.~\ref{polarplot}). In other words, it passes over the Sun in the North
499: Galactic Cap. Close to the anticenter, the Sgr stream is fainter than $g_0=21$
500: (compare Fig.~\ref{polarplot} with Fig.~\ref{polarplot2} near the anticenter).
501: Near $(l, b)=(205^\circ, 30^\circ)$ the Sgr stream is visible
502: in all of the F turnoff star polar plots, but the star density is the greatest at this
503: position for $20<(g-r)_0<21$. Since the the Str stream turnoff at $l=205^\circ$ is at $g_0=20.5$, its
504: implied distance is 18 kpc from the Sun. The Sgr stream is therefore at least 15 kpc from the
505: Solar position and well beyond the Solar Circle as it descends toward the Galactic plane.
506:
507: \subsection{F Turnoff Stars - separating S297+63-20.5 from the Smooth Spheroid}
508:
509: We have already remarked that S297+63-20.5 seems to extend over a large range of magnitudes and
510: a significant fraction of the sky. We now study whether that large extent could be partially
511: explained by an asymmetric (triaxial) smooth distribution of spheroid stars.
512:
513: Fig.~\ref{fcountsplates} shows quantitative comparisons between the numbers of F turnoff stars as
514: a function of magnitude near S297+63-20.5 and those at a symmetric position in the Milky Way,
515: with the same Galactic latitude but on the opposite side of the Galactic center.
516: If the spheroid is axisymmetric, then one could find the number of stars in S297+63-20.5
517: from the difference between the star counts at $(l,b)=(297^\circ,63^\circ)$ and the star counts at
518: $(l,b)=(63^\circ,63^\circ)$.
519: In particular, Fig.~\ref{fcountsplates} shows a comparison of star counts at two places in Virgo:
520: $(l,b)=(288^\circ,62^\circ)$ (upper panel) and $(l,b)=(300^\circ,55^\circ)$ (lower panel), with
521: the corresponding position on the sky on the other side of the Galactic center.
522:
523: These two positions were selected because they match the positions of SEGUE spectroscopic fields in which
524: we will analyze radial velocity kinematics later in this paper. Each sky area probed has a radius of
525: $1.5^\circ$, which matches the footprint of a SEGUE spectroscopic plate. In addition, F stars are
526: selected with a color range: $0.2<(g-r)_0<0.4$ to match the color range with the highest
527: concentration of F stars in S297+63-20.5.
528: This redder color range will include a significant number of thick disk stars at magnitudes brighter than
529: $g_0=18$, but at fainter magnitudes there will be little contamination. Since the
530: thick disk (unlike the halo), is axisymmetric, there should be no effect on the difference in bright star counts
531: due to thick disk stars between the Virgo selected regions and the symmetric reference regions.
532:
533: Comparing the star counts at $(l,b)=(288^\circ,62^\circ)$, which is centered on the
534: central knot of the VSS, with the star counts at $(l,b)=(72^\circ,62^\circ)$ in the upper panel of Fig.~\ref{fcountsplates},
535: one sees that the star counts start to diverge at about $18^{\rm th}$ magnitude in $g_0$. By $g_0=20.5$, there are
536: not quite a factor of two more stars in the VSS field than in the comparison field. In the magnitude
537: range $19.4<g_0<20.0$, there are 560 stars in the $(l,b)=(288^\circ,62^\circ)$ field and only
538: 357 stars in the corresponding reference field at $(l,b)=(72^\circ,62^\circ)$. Of the stars in the
539: VSS field, 36$\pm$6\% are part of S297+63-20.5. In the magnitude range $20.0<g_0<20.3$, there are
540: 369 stars in the VSS field and 206 stars in the reference field. Of the fainter stars in the VSS field,
541: 44$\pm$7\% are part of S297+63-20.5. This means that if
542: one selected a random turnoff star in the VSS field at $g_0=20.5$, there is nearly a 50\% chance of
543: it being a star from S297+63-20.5.
544:
545: The $(l,b)=(300^\circ,55^\circ)$ field in Virgo diverges from the reference field at
546: $(l,b)=(60^\circ,55^\circ)$ at the even brighter magnitude of $g_0=17$ (lower panel of
547: Fig.~\ref{fcountsplates}). About a quarter of the stars with $17<g_0<19$ are part of the
548: S297+63-20.5 excess in Virgo. In the magnitude range $19.4<g_0<20.0$, there are 699
549: stars in the Virgo field, and only 440 in the reference field. Of the stars in the Virgo field,
550: 37$\pm$5\% are part of S297+63-20.5. In the magnitude range $20.0<g_0<20.3$, there are 453 stars in the
551: Virgo field and 238 stars in the reference field. Of the fainter stars in the Virgo field, 47$\pm$6\%
552: are part of S297+63-20.5. At a magnitude of $g_0=20.5$, more than half of the stars in
553: the $(300^\circ,55^\circ)$ field should be part of the excess. If the excess population has a unique
554: kinematic signature, as is expected for a stream or satellite, it should be quite prominent in any sample
555: of faint F turnoff stars. We will return to these fractions when we examine the kinematic distribution
556: of selected F turnoff star spectra in these fields.
557:
558: The wide range of magnitudes and sky coverage makes the overdensity in Virgo difficult to
559: rationalize with our expectations for tidal
560: debris, even before we begin looking at the spectroscopy results. We consider a non-axisymmetric
561: spheroid model as a possible alternative
562: explanation for the excess star counts in the Virgo region.
563:
564: To compare the observed star counts with those
565: predicted by the best currently available asymmetric model of the spheroid, the
566: Galactocentric triaxial Hernquist model of \citep{ny05,ny06,snfg06} is chosen. In this model,
567: the center of the spheroid distribution is fixed at 8.5 kpc from the Sun with an assumed absolute
568: magnitude of blue F turnoff stars of $M_g=4.2$. If the absolute magnitude is incorrect, then the overall
569: scale of all lengths and distances in the model will be off by the same factor. See \citet{ny06}
570: and \citet{snfg06} for parameter definitions and values for the triaxial Hernquist model.
571: The model was generated to fit SDSS F turnoff star counts with color $0.1<(g-r)_0<0.3$, which is a bit bluer
572: than the data at $0.2 < (g-r)_0 < 0.4$. To account for this,
573: the normalization of the model is adjusted upward by a factor of 1.5 so that it matches the star counts as
574: well as possible. We cannot correct for the fact that the model does not include the thick disk stars
575: at brighter magnitudes, so we will have to ignore the difference between the star counts and the model
576: brighter than about $g_0=18$. These triaxial spheroid model curves are plotted in Fig.~\ref{fcountsplates}
577: for comparison with the F turnoff star counts.
578:
579: The model is a reasonable fit to the data for $18<g_0<21$. At brighter magnitudes the thick disk dominates,
580: and at fainter magnitudes there are fewer stars than the model predicts. The discrepancy at faint magnitudes
581: is probably due to a deficiency in the models, and possibly the lower completeness
582: of the fainter stellar data.
583: Note that if one compares the star counts at
584: $(l,b)=(288^\circ,62^\circ)$ and $(l,b)=(300^\circ,55^\circ)$ with the model, the star counts begin to
585: diverge somewhere between $g_0=19$ and $g_0=20$. There is a much smaller excess in the number
586: of stars at magnitudes
587: brighter than $g_0=20$. Even using the current best fit triaxial spheroid model, however, one cannot account
588: for all of the excess stars, particularly those with magnitudes $20<g_0<21$.
589:
590: In the next section the two possibilities for explaining the stellar count excess are
591: explored using additional information obtained from a sample of spectra from the same population of
592: stars. If the spheroid is axisymmetric, and the S297+63-20.5 structure is tidal debris, then
593: 37$\pm$4\% of the stars with $19.4<g_0<20.0$ should have coherent velocities (i.e. show a small $\sigma < 30 \rm \> km\> s^{-1}$ dispersion), and 46$\pm$5\% of the stars with
594: $20.0<g_0<20.3$ should have coherent velocities. If the spheriod is asymmetric, then the fraction of
595: stars with coherent velocities is expected to be lower. With the best fit model presented, one estimates that at
596: $(l,b)=(288^\circ,62^\circ)$, 64 of 560, or 11\% of stars with $19.4<g_0<20.0$ should have coherent
597: velocities, and 159 of 369, or 43\% of stars with $20.0<g_0<20.4$ should have coherent velocities. In
598: the direction $(l,b)=(300^\circ,55^\circ)$, 76 of 699, or 11\% of the stars with $19.4<g_0<20.0$ should
599: be coherent, and 127 of 453, or 28\% of stars with $20.0<g_0<20.4$ should be coherent. The model numbers
600: are an estimate, and will change somewhat as new non-axisymmetric spheroid models are developed.
601:
602: \section{Substructure in Velocities of F Turnoff Stars}
603:
604: Since S297+63-20.5 was discovered in F turnoff stars, and is prominent against the background of
605: smooth spheroid stars in that population, one would like to measure the velocities
606: of these same types of stars if possible. Since the overdensity is most noticeable in quite
607: faint F turnoff stars (with $20.0 < g_0 < 21.0$), this is not an easy task. Essentially zero
608: F turnoff stars in this magnitude range were observed in
609: the primary SDSS galaxy survey.
610:
611: We are currently in the middle of SDSS II, which includes three survey projects, including the
612: Sloan Extension for Galactic Understanding and Exploration (SEGUE).
613: The SEGUE portion of SDSS II is designed to reveal
614: velocity substructure in the Milky Way thick disk and spheroid through analysis of radial
615: velocities and stellar properties from spectroscopy of $\sim 250,000$ Galactic stars.
616: SEGUE spectra are identical
617: to SDSS spectra, in that they are observed with the same instrument and processed with the same (evolving)
618: software; the spectra cover 3700-9300 \AA\ with a resolution of $\approx$ 2000. The difference is that SDSS
619: targeted a very few Galactic stars, most of which are BHBs or bright F subdwarfs that were used as standard
620: stars, while SEGUE targets Galactic stars exclusively. While the SDSS obtained galaxy spectra in all areas
621: of the sky with imaging data, SEGUE samples the sky with a set of pencil beam spectral surveys
622: in 200 target fields, spaced roughly 10 to 20 degrees apart over 3/4 of the sky.
623:
624: In the SEGUE survey, two 640 fiber plates of spectra \citep{setal01} are obtained in each target field.
625: The brighter targets are put on one plate which is exposed about 45 minutes. Stars fainter than
626: about $r_0 = 17.8$ are assigned to the second plate, which is exposed for 1.5 to 2 hours.
627: The faint plates reach about $g_0 = 20.5$, which is just at the bright end of the S297+63-20.5 turnoff population.
628: Targets for SEGUE spectroscopic fibers are chosen by color from the SDSS imaging data to represent
629: a variety of stellar types at a variety of distances sampling the thick disk and spheroid of the Milky Way.
630:
631: We have already obtained two pairs
632: of SEGUE spectroscopic plates in directions that probe the S297+63-20.5 overdensity.
633: These plate pairs are numbered 2689/2707 (bright/faint) at $(l,b)=(300^\circ,55^\circ)$ and
634: 2558/2568 at $(l,b)=(288^\circ,62^\circ)$.
635: The second plate pair is centered on the VSS RR Lyrae star overdensity.
636: During DR6 spectro test processing of globular cluster calibration stars with known cataloged
637: velocities, a universal offset of $7 \rm \>km\>s^{-1}$ was noted in the
638: wavelength solutions; this zero point correction was added to all SEGUE radial velocities used
639: in this paper.
640:
641: Most of the faint stars of interest, with $0.1 < (g-r)_0 < 0.4$, are selected as ``F subdwarf,"
642: ``Blue Horizontal Branch," or ``F/G" spectroscopic target types. The BHB category goes as red
643: as $(g-r)_0 < 0.2$ and as faint as
644: $g_0 < 20.5$. These stars are randomly sampled to favor lower surface gravity stars using a photometric
645: measure of surface gravity for A-colored stars called the v-index \citep{lnrrs98} to estimate surface
646: gravity. The F/G category randomly samples stars with $r_0<20.2$ and $0.2<(g-r)_0<0.48$. The faint subdwarf
647: category favors F stars with low metalicity by favoring stars that are at the very bluest tip of the
648: stellar locus in $(u-g)_0$ and $(g-r)_0$, using a measure of position along the stellar locus in color space called $P1$
649: \citep{hetal03}. The criteria for selecting each SEGUE category are complex, and include techniques for
650: varying the likelihood of selecting a star for spectroscopy as a function of apparent magnitude, so that
651: we select fewer of the more numerous, fainter stars. The broader goal is to sample all of the components
652: of the Milky Way, so less common components are favored in the selection process.
653:
654: Fig.~\ref{seguets} shows the color magnitude diagram of the bluer SDSS stars within
655: $1.5^\circ$ of the center of the SEGUE plate pair 2689/2707, along with the colors and magnitudes
656: of the stars with $0.1<(g-r)_0<0.4$ and $19.4 < g_0 < 20.5$
657: for which we have obtained SEGUE spectra with the
658: two SEGUE plate pairs 2689/2707 and 2558/2568. This is the entire region from which the spectra in
659: this paper are selected. The symbols show that the spectra
660: are spread in color and magnitude, and do not follow the color distribution of the spheroid stars.
661: We must select stars in narrow color and magnitude ranges that correspond to a component we intend to
662: sample; we cannot rely on the fact that one component has many more stars to guarantee that it will
663: dominate the sample.
664:
665: The stars that we expect to best sample the turnoff of S297+63-20.5 are those with $0.2<(g-r)_0<0.4$
666: and $20<g_0<21$. The SEGUE spectra only go as faint as $g_0<20.5$, and most of the spectra have
667: $g_0<20.3$, so we sample only the brightest end of the magnitude range. The right panels of
668: Fig.~\ref{fstarrv} show $V_{gsr}$ for stars from SEGUE faint plates 2707 and 2568 (available publicly with
669: the release of SDSS DR7) that have the colors and magnitudes of S297+63-20.5 F turnoff stars, and
670: radial velocity errors, as measured by cross-correlation with ELODIE
671: standard templates \citep{mipc04}, of less than 20 km s$^{-1}$.
672:
673: In both plates, there is a clear excess of faint stars with positive radial velocities. In the combined
674: panel (bottom right of Fig.~\ref{fstarrv}), there is a five sigma peak in the bin $112<V_{gsr}<144 \rm \>km\>s^{-1}$. There
675: are 30 stars with positive $V_{gsr}$ and only 13 stars with negative $V_{gsr}$. If all of the excess stars
676: are associated with S297+63-20.5, then 40$\pm$11\% of the fainter F turnoff stars could be associated
677: with a single tidal debris structure in Virgo.
678:
679: This fraction is consistent with estimates from photometry, whether or not the spheroid is symmetric.
680: In the symmetric spheroid case, we expected $46\pm5$\% of the excess stars with $20.0<g_0<20.3$ to be
681: in the excess population. If the triaxial spheroid model is correct, the percentage in the excess
682: population is about 35\% for both plates combined. Our measured value of $40\pm11$\% is consistent with
683: either of these options. Therefore, from the faint ($g_0 > 20$) spectroscopic and photometric
684: data combined we conclude: the majority of the stars in the S297+63-20.5 overdensity are consistent with the presence of single substructure with a coherent velocity of
685: $130 \pm 10 \rm \> km\>s^{-1}$ and relatively small dispersion, as we would expect for tidal debris.
686:
687: In the left panels of Fig.~\ref{fstarrv}, we show $V_{gsr}$ for the stars with $19.4<g_0<20.0$. In these
688: plots, there is no excess in the $122<V_{gsr}<144 \rm \>km\>s^{-1}$ bin. One plate has more positive velocities, and the
689: other has more negative velocities. In the combined panel (lower left of Fig.~\ref{fstarrv}), the only
690: significant peak has $-176<V_{gsr}<-144\rm \>km\>s^{-1}$. Thus the brighter F stars, in the left panels of
691: Fig.~\ref{fstarrv}, have distinctly different kinematics than the fainter stars in the right panels
692: of the same figure. Out of 72 brighter stars, a few at best are part of the moving group we
693: identified in fainter stars. The symmetric spheroid assumption indicated that we should have found 37\%,
694: which is 27 stars, in a peak near $122<V_{gsr}<144\rm\>km\>s^{-1}$. The most we can imagine assigning to a peak
695: are about seven stars from the plate at $(l,b)=(288^\circ,62^\circ)$ that are around $V_{gsr}=200\rm\>km\>s^{-1}$.
696: The moving group is ten percent
697: or less of the stars with $19.4<g_0<20.0$.
698: This differs at the $4\sigma$ level with our expectation of 27 stars present in a peak if the halo is axisymmetric.
699:
700: This measurement of brighter ($19.4 <g_0 < 20$) star kinematics and photometry
701: thus favors a triaxial spheroid. In the symmetric spheroid model (plus individual star stream peaks), we expected $37\pm 4$\%
702: of the stars to be coherent in velocity, and we only found 11\% at the most. The triaxial spheroid model
703: predicted that 11\% of the stars would be coherent in velocity, which is in good
704: agreement with the observed fraction.
705:
706: There is one significant peak in the velocities of the brighter F turnoff stars, but it has a very
707: negative $V_{gsr}$.
708: We identify as a ``peak" any bin with more than a $2.5\sigma$ excess in the expected number of stars,
709: where $\sigma^2=y(1-y/n)$, $y$ is the expected number of stars, and $n$ is the total number of stars
710: in the 100 square degree region. The limit for a bin to be identified as a peak is shown by the dotted
711: curve in Fig.\ref{fstarrv}. In plate 2707, there are five stars with $-176<V_{gsr}<-144 \rm km\>s\>^{-1}$ where we would
712: have expected only one, and three stars in plate 2568 where we would have expected only two. This amounts
713: to an excess of about five stars in the summed histogram, lower left of Fig.~\ref{fstarrv}.
714: The mean velocity of this peak is $-168\pm 10\rm \>km\>s^{-1}$.
715:
716: Since \citet{nyetal02} measure a turnoff color for S297+63-20.5 of $(g-r)_0=0.26$, one would not expect
717: many stars in this structure to have measured colors of $0.1<(g-r)_0<0.2$ in the SDSS. We show
718: measurements of $V_{gsr}$ for these bluer stars in Fig.~\ref{fstarrv2}. In the fainter ($20.0<(g-r)_0<20.5$)
719: set of stars, there are maybe two excess stars in the bin one to the right of the moving group
720: associated with the center of S297+63-20.5, but no significant velocity peaks are observed.
721:
722: In the left panels of Fig.~\ref{fstarrv2}, we see two marginally significant peaks: one at nearly the same
723: velocity as the $V_{gsr}=130 \rm \>km\>s^{-1}$ peak in Fig.~\ref{fstarrv2}, and one at in the bin with
724: $-80<V_{gsr}<-48$. We looked at the individual stars in positive velocity peak, and most of them are
725: at the very faint and very red edges of the selection criteria. Possibly, they represent blue
726: stragglers that are at the same distance but have brighter absolute magnitudes than the F turnoff
727: stars in the moving group identified in the fainter panels of Fig.~\ref{fstarrv}.
728:
729: The peak with negative radial velocity is at $-76\pm10\rm \>km\>s^{-1}$, but note that there are more
730: stars on the negative velocity side of this peak than on the positive side. If most of the brighter stars
731: in this color range are associated either with the positive or the negative $V_{gsr}$ peak, then
732: the Gaussian distribution from the expected spheroid would be much lower and the center of the
733: peak would move one bin to the left. The center of the peak is nearly between two bins.
734: This peak is more pronounced in plate 2707 than in plate 2568.
735: Once this peak is identified, one can see that it also present at some level in the fainter panels on
736: the right of Fig.~\ref{fstarrv2}.
737: Since the stars in this peak are at about the same distance and line-of-sight velocity as stars
738: which other authors have attributed to the Sgr dwarf leading tidal tail, they will be analyzed at
739: greater length in the discussion section of this paper.
740:
741: \section{Discussion}
742:
743: \subsection{Is S297+63-20.5 Related to the Sagittarius Dwarf Tidal Stream?}
744:
745: There was a time when any significant clump of tidal debris in the spheroid was suspected of belonging to
746: the one known example of present-day merging in our galaxy $-$ the Sagittarius dwarf tidal stream. We now
747: know there are many tidal debris streams, though the only currently known tidal stream as large as that of the Sagittarius dwarf
748: is the Monoceros stream in the Galactic plane \citep{ynetal03,ietal03}. We identify stars in the tidal tails of the Sagittarius dwarf spheroidal galaxy
749: because either their locations and radial velocities are contiguous to those of other known pieces of Sagittarius
750: debris or because their locations and velocities match those of models.
751:
752: In this paper, we have presented a strong argument that S297+63-20.5 is not part of the Sgr leading tidal tail
753: because the turnoff stars in S297+63-20.5 are much brighter than those in the leading tidal tail
754: debris in the same direction in the sky, and the stars in S297+63-20.5 have positive $V_{gsr}$ while Sgr leading
755: tidal debris would have negative $V_{gsr}$. Moreover, \citet{nyetal02} showed that the turnoff of
756: S297+63-20.5 is redder than that of the Sgr tidal stream anywhere it has been detected in the sky.
757:
758: Although \citet{mpjai06} were able to generate a model that shows the leading tail of the Sagittarius
759: stream going through the position of the S297+63-20.5, they did so at the cost of not fitting some of the
760: more distant spatial detections of that same tidal tail. In this paper, (see \S 2), we locate additional
761: pieces of what appears to be the leading tidal tail of Sagittarius in SDSS F turnoff stars, and show
762: that it does not intersect the position of S297+63-20.5.
763:
764: Since the Sgr tidal debris may be bifurcated, lumpy, wrap multiple times
765: around the Milky Way, and have different stellar populations in different
766: places, it is difficult to prove that any spheroid substructure, especially one that happens
767: to be in the Sgr orbital plane, is unrelated to this tidal disruption event. Since the S297+63-20.5 debris is outgoing in velocity,
768: it is possibly related to the Sgr trailing tidal tail. However, no existing model shows a lump of material near
769: S297+63-20.5. More extensive modeling and mapping of the Sgr tidal debris is required
770: to determine definitively whether they are related to each other.
771:
772: \subsection{Relationship between S297+63-20.5 and other Virgo Substructures}
773:
774: What is much murkier is the relationship between S297+63-20.5 and the other substructures that have
775: been discovered in the Virgo region, and have been identified as overdensities in Virgo.
776: These include the VSS (aka the ``12$^{\rm h}$.4 Clump"), and the VOD.
777:
778: The VSS is in the same general area of the sky as S297+63-20.5, and at a similar calculated distance. They both
779: have positive $V_{gsr}$, though the VSS has a measured $V_{gsr}$ of $99.8\rm \>km\>s^{-1}$ compared to our measurement
780: of $130\rm \>km\>s^{-1}$ for S297+63-20.5. It is possible that membership or measurement errors of a few
781: stars in either the S297+63-20.5 sample or the VSS sample could explain the difference in measured
782: velocity. The central knot of the VSS is also a bit offset ($9^\circ$) from the center of
783: S297+63-20.5. One wonders whether the clump of RR Lyrae stars that defines the VSS could be a
784: substructure within S297+63-20.5, such as a disrupted GC within a disrupted dwarf galaxy. Or, we may
785: find as the number of known stars in the VSS grows, it might resemble the S297+63-20.5 structure
786: more closely. Given the prevalence of velocity substructures in even the small amount of data analyzed
787: here, it cannot be completely ruled out that the VSS and S297+63-20.5 might be chance
788: superpositions. However, that possibility seems fairly unlikely since the velocities are quite similar.
789: We expect that as more data is analyzed, the S297+62-20.5 overdensity will become known as the Virgo
790: Stellar Stream (VSS).
791:
792: It is somewhat difficult to assess the relationship between S297+63-20.5 and the VOD. In the
793: \citet{jetal06} paper, their first step is to determine the distance to each star in the SDSS
794: photometric database. All
795: subsequent analyses are carried out with these spatial positions. The VOD has a distance of $\sim 5-15$
796: kpc, which is a little closer than our estimate of 18 kpc for S297+63-20.5, which is at a similar
797: estimated distance as the VSS. However, our distance errors to S297+63-20.5 are large, and there is
798: no guarantee it is the same as the VSS.
799: In particular, there is no guarantee that our absolute magnitude estimate of
800: $M_g=4.2$, which was derived for Sgr tidal debris with similar colors, is
801: appropriate for S297+63-20.5.
802: The factor of 2 density
803: excess for the VOD is similar to the density excess that we see in comparisons of the number of F
804: turnoff stars near $(l,b)=(300^\circ,60^\circ)$ and $(l,b)=(60^\circ,60^\circ)$. Also supporting the
805: identification of S297+63-20.5 with the VOD is the position in the sky and the large sky area covered.
806:
807: If there were two separate overdensities, one at 10 kpc and one at 18 kpc, we would expect to see
808: a separate VOD structure in the top panel of Fig.~\ref{polarplot2}, with an apparent magnitude
809: around $g_0=19.2$. All we see in that figure is a general asymmetry in the star counts - no
810: detected peak density. This suggests that either our technique of estimating distance gives
811: different results from \citet{jetal06} or that the turnoff of the VOD is redder than $(g-r)_0=0.3$.
812: Probably, they are the same overdensity measured with the same star catalog, but it is difficult to
813: know for sure. What is needed is a representation of the VOD stars that allows us to identify which
814: stars are members of the structure, such as a color magnitude diagram and a map of angular position
815: on the sky. Then we would be able to check whether we are looking at the same stars in the same
816: catalog or not.
817:
818: \subsection{The Sgr Leading Tidal Tail and the Shape of the Milky Way Gravitational Potential}
819:
820: The controversy regarding the oblateness of the Milky Way gravitational potential hinges on the
821: radial velocity data for M giants in the part of the leading tidal tail that is closest to the Sun,
822: $240^\circ<\Lambda_\odot < 260^\circ$.
823: Figure 12 from \citet{ljm05} shows the model distances and velocities of Sagittarius debris
824: for prolate, spherical, and oblate dark matter halos, along with data for 2MASS M stars.
825: There are a large number of stars near $\Lambda_\odot = 250^\circ$ that have
826: velocities of $-150 < V_{gsr} < -50$ km s$^{-1}$ and distances from the Sun of about 15 kpc. It is
827: precisely these stars that do not fit the
828: published models, unless one assumes a very prolate dark matter halo \citep{h04}.
829: The stars with $200^\circ < \Lambda_\odot < 275^\circ$ also have a larger velocity dispersion than
830: Sgr debris stars at other places in the stream.
831:
832: The last column in Table 1
833: gives the position of the Sgr leading tidal tail in terms of $\Lambda_\odot$; at $\Lambda_\odot = 250^\circ$
834: the distance to the Sgr stream is 36 kpc. M giant
835: distances in \citet{mswo03} are systematically $13\%$ less than ours, as determined from a comparison
836: of M giant stars and A/F stream position of the leading tidal tail stars near apogalacticon
837: \citep{nyetal03}. Applying
838: this scale difference, the M giant stars at $\Lambda_\odot = 250^\circ$ should be at 31 kpc
839: on the M giant distance scale. There are very few stars in the \citet{ljm05} sample that are that
840: far away.
841:
842: Fig.~\ref{f11} shows where the discrepancy arises. If one looks directly up from the Sun in
843: Fig.~\ref{f11}, following the direction of $-Y_{SGR, GC}$, the Sgr F turnoff stars are estimated to be
844: more than 30 kpc above the Galactic plane. In contrast, the M giant stars are scattered from 10 kpc
845: to 35 kpc in the same direction. The M giant stars are at about the same distance, and in about the
846: same direction, as the S297+63-20.5 overdensity.
847:
848: In fact, we detect a radial velocity peak for F turnoff stars near S297+63-20.5 that has a velocity
849: of $V_{gsr}=-76\rm \>km\>s^{-1}$, which is very similar to the M giant velocities. There is an excess of stars
850: in the bin with $-80<V_{gsr}<-48\rm \>km\>s^{-1}$ in every histogram in Fig.~\ref{fstarrv2}. There are 15 of these
851: bluer F turnoff stars ($0.1<(g-r)_0<0.2$) with $19.4<g_0<20.5$ where we expected to see less than
852: seven. The excess in this bin is more than 3 sigma, and there are additional extra blue F turnoff
853: stars with more negative $V_{gsr}$.
854:
855: There is also velocity peak in RR Lyrae stars near the VSS, at about the same distance and direction.
856: Figure 2 of \citet{detal06} shows spectroscopy of 28 BHB and RR Lyrae stars from the QUEST survey.
857: In the \citet{detal06} paper, a very tight
858: group of stars at 18.5-20 kpc from the Sun and within $10^\circ$ of each other in the sky is identified.
859: The mean velocity in the Galactic rest frame of these stars is 99.8 km s$^{-1}$. Additional
860: stars as close as 16 kpc and as distant as 24 kpc have similar enough radial velocities that they might
861: be considered to be part of the same kinematic structure.
862:
863: The remaining stars are not consistent with a Gaussian distribution, and we note that there is a
864: very significant peak in the lower panel of their Figure 2 that is very near $V_{gsr}=-75\rm \>km\>s^{-1}$.
865: If one considers all of the radial velocities obtained by \citet{detal06},
866: there are 12 stars in a peak at nearly 100 km s$^{-1}$, nine stars in a peak at $\approx -80$ km s$^{-1}$,
867: and 7 stars with very large negative or positive radial velocities that are consistent with neither peak,
868: nor with any existing model of spheroid kinematics. There is insufficient information in the
869: \citet{detal06} paper to adequately analyze the nine stars with velocities toward
870: the Sun, but they likely cover an area $20^\circ$ on the sky or larger, and at least the distance range
871: $14 < r_{\rm Sun} < 20$ kpc. These stars are very likely associated with our F turnoff star peak
872: at $V_{gsr}=-76\rm \>km\>s^{-1}$ and with the stars that \citet{ljm05} assigns to the Sgr leading tidal tail.
873:
874: Figure 3 of \citet{metal06} also show stars in the same part of the sky, $\Lambda_\odot = 239^\circ$,
875: and with similar velocities, $V_{gsr} \sim -100$ km s$^{-1}$. Interestingly, they identify these stars
876: as part of an ancient tidal debris stream that was stripped from Sgr $>2$ Gyr ago. Although
877: this presents a possible explanation, it does not explain why the dispersion of the stars appears
878: so large in this portion of the sky, and is at odds with the general assumption that 2MASS giants
879: favor younger, more recently stripped portions of the debris. Figure 12 of \citet{ljm05} shows a
880: subset of stars in this region that have a very narrow velocity dispersion and very nearly match the
881: expected position of the ancient tidal debris if one assumes an oblate dark matter halo. One
882: wonders whether a simpler explanation for the debris with $V_{gsr}\approx -100$ km s$^{-1}$ might be
883: the presence of a previously unidentified spheroid component.
884:
885: The fact that the stars in this infalling structure have a blue turnoff supports, but does not prove,
886: the claim that they are part of the Sgr dwarf tidal stream. However, they appear to be closer than
887: the main part of the tidal tail. Further investigation is required to determine whether they are part
888: of the Sgr dwarf tidal debris, and whether they represent the population of stars they are being
889: compared to in the tidal disruption models.
890:
891: \subsection{The Shape of the Spheroid}
892:
893: If we knew the spatial position of every spheroid star, or at least a representative sample of spheroid
894: stars, we could use this information to construct a density model for this Milky Way component.
895: But given that there are very large known overdensities in the spheroid, what would the parameters in
896: this model be? \citet{betal07} show that all smooth models are poor fits to the distribution of stars
897: in the spheroid.
898:
899: We have chosen to model the spheroid as a set of significant overdensities that are coherent in
900: position and velocity, plus a roughly smooth spheroid distribution. Overdensities include globular
901: clusters, dwarf galaxies, and large chunks of associated debris from these objects. Thus, we are now
902: in the process of identifying large, coherent debris structures so that we can fit the remaining stars
903: to a smooth spheroid model; and fitting smooth spheroid models so we can identify overdensities that
904: might be large, coherent debris structures.
905:
906: There is no controversy over the asymmetry of the star counts in the stellar spheroid stars in the
907: North Galactic Cap \citep{ny05,ny06,xdh06}, though there is a question of whether there is
908: an asymmetry in the south \citep{xdh07}. An important question is whether the asymmetry is due to
909: a single large debris structure added to an otherwise axisymmetric distribution of stars.
910:
911: The data in this paper suggest that is not the case. The S297+63-20.5 is a very significant, coherent
912: overdensity that contains about half the spheroid stars at $g_0=20.5$ and $(l,b)=(297^\circ,63^\circ)$. However,
913: we have shown that it is localized in magnitude and velocity, and does not explain the asymmetry at brighter magnitudes.
914:
915: It is possible that there is more than one structure, or maybe a set of structures, that conspire to
916: make the North Galactic Cap appear asymmetric. It seems at least as likely that the spheroid itself
917: is not symmetric about an axis through the center of the Milky Way and perpendicular to the Galactic plane.
918: We have shown that our existing triaxial spheroid model is not perfect, but goes some way toward
919: predicting the number of spheroid stars in the observations. We hope the model will improve as
920: more large, coherent spheroid substructures are identified and as our fitting procedures evolve.
921:
922: \section{Conclusions}
923:
924: The Sgr leading tidal tail is traced through the North Galactic Cap
925: over the Center of the Milky Way, over S297+63-20.5, over the Sun, and at $b=30^\circ$ it is
926: heading toward the Galactic plane at a Galactic longitude of $l=205^\circ$. We expect that it
927: pierces the Galactic plane well outside the solar circle. We question whether some of the
928: M giant stars that have been compared to Sgr dwarf disruption models are at the right distance
929: to be members of the Sgr dwarf leading tidal tail.
930: The main part of the Sgr dwarf leading tidal tail is not spatially coincident with the
931: S297+63-20.5 overdensity in Virgo.
932:
933: The stars in S297+63-20.5 have line-of-sight, Galactic standard of rest velocities
934: $V_{gsr}=130\pm 10\rm\>km\>s^{-1}$. The velocity dispersion
935: is difficult to estimate because we do not know for sure which stars are part of the structure, but
936: velocity dispersions of 10 $\rm km\>s^{-1}$ to 30 $\rm \>km\>s^{-1}$ are not unreasonable.
937: Since the Sgr dwarf tidal tail would have negative velocities in this part of the sky, we
938: determine that S297+63-20.5 is not associated with the leading tidal tail. Because the color of the
939: turnoff, the density structure, and the $V_{gsr}$ velocities do not match any known or expected Sgr debris, we suggest that
940: it is instead part of a distinct merger event.
941:
942: The Virgo Stellar Stream (VSS, Duffau et al. 2006) is at the same distance from the Sun as S297+63-20.5
943: and has a similar but not identical position in the sky and in $V_{gsr}$. It could be a the same
944: as S297+63-20.5 or a structure within S297+63-20.5, but the relationship is not certain.
945:
946: The Virgo Overdensity (VOD, Juri\'{c} et al. 2006) and S297+63-20.5 are in the same position in the
947: sky and have a similar number of stars in excess of the smooth spheroid, but they are at a different
948: distances from the Sun. Probably, there is a scale difference between our distance measurements and
949: the VOD is the same as S297+63-20.5.
950:
951: We show that the number densities of F turnoff stars are not symmetric about the Galactic center at
952: $g_0\sim 19.5$, and that this discrepancy is not due to S297+63-20.5. Either the spheroid is asymmetric
953: about the Galactic center, or there are additional substructures that conspire to be on the same
954: side of the Galaxy as S297+63-20.5.
955:
956: Finally, we note that in every figure showing the spatial and velocity distribution
957: in the spheroid, there are hints of extra unidentified substructure. In particular, we note
958: an unexplained overdensity of BHB stars at $(\Lambda_\odot, g_0)=(240^\circ, 16.7)$,
959: and two additional moving groups near S297+63-20.5 with velocities $V_{gsr}= -168\pm10\rm \>km\>s^{-1}$ and $V_{gsr}=-76\pm10\rm \>km\>s^{-1}$.
960:
961: \acknowledgments
962:
963: HJN acknowledges funding from the National Science Foundation
964: (AST-0307571, AST-0607618, AST-0612213), the NASA NY Space Grant, and John Huberty.
965: TCB acknowledges partial funding for this work from National Science
966: Foundation grants AST 04-06784 and PHY 02-16783: Physics Frontiers
967: Center/Joint Institute for Nuclear Astrophysics (JINA).
968:
969: Funding for the SDSS and SDSS-II has been provided by the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation, the Participating Institutions, the National Science Foundation, the U.S. Department of Energy, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, the Japanese Monbukagakusho, the Max Planck Society, and the Higher Education Funding Council for England. The SDSS Web Site is http://www.sdss.org/.
970:
971: The SDSS is managed by the Astrophysical Research Consortium for the Participating Institutions. The Participating Institutions are the American Museum of Natural History, Astrophysical Institute Potsdam, University of Basel, Cambridge University, Case Western Reserve University, University of Chicago, Drexel University, Fermilab, the Institute for Advanced Study, the Japan Participation Group, Johns Hopkins University, the Joint Institute for Nuclear Astrophysics, the Kavli Institute for Particle Astrophysics and Cosmology, the Korean Scientist Group, the Chinese Academy of Sciences (LAMOST), Los Alamos National Laboratory, the Max-Planck-Institute for Astronomy (MPIA), the Max-Planck-Institute for Astrophysics (MPA), New Mexico State University, Ohio State University, University of Pittsburgh, University of Portsmouth, Princeton University, the United States Naval Observatory, and the University of Washington.
972:
973: \clearpage
974: \begin{thebibliography}{}
975: \bibitem[Adelman-McCarthy et al.(2007)]{dr5} Adelman-McCarthy, J., et al. 2007, ApJS, in press.
976: \bibitem[Abazajian et al.(2003)]{aetal03} Abazajian et al. 2003, AJ, 126,2081
977: \bibitem[Bell et al.(2007)]{betal07} Bell, E. F. et al. 2007, ApJ, submitted
978: \bibitem[Bellazini et al.(2006)]{betal06} Bellazzini, M., Newberg, H. J., Correnti, M., Ferrar, F. R., \& Monaco, L. 2006, \aa, 457, L21
979: \bibitem[Belokurov et al.(2006a)]{betal06a} Belokurov, V. et al. 2006a, ApJ 642, L137.
980: \bibitem[Belokurov et al.(2006b)]{betal06b} Belokurov, V. et al. 2006b, ApJ 647, L111.
981: \bibitem[Belokurov et al.(2007a)]{betal07a} Belokurov, V. et al. 2007a, ApJ 658,337
982: \bibitem[Belokurov et al.(2007b)]{betal07b} Belokurov, V. et al. 2007b, ApJ Letters, in press, astro-ph/0701790
983: \bibitem[Chou et al.(2006)]{chouetal06} Chou, M.-Y., Majewski, S. R., et al. 2006, \apjl, submitted, astro-ph/0605101
984: \bibitem[Dehnen \& Binney(1998)]{db98} Dehnen, W. \& Binney, J. J. 1998, \mnras, 298, 387
985: \bibitem[Duffau et al.(2006)]{detal06} Duffau, S., Zinn, R., Vivas, A. K., Carraro, G., Mendez, R. A., Winnick, R., \& Gallart, C. 2006, \apj, 636, L97
986: \bibitem[Fellhauer et al.(2006)]{fetal06} Fellhauer, M., et al. 2006, \apj, 651, 167
987: %\bibitem[Freese et al.(2004)]{fgnl04} Freese, K., Gondolo, P., Newberg, H. J., \& Lewis, M. 2004, \prl, 71
988: \bibitem[Fukugita et al.(1996)]{figdss96} Fukugita, M., Ichikawa,T., Gunn, J. E., Doi, M., Shimasaku, K., Schneider, D. P. 1996, \aj, 111, 1758
989: %\bibitem[Grillmair(2006)]{Grillmair} Grillmair, C. J. 2006, \apjl, 651, L29
990: \bibitem[Gunn et al.(1998)]{getal98} Gunn, J. E. et al. 1998, \aj, 116, 3040
991: \bibitem[Gunn et al.(2006)]{getal06} Gunn, J. E. et al. 2006, \aj, 131, 2332
992: \bibitem[Helmi et al.(2003)]{hetal03} Helmi, A. et al. 2005, \apj, 586, 195
993: \bibitem[Helmi(2004)]{h04} Helmi, A. 2004, \apj, 610, L97
994: \bibitem[Hogg et al.(2001)]{hfsg01} Hogg, D. W., Finkbeiner, D. P., Schlegel, D. J., \& Gunn, J. E. 2001, \aj, 122, 2129
995: %\bibitem[Helmi et al.(1999)]{hwdz99} Helmi, A., White, S. D. M., deZeeuw, P. T., \& Zhao, H. 1999, Nature, 402, 53
996: \bibitem[Ibata et al.(2003)]{ietal03} Ibata, R. A., Irwin, M. J., Lewis, G. F., Ferguson, A. M. N., \& Tanvir, N 2003, MNRAS 340, L21
997: \bibitem[Ivezi\'{c} et al.(2004)]{ietal04} Ivezi\'{c}, Z., et al. 2004, Astronomische Nachrichten, 325, 583
998: \bibitem[Johnston, Law \& Majewski(2005)]{jlm05} Johnston, K. V., Law, D. R., \& Majewski, S. R. 2005, \apj, 619, 800
999: \bibitem[Juri\'{c} et al.(2006)]{jetal06} Juric, M., et al. 2006, astro-ph/0510520
1000: %\bibitem[Larsen \& Humptreys(1996)]{lh96} Larsen, J. A., \& Humphreys, R. M. 1994, \apj, 436, L149
1001: \bibitem[Law, Johnston, \& Majewski(2005)]{ljm05} Law, D. R., Johnston, K. V. \& Majewski, S. R. 2005, \apj, 619, 807
1002: \bibitem[Lenz et al.(1998)]{lnrrs98} Lenz, D. D., Newberg, H. J., Rosner, R., Richards, G. T., \& Stoughton, C. 1998, \apjs, 119, 121
1003: \bibitem[Majewski et al.(2003)]{mswo03} Majewski, S. R., Skrutskie, M. F., Weinberg, M. D., and Ostheimer, J. C. 2003, \apj, 599, 1082
1004: \bibitem[Martinez-Delgado et al.(2006)]{mpjai06} Martinez-Delgado, D., Penarrubia, J., Juric, M., Alfaro, E. J., Ivezic, Z. 2007, Ap. J. Suppl., 660, 1264
1005: \bibitem[Martinez-Delgado et al.(2004)]{mgac04} Martinez-Delgado, D., Gomez-Flechoso, M. A., Aparicio, A., Carrera, R. 2004, \apj, 601,242
1006: \bibitem[Moulataka, et al.(2004)]{mipc04} Moultaka, J., Ilovaisky, S. A., Prugniel, P., \& Soubiran, C. 2004, PASP, 116, 693
1007: \bibitem[Monaco et al.(2006)]{metal06} Monaco, L., Bellazzini, M., Bonifacio, P., Buzzoni, A., Ferraro, F. R., Marconi, G., Sbordone, L., \& Zaggia, S. 2006, A\&A, 464, 201
1008: \bibitem[Newberg et al.(2002)]{nyetal02} Newberg, H., Yanny, B., et al. 2002, \apj, 569, 245
1009: \bibitem[Newberg et al.(2003)]{nyetal03} Newberg, H., Yanny, B., et al. 2003, \apjl, 596, L191
1010: \bibitem[Newberg \& Yanny(2005)]{ny05} Newberg, H., \& Yanny, B. 2005, in ASP
1011: Conf. Ser. 338: Astrometry in the Age of the Next Generation of Large Telescopes, ed. P. K. Seidelmann \& A. K. B. Monet, 210, astro-ph/0502386
1012: \bibitem[Newberg \& Yanny(2006)]{ny06} Newberg, H., \& Yanny, B. 2006, in JPC Conf. Ser.: Physics at the end of the Galactic Cosmic Ray Spectrum, ed. G. Thomson \& P. Sokolsky, astro-ph/0507671
1013: \bibitem[Odenkirchen et al.(2003)]{oetal03} Odenkirchen, M. et al. 2006, \aj, 126, 2385
1014: \bibitem[Parker, Humphreys, \& Larsen(2003)]{phl03} Parker, J. E., Humphreys, R. M., \& Larsen, J. A. 2003, \aj, 126, 1346
1015: \bibitem[Pier et al.(2002)]{pmhhkli03} Pier, J. R., Munn, J. A., Hindsley, R. B., Hennessy, G. S., Kent, S. M., Lupton, R. H., and Ivezi\'{c}, Z. 2003, \aj, 125, 1559
1016: \bibitem[Savage et al.(2006)]{snfg06} Savage, C., Newberg, H. J., Freese, K., \& Gondolo, P. 2006, Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics, 7, 3
1017: \bibitem[Schlegel, Finkbeiner, \& Davis(1998)]{sfd98} Schlegel, D.J., Finkbeiner, D.P., \& Davis, M. 1998, ApJ, 500, 525
1018: \bibitem[Smith et al.(2002)]{setal02} Smith, J. A. et al. 2002, \aj, 123, 2121
1019: \bibitem[Stoughton et al.(2001)]{setal01} Stoughton, C., et al. 2001, \aj, 123, 485
1020: \bibitem[Tucker et al.(2006)]{tetal06} Tucker, D., et al. 2006, Astronomische Nachrichten, 325, 583
1021: \bibitem[Vivas et al.(2001)]{vetal01} Vivas, A.~K.~et al.\ 2001, \apjl, 554, L33
1022: %\bibitem[Wilhelm, Beers, \& Gray(1999)]{wbg99} Wilhelm, R., Beers, T. C., \& Gray, R. O. 1999, \aj, 117, 2308
1023: \bibitem[Xu, Deng \& Hu(2006)]{xdh06} Xu, Y., Deng, L. C. \& Hu, J. Y. 2006, \mnras, 368, 1811
1024: \bibitem[Xu, Deng \& Hu(2007)]{xdh07} Xu, Y., Deng, L. C. \& Hu, J. Y. 2007, \mnras, in press
1025: \bibitem[Yanny et al.(2000)]{ynetal00} Yanny, B., Newberg, H. J., et al. 2000, \apj, 540, 825
1026: \bibitem[Yanny et al.(2003)]{ynetal03} Yanny, B., Newberg, H. J., et al. 2003, \apj, 588, 841
1027: \bibitem[York et al.(2000)]{yetal00} York, D.G. et al. 2000, \aj, 120, 1579
1028: \bibitem[Zinn et al.(2004)]{zvgw04} Zinn, R., Vivas, A. K., Gallart, C. \& Winnick, R. 2004, ASP Conf. Series, 327, 92
1029: \end{thebibliography}
1030:
1031: \clearpage
1032:
1033: \begin{deluxetable}{rrrrrrrr}
1034: \tabletypesize{\scriptsize}
1035: \tablecolumns{8}
1036: \footnotesize
1037: \tablecaption{SDSS Stripes with Sgr Stream F turnoffs}
1038: \tablewidth{0pt}
1039: \tablehead{
1040: \colhead{Stripe} & \colhead{incl.\tablenotemark{a}} & \colhead{$l$} & \colhead{$b$} & \colhead{$g_0$} & \colhead{$d$\tablenotemark{b}} & \colhead{$\mu$\tablenotemark{c}} &\colhead{$\Lambda_{\odot}$\tablenotemark{d}} \\
1041: \colhead{Number} & \colhead{$^\circ$} & \colhead{$^\circ$} & \colhead{$^\circ$} & \colhead{mag} & \colhead{kpc} & \colhead{$^\circ$} &\colhead{$^\circ$}}
1042: \startdata
1043: 13 & 7.5 & 308.7 & 70.2 & 22.00 & 36 & 195 & 253\\
1044: 15 & 12.5 & 277.1 & 73.9 & 21.85 & 34 & 186 & 242\\
1045: 16 & 15.0 & 245.4 & 69.0 & 21.60 & 30 & 175 & 231\\
1046: 17 & 17.5 & 233.2 & 65.9 & 21.52 & 29 & 170 & 225\\
1047: 18 & 20.0 & 221.7 & 57.2 & 21.35 & 27 & 160 & 216\\
1048: 19 & 22.5 & 215.9 & 51.0 & 21.12 & 24 & 153 & 209\\
1049: 20 & 25.0 & 212.1 & 46.7 & 21.12 & 24 & 149 & 205\\
1050: 21 & 27.5 & 209.2 & 41.0 & 21.02 & 23 & 143 & 200\\
1051: 22 & 30.0 & 207.2 & 33.7 & 20.68 & 20 & 136 & 193\\
1052: 19\tablenotemark{e} & 22.5 & 229.1 & 75.6 & 21.75 & 32 & 179 & 232\\
1053: 20\tablenotemark{e} & 25.0 & 217.2 & 72.9 & 21.45 & 28 & 175 & 226\\
1054: 21\tablenotemark{e} & 27.5 & 209.0 & 67.5 & 21.25 & 26 & 170 & 220\\
1055: 22\tablenotemark{e} & 30.0 & 204.0 & 62.4 & 21.65 & 31 & 165 & 218\\
1056: 23\tablenotemark{e} & 32.5 & 201.8 & 53.2 & 21.40 & 28 & 156 & 209\\
1057: \enddata
1058: \tablenotetext{(a)}{Inclination of stripe relative to celestial equator, node is at $\alpha = 95^\circ$.}
1059: \tablenotetext{(b)}{Inferred distance of stars from the Sun, assuming $M_g(\rm F) = +4.2$.}
1060: \tablenotetext{(c)}{Angle along an SDSS ``Stripe" which navigates an inclined great circle on the sky with a pole at $(\alpha, \delta) = (95^\circ, 0^\circ)$.}
1061: \tablenotetext{(d)}{Sagittarius plane azimuth}
1062: \tablenotetext{(e)}{Indicates a secondary peak in the stripe, tracing a different density ridge.}
1063: \end{deluxetable}
1064:
1065: \clearpage
1066: %
1067: %
1068: %\begin{deluxetable}{rrrrrrrrrrrr}
1069: %\tabletypesize{\scriptsize}
1070: %\tablecolumns{12}
1071: %\footnotesize
1072: %\tablecaption{XX REPLACE WITH F star PEAK info, RV vgsr, d, N stars, width,etc}
1073: %\tablewidth{0pt}
1074: %\tablehead{
1075: %\colhead{}& \colhead{$\alpha$} & \colhead{$\delta$} & \colhead{$l$} & \colhead{$b$} & \colhead{$g_0$} & \colhead{$(g-r)_0$} & \colhead{$(u-g)_0$} & \colhead{$R_V$} & \colhead{$V_{gsr}$} & \colhead{$\Lambda_{\odot}$\tablenotemark{a}} & \colhead{N} \\
1076: %\colhead{P} & \colhead{$^\circ$} & \colhead{$^\circ$} & \colhead{$^\circ$} & \colhead{$^\circ$} & \colhead{mag} & \colhead{mag} & \colhead{mag} & \colhead{$km s^{-1}$} & \colhead{$km s^{-1}$} & \colhead{$^\circ$} & }
1077: %\startdata
1078: %1 & 161.4 & 0.5 & 249.0 & 49.7 & 17.1 & -0.1 & 1.2 & 214.7 & 81.9 & 216.3 & 2\\
1079: %2 & 185.4 & 0.1 & 286.5 & 61.9 & 16.9 & -0.2 & 1.2 & 175.8 & 82.7 & 234.3 & 4\\
1080: %3 & 202.7 & -0.1 & 323.7 & 61.1 & 16.9 & -0.1 & 1.2 & -22.6 & -77.0 & 247.7 & 3\\
1081: %4 & 214.8 & 0.7 & 345.1 & 56.2 & 17.3 & -0.2 & 1.1 & -78.8 & -99.7 & 263.5 & 3\\
1082: %5 & 215.9 & 1.2 & 346.9 & 55.9 & 16.8 & -0.1 & 1.2 & 246.1 & 229.5 & 257.6 & 2\\
1083: %6 & 226.4 & 32.9 & 52.4 & 60.5 & 16.7 & -0.2 & 1.2 & -221.4 & -124.6 & 240.0 & 2\\
1084: %7 & 216.9 & 44.0 & 80.6 & 63.8 & 17.2 & -0.1 & 1.2 & -96.3 & 7.2 & ..... & 8\\
1085: %8 & 177.2 & 44.0 & 155.2 & 67.4 & 17.1 & -0.2 & 1.1 & -196.3 & -159.4 & 213.0 & 3\\
1086: %9 & 185.7 & 1.0 & 287.0 & 62.8 & 16.9 & -0.2 & 1.2 & -9.9 & -100.1 & 232.9 & 5\\
1087: %10 & 187.3 & 1.1 & 290.6 & 63.2 & 17.0 & -0.2 & 1.2 & 170.7 & 84.5 & 235.1 & 7\\
1088: %11 & 196.9 & 3.7 & 312.4 & 65.4 & 16.7 & -0.1 & 1.2 & -99.4 & -156.2 & 239.3 & 4\\
1089: %12 & 194.0 & 1.6 & 305.4 & 64.4 & 16.8 & -0.1 & 1.2 & 284.5 & 214.2 & 238.1 & 3\\
1090: %\enddata
1091: %\tablenotetext{(a)}{Sagittarius plane azimuth, if $|Z_{\rm SGR}| > 10 $ kpc, a ``...." is substituted.}
1092: %\end{deluxetable}
1093: %
1094: %\clearpage
1095: %
1096: %
1097: %
1098: %\begin{deluxetable}{rrrrrrrrrrrrr}
1099: %\tabletypesize{\scriptsize}
1100: %\tablecolumns{12}
1101: %\footnotesize
1102: %\tablecaption{XX replace with F star info - stub only }
1103: %\tablewidth{0pt}
1104: %\tablehead{
1105: %& \colhead{RA} & \colhead{DEC} & \colhead{$l$} & \colhead{$b$} & \colhead{$g$} & \colhead{$(g-r)_0$} & \colhead{$(u-g)_0$} & \colhead{$R_V$} & \colhead{$V_{gsr}$} & \colhead{$\Lambda_{\odot}^{\rm b}$} & \colhead{pid$^{\rm c}$} \\
1106: %\colhead{SDSS ID$^{\rm a}$} & \colhead{$^\circ$} & \colhead{$^\circ$} & \colhead{$^\circ$} & \colhead{$^\circ$} & \colhead{mag} & \colhead{mag} & \colhead{mag} & \colhead{$km s^{-1}$} & \colhead{$km s^{-1}$} & \colhead{$^\circ$} & }
1107: %\startdata
1108: %274-51913-055&160.362&-1.055&249.67&47.91&16.57&-0.16&1.21&175.6&37.0&211.0&.\\
1109: %275-51910-402&161.086&1.002&248.18&49.86&17.18&-0.10&1.22&220.4&88.7&216.5&1\\
1110: %275-51910-172&161.665&0.062&249.85&49.62&17.07&-0.16&1.17&208.9&75.1&216.2&1\\
1111: %507-52353-277&162.109&2.172&247.94&51.41&16.52&-0.08&1.25&31.2&-95.7&211.5&.\\
1112: %507-52353-461&162.652&2.574&248.07&52.08&17.33&-0.01&1.24&181.1&56.0&218.7&.\\
1113: %277-51908-347&164.579&0.004&253.21&51.61&16.51&-0.01&1.21&293.6&163.5&213.5&.\\
1114: %277-51908-428&165.209&0.678&253.22&52.53&16.57&-0.12&1.24&80.3&-46.9&214.4&.\\
1115: %277-51908-056&165.706&-1.123&255.77&51.52&16.98&-0.15&1.20&120.4&-11.3&218.9&.\\
1116: %580-52368-045&165.742&3.954&250.00&55.26&17.16&-0.17&1.17&353.5&236.8&219.6&.\\
1117: %326-52375-088&172.136&-3.619&266.69&53.32&17.25&-0.07&1.14&118.9&-10.0&227.3&.\\
1118: %\enddata
1119: %\tablenotetext{(a)}{``Plate number"-``modified Julian date of last exposure"-``fiber number (1-640)".}
1120: %\tablenotetext{(b)}{Sagittarius plane azimuth, if $|Z_{\rm SGR}| > 10 $ kpc, a ``...." is substituted.}
1121: %\tablenotetext{(c)}{Peak Id, if present, indicates this star is likely associated with this peak from Table 2.}
1122: %\end{deluxetable}
1123: %
1124: %\clearpage
1125: %
1126: \figcaption {Spatial positions of BHB stars within 15 kpc of the Sgr dwarf orbital plane.
1127: Notice the arc of the leading tidal tail descending
1128: from 40 kpc above the Galactic plane and falling down on the solar position at $X_{Sgr, GC} = -8.5$ kpc.
1129: The overdensity near the Sun appears unexpectedly wide compared
1130: to the width of the leading tidal tail at apogalacticon.
1131: Part of the trailing tidal tail can be seen at $(X_{SGR,GC},Y_{SGR,GC})=(-80,-40)$ kpc.
1132: The Galactic plane
1133: is at $Y_{Sgr, GC} = 0$; the Sgr orbital plane is as measured by \citet{mswo03} and with the Galaxy-centered
1134: ${X, Y, Z}$ convention as described in \citet{nyetal03}.
1135: \label{sagxy}}
1136:
1137: \figcaption {$g_0$ magnitude vs. $\Lambda_\odot$ for BHB (left) and BS (right) stars within 15 kpc of the
1138: Sgr dwarf orbital plane.
1139: The A stars were separated into blue horizontal branch (BHB) and blue straggler
1140: (BS) stars using the color separation defined by Fig. 10 of \citet{ynetal00}.
1141: The Sgr leading and trailing tidal tails are marked as ``Leading" and ``Trailing," respectively.
1142: The leading tidal tail is evident in BHB stars from
1143: $(\Lambda_\odot, g_0) = (290^\circ, 19.0)$ and sloping down toward the center of the diagram. If the leading tail came down on the Solar position from close
1144: to the North Galactic pole, it would come down at $\Lambda_\odot=256^\circ,$ which is marked in the diagram.
1145: Note that it instead passes this angle, heading towards the Galactic anticenter. The Sgr leading tidal tail is also
1146: evident in BS stars two magnitudes fainter; a small fraction of these BS stars are observed leaking into the BHB sample on the left panel. The trailing
1147: tidal tail is evident from $(\Lambda_\odot, g_0) = (185^\circ, 20.3)$ and sloping down toward the center of
1148: the diagram. There is a very large falloff in the number of BHB's in the trailing tail at $\Lambda_\odot=195^\circ$.
1149: Stars brighter than about 15.5 magnitudes are saturated in the SDSS survey, and
1150: therefore have less accurate magnitudes. It is unclear whether the bright stars are BHB stars out to 10 kpc,
1151: or BS stars closer than 4 kpc. In the left panel, there is a density peak of unknown origin centered at $(\Lambda_\odot, g_0) =
1152: (240^\circ, 16.7)$. BHB stars within $0.2^\circ$ of the four globular clusters M53, NGC 5053, NGC 4147,
1153: and NGC 5466 were discarded before making this diagram, which reduced but did not remove this density peak.
1154: \label{glambda}}
1155:
1156: \figcaption{Separation of the BHB stars on each side of the Sagittarius orbital plane.
1157: We divide the BHB stars in the left panel of Fig.~\ref{glambda} along the plane of the Sagittarius dwarf orbit.
1158: The plane of the orbit of the dwarf is close to the Galactic $(X,Z)$ plane, so most of the stars in the
1159: left panel have $180^\circ<l<360^\circ$ and most of the stars in the right panel have $0^\circ<l<180^\circ$.
1160: Stars from four globular clusters have been removed from the plot.
1161: Note that the peak at $(\Lambda_\odot, g_0) = (240^\circ, 16.7)$ is not in the direction of S297+63-20.5, at
1162: $(l, b) = (297^\circ, 63^\circ)$; it is on the wrong side of the Sgr orbital plane.
1163: The $(\Lambda_\odot, g_0) = (240^\circ, 16.7)$ is
1164: low enough signal-to-noise that when we further subdivided the data into bins that were 5 kpc wide in $Z_{SGR,GC}$
1165: it could not be discerned. Note also in this figure that the trailing Sgr stream is more evident in
1166: the right panel near apogalacticon (on the left edge) and then is more prominent in the left panel
1167: at brighter magnitudes. The trailing tidal tail is faint, but possibly extends as bright as $17^{\rm th}$
1168: magnitude at $\Lambda_\odot=256^\circ$.
1169: \label {glambda2}}
1170:
1171: \figcaption{Position of S297+63-20.5 compared to other detections of the Sagittarius tidal tails. We
1172: reproduce Figures 3 and 4 from \citet{nyetal03}, which show the positions of the A-colored stars of the Sgr stream
1173: selected from eleven SDSS stripes (filled circles are leading tidal debris and open circles are trailing tidal debris),
1174: and the positions of 2MASS M giants from Fig. 11 of \citet{mswo03} (one point for each star).
1175: The larger open squares show the positions of ten new detections of the leading Sgr tidal tail. The smaller open
1176: squares show the positions of other bits of tidal debris detected in the same SDSS stripes, which is
1177: possibly due to superposition of young leading tidal debris and old trailing tidal debris
1178: \citep{fetal06}. The smaller squares
1179: trace debris on the opposite side of the Sgr orbital plane.
1180: The cross shows the position of S297+63-20.5, at
1181: $(l,b,R) = (297^\circ, 63^\circ, 18 {\rm ~kpc})$, where R is the distance from the Sun. Note that although the center of S297+63-20.5
1182: appears to be in the plane of the Sgr leading tidal tail, the distance does not match previous detections of the leading tidal tail.
1183: \label{f11}}
1184:
1185: \figcaption {F Star Polar Plot of the North Galactic Cap.
1186: The bottom panel shows stars with $0.2 < (g-r)_0 < 0.3$ and $(u-g)_0 > 0.4$ in the magnitude range
1187: $20.0 < g_0 <21.0$. The North Galactic Pole is in the center of the plot, and the outer circle is at $b=30^\circ$.
1188: The distance between concentric circles of constant
1189: Galactic latitude was stretched to preserve solid angle per pixel.
1190: Darker areas of the diagram contain more F turnoff stars. All of
1191: the magnitudes were corrected using
1192: the reddening map of \citet{sfd98} before selection.
1193: The dark areas at low latitude and toward
1194: the Galactic center represent the smooth portion of the Galactic spheroid. The dark line from
1195: $(l,b) = (205^\circ, 25^\circ)$ to $(l, b) = (255^\circ, 70^\circ)$ is the leading tail of the Sgr tidal stream,
1196: descending toward the Galactic plane as one moves to the left. The Sgr stream turnoff is fainter than $g_0 = 21$
1197: at the longitude of S297+63-20.5. A pair of square brackets encloses the
1198: primary area containing the S297+63-20.5 stellar excess.
1199: The top panel shows a
1200: subtraction of the pixels on the top half of the polar diagram, which does not contain any obvious tidal debris,
1201: from the lower half, with the assumption that the star counts are symmetric about $l=0^\circ,180^\circ$.
1202: One sees in the subtracted diagram that S297+63-20.5 peaks in this magnitude range near
1203: $(l,b) = (300^\circ, 60^\circ$); the density decreases for $b < 64^\circ$ as one moves down the center
1204: ``outrigger" (SEGUE) extension of photometric data at $l=300^\circ$. The Orphan Stream \citep{betal07a} is visible
1205: on the edge of the data at $l=255^\circ$. The tidal tails of the Pal 5 globular cluster \citep{oetal03} are
1206: near the edge of the data at $l=0^\circ$.
1207: \label{polarplot}}
1208:
1209: \figcaption{Brighter and fainter F Star Polar Plots. SDSS data is extracted as in
1210: Figure \ref{polarplot}, except we select closer (brighter, $19 < g_0 < 20$) F turnoff stars
1211: (upper panel) and more distant (fainter, $21 < g_0 < 22$) stars (lower panel). The Monoceros structure
1212: is apparent as a density enhancement toward the Galactic anti-center ($165^\circ < l < 225^\circ$) in the
1213: upper panel. The Sagittarius stream and the S297+63-20.5 structures are
1214: prominent in the lower panel, as is Palomar 5 at $l=0^\circ, b=45^\circ$. The brighter (top) panel shows
1215: stars approximately 9 to 14.5 kpc from the Sun. We do not see evidence for a separate VOD at this
1216: distance. There is, however, a general asymmetry in the number of spheroid stars around the
1217: Galactic center at $l=0$. The fainter (bottom) panel shows stars approximately 23 to 36 kpc from the
1218: Sun. Since the Sgr stream at the anticenter is most prominent in Fig~\ref{polarplot}, it is
1219: between 14.5 and 23 kpc from the Sun as it passes below a Galactic longitude of $b=30^\circ$.
1220: \label{polarplot2}}
1221:
1222: \figcaption{Magnitude distribution of F Turnoff Stars in Virgo. We show histograms of F star
1223: ($0.2 < g-r < 0.4$) counts in mirror image
1224: 1.5$^\circ$ radius fields centered on: $(l,b) = (288^\circ,62^\circ)$, upper panel, light line, the VSS field; $(l,b) = (72^\circ,62^\circ)$, heavy line: the mirror
1225: image Galactic field at $l' = 360-l$. In the lower panel: $(l,b) = (300^\circ,55^\circ)$,
1226: light line, the S297+63-20.5 field; and $(l,b) = (60^\circ,55^\circ)$, heavy line, its mirror image field.
1227: The strong asymmetry in number counts between the quadrant IV fields over
1228: their quadrant I mirror images is apparent at
1229: magnitudes $18.5 < g_0 < 22.5$ (8 kpc $< d < $ 45 kpc). The matching
1230: curves indicate the predicted triaxial halo model counts associated
1231: with each pointing. Note that neither a triaxial model alone nor
1232: a single halo stream alone can match all the strongly asymmetric data (see text).
1233: \label{fcountsplates}}
1234:
1235: \figcaption {Colors and magnitudes of SDSS F turnoff stars which have spectra in SEGUE. The
1236: smaller black dots show the colors and magnitudes of stellar objects in the part of
1237: the S297+63-20.5 structure observed with SEGUE plate 2707. The
1238: turnoff of S297+63-20.5 is visible in the enhanced density of field stars
1239: at $g-r \sim 0.26$ and $g_0 \sim 20.5$. Larger
1240: symbols indicate stars with $0.1 < (g-r)_0 < 0.4$ and $19.4 < g_0 < 20.5$ for which spectra were obtained in the same
1241: 1.5 degree radius field targeted with plates 2568 and 2707. The symbol type indicates the
1242: SEGUE target selection category: BHB, F sub-dwarf and F/G dwarf candidates are variously-sized filled circles; squares indicate low
1243: metalicity candidates, and crosses indicate cool white dwarf candidates.
1244: The targets selected for spectroscopy were heavily weighted toward
1245: low metalicity (generally bluer) candidates, and do not
1246: representatively sample the color distribution of all objects in
1247: the field (black dots) when $g-r_0 < 0.2$.
1248: \label{seguets}}
1249:
1250: \figcaption{Galactic standard of rest velocities of F stars near the center of S297+63-20.5.
1251: We selected from SEGUE plates 2707 and 2568 all 91 of the stars with
1252: $0.2 < (g-r)_0 < 0.4$ and $19.4 < g_0 <20.5$ that also
1253: had radial velocity errors of less than 20 km s$^{-1}$. In the upper panels,
1254: stars from plate 2707 $(l,b) = (300^\circ,55^\circ)$ are subdivided into
1255: brighter ($19.4 < g_0 < 20$, upper left), and fainter ($g_0 > 20$) subsamples.
1256: The middle two panels show the same subsets for
1257: plate 2568 $(l,b) = (288^\circ,62^\circ)$. The lower panels sum the
1258: two panels above them, for these two fields separated by $\sim 9^\circ$ degrees
1259: on the sky ($2-3$ kpc at the distances implied by these
1260: turnoff stars). In each panel, the solid line histogram represents a
1261: Gaussian distribution of halo stars centered on $V_{gsr}=0$ with $\sigma=120$ km s$^{-1}$.
1262: The Gaussians are normalized so that the area under the curve equals the number of
1263: spectra in that panel minus the number of stars above the Gaussian in bins that
1264: have more than a $2.5 \sigma$ excess. The dotted line shows the limits for a $2.5 \sigma$
1265: excess in each bin. Any data peak above the dotted line represents a peak of
1266: greater than 2.5 $\sigma $ significance. There are two significant
1267: peaks apparent in the lower panels, one at $v_{gsr} = -168 \> \rm km\> s^{-1}$
1268: for closer, brighter stars in the lower left panel, and a very prominent
1269: peak at $v_{gsr} = 130 \>\rm km\> s^{-1}$
1270: in the lower right panel (fainter stars) that is associated with the
1271: S297+63-20.5 structure at an implied distance of $\sim 18$ kpc from the sun.
1272: \label{fstarrv}}
1273:
1274: \figcaption{Galactic standard of rest velocities for F stars near the center of S297+63-20.5.
1275: 115 stars were selected and displayed as in Fig.\ref{fstarrv}, except they are bluer,
1276: $0.1<(g-r)_0<0.2$. There are two significant peaks: one at $V_{gsr}\sim 150\rm \>km\>s^{-1}$ in the left
1277: middle panel, and one at $V_{gsr} = -76 \> \rm km\> s^{-1}$ in the upper left panel. They
1278: are both present in the sum of these two panels at the lower left.
1279: The outgoing (positive $V_{gsr}$) stars are possibly related to S297+63-20.5. The origin of the incoming stars, which
1280: are also present at some level in the lower right panel, is less clear, but these stars have
1281: similar velocities to the stars which \citet{ljm05} fit to the Sgr leading tidal tail. \label{fstarrv2}}
1282:
1283: \clearpage
1284:
1285: \setcounter{page}{1}
1286:
1287:
1288: %\plotone{xybhb4n.eps}
1289: \plotone{f1.eps}
1290:
1291: %\plotone{lgbhb5n.eps}
1292: \plotone{f2.eps}
1293:
1294: \clearpage
1295: %\plotone{lgbhbsidebyside14n.eps}
1296: \plotone{f3.eps}
1297:
1298: %\plotone{f11n.eps}
1299: \plotone{f4.eps}
1300: %\plotone{f4hires.eps}
1301:
1302: %\plotone{figpolarn.eps}
1303: \plotone{f5.eps}
1304:
1305: %\plotone{figpolar2n.eps}
1306: \plotone{f6.eps}
1307:
1308: %\plotone{fcountsonplatesn.eps}
1309: \plotone{f7.eps}
1310:
1311: %\plotone{gentypen.eps}
1312: \plotone{f8.eps}
1313:
1314: %\plotone{virgorvn8n.eps}
1315: \plotone{f9.eps}
1316:
1317: %\plotone{virgorvn8n2.eps}
1318: \plotone{f10.eps}
1319:
1320: \end{document}
1321: