1: %\documentclass[12pt,preprint]{aastex}
2:
3: \documentclass{emulateapj}
4: \usepackage{natbib}
5: %\documentclass[manuscript]{aastex}
6: \usepackage{epsfig}
7: \begin{document}
8: \title{KECK/DEIMOS Spectroscopy of a {\sl GALEX} UV Selected
9: Sample from the Medium Imaging Survey \footnote{Some of the
10: data presented herein were obtained at the W.M. Keck
11: Observatory, which is operated as a scientific partnership
12: among the California Institute of Technology, the
13: University of California and the National Aeronautics and
14: Space Administration. The Observatory was made possible by
15: the generous financial support of the W.M. Keck
16: Foundation.}}
17:
18:
19: \author{ Ryan P. Mallery\altaffilmark{1}, R. Michael Rich\altaffilmark{1}, Samir Salim\altaffilmark{1}, Todd Small\altaffilmark{2}, Stephane Charlot\altaffilmark{3,4}, Mark Seibert\altaffilmark{2},
20: Ted Wyder\altaffilmark{2}, Tom A. Barlow\altaffilmark{2},
21: Karl Forster\altaffilmark{2},
22: Peter G. Friedman\altaffilmark{2},
23: D. Christopher Martin\altaffilmark{2},
24: Patrick Morrissey\altaffilmark{2},
25: Susan G. Neff\altaffilmark{5},
26: David Schiminovich\altaffilmark{6},
27: Luciana Bianchi\altaffilmark{7},
28: Jose Donas\altaffilmark{8},
29: Timothy M. Heckman\altaffilmark{9},
30: Young-Wook Lee\altaffilmark{10},
31: Barry F. Madore\altaffilmark{11},
32: Bruno Milliard\altaffilmark{8},
33: Alex S. Szalay\altaffilmark{9},
34: Barry Y. Welsh\altaffilmark{12},
35: Suk Young Yi\altaffilmark{10}}
36:
37: \altaffiltext{1}{Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of California, Los Angeles, CA 90095-1562}
38: \altaffiltext{2}{California Institute of Technology,MC 405-47, 1200 East California Boulevard, Pasadena, CA 91125}
39: \altaffiltext{3}{Max-Planck Institut f\"ur Astrophysik, D-85748 Garching, Germany}
40: \altaffiltext{4}{Institut d'Astrophysique de Paris, CNRS, 98 bis boulevard Arago, F-75014 Paris, France}
41: \altaffiltext{5}{Laboratory for Astronomy and Solar Physics, NASA Goddard
42: Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, MD 20771}
43: \altaffiltext{6}{Department of Astronomy, Columbia University, New York, NY 10027}
44:
45: \altaffiltext{7}{Center for Astrophysical Sciences, The Johns Hopkins
46: University, 3400 N. Charles St., Baltimore, MD 21218}
47:
48: \altaffiltext{8}{Laboratoire d'Astrophysique de Marseille, BP 8, Traverse
49: du Siphon, 13376 Marseille Cedex 12, France}
50:
51: \altaffiltext{9}{Department of Physics and Astronomy, The Johns Hopkins
52: University, Homewood Campus, Baltimore, MD 21218}
53:
54: \altaffiltext{10}{Center for Space Astrophysics, Yonsei University, Seoul
55: 120-749, Korea}
56:
57: \altaffiltext{11}{Space Sciences Laboratory, University of California at
58: Berkeley, 601 Campbell Hall, Berkeley, CA 94720}
59:
60: \altaffiltext{11}{Observatories of the Carnegie Institution of Washington,
61: 813 Santa Barbara St., Pasadena, CA 91101}
62:
63: \altaffiltext{12}{Space Sciences Laboratory, University of California at
64: Berkeley, 601 Campbell Hall, Berkeley, CA 94720}
65:
66:
67:
68: \begin{abstract}
69: We report results from a pilot program to obtain spectroscopy
70: for objects detected in the {\it Galaxy Evolution Explorer} ({\sl GALEX}) Medium Imaging
71: Survey (MIS). Our study examines the properties of galaxies
72: detected by {\it GALEX} fainter than the Sloan Digital Sky
73: Survey (SDSS) spectroscopic survey. This is the first study
74: to extend the techinques of \citep{salim05} to estimate
75: stellar masses, star formation rates (SFR) and
76: the b (star formation history) parameter for star-forming
77: galaxies out to $z\sim0.7$.
78: We obtain redshifts for 50 {\sl GALEX} MIS sources reaching $NUV=23.9$
79: (AB mag), having counterparts in the SDSS Data Release 4 (DR4). Of our sample, 43 are starforming
80: galaxies with $z<0.7$, 3 have emission line ratios indicative
81: of AGN with $z<0.7$,
82: and 4 objects with $z>1$ are QSOs, 3 of which are not previously cataloged.
83: We compare our sample to a much larger sample of $\sim$50,000 matched GALEX/SDSS galaxies
84: with SDSS spectroscopy; while our survey is shallow, the optical counterparts to our sources
85: reach $\sim$3 magnitudes fainter in SDSS {\it r} than the
86: SDSS spectroscopic sample.
87: We use emission line diagnostics for the galaxies to determine that the sample
88: contains mostly star-forming galaxies. The galaxies in the sample populate
89: the blue sequence in the $NUV-r$ vs $M_r$ color-magnitude
90: diagram. The derived
91: stellar masses of the galaxies range from 10$^8$ to 10$^{11}$
92: M$_{\odot}$ and derived SFRs are between 10$^{-1}$ and 10$^{2}$
93: M$_{\odot}$$yr^{-1}$. Our sample has
94: SFRs, luminosities, and velocity dispersions that are similar
95: to the samples of faint compact blue galaxies studied previously in
96: the same redshift range by \citet{koo}, \citet{guzmana}, \&
97: \citet{phillips}. However, our sample is $\sim2$ mag fainter in
98: surface brightness than the compact blue galaxies. We find that the star-formation
99: histories for a majority of the galaxies are consistent with
100: a recent starburst within the last 100 Myr.
101: \end{abstract}
102:
103: \keywords{galaxies: active galaxies:redshifts galaxies: starburst ultraviolet: galaxies}
104:
105:
106: \section{Introduction}
107: Following the successful launch and early operations of the {\sl Galaxy
108: Evolution Explorer} satellite in 2003, we decided to undertake an initial
109: spectroscopic assay of sources detected by {\sl GALEX} using the DEIMOS
110: multiobject spectrograph \citep{faber03} on the Keck II telescope. Although {\sl GALEX} data
111: have been matched to relatively deep optical surveys \citep{schiminovich} our study is the
112: first to extend the modeling technique
113: of \citet{salim05} from $z=0.25$ to $z\sim0.5$.
114:
115: The power of the {\sl GALEX} Medium Imaging Survey to select interesting objects is noteworthy.
116: We recall that the MIS observations are 1500 sec in duration,
117: imaging FUV and NUV simultaneously (\citet{martin} \& \citet{pm}).
118: The {\sl GALEX} satellite has
119: investigated the ultraviolet universe to $z\sim1$ with the
120: goal of determining among other things, the star formation
121: rate (SFR) of galaxies in the local universe, $z\lesssim0.25$
122: \citep{salim05,martina,wyder,treyer} and the evolution of the
123: global star formation density out to $z\sim1$
124: \citep{schiminovich}. The ultimate goal of such work along
125: with other surveys and observations of galaxies at similar and
126: higher redshifts is to constrain the baryonic physics of
127: galaxy formation and evolution. Questions still remain as to
128: how the SFR depends on different factors such as environment,
129: mass, morphology etc. \citep{martin}. Previous work deriving SFRs
130: with a UV-selected sample was carried out by \citet{sullivan}
131: who derive SFRs both from UV luminosities at 2000\AA~and
132: H$\alpha$ luminosities from optical spectra for a sample of
133: galaxies at redshifts of $0<z<0.4$ detected in the UV by the
134: balloon-borne telescope FOCA \citep{milliard}. Estimates of
135: local star formation rates before this were only possible
136: through either optical emission line luminosities of the
137: recombination lines of Hydrogen, mostly H$\alpha$, and
138: [OII]$\lambda$3727 or the far infrared luminosity from
139: 10-100$\mu$m \citep{kennicutt}.
140:
141:
142: In this paper we present the observations and results from the pilot program for a
143: sample of objects detected by {\sl GALEX} and SDSS
144: with spectra obtained from the DEIMOS spectrograph at the Keck II telescope.
145: The analysis of this sample is enhanced greatly by the
146: techniques of Salim et al.(2005) that have been expanded to include the derivation of galaxy
147: physical parameters such as stellar mass, from {\sl GALEX} + SDSS photometry
148: and redshifts. The main goal of this paper is to characterize the
149: galaxies detected by {\sl GALEX} that are fainter than SDSS
150: Spectroscopic Galaxy Sample, in terms of
151: mass, SFR, and UV-optical color.
152: We are predominantly (about two-thirds of the sample)
153: seeing the faint blue galaxy population \citep{ellis} and
154: are also sensitive to QSOs. While {\sl GALEX} observations have been undertaken
155: in many deep fields with much higher median redshifts
156: \citep{schiminovich} we have the advantage in this sample of obtaining spectroscopy
157: with Keck/DEIMOS, which gives wavelength coverage sufficient to derive
158: some detailed physical parameters from the spectra.
159: In \S 2 we describe the Sample and the photometric and
160: spectroscopic data. Redshift and emission line flux
161: measurements from the spectroscopy are presented in \S 3. The
162: distributions of UV color, UV-optical color, and the SDSS
163: {\it r} magnitude for the sample
164: are described in \S 4. The derived galaxy parameters from SED
165: fits are described in \S 5. We give a discussion and
166: summary of our findings in \S 6 and 7. Throughout this paper we assume {\it H$_o$}=70
167: km s$^{-1}$ Mpc$^{-1}$, $\Omega_{m}$=0.3, and
168: $\Omega_{\Lambda}$=0.7.
169:
170:
171: \section{Sample and Observations}
172: \subsection{GALEX/SDSS Data}
173: {\sl GALEX} is a NASA Small
174: Explorer Mission aimed to survey the UV emission from Galactic and extragalactic sources
175: from 700km circular orbit
176: \citep{martin,pm}. {\sl GALEX} images the sky simultaneously in two bands,
177: the far-UV (FUV 1344-1786\AA) and the near-UV (NUV 1771-2831
178: \AA). Each {\sl GALEX} circular field is 1.25 deg. in diameter. We use
179: FUV and NUV magnitudes and magnitude errors
180: derived in elliptical apertures \footnote{{\sl GALEX} source
181: detection and measurement is obtained from SExtractor
182: \citep{bar}}. The photometry is taken from the {\sl GALEX}
183: Internal Release 1.1 (IR1.1). The {\sl GALEX} MIS photometry for
184: tile number 10273 has a limiting magnitude, m$_{lim}$(AB)$= 23$.
185:
186: We use optical photometry for our objects obtained from
187: SDSS Data Release 4 (DR4) \citep{abaz}.
188: The SDSS photometric data are taken with
189: the 2.5m telescope at Apache Point Observatory. Imaging is
190: obtained in {\it ugriz} bands
191: \citep{fuk96,smith02}. The imaging data are photometrically
192: \citep{hogg} and astrometrically \citep{pier} calibrated. An
193: overview of the SDSS data pipelines and products can be
194: found in \citet{stoughton}.
195:
196: \subsection{Sample}
197: Our sample is derived from objects with
198: detections in the {\sl GALEX} Medium Imaging Survey (MIS) tile 10273,
199: centered at a right ascension/declination of
200: 17$^h$40$^m$32.07$^s$ $/$
201: 57$^o$10$^{\prime}$45.15$^{\prime\prime}$.
202:
203: The {\sl GALEX} field being much larger than the DEIMOS slit
204: mask,
205: we selected objects from the {\sl GALEX} field to populate
206: two DEIMOS slit masks.
207: The two DEIMOS fields were initially chosen to maximize the number of
208: MIS objects
209: with optical counterparts in the SDSS classified as galaxies
210: with $FUV-NUV < 0$ photometry from an early version of the
211: {\sl GALEX} data reduction pipeline. The number of galaxies
212: matching this criteria was much smaller than the number of
213: available slits, and so to take full advantage of the DEIMOS
214: field of view, the slits were populated by any galaxy detected by both {\sl
215: GALEX} and SDSS. In addition, the remainder of
216: available slits in both fields was populated with blue
217: stellar-like objects (QSOs and white dwarfs), main sequence
218: outlier stars ($u-g <1$ or $g-r<0$), and bright alignment
219: stars. The first DEIMOS field contains 26 objects classified
220: as galaxies in SDSS, and 10 blue stellar objects and main
221: sequence outlier stars. The second DEIMOS field contains 19
222: objects classified as galaxies in SDSS, and 9 blue stellar
223: objects and main sequence outlier stars.
224:
225:
226: \subsection{Spectroscopic observations}
227: The spectroscopic data were obtained at the Keck II
228: telescope with the DEIMOS multi-object spectrometer on
229: October 1, 2003 \citep{faber03}. Spectra were obtained using two slit masks,
230: for a total 64 spectra. The 830 grooves mm$^{-1}$ grating
231: was used with a slit width of $0^{\prime\prime}.73$ giving a
232: resolution of $\sim2.5$\AA$~$FWHM. The signal-to-noise ratio
233: obtained over the continuum of each spectrum varied between
234: sources from 1 to $\sim20$, depending on the brightness of the source.
235: The integration time for both slit masks was
236: 30 minutes. Flux calibration of the spectra was not performed
237: as no flux standards were observed.
238: The spectra cover a wavelength range of $\sim
239: 5000-9000$\AA. Figure 1 shows a panel of several one
240: dimensional spectra for star-forming galaxies in the sample
241: at a range of redshifts, plotted in the rest wavelength, and
242: Figure 2 shows the spectra for objects with measured $z>1$.
243:
244: \section{Redshift determination and measurement of emission lines}
245: In all, we measured 50 redshifts, 45 for sources
246: classified as galaxies in SDSS and 5 for sources
247: classified as stars in SDSS. Of those five,
248: %%%% 3 or 4?
249: three are QSO's at $z>1$ and the other two are star-forming
250: galaxies. The remaining 14 of the sources classified as stars
251: by the SDSS have stellar spectra. The redshifts for objects
252: with detected emission lines were measured by eye. For objects
253: with $z<1$, multiple emission lines were detected including
254: either H$\alpha$ and/or H$\beta$ and [OII]$\lambda$3727,
255: [OIII]$\lambda$4959 ,[OIII]$\lambda$5007,
256: [NII]$\lambda$6584,[SII]$\lambda$6717, and
257: [SII]$\lambda$6731. For all objects where the doublet
258: [OII]$\lambda$3727 was detected, H$\alpha$ was redshifted
259: beyond the wavelength range of the detector. For one source,
260: at z=1.028, we detected two features that we assigned as
261: [OII]$\lambda$3727 and MgII$\lambda$2800 emission. For the
262: other three sources with $z>1$ we find only 1 feature that we
263: identify as MgII$\lambda$2800, based on the width of the line
264: and the absence of other features in the spectrum. Figure 3 shows
265: the redshift distribution of the sample. The mean redshift of the sample is $z_{mean}=0.421$.
266: Two of the sources in the DEIMOS sample have corresponding
267: SDSS spectra. The redshifts obtained for these two objects
268: agree with the SDSS redshifts. One of the objects with SDSS
269: spectra is the QSO at $z=1.028$ and the other is a galaxy at
270: $z=0.176$. Both the DEIMOS spectra and the SDSS spectra for
271: the latter object have significant detections of only
272: H$\alpha$ and [NII]6584.
273:
274: We measure spectral emission line fluxes and equivalent
275: widths for [OII]$\lambda$3727, H$\beta$,
276: [OIII]$\lambda$4959, [OIII]$\lambda$5007, H$\alpha$,
277: [NII]$\lambda$6584, [SII]$\lambda$6717, and
278: [SII]$\lambda$6731. Fluxes, equivalent widths and errors for the emission
279: lines were measured in IDL using the MPFIT function. The
280: continuum of each spectrum was first fit by a polynomial,
281: then the emission lines were simultaneously fit with
282: gaussians. Table 1 lists the objects, their equivalent widths
283: and flux ratios of [OIII]$\lambda$5007/H$\beta$ and
284: [NII]$\lambda$6584/H$\alpha$ for objects
285: with a 3$\sigma$ measurement of at least one of the above
286: lines. We did not perform a reddening correction to the
287: fluxes, since the standard procedure requires either
288: detections of both H$\alpha$ and H$\beta$ or a measurement of
289: the radio continuum \citep{oster}. The effect of this on the flux ratios of [OIII]$\lambda$5007/H$\beta$ and
290: [NII]$\lambda$6584/H$\alpha$ is thought to be negligible due
291: to the small wavelength separation of the emission lines. In the DEIMOS sample we
292: only have detections of both H$\alpha$ and H$\beta$ for 18
293: objects, all at $z<0.3$, and chose for consistency not to
294: perform corrections on any of the spectra. We note that the
295: foreground Galactic extinction, E(B-V), calculated from the
296: dust maps of \citet{schleg} is $\sim.05$ magnitudes for the field.
297:
298: Fourteen objects have measured fluxes of H$\beta$,
299: [OIII]$\lambda$5007, H$\alpha$, and [NII]$\lambda$6584. Figure
300: 4 shows the emission line diagnostic of \citet{bpt} used to
301: distinguish star-forming galaxies and Type II AGN. The solid
302: curve is the boundary between star-forming galaxies and AGN
303: determined through modeling of starburst galaxy spectra by
304: \citet{kew}. A star forming galaxy with only $\sim20$\% of the
305: optical emission line flux due to an AGN would lie above the
306: star-forming/AGN boundary \citep{kew}. The dashed curve is the
307: more stringent demarcation used by \citet{kauf03a} to distinguish
308: between AGN and star-forming galaxies in SDSS. The shaded
309: histogram shows the distribution of emission line ratios for a sample of ~51,000 SDSS/GALEX
310: objects (see \S 4). The curve of \citet{kauf03a}
311: distinguishes between the two different sources of emission
312: line flux in this large sample with the AGN occupying the
313: parameter space to the right of the distribution of star-forming
314: galaxies. In the DEIMOS sample only three galaxies of
315: the fourteen have emission line flux ratios above this curve,
316: implying that some portion of the flux is due to an AGN,
317: though it is still within the errors that the emission line
318: flux for two of these objects results entirely from star-forming regions inside the
319: host galaxies. Objects can also be AGN if $\log$
320: [OIII]/H$\beta>1$ or $\log$ [NII]/H$\alpha >0.3$. Another 13
321: objects also have only detections of H$\beta$ and
322: [OIII]$\lambda$5007. Of the thirteen, one has a flux ratio of
323: $\log$ [OIII]/H$\beta>1$, indicative of an AGN. \citet{sullivan}
324: find a similar ratio of galaxies classified as
325: star-forming/AGN from examination of emission lines in their
326: sample of UV selected galaxies.
327:
328: \section{Magnitude and color distribution}
329: The DEIMOS sample is $\sim3$ magnitudes deeper in {\it r}
330: than the SDSS spectroscopic sample. Figure 5 shows a
331: histogram of the SDSS {\it r} magnitudes
332: for the sample plotted with the SDSS {\it
333: r} magnitude for {\sl GALEX} MIS sources in IR1.1 with
334: matches in the SDSS DR2 spectroscopic sample. The IR1.1/DR2
335: sample consists of $ \sim51,000$ galaxies at redshifts
336: $0.005<z<0.25$ with derived star-formation histories (SFHs) by
337: SED fitting (see \S 5). The IR1.1/DR2 histogram is normalized
338: to the size of the DEIMOS galaxy sample. The IR1.1/DR2 sample
339: is mostly bounded in {\it r} by the SDSS spectroscopic survey
340: limits, ${\it r}<17.7$ \citep{strauss}.
341:
342: Using the redshifts determined for the DEIMOS sample we
343: calculate the absolute {\it r} magnitude, M$_{r}$, of
344: galaxies in the sample, k-corrected to the mean redshift of
345: the IR1.1/DR2 sample, $z=0.1$. K-corrections for all
346: bandpasses were calculated using the publicly available code
347: of \citet{blanton} version 4\_1\_4.
348: In Figure 6 we construct a
349: color magnitude diagram (CMD) of $NUV-{\it r}$ versus
350: $M_{r}$. We overplot
351: our sample onto the IR1.1/DR2 sample, plotted as a shaded
352: contour plot. In the figure the diamond symbols correspond
353: to DEIMOS objects with spectroscopically measured redshifts
354: at $z<0.25$, and the crosses correspond to objects with
355: spectroscopically measured redshifts at $z>0.25$. The contours
356: enclose 40\% and 80\% of the objects in the IR1.1/DR2 sample.
357:
358: The CMD of the IR1.1/DR2 sample clearly shows the bimodality
359: of galaxies seen by {\sl GALEX} in the nearby universe,
360: $z<0.25$, with distribution peaks at blue $NUV-{\it r}$ colors
361: of $\sim 3$ and at red $NUV-r$ colors of $\sim 6$
362: \citep{wyder}. We henceforth call these the blue and red
363: sequences. The galaxies in the blue sequence are generally
364: late-type in morphology and have spectra with emission
365: line-ratios indicative of star-formation
366: \citep{salim05,jarle}, while the galaxies in the red sequence
367: typically have absorption line spectra and lower
368: star-formation rates than blue sequence galaxies. The majority of
369: the objects in the DEIMOS sample lie in the region of the
370: diagram occupied by blue star-forming galaxies in the
371: IR1.1/DR2 sample, mostly along the blue edge of the
372: distribution, with only one having a $NUV-r$ color greater
373: than 4. The spectrum for this object, at $z=0.077$, is shown
374: in Figure 1. The spectrum shows absorption features: NaD, and
375: MgIb, but also shows weak emission features of H$\alpha$,
376: [NII]6584, and [SII]6717,6731.
377:
378:
379: In the bottom-left panel of Figure 7 we again plot the color
380: magnitude diagram for the sample, highlighting the objects
381: with $FUV$ detections (filled circles).
382: The other 3 panels of this figure show the UV color
383: distribution for the 24 galaxies in the DEIMOS sample with
384: $FUV$ detections. Plotted for reference are galaxies from the
385: IR1.1/DR2 sample with $FUV$ detections shown as the shaded
386: countour plots or shaded histogram in the respective
387: panels. Besides the 3 galaxies in the DEIMOS sample with
388: $FUV-NUV <0$ the UV color for this sample shows a similar
389: distribution with the IR1.1/DR2 sample. In the FUV CMD the
390: objects with M$_{r}<20$ show a range of UV color not seen in
391: the local blue sequence galaxies of similar optical
392: luminosity. Both figures 6 and 7 show that this sample
393: probes the type of galaxies that one obtains when looking at
394: objects detected by {\sl GALEX} several magnitudes deeper than the SDSS spectroscopic limit.
395:
396:
397: \section{Derived Galaxy Parameters}
398: We derive the following galaxy parameters according to the approach of
399: \citet{salim05}: the V-band dust attenuations, A$_{V}$ in
400: magnitudes, stellar metallicity Z, the current star formation
401: rate, SFR, averaged over the past 100 Myr in M$_{\odot}$ yr$^{-1}$, the
402: present-day stellar mass, M$_*$, of the galaxy in
403: M$_{\odot}$, the
404: fraction of stellar mass formed in bursts over the last
405: 100 Myr, F$_{burst}$, and the \citet{scalo} b parameter,
406: defined as the ratio of the current SFR
407: to the past time-averaged SFR (averaged over the estimated
408: age, not Hubble time).
409: The galaxy parameters are derived from model libraries of
410: galaxies at redshifts between 0.1 and 1.6 at redshift
411: increments of 0.1 for the DEIMOS sample, and at redshifts of
412: 0.05,0.1,0.15,0.2, and 0.25 for the IR1.1/DR2 sample.
413: Each library consists of up to $\sim$10$^5$ models. Each model is
414: parameterized according to galaxy age, optical depth, star formation history (SFH), and metallicity.
415: The SFH of each model is parameterized according to \citet{kauf03a}, with an underlying, continuous, exponentially
416: declining SFR upon which bursts of star formation, random in time and amplitude, are superimposed.
417: Dust attenuation in each model is parameterized using the
418: prescription of \citet{cf00} using an effective $V$-band optical depth
419: $\tau$$_{V}$ and absorption curve, $\tau\propto\lambda^{0.7}$ resulting from both giant molecular clouds and the
420: diffuse ISM, with the fraction $\mu$ of $\tau$$_{V}$
421: contributed only by the diffuse ISM. The $V$-band optical
422: depth from giant molecular clouds
423: is taken to only affect stars younger than 10 Myr. A description of the prior distributions of
424: the model parameters is discussed in \citet{salim05}.
425:
426: Spectral energy distributions (SEDs) are created for each galaxy in the library
427: using the population synthesis code of \citet{bc03}.
428: The model SEDs are convolved with the {\sl GALEX} and SDSS filter
429: response curves. Statistical estimates of physical galaxy parameters are derived by
430: comparing the observed 7 band GALEX$/$SDSS fluxes of each
431: galaxy to all the convolved model SEDs in the nearest redshift
432: library. Probability density functions (PDFs) for each
433: physical parameter are created by assigning weights to
434: the parameters. The $\chi^{2}$ goodness of fit of the
435: model determines the weight ($\propto \exp[-\chi^{2}/2]$)
436: that is assigned to the parameters of that model. The median
437: (or most typical parameter value)
438: of the PDF is taken as the estimate of the galaxy parameter.
439:
440:
441: We perform SED fits for galaxies not identified as QSOs.
442: In Table 2 we list the galaxies, their redshifts, $NUV-{\it
443: r}$ non k-corrected colors, and their derived parameters.
444: The parameters derived from the SED fits are not used unless
445: the reduced $\chi^{2}$ fit of at least one model is below
446: 10. Only two of the 46 galaxies do not meet this
447: criterion. Figures 8 and 9 show the derived parameters for the DEIMOS
448: sample of galaxies overplotted on the IR1.1/DR2 sample
449: plotted as shaded contour plots. The contours are labeled
450: and encompass 52\%, 84\%, and 97\% of the data. The
451: diamonds as before are objects with $z<0.25$, and the crosses are objects
452: with $z>0.25$. The objects
453: span the range of derived parameters of the IR1.1/DR2
454: sample for Z, and A$_{V}$.
455:
456: The derived metallicities, $Z = [Fe/H]$, for the sample are
457: not very well constrained. The typical error, $1/4$ of the
458: difference between the 97.5 percentile and the 2.5 percentile
459: of the PDF, of the derived metallicities are $\pm$43\%
460: Z$_{\odot}$. The derived M$_*$ range from 10$^8$ to 10$^{11}$
461: M$_{\odot}$ with an average error of $\sim\pm0.2$dex, but the majority of the M$_*$ are at or below
462: 10$^{10}$M$_{\odot}$, about an order of magnitude below the
463: mean of the IR1.1/DR2 sample. The derived SFRs lie between $10^{-1}$ and
464: $10^{2}$ M$_{\odot}yr^{-1}$, with five galaxies having derived SFRs
465: greater than 10 M$_{\odot}yr^{-1}$. The average error on the
466: derived SFRs is typically $\pm0.3$dex. Comparing the SFRs between galaxies with
467: similar $NUV-r$ color or M$_{*}$, the galaxies at
468: $z>0.25$ have SFRs about an order of magnitude greater than
469: the galaxies at $z<0.25$. This is mostly a selection effect
470: since the more distant galaxies are also more luminous on
471: average. A comparison of these SED derived SFRs
472: with H$\alpha$ derived SFRs cannot be performed since the
473: spectra are not flux calibrated and many lack H$\alpha$. The range of SFRs we find for
474: this sample is similar to the range of SFRs for local UV
475: galaxies found by \citet{sullivan} derived both from H$\alpha$
476: luminosity and from the UV luminosity, but is an order of
477: magnitude larger than the SFRs found by \citet{kk04} in their
478: sample of Goods-North Treasury Keck Redshift Survey galaxies at
479: $0.4<z<.9$ when compared to galaxies in the DEIMOS sample with similar redshifts.
480:
481: We find that the galaxies are largely starbursts with $\log
482: b \sim -0.1$. This is shown in Figure 10. The distribution of
483: $\log b$ for objects in the DEIMOS sample with SED fits are
484: plotted with the distribution for the IR1.1/DR2 sample
485: normalized to the number of objects in the DEIMOS sample with
486: SED fits. The DEIMOS sample shows a highly peaked value of
487: $\log b$ compared to the IR1.1/DR2 sample which has two small
488: peaks near $\log b \sim -3$ and $\sim -1$, showing that most
489: of these galaxies currently have less star-formation now than
490: in the past. The value $\log b \sim -0.1$ that describes most of
491: the galaxies in the DEIMOS sample indicates that while these
492: galaxies have less star formation than in the past, they are
493: currently or have recently gone through a burst of
494: star-formation. Two of the galaxies have $\log b > 0$
495: indicating that these galaxies are going through major
496: starbursts in their histories. From a statistical
497: standpoint, the SED fits reveal with a 95\% reliability that at least three galaxies
498: have not had a burst of starformation
499: in the last 100 Myr. Half of the galaxies in the sample
500: could have formed as much as $\sim$ 10\% of their stellar mass in
501: a burst within the last 100 Myr, 10 could have formed up
502: to $\sim 25\%$ and five of the less massive
503: systems could have had up to
504: $\sim 50\%$ of their stellar mass form in bursts within
505: the last 100Myr.
506:
507:
508: \section{Discussion}
509: In the plot of $NUV-r $ vs $M_r$ our sample lies along a ``blue sequence'' of star
510: forming galaxies and they have among the bluest colors for star forming galaxies
511: in the local Universe found by {\sl GALEX} and SDSS. While all
512: the galaxies show blue $NUV -r$ color this is not a homogenous
513: sample. Fifteen of the galaxies show disk structure in the SDSS
514: images. The remaining two-thirds of the sample fit into the
515: heterogeneous class of faint blue galaxies at intermediate
516: redshifts previously studied
517: by \citet{koo,guzmana,guzmanb,phillips} and \citet{guzmanLCBG} in the
518: Hubble Deep Field and adjoining fields, and by
519: \citet{hammer} and \citet{ornellas} in the Canada-France Redshift Survey.
520:
521: The faint blue subset of the DEIMOS sample has similar luminosities,
522: SFRs and optical colors to the compact galaxies found in the
523: Hubble Deep Field by \citet{phillips}, though none are
524: ``compact'' (optical half-light radii $<0^{\prime\prime}$.5.) This is a
525: selection effect in our sample. Galaxies with half-light radii this small
526: are classified as stars in SDSS and would not have been
527: selected for spectroscopy in our sample. In Figure 11 we plot, as filled
528: diamonds, the rest frame
529: absolute B magnitude versus the B magnitude surface
530: brightness and SFR versus velocity dispersion.
531: The absolute B magnitudes are calculated from the observed
532: bandpasses using the k-correction code of \citet{blanton},
533: and the surface brightness are calculated with the
534: half-light SDSS r petrosian radii. The velocity dispersions
535: are derived from the measured linewidths of [OIII]5007
536: for objects with $\ge3\sigma$ detections of
537: the emission line. For
538: comparison, we also plot, as stars and squares,
539: the faint blue galaxy samples of \citet{koo,guzmana} and
540: \citet{phillips} making the necessary corrections to our
541: adopted cosmology. While our sample of
542: galaxies have luminosities, SFRs, and velocity dispersions comparable with the previous samples,
543: the size selection effect separates our sample from the
544: previous samples in surface brightness.
545:
546:
547: \citet{koo} and \citet{guzmanb} propose that the subset of the faint blue population of
548: galaxies with compact geometry (half light radii
549: $<0^{\prime\prime}$.5) and narrow emission lines ($\sigma<65
550: km s^{-1}$) will fade to
551: become dwarf spheroidals by z=0, while \citet{hammer} claims
552: that the most luminous of these are too massive to become
553: dwarf spheroidals, and instead will become the bulges of
554: spiral galaxies. The most massive intermediate redshift
555: galaxies ($M_{*} \gtrsim 10^{10}$) in our sample could likely follow
556: this latter evolution path. Indeed, we see that the galaxies in our sample that
557: show extended structure at low redshifts ($z<0.3$) are among the the
558: most massive of the sample.
559:
560: The conclusions of \citet{koo} and \citet{guzmanb}
561: rest partially on the assumption that galactic winds from the last
562: starburst event will remove the remaining gas from these
563: systems and halt star formation causing them to fade
564: several magnitudes by z=0. Through modeling the UV
565: and optical broadband colors we find that
566: about half the galaxies in our present sample could have formed at most
567: $\sim10\%$ of their stellar mass in bursts within the past 100 Myr,
568: and only fifteen (all having $M_{*}<10^{9}$) could have formed over 20\% of their stellar
569: mass within the last 100 Myr. If the last starburst event
570: removes all remaining gas from these systems, as \citet{koo} propose, then
571: why did the previous starforming
572: events in these galaxies that produced the majority of the stars
573: in these systems not halt star formation? Our derived
574: starformation histories of these galaxies argues that the current star formation events will
575: not halt starfromation in every galaxy. But what percentage of these will continue to
576: experience further bursts of star formation is
577: unknown. However, even in the low mass systems of the present sample, residual
578: star formation or another burst of star formation is
579: ultimately unlikely to
580: change the evolutionary outcome proposed by \citet{koo} and
581: \citet{guzmanb} for the most compact low mass galaxies in our
582: sample. We suggest that the more extended sources of our sample are more likely to become present-day dwarf
583: irregulars rather than dwarf spheroidals.
584:
585:
586: \section{Summary}
587: We have presented DEIMOS spectra for
588: objects detected by {\sl GALEX} in the MIS survey with
589: imaged counterparts in SDSS; a total exposure time of 30 min
590: per slitmask was used. GALEX has proven
591: to be a sensitive instrument for wide field galaxy surveys.
592: We have shown that the {\sl GALEX} Medim Imaging Survey followed up
593: with a 30 m integration with Keck/DEIMOS yields redshifts and
594: line measurements for star forming galaxies to z$\sim$~0.7, and has
595: yielded 4 QSO's 3 of which are previously un cataloged.
596: The matched sample
597: reaches approximately 3 magnitudes fainter in {\it r} than
598: the SDSS spectroscopic survey limits. The sample is not a homogenous
599: sample, but is indicative of the types of galaxies forming
600: stars out to z$\sim0.7$. We have derived physical parameters
601: for these galaxies from the SEDS and compared this sample to a
602: sample of ~50,000 SDSS galaxies with GALEX detections.
603:
604:
605: 1. We find that roughly one-third of the galaxies are
606: starforming late type disk galaxies, four are QSOs at $z>1$,
607: and the remaining galaxies are faint blue low mass
608: starbursts.\\
609: \\
610: 2. Approximately 3 out of 14 star formimg galaxies show emission line ratios
611: indicative of an AGN. A similar fraction was found by
612: \citet{sullivan} in their UV selected sample. \\
613: \\
614: 3. The masses of the galaxies are typically lower than what
615: is found locally in the SDSS spectroscopic sample. The range
616: of $M_{*}$ for the DEIMOS sample spans from $10^8$ to
617: $10^{11} M_{\odot}$, whereas the median of the SDSS
618: spectroscopic sample is $\sim5\times10^{10}$.\\
619: \\
620: 4. The SFRs of the galaxies at $z>0.25$ are roughly an order
621: of magnitude greater than the SFRs for the galaxies at
622: $z<0.25$.\\
623: \\
624: 5. Besides three of the most massive, and reddest in NUV -r
625: color, the remaining galaxies show evidence of a
626: starburst in the last 100 Myr, with $\log b\sim-0.1$. Fifteen
627: of the galaxies in the lower mass range of
628: the sample could have formed more than 20\% of their
629: stellar mass in bursts of star formation within the last 100
630: Myr. \\
631: \\
632: 6. Our sample has similar velocity dispersions, SFRs, and
633: B luminosities to previous samples of faint blue galaxies,
634: though the galaxies in our present study are 2 mag fainter in
635: surface brightess.
636:
637:
638:
639:
640: \acknowledgments
641:
642: {\sl GALEX} is a NASA Small Explorer, launched in April 2003.
643: We gratefully acknowledge NASA's support for construction, operation,
644: and science analysis for the GALEX mission,
645: developed in cooperation with the Centre National d'Etudes Spatiales
646: of France and the Korean Ministry of
647: Science and Technology.
648:
649: The authors wish to recognize and acknowledge the very
650: significant cultural role and reverence that the summit of
651: Mauna Kea has always had within the indigenous Hawaiian
652: community. We are most fortunate to have the opportunity to
653: conduct observations from this mountain.
654: The analysis pipeline used to reduce the DEIMOS data was developed at UC Berkeley with
655: support from NSF grant AST-0071048.
656:
657: The authors thank an anonymous referee for extremely
658: helpful comments.
659:
660:
661: {\it Facilities:} \facility{GALEX}, \facility{KECK:II(DEIMOS)}
662:
663:
664:
665: \begin{thebibliography}{}
666: \bibitem[Abazajian et al.~(2004)]{abaz} Abazajian, K. et
667: al. 2004, \aj, 128, 502
668: \bibitem[Baldwin, Phillips, \& Terlevich
669: ~(1981)]{bpt} Baldwin, J. A., Phillips, M. M., \&
670: Terlevich, R. 1981, PASP, 93, 5
671: \bibitem[Bertin, \& Arnouts~(1996)]{bar} Bertin, E.,
672: \& Arnouts, S. 1996, A\&AS, 117, 393
673: \bibitem[Blanton et al.~(2003)]{blanton} Blanton, M. et al.
674: 2003, \aj, 125, 2276
675: \bibitem[Brinchmann et al.~(2004)]{jarle} Brinchmann, J.,
676: Charlot, S., White, S. D. M., Tremonti, C., Kauffmann, G.,
677: Heckman, T., \& Brinkmann, J. 2004, MNRAS, 351, 1151
678: \bibitem[Bruzual \& Charlot~(2003)]{bc03} Bruzual, G. \& Charlot, S. 2003, MNRAS, 344, 1000
679: %\bibitem[Budavari et al.~(2005)]{budavari} Budavari, T. et al.\2005, ApJ, 619, 31
680: \bibitem[Charlot \& Longhetti~(2000)]{cl01} Charlot,
681: S. \& Longhetti 2000, MNRAS, 323 887
682: \bibitem[Charlot \& Fall~(2000)]{cf00} Charlot,
683: S. \& Fall, S. M. 2000, ApJ 539, 718
684: %\bibitem[Contini et al.~(2002)]{cont} Contini, T.,
685: % Treyer, M. A., Sullivan, M. \& Ellis, R. S. 2002, MNRAS,
686: % 330, 75
687: \bibitem[Davis, M. et al.~(2003)]{davis} Davis M. et al. in Discoveries and Research Prospects
688: from 6- to 10-Meter-Class Telescopes II. Edited by Guhathakurta, Puragra.
689: Proceedings of the SPIE, Volume 4834, pp. 161-172 (2003)
690: \bibitem[Ellis~(1997)]{ellis} Ellis, R., S. 1007, ARAA, 35, 389
691: \bibitem[Faber et al.(2003)]{faber03} Faber, S.~M., et al.
692: 2003, \procspie, 4841, 1657
693: \bibitem[Fukugita et al.~(1996)]{fuk96} Fukugita, M.,
694: Ichikawa, T., Gunn, J. E., Doi, M., Shimasaku, K.,
695: \& Schneider, D. P. 1996, \aj, 111, 1748
696: \bibitem[Guzm$\acute{a}$n et al.~(1996)]{guzmana} Guzm$\acute{a}$n, R., Koo,
697: D. C., Faber, S. M., Illingworth, G. D., Takamiya, M., Kron,
698: R. G., \& Bershady, M. A. 1996, ApJ, 460, 5
699: \bibitem[Guzm$\acute{a}$n et al.~(1997)]{guzmanLCBG}
700: Guzm$\acute{a}$n et al. 1997,
701: Apj, 489, 559
702: \bibitem[Guzm$\acute{a}$n et al.~(1998)] {guzmanb} Guzm$\acute{a}$n, R., Jangren,
703: A., Koo, D. C., Bershady, M. A., \& Simard, L. 1998 ApJ 495, 13
704: \bibitem[Hammer et al.~(2000)]{hammer} Hammer, F., Gruel, N.,
705: Thuan, T. X., Flores, H., \& Infante, L. 2000, ApJ, 550, 570
706: \bibitem[Hogg et al.~(2001)]{hogg} Hogg, D. W.,
707: Finkbeiner, D. P., Schlegel, D. J., and Gunn, J. E. 2001,
708: \aj, 122, 2129
709: \bibitem[Kauffmann et al.~(2003)]{kauf03a} Kauffmann,
710: F. et al. 2003, MNRAS, 341,33
711: \bibitem[Kennicutt~(1998)]{kennicutt} Kennicutt, R. C., ARA\&A, 36, 189
712: \bibitem[Kennicutt, Bresolin, \& Garnett~(2003)]{kbg} Kennicutt R. C., Bresolin, F. \& Garnett, D. R. 2003, ApJ, 591, 801
713: %\bibitem[Kewley \& Dopita (2002)]{kd02}
714: % Kewley, L. J., \& Dopita, M. A. 2002, ApJS, 142, 35
715: \bibitem[Kewley et al.~(2001)]{kew} Kewley, L. J., Dopita, M. A., Sutherland, R. S.,
716: Heisler, C. A., \& Trevena, J. 2001, ApJ, 556,121
717: \bibitem[Kobulnicky \& Kewley~(2004)]{kk04}
718: Kobulnicky, H. A. \& Kewley, L. 2004, ApJ, 617, 240
719: \bibitem[Koo et al~(1995)]{koo} Koo, D. C., Guzm$\acute{a}$n, R.,
720: Faber, S. M., Illingworth, G. D., Bershady, M. A., Kron,
721: R. G., \& Takamiya, M. 1995, ApJ, 440, 49
722: %\bibitem[Kobulnicky, H. A. \& Skillman, E. D.~(1996)]{ks} Kobulnicky, H. A. \& Skillman, E. D. 1996, ApJ, 471, 211
723: \bibitem[Martin et al.~(2005a)]{martin} Martin, C. D. et
724: al. 2005, ApJ, 619, 1
725: \bibitem[Martin et al.~(2005b)]{martina} Martin, C. D. et al. 2005, ApJ, 619, 59
726: %\bibitem[McGaugh (1991)]{mcgaugh} McGaugh, S. S. 1991,
727: % ApJ, 380, 140
728: %\bibitem[Miller \& Matthews (1972)]{mm} Miller,
729: % J. S. \& Matthews, W. G. 1972, ApJ, 172, 591
730: \bibitem[Milliard, B. et al.~(1992)]{milliard} Milliard, B., Donas, J., Laget, M., Armand, C., Vuillemin, A. 1992 A\&A, 257, 24
731: \bibitem[Morrissey et al.~(2005)]{pm} Morrissey, P. et
732: al. 2005, ApJ 619, 7
733: \bibitem[Mallen-Ornelas et al.~(1999)]{ornellas}
734: Mallen-Ornelas, G., Lilly, S. J., Crampton, D., \& Schade,
735: D. 1999, ApJ, 518, 83
736: \bibitem[Osterbrock~(1989)]{oster} Osterbrock,
737: D. E. 1989, Astrophysics of Gaseous Nebulae and Active
738: %\bibitem[Pagel et al.~(1979)]{pagel} Pagel, B. E. J.,
739: Edmunds, M. G., Blackwell, D. E., Chun, M. S., \& Smith, G. 1979, MNRAS, 189, 95
740: %\bibitem[Pei et al.~(1998)]{pei} Pei, Y. C., Fall, S. M., \& Hauser, M. G. 1998 Bulletin of the American Astronomical Society, 30 327
741: \bibitem[Phillips et al.~(1997)]{phillips} Phillips, A. C. et
742: al. 1997, ApJ, 489, 543
743: \bibitem[Pier et al.~(2003)]{pier} Pier, J. R., Munn,
744: J. A., Hindsley, R. B., Hennessy, G. S., Kent, S. M.,
745: Lupton, R. H., and Ivezic, Z. 2003, 125, 1559
746: \bibitem[Salim et al.~(2005)]{salim05} Salim, S. et al. 2005,
747: ApJ, 619, 39
748: \bibitem[Salim et al.~(2006)]{salim07} Salim, S. et al 2007, arXiv:0704.3611
749: \bibitem[Scalo~(1986)]{scalo} Scalo, J. M. 1986. {\it
750: Fundam. Cosm. Phys.} 11:1-278
751: \bibitem[Schiminovich et al.~(2005)]{schiminovich} Schiminovich, D. et al. 2005, ApJ, 619,47
752: \bibitem[D.J. Schlegel, D.P. Finkbeiner, \& M. Davis~(1998)]{schleg} D.J. Schlegel, D.P. Finkbeiner,\& M. Davis, ApJ, 500, 525 (20 June 1998)
753: %\bibitem[Seaton (1978)]{seaton} Seaton, M. J. 1979,
754: % MNRAS 187, 785
755: \bibitem[Smith et al.~(2002)]{smith02} Smith, J. A. et
756: al. 2002, \aj, 123, 2121
757: %\bibitem[Shapely et al.~(2004)]{shapley} Shapley, A. E., Erb, D. K., Pettini, M., Steidel, C. C., \& Adelberger, K. %L. 2004, ApJ, 612, 108
758: \bibitem[Stoughton et al.~(2002)]{stoughton} Stoughton,
759: C. et al. 2002, \aj, 123, 485
760: \bibitem[Strauss et al.~(2002)]{strauss} Strauss, M. A. et
761: al. 2002, AJ, 124, 181
762: \bibitem[Sullivan et al.~(2000)]{sullivan} Sullivan, M., Treyer, M. A., Ellis, S. R., Bridges, T. J., Milliard, B., Donas, J. 2000, MNRAS, 312, 442
763: \bibitem[~Tremonti et al.~(2004)]{trem} Tremonti,
764: C. A. et al. 2004, ApJ, 613, 898
765: \bibitem[Treyer et al.~(2005)]{treyer} Treyer, M. A. et al. 2005, ApJ, 619, 15
766: %\bibitem[Whitford~(1958)]{whit} Whitford, A. E. 1958,
767: % \aj, 63, 201
768: \bibitem[Wyder et al.~(2005)]{wyder} Wyder, T. K et al. 2005, ApJ, 619, 15
769: \bibitem[Wyder et al.~(2006)]{wyder_a} Wyder, T. K. 2006, in preparation
770: \end{thebibliography}
771: \clearpage
772:
773:
774:
775: \begin{figure}
776: \plotone{f1.eps}
777: \caption{Spectra of several galaxies from our sample at a
778: range of different redshifts. All of the galaxies are blue
779: sequence galaxies except the galaxy at $z=0.77$, which lies
780: on the red sequence. The spectra have been boxcar smoothed by 5 pixels.}
781: \end{figure}
782: \clearpage
783:
784:
785: \begin{figure}
786: \plotone{f2.eps}
787: \caption{Spectra of four QSOs from our sample. The spectra have been smoothed by 5 pixels.}
788: \end{figure}
789: \clearpage
790:
791:
792: \begin{figure}
793: \plotone{f3.eps}
794: \caption{Redshift distribution of spectroscopic sample. The mean redshift for the
795: sample is $z=0.421$. Shaded boxes indicate the quasar redshifts.}
796: \end{figure}
797: \clearpage
798:
799:
800: \begin{figure}
801: \plotone{f4.eps}
802: \caption{Emission line diagnostic diagram first used by
803: \citet{bpt}. The shaded 2D-histogram corresponds a to the GALEX
804: IR1.1/SDSS DR2 spectroscopic sample. The dashed curves taken from
805: \citet{kew,kauf03a} show the distinction between sources
806: with emission line flux coming from AGN (above) and sources
807: with emission line flux coming from HII regions (below). Out
808: of the 14 objects from our DEIMOS sample with detections of
809: H$\beta$, [OIII], H$\alpha$, and [NII], only three have
810: emission line ratios consistent with emission due to an AGN.}
811: \end{figure}
812: \clearpage
813:
814:
815: \begin{figure}
816: \plotone{f5.eps}
817: \caption{SDSS {\it r} magnitude distribution of the
818: DEIMOS spectroscopic sample plotted with the SDSS
819: {\it r} magnitude distribution of the matched GALEX
820: IR1.1/SDSS DR2 spectroscopic sample (shaded histogram).
821: The DEIMOS matched spectroscopic sample mean r magnitude (~21) is 3
822: magnitudes fainter than the mean of the SDSS spectroscopic
823: sample. }
824: \end{figure}
825: \clearpage
826:
827: \begin{figure}
828: \plotone{f6.eps}
829: \caption{CMD of M$_{r}$ vs. NUV-r plotted for the sample of
830: GALEX/SDSS objects with DEIMOS spectroscopy plotted with the
831: entire GALEX(IR1.1)/SDSS (DR2) matched sample having SDSS
832: spectroscopy. The diamonds represent galaxies in the DEIMOS
833: sample at $z<0.25$; crosses represent galaxies in the DEIMOS
834: sample at $z>0.25$. The
835: IR1.1/DR2 sample is plotted as the shaded contour plot; the
836: darker regions correspond to a higher density of points and
837: the contours encompass 40\% and 80\% of the of the objects in the sample.}
838: \end{figure}
839: \clearpage
840:
841:
842: \begin{figure}
843: \epsfig{file=f7.eps, scale=1.}
844: \setlength{\abovecaptionskip}{50pt}
845: \caption{Panel 1: CMD of M$_{r}$ vs. $FUV-NUV$ plotted for the
846: 24 galaxies in the DEIMOS sample with $FUV$ detections,
847: plotted with objects in the IR1.1/DR2 matched sample with
848: $FUV$ detections shown as a shaded contour plot. PANEL 2:
849: histogram of $FUV-NUV$ color for the 24 DEIMOS $FUV$
850: galaxies plotted with distribution of the IR1.1/DR2 FUV
851: sample (shaded histogram). PANEL 3: same as figure 5. The
852: filled (unfilled) circles correspond to objects with
853: (without) $FUV$ detections. Panel 4: Color-Color diagram of
854: the $FUV$ DEIMOS galaxies again overplotted onto the $FUV$
855: IR1.1/DEIMOS sample. The symbols used are the same as in
856: figure 6 and the contours encompass 40\% and 80\% of the of the objects in the IR1.1/DR2 sample.}
857: \end{figure}
858: \clearpage
859:
860:
861: \begin{figure}
862: %\plotone{f8.eps}
863: \epsfig{file=f8.eps, scale=1.}
864: \setlength{\abovecaptionskip}{50pt}
865: \caption{Derived Galaxy parameters, metallicity and V-band
866: attenuation plotted versus M$_{*}$ and $NUV - r$ color. The
867: DEIMOS spectroscopic sample is plotted over the matched
868: {\sl GALEX} IR1.1/SDSS DR2 spectroscopic sample (shaded
869: contour plot). The crosses correspond to objects with s
870: redshifts $z>0.25$. The diamonds correspond to objects with
871: redshifts $z<0.25$. The contours for the plots of stellar
872: mass contain 57\%, 84\%, and 97\% of the data. The contours
873: of $NUV-r$ color enclose 40\% and 80\% of the sample.}
874: \end{figure}
875: \clearpage
876:
877: \begin{figure}
878: \epsfig{file=f9.eps, scale=1.}
879: %\plotone{f9.eps}
880: \setlength{\abovecaptionskip}{50pt}
881: \caption{Derived Galaxy parameters, $\log$ SFR and $\log$ b
882: plotted versus M$_{*}$ and $NUV-r$ color. The DEIMOS
883: spectroscopic sample is plotted over the matched {\sl
884: GALEX} IR1.1/SDSS DR2 spectroscopic sample (shaded
885: contour plot). The crosses correspond to objects with
886: redshifts $z>0.25$. The diamonds correspond to objects with
887: redshifts $z<0.25$. The contours for the plots of M$_{*}$
888: contain 56\%, 84\%, and 97\% of the data. The contours of
889: $NUV -r$ color enclose 40\% and 80\% of the data. The SFRs
890: for the high z galaxies are approximately and order of
891: magnitude higher than the SFRS of the low z galaxies.}
892: \end{figure}
893: \clearpage
894:
895:
896: \begin{figure}
897: \plotone{f10.eps}
898: \caption{$\log b$ histogram distribution of the DEIMOS sample
899: plotted with the $\log b$ distribution of the matched GALEX
900: IR1.1/SDSS DR2 spectroscopic sample (shaded histogram)
901: normalized to the size of the DEIMOS sample. This figure
902: reflects our predominant sensitivity to the blue sequence
903: star forming
904: galaxies. }
905: \end{figure}
906: \clearpage
907:
908:
909: \begin{figure}
910: \epsfig{file=f11.eps, scale=1}
911: %\plotone{f11.eps}
912: \setlength{\abovecaptionskip}{50pt}
913: \caption{Panel 1: Rest frame absolute B magnitude, M$_b$ plotted versus the
914: B-mag surface brightness within the petrosian r half$-$light
915: radius. Panel 2: Star formation rate plotted versus measured
916: velocity dispersions. The filled diamonds correspond to objects in
917: our sample. Objects taken from \citet{koo} \& \citet{guzmana} are
918: plotted as stars, and objects taken from \citet{phillips}
919: are plotted as squares. While the present sample has
920: SFRs, luminosities, and velocity dispersions similar to the previous
921: studies of faint blue galaxies, our sample contains sources
922: with more extended emission and thus has lower surface brightness.}
923: \end{figure}
924: \clearpage
925:
926:
927: \begin{deluxetable}{lcccccccc}
928: \tabletypesize{\scriptsize}
929: \setlength{\tabcolsep}{0.02in}
930: \tablecaption{}
931: %\tablewidth{0pc}
932: \tablecolumns{9}
933: \tablehead{
934: \colhead{SDSS Object ID} &\colhead{z}
935: &\colhead{EW$_{[OII]3727}$} &\colhead{EW$_{H\beta}$}
936: &\colhead{EW$_{[OIII]5007}$} &\colhead{EW$_{H\alpha}$}
937: &\colhead{EW$_{[NII]6584}$} &\colhead{[OIII]5007/$H\beta$} &\colhead{[NII]6584/H$\alpha$} }
938:
939: \startdata
940: 587725578037494738 &0.474 & 7.23 $\pm$ 5.29 &2.11 $\pm$ 0.51 &2.54 $\pm$ 0.29 & *** $\pm$ *** & *** $\pm$ *** & 2.83 $\pm$ 0.72 & *** $\pm$ ***\\
941: 587725578037494286 &0.134 & *** $\pm$ *** &2.05 $\pm$ 0.20 &2.57 $\pm$ 0.22 & 4.51 $\pm$ 0.05 &3.46 $\pm$ 0.13 & 1.37 $\pm$ 0.18 &0.25 $\pm$ 0.01\\
942: 587725591459201372 &0.615 & 4.63 $\pm$ 1.24 &3.02 $\pm$ 0.50 &3.74 $\pm$ 0.33 & *** $\pm$ *** & *** $\pm$ *** & 1.46 $\pm$ 0.28 & *** $\pm$ ***\\
943: 587725578037495014 &0.213 & *** $\pm$ *** &6.16 $\pm$ 4.88 &4.83 $\pm$ 4.78 &58.32 $\pm$ 30.70 &3.91 $\pm$ 16.30 & 1.12 $\pm$ 1.38 &0.98 $\pm$ 0.60\\
944: 587725578037494283 &0.084 & *** $\pm$ *** &0.82 $\pm$ 0.25 &1.17 $\pm$ 0.25 & 2.36 $\pm$ 0.05 &1.68 $\pm$ 0.10 & 1.84 $\pm$ 0.69 &0.27 $\pm$ 0.02\\
945: 587725591459201726 &0.439 & 5.21 $\pm$ 0.35 &3.17 $\pm$ 0.18 &3.34 $\pm$ 0.06 & *** $\pm$ *** & *** $\pm$ *** & 4.95 $\pm$ 0.30 & *** $\pm$ ***\\
946: 587725591459201125$^b$ &0.066 & *** $\pm$ *** &7.74 $\pm$ 0.19 &2.74 $\pm$ 0.06 & 3.57 $\pm$ 0.01 &3.13 $\pm$ 0.02 & 1.40 $\pm$ 0.05 &0.29 $\pm$ 0.01\\
947: 587725591459201562 &0.068 & *** $\pm$ *** &0.81 $\pm$ 0.82 &1.51 $\pm$ 0.75 & 2.66 $\pm$ 0.19 &1.17 $\pm$ 0.51 & 2.93 $\pm$ 3.32 &0.14 $\pm$ 0.06\\
948: 587725591459201436 &0.066 & *** $\pm$ *** & *** $\pm$ *** &2.28 $\pm$ 0.10 & 2.25 $\pm$ 0.03 &1.65 $\pm$ 0.12 & *** $\pm$ *** &0.14 $\pm$ 0.010\\
949: 587725591459201670 &0.651 & 6.22 $\pm$ 0.58 &3.66 $\pm$ 0.77 &5.06 $\pm$ 0.21 & *** $\pm$ *** & *** $\pm$ *** & 3.98 $\pm$ 0.84 & *** $\pm$ ***\\
950: 587725591459201656 &0.157 & *** $\pm$ *** &2.04 $\pm$ 0.51 &2.10 $\pm$ 0.11 & 2.53 $\pm$ 0.12 &1.60 $\pm$ 1.65 & 5.81 $\pm$ 1.47 &0.02 $\pm$ 0.02\\
951: 587725591459201666 &0.078 & *** $\pm$ *** &1.03 $\pm$ 1.80 &1.08 $\pm$ 0.62 & 2.10 $\pm$ 0.11 &1.50 $\pm$ 0.51 & 2.36 $\pm$ 4.33 &0.18 $\pm$ 0.06\\
952: 587725591459201614 &0.188 & *** $\pm$ *** &2.62 $\pm$ 0.40 &2.69 $\pm$ 0.15 & 3.38 $\pm$ 0.10 &2.02 $\pm$ 0.83 & 3.01 $\pm$ 0.49 &0.08 $\pm$ 0.03\\
953: 587725591459136404 &0.220 & *** $\pm$ *** &0.74 $\pm$ 0.59 &3.43 $\pm$ 0.57 & 4.95 $\pm$ 0.23 &2.77 $\pm$ 0.67 & 7.21 $\pm$ 5.93 &0.18 $\pm$ 0.04\\
954: 587725591459136351 &0.319 & 1.34 $\pm$ 1.16 &2.38 $\pm$ 0.72 &0.76 $\pm$ 0.45 & *** $\pm$ *** & *** $\pm$ *** & 0.34 $\pm$ 0.23 & *** $\pm$ ***\\
955: 587725591459136031 &0.192 & *** $\pm$ *** &0.25 $\pm$ 0.22 &0.59 $\pm$ 0.34 & 2.98 $\pm$ 0.12 &2.79 $\pm$ 0.18 & 2.42 $\pm$ 2.55 &0.63 $\pm$ 0.05\\
956: 587725591459136024$^b$ &0.245 & *** $\pm$ *** &2.00 $\pm$ 0.44 &1.81 $\pm$ 0.47 & 3.87 $\pm$ 0.12 &2.54 $\pm$ 0.32 & 0.85 $\pm$ 0.29 &0.23 $\pm$ 0.03\\
957: 587725591459136330 &0.565 & 8.01 $\pm$ 0.95 &3.13 $\pm$ 0.32 &3.43 $\pm$ 0.11 & *** $\pm$ *** & *** $\pm$ *** &18.69 $\pm$ 1.78 & *** $\pm$ ***\\
958: 587725591459135913 &0.293 & *** $\pm$ *** &2.32 $\pm$ 0.61 &2.23 $\pm$ 0.47 & 2.76 $\pm$ 0.09 &2.18 $\pm$ 0.26 & 1.29 $\pm$ 0.44 &0.19 $\pm$ 0.02\\
959: 587725591459136277 &0.290 & *** $\pm$ *** & *** $\pm$ *** &1.81 $\pm$ 1.07 & 0.82 $\pm$ 0.44 &2.80 $\pm$ 0.41 & *** $\pm$ *** &3.97 $\pm$ 2.21\\
960: 587725591459136339 &0.188 & *** $\pm$ *** &2.97 $\pm$ 0.35 &2.69 $\pm$ 0.35 & 5.10 $\pm$ 0.07 &5.15 $\pm$ 0.17 & 0.95 $\pm$ 0.17 &0.36 $\pm$ 0.01\\
961: 587725578037166749 &0.320 & *** $\pm$ *** &2.30 $\pm$ 0.35 &2.45 $\pm$ 0.86 & *** $\pm$ *** & *** $\pm$ *** & 0.59 $\pm$ 0.22 & *** $\pm$ ***\\
962: 587725578037166468 &0.330 & *** $\pm$ *** &1.49 $\pm$ 0.20 &0.94 $\pm$ 0.17 & *** $\pm$ *** & *** $\pm$ *** & 0.62 $\pm$ 0.14 & *** $\pm$ ***\\
963: 587725578037166557 &0.168 & *** $\pm$ *** &2.47 $\pm$ 0.11 &3.06 $\pm$ 0.07 & 4.11 $\pm$ 0.03 &3.06 $\pm$ 0.09 & 2.39 $\pm$ 0.12 &0.20 $\pm$ 0.01\\
964: 587725578037166705 &0.192 & *** $\pm$ *** &1.54 $\pm$ 0.35 &2.71 $\pm$ 0.29 & 2.50 $\pm$ 0.11 &1.24 $\pm$ 0.50 & 2.94 $\pm$ 0.73 &0.06 $\pm$ 0.03\\
965: 587725578037166672 &0.189 & *** $\pm$ *** &3.85 $\pm$ 0.15 &2.92 $\pm$ 0.20 & 5.48 $\pm$ 0.03 &5.96 $\pm$ 0.07 & 0.59 $\pm$ 0.05 &0.34 $\pm$ 0.01\\
966: 587725578037166295 &0.560 & 7.13 $\pm$ 0.52 &5.94 $\pm$ 0.38 &5.37 $\pm$ 0.29 & *** $\pm$ *** & *** $\pm$ *** & 1.29 $\pm$ 0.11 & *** $\pm$ ***\\
967: 587725578037166628 &0.652 & 0.95 $\pm$ 0.65 &3.54 $\pm$ 0.43 &0.86 $\pm$ 0.45 & *** $\pm$ *** & *** $\pm$ *** & 0.17 $\pm$ 0.09 & *** $\pm$ ***\\
968: 587725578037166629 &0.321 & 2.15 $\pm$ 4.43 &2.93 $\pm$ 0.17 &3.21 $\pm$ 0.07 & *** $\pm$ *** & *** $\pm$ *** & 3.02 $\pm$ 0.19 & *** $\pm$ ***\\
969: 587725578037100839 &0.561 & 5.25 $\pm$ 0.34 &2.84 $\pm$ 0.15 &4.40 $\pm$ 0.25 & *** $\pm$ *** & *** $\pm$ *** & 1.70 $\pm$ 0.13 & *** $\pm$ ***\\
970: 587725578037101267 &0.293 & *** $\pm$ *** &7.99 $\pm$ 8.21 &6.65 $\pm$ 0.68 & 2.60 $\pm$ 1.68 &0.17 $\pm$ 0.51 & *** $\pm$ *** &0.10 $\pm$ 0.30\\
971: 587725578037101221 &0.518 & 5.79 $\pm$ 0.95 &3.31 $\pm$ 0.35 & *** $\pm$ *** & *** $\pm$ *** & *** $\pm$ *** & *** $\pm$ *** & *** $\pm$ ***\\
972: 587725578037100922 &0.168 & *** $\pm$ *** &1.24 $\pm$ 0.44 &1.06 $\pm$ 0.45 & 3.54 $\pm$ 0.11 &2.82 $\pm$ 0.20 & 0.85 $\pm$ 0.47 &0.48 $\pm$ 0.04\\
973: 587725578037101176 &0.281 & *** $\pm$ *** &2.28 $\pm$ 0.29 &3.52 $\pm$ 0.27 & 2.49 $\pm$ 0.08 & *** $\pm$ *** & 2.07 $\pm$ 0.31 & *** $\pm$ ***\\
974: 587725591458873892 &0.281 & *** $\pm$ *** &2.49 $\pm$ 0.21 &3.14 $\pm$ 0.26 & *** $\pm$ *** & *** $\pm$ *** & 1.21 $\pm$ 0.14 & *** $\pm$ ***\\
975: 587725578037100775$^a$ &0.176 & *** $\pm$ *** & *** $\pm$ *** & *** $\pm$ *** & 0.86 $\pm$ 0.11 &1.07 $\pm$ 0.08 & *** $\pm$ *** &1.30 $\pm$ 0.20\\
976: 587725591458808530 &0.427 & 2.53 $\pm$ 0.96 &3.58 $\pm$ 0.27 &3.92 $\pm$ 0.38 & *** $\pm$ *** & *** $\pm$ *** & 0.94 $\pm$ 0.11 & *** $\pm$ ***\\
977: 587725591458808528 &0.598 & 5.42 $\pm$ 0.31 &3.57 $\pm$ 0.20 & *** $\pm$ *** & *** $\pm$ *** & *** $\pm$ *** & *** $\pm$ *** & *** $\pm$ ***\\
978: 587725578037101077 &0.387 & 6.51 $\pm$ 1.41 &3.96 $\pm$ 0.33 &3.12 $\pm$ 0.13 & *** $\pm$ *** & *** $\pm$ *** & 2.40 $\pm$ 0.22 & *** $\pm$ ***\\
979: 587725578037101473 &0.496 & 4.81 $\pm$ 1.31 &2.44 $\pm$ 0.52 &2.95 $\pm$ 0.13 & *** $\pm$ *** & *** $\pm$ *** & 4.70 $\pm$ 1.01 & *** $\pm$ ***\\
980: 587725578037166675 &0.498 & 7.79 $\pm$ 0.92 &3.15 $\pm$ 0.23 &3.32 $\pm$ 0.14 & *** $\pm$ *** & *** $\pm$ *** & 1.39 $\pm$ 0.11 & *** $\pm$ ***
981: \enddata
982: \tablenotetext{a}{denotes objects with corresponding spectra in SDSS}
983: \tablenotetext{b}{denotes objects with failed SED fit}
984:
985: \end{deluxetable}
986:
987: \begin{deluxetable}{lccllcclll}
988: \tabletypesize{\scriptsize}
989: \tablecaption{}
990: \tablewidth{0pc}
991: \tablecolumns{10}
992: \tablehead{
993: \colhead{SDSS Object ID} &\colhead{z}
994: &\colhead{RA} &\colhead{Dec}
995: &\colhead{$FUV$} &\colhead{$NUV$}
996: &\colhead{$NUV - r$} &\colhead{$\log M_{*}$} &\colhead{$\log$ SFR}
997: &\colhead{$\log b$}}
998: \startdata
999: 587725578037166705 &0.192 &17$^h$ 37$^m$ 30.681$^s$ &57$^o$ 20$^{\prime}$ 8.70$^{\prime\prime}$ &22.53 &23.11 & 1.51 & 8.69 &-0.42 &-0.09\\
1000: 587725578037166675 &0.498 &17$^h$ 37$^m$ 34.409$^s$ &57$^o$ 21$^{\prime}$ 13.71$^{\prime\prime}$ & *** &22.62 & 0.97 & 9.50 & 0.50 &-0.07\\
1001: 587725578037166672 &0.189 &17$^h$ 37$^m$ 39.053$^s$ &57$^o$ 21$^{\prime}$ 30.10$^{\prime\prime}$ & *** &23.04 & 3.36 &10.05 & 0.15 &-0.55\\
1002: 587725578037166749 &0.320 &17$^h$ 37$^m$ 41.177$^s$ &57$^o$ 18$^{\prime}$ 46.29$^{\prime\prime}$ &22.87 &22.12 & 1.88 & 9.91 & 0.65 &-0.14\\
1003: 587725578037100839 &0.561 &17$^h$ 37$^m$ 43.542$^s$ &57$^o$ 24$^{\prime}$ 5.51$^{\prime\prime}$ & *** &22.19 & 1.19 &10.40 & 0.85 &-0.32\\
1004: 587725578037166468 &0.330 &17$^h$ 37$^m$ 45.923$^s$ &57$^o$ 19$^{\prime}$ 17.19$^{\prime\prime}$ &22.38 &21.50 & 2.15 &10.85 & 0.48 &-0.84\\
1005: 587725578037166557 &0.168 &17$^h$ 37$^m$ 58.250$^s$ &57$^o$ 20$^{\prime}$ 16.80$^{\prime\prime}$ &20.61 &20.12 & 1.18 & 9.47 & 0.53 &-0.08\\
1006: 587725578037166295 &0.560 &17$^h$ 37$^m$ 59.495$^s$ &57$^o$ 23$^{\prime}$ 21.80$^{\prime\prime}$ & *** &22.16 & 0.89 & 9.70 & 0.79 &-0.07\\
1007: 587725578037166628 &0.652 &17$^h$ 38$^m$ 2.622$^s$ &57$^o$ 23$^{\prime}$ 26.99$^{\prime\prime}$ & *** &22.73 & 1.51 &10.51 & 1.11 &-0.24\\
1008: 587725578037166629 &0.321 &17$^h$ 38$^m$ 7.756$^s$ &57$^o$ 23$^{\prime}$ 34.90$^{\prime\prime}$ & *** &22.32 & 1.04 & 9.09 & 0.28 &-0.05\\
1009: 587725578037101267 &0.293 &17$^h$ 38$^m$ 22.192$^s$ &57$^o$ 25$^{\prime}$ 2.82$^{\prime\prime}$ & *** &23.36 & 1.66 & 9.16 &-0.06 &-0.18\\
1010: 587725578037100922 &0.168 &17$^h$ 38$^m$ 23.628$^s$ &57$^o$ 27$^{\prime}$ 56.42$^{\prime\prime}$ &21.48 &21.97 & 2.67 & 9.97 &-0.24 &-0.76\\
1011: 587725578037101473 &0.496 &17$^h$ 38$^m$ 27.876$^s$ &57$^o$ 26$^{\prime}$ 33.90$^{\prime\prime}$ &22.91 &22.28 & 1.22 & 9.76 & 0.68 &-0.10\\
1012: 587725578037101077 &0.387 &17$^h$ 38$^m$ 36.526$^s$ &57$^o$ 30$^{\prime}$ 38.59$^{\prime\prime}$ & *** &22.32 & 0.52 & 9.11 & 0.51 &-0.01\\
1013: 587725578037101221 &0.518 &17$^h$ 38$^m$ 37.317$^s$ &57$^o$ 26$^{\prime}$ 53.92$^{\prime\prime}$ & *** &22.50 & 1.09 &10.07 & 0.62 &-0.26\\
1014: 587725578037100775$^a$ &0.176 &17$^h$ 38$^m$ 37.646$^s$ &57$^o$ 29$^{\prime}$ 13.99$^{\prime\prime}$ &21.03 &20.34 & 3.08 &11.08 & 0.69 &-0.88\\
1015: 587725578037101176 &0.281 &17$^h$ 38$^m$ 41.873$^s$ &57$^o$ 28$^{\prime}$ 9.30$^{\prime\prime}$ & *** &22.33 & 0.99 & 9.24 &-0.09 &-0.19\\
1016: 587725591458873892 &0.281 &17$^h$ 38$^m$ 48.259$^s$ &57$^o$ 29$^{\prime}$ 10.40$^{\prime\prime}$ &22.69 &22.23 & 1.80 & 9.76 & 0.43 &-0.13\\
1017: 587725591458808530 &0.427 &17$^h$ 38$^m$ 50.596$^s$ &57$^o$ 29$^{\prime}$ 54.31$^{\prime\prime}$ & *** &22.88 & 2.89 &10.50 & 2.12 & 0.00\\
1018: 587725591458808528 &0.598 &17$^h$ 38$^m$ 54.873$^s$ &57$^o$ 30$^{\prime}$ 5.80$^{\prime\prime}$ & *** &22.58 & 1.83 &10.37 & 1.33 &-0.09\\
1019: 587725578037494286 &0.134 &17$^h$ 39$^m$ 45.205$^s$ &56$^o$ 40$^{\prime}$ 2.20$^{\prime\prime}$ &20.87 &20.47 & 1.17 & 9.66 &-0.15 &-0.28\\
1020: 587725578037494409 &0.355 &17$^h$ 39$^m$ 51.035$^s$ &56$^o$ 39$^{\prime}$ 13.11$^{\prime\prime}$ & *** &23.23 & 1.78 & 9.14 & 0.36 &-0.04\\
1021: 587725578037495014 &0.213 &17$^h$ 39$^m$ 51.343$^s$ &56$^o$ 39$^{\prime}$ 58.89$^{\prime\prime}$ & *** &22.73 & 0.95 & 8.18 &-0.66 &-0.02\\
1022: 587725578037494283 &0.084 &17$^h$ 39$^m$ 53.130$^s$ &56$^o$ 40$^{\prime}$ 18.91$^{\prime\prime}$ &22.24 &22.00 & 2.34 & 9.17 &-0.57 &-0.35\\
1023: 587725578037494050 &0.077 &17$^h$ 39$^m$ 56.243$^s$ &56$^o$ 38$^{\prime}$ 17.20$^{\prime\prime}$ & *** &22.11 & 5.46 &10.76 &-0.80 &-1.91\\
1024: 587725578037494494 &0.356 &17$^h$ 39$^m$ 56.287$^s$ &56$^o$ 37$^{\prime}$ 21.00$^{\prime\prime}$ & *** &22.20 & 1.96 & 9.99 & 1.14 &-0.03\\
1025: 587725578037494738 &0.474 &17$^h$ 39$^m$ 56.704$^s$ &56$^o$ 37$^{\prime}$ 53.80$^{\prime\prime}$ & *** &22.72 & 0.86 & 9.67 & 0.38 &-0.16\\
1026: 587725591459201436 &0.066 &17$^h$ 40$^m$ 1.663$^s$ &56$^o$ 44$^{\prime}$ 3.12$^{\prime\prime}$ &20.89 &20.74 & 2.20 & 9.21 &-0.41 &-0.35\\
1027: 587725591459201125$^b$ &0.066 &17$^h$ 40$^m$ 3.853$^s$ &56$^o$ 41$^{\prime}$ 59.82$^{\prime\prime}$ &20.37 &19.99 & 1.96 & *** & *** & ***\\
1028: 587725591459201656 &0.157 &17$^h$ 40$^m$ 6.724$^s$ &56$^o$ 43$^{\prime}$ 49.51$^{\prime\prime}$ &22.64 &22.12 &-0.52 & 8.68 &-0.97 &-0.24\\
1029: 587725591459201627 &0.079 &17$^h$ 40$^m$ 8.196$^s$ &56$^o$ 44$^{\prime}$ 57.80$^{\prime\prime}$ &22.18 &21.68 & 1.51 & 8.48 &-0.61 &-0.09\\
1030: 587725591459201372 &0.615 &17$^h$ 40$^m$ 8.328$^s$ &56$^o$ 39$^{\prime}$ 39.82$^{\prime\prime}$ & *** &22.68 & 1.80 &10.53 & 0.81 &-0.51\\
1031: 587725591459201929 &0.436 &17$^h$ 40$^m$ 15.117$^s$ &56$^o$ 46$^{\prime}$ 4.70$^{\prime\prime}$ &22.36 &22.16 & 0.24 & 9.27 & 0.22 &-0.07\\
1032: 587725591459201726 &0.439 &17$^h$ 40$^m$ 17.307$^s$ &56$^o$ 41$^{\prime}$ 31.09$^{\prime\prime}$ & *** &22.42 & 0.94 & 9.98 & 0.37 &-0.22\\
1033: 587725591459136339 &0.188 &17$^h$ 40$^m$ 17.468$^s$ &56$^o$ 48$^{\prime}$ 5.50$^{\prime\prime}$ &21.23 &20.57 & 0.76 & 9.98 &-0.06 &-0.47\\
1034: 587725591459201670 &0.651 &17$^h$ 40$^m$ 19.175$^s$ &56$^o$ 43$^{\prime}$ 39.18$^{\prime\prime}$ & *** &22.46 & 0.14 & 8.93 & 0.61 & 0.29\\
1035: 587725591459201562 &0.068 &17$^h$ 40$^m$ 20.969$^s$ &56$^o$ 42$^{\prime}$ 43.30$^{\prime\prime}$ & *** &22.77 & 2.90 & 8.77 &-1.06 &-0.53\\
1036: 587725591459201614 &0.188 &17$^h$ 40$^m$ 23.225$^s$ &56$^o$ 45$^{\prime}$ 42.52$^{\prime\prime}$ &22.37 &21.50 & 0.59 & 8.72 &-0.06 &-0.04\\
1037: 587725591459136404 &0.220 &17$^h$ 40$^m$ 23.708$^s$ &56$^o$ 46$^{\prime}$ 34.10$^{\prime\prime}$ &22.53 &21.76 & 0.79 & 9.59 &-0.47 &-0.55\\
1038: 587725591459135913 &0.293 &17$^h$ 40$^m$ 29.685$^s$ &56$^o$ 50$^{\prime}$ 27.71$^{\prime\prime}$ &21.64 &21.93 & 1.18 & 9.55 & 0.12 &-0.21\\
1039: 587725591459136024$^b$ &0.245 &17$^h$ 40$^m$ 32.498$^s$ &56$^o$ 49$^{\prime}$ 12.51$^{\prime\prime}$ &22.73 &20.99 &-0.08 & *** & *** & ***\\
1040: 587725591459201666 &0.078 &17$^h$ 40$^m$ 33.193$^s$ &56$^o$ 44$^{\prime}$ 5.32$^{\prime\prime}$ & *** &20.82 & 1.06 & 9.00 &-0.90 &-0.42\\
1041: 587725591459136277 &0.290 &17$^h$ 40$^m$ 35.691$^s$ &56$^o$ 50$^{\prime}$ 29.29$^{\prime\prime}$ &22.66 &22.23 & 3.27 &10.99 & 0.49 &-0.98\\
1042: 587725591459136330 &0.565 &17$^h$ 40$^m$ 46.362$^s$ &56$^o$ 49$^{\prime}$ 13.40$^{\prime\prime}$ & *** &22.18 & 1.33 &10.03 & 1.06 &-0.08\\
1043: 587725591459136031 &0.192 &17$^h$ 40$^m$ 56.177$^s$ &56$^o$ 49$^{\prime}$ 15.38$^{\prime\prime}$ &20.94 &20.09 & 2.45 &10.92 & 0.97 &-0.47\\
1044: 587725591459136351 &0.319 &17$^h$ 40$^m$ 56.594$^s$ &56$^o$ 48$^{\prime}$ 52.20$^{\prime\prime}$ & *** &21.35 & 2.15 &10.90 & 0.75 &-0.60\\
1045: \\
1046: \\
1047: 587725578037100834 &1.515 &17$^h$ 38$^m$ 9.360$^s$ &57$^o$ 25$^{\prime}$ 21.36$^{\prime\prime}$ & *** &23.40 & 2.63 & *** & *** & *** \\
1048: 587725591459201473 &1.387 &17$^h$ 40$^m$ 9.836$^s$ &56$^o$ 40$^{\prime}$ 7.68$^{\prime\prime}$ & *** &22.67 & 1.14 & *** & *** & *** \\
1049: 587725591459136108 &1.632 &17$^h$ 40$^m$ 43.682$^s$ &56$^o$ 48$^{\prime}$ 45.36$^{\prime\prime}$ & *** &23.05 & 1.67 & *** & *** & *** \\
1050: 587725591459135981$^a$ &1.028 &17$^h$ 40$^m$ 49.197$^s$ &56$^o$ 47$^{\prime}$ 23.65$^{\prime\prime}$ &22.62 &21.20 & 1.94 & *** & *** & ***
1051: \enddata
1052: \tablenotetext{a}{denotes objects with corresponding spectra in SDSS}
1053: \tablenotetext{b}{denotes objects with failed SED fit}
1054: \end{deluxetable}
1055: \end{document}
1056: