1: \documentclass[12pt,preprint]{aastex}
2: % \documentclass[apj]{emulateapj}
3: % \usepackage{apjfonts}
4: \usepackage{epsf}
5: \bibliographystyle{apj}
6: \newcommand{\Msun}{\mathrm{M}_{\odot}}
7: \newcommand\sfr{{\rm SFR}}
8: \newcommand\loh{{12+\log{\rm(O/H)}}}
9:
10: \begin{document}
11:
12: \shortauthors{Prieto, Stanek, \& Beacom}
13:
14: \title{Characterizing Supernova Progenitors via the Metallicities of
15: their Host Galaxies, from Poor Dwarfs to Rich Spirals}
16:
17: \author{Jos\'e~L.~Prieto\altaffilmark{1}, Krzysztof~Z.~Stanek\altaffilmark{1,3},
18: John~F.~Beacom\altaffilmark{2,1,3}}
19:
20: \altaffiltext{1}{\small Department of Astronomy, Ohio State University, Columbus, OH 43210 }
21: \altaffiltext{2}{\small Department of Physics, Ohio State University, Columbus, OH 43210}
22: \altaffiltext{3}{\small Center for Cosmology and Astro-Particle Physics, Ohio State University, Columbus, OH 43210}
23:
24: \email{prieto@astronomy.ohio-state.edu}
25:
26: \begin{abstract}
27: We investigate how the different types of supernovae are relatively
28: affected by the metallicity of their host galaxy. We match the SAI
29: supernova catalog to the SDSS-DR4 catalog of star-forming galaxies with
30: measured metallicities. These supernova host galaxies span a range of
31: oxygen abundance from $\loh=7.9$ to $9.3$ ($\sim 0.1$ to 2.7 solar) and
32: a range in absolute magnitude from M$_{B} = -15.2$ to $-22.2$. To reduce
33: the various observational biases, we select a subsample of
34: well-characterized supernovae in the redshift range from 0.01 to 0.04,
35: which leaves us with 58 SN~II, 19~Ib/c, and 38~Ia. We find strong
36: evidence that SN~Ib/c are occurring in higher-metallicity host galaxies
37: than SN~II, while we see no effect for SN~Ia relative to SN~II. We note
38: some extreme and interesting supernova-host pairs, including the
39: metal-poor ($\sim 1/4$ solar) host of the recent SN~Ia 2007bk, where the
40: supernova was found well outside of this dwarf galaxy. To extend the
41: luminosity range of supernova hosts to even fainter galaxies, we also
42: match all the supernovae with $z < 0.3$ to the SDSS-DR6 sky
43: images, resulting in 1225 matches. This allows us to identify some even
44: more extreme cases, such as the recent SN~Ic 2007bg, where the likely
45: host of this hypernova-like event has an absolute magnitude M$_B \sim
46: -12$, making it one of the least-luminous supernova hosts ever observed.
47: This low-luminosity host is certain to be very metal poor ($\sim 1/20$
48: solar), and therefore this supernova is an excellent candidate for
49: association with an off-axis GRB. The two catalogs that we have
50: constructed are available online and will be updated regularly.
51: Finally, we discuss various implications of our findings for
52: understanding supernova progenitors and their host galaxies.
53: \end{abstract}
54:
55: \keywords{supernovae: general}
56:
57: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
58:
59: \section{Introduction}
60:
61: On general grounds, it is thought that metallicity will affect the
62: endpoints of stellar evolution, e.g., the relative outcomes in terms of
63: different supernova types and the observed properties of each. Metals
64: are a source of opacity that affects supernova progenitors
65: \citep[e.g.,][]{kudritzki00} and also the supernova explosions
66: themselves \citep[e.g.,][]{heger03}. However, the hypothesized
67: metallicity effects have been rather difficult to measure directly. The
68: number of supernova progenitors that have been identified directly from
69: pre-explosion imaging is small and limited to core-collapse events
70: \citep[e.g.,][]{hendry06, li07}. Previous works have either used
71: population studies with only observational proxies for metallicity
72: \citep[e.g.,][]{prantzos03} or have considered direct metallicity
73: measurements with only relatively small numbers of events
74: \citep[e.g.,][]{hamuy00, gallagher05, stanek06, modjaz07}.
75:
76: A new approach is now possible, which we employ in this paper, that
77: takes advantage of the large sample of well-observed and typed
78: supernovae. Due to a fortuitous match in coverage, many of
79: these supernovae were in galaxies for which the Sloan Digital Sky Survey
80: (SDSS) has identified the host galaxies and measured their oxygen
81: abundances from emission lines in their spectra \citep{tremonti04}.
82: While these are central metallicities for the host galaxies, and are not
83: measured for each supernova site, they are much more directly connected
84: to the latter than proxies like the host luminosity. To further sharpen
85: our tests, we compare the metallicity distributions of the host galaxies
86: of SN~Ib/c and SN~Ia to those of SN~II, which are taken as a control
87: sample.
88:
89: The progenitors of core-collapse supernovae (SN~II and Ib/c) are massive
90: stars, either single or in binaries, with initial main sequence masses
91: $\ga 8\,\Msun$ \citep[e.g.,][]{heger03}. The presence of hydrogen in
92: the spectra of SN~II indicates that the massive envelopes are retained
93: by the progenitors, of which red supergiants are probably the most
94: common. However, SN~Ib/c lack hydrogen (SN~Ib) or both hydrogen and
95: helium (SN~Ic) in their spectra, and are therefore thought to have
96: Wolf-Rayet (WR) stars as progenitors (see \citealt{crowther07} for a
97: review). The latter originate from the most massive stars, and have had
98: their outer layers stripped off by strong winds. Thus SN~Ib/c are
99: thought to have main sequence masses $\ga 30\,\Msun$, which would make
100: them $\simeq (8/30)^{1.35} \simeq 20\%$ of all core-collapse supernovae,
101: assuming a Salpeter slope in the high-mass end of the initial mass
102: function.
103:
104: Based on theoretical considerations, the effects of line-driven winds
105: are expected to introduce a metallicity dependence in the minimum mass
106: necessary to produce WR stars
107: \citep[e.g.,][]{heger03,eldridge04,vink05}, which in turn can change the
108: fractions of core-collapse supernovae that explode as SN~II and
109: SN~Ib/c. Due to the relative frequencies, SN~Ib/c will be more affected
110: than SN~II. These metallicity effects on the progenitor winds may
111: strongly affect the rate at which radioactive $^{26}$Al is expelled into
112: the interstellar medium before decaying
113: \citep[e.g.,][]{prantzos04,palacios05}, in which case the decays
114: contribute to the observed diffuse 1.809 MeV gamma-ray line emission
115: from the Milky Way \citep[e.g.,][]{diehl06}. While $^{26}$Al appears to
116: originate in massive stars, it is not yet known how much comes from the
117: progenitors or the different core-collapse supernova types
118: \citep[e.g.,][]{prantzos96,higdon04}. For the most massive stars, GRB
119: progenitors in the collapsar model (e.g., \citealt{macfadyen99},
120: \citealt{yoon05}), the interplay between metallicity-dependent mass loss
121: through winds and rotation may be crucial (e.g.,
122: \citealt{hirschi05}). In all cases, binary progenitors may be more
123: complicated \citep[e.g.,][]{eldridge07}.
124:
125: \citet{prantzos03} used the absolute magnitudes of galaxies as a proxy
126: for their average metallicities, from the luminosity-metallicity
127: relationship, and found that the number ratio of SN~Ib/c to SN~II
128: increases with metallicity; they argued that their result is consistent
129: with stellar evolution models of massive stars with rotation
130: \citep[e.g.,][]{meynet06}. If so, then one would expect a more robust
131: signature if the host metallicities were known directly. Ideally, in
132: the latter approach, one would use the metallicities as measured from
133: follow-up spectra obtained at the supernova sites, but this is difficult
134: in practice. This approach of using measured as opposed to estimated
135: metallicities was used by \citet{stanek06} (with compiled results from
136: the literature) to study nearby long-duration GRBs with subsequent
137: supernovae, finding that all of them had very low metallicity
138: environments and that this appeared to be key to forming powerful GRB
139: jets, and by \citet{modjaz07} to study nearby broad-lined SN~Ic (without
140: GRBs), finding in contrast that the metallicities of these environments
141: were much higher. The main caveats associated with these results are the
142: low statistics, five and twelve events, respectively. We try to combine
143: the virtues of these two approaches, with higher statistics and mostly
144: direct metallicity measurements.
145:
146: The likely progenitors of SN~Ia are white dwarfs, forming from stars
147: with initial main-sequence masses $\la 8\,\Msun$, which accrete mass
148: from a companion (single-degenerate model) until they reach the
149: Chandrasekhar mass ($\simeq 1.4\,\Msun$) and produce a thermonuclear
150: explosion that completely disrupts the star \citep[e.g.,][]{whelan73}.
151: During the accretion process, white dwarfs could have strong winds when
152: the accretion rate reaches a critical value \citep[e.g.,][]{hachisu96},
153: which would allow them to burn hydrogen steadily and grow in mass. At
154: low metallicities (${\rm [Fe/H]} \la -1$), SN~Ia may be inhibited
155: through the single-degenerate channel \citep{kobayashi98}, as the white
156: dwarf wind is thought to be weak and the system passes through a common
157: envelope phase before reaching the Chandrasekhar mass. Metallicity also
158: affects the CNO abundances of white dwarfs, which can affect the
159: production of $^{56}$Ni in the explosion, and therefore the peak
160: luminosities of SN~Ia
161: \citep[e.g.,][]{umeda99,hoeflich00,timmes03,roepke06}. Studies of the
162: integrated metallicities of nearby SN~Ia hosts
163: \citep{hamuy00,gallagher05} have shown that metallicity does not seem to
164: be the main factor regulating their peak luminosities, which is
165: consistent with some theoretical models
166: \citep[e.g.,][]{podsiadlowski06}. Instead, the age of the stellar
167: population where SN~Ia progenitors originate seems to be very important:
168: {\it prompt} (SN~Ia explode $\sim 10^{8}$~yr after star formation) and
169: {\it delayed} (SN~Ia explode $> 10^{9}$~yr after star formation)
170: components were suggested to explain the high rates of SN~Ia in actively
171: star-forming galaxies (late type spirals and irregulars) compared with
172: SN~Ia in old, elliptical galaxies
173: \citep[e.g.,][]{mannucci05,scannapieco05,neill06}.
174:
175: In this work, to our knowledge for the first time, we compare the
176: directly measured oxygen abundances of the hosts of SN~Ib/c and SN~Ia
177: with SN~II. We use the Sternberg Astronomical Institute (SAI) supernova
178: catalog and match it with the SDSS-DR4 catalog of oxygen abundances of a
179: large sample of star-forming galaxies from SDSS. Using the supernova
180: classifications presented in the literature, we can separate the sample
181: according to different supernova types and make statistical comparisons
182: of the metallicity distributions of their host galaxies. We also
183: investigate some individual cases in metal-poor environments that are
184: especially interesting and which can be used to test the strong
185: predictions made by some theoretical models. We create a second catalog
186: by matching the positions of all supernovae with images from
187: SDSS-DR6, independent of the host galaxy association. This allows us to
188: investigate significantly fainter SNe hosts, and we identify some even
189: more extreme hosts for follow-up observations. To enable their further
190: use in other studies, we make both catalogs available online, and will
191: update them regularly.
192:
193: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
194:
195:
196: \section{First Catalog: Supernova-Host Pairs with Known Host
197: Metallicities (SAI~$\cap$~SDSS-DR4)}
198: \label{sec:data1}
199:
200: We use the SAI supernova catalog\footnote{\scriptsize{{\tt
201: http://www.sai.msu.su/sn/sncat/}}} \citep{tsvetkov04} to obtain the
202: main properties of supernovae (name, classification, RA, DEC,
203: redshift) and their host information when available (galaxy
204: name, RA, DEC, redshift). The SAI catalog is a compilation of
205: information about supernova discoveries, obtained mainly
206: from reports in the International Astronomical Union Circulars (IAUC),
207: which include the coordinates and classification of the supernovae
208: from the IAUCs and also basic information about the host galaxies in
209: the cases where the galaxies can be identified in online galaxy
210: catalogs (e.g., HyperLEDA, NED and SDSS). The version of the catalog
211: we use contains 4,169 entries\footnote{Version updated on June 15,
212: 2007.}, of which we have selected 3,050 supernovae discovered between
213: 1909 and 2007 classified as SN~Ia, II, and Ib/c, including their
214: sub-types. Supernovae in the catalog with no classification or only
215: classified as Type~I are not considered for further analysis since we
216: want to be able to distinguish between SN~Ia and the core-collapse
217: types SN~Ib/c.
218:
219: \citet{tremonti04} determined metallicities for a sample of star-forming
220: galaxies in the SDSS Data Release 2 (SDSS-DR2; \citealt{abazajian04})
221: from their spectra. Here we use a larger sample of 141,317 star-forming
222: galaxies (excluding AGN) from the SDSS-DR4 \citep{adelman06}, with
223: metallicities derived in the same consistent fashion, and which are
224: available online\footnote{\scriptsize{{\tt
225: http://www.mpa-garching.mpg.de/SDSS/DR4/}}}. The metallicities are
226: derived by a likelihood analysis which compares multiple nebular
227: emission lines ([\ion{O}{2}], H$\beta$, [\ion{O}{3}], H$\alpha$,
228: [\ion{N}{2}], [\ion{S}{2}]) to the predictions of the hybrid
229: stellar-population plus photoionization models of \citet{charlot01}. A
230: particular combination of nebular emission line ratios arises from a
231: model galaxy that is characterized by a galaxy-averaged metallicity,
232: ionization parameter, dust-to-metal ratio, and 5500\AA\ dust
233: attenuation. For each galaxy, a likelihood distribution for metallicity
234: is constructed by comparison to a large library of model galaxies. We
235: use the median of the oxygen abundance distributions in this paper. The
236: metallicities derived by \citet{tremonti04} are essentially on the
237: \citet{kewley02} abundance scale ($\Delta[\loh] < 0.05$~dex;
238: \citealt{ellison05}). For further reference in this paper, we call this
239: galaxy metallicity catalog SDSS-DR4.
240:
241: We restrict the initial sample of galaxies to 125,958 by applying two of
242: the cuts that \citet{tremonti04} used for their final cleaned sample:
243: (1) the redshifts of the galaxies have to be reliable by SDSS standards;
244: and (2) H$\beta$, H$\alpha$, and [\ion{N}{2}]~$\lambda$6584 should be
245: detected at $> 5\sigma$ confidence, and
246: [\ion{S}{2}]~$\lambda\lambda$6717,6731 and [\ion{O}{3}]~$\lambda$5007
247: should at least have detections. While in our analysis we directly
248: compare nebular oxygen abundance within the SDSS-DR4 catalog for the
249: supernova hosts, when referring to ``Solar metallicity,'' we adopt the
250: Solar oxygen abundance of $\loh = 8.86$ \citep{delahaye06}.
251:
252: We cross-matched the SAI catalog with the galaxy metallicity catalog
253: SDSS-DR4 using a matching radius of 60$\arcsec$ ($\sim 48$~kpc at
254: $z=0.04$). We used the coordinates of the host galaxies in the cases
255: where they are known and identified in the SAI catalog, and the
256: supernovae coordinates were used otherwise. We also required that the
257: redshifts reported in the SAI catalog, which were taken from galaxy
258: catalogs and the IAUCs, to be consistent within $20\%$ with the
259: redshifts of the closest galaxy from the SDSS catalog that passed the
260: proximity cut. After selecting the supernovae that passed the proximity
261: and redshift criteria, we visually inspected the SDSS images around the
262: galaxies to identify the ones that were wrongly selected as hosts (e.g.,
263: close galaxy pairs). The number of supernovae that passed
264: all these cuts is 254 in total: 95 SN~Ia, 123 SN~II, and 36
265: SN~Ib/c. There were some galaxies that hosted more than one supernova:
266: five galaxies had three supernovae each (NGC~1084, NGC~3627, NGC~3631,
267: NGC~3938, and NGC~5457) and 15 galaxies had two supernovae (NGC~2532,
268: NGC~2608, NGC~3627, NGC~3780, NGC~3811, NGC~3913, NGC~4012, NGC~4568,
269: NGC~5584, NGC~5630, NGC~6962, UGC~4132, UGC~5695, IC~4229, and
270: MCG~+07-34-134).
271:
272: In Table~\ref{tab1} we present the final matched sample of supernovae
273: and host galaxy metallicities from SDSS-DR4, as well as the absolute
274: M$_B$ magnitudes of the galaxies obtained from the HyperLEDA database
275: and SDSS. The absolute magnitudes for SDSS galaxies were calculated
276: using Petrosian $gr$ magnitudes transformed to $B$ magnitudes using the
277: transformation of \citet{lupton05}, corrected by Galactic extinction
278: \citep{sfd98} and internal extinction to a face-on geometry
279: \citep{tully98}, and $k$-corrections \citep{blanton03}. To calculate the
280: absolute magnitudes, we use a flat cosmology with ${\rm
281: H}_{0}=70\,\,{\rm km\,s^{-1}\,Mpc^{-1}}$, $\Omega_{M}=0.3$,
282: $\Omega_{\Lambda}=0.7$. The typical 1$\sigma$ uncertainties in the
283: oxygen abundances are 0.05~dex at $\loh > 8.5$, and 0.15~dex at $\loh <
284: 8.5$. Our estimated uncertainty in the absolute magnitudes of the hosts
285: is $\sim 0.3$~mag, calculated from a sub-sample of galaxies in the
286: catalog with reliable absolute magnitudes from SDSS and HyperLEDA.
287:
288: Our first catalog, SAI~$\cap$~SDSS-DR4, is available
289: online\footnote{{\scriptsize{\tt
290: http://www.astronomy.ohio-state.edu/$\sim$prieto/snhosts/}}} and will be
291: updated as new supernovae are discovered with host galaxy metallicities
292: in the SDSS-DR4 catalog. It includes the information presented in
293: Table~\ref{tab1}, as well as images around the supernovae obtained from
294: SDSS-DR6.
295:
296: Figure~\ref{fig1} shows the distribution of metallicities as a function
297: of redshift and M$_B$ of the supernova host galaxies, as well as the
298: distribution of star-forming galaxies in the SDSS-DR4 catalog. The
299: apparent ``stripes'' in the plots, regions with very few oxygen
300: abundance measurements, are an effect of the grid of model parameters
301: (metallicity, ionization parameters, attenuation, etc.) used to
302: calculate the metallicities (see \citealt{brinchmann04} for details). As
303: can be seen, the redshift distribution of supernovae varies for
304: different types, with the median redshifts of the samples at $z=0.014$
305: (II), 0.018 (Ib/c), and 0.031 (Ia). This is a combination of several
306: effects. First, SN~Ia supernovae are, on average, $\sim 2$~mag brighter
307: at peak luminosity than core-collapse events \citep{richardson02},
308: therefore, they can be found at larger distances in magnitude-limited
309: surveys. Second, the local rate of core-collapse supernovae in
310: late-type galaxies is $\sim 3$ times higher than the SN~Ia rate
311: \citep{cappellaro99,mannucci05}. Finally, the great interest in SN~Ia
312: as cosmological distance indicators makes most of the supernovae
313: searches concentrate their limited spectroscopic follow-up resources on
314: likely Type~Ia supernovae (as determined by their light curves).
315:
316: As shown in Figure~\ref{fig1}, the distribution of host galaxy
317: metallicities follows the distribution of galaxies from SDSS, with a
318: wide range spanning $\sim 1.4$~dex ($7.9 < \loh < 9.3$). However, there
319: appear to be significant differences present between the hosts of
320: different supernovae types. In particular, most of the SN~Ib/c hosts are
321: concentrated in the higher metallicity/luminosity end of the
322: distribution ($\loh \ga 8.7$), while the metallicities of SN~II and
323: SN~Ia hosts are more evenly distributed and appear to be tracing each
324: other fairly well.
325:
326: Figure~\ref{fig2} shows a mosaic of SDSS-DR6 \citep{adelman07}
327: images\footnote{{\scriptsize{{\tt
328: http://cas.sdss.org/dr6/en/tools/chart/chart.asp}}}} of the host
329: galaxies with the highest and lowest metallicities in the sample,
330: including two supernovae of each type. This figure shows the wide range
331: of host galaxy environments present in the sample, from big spirals
332: (e.g., SN~2000dq, SN~2004cc, SN~2005bc, SN~2005mb, SN~2002cg, and
333: SN~2006iq) to small dwarfs (e.g., SN~1997bo, SN~2006jc, SN~2004hw,
334: SN~1998bv, SN~2007I, and SN~2007bk), and that all types of supernovae
335: can be found in metal-rich and metal-poor star-forming galaxies.
336:
337: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
338:
339: \subsection{Testing Supernova Trends with Metallicity}
340: \label{sec:analysis}
341:
342: Is the tendency of SN~Ib/c hosts towards higher metallicity, compared
343: with SN~II and SN~Ia, clearly seen in Figure~\ref{fig1}, a real physical
344: effect? To answer this question we identify and try to reduce some of
345: the biases present in the sample.
346:
347: The supernova sample studied in this work is far from homogeneous. The
348: supernovae have been discovered by a variety of supernova surveys,
349: including amateur searches that look repeatedly at bright galaxies in
350: the local universe, professional searches that look at a number of
351: cataloged galaxies to a certain magnitude limit (e.g., LOSS), and
352: professional searches that look at all the galaxies in a given volume
353: (e.g., SDSS-II, The Supernova Factory), among others. The host galaxies
354: of supernovae discovered by amateur searches tend to have higher
355: metallicities due to the luminosity-metallicity relation (see
356: Figure~\ref{fig1}), while the metallicities of galaxies observed by
357: professional searches span a wider range.
358:
359: As an example of a possible bias in the supernovae in our catalog, we
360: note that the median metallicity decreases by $\sim 0.1$~dex for the
361: hosts of supernovae discovered between 1970 and 2007. Ideally, all the
362: supernovae for the current study would be selected from galaxy-impartial
363: surveys. However, the numbers of different supernova types found by such
364: surveys in our catalog are still small (especially core-collapse
365: events), and do not allow a statistical comparison (see the discussion
366: in \citealt{modjaz07}).
367:
368: Another bias present in the galaxy data that we use is the so-called
369: aperture bias \citep{kewley05,ellison05}. The SDSS spectra are taken
370: with a fixed fiber aperture of $3\arcsec$ (2.4~kpc at $z=0.04$). Since
371: galaxies have radial metallicity gradients (e.g., \citealt{zaritsky94}),
372: for nearby galaxies we are, on average, only measuring the higher
373: central metallicity, while for more distant galaxies we are covering a
374: larger fraction of the galaxy light with the SDSS fiber. This effect
375: also depends on galaxy luminosity, as for dwarf galaxies the fiber will
376: cover a larger fraction of the total light than in large
377: spirals. \citet{kewley05} find a mean difference of $\sim 0.1$~dex,
378: although with a large scatter ($0.1-0.3$~dex), between the central and
379: integrated metallicities of a sample of $\sim 100$ galaxies of all types
380: (S0-Im) in the redshift range $z = 0.005-0.014$.
381:
382: In order to reduce these and other biases, we limit the comparison of
383: supernova types to host galaxies in the redshift range $0.01 < z <
384: 0.04$, where there are 115 supernovae. In this {\it pseudo}
385: volume-limited sample, the median redshifts of the 58 SN~II (0.020), 19
386: SN~Ib/c (0.021) and 38 SN~Ia (0.024) hosts are consistent, while the
387: number of galaxies in each sub-sample still allows us to make a
388: meaningful statistical comparison. By using a small redshift slice we
389: are, effectively, reducing the aperture biases when comparing the galaxy
390: metallicity measurements, such that they are now comparable to or
391: smaller than the statistical errors in the metallicity determination.
392:
393: We made additional checks of relative biases between supernova types in
394: our redshift-limited sample. First, the ratios of the numbers of
395: SN~Ib/c and SN~Ia to the total number of core-collapse supernovae are
396: reasonably consistent with the ratios obtained from the local supernovae
397: rates \citep[e.g.,][]{cappellaro99,mannucci05}. Second, the fact that
398: the SN--host separation distributions for SN~Ia and SN~II agree,
399: particularly at small radii (see below), suggests that our supernova
400: samples are not biased (relatively, one supernova type to another) by
401: obscuration effects.
402:
403: We compare the metallicity distributions of the hosts of SN~Ib/c and
404: SN~Ia to SN~II, which are taken as the control sample. Given that SN~II
405: are the most common type of supernovae \citep[e.g.,][]{mannucci05} and
406: that they come from massive stars from a wide range of masses that
407: explode in all environments, presumably independent of metallicity, they
408: are effectively giving us the star-formation-rate weighting of the
409: luminosity-metallicity (or mass-metallicity) relationship for
410: star-forming galaxies. It would be of interest to test if indeed the
411: SN~II rates are independent of metallicity, but this is outside the
412: scope of the current paper.
413:
414: Figure~\ref{fig3} shows the cumulative distribution of metallicities for
415: hosts of different supernova types in the redshift ranges $z<0.04$ and
416: $0.01 < z < 0.04$. Two important results are immediately apparent:
417:
418: \begin{itemize}
419:
420: \item The metallicities of SN~Ib/c hosts tend to be higher than those
421: of SN~II hosts,
422:
423: \item The SN~Ia and SN~II hosts have very similar metallicity
424: distributions.
425:
426: \end{itemize}
427:
428: Kolmogorov-Smirnov (KS) tests between the metallicity distributions of
429: different supernova types in the redshift range $0.01 < z < 0.04$
430: strengthen these findings. The KS probabilities of two host metallicity
431: samples being drawn from the same distribution are: 5\% (II--Ib/c), 3\%
432: (Ia--Ib/c) and 56\% (II--Ia). We obtain a similar result if we compare
433: the mean metallicities of the host samples: 8.94$\pm$0.04 (SN~II),
434: 8.94$\pm$0.04 (SN~Ia) and 9.06$\pm$0.04 (SN~Ib/c), where the errors are
435: the RMS of similar-sized samples obtained using bootstrap resampling.
436:
437: The metallicity distribution of the SDSS-DR4 star-forming galaxies in
438: our redshift range, weighted only by galaxy counts, is also shown in
439: Figure~\ref{fig3}. This should not be used in any comparisons, as it
440: does not take into account the weighting with star formation rate or the
441: supernova and galaxy selection criteria. We take all of these into
442: account by only making relative comparisons between supernova types.
443:
444: If we restrict the sample of SN~Ib/c to only SN~Ic and broad-lined Ic in
445: the same redshift range, leaving out supernovae classified as SN~Ib/c
446: and SN~Ib, the difference in metallicity distributions of the hosts of
447: SN~II and SN~Ic$+$hypernovae (13 SN) becomes smaller, with a KS
448: probability of 19\%. If only the three supernova classified as SN~Ib
449: (SN~2003I, SN~2005O, and SN~2005hl) in the {\it pseudo} volume-limited
450: sample are not considered, then the KS probability of SN~II and
451: SN~Ic$+$hypernovae$+$SNIb/c being drawn from the same sample is 10\%.
452:
453: In Figure~\ref{fig4} we show the number ratio of SN~Ib/c to SN~II as a
454: function of the metallicities of the host galaxies. This ratio is very
455: important because the rates of core-collapse SNe are expected to change
456: as a function of the progenitor mass and metallicity and, therefore, it
457: can help to put constrains on massive stellar evolution models
458: \citep[e.g.,][]{eldridge07}. We have calculated the ratio in bins of
459: equal number of SN~II+SN~Ib/c, with 11 SNe per bin, to do a direct
460: comparison with the results of \citet{prantzos03}. The small statistics
461: compared with \citet{prantzos03}, who used the absolute magnitudes of
462: the hosts as a proxy for the average metallities through the
463: luminosity-metallicity relationship, is reflected in the large errors of
464: the ratio. The large error bars do not allow us to put constraints in
465: progenitor models, however, the general trend observed in the cumulative
466: distribution (see Figure~\ref{fig3}) is confirmed with the number
467: counts: SN~Ib/c are more common at higher metallicities compared with
468: SN~II. Our results are consistent with those of \citet{prantzos03}.
469:
470: Figure~\ref{fig5} shows the cumulative distributions of projected
471: host-supernova distances for the reduced sample of 115 SNe used to
472: compare the host metallicities ($0.01 < z < 0.04$). Clearly, the SN~Ib/c
473: in the sample are found more towards the centers of their hosts when
474: compared with SN~II and SN~Ia
475: \citep[e.g.,][]{vandenbergh97,tsvetkov04,petrosian05}, which have
476: similar distributions to each other (as also in Figure~\ref{fig3}). A
477: galactocentric concentration of SN~Ib/c and their progenitors may be
478: important for the angular distributions of diffuse gamma-ray line
479: emission from the Milky Way. Besides the 1.809 MeV line from $^{26}$Al,
480: the 0.511 MeV line from positron annihilation is poorly understood, in
481: terms of its high flux and very strong central concentration
482: \citep[e.g.,][]{casse04, knodlseder05,beacom06}. Since the SN~Ib/c are
483: found at small separation, the central galaxy metallicities determined
484: by the SDSS should be representative of the local environments of the
485: supernovae. Taking into account the existence of negative metallicity
486: gradients in increasing galactocentric radii, the local metallicities of
487: the SN~II and SN~Ia, if anything, are even {\em lower} than deduced from
488: the SDSS central metallicities. The tendency for SN~Ib/c to prefer
489: higher metallicity relative to SN~II and SN~Ia is probably even stronger
490: than shown in Figure~\ref{fig3}.
491:
492: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
493:
494: \subsection{Supernovae in Low-Metallicity Hosts}
495:
496: Even though we have shown that there is a strong preference of SN~Ib/c
497: for high-metallicity environments, compared with SN~II and SN~Ia, there
498: are four SN~Ib/c with relatively metal-poor host galaxies ($\loh <
499: 8.6$). These events, and also some SN~Ia found in low-metallicity
500: dwarfs, made us investigate more carefully a number of individual cases.
501: We found that among the lowest-metallicity host galaxies in the sample,
502: there were supernovae that stood out because of their unusual properties
503: (all shown in Figure~\ref{fig2}).
504:
505: %
506: \begin{description}
507:
508: \item [SN~2006jc:] Peculiar SN~Ib/c supernova with strong \ion{He}{1}
509: lines in emission in the spectrum \citep{crotts06}, thought to arise
510: from the interaction of the supernova ejecta with a He-rich
511: circumstellar medium \citep{foley07,pastorello07}. Its host galaxy,
512: UGC~4904 at $z=0.006$, is a low luminosity, blue, and relatively
513: low-metallicity starburst (M$_{B}=-16.0$, $\loh=8.5$). Interestingly,
514: the host galaxy of SN~2002ao at $z=0.005$ (in UGC~9299), another
515: peculiar SN~Ib/c with spectral properties very similar to SN~2006jc
516: \citep{benetti06} that is also present in our first catalog, has low
517: metallicity compared with the majority of the SN~Ib/c hosts, and
518: shares similar morphological properties with the host of SN~2006jc.
519:
520: \item [SN~2007I:] Broad-lined Ic (or hypernova) with a spectrum similar
521: to SN~1997ef \citep{blondin07} at $z=0.022$. Its host galaxy is a
522: star-forming, low-metallicity dwarf (M$_{B}=-16.7$, $\loh=8.3$),
523: unlike other broad-lined Ic supernovae observed in higher-metallicity
524: galaxies \citep{modjaz07}, and somewhat similar to the host galaxies
525: of long GRBs associated with supernovae \citep{stanek06,fruchter06};
526: however, see a detailed discussion in \citet{modjaz07}. The other
527: four broad-lined Ic supernovae in our sample that have been reported
528: in the literature are: SN~1997ef \citep{iwamoto00}, 2004ib
529: \citep{sako05}, 2005ks \citep{frieman05}, 2006qk \citep{frieman06}.
530:
531: \item [SN~2007bk:] Type~Ia supernova with a spectrum similar to the slow
532: decliner/luminous SN~1991T \citep{dennefeld07} at $z=0.032$. The host
533: galaxy is a low metallicity/luminosity dwarf, with M$_B=-18.2$ and
534: $\loh=8.3$, similar to the Large Magellanic Cloud. The supernova was
535: found very far from the center of its dwarf host, at a projected
536: separation of $\sim9$~kpc. The magnitude of the supernova at discovery
537: ($R=16.7$, \citealt{mikuz07}) and the phase obtained from the spectrum
538: ($+50$~days, \citealt{dennefeld07}, although S.~Blondin finds equally
539: good matches with templates at $+30$~days, private communication),
540: imply that this was a very luminous Type~Ia event. If the reported
541: discovery magnitude and spectral phases are accurate, SN~2007bk was
542: $\sim 0.5-1.5$~mag brighter than SN~1991T at the same phase after
543: maximum light.
544:
545: \end{description}
546:
547: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
548:
549: \section{Second Catalog: Supernova-Host Pairs with Unknown Host
550: Metallicities (SAI~$\cap$~SDSS-DR6)}
551: \label{sec:data2}
552:
553: The existence of supernovae with unusual properties among the most
554: metal-poor, low-luminosity galaxies in the first catalog prompted us to
555: investigate a much larger sample of supernovae. We constructed a second
556: catalog with images around the positions of supernovae using SDSS,
557: matching the SAI catalog with SDSS-DR6. We included the redshifts
558: obtained from the SAI catalog to produce images in physical units around
559: the supernovae. The total number of matches is 1225 for supernovae at
560: $z<0.3$. This catalog is also available online, with the first catalog
561: described earlier in \S~\ref{sec:data1}.
562:
563: This extended second catalog (SAI~$\cap$~SDSS-DR6) does not have
564: information about metallicities or luminosities of the hosts. It is a
565: visual tool that can be used to explore the environments around
566: supernovae found in the SDSS area, independent of the host galaxy
567: association. Identification of the supernovae hosts and their integrated
568: properties obtained from SDSS will be added in a future study.
569:
570: Visually inspecting the images of the second catalog, we identified a
571: number of supernovae in what appear to be very faint galaxies, and which
572: are likely to be low-luminosity, metal-poor galaxies not present in the
573: first catalog. Some examples in the redshift range $0.01 \la z \la 0.05$
574: are (supernova types shown in parentheses): SN~1997ab (II), SN~1997az
575: (II), SN~2001bk (II), SN~2003cv (II), SN~2004gy (II), SN~2004hx (II),
576: SN~2005cg (Ia), SN~2005gi (II), SN~2005hm (Ib), SN~2005lb (II), SN~2006L
577: (IIn), SN~2006bx (II), SN~2006fg (II), 2007bg (Ic), 2007bu (II), and
578: 2007ce (Ic). In this incomplete sample, which was selected by noting
579: some especially low-luminosity galaxies, the SN~Ia/SN~II ratio is lower
580: than expected. Similarly, in our catalog of hosts with known
581: metallicities, SN~Ia may also be relatively underabundant at the lowest
582: host luminosities and metallicities, as shown in Figure~\ref{fig1}. We
583: caution that the small statistics make these only hints, and we discuss
584: these issues further below.
585:
586: One of the most interesting supernovae in our second catalog is
587: SN~2007bg, a recently discovered broad-lined Ic
588: \citep{quimby07,harutyunyan07} at $z=0.03$, which has an extremely faint
589: galaxy coincident with the position of the supernova. Using photometry
590: and images from SDSS-DR6, we estimate the luminosity of the apparent
591: host galaxy to be M${_B} \approx -12$, most likely a very metal-poor
592: dwarf ($\loh \sim 7.5$, or $\sim 1/20$~solar; see the
593: metallicity-luminosity relationship extended to dwarf galaxies by
594: \citealt{lee06}). Due to the extremely low luminosity of that galaxy, in
595: fact one of the lowest-luminosity supernova hosts ever seen, and also
596: fainter than most if not all GRB hosts \citep[see e.g.,][]{fruchter06},
597: this event may represent the missing link between broad-lined SN~Ic and
598: GRBs. This event is therefore an excellent candidate for a search for
599: an off-axis GRB jet in radio \citep{soderberg06} and possibly other
600: wavelengths. Follow-up spectroscopic observations and deep photometry
601: to determine the metallicity of the host and study the supernova
602: environment are strongly encouraged in this and other cases of very
603: low-luminosity SN hosts.
604:
605: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
606:
607: \section{Discussion and Conclusions}
608: \label{sec:discussion}
609:
610: We find that SN~Ib/c tend to be in high-metallicity host galaxies,
611: compared to SN~II, our control sample that traces the underlying star
612: formation rates. This is the first time that such a trend has been found
613: using the directly-measured oxygen abundances of the supernova host
614: galaxies. This confirms and greatly strengthens an earlier result of
615: \citet{prantzos03}, which found a similar result using the absolute
616: magnitudes of the host galaxies as an indirect estimate of their
617: metallicities through the luminosity-metallicity relationship. This can
618: be interpreted in relative supernova rates: the ratio of SN~Ib/c to
619: SN~II increases with increasing metallicity and hence also cosmic age.
620: We also find that SN~Ib/c are consistently found towards the centers of
621: their hosts compared with SN~II and SN~Ia, which had been also found in
622: previous studies \citep[e.g.,][]{vandenbergh97,tsvetkov04,petrosian05}.
623: This suggests that direct measurements of metallicities at the explosion
624: sites, as opposed to the central host metallicities used here, would
625: reveal an even stronger effect, due to the radial metallicity gradients
626: observed in spiral galaxies. The local metallicities of SN~Ib/c would
627: be less reduced with respect to the central metallicities than SN~II and
628: SN~Ia, which would widen the separation seen in Figure~\ref{fig3}.
629:
630: The tendency towards high metallicity of SN~Ib/c environments compared
631: to those of SN~II supports, in general terms, theoretical models of the
632: effects of metallicity in stellar evolution and the massive stars that
633: are core-collapse supernova progenitors (e.g.,
634: \citealt{heger03,meynet06,eldridge07,fryer07}). Also, models of stellar
635: evolution that include rotation, from \citet{meynet06}, predict that at
636: high metallicity Wolf-Rayet stars will earlier enter the WC phase when
637: they still are rich in helium, and that these stars would explode as
638: SN~Ib. The fact that we do see both SN~Ib and SN~Ic in hosts at high
639: metallicity should not be taken as inconsistent with these models,
640: mainly because the number of supernovae is small and the sample has not
641: been homogeneously selected. There is an indication, although not
642: statistically significant, that SN~Ib may be more common in higher
643: metallicity environments than SN~Ic and broad-lined SN~Ic in our sample.
644:
645: The agreement between the metallicity distributions of the hosts of
646: SN~II and SN~Ia shows that their hosts are sampling a wide range of
647: properties of star-forming galaxies, from the relatively metal-poor
648: dwarfs to metal-rich grand design spirals. Using models of white dwarf
649: winds in the framework of single-degenerate progenitors of SN~Ia
650: \citep{hachisu96}, \citet{kobayashi98} made a strong prediction that
651: SN~Ia would not be found in low metallicity environments, such as dwarf
652: galaxies and the outskirts of spiral galaxies. However, we do observe
653: SN~Ia in metal poor dwarfs (e.g., SN~2004hw, SN~2006oa, and SN~2007bk,
654: with host metallicities between $\sim 0.2$ and 0.5 solar) and at large
655: projected distances ($> 10$~kpc) from their star-forming hosts (e.g.,
656: SN~1988Y, SN~1992B, SN~1993I, SN~2001bg, SN~2002gf, SN~2004ia,
657: SN~2004ig, SN~2005ms, SN~2006fi, and SN~2006gl). There are also extreme
658: cases that have been pointed out in previous studies, like the
659: low-luminosity dwarf (M$_B \approx -12.2$) host galaxy of the luminous
660: and slow decliner SN~1999aw \citep{strolger02}, which is most likely
661: very metal-poor ($\loh \sim 7.5$, or $\sim 1/20$~solar; see
662: \citealt{lee06}). Also, SN~2005cg was found in a dwarf with subsolar
663: gas metallicity \citep{quimby06}.
664:
665: We do not find a statistically significant low-metallicity threshold in
666: the metallicities of SN~Ia compared with SN~II hosts, as predicted from
667: theory by \citet{kobayashi98} for single-degenerate progenitors of SN~Ia
668: with winds. However, there is a preference for finding more SN~II in
669: very faint galaxies compared with SN~Ia in our second catalog, which is
670: suggestive of a luminosity or metallicity threshold for the main channel
671: that produces SN~Ia. This will have to be explored in the future with a
672: larger sample that includes good luminosity information for the hosts
673: and actual metallicities measured from spectra. If no metallicity
674: threshold is found in larger samples, it means that the models and
675: predictions of white dwarf winds will have to be revisited. This would
676: have implications for modeling and understanding of galactic chemical
677: evolution that include the effects of white dwarf winds to shut down
678: SN~Ia at low metallicities (e.g., \citealt{kobayashi07}). Interestingly,
679: modeling the X-ray spectra of supernova remnants from probable SN~Ia
680: explosions in our Galaxy, the LMC and M31, \citet{badenes07} did not
681: find the strong effects of white dwarf winds predicted from theory.
682:
683: On the other hand, independent of the existence (or not) of a mechanism
684: that can shut down the production of SN~Ia in low-metallicity
685: environments, we have noted examples of SN~Ia that explode in
686: low-metallicity dwarf galaxies, like SN~2007bk. Also, supernova remnants
687: from probable SN~Ia have been identified in the LMC
688: \citep[e.g.,][]{hughes95} and SMC \citep[e.g.,][]{vanderheyden04}. Is
689: this SN~Ia population dominated by a different kind of progenitors, like
690: double-degenerate mergers, compared to the main progenitor channel? Is
691: the expected trend between progenitor metallicities and peak-luminosity
692: starting to appear as we extend the sample to even lower metallicity
693: hosts? It is suggestive that the small number of SN~Ia in
694: low-metallicity hosts, like SN~2007bk, SN~2005cg and SN~1999aw, were all
695: luminous events compared with normal SN~Ia. Also, the very luminous
696: SN~Ia events that have spectral signatures of a strong ejecta-CSM
697: interaction, like SN~2005gj, are mostly associated with low-luminosity,
698: and most likely low-metallicity, hosts \citep{prieto07}. Is low
699: metallicity necessary to produce this extreme class of SN~Ia? Detailed
700: comparison studies of the observational properties of supernovae in
701: these extreme environments are encouraged.
702:
703: In the course of this work, we have prepared two new catalogs that
704: should be useful for other studies. We used the SAI supernova catalog
705: and the SDSS-DR4 sample of metallicities of star-forming galaxies from
706: \citet{tremonti04} to produce a catalog of supernovae hosts with
707: metallicities derived in a consistent fashion. From this first catalog,
708: we found several interesting core-collapse (e.g., SN~2002ao, SN~2006jc,
709: and SN~2007I) and SN~Ia events (e.g., SN~2007bk) in low-metallicity
710: galaxies. We constructed a second catalog by matching the SAI supernova
711: catalog with images obtained from SDSS-DR6. The second catalog does not
712: contain information on host metallicities, but it can be used to
713: investigate the environments of supernovae independent of the host
714: association. In that second catalog, we found several examples of
715: core-collapse supernovae in faint galaxies. One of most interesting
716: cases is SN~2007bg, a broad-lined SN~Ic in an extremely low-luminosity
717: and very likely low-metallicity host. These catalogs will allow
718: researchers to select interesting candidates for further follow-up
719: observations. Also, as more homogeneous light curve and spectroscopic
720: data become available for supernovae in the first catalog, this will
721: allow us to test possible correlations between supernova properties and
722: the metallicities of their hosts, which may turn out to be crucial for
723: improving our understanding of the nature of different supernova
724: explosions. Another possible use of our catalogs is for systematically
725: characterizing the morphologies of supernova hosts.
726:
727: We stress the great importance of galaxy-impartial surveys for finding
728: and studying the properties of all supernovae types. Some very
729: interesting and potentially informative supernovae have been found in
730: very low-luminosity, low-metallicity galaxies, hosts which are not
731: included in supernova surveys based on catalogs of normal galaxies.
732: These unusual supernovae and hosts may help probe the relationship
733: between the SN~Ib/c and SN~II core-collapse supernova types, the
734: progenitors of SN~Ia as well as the possible correlations between
735: observed SN~Ia properties and host metallicities, the supernova-GRB
736: connection \citep[e.g.,][]{stanek03} and its possible metallicity
737: dependence \citep[e.g.,][]{stanek06,modjaz07}, and also to test the
738: consistency between the cosmic stellar birth and death rates
739: \citep[e.g.,][]{hopkins06}. As we pointed out in \S~\ref{sec:analysis},
740: presently the comparison of host metallicities using supernovae
741: discovered by galaxy-impartial surveys is limited by their small
742: numbers, especially for core-collapse events, since SN~Ia receive much
743: more attention when decisions about spectroscopic follow-up are made.
744: This is also true for the study of their observational properties (e.g.,
745: light curves and spectra). However, in order to better understand all
746: types of cosmic explosions and put further constraints on the
747: predictions of stellar evolution theory, a larger effort on other
748: supernovae types is greatly needed.
749:
750: \vspace{0.5in}
751:
752: We are grateful to C.~Tremonti for help with the extended SDSS-DR4
753: catalog of galaxy metallicities. We thank C.~Badenes, S.~Blondin,
754: A.~Hopkins, J.~Johnson, M.~Kistler, M.~Modjaz, and G.~Pojmanski for
755: helpful discussions and suggestions. JFB is supported by the National
756: Science Foundation CAREER Grant PHY-0547102.
757:
758: Funding for the SDSS and SDSS-II has been provided by the Alfred P.
759: Sloan Foundation, the Participating Institutions, the National Science
760: Foundation, the U.S. Department of Energy, the National Aeronautics and
761: Space Administration, the Japanese Monbukagakusho, the Max Planck
762: Society, and the Higher Education Funding Council for England.
763:
764: The SDSS is managed by the Astrophysical Research Consortium for the
765: Participating Institutions. The Participating Institutions are the
766: American Museum of Natural History, Astrophysical Institute Potsdam,
767: University of Basel, Cambridge University, Case Western Reserve
768: University, University of Chicago, Drexel University, Fermilab, the
769: Institute for Advanced Study, the Japan Participation Group, Johns
770: Hopkins University, the Joint Institute for Nuclear Astrophysics, the
771: Kavli Institute for Particle Astrophysics and Cosmology, the Korean
772: Scientist Group, the Chinese Academy of Sciences (LAMOST), Los Alamos
773: National Laboratory, the Max-Planck-Institute for Astronomy (MPIA), the
774: Max-Planck-Institute for Astrophysics (MPA), New Mexico State
775: University, Ohio State University, University of Pittsburgh, University
776: of Portsmouth, Princeton University, the United States Naval
777: Observatory, and the University of Washington.
778:
779:
780: \newpage
781:
782: \begin{thebibliography}
783:
784: \bibitem[Abazajian et~al.(2004)]{abazajian04} Abazajian, K., et~al.
785: 2004, \aj, 128, 502
786:
787: \bibitem[Adelman-McCarthy et~al.(2006)]{adelman06} Adelman-McCarthy, J.~K., et~al.
788: 2006, \apjs, 162, 38
789:
790: \bibitem[Adelman-McCarthy et~al.(2007)]{adelman07} Adelman-McCarthy, J.~K., et~al.
791: 2007, \apjs, submitted (arxiv:0707.3413)
792:
793: \bibitem[Badenes et~al.(2007)]{badenes07} Badenes, C., et~al. 2007,
794: \apj, 662, 472
795:
796: \bibitem[Beacom \& Y{\"u}ksel(2006)]{beacom06} Beacom, J.~F., \&
797: Y{\"u}ksel, H. 2006, \prl, 97, 071102
798:
799: \bibitem[Benetti et~al.(2006)]{benetti06} Benetti, S., et~al. 2006, CBET~674
800:
801: \bibitem[Blanton et~al.(2003)]{blanton03} Blanton, M.~R., et~al.
802: 2003, \aj, 125, 2348
803:
804: \bibitem[Blondin et~al.(2007)]{blondin07} Blondin, S., et~al. 2007,
805: CBET~808
806:
807: \bibitem[Brinchmann et~al.(2004)]{brinchmann04} Brinchmann, J.,
808: et~al. 2004, \mnras, 351, 1151
809:
810: \bibitem[Cappellaro et~al.(1999)]{cappellaro99} Cappellaro, E., et~al. 1999,
811: \aap, 351, 459
812:
813: \bibitem[Cass\'e et~al.(2004)]{casse04} Cass\'e, M., et~al. 2004, \apj,
814: 602, 17
815:
816: \bibitem[Charlot \& Longhetti(2001)]{charlot01} Charlot, S., \&
817: Longhetti, M. 2001, \mnras, 323, 887
818:
819: \bibitem[Crotts et~al.(2006)]{crotts06} Crotts, A., et~al. 2006, CBET~672
820:
821: \bibitem[Crowther(2007)]{crowther07} Crowther, P.~A. 2007, \araa, 45,
822: 177
823:
824: \bibitem[Delahaye \& Pinsonneault(2006)]{delahaye06} Delahaye, F., \&
825: Pinsonneault, M.~H. 2006, \apj, 649, 529
826:
827: \bibitem[Dennefeld et~al.(2007)]{dennefeld07} Dennefeld, M., et~al. 2007, CBET~937
828:
829: \bibitem[Diehl et~al.(2006)]{diehl06} Diehl, R., et~al. 2006, Nature,
830: 439, 45
831:
832: \bibitem[Eldridge \& Tout(2004)]{eldridge04} Eldridge, J.~J., \& Tout,
833: C.~A. 2004, \mnras, 353, 87
834:
835: \bibitem[Eldridge(2007)]{eldridge07} Eldridge, J.~J. 2007, \rmxaa, 30, 35
836:
837: \bibitem[Ellison \& Kewley(2005)]{ellison05} Ellison, S.~L., \& Kewley,
838: L.~J., astro-ph/0508627
839:
840: \bibitem[Foley et~al.(2007)]{foley07} Foley R.~J., et~al. 2007, \apjl, 657, L105
841:
842: \bibitem[Frieman et~al.(2005)]{frieman05} Frieman, J., et~al. 2005, IAUC~8616
843:
844: \bibitem[Frieman et~al.(2006)]{frieman06} Frieman, J., et~al. 2006, CBET~762
845:
846: \bibitem[Fruchter et~al.(2006)]{fruchter06} Fruchter, A.~S.,
847: et~al. 2006, Nature, 441, 463
848:
849: \bibitem[Fryer et~al.(2007)]{fryer07} Fryer, C., et~al. 2007, astro-ph/0702338
850:
851: \bibitem[Gallagher et~al.(2005)]{gallagher05} Gallagher, J.~S., et~al. 2005, \apj, 634, 210
852:
853: \bibitem[Hachisu et~al.(1996)]{hachisu96} Hachisu, I., Kato, M., \& Nomoto, K. 1996, \apjl, 470, L97
854:
855: \bibitem[Hamuy et~al.(2000)]{hamuy00} Hamuy, M., et~al. 2000, \aj, 120, 1479
856:
857: \bibitem[Harutyunyan et~al.(2007)]{harutyunyan07} Harutyunyan, A.,
858: et~al. 2007, CBET~948
859:
860: \bibitem[Heger et~al.(2003)]{heger03} Heger, A., et~al. 2003, \apj, 591, 288
861:
862: \bibitem[Hendry et~al.(2006)]{hendry06} Hendry, M.~A., et~al. 2006,
863: \mnras, 369, 1303
864:
865: \bibitem[Higdon et~al.(2004)]{higdon04} Higdon, J.~C., et~al. 2004,
866: \apjl, 611, 29L
867:
868: \bibitem[Hirschi et~al.(2005)]{hirschi05} Hirschi, R., Meynet, G., \&
869: Maeder, A. 2005, \aap, 443, 581
870:
871: \bibitem[H{\"o}flich et~al.(2000)]{hoeflich00} H{\"o}flich, P., et~al
872: 2000, \apj, 528, 590
873:
874: \bibitem[Hopkins \& Beacom(2006)]{hopkins06} Hopkins, A.~M., \& Beacom,
875: J.~F. 2006, \apj, 651, 142
876:
877: \bibitem[Hughes et~al.(1995)]{hughes95} Hughes, J.~P., et~al. 1995,
878: \apjl, 444, L81
879:
880: \bibitem[Iwamoto et~al.(2000)]{iwamoto00} Iwamoto, K., et~al. 2000,
881: \apj, 534, 660
882:
883: \bibitem[Kewley \& Dopita(2002)]{kewley02} Kewley, L.~J., \& Dopita,
884: M.~A. 2002, \apjs, 142, 35
885:
886: \bibitem[Kewley et~al.(2005)]{kewley05} Kewley, L.~J., Jansen, R.~A., \& Geller, M.~J.
887: 2005, \pasp, 117, 227
888:
889: \bibitem[Kn{\"o}dlseder et~al.(2005)]{knodlseder05} Kn{\"o}dlseder, J.,
890: et~al. 2005, \aap, 441, 513
891:
892: \bibitem[Kobayashi et~al.(1998)]{kobayashi98} Kobayashi, C., et~al. 1998, \apjl, 503, 155L
893:
894: \bibitem[Kobayashi et~al.(2007)]{kobayashi07} Kobayashi, C., Springel,
895: V., \& White, S.~D.~M. 2007, \mnras, 376, 1465
896:
897: \bibitem[Kudritzki \& Puls(2000)]{kudritzki00} Kudritzki, R.~P., \& Puls, J. 2000, \araa, 38, 613
898:
899: \bibitem[Lee et~al.(2006)]{lee06} Lee, H., et~al. 2006, \apj, 647, 970
900:
901: \bibitem[Li et~al.(2007)]{li07} Li, W., et~al. 2007, \apjl, 661, 1013L
902:
903: \bibitem[Lupton(2005)]{lupton05} Lupton, R. 2005 \\
904: (http://www.sdss.org/dr4/algorithms/sdssUBVRITransform.htm)
905:
906: \bibitem[Maeder \& Meynet(2004)]{maeder04} Maeder, A., \& Meynet, G. 2004, \aap, 422, 225
907:
908: \bibitem[Mannucci et~al.(2005)]{mannucci05} Mannucci, F., et~al. 2005, \aap, 433, 807
909:
910: \bibitem[MacFadyen \& Woosley(1999)]{macfadyen99} MacFadyen, A.~I., \&
911: Woosley, S.~E. 1999, \apj, 524, 262
912:
913: \bibitem[Meynet et~al.(2006)]{meynet06} Meynet, G., Mowlavi, N., \&
914: Maeder, A. 2006, astro-ph/0611261
915:
916: \bibitem[Mikuz(2007)]{mikuz07} Mikuz, H. 2007, CBET~933
917:
918: \bibitem[Modjaz et~al.(2007)]{modjaz07} Modjaz, M., et~al. 2007, \aj,
919: submitted (astro-ph/0701246)
920:
921: \bibitem[Neill et~al.(2006)]{neill06} Neill, J.~D., et~al. 2006, \aj,
922: 132, 1126
923:
924: \bibitem[Palacios et~al.(2005)]{palacios05} Palacios, A., et~al. 2005,
925: \aap, 429, 613
926:
927: \bibitem[Pastorello et~al.(2007)]{pastorello07} Pastorello, A.,
928: et~al. 2007, Nature, 447, 829
929:
930: \bibitem[Prantzos \& Diehl(1996)]{prantzos96} Prantzos, N., \& Diehl,
931: R. 1996, \physrep, 267, 1
932:
933: \bibitem[Prantzos \& Boissier(2003)]{prantzos03} Prantzos, N., \&
934: Boissier, S. 2003, \aap, 406, 259
935:
936: \bibitem[Prantzos(2004)]{prantzos04} Prantzos, N. 2004, \aap, 420, 1033
937:
938: \bibitem[Prieto et~al.(2007)]{prieto07} Prieto, J.~L., et~al. 2007,
939: \aj, submitted (arxiv:0706.4088)
940:
941: \bibitem[Petrosian et~al.(2005)]{petrosian05} Petrosian, A.,
942: et~al. 2005, \aj, 129, 1369
943:
944: \bibitem[Podsiadlowski et~al.(2006)]{podsiadlowski06} Podsialdlowski, P.,
945: et~al. 2006, astro-ph/0608324
946:
947: \bibitem[Quimby et~al.(2006)]{quimby06} Quimby, R., et~al. 2006, \apj,
948: 636, 400
949:
950: \bibitem[Quimby et~al.(2007)]{quimby07} Quimby, R., et~al. 2007, CBET~927
951:
952: \bibitem[Richardson et~al.(2002)]{richardson02} Richardson, D., et~al. 2002, \apj, 123, 745
953:
954: \bibitem[R{\"o}pke et~al.(2006)]{roepke06} R{\"o}pke, F.~K., et
955: al. \aap, 453, 203
956:
957: \bibitem[Sako et~al.(2005)]{sako05} Sako, M., et~al. 2005, astro-ph/0504455
958:
959: \bibitem[Scannapieco \& Bildsten(2005)]{scannapieco05} Scannapieco, E.,
960: \& Bildsten, L. 2005, \apjl, 629, 85L
961:
962: \bibitem[Schlegel et al.(1998)]{sfd98} Schlegel, D.~J., Finkbeiner,
963: D.~P., \& Davis, M. 1998, \apj, 500, 525
964:
965: \bibitem[Soderberg et~al.(2006)]{soderberg06} Soderberg, A.,
966: et~al. 2006, 638, 930
967:
968: \bibitem[Stanek et~al.(2003)]{stanek03} Stanek, K.~Z., et~al. 2003,
969: \apjl, 591, 17L
970:
971: \bibitem[Stanek et~al.(2006)]{stanek06} Stanek, K.~Z., et~al. 2006,
972: \actaa, 56, 333
973:
974: \bibitem[Strolger et~al.(2002)]{strolger02} Strolger, L.-G.,
975: et~al. 2002, \aj, 124, 2905
976:
977: \bibitem[Timmes et al.(2003)]{timmes03} Timmes, F.~X., Brown, E.~F., \&
978: Truran, J.~W. 2003, \apjl, 590, L83
979:
980: \bibitem[Tremonti et~al.(2004)]{tremonti04} Tremonti, C.~A., et~al.
981: 2004, \apj, 613, 898
982:
983: \bibitem[Tsvetkov et~al.(2004)]{tsvetkov04} Tsvetkov, D.~Y., Pavlyuk,
984: N.~N., \& Bartunov, O.~S. 2004, AstL, 30, 729
985:
986: \bibitem[Tully et~al.(1998)]{tully98} Tully, R.~B., et~al. 1998, \aj, 115, 2264
987:
988: \bibitem[Umeda et~al.(1999)]{umeda99} Umeda, H., et~al. 1999, \apjl, 522, L43
989:
990: \bibitem[van den Bergh(1997)]{vandenbergh97} van den Bergh, S. 1997,
991: \aj, 113, 197
992:
993: \bibitem[van der Heyden et~al.(2004)]{vanderheyden04} van der Heyden,
994: K.~J., Bleeker, J.~A.~M. \& Kaastra, J.~S. 2004, \aap, 421, 1031
995:
996: \bibitem[Vink \& de Koter(2005)]{vink05} Vink, J.~S., \& de Koter, A. \aap,
997: 442, 587
998:
999: \bibitem[Whelan \& Iben(1973)]{whelan73} Whelan, J., \& Iben, I.~J. 1973, 186, 1007
1000:
1001: \bibitem[Yoon \& Langer(2005)]{yoon05} Yoon, S.~-C., \& Langer, N. 2005,
1002: \aap, 443, 643
1003:
1004: \bibitem[Zaritsky et~al.(1994)]{zaritsky94} Zaritsky, D., Kennicutt,
1005: R.~C., Jr., \& Huchra, J.~P. \apj, 420, 87
1006:
1007: \end{thebibliography}
1008:
1009: \newpage
1010:
1011:
1012: \begin{figure*}[t]
1013: \epsscale{1.0}
1014: \plotone{f1.eps}
1015: \caption{Metallicities of supernova host galaxies from SDSS-DR4 as a
1016: function of redshift and absolute $B$ magnitude. The symbols distinguish
1017: different supernova types: SN~II ({\it triangles}), SN~Ib/c ({\it
1018: squares}) and SN~Ia ({\it circles}). The {\it dots} in the {\it left
1019: panel} are 125,958 star forming galaxies in SDSS-DR4 with reliable
1020: metallicity and redshift measurements. The {\it dots} in the {\it right
1021: panel} are a subsample of 86,914 star forming galaxies ($z>0.005$)
1022: selected from the main SDSS-DR4 galaxy sample. \label{fig1} }
1023: \end{figure*}
1024:
1025: \begin{figure*}[t]
1026: \epsscale{0.8}
1027: \plotone{f2.eps}
1028: \caption{SDSS color images of the most metal rich ({\it top six images})
1029: and most metal poor ({\it bottom six images}) host galaxies in our
1030: sample. We show two galaxies of each supernova type. The images are
1031: centered on the position of the supernova explosion, marked with a
1032: cross, with North-up and East-left. They have the same physical size of
1033: 30~kpc at the distance of each galaxy. \label{fig2}}
1034: \end{figure*}
1035:
1036: \begin{figure*}[t]
1037: \epsscale{1.0}
1038: \plotone{f3.eps}
1039: \caption{Cumulative fraction plots with the oxygen abundance of the
1040: supernova host galaxies. The number of host galaxies of each supernova
1041: type is indicated in each panel and the lines correspond to: SN~II ({\it
1042: solid}), SN~Ib/c ({\it dot-dashed}) and SN~Ia ({\it dotted}). The {\it
1043: left panel} includes host galaxies with redshifts $z < 0.04$, while the
1044: {\it right panel} includes host galaxies with redshifts $0.01 < z <
1045: 0.04$. The {\it thick line} in the {\it right panel} shows the
1046: cumulative distribution of the 15,116 star-forming galaxies from
1047: SDSS-DR4 in the same redshift range. \label{fig3}}
1048: \end{figure*}
1049:
1050: \begin{figure*}[t]
1051: \epsscale{1.0}
1052: \plotone{f4.eps}
1053: \caption{Number ratio of SN~Ib/c to SN~II as a function of metallicity
1054: of the host galaxies. The {\em open circles} are the values obtained
1055: with our sample from directly measured central metallicities, and the
1056: {\em filled squares} are the results from \citet{prantzos03} using
1057: absolute magnitudes as a proxy to host metallicities. The error bars are
1058: obtained from Poisson statistics. The {\em solid line} shows the
1059: predicted ratio from the binary models of \citet{eldridge07}; the {\em
1060: dashed line} is from the models of single stars with rotation of
1061: \citet{maeder04}; and the {\em dot-dashed line} is from the single star
1062: models of \citet{eldridge07}. \label{fig4}}
1063: \end{figure*}
1064:
1065: \begin{figure*}[t]
1066: \epsscale{1.0} \plotone{f5.eps}
1067: \caption{Cumulative fraction plot of the projected separation between
1068: the supernova and its host for the reduced sample in the redshift range
1069: $0.01 < z < 0.04$. The lines correspond to: SN~II ({\it solid}), SN~Ib/c
1070: ({\it dot-dashed}) and SN~Ia ({\it dotted}). \label{fig5}}
1071: \end{figure*}
1072:
1073: \input{tab1.tex}
1074:
1075: \end{document}
1076: