1: %DOCUMENT CLASS
2: %\documentclass[12pt,preprint]{aastex}
3: %\documentclass[12pt,preprint2]{aastex}
4: %\usepackage{emulateapj5}
5: \documentclass[apj]{emulateapj}
6: \usepackage{lscape}
7:
8:
9: % NEW COMMANDS AND DEFINITIONS %
10:
11: \newcommand{\co} {{\rm $^{12}$CO}}
12: \newcommand{\hi} {\mbox{\rm \ion{H}{1}}}
13: \newcommand{\hii} {\mbox{\rm \ion{H}{2}}}
14: \newcommand{\htwo} {H$_{2}$}
15: \newcommand{\jone} {($J=1\rightarrow0$)}
16: \newcommand{\um} {$\mu$m}
17: \newcommand{\percmsq} {cm$^{-2}$}
18: \newcommand{\kms} {km~s$^{-1}$}
19: \newcommand{\jykms} {Jy~km~s$^{-1}$}
20: \newcommand{\gpercmcu} {g~cm$^{-3}$}
21: \newcommand{\msun} {M$_{\odot}$}
22: \newcommand{\ha} {\mbox{H$\alpha$}}
23: \newcommand{\mlk} {\mbox{$M_{\odot}/L_{\odot K}$}}
24: \newcommand{\mlr} {\mbox{$M_{\odot}/L_{\odot R}$}}
25: \newcommand{\mslk} {\mbox{$M_{*}/L_{K}$}}
26: \newcommand{\msl} {\mbox{$M_{*}/L$}}
27: \newcommand{\mslr} {\mbox{$M_{*}/L_{R}$}}
28: \newcommand{\hr} {\mbox{$^h$}}
29: \renewcommand{\min} {\mbox{$^m$}}
30: \renewcommand{\sec} {\mbox{$^s$}}
31: \newcommand{\ad} {($\alpha,\delta$)}
32: \newcommand{\surfb} {mag~arcsecond$^{-2}$}
33: \newcommand{\vco} {$v_{\mbox{{\tiny CO}}}$}
34: \newcommand{\vha} {$v_{\mbox{{\tiny \ha}}}$}
35: \newcommand{\mpc} {$M_{\odot}$~pc$^{-3}$}
36: \newcommand{\vhirot} {v_{\mbox{\tiny HI},rot}}
37: \newcommand{\vcorot} {v_{\mbox{\tiny CO},rot}}
38: \newcommand{\bracket} {[3.6]}
39: \newcommand{\simgtr}{\, \raisebox{-.2ex}{$\stackrel{>}{\mbox{\tiny $\sim$}}$} \,}
40:
41:
42: % OTHER STUFF
43: \shorttitle{S$^{3}$MC: Discovery of Embedded Protostars in NGC 346}
44: \shortauthors{Simon et al.}
45: \slugcomment{Accepted for publication in \emph{The Astrophysical Journal}}
46:
47: % PAPER
48: \begin{document}
49:
50: \title{The \emph{Spitzer} Survey of the Small Magellanic Cloud:
51: Discovery of Embedded Protostars in the \hii\ region NGC 346}
52:
53: \author{Joshua D. Simon\altaffilmark{1}, Alberto D.
54: Bolatto\altaffilmark{2}, Barbara A. Whitney\altaffilmark{3}, Thomas
55: P. Robitaille\altaffilmark{4}, Ronak Y. Shah\altaffilmark{5}, David
56: Makovoz\altaffilmark{6}, Sne\v{z}ana
57: Stanimirovi\'{c}\altaffilmark{7}, Rodolfo H. Barb{\'
58: a}\altaffilmark{8}, and M{\' o}nica Rubio\altaffilmark{9}}
59:
60:
61: \altaffiltext{1}{Department of Astronomy, California Institute of Technology,
62: 1200 E. California Blvd, MS 105-24, Pasadena, CA 91125;
63: jsimon@astro.caltech.edu}
64:
65: \altaffiltext{2}{Department of Astronomy, University of California at
66: Berkeley, 601 Campbell Hall, Berkeley, CA 94720;
67: bolatto@astro.berkeley.edu}
68:
69: \altaffiltext{3}{Space Science Institute,
70: 4750 Walnut Street, Suite 205, Boulder, CO 80301;
71: bwhitney@spacescience.org}
72:
73: \altaffiltext{4}{SUPA, School of Physics and Astronomy, University of
74: St. Andrews, North Haugh, St. Andrews, KY16 9SS, UK;
75: tr9@st-andrews.ac.uk}
76:
77: \altaffiltext{5}{Institute for Astrophysical Research, Boston University,
78: 725 Commonwealth Avenue, Boston, MA 02215;
79: ronak@bu.edu}
80:
81: \altaffiltext{6}{\emph{Spitzer} Science Center, California Institute
82: of Technology, 1200 E. California Blvd.,
83: MS 220-6, Pasadena, CA 91125;
84: davidm@ipac.caltech.edu}
85:
86: \altaffiltext{7}{Department of Astronomy, University of Wisconsin,
87: 475 North Charter Street, Madison, WI 53706;
88: sstanimi@astro.wisc.edu}
89:
90: \altaffiltext{8}{Departamento de F{\' i}sica, Universidad de La Serena,
91: Benavente 980, La Serena, Chile;
92: rbarba@xeneize.dfuls.cl}
93:
94: \altaffiltext{9}{Departamento de Astronom{\' i}a, Universidad de Chile,
95: Casilla 36-D, Santiago, Chile;
96: monica@das.uchile.cl}
97:
98:
99:
100:
101: \begin{abstract}
102:
103: We use \emph{Spitzer Space Telescope} observations from the
104: \emph{Spitzer} Survey of the Small Magellanic Cloud (S${^3}$MC) to
105: study the young stellar content of N66, the largest and brightest
106: \hii\ region in the SMC. In addition to large numbers of normal
107: stars, we detect a significant population of bright, red infrared
108: sources that we identify as likely to be young stellar objects (YSOs).
109: We use spectral energy distribution (SED) fits to classify objects as
110: ordinary (main sequence or red giant) stars, asymptotic giant branch
111: stars, background galaxies, and YSOs. This represents the first
112: large-scale attempt at blind source classification based on
113: \emph{Spitzer} SEDs in another galaxy. We firmly identify at least 61
114: YSOs, with another 50 probable YSOs; only one embedded protostar in
115: the SMC was reported in the literature prior to the S${^3}$MC. We
116: present color selection criteria that can be used to identify a
117: relatively clean sample of YSOs with IRAC photometry. Our fitted SEDs
118: indicate that the infrared-bright YSOs in N66 have stellar masses
119: ranging from 2~\msun\ to 17~\msun, and that approximately half of the
120: objects are Stage II protostars, with the remaining YSOs roughly
121: evenly divided between Stage I and Stage III sources. We find
122: evidence for primordial mass segregation in the \hii\ region, with the
123: most massive YSOs being preferentially closer to the center than
124: lower-mass objects. Despite the low metallicity and dust content of
125: the SMC, the observable properties of the YSOs appear consistent with
126: those in the Milky Way. Although the YSOs are heavily concentrated
127: within the optically bright central region of N66, there is ongoing
128: star formation throughout the complex and we place a lower limit on
129: the star formation rate of $3.2 \times 10^{-3}$~\msun~yr$^{-1}$ over
130: the last $\sim$1~Myr.
131: \end{abstract}
132:
133:
134: \keywords{Magellanic Clouds --- \hii\ regions --- infrared: stars ---
135: ISM: individual (N66) --- stars: formation --- stars: pre-main
136: sequence}
137:
138:
139: \section{INTRODUCTION}
140:
141: Star formation is one of the most important astrophysical processes,
142: but because it takes place on small physical scales and behind heavy
143: optical obscuration, observations of the early phases of star
144: formation have generally been limited to the Milky Way. Only in
145: recent years have these studies begun to be extended to extragalactic
146: objects. Now, the high sensitivity, high angular resolution, and
147: large field of view provided by the \emph{Spitzer Space Telescope} at
148: mid-infrared wavelengths open a new window on recently formed stars in
149: nearby galaxies like the Magellanic Clouds. Studying these young
150: stellar objects (YSOs) provides an excellent complement to
151: observations of star formation in the Milky Way because the physical
152: conditions they are subject to are quite different from those in the
153: Galaxy. In particular, the metallicity of the Magellanic Clouds is
154: well below solar, and their dust content is correspondingly lower as
155: well \citep{snez00,leroy07}. Most star formation today is taking
156: place in galaxies smaller than the Milky Way (for which the Magellanic
157: Clouds are good prototypes), and star formation at high redshift
158: occurred in low-metallicity environments, so investigating the effects
159: of these differences on how star formation works will be an important
160: step towards understanding how many of the stars in the universe were
161: formed.
162:
163: The Small Magellanic Cloud (SMC), and its more massive companion the
164: Large Magellanic Cloud (LMC), are the two nearest star-forming dwarf
165: galaxies. Located at a distance of 61.1~kpc \citep*{westerlund,storm04,
166: hhh05,kw06}, and with a luminosity of $\sim6 \times 10^{8}$~L$_{\odot}$
167: \citep{rc3} and a metallicity of $\sim1/5$ solar
168: \citep*{dufour75,ptp76,dh77,ppr00}, the SMC is perhaps the best local
169: analog of primitive galaxies. The SMC is actively forming stars at a
170: rate of $\sim0.05$~M$_{\odot}$~yr$^{-1}$ \citep{wilke04}, and is
171: populated by well studied \hii\ regions and young star clusters. The
172: most active star-forming region is NGC~346 \citep[alternately known as
173: N66;][]{henize}, located toward the northern end of the SMC bar.
174: The OB association powering N66 contains 33 spectroscopically
175: confirmed O stars, and a similar number of bright blue stars without
176: spectra that are likely to be O stars as well \citep*{mpg89}
177:
178: In this paper, we employ \emph{Spitzer} observations from the
179: \emph{Spitzer} Survey of the Small Magellanic Cloud (S$^{3}$MC;
180: \citealt{bolatto07}, hereafter B07) to locate objects in N66 with
181: mid-infrared excesses that we identify as candidate YSOs. In the
182: following section, we very briefly describe the observations and our
183: photometry. In \S \ref{results}, we classify the detected sources by
184: fitting their spectral energy distributions and study their locations
185: in color-color space. In \S \ref{discussion} we discuss some of the
186: implications of our results and compare to recent optical studies of
187: N66. We summarize our findings in \S \ref{conclusions}.
188:
189:
190: \section{Observations, Data Reduction, and Analysis}
191: \label{observations}
192:
193: The S$^{3}$MC is a project to map the star-forming body of the SMC
194: with \emph{Spitzer} in all seven Infrared Array Camera
195: \citep[IRAC;][]{irac} and Multiband Imaging Photometer for
196: \emph{Spitzer} \citep[MIPS;][]{mips} bands. The images cover an area
197: of $\sim3$~deg$^{2}$ including the entire bar and wing of the SMC,
198: with an average exposure time of 144~s at each position. The MIPS
199: data were obtained in 2004 November and the IRAC data in 2005 May.
200: The data were processed with version S11.4 of the automated
201: \emph{Spitzer} pipeline. We constructed mosaic images from the
202: individual Basic Calibrated Data frames using the Mosaicking and Point
203: Source Extraction (MOPEX) software provided by the \emph{Spitzer}
204: Science Center (SSC). B07 describe further details of the
205: observations and the data processing.
206:
207: We performed photometry on the mosaic images with the Astronomical
208: Point Source Extraction (APEX) tasks in the MOPEX package
209: \citep{apex}. We selected a set of $20-30$ bright stars in each band
210: that were as isolated as possible and constructed point response
211: functions (PRFs) directly from the data. We then fit these PRFs to
212: every detected source in the images to determine fluxes. The images
213: contain extensive diffuse emission that must be separated from point
214: sources, so we used a small median filter ($8\farcs4$) to remove the
215: background, and then detected sources on the background-subtracted
216: image. Because the median filtering removes some flux even from point
217: sources, the PSF fitting then took place on the original (not
218: background subtracted) image. We found that this technique offered
219: the best compromise between detecting bright sources on top of diffuse
220: emission and detecting faint sources in background-free regions. For
221: the 24~\um\ MIPS data, in which the extended emission dominates over
222: the point sources, we used a somewhat larger median filter
223: ($27\farcs5$) and switched to the `combo' algorithm for separating
224: clusters of bright emission into individual sources in place of the
225: `peak' algorithm in the task {\sc detect}.\footnote{More information
226: about the {\sc detect} task and its associated options can be found
227: in the documents titled \emph{APEX User's Guide} and \emph{Image
228: Segmentation} (both by D. Makovoz) that are available on the
229: \emph{Spitzer Science Center} website.} We used observations of
230: bright, isolated point sources in the SMC to measure the aperture
231: corrections for the photometry. To provide near-infrared fluxes, we
232: used VLT/ISAAC J and K$_{s}$ imaging of the center of N66
233: \citep[][Rubio \& Barb\'{a}, in preparation]{rubio02} and Two Micron
234: All Sky Survey \citep[2MASS;][]{2mass} measurements in the outer
235: regions. We also added \emph{HST} $V$- and $I$-band photometry of the
236: central region from \citet{gouliermis06}, but because the much higher
237: angular resolution of the ACS images can cause confusion within the
238: \emph{Spitzer} resolution element, we only used these data for bright
239: stars ($V \le 17.5$).
240:
241: The assumed photometric uncertainty associated with each flux
242: measurement is very important for determining the relative weights
243: given to the various data points in the SED fitting that we carry out
244: in \S \ref{sedfitting}. Although the statistical uncertainties on all
245: of the photometric measurements were quite small (generally a few
246: percent or less), we imposed larger minimum uncertainties on all of
247: the data points to account for systematics. For example, the
248: \emph{HST}, 2MASS, VLT, IRAC, and MIPS observations were made at
249: various times over a period of 7 years, providing plenty of time for
250: the fluxes of the YSOs, which may be variable, to change. The
251: absolute photometric accuracy of IRAC is 10\% \citep{irac}, so we
252: added 10\% of the flux in quadrature to the measured uncertainty for
253: each source. MIPS also has a stated accuracy of 10\% \citep{mips}, so
254: when combined with the IRAC calibration accuracy and the 6 month time
255: baseline between the observations, we used a 20\% minimum error for
256: MIPS fluxes. Since the near-IR observations took place $6-7$ years
257: earlier, we imposed larger minimum errors of 35\% (for the deep VLT
258: data) and 50\% (for the shallow 2MASS data) on those data points. The
259: optical measurements are more recent (2004 July) and more accurate, so
260: we assumed 10\% uncertainties on the \emph{HST} photometry.
261:
262:
263: \section{RESULTS}
264: \label{results}
265:
266: \subsection{Photometry}
267: \label{photometry}
268:
269: For the purposes of this study, we limited our point-source fitting to
270: a $12\farcm75 \times 12\farcm75$ region covering the full extent of
271: the hot dust emission from N66 seen in our 24~\um\ image (from
272: 00\hr57\min51\sec\ to 01\hr00\min37\sec\ and from
273: $-$72\degr16\arcmin48\arcsec\ to $-$72\degr04\arcmin19\arcsec\ [all
274: coordinates J2000.0]). In this box, we detect 6544 sources at
275: 3.6~\um, 5836 at 4.5~\um, 1784 at 5.8~\um, 1718 at 8.0~\um, 101 at
276: 24~\um, and 15 at 70~\um, for a total of 8011 unique objects. A
277: significant number of these objects have \emph{Spitzer} colors that
278: are redder than normal stars should be at these wavelengths,
279: suggesting that they may be YSOs or background galaxies (B07).
280:
281:
282: \subsection{SED Fitting}
283: \label{sedfitting}
284:
285: There are two possible approaches to determining the nature of
286: individual \emph{Spitzer} sources. One could simply use the observed
287: colors and magnitudes to classify the sources into various categories.
288: Stars of nearly all kinds (except those with dusty atmospheres) have
289: colors near zero for any combination of \emph{Spitzer} bands because
290: the IRAC and MIPS bands are on the Rayleigh-Jeans tail of their
291: spectral energy distributions (SEDs).\footnote{Note that we use the
292: Vega magnitude system throughout this paper.} YSOs, because of the
293: emission from warm ($T \sim 200$~K) dust around the central protostar,
294: have red colors throughout the mid-IR. IRAC colors for theoretical
295: YSO models are given by, e.g., \citet{allen04} and
296: \citet{whitney03a,whitney03b,whitney04b}. Alternatively, one can
297: compare the full SEDs to a variety of source models and find the best
298: match for each object.
299:
300: The advantage of the color selection strategy is its simplicity, but
301: it also has some drawbacks. It fails to use all of the available
302: information about each object (since we also have MIPS, optical, and
303: near-IR fluxes for many of the sources), and it is very difficult to
304: learn about the detailed properties of individual sources from only
305: their colors. Color selection also does not offer a way to test the
306: assumption that SED models designed for Milky Way sources offer a good
307: description of YSOs that form in the metal- and dust-poor environment
308: of the SMC; this is a disadvantage for studies seeking to determine
309: how star formation proceeds at low metallicity, but could also be an
310: advantage in that it enables the selection of YSOs without regard to
311: the properties of their environment. Because the SED classification
312: should be more accurate, we begin with that technique and then compare
313: the results to color selection in \S \ref{colors}.
314:
315: The SED fitting tool used for this study employs a linear regression
316: method to find all the SEDs from a large grid of models that fit the
317: data within a specified $\chi^{2}$ \citep{robitaille07}. The grid of
318: models consists of 7853 stellar atmospheres \citep{kurucz92,bh05}
319: encompassing all available metallicities and effective temperatures, a
320: limited number of \emph{Infrared Space Observatory} (ISO) spectra of
321: galaxies \citep{dale05,silva98} and AGB stars
322: \citep{sylvester99,olivier01,hony02a,molster02,hony02b,fn03}, and the
323: 20,000 YSO models from \citet{robitaille06} computed using the
324: radiation transfer codes from
325: \citet{whitney03a,whitney03b,whitney04b}. Each YSO model outputs SEDs
326: for 10 viewing angles, so the YSO grid effectively contains $2 \times
327: 10^{5}$ SEDs. The foreground extinction, $A_V$, is fit simultaneously
328: using an extinction law derived from GLIMPSE observations (Indebetouw
329: et al. 2006). At ultraviolet and visible wavelengths, this extinction
330: law is not appropriate for the SMC, but in the near-IR and mid-IR the
331: differences in extinction between the SMC and Galaxy are small
332: \citep{gordon03,cartledge05}. The fitter is run first using only the
333: stellar atmosphere grid. It is then run three more times using the
334: YSO grid, ISO galaxy spectra, and ISO AGB spectra on the sources that
335: are not well-fit by stellar atmospheres. Based on all the successful
336: fit results, defined by their $\chi^{2}$ values (see below), we can
337: classify sources and calculate best estimates and uncertainties for
338: each model parameter.
339:
340: We fit an SED for every object for which we had at least four flux
341: measurements. To better constrain the fits at long wavelengths where
342: most of the sources were not detected, we added 24~\um\ upper limits
343: of 1~mJy (5 times the limiting sensitivity of the 24~\um\ data) for
344: each source that was not detected at 24~\um. Because there are many
345: more model parameters than data points that go into each observed SED,
346: the traditional reduced $\chi^{2}$ statistic cannot be used to
347: evaluate the success of the fits. As a proxy, we calculate the
348: $\chi^{2}$ per data point (where each SED has between 4 and 11 data
349: points). Given this definition, it is difficult to establish \emph{a
350: priori} the division between good and poor fits. We inspected the
351: fits by eye and determined that fits with a $\chi^{2}$ per data point
352: of less than 2.2 could reasonably be interpreted as good fits, while
353: higher $\chi^{2}$ values indicated fits that were not a good match to
354: the templates. We will therefore use this cutoff point to separate
355: good and poor fits throughout the paper. Note that this definition
356: depends on the flux uncertainties imposed in \S \ref{observations}.
357:
358:
359: \subsubsection{Results From Successful SED Fits}
360:
361: Out of the 1645 sources with four or more fluxes, 1322 (80.4\%) are
362: succesfully fit with stellar SEDs (see above for what we mean by a
363: ``successful fit''). Of the remaining 323 sources, 61 can only be fit
364: successfully by YSO models, 27 are background galaxies, 6 are AGB
365: stars, 81 can be fit by multiple classes of models, and 148 cannot be
366: fit by any of the available templates. We display one example YSO SED
367: in Figure \ref{fits}.
368:
369: \begin{figure}[t!]
370: \epsscale{1.20}
371: \plotone{f1.eps}
372: \caption{Sample SED fits for a YSO in N66. The black points indicate
373: the measured fluxes and uncertainties, and the black triangles are
374: for upper limits. The thin black line represents the best fitting
375: SED, and the gray lines represent all other acceptable
376: ($\chi^{2}$/data point $\le 2.2$) YSO fits. The dashed line
377: represents the stellar photosphere model (including the effect of
378: foreground extinction). This object is a Stage II YSO with a
379: stellar mass of 4.9~\msun\ (see \S \ref{stages} for the definition
380: of YSO stages).}
381: \label{fits}
382: \end{figure}
383:
384:
385: For the sources that can be well-described by multiple types of
386: templates, we used the $\chi^{2}$ value of the best fit for each
387: template type to attempt a more accurate classification. We set a
388: cutoff of 1.5 times the best $\chi^{2}$ value, and if, for example,
389: the best YSO fit had $\chi^{2} = 1.0$ and the best galaxy fit had
390: $\chi^{2} = 1.6$ then we classified the object as a probable YSO.
391: This choice of a $\chi^{2}$ cutoff indeed results in the majority of
392: the uncertain objects being classified as YSOs and leaves very few
393: objects with unknown types, which appears to be a reasonable outcome.
394: While the exact value chosen for the cutoff is arbitrary, it is clear
395: from the spatial distribution of the various object types that many of
396: the sources classified as possible or definite galaxies must actually
397: be YSOs. The results of this paper do not depend strongly on the
398: exact value of the cutoff. Using this method, we were able to obtain
399: probable classifications for 68 of the 81 objects of uncertain type,
400: including 50 YSOs, 13 galaxies, and 5 AGB stars. Thus, the final
401: object counts are 111 YSOs, 40 galaxies, and 11 AGB stars. The
402: remaining 13 objects had $\chi^{2}$ values for multiple object types
403: that were too close to distinguish reliably. We list selected
404: parameters from the fits for all 111 YSOs in Table \ref{ysotable}, and
405: we summarize the source classification results in Table
406: \ref{sourcetypes}.
407:
408:
409: \subsubsection{Objects Poorly Fit by the SED Models}
410:
411: We inspected each of the 148 poorly fit sources and the various
412: attempted fits to their SEDs to determine why the fitting failed for
413: them. We found that slightly more than 1/3 of the objects had SEDs at
414: short wavelengths that appeared stellar in origin, but the long
415: wavelength data (often at 24~\um) were significantly in excess of the
416: extrapolated photospheric emission. The fits to these sources appear
417: to have failed for a number of reasons including slight mismatches
418: between the optical and IR photometry (either from variability or
419: measurement error), confusion, misidentification of the long
420: wavelength counterparts, and contamination of the photometry by
421: underlying dust emission (revealed by PAH features). However, some of
422: these sources may also have true infrared excesses indicating the
423: presence of circumstellar material. Another $\sim1/3$ of the bad fits
424: were generally faint sources that are spatially coincident with dust
425: filaments in the \emph{Spitzer} images, again causing significant
426: contamination of their SEDs by PAH features in the IRAC bands. Some
427: of these objects are probably point sources (either stars or YSOs),
428: while others may simply be unresolved dust knots. The final 1/3 of
429: the bad fits was a mixed population whose SEDs could not be
430: straightforwardly interpreted. Photometric errors in one or more
431: bands and blending were likely responsible for the failure to fit
432: these objects, but they represented only 2.6\% of the total sample.
433:
434:
435: \subsection{IRAC Colors of YSOs}
436: \label{colors}
437:
438: Using the results of the SED fitting, we can now investigate the
439: colors of the objects classified as YSOs and as stars. We display
440: four color-color plots in Figure \ref{ysocolors} to illustrate the
441: possibilities for color selection. Stars, as expected, lie in the
442: cloud of points centered near (0,~0), while sources that are red in
443: one or both colors may be YSOs. Note that the frequently used [3.6]$
444: - $[4.5] vs. [5.8]$ - $[8.0] color-color plot (Fig. \ref{ysocolors}a)
445: does not cleanly separate YSOs from other types of sources,
446: particularly stars with modest IR excesses and sources with PAH
447: contamination. Better separation can be achieved using different
448: combinations of colors, as shown in Figure \ref{ysocolors}b. These
449: plots take advantage of longer color baselines and the abrupt change
450: in YSO spectra between the 4.5~\um\ and 5.8~\um\ bands to distinguish
451: YSOs from stars, galaxies, and PAHs. These results demonstrate that
452: while color selection can be a useful technique for identifying YSOs,
453: it does not appear possible to obtain a YSO sample that is both
454: complete and clean with a simple set of color diagnostics. SED
455: fitting is a more comprehensive way to determine the nature of sources
456: if measurements in enough bands are available. Nevertheless, because
457: in many cases it is desirable to classify objects with easily
458: applicable techniques, we use our data to provide guidance for color
459: selection of YSOs.
460:
461: \begin{figure*}[t!]
462: \epsscale{1.20}
463: \plotone{f2.eps}
464: \caption{(\emph{a}) IRAC [3.6]$ - $[4.5] vs. [5.8]$ - $[8.0]
465: color-color diagram of N66. The black dots represent all detected
466: sources (primarily stars), the filled red circles represent objects
467: that can only be fit by YSO models, the smaller purple circles
468: represent objects that are best fit by YSO models, although galaxy
469: and/or AGB fits with significantly higher $\chi^{2}$ values are also
470: acceptable, the filled blue triangles are background galaxies, and
471: the filled green diamonds are AGB stars. The open squares represent
472: sources for which satisfactory fits were not obtained: the cyan
473: symbols have SEDs that suggest they are likely to be stars, the
474: orange symbols are sources that are contaminated by PAH emission
475: features, and the gray symbols are the remaining unclassified poor
476: fits. Note that the separation of YSOs from the other classes of
477: sources is not very clean in this diagram. (\emph{b}) IRAC [3.6]$ -
478: $[4.5] vs. [4.5]$ - $[8.0] color-color diagram of N66. Symbols are
479: the same as in (\emph{a}). This plot offers the best separation of
480: YSOs from the various contaminants, although there are still a few
481: extragalactic sources that have similar colors to the YSOs.}
482: \label{ysocolors}
483: \end{figure*}
484:
485: Assuming that the purple points in Figure \ref{ysocolors} are indeed
486: YSOs, one can select YSOs with the following set of criteria:
487:
488: \begin{eqnarray}
489: \nonumber [3.6] - [4.5] & > & 0.6\times([4.5] - [8.0]) - 1.0 \\
490: \nonumber [4.5] - [8.0] & < & 2.8 \\
491: \nonumber [3.6] - [4.5] & < & 0.6\times([4.5] - [8.0]) + 0.3 \\
492: \bracket - [4.5] & > & -([4.5] - [8.0]) + 0.85.
493: \label{colorselection1}
494: \end{eqnarray}
495:
496: \noindent These criteria were defined to maximize completeness; one
497: could alternatively choose to minimize contamination at the cost of
498: increased incompleteness, but given the distribution of sources in
499: Figure \ref{ysocolors}\emph{b}, the differences would be small. This
500: selection is only 7\% incomplete for YSOs in our sample that have
501: measured fluxes at 3.6~\um, 4.5~\um, and 8.0~\um, and has a
502: contamination of less than 27\%\ (the majority of the objects in this
503: color box with uncertain classifications may still be YSOs).
504: Approximately equivalent results can be obtained by substituting the
505: [3.6]$-$[8.0] color for the [4.5]$-$[8.0] color, but it is slightly
506: more difficult to avoid picking up stars on the blue end of the
507: [3.6]$-$[8.0] color axis.
508:
509:
510: \subsubsection{Comparison to B07 Photometric Selection}
511:
512: B07 identified a set of very bright YSOs across the entire SMC based
513: on their 8.0~\um\ magnitudes and [5.8]$-$[8.0] colors. If we select
514: the same region of the color-magnitude diagram in N66, we find 15
515: sources, only 3 of which are conclusively classified as YSOs. Almost
516: all of the remaining objects have SEDs that are not well-fit by any of
517: the models we apply, primarily because of PAH contamination. The PAH
518: contamination across the rest of the galaxy should be much lower than
519: in N66, so these numbers clearly represent a lower limit to the
520: fraction of actual YSOs in the B07 sample.
521:
522:
523: \subsection{YSO Masses and Stages}
524: \label{stages}
525:
526: YSOs are traditionally divided into classes based on their observed
527: spectral indices as originally defined by \citet{lada87}. Because
528: spectral indices can vary with inclination angle as well as with
529: evolutionary state, \citet{robitaille06} described their YSO models in
530: terms of ``stages'', which are analogous to the usual classes, but are
531: based on the physical quantities that define the evolutionary stage of
532: the models. When comparing these models to data (rather than
533: considering only observations), it therefore makes sense to use the
534: stage system. The definitions of each stage rely on the ratio of the
535: disk mass and envelope accretion rate to the central stellar mass.
536: Stage I sources have $\dot{M}/M_{*} > 10^{-6}$, Stage II sources have
537: $\dot{M}/M_{*} < 10^{-6}$ and $M_{disk}/M_{*} > 10^{-6}$, and Stage
538: III sources have $\dot{M}/M_{*} < 10^{-6}$ and $M_{disk}/M_{*} <
539: 10^{-6}$, where $\dot{M}$ is the envelope accretion rate. Note that
540: we assumed a dust-to-gas ratio of $2 \times 10^{-3}$ (1/5 of the Milky
541: Way value) for N66 \citep{leroy07}.\footnote{The dust-to-gas ratio
542: does not affect the YSO fits themselves, but does change the mass
543: ratios between the disk and the central star, which is used for the
544: stage classification.}
545:
546: Using this classification scheme, we have grouped the 111 definite and
547: probable YSOs in N66 into stages. The SEDs of most objects can be fit
548: by more than 1 YSO model, so we first selected the models that produce
549: a $\chi^{2}$ that is within 1 of the best $\chi^{2}$ for each object.
550: We then computed a stage for each of the acceptable models and
551: calculated a weighted average stage, using the $\chi^{2}$ values as
552: weights. The averages were rounded to the nearest integer to produce
553: a classification. We find that of the 111 YSOs, 33 are Stage I, 50
554: are Stage II, and 28 are Stage III.
555:
556: We also calculated YSO masses with the same weighted averaging scheme,
557: and defined the uncertainty on the mass to be the weighted standard
558: deviation of the masses of the acceptable models. We found YSOs with
559: a range of masses from $2.4-16.6$~M$_{\odot}$, including 19 objects
560: that appear to be proto-OB stars ($M \ge 8$~M$_{\odot}$). We list the
561: names, positions, luminosities, luminosity uncertainties ($\Delta$L,
562: the weighted standard deviation of the luminosities of the acceptable
563: models), masses, mass uncertainties ($\Delta$M, as defined in the
564: first sentence of this paragraph), stages, and stage uncertainties
565: ($\Delta$Stage, the weighted standard deviation of the stages of the
566: acceptable models) of all of the YSOs in Table \ref{ysotable}.
567:
568:
569: \subsection{Spatial Distribution of YSO Candidates}
570: \label{distribution}
571:
572: In Figure \ref{spatialdist} we plot the spatial distribution of the
573: YSOs in N66. The protostars are obviously highly concentrated towards
574: the peaks of the 8.0~\um\ emission. However, there is also star
575: formation taking place outside of the dense dust cloud that marks the
576: optical \hii\ region, particularly to the south and southeast.
577: \citet{mpg89} hypothesized that star formation in N66 has proceeded
578: from the southwest to the center of the present-day \hii\ region, but
579: we do find a few probable YSOs southwest of N66, indicating that at
580: least modest star formation has taken place there within the past few
581: million years.
582:
583: \begin{figure}[t!]
584: \epsscale{1.20}
585: \plotone{f3.eps}
586: \caption{Spatial distribution of YSOs in N66, overplotted on an image
587: of the 8.0~\um\ emission. The red circles represent objects with
588: SEDs that can only be fit by YSO models, and the yellow circles
589: represent objects that are probably YSOs but can be fit by other
590: source types as well (albeit with significantly higher $\chi^{2}$
591: values). The image is displayed on a logarithmic scale from
592: 4~MJy~sr$^{-1}$ to 20~MJy~sr$^{-1}$. }
593: \label{spatialdist}
594: \end{figure}
595:
596: The distribution of YSOs throughout the \hii\ region as a function of
597: mass and stage is not uniform. We find that the most-embedded objects
598: (Stage I) are slightly more concentrated towards the center of the
599: \hii\ region than the more advanced (and presumably older) YSOs. We
600: also see evidence for mass segregation, with the most massive objects
601: exhibiting a strong preference for locations close to the center (see
602: Figure \ref{massdist}). All but 2 of the YSOs with $M \ge
603: 8$~M$_{\odot}$ lie on top of bright dust filaments in the main
604: \hii\ region, and many of them are coincident with molecular peaks and
605: optical star clusters \citep{rubio00,sabbi07}. If these massive YSOs
606: are indeed single objects rather than multiple unresolved sources,
607: then the mass segregation must be primordial in origin, as the YSOs
608: have not had time to move very far from their birthplaces.
609:
610: \begin{figure}[t!]
611: \epsscale{1.20}
612: \plotone{f4.eps}
613: \caption{Mass distribution of YSOs in N66, overplotted on an image of
614: the 8.0~\um\ emission. The most massive sources ($M > 8$~\msun) are
615: plotted as cyan points, and then decreasing masses are indicated by
616: yellow (4.5~\msun$ < M \le 8$~\msun) and red ($M \le 4.5$~\msun)
617: points. The high-mass stars are more concentrated in the center of
618: the \hii\ region than the less massive objects. Note that the
619: objects shown in this figure include the full YSO sample, not just
620: the 61 definite YSOs that can only be fit by YSO SEDs.}
621: \label{massdist}
622: \end{figure}
623:
624:
625: \section{DISCUSSION}
626: \label{discussion}
627:
628: The census of previously known embedded protostars in the SMC consists
629: of a single object discovered by \citet{gatley82}. \citet{beaulieu01}
630: and \citet{dewit03} used variability data and \ha\ imaging to uncover
631: a small sample of Herbig Ae/Be stars in the SMC, and \citet{nota06}
632: discovered several hundred low-mass pre-main-sequence stars in N66 via
633: isochrone fits to \emph{HST} photometry. These objects, however, are
634: generally much more evolved than the YSOs identified by this study,
635: many of which are still embedded in their natal dust clouds and are
636: therefore faint or invisible at optical wavelengths. The distribution
637: of YSOs is concentrated towards clumps of molecular gas traced by the
638: CO(2-1) emission line \citep{rubio00} and the peaks of the dust
639: emission at 7~\um\ \citep{contursi00}. \citet{rubio00} showed that
640: dense H$_{2}$ knots are associated with these molecular clumps and
641: suggested that massive star formation could be taking place there.
642: The large number of embedded YSOs found in this study confirms that
643: prediction. Moreover, IR spectroscopy of the 3 brightest embedded
644: sources detected with ground-based near-IR imaging confirm that these
645: sources are YSOs (Rubio and Barb{\' a}, in preparation).
646:
647: The sample of Stage I, II, and III YSOs that we have identified in N66
648: presents the first opportunity for studying in detail a large sample
649: of embedded YSOs in another galaxy \citep[see also][]{jones05,chu05},
650: and more importantly, one whose ISM properties differ substantially
651: from those of the Milky Way. The fact that we are able to identify
652: over 100 YSOs in N66, as well as obtain successful SED fits for almost
653: all of the other sources, suggests (perhaps surprisingly) that
654: protostars in the SMC resemble the YSO models constructed by
655: \citeauthor{whitney03a} for Milky Way objects, even though the
656: metallicity and dust-to-gas ratio are a factor of $\sim5$ lower in the
657: SMC. The only potential difference between Milky Way and SMC YSOs
658: that is evident in our results is that some of the sources are best
659: fit by relatively cool photospheres, but the YSO models with such
660: photospheres do not have high enough luminosities to match their
661: observed brightnesses at the distance of the SMC. If these objects
662: are actually YSOs, this problem could be an indication that accretion
663: is continuing even after these stars have reached the main sequence,
664: which leads to expanded photospheres and lower temperatures compared
665: to normal pre-main sequence tracks and zero-age main-sequence
666: photospheres \citep{mt03}. An alternative possibility is that these
667: sources actually consist of multiple cool protostars, which would
668: explain their unusually high luminosities. The luminosities of these
669: objects are $2-3$ orders of magnitude higher than the expected
670: luminosities of individual YSOs of the same temperature, however,
671: which makes the multiplicity explanation appear unlikely. Finally,
672: evolved stars in the post-AGB phase also have expanded cool
673: photospheres, so it is possible that some of the ``cool luminous''
674: sources could be post-AGB stars. Additional modeling and observations
675: of some representative objects may be necessary to resolve this issue.
676:
677:
678: \subsection{The Star Formation Rate in N66}
679:
680: The 111 YSOs in our sample have a combined stellar mass of 692~\msun.
681: The observed mass function (see Figure \ref{imf}) turns over at
682: $\sim4$~\msun, indicating that incompleteness becomes serious at this
683: point. Artificial star tests in our photometry show that we are 90\%
684: complete even in the confused central region of N66 down to flux
685: levels of 300~$\mu$Jy, 200$\mu$Jy, 200$\mu$Jy, and 300~$\mu$Jy from
686: 3.6-8.0~\um. Applying these limits to the full library of YSO models
687: confirms that our incompleteness is severe below 4~\msun. If we
688: assume that star formation in N66 follows a \citet{salpeter} initial
689: mass function (IMF) down to 0.1~\msun, we calculate that the total
690: mass in protostars for the entire \hii\ region is $\sim3160$~\msun.
691: In reality, this is a lower limit to the mass because even at
692: 4~\msun\ the data are somewhat incomplete. If these YSOs have all
693: formed within the last $\sim1$~Myr, then the average star formation
694: rate over that time is $3.2 \times 10^{-3}$~\msun~yr$^{-1}$. Thus, we
695: find that N66 comprises at least $\sim6$\% of the total current star
696: formation in the SMC.
697:
698: \begin{figure}[t!]
699: \epsscale{1.20}
700: \plotone{f5.eps}
701: \caption{Mass function of YSOs in N66. The solid curve shows the
702: best-fitting Salpeter IMF, which provides a reasonable fit to the
703: data above 4~\msun, where the observational incompleteness becomes
704: severe.}
705: \label{imf}
706: \end{figure}
707:
708:
709: \subsection{Comparison with Optical Observations}
710:
711: \citet{nota06}, \citet{gouliermis06}, and \citet{sabbi07} used
712: \emph{HST} imaging to study the young stellar population of N66 in the
713: optical. \citet{sabbi07} identified 16 subclusters of pre-main
714: sequence stars (their Figure 8; several of these clusters were also
715: pointed out by \citeauthor{gouliermis06}) in the \hii\ region, and we
716: find that all but two of these also have YSOs associated with them
717: (see below). \citeauthor{sabbi07} estimated ages of $\sim3$~Myr for
718: the first 15 of the subclusters, but our detection of YSOs
719: demonstrates that star formation has continued until the present day
720: in these areas.
721:
722: Subcluster 1 (Sc~1) is nearly coincident with an extremely bright
723: \emph{Spitzer} source (the 4th-most luminous object in the field at
724: 8.0~\um), SSTS3MC~14.7725-72.1766, which we are able to fit with both
725: YSO and AGB SEDs with similar $\chi^{2}$ values. Given the location
726: of this object at the center of the NGC~346 cluster, surrounded by
727: numerous very young massive stars, it is most likely a YSO
728: (nevertheless, since it does not formally meet our selection criteria
729: it is not included in our analysis). If so, the fitted SEDs suggest
730: that this is a Stage I object with a luminosity of $3.3\times
731: 10^{4}$~L$_{\odot}$ and a mass of 14.7~\msun. However, it is
732: important to remember that because of the very high source density
733: here we may actually be seeing multiple unresolved YSOs. In that
734: case, we would be likely to overestimate the mass of the most massive
735: YSO and underestimate the total mass of YSOs contained in this source.
736: This type of source confusion should not have a strong effect on the
737: SED fitting results, because the observed SED will be dominated by
738: that of the most massive embedded YSO. A mid-IR spectrum of this
739: object is displayed in \citet[][peak C]{contursi00}. Another bright
740: \emph{Spitzer} source, SSTS3MC~14.7748-72.1749, is located within
741: 3\arcsec\ of Sc 1 and has a steeply-rising mid- and far-IR SED that we
742: are unable to fit successfully. If we remove the 24~\um\ upper limit
743: and either the 70~\um\ or $J$- and $K$-band detections (perhaps
744: justified because of confusion in this very densely populated region),
745: then this source has the SED of a very massive ($M > 10$~\msun),
746: early-stage YSO. We do not detect any non-stellar sources in Sc~3
747: (immediately south of Sc~1), but confusion as a result of the very
748: bright source just north of the cluster may play a role in this
749: non-detection.
750:
751: Sc~2 is located very close to 2 \emph{Spitzer} sources.
752: SSTS3MC~14.7574 has a stellar SED with a strong 24~\um\ detection
753: (indicating either confusion or circumstellar dust) and
754: SSTS3MC~14.7580-72.1763 is formally a poor fit as a result of a low
755: $K$-band flux and slight PAH contamination, but appears to have an SED
756: consistent with being an early stage YSO.
757:
758: Scs 4-6 each have bright infrared counterparts. Sc~4
759: is coincident with SSTS3MC~14.7605-72.1687, a massive embedded YSO.
760: Sc~5 is SSTS3MC~14.7514-72.1681, another object that can be
761: fitted by both YSO and AGB SEDs. Again, given its position in a very
762: young cluster, it is most likely a massive stage I YSO rather than an
763: evolved star. And Sc~6 contains 2 blended \emph{Spitzer}
764: sources, SSTS3MC~14.7371-72.1651 and SSTS3MC~14.7380-72.1651, both
765: very high-mass stage I YSOs. The caveat mentioned above about
766: multiple unresolved sources applies here as well.
767: %=Contursi peaks A-B
768:
769: Located on the southern edge of Sc~7, very close to the
770: prominent dust lane that arcs nearly halfway around N66, is
771: SSTS3MC~14.7733-72.1835, yet another very massive (18.6~\msun) stage I
772: protostar that can also be fit by AGB models. Slightly further to the
773: southwest are 2 additional, lower-mass YSOs, SSTS3MC~14.7673-72.1834
774: and SSTS3MC~14.7698-72.1846.
775:
776: Sc~8 has a faint \emph{Spitzer} counterpart, SSTS3MC~14.7816-72.1802,
777: which shows a stellar SED in the optical and near-IR and excesses in
778: the IRAC bands, but is not fit well by any of our YSO models. It is
779: possible that the optical and IR emission is coming from different
780: sources.
781:
782: Scs 9-11 are located around a quintet of YSOs. The 2
783: brightest of these, SSTS3MC~14.8112-72.1843 and
784: SSTS3MC~14.8130-72.1840, lie within Sc~10, but it is not clear
785: whether these are truly blended YSOs as opposed to a bright, extended
786: clump of dust. The other 3 sources classified as YSOs in this region
787: are SSTS3MC~14.8041-72.1867, SSTS3MC~14.8068-72.1856, and
788: SSTS3MC~14.8174-72.1866.
789: %=Contursi peak H
790:
791: Sc~12 contains two bright \emph{Spitzer} sources
792: (SSTS3MC~14.8318-72.1890 and SSTS3MC~14.8353-72.1892) that are not fit
793: well by any of the available models. The rising SEDs of these objects
794: towards long wavelengths strongly suggest that there are YSOs present
795: here, but blending may be a problem. This cluster is coincident with
796: the source labeled peak I by \citet{contursi00}.
797: %=Contursi peak I
798:
799: Scs 13-15 lie in the northward extension of the \hii\ region (N66A).
800: Clusters 13 and 14 each overlap with a YSO (SSTS3MC~14.8009-72.1663 =
801: \citeauthor{contursi00} peak F and SSTS3MC~14.8080-72.1578 =
802: \citeauthor{contursi00} peak G), but as with Sc~10 the source in Sc~14
803: does not appear pointlike in the IRAC bands, and so may not be a
804: single object. Sc~15 is associated with SSTS3MC~14.8205-72.1544,
805: which shows very strong PAH emission but is not well-fit by YSO
806: models.
807:
808: Finally, Sc~16 contains 2 \emph{Spitzer} sources, but both of these
809: are well-fit by normal stellar models, consistent with the older age
810: of this cluster derived by \citet{sabbi07}.
811:
812: Out of the 44 YSOs in our sample that lie within the ACS \ha\ images
813: of \citet{nota06}, $\sim10$ are spatially coincident with gas or dust
814: pillars strongly resembling those made famous by \emph{HST} imaging of
815: the ``Pillars of Creation'' in the Eagle Nebula \citep{hester96}.
816: Higher spatial resolution near-IR and mid-IR imaging of these objects
817: may reveal exactly how the YSOs are related to these features.
818:
819:
820: \section{SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS}
821: \label{conclusions}
822:
823: We have obtained mid-infrared imaging of the \hii\ region N66
824: (NGC~346) in the SMC with the IRAC and MIPS instruments on the
825: \emph{Spitzer Space Telescope}. We detected 8011 unique sources, with
826: photometric coverage extending from $V$-band to 24~\um\ (70~\um\ in a
827: few cases). Most of these sources have colors and SEDs consistent
828: with being normal stars, but we also detect a significant population
829: of objects that are very red in the mid-IR. SED fitting of the 1645
830: sources with photometric measurements in at least four bands yielded
831: 111 objects with SEDs that are best fit by YSO models rather than
832: stars or background galaxies. These data represent the first
833: significant sample of embedded YSOs identified in an external galaxy.
834:
835: We show that these YSOs can be mostly, but not completely, separated
836: from stars on the basis of their IRAC colors. However, SED fitting is
837: necessary to significantly constrain the properties of individual
838: objects. We find that the YSO models of
839: \citet{whitney03a,whitney03b,whitney04b}, which were designed to
840: represent Milky Way YSOs with solar metallicities, fit most of the
841: YSOs in N66 well, despite its much lower metallicity and dust-to-gas
842: ratio. These results suggest that if low metallicity causes
843: significant changes in the star formation process, the threshold for
844: those effects must lie below the metallicity of the SMC (12 + log[O/H]
845: $\approx$ 8.0; \citealt{dufour75}). The one possible difference
846: between SMC and Milky Way YSOs is that the SMC appears to contain a
847: population of very luminous but cool objects that have not been seen
848: in the Milky Way. These objects may have expanded photospheres and
849: hence lower temperatures than normal because they are still accreting
850: material from their protostellar disks when they reach the main
851: sequence. Alternatively, these sources could be multiple cool YSOs
852: that are unresolved by \emph{Spitzer}.
853:
854: We calculate masses and stages (analogous to the usual YSO classes)
855: for each of the N66 YSOs, finding a range of masses from 2.4 to
856: 16.6~M$_{\odot}$ (including 19 objects with masses above
857: 8~M$_{\odot}$). Almost half (45\%) of the YSOs are Stage II objects,
858: 30\% are Stage I, and the remaining 25\% are evolved Stage III
859: sources. We examine the spatial distribution of the YSOs and find
860: that they are strongly concentrated in the center of the \hii\ region
861: where bright \ha\ and dust emission is seen, but there are also small
862: numbers of YSOs in the surrounding region with much less diffuse ISM
863: emission. The most massive YSOs are preferentially located closer to
864: the center of N66, indicating that mass segregation is taking place.
865: We compare our YSO map to the clusters of pre-main sequence stars
866: identified in the optical by \citet{sabbi07} and find that all but 2
867: of the clusters have associated YSOs. Using a Salpeter IMF, we
868: calculate that a total of at least 3160~\msun\ of YSOs have been
869: formed in the last $\sim10^{6}$~yr, representing $\simgtr6$\% of the
870: current star formation in the SMC.
871:
872:
873: \acknowledgements
874: We would like to thank the anonymous referee for a
875: careful reading of the paper that produced valuable feedback.
876: J.D.S. gratefully acknowledges the support of a Millikan Fellowship
877: provided by the California Institute of Technology. This research
878: was partially funded by NASA through an award issued by JPL/Caltech
879: (NASA-JPL \emph{Spitzer} grant 1264151 awarded to Cycle 1 project
880: 3316). B.W. was supported by NASA Astrophysics Theory Program grant
881: NNG05GH35G and the \emph{Spitzer} Theoretical Research Program under
882: Subcontract 1290701, M.R. was supported by the Chilean {\sl Center
883: for Astrophysics} FONDAP No. 15010003, and financial support from
884: FONDECYT No. 1050052 is acknowledged by R.H.B. We thank You-Hua
885: Chu, Robert Gruendl, Lynne Hillenbrand, Jacco van Loon, Adam Leroy,
886: and Bob Benjamin for helpful conversations, and we also thank
887: Dimitrios Gouliermis for providing us with the \emph{HST} photometry
888: in advance of publication. This work is based on observations made
889: with the \emph{Spitzer Space Telescope}, which is operated by the
890: Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology under
891: a contract with NASA. This publication makes use of data products
892: from the Two Micron All Sky Survey, which is a joint project of the
893: University of Massachusetts and the Infrared Processing and Analysis
894: Center/California Institute of Technology, funded by NASA and the
895: National Science Foundation. This research has also made use of
896: NASA's Astrophysics Data System Bibliographic Services and the
897: SIMBAD database, operated at CDS, Strasbourg, France.
898:
899:
900:
901: \begin{thebibliography}{}
902:
903: \bibitem[Allen et al.(2004)]{allen04} Allen, L.~E., et al.\
904: 2004, \apjs, 154, 363
905:
906: \bibitem[Beaulieu et al.(2001)]{beaulieu01} Beaulieu, J.-P., et
907: al.\ 2001, \aap, 380, 168
908:
909: \bibitem[Bolatto et al.(2007)]{bolatto07} Bolatto, A.~D., et
910: al.\ 2007, \apj, 655, 212 (B07)
911:
912: \bibitem[Brott \& Hauschildt(2005)]{bh05} Brott, I., \& Hauschildt,
913: P.~H.\ 2005, ESA SP-576: The Three-Dimensional Universe with Gaia,
914: 565
915:
916: \bibitem[Cartledge et al.(2005)]{cartledge05} Cartledge, S.~I.~B., et
917: al.\ 2005, \apj, 630, 355
918:
919: \bibitem[Chu et al.(2005)]{chu05} Chu, Y.-H., et al.\ 2005,
920: \apjl, 634, L189
921:
922: \bibitem[Contursi et al.(2000)]{contursi00} Contursi, A., et
923: al.\ 2000, \aap, 362, 310
924:
925: \bibitem[Dale et al.(2005)]{dale05} Dale, D.~A., et al.\ 2005, \apj,
926: 633, 857
927:
928: \bibitem[de Vaucouleurs et al.(1991)]{rc3} de Vaucouleurs, G., de
929: Vaucouleurs, A., Corwin, H.~G., Buta, R.~J., Paturel, G., \&
930: Fouqu{\'e}, P.\ 1991, Third Reference Catalog of Bright Galaxies
931: (Berlin: Springer-Verlag)
932:
933: \bibitem[de Wit et al.(2003)]{dewit03} de Wit, W.~J., Beaulieu,
934: J.-P., Lamers, H.~J.~G.~L.~M., Lesquoy, E., \& Marquette, J.-B.\ 2003,
935: \aap, 410, 199
936:
937: \bibitem[Dufour(1975)]{dufour75} Dufour, R.~J.\ 1975, \apj, 195, 315
938:
939: \bibitem[Dufour \& Harlow(1977)]{dh77} Dufour, R.~J., \& Harlow,
940: W.~V.\ 1977, \apj, 216, 706
941:
942: \bibitem[Fazio et al.(2004)]{irac} Fazio, G.~G., et al.\ 2004, \apjs,
943: 154, 10
944:
945: \bibitem[Fujii \& Nakada(2003)]{fn03} Fujii, T., \& Nakada, Y.\ 2003,
946: Astrophysics and Space Science Library, 283, 221
947:
948: \bibitem[Gatley et al.(1982){Gatley, Hyland, \& Jones}]{gatley82}
949: Gatley, I., Hyland, A.~R., \& Jones, T.~J.\ 1982, \mnras, 200, 521
950:
951: \bibitem[Gordon et al.(2003)]{gordon03} Gordon, K.~D., Clayton, G.~C.,
952: Misselt, K.~A., Landolt, A.~U., \& Wolff, M.~J.\ 2003, \apj, 594,
953: 279
954:
955: \bibitem[Gouliermis et al.(2006)]{gouliermis06} Gouliermis, D.~A.,
956: Dolphin, A.~E., Brandner, W., \& Henning, T.\ 2006, \apjs, 166, 549
957:
958: \bibitem[Henize(1956)]{henize} Henize, K.~G.\ 1956, \apjs, 2,
959: 315
960:
961: \bibitem[Hester et al.(1996)]{hester96} Hester, J.~J., et al.\ 1996,
962: \aj, 111, 2349
963:
964: \bibitem[Hilditch et al.(2005){Hilditch, Howarth, \& Harries}]{hhh05}
965: Hilditch, R.~W., Howarth, I.~D., \& Harries, T.~J.\ 2005, \mnras,
966: 357, 304
967:
968: \bibitem[Hony(2002)]{hony02a} Hony, S.\ 2002, Ph.D.~Thesis,
969: University of Amsterdam
970:
971: \bibitem[Hony et al.(2002)]{hony02b} Hony, S., Waters,
972: L.~B.~F.~M., \& Tielens, A.~G.~G.~M.\ 2002, \aap, 390, 533
973:
974: \bibitem[Jones et al.(2005)]{jones05} Jones, T.~J., Woodward, C.~E.,
975: Boyer, M.~L., Gehrz, R.~D., \& Polomski, E.\ 2005, \apj, 620, 731
976:
977: \bibitem[Keller \& Wood(2006)]{kw06} Keller, S.~C., \& Wood,
978: P.~R.\ 2006, \apj, 642, 834
979:
980: \bibitem[Kurucz(1992)]{kurucz92} Kurucz, R.~L.\ 1992, IAU
981: Symp.~149: The Stellar Populations of Galaxies, 149, 225
982:
983: \bibitem[Lada(1987)]{lada87} Lada, C.~J.\ 1987, IAU Symp.~115: Star
984: Forming Regions, 115, 1
985:
986: \bibitem[Leroy et al.(2007)]{leroy07} Leroy, A., Bolatto, A.,
987: Stanimirovi\'{c}, S., Mizuno, N., Israel, F., \& Bot, C.\ 2007,
988: \apj, in press (preprint: astro-ph/0611687)
989:
990: \bibitem[Makovoz \& Marleau(2005)]{apex} Makovoz, D., \& Marleau,
991: F.~R.\ 2005, \pasp, 117, 1113
992:
993: \bibitem[Massey et al.(1989){Massey, Parker, \& Garmany}]{mpg89}
994: Massey, P., Parker, J.~W., \& Garmany, C.~D.\ 1989, \aj, 98, 1305
995:
996: \bibitem[McKee \& Tan(2003)]{mt03} McKee, C.~F., \& Tan,
997: J.~C.\ 2003, \apj, 585, 850
998:
999: \bibitem[Molster et al.(2002)]{molster02} Molster, F.~J., Waters,
1000: L.~B.~F.~M., Tielens, A.~G.~G.~M., \& Barlow, M.~J.\ 2002, \aap,
1001: 382, 184
1002:
1003: \bibitem[Nota et al.(2006)]{nota06} Nota, A., et al.\ 2006,
1004: \apjl, 640, L29
1005:
1006: \bibitem[Olivier et al.(2001)]{olivier01} Olivier, E.~A., Whitelock,
1007: P., \& Marang, F.\ 2001, \mnras, 326, 490
1008:
1009: \bibitem[Peimbert et al.(2000){Peimbert, Peimbert, \& Ruiz}]{ppr00}
1010: Peimbert, M., Peimbert, A., \& Ruiz, M.~T.\ 2000, \apj, 541, 688
1011:
1012: \bibitem[Peimbert \& Torres-Peimbert(1976)]{ptp76} Peimbert,
1013: M., \& Torres-Peimbert, S.\ 1976, \apj, 203, 581
1014:
1015: \bibitem[Rieke et al.(2004)]{mips} Rieke, G.~H., et al.\ 2004, \apjs,
1016: 154, 25
1017:
1018: \bibitem[Robitaille et al.(2006)]{robitaille06} Robitaille, T.~P.,
1019: Whitney, B.~A., Indebetouw, R., Wood, K., \& Denzmore, P.\ 2006,
1020: \apjs, 167, 256
1021:
1022: \bibitem[Robitaille et al.(2007)]{robitaille07} Robitaille, T.~P.,
1023: Whitney, B.~A., Indebetouw, R., \& Wood, K.\ 2007,
1024: \apjs, 169, 328
1025:
1026: \bibitem[Rubio et al.(2002)]{rubio02} Rubio, M., Barb{\'a}, R.,
1027: Boulanger, F., \& Gallart, C. 2002, in ESO Workshop: The Origins of
1028: Stars and Planets: The VLT View (Berlin: Springer-Verlag)
1029:
1030: \bibitem[Rubio et al.(2000)]{rubio00} Rubio, M., Contursi, A.,
1031: Lequeux, J., Probst, R., Barb{\'a}, R., Boulanger, F., Cesarsky, D., \&
1032: Maoli, R.\ 2000, \aap, 359, 1139
1033:
1034: \bibitem[Sabbi et al.(2007)]{sabbi07} Sabbi, E., et al.\ 2007,
1035: \aj, 133, 44
1036:
1037: \bibitem[Salpeter(1955)]{salpeter} Salpeter, E.~E.\ 1955, \apj, 121,
1038: 161
1039:
1040: \bibitem[Silva et al.(1998)]{silva98} Silva, L., Granato, G.~L.,
1041: Bressan, A., \& Danese, L.\ 1998, \apj, 509, 103
1042:
1043: \bibitem[Skrutskie et al.(2006)]{2mass} Skrutskie, M.~F., et
1044: al.\ 2006, \aj, 131, 1163
1045:
1046: \bibitem[Stanimirovi\'{c} et al.(2000)]{snez00} Stanimirovi\'{c}, S.,
1047: Staveley-Smith, L., van der Hulst, J.~M., Bontekoe, T.~R., Kester,
1048: D.~J.~M., \& Jones, P.~A.\ 2000, \mnras, 315, 791
1049:
1050: \bibitem[Storm et al.(2004)]{storm04} Storm, J., Carney, B.~W.,
1051: Gieren, W.~P., Fouqu{\'e}, P., Latham, D.~W., \& Fry, A.~M.\ 2004,
1052: \aap, 415, 531
1053:
1054: \bibitem[Sylvester et al.(1999)]{sylvester99} Sylvester, R.~J.,
1055: Kemper, F., Barlow, M.~J., de Jong, T., Waters, L.~B.~F.~M.,
1056: Tielens, A.~G.~G.~M., \& Omont, A.\ 1999, \aap, 352, 587
1057:
1058: \bibitem[Westerlund (1997)]{westerlund} Westerlund, B.~E.
1059: 1997, The Magellanic Clouds (Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press)
1060:
1061: \bibitem[Whitney et al.(2003a)]{whitney03a} Whitney, B.~A., Wood,
1062: K., Bjorkman, J.~E., \& Wolff, M.~J.\ 2003, \apj, 591, 1049
1063:
1064: \bibitem[Whitney et al.(2003b)]{whitney03b} Whitney, B.~A., Wood,
1065: K., Bjorkman, J.~E., \& Cohen, M.\ 2003, \apj, 598, 1079
1066:
1067: \bibitem[Whitney et al.(2004)]{whitney04b} Whitney, B.~A.,
1068: Indebetouw, R., Bjorkman, J.~E., \& Wood, K.\ 2004, \apj, 617, 1177
1069:
1070: \bibitem[Wilke et al.(2004)]{wilke04} Wilke, K., Klaas, U., Lemke, D.,
1071: Mattila, K., Stickel, M., \& Haas, M.\ 2004, \aap, 414, 69
1072:
1073:
1074: \end{thebibliography}
1075:
1076:
1077:
1078: \clearpage
1079: \LongTables
1080: \begin{landscape}
1081: \begin{deluxetable}{cccccccccccc}
1082: \tabletypesize{\scriptsize}
1083: \tablenum{1}
1084: \tablewidth{0pt}
1085: \tablecolumns{12}
1086: \tablecaption{Young Stellar Objects in N66}
1087: \tablehead{
1088: \colhead{Number} & \colhead{Source name} & \colhead{$\alpha$ (J2000.0)} &
1089: \colhead{$\delta$ (J2000.0)} & \colhead{$L$ (L$_{\odot}$)} &
1090: \colhead{$\Delta L$\tablenotemark{a} (L$_{\odot}$)} & \colhead{$M_{*}$ (\msun)} &
1091: \colhead{$\Delta M_{*}$\tablenotemark{a} (\msun)} & \colhead{Stage} & \colhead{$\Delta$Stage\tablenotemark{a}} &
1092: \colhead{$\chi^{2}$ \tablenotemark{b}} & \colhead{$\chi_{2}^{2}$ \tablenotemark{c}} \\
1093: \colhead{(1)} & \colhead{(2)} & \colhead{(3)} & \colhead{(4)} &
1094: \colhead{(5)} & \colhead{(6)} & \colhead{(7)} & \colhead{(8)} &
1095: \colhead{(9)} & \colhead{(10)} & \colhead{(11)} & \colhead{(12)} }
1096: \startdata
1097: \cutinhead{Definite YSOs}
1098: 1 & SSTS3MC14.5039$-$72.0895 & 00 58 00.94 & $-$72 05 22.3 & 1290 & 556 & 6.5 & 0.8 & III & 0.6 & \phn0.26 & --- \\
1099: 2 & SSTS3MC14.5579$-$72.1554 & 00 58 13.89 & $-$72 09 19.5 & 131 & --- & 5.1 & --- & I & --- & \phn1.76 & --- \\
1100: 3 & SSTS3MC14.6261$-$72.1449 & 00 58 30.26 & $-$72 08 41.5 & 328 & 107 & 4.6 & 0.4 & II & 0.4 & \phn0.12 & --- \\
1101: 4 & SSTS3MC14.6680$-$72.1503 & 00 58 40.31 & $-$72 09 01.0 & 1590 & 1600 & 6.0 & 2.5 & II & 0.5 & \phn0.40 & --- \\
1102: 5 & SSTS3MC14.7018$-$72.1834 & 00 58 48.43 & $-$72 11 00.2 & 35 & 2 & 2.8 & 0.5 & I & --- & \phn4.06 & --- \\
1103: 6 & SSTS3MC14.7094$-$72.1725 & 00 58 50.25 & $-$72 10 20.9 & 3300 & --- & 8.3 & --- & III & --- & \phn5.53 & --- \\
1104: 7 & SSTS3MC14.7148$-$72.2427 & 00 58 51.55 & $-$72 14 33.9 & 671 & 353 & 5.3 & 0.9 & III & 0.5 & \phn0.95 & --- \\
1105: 8 & SSTS3MC14.7223$-$72.1679 & 00 58 53.35 & $-$72 10 04.3 & 3520 & 789 & 8.9 & 1.5 & I & --- & \phn1.39 & --- \\
1106: 9 & SSTS3MC14.7315$-$72.1734 & 00 58 55.56 & $-$72 10 24.3 & 4430 & --- & 9.0 & --- & III & --- & \phn1.37 & --- \\
1107: 10 & SSTS3MC14.7329$-$72.2439 & 00 58 55.90 & $-$72 14 38.1 & 261 & --- & 6.4 & --- & I & --- & \phn6.15 & --- \\
1108: 11 & SSTS3MC14.7429$-$72.1741 & 00 58 58.30 & $-$72 10 26.9 & 4340 & --- & 7.9 & --- & I & --- & \phn3.55 & --- \\
1109: 12 & SSTS3MC14.7485$-$72.1843 & 00 58 59.63 & $-$72 11 03.3 & 348 & --- & 4.5 & --- & II & --- & \phn1.68 & --- \\
1110: 13 & SSTS3MC14.7509$-$72.1797 & 00 59 00.22 & $-$72 10 47.0 & 1940 & --- & 7.3 & --- & III & --- & \phn2.37 & --- \\
1111: 14 & SSTS3MC14.7534$-$72.1829 & 00 59 00.81 & $-$72 10 58.6 & 388 & 1 & 4.7 & --- & II & --- & \phn5.48 & --- \\
1112: 15 & SSTS3MC14.7566$-$72.1722 & 00 59 01.58 & $-$72 10 19.8 & 2230 & --- & 7.5 & --- & II & --- & \phn0.68 & --- \\
1113: 16 & SSTS3MC14.7582$-$72.2715 & 00 59 01.96 & $-$72 16 17.5 & 306 & 813 & 4.6 & 1.1 & II & 0.7 & \phn0.41 & --- \\
1114: 17 & SSTS3MC14.7605$-$72.1687 & 00 59 02.53 & $-$72 10 07.4 & 5120 & 2210 & 10.3 & 0.8 & I & 0.4 & \phn3.69 & --- \\
1115: 18 & SSTS3MC14.7639$-$72.2068 & 00 59 03.34 & $-$72 12 24.3 & 197 & 46 & 3.9 & 0.2 & II & --- & \phn0.56 & --- \\
1116: 19 & SSTS3MC14.7698$-$72.1846 & 00 59 04.75 & $-$72 11 04.7 & 684 & 7 & 5.5 & --- & II & --- & \phn0.50 & --- \\
1117: 20 & SSTS3MC14.7766$-$72.2300 & 00 59 06.37 & $-$72 13 48.0 & 369 & 214 & 4.5 & 0.7 & II & 0.5 & \phn0.00 & --- \\
1118: 21 & SSTS3MC14.7800$-$72.1454 & 00 59 07.19 & $-$72 08 43.4 & 261 & --- & 6.4 & --- & I & --- & \phn9.19 & --- \\
1119: 22 & SSTS3MC14.7829$-$72.2091 & 00 59 07.90 & $-$72 12 32.9 & 459 & 151 & 4.9 & 0.4 & II & --- & \phn6.59 & --- \\
1120: 23 & SSTS3MC14.7876$-$72.1769 & 00 59 09.03 & $-$72 10 37.0 & 4430 & --- & 9.0 & --- & III & --- & \phn1.44 & --- \\
1121: 24 & SSTS3MC14.7880$-$72.1864 & 00 59 09.13 & $-$72 11 11.0 & 9880 & --- & 11.6 & --- & III & --- & 13.16 & --- \\
1122: 25 & SSTS3MC14.7886$-$72.1827 & 00 59 09.25 & $-$72 10 57.8 & 30300 & --- & 16.6 & --- & I & --- & \phn6.79 & --- \\
1123: 26 & SSTS3MC14.7898$-$72.1777 & 00 59 09.55 & $-$72 10 39.6 & 1620 & --- & 7.0 & --- & III & --- & \phn3.99 & --- \\
1124: 27 & SSTS3MC14.7933$-$72.1930 & 00 59 10.40 & $-$72 11 34.9 & 6540 & 12500 & 7.9 & 8.3 & I & --- & 12.36 & --- \\
1125: 28 & SSTS3MC14.8009$-$72.1663 & 00 59 12.22 & $-$72 09 58.8 & 5060 & --- & 10.1 & --- & I & --- & \phn9.19 & --- \\
1126: 29 & SSTS3MC14.8041$-$72.1867 & 00 59 12.98 & $-$72 11 12.3 & 176 & 15 & 3.8 & --- & II & --- & \phn0.81 & --- \\
1127: 30 & SSTS3MC14.8056$-$72.2720 & 00 59 13.33 & $-$72 16 19.1 & 456 & 245 & 4.8 & 0.7 & III & 0.5 & \phn0.01 & --- \\
1128: 31 & SSTS3MC14.8061$-$72.1918 & 00 59 13.46 & $-$72 11 30.5 & 5990 & 2100 & 13.1 & 3.1 & I & --- & \phn6.52 & --- \\
1129: 32 & SSTS3MC14.8068$-$72.1856 & 00 59 13.62 & $-$72 11 08.0 & 540 & 131 & 5.2 & 0.4 & II & --- & \phn0.18 & --- \\
1130: 33 & SSTS3MC14.8077$-$72.1466 & 00 59 13.85 & $-$72 08 47.7 & 728 & 159 & 5.6 & 0.3 & III & --- & \phn5.52 & --- \\
1131: 34 & SSTS3MC14.8080$-$72.1578 & 00 59 13.92 & $-$72 09 27.9 & 8380 & 1470 & 11.0 & 0.6 & II & 0.7 & \phn8.32 & --- \\
1132: 35 & SSTS3MC14.8104$-$72.1621 & 00 59 14.49 & $-$72 09 43.7 & 387 & --- & 4.7 & --- & II & --- & \phn7.82 & --- \\
1133: 36 & SSTS3MC14.8112$-$72.1843 & 00 59 14.68 & $-$72 11 03.4 & 13000 & 7940 & 15.1 & 2.9 & I & --- & \phn1.17 & --- \\
1134: 37 & SSTS3MC14.8130$-$72.1840 & 00 59 15.11 & $-$72 11 02.2 & 9560 & 2180 & 11.4 & 0.8 & II & 0.5 & \phn5.23 & --- \\
1135: 38 & SSTS3MC14.8140$-$72.1917 & 00 59 15.36 & $-$72 11 30.0 & 3300 & --- & 8.3 & --- & III & --- & \phn0.42 & --- \\
1136: 39 & SSTS3MC14.8174$-$72.1866 & 00 59 16.18 & $-$72 11 11.6 & 210 & 61 & 4.0 & 0.2 & II & --- & \phn1.00 & --- \\
1137: 40 & SSTS3MC14.8211$-$72.1822 & 00 59 17.07 & $-$72 10 55.8 & 87 & 10 & 4.5 & 0.3 & I & --- & \phn6.43 & --- \\
1138: 41 & SSTS3MC14.8284$-$72.1568 & 00 59 18.82 & $-$72 09 24.3 & 1180 & --- & 6.4 & --- & II & --- & \phn4.08 & --- \\
1139: 42 & SSTS3MC14.8292$-$72.1585 & 00 59 19.00 & $-$72 09 30.5 & 656 & --- & 5.5 & --- & II & --- & \phn4.88 & --- \\
1140: 43 & SSTS3MC14.8302$-$72.2441 & 00 59 19.25 & $-$72 14 38.8 & 453 & 174 & 4.9 & 0.8 & III & 0.5 & \phn0.00 & --- \\
1141: 44 & SSTS3MC14.8373$-$72.1449 & 00 59 20.95 & $-$72 08 41.5 & 922 & 345 & 6.2 & 0.4 & II & 0.3 & \phn0.15 & --- \\
1142: 45 & SSTS3MC14.8465$-$72.1468 & 00 59 23.16 & $-$72 08 48.4 & 4430 & 1780 & 8.8 & 1.7 & III & 0.3 & \phn2.67 & --- \\
1143: 46 & SSTS3MC14.8487$-$72.1464 & 00 59 23.69 & $-$72 08 47.1 & 204 & 60 & 3.9 & 0.3 & II & --- & \phn2.78 & --- \\
1144: 47 & SSTS3MC14.8551$-$72.1345 & 00 59 25.22 & $-$72 08 04.1 & 1340 & --- & 6.6 & --- & III & --- & \phn0.40 & --- \\
1145: 48 & SSTS3MC14.8701$-$72.2089 & 00 59 28.83 & $-$72 12 31.9 & 131 & --- & 5.1 & --- & I & --- & \phn6.78 & --- \\
1146: 49 & SSTS3MC14.8830$-$72.2265 & 00 59 31.91 & $-$72 13 35.3 & 206 & --- & 5.9 & --- & I & --- & \phn5.28 & --- \\
1147: 50 & SSTS3MC14.8900$-$72.2789 & 00 59 33.61 & $-$72 16 43.9 & 678 & 215 & 5.5 & 0.5 & III & --- & \phn2.11 & --- \\
1148: 51 & SSTS3MC14.9039$-$72.1509 & 00 59 36.94 & $-$72 09 03.2 & 77 & 11 & 4.6 & 0.3 & I & 0.4 & \phn3.33 & --- \\
1149: 52 & SSTS3MC14.9041$-$72.2398 & 00 59 36.98 & $-$72 14 23.2 & 1000 & 495 & 5.8 & 1.5 & II & 0.2 & \phn0.22 & --- \\
1150: 53 & SSTS3MC14.9360$-$72.2122 & 00 59 44.64 & $-$72 12 44.0 & 2150 & --- & 7.5 & --- & III & --- & \phn7.94 & --- \\
1151: 54 & SSTS3MC14.9603$-$72.2764 & 00 59 50.48 & $-$72 16 35.2 & 644 & 249 & 5.4 & 0.6 & III & 0.5 & \phn0.51 & --- \\
1152: 55 & SSTS3MC14.9671$-$72.2613 & 00 59 52.12 & $-$72 15 40.8 & 529 & 376 & 5.0 & 0.9 & II & 0.5 & \phn0.21 & --- \\
1153: 56 & SSTS3MC14.9858$-$72.2454 & 00 59 56.59 & $-$72 14 43.5 & 683 & 177 & 5.9 & 0.8 & II & 0.4 & 11.79 & --- \\
1154: 57 & SSTS3MC15.0636$-$72.2746 & 01 00 15.27 & $-$72 16 28.7 & 1000 & --- & 6.2 & --- & III & --- & \phn5.99 & --- \\
1155: 58 & SSTS3MC15.0655$-$72.0788 & 01 00 15.72 & $-$72 04 43.6 & 360 & 87 & 4.6 & 0.4 & II & --- & \phn0.26 & --- \\
1156: 59 & SSTS3MC15.0859$-$72.2232 & 01 00 20.62 & $-$72 13 23.6 & 488 & 119 & 5.0 & 0.3 & II & 0.5 & \phn7.91 & --- \\
1157: 60 & SSTS3MC15.0930$-$72.1662 & 01 00 22.32 & $-$72 09 58.2 & 2910 & 944 & 8.0 & 0.7 & I & 0.5 & \phn0.40 & --- \\
1158: 61 & SSTS3MC15.1415$-$72.2574 & 01 00 33.97 & $-$72 15 26.5 & 1750 & 99 & 8.8 & 0.4 & I & --- & \phn5.55 & --- \\
1159: \cutinhead{Probable YSOs}
1160: 62 & SSTS3MC14.4895$-$72.2499 & 00 57 57.49 & $-$72 14 59.7 & 12700 & 10900 & 11.4 & 5.3 & III & --- & \phn1.95 & \phn3.49 \\
1161: 63 & SSTS3MC14.5083$-$72.0835 & 00 58 02.00 & $-$72 05 00.7 & 2000 & 2130 & 7.0 & 2.3 & II & 0.4 & \phn0.04 & \phn8.60 \\
1162: 64 & SSTS3MC14.5104$-$72.2020 & 00 58 02.50 & $-$72 12 07.0 & 573 & 536 & 5.1 & 1.5 & II & 0.8 & \phn0.02 & \phn4.23 \\
1163: 65 & SSTS3MC14.5410$-$72.1448 & 00 58 09.85 & $-$72 08 41.2 & 160 & 107 & 4.0 & 0.8 & II & 0.5 & \phn0.28 & \phn1.45 \\
1164: 66 & SSTS3MC14.5911$-$72.1983 & 00 58 21.87 & $-$72 11 53.8 & 114 & --- & 5.0 & --- & I & --- & \phn5.85 & 10.50 \\
1165: 67 & SSTS3MC14.5959$-$72.2472 & 00 58 23.01 & $-$72 14 50.0 & 95 & 93 & 4.3 & 0.9 & I & 0.4 & \phn0.60 & \phn7.06 \\
1166: 68 & SSTS3MC14.6593$-$72.2436 & 00 58 38.23 & $-$72 14 37.0 & 210 & 300 & 3.7 & 1.1 & II & 0.5 & \phn0.01 & \phn2.29 \\
1167: 69 & SSTS3MC14.6977$-$72.1509 & 00 58 47.45 & $-$72 09 03.2 & 2290 & 188 & 7.6 & 0.2 & III & --- & \phn5.99 & 14.70 \\
1168: 70 & SSTS3MC14.7067$-$72.1161 & 00 58 49.60 & $-$72 06 58.0 & 1470 & 2230 & 6.5 & 1.2 & II & 0.3 & \phn0.05 & \phn3.93 \\
1169: 71 & SSTS3MC14.7169$-$72.1788 & 00 58 52.04 & $-$72 10 43.8 & 517 & 900 & 4.8 & 0.9 & II & 0.2 & \phn2.20 & \phn7.18 \\
1170: 72 & SSTS3MC14.7173$-$72.1293 & 00 58 52.16 & $-$72 07 45.4 & 260 & 317 & 4.3 & 0.6 & II & 0.2 & \phn0.07 & \phn1.78 \\
1171: 73 & SSTS3MC14.7175$-$72.2081 & 00 58 52.19 & $-$72 12 29.1 & 80 & 16 & 4.1 & 1.0 & I & --- & \phn4.49 & 12.55 \\
1172: 74 & SSTS3MC14.7177$-$72.2063 & 00 58 52.24 & $-$72 12 22.6 & 37 & 69 & 2.9 & 0.8 & II & 0.6 & \phn0.00 & \phn0.32 \\
1173: 75 & SSTS3MC14.7208$-$72.1536 & 00 58 53.00 & $-$72 09 12.9 & 1640 & 307 & 7.0 & 0.4 & III & --- & \phn0.06 & \phn1.01 \\
1174: 76 & SSTS3MC14.7265$-$72.1957 & 00 58 54.36 & $-$72 11 44.6 & 59 & 105 & 2.4 & 4.6 & I & --- & \phn0.01 & \phn2.38 \\
1175: 77 & SSTS3MC14.7269$-$72.2737 & 00 58 54.45 & $-$72 16 25.1 & 1170 & 861 & 6.4 & 2.3 & III & 0.5 & \phn0.00 & \phn2.29 \\
1176: 78 & SSTS3MC14.7327$-$72.1420 & 00 58 55.85 & $-$72 08 31.3 & 236 & --- & 4.0 & --- & I & --- & \phn3.05 & 11.44 \\
1177: 79 & SSTS3MC14.7371$-$72.1651 & 00 58 56.89 & $-$72 09 54.5 & 9390 & 3200 & 13.5 & 1.8 & I & --- & \phn3.54 & 10.49 \\
1178: 80 & SSTS3MC14.7380$-$72.1651 & 00 58 57.11 & $-$72 09 54.3 & 14800 & 7190 & 15.5 & 2.4 & I & --- & \phn0.18 & \phn1.96 \\
1179: 81 & SSTS3MC14.7383$-$72.1449 & 00 58 57.19 & $-$72 08 41.5 & 231 & 370 & 4.1 & 1.0 & II & 0.5 & \phn0.02 & \phn1.76 \\
1180: 82 & SSTS3MC14.7407$-$72.2761 & 00 58 57.76 & $-$72 16 34.0 & 1210 & 874 & 6.4 & 0.6 & II & 0.6 & \phn0.48 & \phn1.57 \\
1181: 83 & SSTS3MC14.7426$-$72.1701 & 00 58 58.23 & $-$72 10 12.4 & 3290 & --- & 8.3 & --- & III & --- & \phn0.32 & \phn1.64 \\
1182: 84 & SSTS3MC14.7542$-$72.2250 & 00 59 01.01 & $-$72 13 30.1 & 257 & 469 & 4.2 & 0.8 & II & 0.4 & \phn0.00 & \phn3.06 \\
1183: 85 & SSTS3MC14.7569$-$72.2725 & 00 59 01.65 & $-$72 16 21.1 & 251 & --- & 6.5 & --- & I & --- & \phn2.77 & \phn8.52 \\
1184: 86 & SSTS3MC14.7577$-$72.2715 & 00 59 01.86 & $-$72 16 17.4 & 726 & 1020 & 5.2 & 1.4 & II & 0.6 & \phn0.00 & \phn6.20 \\
1185: 87 & SSTS3MC14.7673$-$72.1834 & 00 59 04.14 & $-$72 11 00.1 & 2290 & 1870 & 7.0 & 1.9 & II & 0.7 & \phn2.42 & \phn8.66 \\
1186: 88 & SSTS3MC14.7702$-$72.2090 & 00 59 04.84 & $-$72 12 32.5 & 310 & 47 & 6.7 & 0.5 & I & --- & \phn0.96 & \phn3.43 \\
1187: 89 & SSTS3MC14.7814$-$72.1369 & 00 59 07.54 & $-$72 08 12.8 & 176 & 151 & 3.6 & 0.7 & III & 0.5 & \phn0.50 & \phn2.90 \\
1188: 90 & SSTS3MC14.7872$-$72.1781 & 00 59 08.93 & $-$72 10 41.2 & 2360 & --- & 7.6 & --- & II & --- & \phn0.20 & \phn6.33 \\
1189: 91 & SSTS3MC14.7882$-$72.1441 & 00 59 09.17 & $-$72 08 38.7 & 201 & 914 & 3.9 & 1.2 & II & 0.5 & \phn0.12 & \phn1.09 \\
1190: 92 & SSTS3MC14.7893$-$72.1401 & 00 59 09.43 & $-$72 08 24.2 & 80 & 40 & 3.6 & 0.5 & II & 0.5 & \phn0.10 & \phn7.14 \\
1191: 93 & SSTS3MC14.7900$-$72.0911 & 00 59 09.60 & $-$72 05 27.9 & 821 & 226 & 5.8 & 0.4 & III & 0.7 & \phn0.48 & \phn3.25 \\
1192: 94 & SSTS3MC14.7908$-$72.2089 & 00 59 09.80 & $-$72 12 31.9 & 57 & 23 & 2.7 & 0.2 & II & --- & \phn0.38 & \phn8.03 \\
1193: 95 & SSTS3MC14.7909$-$72.1970 & 00 59 09.81 & $-$72 11 49.1 & 2270 & 1610 & 7.2 & 1.7 & III & 0.5 & \phn0.49 & \phn9.59 \\
1194: 96 & SSTS3MC14.7911$-$72.2052 & 00 59 09.87 & $-$72 12 18.8 & 162 & 74 & 3.7 & 0.3 & II & 0.3 & \phn0.05 & \phn6.49 \\
1195: 97 & SSTS3MC14.7956$-$72.1865 & 00 59 10.93 & $-$72 11 11.5 & 114 & 373 & 3.2 & 1.5 & II & --- & \phn0.01 & \phn3.12 \\
1196: 98 & SSTS3MC14.7988$-$72.1372 & 00 59 11.72 & $-$72 08 13.7 & 114 & --- & 5.0 & --- & I & --- & \phn6.32 & 12.05 \\
1197: 99 & SSTS3MC14.8006$-$72.1939 & 00 59 12.13 & $-$72 11 38.1 & 171 & 54 & 4.1 & 0.7 & I & 0.5 & \phn1.69 & \phn8.27 \\
1198: 100 & SSTS3MC14.8011$-$72.1935 & 00 59 12.25 & $-$72 11 36.7 & 305 & 228 & 4.2 & 0.8 & II & --- & \phn0.07 & \phn7.34 \\
1199: 101 & SSTS3MC14.8426$-$72.2461 & 00 59 22.23 & $-$72 14 45.8 & 275 & 170 & 4.7 & 0.6 & II & 0.2 & \phn0.00 & \phn0.12 \\
1200: 102 & SSTS3MC14.8466$-$72.1513 & 00 59 23.19 & $-$72 09 04.5 & 356 & 109 & 4.5 & 0.6 & II & --- & \phn2.22 & \phn6.76 \\
1201: 103 & SSTS3MC14.8532$-$72.1669 & 00 59 24.77 & $-$72 10 00.8 & 1160 & 90 & 7.0 & 0.7 & II & 1.0 & \phn0.70 & \phn7.04 \\
1202: 104 & SSTS3MC14.8715$-$72.1774 & 00 59 29.15 & $-$72 10 38.6 & 490 & 58 & 7.3 & 0.3 & I & --- & \phn2.46 & \phn5.53 \\
1203: 105 & SSTS3MC14.8729$-$72.1393 & 00 59 29.49 & $-$72 08 21.6 & 123 & 45 & 4.4 & 0.8 & I & --- & \phn2.10 & \phn4.92 \\
1204: 106 & SSTS3MC14.8781$-$72.1694 & 00 59 30.74 & $-$72 10 09.9 & 441 & 385 & 4.4 & 1.5 & III & 0.5 & \phn0.97 & \phn9.78 \\
1205: 107 & SSTS3MC14.8817$-$72.2385 & 00 59 31.60 & $-$72 14 18.6 & 540 & 963 & 4.6 & 1.6 & II & 0.7 & \phn0.16 & \phn6.91 \\
1206: 108 & SSTS3MC14.8848$-$72.0817 & 00 59 32.35 & $-$72 04 54.2 & 98 & 47 & 4.2 & 1.1 & I & --- & \phn1.85 & \phn6.99 \\
1207: 109 & SSTS3MC14.9738$-$72.1101 & 00 59 53.70 & $-$72 06 36.3 & 201 & 215 & 4.3 & 0.7 & II & 0.6 & \phn0.05 & \phn4.07 \\
1208: 110 & SSTS3MC15.0896$-$72.1743 & 01 00 21.49 & $-$72 10 27.5 & 80 & 30 & 3.9 & 0.9 & I & 0.5 & \phn0.14 & \phn3.10 \\
1209: 111 & SSTS3MC15.1199$-$72.1377 & 01 00 28.78 & $-$72 08 15.6 & 847 & 166 & 5.9 & 0.3 & III & --- & \phn0.06 & \phn6.27 \\
1210: \enddata
1211: \tablecomments{The coordinates in this table are not necessarily
1212: identical to the ones presented by B07 and made available on the
1213: S$^{3}$MC website because the N66 photometry was carried out
1214: independently. However, the differences should be very small.}
1215:
1216: \tablenotetext{a}{The uncertainties on the luminosities, masses, and
1217: stages are calculated as the weighted standard deviation of the
1218: luminosities, masses, and stages of all of the acceptable YSO
1219: models. In cases where there is only one acceptable model for a
1220: given source, or there are multiple models but they all produce the
1221: same luminosity/mass/stage, we cannot calculate an uncertainty in
1222: this way, so we leave the corresponding space in the table blank.}
1223:
1224: \tablenotetext{b}{$\chi^{2}$ value for the best fitting SED. Note
1225: that these are raw $\chi^{2}$ values, not $\chi^{2}$ per data point,
1226: so a good fit ($\chi^{2}$ per data point $ \le 2.2$) can have a
1227: $\chi^{2}$ as high as 8.8 (if there are 4 flux data points for that
1228: source) or more.}
1229: \tablenotetext{c}{$\chi^{2}$ value for the best fitting AGB star or
1230: background galaxy SED.}
1231: \label{ysotable}
1232: \end{deluxetable}
1233: \clearpage
1234: \end{landscape}
1235:
1236:
1237:
1238: \begin{deluxetable}{lc}
1239: \tablenum{2}
1240: %\tablewidth{0pt}
1241: \tablecolumns{2}
1242: \tablecaption{SED Classification Results}
1243: \tablehead{
1244: \colhead{\hspace{-1.22in}Object Class} & \colhead{Number} }
1245:
1246: \startdata
1247: All sources & 1645 \\
1248: \cutinhead{Objects with unique SED classifications}
1249: Normal stars & 1322 \\
1250: YSOs & 61 \\
1251: Galaxies & 27 \\
1252: AGB stars & 6 \\
1253: \cutinhead{Objects without unique SED classifications}
1254: Probable YSOs & 50 \\
1255: Probable galaxies & 13 \\
1256: Probable AGB stars & 5 \\
1257: Multiple good fits; unable to classify & 13 \\
1258: Poor fits & 148
1259: \enddata
1260: \label{sourcetypes}
1261: \end{deluxetable}
1262:
1263:
1264:
1265: \end{document}
1266: