1: \documentclass[twocolumn,apj]{emulateapj}
2:
3: \shorttitle{GRB 060505 ISM Properties}
4: \shortauthors{Levesque \& Kewley}
5: %\slugcomment{DRAFT \today}
6:
7: \begin{document}
8:
9: \title{The Host Galaxy of GRB 060505: Host ISM Properties}
10:
11: \author{Emily M. Levesque and Lisa. J. Kewley}
12: \affil{Institute for Astronomy, University of Hawaii, 2680 Woodlawn Dr., Honolulu, HI 96822}
13: \email{emsque@ifa.hawaii.edu, kewley@ifa.hawaii.edu}
14:
15:
16: \begin{abstract}
17: We investigate the ISM environment of GRB 060505. Using optical emission-line diagnostic ratios, we compare the ISM properties of the GRB 060505 host region with the hosts of unambiguous long- and short- duration GRBs. We show that the metallicity, ionization state, and star formation rate of the GRB 060505 environment are more consistent with short-duration GRBs than with long-duration GRBs. We compare the metallicity and star formation rates of the GRB 060505 region with four other star-forming regions within the GRB 060505 host galaxy. We find no significant change in metallicity or star formation rate between the GRB 060505 region and the other four host regions. Our results are consistent with a compact-object-merger progenitor for GRB 060505.
18: \end{abstract}
19:
20: \keywords{gamma-ray bursts}
21:
22:
23: \section{Introduction}
24: \label{Sec-intro}
25: The nature of the GRB 060505 progenitor is currently a topic of hot debate.
26: GRBs are the signatures of extraordinarily high-energy events. Burst length
27: distinguishes between ``short'' ($<$ 2 s) bursts arising from compact-object mergers (Gehrels et al. 2005) and ``long'' ($>$ 2 s) bursts with massive core-collapse progenitors (Woosley 1993) that
28: are commonly accompanied by luminous and broad-lined Type Ic supernovae (Watson et al. 2007).
29: GRB 060505 has a burst length of $\sim$4 s, but notably lacks evidence of an accompanying supernova. Investigations into the host properties of GRB 060505 strongly
30: disagree on the nature of the progenitor. It is unclear whether GRB 060505 originates from
31: a compact-object merger, a massive core-collapse supernova, or a new class of long-duration GRBs with no associated supernovae. The nature of GRB 060505 may have important implications for our classification and understanding of GRB progenitors.
32:
33: GRB 060505 was observed on UTC 2006 May 5 by the Swift Burst Alert Telescope (BAT)
34: (Hullinger et al. 2006; Palmer et al. 2006), associated with the $z$ = 0.0889 galaxy
35: 2dFGRS S173Z112 (Colless et al. 2003; Ofek et al. 2006; Th\"{o}ne et al. 2006a; Fynbo et al. 2006). It was initially categorized as a long-duration GRB based on its $\sim$4 s burst length (Kouveliotou et al. 1993). Th\"{o}ne \& Fynbo (2007) find a lower metallicity and higher rate of star formation at the GRB 060505 burst site when compared with other regions of the host galaxy. Recent investigations suggest that long-duration GRBs are associated with low-metallicity star-forming environments (Stanek et al. 2006, Sollerman et al. 2005, Fruchter et al. 2006, Kewley et al. 2007, Brown et al. 2007), supporting a core-collapse progenitor scenario for GRB 060505.
36:
37: On the other hand, GRB 060505 may be the product of a compact-object merger with a longer-than-average burst duration. Short- and long-duration GRBs are separated by a burst-duration cut-off of 2 s, but there may be some overlap between these two classes of progenitor
38: events; short-burst progenitors have a 12\% chance of yielding a burst longer
39: than 4 s (Horv\'{a}th 2002).
40:
41: Additional support for a compact-object merger progenitor for GRB 060505 includes the progenitor's evolutionary timescale, the spiral nature of the host galaxy, and the brightness of the burst region. Ofek et al. (2007) calculate an upper limit of 10 Myr for the progenitor birth-to-explosion timescale of the GRB 060505 event. While this age limit does not rule out the possibility of a core-collapse progenitor, such a timescale is also consistent with the merging of two neutron stars or a neutron star-black hole merger, both of which are compact object merger scenarios associated with short bursts (Belczynski et al. 2006). The host galaxy of GRB 060505 is categorized as an Sbc spiral, which is unusual for a long-duration GRB host galaxy (Th\"{o}ne \& Fynbo 2007). Fruchter et al. (2006) found that long-duration GRBs favor the brightest regions of their host galaxies that are associated with concentrated populations of young massive stars (van den Heuvel \& Yoon 2007). The GRB 060505 progenitor region is relatively faint compared to its host galaxy, supporting a compact-object merger progenitor (Ofek et al. 2007).
42:
43: Alternatively, GRB 060505 may belong to a new class of long-duration GRBs with
44: no associated supernovae. The distribution of known GRB burst durations suggest the
45: existence of a third category of GRBs (Mukherjee et al. 1998, Horv\'{a}th 2002).
46: GRB 060505 is often compared with GRB 060614, a $\sim$102 s burst (Barthelmy et al. 2006) classified as a long GRB with no apparent supernova counterpart - both have been proposed as representative examples of a new class of GRBs (Fynbo et al. 2006, Jakobsson \& Fynbo 2007, King et al. 2007).
47:
48: Schaefer \& Xiao (2006) suggest that GRB 060505 is a background event that has been associated with 2dFGRS S173Z112 by coincidence. However, Watson et al. (2007) estimate that
49: the superposition of the burst directly over a star-forming region of low metallicity would be unreasonably serendipitous.
50:
51: There are several reasons to believe that the progenitors of long-duration bursts
52: would favor low-metallicity environments. Mass loss in late-type massive
53: stars, driven by radiation pressure on spectral lines, is heavily dependent on
54: metallicity (Vink \& de Koter 2005), with mass loss and metallicity
55: correlated by the rough relation $\dot M_w \propto Z^{0.78}$ (Mokiem et al.
56: 2006). Surface velocities are also expected to be higher for such stars at
57: low metallicity, a consequence of the lower mass loss rate and an important
58: property of collapsars (Kudritzki \& Puls 2000, Meynet \& Maeder 2005).
59: The host environments of long-duration GRBs should also have high
60: ionization parameters, since the typical age of the young stellar populations in
61: long-duration bursts is
62: consistent with late-type massive stars that dominate the radiation
63: field, such as Wolf-Rayet stars (Kewley et al. 2007).
64: There is no evidence that a compact-object-merger progenitor would favor such an environment: compact-object mergers are found in many galaxy types (such as
65: ellipticals and spirals, including early-type spirals,) that typically have older stellar
66: populations (and, therefore, less ionizing radiation) and considerably smaller
67: star formation rates (Nakar 2007). These hosts typically have
68: higher metallicities than the blue compact dwarf galaxy hosts of
69: core-collapse-progenitor long GRBs (Bloom \& Prochaska 2006). These characteristics
70: suggest that the ISM properties of these two host environments should be distinct.
71:
72: In this paper, we compare the ISM properties of GRB 060505's host galaxy
73: to long and short GRB hosts, as well as a large sample of blue compact galaxies. We show that GRB 060505 has a unique set of ISM properties that leads to insight into the puzzling nature of its progenitor.
74: Throughout this paper we assume a cosmology of $H_0$ = 70 km s$^{-1}$ Mpc$^{-1}$, $\Omega_m$ = 0.3, and
75: $\Omega_{\Lambda}$ = 0.7.
76:
77: \section{Emission Line Fluxes}
78: We use emission line fluxes from Th\"{o}ne et al. (2007) for five different regions of the host galaxy: (a)
79: the site of the gamma-ray burst, (b) the upper, (c) middle, and (d) lower regions of the
80: galaxy's bulge, and (e) a region of the galaxy's lower spiral arm.
81:
82: Our comparison sample is composed
83: of sixty-seven blue compact galaxies (BCGs) from the spectroscopic study of Kong \& Cheng (2002), and seven long- and two
84: short- duration GRB host galaxies from the GHostS public archive (Savaglio et al. 2006) . The reference sources for these fluxes are given in Table \ref{tab:params}.
85:
86: All LGRB fluxes were corrected for local extinction effects based on the H$\alpha$/H$\beta$
87: emission line ratio where possible. We use the Cardelli, Clayton \& Mathis (1989)
88: reddening curve, assuming an ${\rm R_{V}=Av/{\rm E}(B-V)} = 3.1$ and an
89: intrinsic H$\alpha$/H$\beta$ ratio of 2.85 (the Balmer decrement for case B
90: recombination at T$=10^4$K and $n_{e} \sim 10^2 - 10^4 {\rm cm}^{-3}$;
91: Osterbrock 1989). The E($B-V$) values applied are given in Table \ref{tab:params}.
92:
93: H$\alpha$ line fluxes were unavailable for the short GRB hosts.
94: In these cases we estimate the extinction using the E($B-V$)-$M_B$ relation in Jansen et al. (2001). We use $M_B$ for GRB 051221 and GRB 050416 from Soderberg et al. (2006, 2007),
95: respectively. The resulting extinction values are $\sim 0.3$, consistent with the mean extinction for the Nearby Field Galaxy Survey (Kewley, Jansen \& Geller 2005), and with the mean extinction of star-forming galaxies in the Sloan Digital Sky Survey (Kewley et al. 2007).
96:
97: \section{Line Ratio Diagnostics}
98: In figures~\ref{fig:N2Ha} and \ref{fig:N2O2} we show the common line diagnostic diagrams proposed
99: by Veilleux \& Osterbrock
100: (1987), Baldwin et al. (1981), and Dopita et al. (2000). For comparison, we show representative Mappings
101: photoionization grids from
102: Kewley et al. (2001). These grids model a continuous star
103: formation history, using the Starburst99 v3.0 stellar population synthesis models and the
104: Mappings III photoionization models with an electron
105: density of 350 cm$^{-3}$ and an age of 4 Myr. The grids shown here
106: have ionization parameters ranging from $q = 5 \times 10^6$ to $3 \times 10^8$ cm s$^{-1}$ and
107: metallicities ranging from $Z = 0.09Z_{\odot}$ to $Z = 3.5Z_{\odot}$, where solar metallicity
108: is log(O/H) + 12 = 8.7 (Allende Prieto, Lambert, \& Asplund 2001). We discuss each diagram separately below.
109:
110: \subsection{[NII]/H$\alpha$ vs. [OIII]/H$\beta$}
111: The [NII]/H$\alpha$ ratio is correlated strongly with metallicity and ionization parameter (Veilleux \&
112: Osterbrock 1987, Kewley \& Dopita 2002). The [OIII]/H$\beta$ ratio is sensitive to
113: the ionization parameter of a galaxy and the hardness of the ionizing radiation field
114: (Baldwin et al. 1981). From
115: Figure~\ref{fig:N2Ha}
116: we can see that the long GRB host galaxies are concentrated in the upper region of
117: the diagnostic diagram (0.688 $<$ log([OIII]/H$\beta$)$_{LGRBs}$ $<$ 0.932), with the short GRB hosts
118: in the lower region of the diagram (0.161 $<$ log([OIII]/H$\beta$)$_{SGRBs}$ $<$ 0.452).
119: The BCG sample spans a much broader range of
120: [OIII]/H$\beta$ ratios (-0.245 $<$ log([OIII]/H$\beta$)$_{BCGs}$ $<$ 0.990).
121:
122: Examining the placement of GRB 060505's burst site on this diagram, we see that
123: the [OIII]/H$\beta$ ratio of the GRB site (log([OIII]/H$\beta$) = 0.520)
124: places it well $below$ the region delineated by
125: the long GRB hosts, lying closer to the region occupied by the short GRB hosts. Its
126: [NII]/H$\alpha$ ratio cannot distinguish it from long or short GRB hosts. The other regions
127: of GRB 060505's host galaxy all have higher [NII]/H$\alpha$ ratios and lower
128: [OIII]/H$\beta$ ratios than the long GRB hosts, occupying the same region as the short GRB hosts
129: in Figure~\ref{fig:N2Ha}.
130:
131: \subsection{[NII]/[OII] vs. [OIII]/[OII]}
132: As described by Baldwin et al. (1981), the [NII] and [OII] fluxes are directly
133: proportional to a galaxy's high-ionization volume, while the [OIII] flux
134: is directly proportional to the low-ionization volume. This makes the [NII]/[OII] vs.
135: [OIII]/[OII] diagnostic (Figure~\ref{fig:N2O2}) a powerful means of measuring a galaxy's
136: ionization parameter, with [NII]/[OII] primarily sensitive to metallicity and [OIII]/[OII] primarily
137: sensitive to ionization parameter.
138:
139: In Figure~\ref{fig:N2O2} there is a large separation between the [OIII]/[OII] ratios (or ionization
140: parameters) of the host galaxies; long GRBs (0.380 $<$ log([OIII]/[OII])$_{LGRBs}$ $<$ 1.053) and short GRBs
141: (-0.409 $<$ log([OIII]/[OII])$_{SGRBs}$ $<$ -0.108). The BCG sample spans a much larger
142: range (-0.994 $<$ log([OIII]/[OII])$_{BCGs}$ $<$ 0.952).
143:
144: The [OIII]/[OII] ratio of the GRB 060505 burst site (log([OIII]/[OII]) = -0.108) lies well below (0.5 dex)
145: the region
146: of the long GRBs, instead resting at the upper limit of the short GRB region. The [NII]/[OII] ratio of the burst
147: site agrees well with the long GRB hosts and BCGs. The other regions of GRB 060505's host galaxy show
148: similarly intermediate [NII]/[OII] ratios and [OIII]/[OII] that are consistent with the short GRB host region.
149:
150: The metallicity-sensitive [NII]/[OII] ratio suggests that the GRB 060505 burst site has a
151: marginally lower metallicity than the other regions of its host galaxy, while the
152: [OIII]/[OII] ratio shows that the ionization parameter of the GRB 060505 burst site is consistent with the
153: short GRB region of the diagram. Figures~\ref{fig:N2Ha} and \ref{fig:N2O2}
154: indicate that the ISM properties of both the GRB 060505 burst site and the other
155: regions of the galaxy are consistent with the ISM properties of short-duration GRBs associated with compact-object mergers.
156:
157: \section{ISM Properties}
158: We calculate metallicities using the R$_{23}$ diagnostic originally described
159: in Kewley \& Dopita (2002) and later refined and quantified in Kobulnicky \& Kewley
160: (2004). The R$_{23}$ diagnostic is double-valued, so we use the [NII]/[OII] criterion of Kewley
161: \& Dopita (2002) to distinguish between the upper (log([NII]/[OII]) $>$ -1.2 and lower
162: (log([NII]/[OII]) $<$ -1.2) R$_{23}$ diagnostics. The [NII]/[OII] ratio is available
163: for five of our long GRB host galaxies as well as all five
164: regions of the GRB 060505 host galaxy and the entire BCG sample. In the absence of
165: the [NII] $\lambda$6584 flux (GRB 010921 and GRB 990712), we distinguish between the branches using the
166: [NeIII]/H$\alpha$ ratio (Nagao et al. 2006). When
167: neither [NII] nor [NeIII] is available (GRB 051121 and GRB 050416),
168: we calculate the metallicities for both R$_{23}$ branches.
169: For comparison, we also calculate the metallicities using the Pettini \& Pagel (2004)
170: [NII]/H$\alpha$-metallicity relation for our five long GRB hosts with [NII]$\lambda$6583 line
171: fluxes.
172:
173: We determine the ionization
174: parameter using the Kewley \& Dopita (2002) [OIII]/[OII]-$q$ relation.
175: For the five regions of GRB 060505's host galaxy, we also calculate the age of the
176: young ($<$ 10 Myr) stellar population using the calibration of H$\beta$ equivalent width with age by
177: Schaerer \& Vacca (1998). We calculate the H$\alpha$ luminosities and corresponding star formation rates (SFRs)
178: using the relation of Kennicutt (1998)
179: for the GRB 060505 host regions and our long GRB hosts (H$\alpha$ fluxes were unavailable for the short
180: GRB hosts). The metallicities, ionization parameters, H$\alpha$ luminosities, and SFRs are given in Table~\ref{tab:params}.
181:
182: We find that the GRB 060505 site has a similar metallicity to
183: the other regions of its host galaxy; the R$_{23}$ diagnostic assigns the
184: GRB 060505 burst site an intermediate metallicity of log(O/H) + 12 = 8.57 $\pm$ 0.01 as compared to the rest of the host
185: galaxy, with an average log(O/H) + 12 = 8.62 $\pm$ 0.2.
186: The Pettini \& Pagel (2004), or PP04, relation gives the GRB 060505 site a lower metallicity of log(O/H) + 12 = 8.28 $\pm$ 0.01
187: than the average metallicity of the other regions (log(O/H) + 12 = 8.45 $\pm$ 0.06), but the difference is within the 0.15 dex
188: errors of the PP04 method. The relative metallicity of the GRB 060505 site to the other regions of the galaxy is dependent on the diagnostic that is used; when the errors of these diagnostics are considered (0.1-0.15~dex), we find no statistically
189: significant difference in metallicity between these five regions.
190:
191: The ionization parameter of the GRB 060505
192: site, log($q$) = 7.49~cm/s, is unusually low as compared with average ionization parameter of the long GRB host galaxies
193: (log($q$) = 7.95 $\pm$ 0.28~cm/s. The ionization parameter of the GRB 060505 site is consistent with the short GRB hosts,
194: which have an average ionization parameter of log($q$) = 7.36 $\pm$ 0.15~cm/s.
195:
196: The ages of the young stellar
197: populations are representative of core-collapse progenitor ages
198: (see Bloom et al. 2002, Berger et al. 2007). While the GRB site's is the youngest at 5.3 $\pm$ 0.3,
199: this age is comparable to the 6.1 $\pm$ 0.6 age of the young stellar population of the
200: upper bulge, to within the errors.
201:
202: Finally, the GRB site does not have a
203: high SFR with respect to the other regions of the host galaxy. The SFR of the GRB site
204: is also found to be notably lower than the SFRs of the long GRB host galaxies.
205:
206: \section{Conclusions}
207: We compare the optical diagnostic emission-line ratios of GRB 060505 with the hosts of unambiguous long- and short- duration GRBs.\
208: We show that the emission-line ratios, metallicities, ionization parameters and star formation rates of the GRB 060505 environment are more consistent with the two short-duration GRB hosts that have measured optical emission-line ratios rhan with long-duration GRBs.
209:
210: We compare the metallicity and SFR of the GRB 060505 star-forming region with four other star-forming regions in the GRB 060505 host galaxy. We find no significant difference in either metallicity or SFR between the GRB 060505 region or the other star-forming regions, including the host galaxy bulge.
211:
212: We do not find compelling evidence to suggest that GRB 060505 originated in a long-duration core-collapse progenitor. Our emission line diagnostic analysis suggests that the environment of GRB 060505 is more consistent with the host environments of compact-object-merger GRB progenitors. A larger comparison sample of short and long GRBs with emission line spectra may shed further light on the nature of GRB 060505 and other intermediate-duration gamma-ray bursts.
213:
214: \begin{references}
215: \reference {} Allende Prieto, C., Lambert, D. L., \& Asplund, M. 2001, ApJ, 566, 63
216: \reference {} Baldwin, J. A., Phillips, M. M., \& Terlevich, R. 1981, $Pub. A. S. P.$, 93, 5
217: \reference {} Barthelmy, S. et al. 2006, GRB Coordinates Network, 5256, 1
218: \reference {} Belczynski, K., Perna, R., Bulik, T., Kalogera, V., Ivanova, N., \& Lamb, D. Q. 2006, ApJ, 648, 1110
219: \reference {} Berger, E., Fox, D. B., Kulkarni, S. R., Frail, D. A., \& Djorgovski, S. G. 2007, ApJ, 660, 504
220: \reference {} Bloom, J. S., Kulkarni, S. R., \& Djorgovski, S. G. 2002, ApJ, 121, 1111
221: \reference {} Bloom, J. S. \& Prochaska, J. X. 2006, in AIP Conf. Ser. 836, ed. S. S. Holt, N. Gehrels, \& J. A. Mousek (Melville: AIP), 473
222: \reference {} Brown, W. R., Kewley, L. J., \& Geller, M. J. 2007, {\it in prep}
223: \reference {} Cardelli, J. A., Clayton, G. C., \& Mathis, J. S. 1989, ApJ, 345, 245
224: \reference {} Christensen, L., Hjorth, J., Gorosabel, J., Vreeswijk, P., Fruchter, A., Sahu, K., \& Petro, L. 2004, A\&A, 413, 121
225: \reference {} Colless, M. et al. 2003, VizieR Online Data Catalog, 7226, 0
226: \reference {} Dopita, M. A., Kewley, L. J., Heisler, C. A., \& Sutherland, R. S. 2000, ApJ, 542, 224
227: \reference {} Fruchter, A. S. et al. 2006, Nature, 441, 463
228: \reference {} Fynbo, J. P. U., et al. 2006, Nature, 444, 1047
229: \reference {} Gehrels, N., et al. 2005, Nature, 437, 851
230: \reference {} Gorosabel, J. et al. 2005, A\&A, 444, 711
231: \reference {} Hammer, F., Flores, H., Schaerer, D., Dessauges-Zavadsky, M., Le Floc'h, E., \& Puech, M. 2006, A\&A, 454, 103
232: \reference {} Hjorth, J. et al. 2003, Nature, 423, 847
233: \reference {} Horv\'{a}th, I. 2002, A\&A, 392, 791
234: \reference {} Hullinger, D. et al. 2006, GRB Coordinates Network, 5142, 1
235: \reference {} Jakobsson, P. \& Fynbo, J. P. U. 2007, astro-ph/0704.1421
236: \reference {} Jansen, R. A., Franx, M., Fabricant, D. 2001, ApJ, 551, 825
237: \reference {} Kennicutt, R. C. 1998, ARA\&A, 36, 189
238: \reference {} Kewley, L. J., Dopita, M. A., Sutherland, R. S., Heisler, C. A., \& Trevana, J. 2001, ApJ, 556, 121
239: \reference {} Kewley, L. J. \& Dopita, M. A. 2002, ApJS, 142, 35
240: \reference {} Kewley, L. J., Jansen, R. A., \& Geller, M. J. 2005, PASP, 117, 227
241: \reference {} Kewley, L. J., Brown. W. R., Geller, M. J., Kenyon, S. J., \& Kurtz, M. J. 2007, AJ, 133, 882
242: \reference {} King, A., Olsson, E., \& Davies, M. 2007, MNRAS, 374, L34
243: \reference {} Kobulnicky, H. A. \& Kewley, L. J. 2004, ApJ, 617, 240
244: \reference {} Kong, X. \& Cheng, F. Z. 2002, A\&A, 389, 845
245: \reference {} Kouveliotou, C., Meegan, C. A., Fishman, G. J., Bhat, N. P., Briggs, M. S., Koshut, T. M., Paciesas, W. S., \& Pendleton, G. N. 1993, ApJL, 413, L101
246: \reference {} Kudritzki, R. P. \& Puls, J. 2000, ARA\&A, 38, 613
247: \reference {} K\"{u}pc\"{u} Yoldas, A., Greiner, J., \& Perna, R. 2006, A\&A, 457, 115
248: \reference {} Meynet, G. \& Maeder, A. 2005, A\&A, 429, 581
249: \reference {} Mokiem, M. R. et al. 2006, A\&A, 456, 1131
250: \reference {} Mukherjee, S., Feigelson, E. D., Jogesh Babu, G., Murtagh, F., Fraley, C., \& Raftery, A. 1998, ApJ, 508, 314
251: \reference {} Nagao, T., Maiolino, R., \& Marconi, A. 2006, A\&A, 459, 85
252: \reference {} Nakar, E. 2007, Physics Reports, 442, 166
253: \reference {} Ofek, E. O, Cenko, S. B., Gal-Yam, A., Peterson, B., Schmidt, B. P., Fox, D. B., \& Price, P. A. 2006, GRB Coordinates Network, 5123, 1
254: \reference {} Ofek, E. O., et al. 2007, astro-ph/0703192
255: \reference {} Osterbrock, D. E. 1989, Astrophysics of Gaseous Nebulae and Active Galactic Nuclei (Mill Valley; University Science Books)
256: \reference {} Palmer, D., Cummings, J., Stamatikos, M., Markwardt, C., \& Sakamoto, T. 2006, GRB Coordinates Netowkr, 5076, 1
257: \reference {} Pettini, M. \& Pagel, B. E. J. 2004, MNRAS, 348, 59
258: \reference {} Pian, E. et al. 2006, Nature, 442, 1011
259: \reference {} Price, P. et al. 2002, ApJ, 571, L121
260: \reference {} Prochaska, J. X. et al. 2004, ApJ, 611, 200
261: \reference {} Savaglio, S., Glazebrook, K., \& Le Borgne, D. 2006, in American Institute of Physics Conference Series, ed. S. S. Holt, N. Gehrels, \& J. A. Nousek, 540-545
262: \reference {} Schaefer, B. E., \& Xiao, L. 2006, astro-ph/0608441
263: \reference {} Schaerer, D., \& Vacca, W. D. 1998, ApJ, 497, 618
264: \reference {} Soderberg, A. et al. 2004, ApJ, 606, 994
265: \reference {} Soderberg, A. et al. 2006, ApJ, 650, 261
266: \reference {} Soderberg, A. et al. 2007, ApJ, 661, 982
267: \reference {} Sollerman, J., Ostlin, G., Fynbo, J. P. U., Hjorth, J., Fruchter, A., \& Pedersen, K. 2005, New Astronomy, 11, 103
268: \reference {} Stanek, K. Z. et al. 2006, Acta Astron. 56, 333
269: \reference {} Th\"{o}ne, C. C., Fynbo, J. P. U., Sollerman, J., Jensen, B. L., Hjorth, J., Jakobsson, P., \& Klose, S. 2006, GRB Coordinates Network, 5161, 1
270: \reference {} Th\"{o}ne, C. C. et al. 2007, astro-ph/0703407
271: \reference {} Th\"{o}ne, C. C. \& Fynbo, J. P. U. 2007, astro-ph/0706.0674
272: \reference {} van den Heuvel, E. P. J., \& Yoon, S.-C. 2007, astro-ph/07040659
273: \reference {} Veilleux, S. \& Osterbrock, D. E. 1987, ApJS, 63, 295
274: \reference {} Vink, J. S. \& de Koter, A. 2005, A\&A, 442, 587
275: \reference {} Watson, D., Fynbo, J. P. U., Th\"{o}ne, C. C., \& Sollerman, J. 2007, astro-ph/0703678
276: \reference {} Wiersema, K. et al. 2007, A\&A, 464, 529
277: \reference {} Woosley, S. E. 1993, ApH, 405, 273
278: \end{references}
279:
280: \clearpage
281: \begin{deluxetable}{l l l l l l l l l l l}
282: \tabletypesize{\scriptsize}
283: \tablewidth{0pc}
284: \tablenum{1}
285: \tablecolumns{11}
286: \tablecaption{\label{tab:params} ISM Properties of GRB Host Galaxies}
287: \tablehead{
288: \colhead{Galaxy}
289: &\colhead{$z$\tablenotemark{a}}
290: &\multicolumn{2}{c}{log(O/H) + 12\tablenotemark{b}}
291: &\colhead{log($q$)}
292: &\colhead{E($B-V$)}
293: &\colhead{W$_{H\beta}$}
294: &\colhead{Age (Myr)\tablenotemark{c}}
295: &\colhead{L(H$\alpha$) (ergs s$^{-1}$)}
296: &\colhead{SFR (M$_{\odot}$/yr)}
297: &\colhead{Refs.\tablenotemark{d}} \\ \cline{3-4}
298: \multicolumn{2}{c}{}
299: &\colhead{R$_{23}$}
300: &\colhead{PP04}
301: &\multicolumn{7}{c}{}
302: }
303: \startdata
304: GRB 060505 HOST & & & & & & & & & & \\
305: \hline
306: GRB region &0.0889 &8.57$\pm$0.01 &8.28$\pm$0.01 &7.49 &0.13 &39.20 &5.1$\pm$0.2 &$2.61 \times 10^{39}$ &0.021 &1\\
307: Upper bulge &0.0889 &8.84$\pm$0.01 &8.47$\pm$0.01 &7.66 &$<$0.03 &27.22 &5.4$\pm$0.6 &$2.38 \times 10^{39}$ &0.019 &1\\
308: Middle bulge &0.0889 &8.43$\pm$0.00 &8.50$\pm$0.00 &7.09 &0.59 &8.06 &7.8$\pm$0.4 &$1.69 \times 10^{40}$ &0.134 &1\\
309: Lower bulge &0.0889 &8.59$\pm$0.01 &8.42$\pm$0.00 &7.25 &0.30 &12.60 &6.7$\pm$0.3 &$5.09 \times 10^{39}$ &0.040 &1\\
310: Lower spiral &0.0889 &8.60$\pm$0.06 &8.41$\pm$0.04 &7.44 &$<$0.03 &8.92 &7.5$\pm$0.4 &$3.12 \times 10^{38}$ &0.002 &1\\
311: \hline
312: LONG GRBs & & & & & & & & & & \\
313: \hline
314: GRB 060218 &0.0335 &8.35$\pm$0.01 &8.19$\pm$0.02 &7.78 &0.17 &\nodata &\nodata &$1.22 \times 10^{40}$ &0.096 &2,3\\
315: GRB 031203 &0.1055 &8.26$\pm$0.01 &8.17$\pm$0.01 &8.32 &0.03 &90.72 &4.7 $\pm$ 0.1 &$1.51 \times 10^{42}$ &11.93 &4\\
316: GRB 030329 &0.1680 &8.72$\pm$0.03 &8.32$\pm$0.05 &8.08 &$<$0.03 &\nodata &\nodata &$2.54 \times 10^{40}$ &0.201 &5,6\\
317: GRB 020903 &0.2510 &8.15\tablenotemark{e} &8.00 &7.88 &0.25 &36.08 &5.5 $\pm$ 0.2 &$2.57 \times 10^{41}$ &2.030 &7\\
318: GRB 010921 &0.4510 &8.55$\pm$0.03 &\nodata &7.67 &0.52 &\nodata &\nodata &$8.21 \times 10^{41}$ &6.486 &8\\
319: GRB 990712 &0.4340 &8.43$\pm$0.01 &\nodata &7.74 &0.17 &\nodata &\nodata &$4.63 \times 10^{41}$ &3.658 &9,10\\
320: GRB 980425 &0.0085 &8.36\tablenotemark{e} &8.19 &7.86 &0.60 &\nodata &\nodata &$1.20 \times 10^{40}$ &0.095 &11\\
321: \hline
322: SHORT GRBS & & & & & & & & & & \\
323: \hline
324: GRB 051221 &0.5464 &8.25 or 8.80 &\nodata &7.17 or 7.36 &0.34\tablenotemark{f} &\nodata &\nodata &\nodata &\nodata &12\\
325: GRB 050416 &0.6528 &8.30 or 8.68 &\nodata &7.38 or 7.53 &0.34\tablenotemark{f} &\nodata &\nodata &\nodata &\nodata &13\\
326:
327: \enddata
328: \tablenotetext{a}{Redshifts come from the GHostS database.}
329: \tablenotetext{b}{Errors are propagated from statistical flux errors. These do not include the systematic
330: error introduced by the metallicity calibrations, which are 0.1 dex for the R$_{23}$ metallicities (Kewley
331: \& Dopita 2002) and 0.15 dex for the PP04 metallicities (Pettini \& Pagel 2004).}
332: \tablenotetext{c}{Ages comes from equations derived for the Schaerer \& Vacca (1998)
333: models relating H$\beta$ equivalent widths ($W_{H\beta}$) and the age of the young stellar population.}
334: \tablenotetext{d}{Reference: (1) Th\"{o}ne et al. (2007), (2) Pian et al. (2006), (3) Wiersema et al. (2007),
335: (4) Prochaska et al. (2004), (5) Gorosabel et al. (2005), (6) Hjorth et al. (2003), (7) Soderberg et al. (2004),
336: (8) Price et al. (2002), (9) K\"{u}pc\"{u} Yoldas et al. (2006), (10) Christensen et al. (2004), (11) Hammer et al. (2006),
337: (12) Soderberg et al. (2006), (13) Soderberg et al. (2007)}
338: \tablenotetext{e}{Statistical flux errors not available in literature.}
339: \tablenotetext{f}{Derived from the $M_B$-E($B-V$) relation of Jansen et al. (2001).}
340: \end{deluxetable}
341:
342: \clearpage
343:
344: \begin{figure}
345: \epsscale{1.0}
346: \plotone{f1.eps}
347: \caption{\label{fig:N2Ha} Comparison of the [NII]/H$\alpha$ vs. [OIII]/H$\beta$
348: diagnostic for the Kong \& Cheng (2002) sample of BCGs (small points), the
349: long GRB host galaxies (open circles), the GRB region of GRB 060505's host (star), and
350: several bulge and spiral arm regions of GRB 060505's host (X's). The range of
351: ionization parameters delineated by the location of the long and short GRB hosts are shaded
352: and labeled as shown. The
353: galaxy positions are compared to the photoionization grids
354: of Kewley et al. (2001).}
355: \end{figure}
356:
357: \begin{figure}
358: \epsscale{1.0}
359: \plotone{f2.eps}
360: \caption{\label{fig:N2O2} Comparison of the [NII]/[OII] vs. [OIII]/[OII]
361: diagnostic for the Kong \& Cheng (2002) sample of BCGs (points), the
362: long-duration GRB host galaxies (open circles), the GRB region of GRB 060505's host (star), and
363: several bulge and spiral arm regions of GRB 060505's host (X's). The range of
364: ionization parameters delineated by the location of the long and short GRB hosts are shaded
365: and labeled as shown. The
366: galaxy positions are compared to the photoionization grids
367: of Kewley et al. (2001).}
368: \end{figure}
369:
370:
371:
372: \end{document}
373:
374: %051221: MB = -19.9 pm 0.1 mag (Soderberg et al. 2006 reference that I have)
375: %050416: MB = -20.3 pm 0.1 mag (soderberg et al. 2007 reference that I have)
376:
377:
378: