1: \documentclass[12pt,preprint]{aastex}
2:
3: \def\hi {\protect\ion{H}{1}}
4:
5: \slugcomment{Accepted for publication by The Astronomical Journal}
6:
7: \shorttitle{NGC 1311 Clusters}
8: \shortauthors{Eskridge et al.}
9:
10: \begin{document}
11:
12: \title{Star Clusters in the Nearby Late-Type Galaxy NGC 1311\footnotemark[1]}
13:
14: \author{Paul B.~Eskridge\altaffilmark{2}}
15: \email{paul.eskridge@mnsu.edu}
16:
17: \author{Richard de Grijs\altaffilmark{3,4}, Peter Anders\altaffilmark{5},
18: Rogier A.~Windhorst\altaffilmark{6}, Violet A.~Mager\altaffilmark{7,8}, \&
19: Rolf A.~Jansen\altaffilmark{6}}
20:
21: \footnotetext[1]{Based on observations with the NASA/ESA Hubble Space
22: Telescope, obtained at the Space Telescope Science Institute, which is operated
23: by the Association of Universities for Research in Astronomy, Inc.~under NASA
24: contract No.~NAS5-26555.}
25: \altaffiltext{2}{Department of Physics and Astronomy, Minnesota State
26: University, Mankato, MN 56001}
27: \altaffiltext{3}{Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Sheffield,
28: Sheffield S3 7RH, United Kingdom}
29: \altaffiltext{4}{National Astronomical Observatories, Chinese Academy of
30: Sciences, Beijing, P.R.~China}
31: \altaffiltext{5}{Sterrenkundig Instituut, Universiteit Utrecht, NL-3508 TA
32: Utrecht, The Netherlands}
33: \altaffiltext{6}{School of Earth \& Space Exploration, Arizona State
34: University, Tempe, AZ 85287}
35: \altaffiltext{7}{Department of Physics and Astronomy, Arizona State University,
36: Tempe, AZ 85287}
37: \altaffiltext{8}{Observatories of the Carnegie Institution of Washington,
38: Pasadena, CA 91101}
39:
40: \begin{abstract}
41: Ultraviolet, optical and near infrared images of the nearby ($D \approx 5.5$
42: Mpc) SBm galaxy NGC 1311, obtained with the {\it Hubble Space Telescope},
43: reveal a small population of 13 candidate star clusters. We identify candidate
44: star clusters based on a combination of their luminosity, extent and spectral
45: energy distribution. The masses of the cluster candidates range from
46: $\sim$10$^3$ up to $\sim$10$^5$ $M_{\odot}$, and show a strong positive trend
47: of larger mass with increasing with cluster age. Such a trend follows from the
48: fading and dissolution of old, low-mass clusters, and the lack of any young
49: super star-clusters of the sort often formed in strong starbursts. The cluster
50: age distribution is consistent with a bursting mode of cluster formation, with
51: active episodes of age $\sim$10 Myr, $\sim$100 Myr and $\ga$1 Gyr. The ranges
52: of age and mass we probe are consistent with those of the star clusters found
53: in quiescent Local Group dwarf galaxies.
54: \end{abstract}
55:
56: \keywords{galaxies: individual (NGC 1311) --- galaxies: spiral --- galaxies:
57: star clusters --- infrared: galaxies --- ultraviolet: galaxies}
58:
59: \section{Introduction}
60:
61: Star clusters are powerful tools for probing the star-formation history and
62: chemical enrichment of galaxies (e.g., \citeauthor{h61}\citeyear{h61};
63: \citeauthor{whit99}\citeyear{whit99}; \citeauthor{dk2}\citeyear{dk2};
64: \citeauthor{grijs}\citeyear{grijs}). In nearby systems, star clusters provide
65: us with spatially resolved examples of simple stellar populations (SSPs).
66: Observations of individual cluster stars are, therefore, crucial for
67: understanding the effect of metallicity on stellar evolution (e.g.,
68: \citeauthor{carme}\citeyear{carme} and references therein). In more distant
69: systems, star clusters provide us with examples of unresolved SSPs. Analysis
70: of statistical samples of such clusters offers us a wealth of information on
71: the history of star formation in their parent galaxies (e.g.,
72: \citeauthor{grijs}\citeyear{grijs} and references therein). Understanding star
73: and cluster formation in a range of environments is essential for understanding
74: galaxy evolution because star cluster formation traces the strongest episodes
75: of galactic star formation (e.g., \citeauthor{dGNA}\citeyear{dGNA}).
76:
77: There has been a great deal of work on star cluster populations and formation
78: histories in nearby luminous spiral galaxies over the last decade (e.g.,
79: \citeauthor{whit99}\citeyear{whit99}; \citeauthor{grijs}\citeyear{grijs};
80: \citeauthor{dk2}\citeyear{dk2}; \citeauthor{lar04}\citeyear{lar04}). By
81: comparison, the star cluster formation history in nearby, low-luminosity
82: galaxies has received relatively little attention (but see, e.g.,
83: \citeauthor{bhe}\citeyear{bhe}; \citeauthor{a04}\citeyear{a04};
84: \citeauthor{seth04}\citeyear{seth04}; \citeauthor{dGA06}\citeyear{dGA06}).
85: Studies of nearby galaxies are important because we can resolve abundant
86: small-scale detail in them. Moreover, the low metallicities of low-luminosity
87: nearby galaxies offer us a close-up view of the star-formation process that may
88: better resemble that in the high-redshift, early Universe.
89:
90: Studies of detailed stellar formation histories are still restricted to fairly
91: nearby galaxies, and are most powerful when they combine high angular
92: resolution with broad wavelength coverage. The number of very nearby galaxies
93: with such data available is still quite small. NGC 1311 is a very nearby ($D
94: \approx 5.5$ Mpc), but little-studied late-type (SBm) galaxy.
95: \citeauthor{tully}(\citeyear{tully}) identify it as a member of the 14$+$14
96: Association, a loose group dominated by the luminous spiral NGC 1313. Table 1
97: summarizes the basic properties of the system. NGC 1311 was a target in
98: several {\it Hubble Space Telescope} (HST) snapshot surveys (GO programs 9124
99: and 9824; \citeauthor{wind02}\citeyear{wind02}, \citeauthor{vio}\citeyear{vio},
100: and \S 2 below). As a result, a set of broad-band images spanning a wide
101: wavelength interval (0.3---1.6$\mu$m) at sub-arcsecond resolution now exists
102: for this galaxy. As NGC 1311 is quite nearby, the bright star clusters and
103: luminous individual stars are detected as discrete sources. We can thus probe
104: the spatially resolved star-formation history of NGC 1311 by studying the
105: broad-band spectral energy distributions of the star clusters, the individual
106: stars, and the unresolved light. This paper is concerned with the star
107: clusters of NGC 1311. We shall address the individual stars and unresolved
108: light in future publications.
109:
110: In \S 2 we describe the HST observational data. We present the observed
111: properties of the candidate star clusters in \S 3, and our analysis of these
112: observations in \S 4. We summarize our conclusions, and discuss issues for
113: further research in \S 5.
114:
115: \section{Observational Data}
116:
117: The data for this study are a set of UV, optical and NIR images obtained with
118: the Wide-Field and Planetary Camera 2 (WFPC2) and the Near Infrared Camera and
119: MultiObject Spectrograph (NICMOS) on board HST. We have WFPC2 images taken
120: through the F300W, F606W and F814W filters, and a NICMOS image taken with the
121: NIC3 camera through the F160W filter. Details of the observations are given in
122: Table 2. The F300W and F814W WFPC2 images were obtained as part of the HST
123: program GO-9124 ``Mid-UV Snapshot Survey of Nearby Irregulars: Galaxy
124: Structure and Evolution Benchmark'' (R.~Windhorst PI). For these images, the
125: nuclei of the target galaxies were placed on the WF3 chip. Details of the
126: observing and reduction procedures for these data are given in
127: \citeauthor{wind02}(\citeyear{wind02}). The F160W image was obtained as part
128: of the HST program GO-9824 ``NIC3 SNAPs of Nearby Galaxies Imaged in the
129: mid-UV: The Remarkable Cool Stellar Population in Late-Type Galaxies''
130: (R.~Windhorst PI). Details of the observing and reduction procedures for these
131: data are given in \citeauthor{vio}(\citeyear{vio}). The archival WFPC2 F606W
132: image of NGC 1311 was obtained as part of the HST program GO-9162 ``Local
133: Galaxy Flows and the Local Mass Density'' (R.~Tully PI). The WFPC2 Wide-Field
134: Camera (WFC) spatial sampling is $\approx 0{''}\llap.10$ per pixel. Our search
135: for candidate star clusters turned up no examples on the WFPC2 Planetary Camera
136: CCD, so we do not use the PC data in this study. The NIC3 spatial sampling is
137: $0{''}\llap.20$ per pixel. We show images of the central 42$'' \times 26''$ of
138: NGC 1311 in the four observed bands in Figure 1.
139:
140: \section{Candidate Star Clusters}
141:
142: Candidate star clusters in external galaxies can be identified in several ways.
143: Physically large clusters in sufficiently nearby galaxies are extended sources.
144: Compact star clusters, or star clusters in more distant galaxies can be
145: identified by their luminosity in the most extreme cases. Such clusters can
146: also be distinguished from bright stars by their spectral energy distribution
147: (SED). \citeauthor{whit99}(\citeyear{whit99}),
148: \citeauthor{a04}(\citeyear{a04}, \citeyear{a07}) and
149: \citeauthor{bas05}(\citeyear{bas05}) give more detailed discussions of how to
150: distinguish star clusters from individual luminous stars. We make use of both
151: luminosity and SED criteria to define our list of candidate star clusters in
152: NGC 1311.
153:
154: We used HSTPhot\footnotemark[7] (\citeauthor{hstpht}\citeyear{hstpht}) to
155: extract stellar photometry from the WFPC2 images For the NICMOS image, we used
156: the version of DAOPHOT (\citeauthor{hat87}\citeyear{hat87}) embedded in the
157: XVISTA image analysis package (\citeauthor{stov88}\citeyear{stov88}). We then
158: selected candidate clusters by searching the output photometry files for
159: sources that are either extended compared to the point-spread function (PSF),
160: or have colors that deviate from those of individual stars. We discuss the
161: details of our analysis below.
162:
163: \footnotetext[7]{We used the May 2003 revision of HSTPhot v.~1.1.5b obtained
164: from {\tt http://purcell.as.arizona.edu/wfpc2\_calib/}.}
165:
166: \subsection{Stellar Photometry}
167:
168: HSTPhot is designed to perform stellar photometry on WFPC2 images, including
169: aperture corrections, charge-transfer efficiency corrections, and zero-point
170: calibrations. The zero-points to the VEGAMAG system are thus updated from
171: those of \citeauthor{holtz}(\citeyear{holtz}). For the NICMOS image, we first
172: applied the non-linearity correction determined by
173: \citeauthor{nonlin}(\citeyear{nonlin}). This refines the zero-point
174: calibration from the 2004 June standard \citep{nic70}. We then extracted
175: stellar photometry with XVISTA/DAOPHOT. For the NICMOS photometry, we had to
176: determine the aperture correction manually by measuring the asymptotic count
177: rates for two bright, isolated stars in the observed field. The correction
178: from the 2-pixel radius to infinite aperture is 0.10$\pm$0.02 magnitudes. All
179: of our photometry is calibrated to the VEGAMAG system.
180:
181: We compare our stellar photometry to isochrones derived from the models of
182: \citeauthor{thiso}(\citeyear{thiso}). In order to plot the isochrones with the
183: photometry, we need an estimate of the distance to NGC 1311. The best
184: available distance estimate for NGC 1311 is that of
185: \citeauthor{tully}(\citeyear{tully}), who quote $D = 5.45$ Mpc based on the
186: magnitude of the tip of the red giant branch. There appear to be no
187: metallicity measurements of NGC 1311 in the literature. For the distance
188: quoted above, we find that the isochrones with $Z=0.004$ provide the best
189: visual fit to the CMDs. The more metal-poor isochrones have upper main
190: sequences that are substantially bluer than observed in all available colors.
191: The isochrones more metal-rich than $Z=0.008$ do not predict stars luminous
192: enough in the ultraviolet compared to the data. We defer a more detailed
193: discussion of the isochrone fitting to our paper on the stellar photometry. We
194: adopt a metallicity of $Z=0.004$ below unless otherwise noted.
195:
196: \subsection{Identification of Cluster Candidates}
197:
198: There are a number of objects that are not well-fit by the isochrones in
199: color-color diagrams. Figure 2 shows two color-color diagrams that demonstrate
200: the problem. There are objects that are bluer than the isochrones for
201: short-wavelength filter combinations and redder than the isochrones for
202: long-wavelength filter combinations. Several of the oddly colored objects are
203: within 3$\sigma$ of the photometric limits in at least one bandpass. In those
204: cases, we adopt the conservative view that the odd colors are likely caused by
205: relatively large errors near the photometric limit. We note that a large
206: fraction of the points shown in Fig.~2 deviate from the isochrones. This is
207: due to a selection bias. There are a relatively small number of normal stars
208: that are bright enough at both 3000\AA\ and at 8000\AA\ to be detected in both
209: F300W and F814W.
210:
211: In Figure 3, we show an example of a stellar color--magnitude diagram (CMD)
212: with the objects with secure measurements of their anomalous colors marked with
213: large circles and those with uncertain measurements, too near the relevant
214: photometric limits, enclosed within large diamonds. In practice, we impose a
215: magnitude limit of $I_{814} < 22$ on objects selected by their photometric
216: peculiarity. This is a simple cut-off to impose, and we found that objects
217: fainter than this limit have color uncertainties large enough that their
218: deviation from the isochrones in color-color plots are not statistically
219: significant. A number of objects are substantially brighter than this faint
220: limit, and still have colors that deviate from the isochrones by more than
221: 2$\sigma$. On this basis, we consider them to be candidate star clusters.
222: Figure 4 shows a portion of the F606W image with the photometrically selected
223: candidate clusters circled. We note that the faintest cluster candidates so
224: identified have apparent magnitudes of $V_{606} \approx 22.6$, or absolute
225: magnitudes of $M_{606} \approx -6.1$.
226:
227: A stellar cluster with an age of $\sim$10 can have extremely red supergiants
228: dominating the red and NIR bands, as well as hot blue main sequence stars
229: dominating the blue and NUV bands. At ages of $\sim$100 Myr, the red spectrum
230: can be dominated by luminous asymptotic giant branch stars and the blue
231: spectrum by blue supergiants (\citeauthor{p83}\citeyear{p83};
232: \citeauthor{m05}\citeyear{m05}). This will cause the integrated colors of such
233: a cluster to appear blue in bands dominated by the luminous blue stars, and red
234: in bands dominated by the luminous red stars; exactly the phenomenon
235: demonstrated in Fig.~2, and one that has been well known to apply to Magellanic
236: Cloud clusters for many years (\citeauthor{p83}\citeyear{p83}). We note that
237: the candidate clusters do not stand out in the CMD (see Fig.~3). It is only in
238: the color-color diagrams that their peculiarity becomes evident. This is in
239: keeping with the results of \citeauthor{bas05}(\citeyear{bas05}), who showed
240: that broad wavelength sampling of the SED could discriminate between star
241: clusters and luminous single stars.
242:
243: The HSTPhot output includes a number of parameters that are useful in
244: distinguishing extended sources from point sources. These are discussed in
245: detail by \citeauthor{hstpht}(\citeyear{hstpht}). The $\chi$ parameter is a
246: goodness-of-fit parameter derived from the standard statistical $\chi^2$. A
247: good, well-fit stellar image in an uncrowded field should have $\chi \la 1.5$.
248: Sources with $\chi$ much greater than this are candidate star clusters, but can
249: also include stellar blends and background galaxies. The sharpness parameter
250: is zero for a perfectly-fit stellar image, negative for objects more extended
251: than the PSF, and positive for artifacts that are too sharp (cosmic rays, for
252: instance). A stellar PSF image in a relatively uncrowded field should have a
253: sharpness of $0 \pm 0.5$. A plot of the sharpness parameter, output from
254: HSTPhot, against $V_{606}$ is shown in Figure 5. The figure indicate that
255: there are plausible cluster candidates up to a magnitude fainter than the
256: candidates found above. Fainter than $V_{606} \approx 24$ mag, the
257: HSTPhot-identified ``extended sources'' are consistent with the outer envelope
258: of point sources in the $V_{606}$--sharpness plot. They are thus not
259: significantly extended in our data. However, there is a group of nine sources
260: with $22.4 \leq V_{606} \leq 23.6$ that are clearly offset from the stellar
261: locus in this magnitude range (see Fig.~5). None of these sources have colors
262: that distinguish them from the stellar isochrones at a statistically
263: significant level. We indicate these extended sources by diamonds in Figure 6.
264: Two of them are obvious background spirals, and two more are likely background
265: objects. These four are labelled ``bg'' in Fig.~6, and shown by large, dark
266: crosses in Fig.~5. The remaining five sources are additional faint candidate
267: clusters in NGC 1311, bringing the total to 13. Postage stamp images from the
268: F606W data, centered on the candidate clusters, and oriented as in Fig.~6, are
269: shown in Figure 7. Each postage stamp measures $6{''}\llap{.}5$ square.
270:
271: We make no formal assessment of our completeness level, as this is not critical
272: for our current purposes. However, we point out that we are unlikely to have
273: missed any luminous clusters ($V_{606} \la 22$), even in the most crowded part
274: of the field. At fainter magnitudes, our census is certainly incomplete. Thus
275: we make no attempt to quantify the cluster formation rate. We shall address
276: the completeness function (for point sources) in our paper on the individual
277: stars in NGC 1311.
278:
279: \section{Discussion}
280:
281: \subsection{Extendedness Tests}
282:
283: We see from Fig.~7 that several of the cluster candidates are quite compact.
284: For an object at a distance of 5.45 Mpc a WFC pixel subtends only about 2.6 pc.
285: Thus unresolved sources are either very compact, or they are
286: foreground/background point sources. The simplest way to test for extendedness
287: is to plot the radial profiles of the candidate clusters along with those of
288: stars. We show such plots in Figure 8. Cluster candidates 1, 5, 6, 10 and 12
289: are not significantly more extended than stars in their vicinity. The
290: remaining sources are clearly extended at WFPC2 resolution. This is consistent
291: with the HSTPhot results shown in Fig.~5.
292:
293: Globular star clusters in the Milky Way have an average half-light radius
294: of $R_{hl} \approx 3.3 \pm 1.7$ pc (determined from the database of
295: \citeauthor{hcat}\citeyear{hcat}\footnotemark[8], not including the distant
296: halo clusters). At the distance of NGC 1311, this corresponds to
297: $0{''}\llap{.}12$, or about 1.2 WFC pixels. Figure 9 shows a histogram of the
298: observed half-light radii of our candidate clusters, along with those of the
299: comparison stars used in Fig.~8. There is a group of objects that are
300: marginally resolved (comparable to globular clusters at the distance of NGC
301: 1311), and another group that is much more extended. The most extended objects
302: are also the fainter ones (candidates 8,11 and 13). It may be that these
303: objects are background galaxies, or statistical fluctuations in the disk of NGC
304: 1311. However, they have physical sizes ($R_{hl} \approx 10$pc) and absolute
305: magnitudes ($M_V \approx -5$ to $-$7) similar to those of Galactic open
306: clusters (see Table 6.2 of \citeauthor{binmer}\citeyear{binmer}).
307:
308: \footnotetext[8]{We used the February 2003 database revision available at
309: \break {\tt http://www.physics.mcmaster.ca/Fac\_Harris/Databases.html}.}
310:
311: \subsection{Background and Foreground Contamination}
312:
313: We note that all of the compact candidates were identified as such because
314: their colors are unusual for luminous hot stars. Possible sources of
315: contamination are foreground (Galactic) stars, background QSOs, and blending of
316: stars in NGC 1311. The five compact sources are all within the 48$'' \times
317: 80''$ region shown in Fig.~4, and all have $V_{606} \la 22.6$. The expected
318: foreground Galactic stellar contamination down to this magnitude level is less
319: than one star (\citeauthor{rbm}\citeyear{rbm}). It seems unlikely from this
320: that all five sources are foreground stars. We shall return to this point when
321: we consider photometric modelling of the source colors below.
322:
323: It is unlikely the sample is contaminated by background QSOs. Based on the
324: bright QSO number counts of \citeauthor{kk82} (\citeyear{kk82}), we expect an
325: average of 0.07 QSOs with $V_{606} \la 22.6$ in our 48$'' \times 80''$ field
326: of view.
327:
328: \subsection{Analysis of Cluster Photometry}
329:
330: \subsubsection{Aperture Correction}
331:
332: As noted in \S 3.1 above, we used HSTPhot to perform aperture photometry on our
333: WFPC2 data, and measured our own set of aperture corrections for the NICMOS
334: photometry. In both cases we expect excellent photometric results (statistical
335: errors of $\la 0.05$ mag for sources brighter than 22nd mag) for stellar
336: sources. But even marginally resolved sources, such as compact clusters, will
337: require different aperture corrections than individual stars. While HSTPhot is
338: able to deliver excellent photometry for marginally resolved clusters
339: (\citeauthor{dk1}\citeyear{dk1}; \citeyear{dk2}), some of our sources are
340: clearly well-resolved. We thus adopted the more general methodology for
341: aperture correction of HST/WFPC2 data from
342: \citeauthor{apcor}(\citeyear{apcor}).
343:
344: We began by fitting circular 2-D Gaussians to each of the 13 candidate clusters
345: in the F606W image. We then chose source and sky apertures and cluster light
346: profiles for each object. Typically the source aperture was 1 to 2 pixels
347: larger than the measured full width at half-maximum (FWHM) of the Gaussian fit,
348: and the sky apertures were 2 (inner) and 4 (outer) pixels larger than the
349: source aperture. Note that this will subtract counts due to both the sky and
350: to diffuse light in NGC 1311 that is smooth on angular scales of $\la$4 WFC
351: pixels ($0{''}\llap{.}4$). This will also subtract the extended cluster light,
352: however that flux should be accounted for the by aperture correction, as
353: discussed below.
354:
355: We used the formalism of \citeauthor{apcor}(\citeyear{apcor}) to determine
356: aperture corrections for each source. As \citeauthor{apcor}(\citeyear{apcor})
357: model aperture corrections for the F555W, but not the F606W filter, we must
358: assume that there is no significant aperture-correction color term between the
359: F555W and F606W filters. As the characteristic wavelengths of the two filters
360: differ by only $\approx$650\AA, this is not unreasonable. For the compact, red
361: objects (candidates 1, 7 and 10) we used the King30 profile (a
362: \citeauthor{king62}\citeyear{king62} profile with $r_t / r_c = 30$,
363: corresponding to a concentration index of 1.48). This profile is appropriate
364: for star clusters that are old enough to be tidally truncated
365: (\citeauthor{king62}\citeyear{king62}). For the bluer objects (all the others)
366: we used the EFF15 profile (an \citeauthor{eff87}\citeyear{eff87} profile with a
367: power-law index of 1.5), as star clusters in the nearby galaxies are better-fit
368: with power-law profiles than with King models (e.g.,
369: \citeauthor{mg03}\citeyear{mg03}; \citeauthor{dGA06}\citeyear{dGA06} and
370: references therein).
371:
372: The measured FWHMs from the F300W and F814W frames are statistically consistent
373: with those found from the F606W frame, but are less well determined due to the
374: lower signal-to-noise ratio in these shallower images. Given this, we decided
375: to apply the F606W aperture corrections to the much shallower F814W and F300W
376: data. This is reasonable unless there is significant mass segregation in the
377: target clusters. For young clusters, mass segregation can cause both the
378: F300W and F814W profiles to be more concentrated than the F606W profile, due
379: to the massive main-sequence stars and red supergiants, respectively. For old
380: clusters, mass segregation can also cause both the F300W and F814W profiles to
381: be more concentrated than the F606W profile, due to the hot horizontal branch
382: stars and upper RGB and AGB stars respectively. In both cases, the F606W
383: aperture correction will be an overcorrection for the other bands. It is
384: impossible to predict how much of a problem this will be for a given cluster
385: because of statistical sampling of the stellar mass function (e.g.,
386: \citeauthor{j01}\citeyear{j01}). Except for very populous clusters, the number
387: of stars in the various evolutionary states in question is very small. We
388: discuss this possibility further in \S 4.3.2, below.
389:
390: Our NICMOS data were obtained with the NIC3 camera. There are no
391: \citeauthor{apcor}(\citeyear{apcor}) aperture corrections for the NIC3 camera.
392: However, the large pixel size and PSF of the NIC3 camera makes aperture
393: correction a less severe problem than for our WFPC2 data. Our 2-pixel radius
394: aperture has an angular radius of $\approx 0{''}\llap{.}4$, or about 4 WFC
395: pixels. This is larger than the F606W FWHM for most of the cluster candidates.
396: The exceptions are candidates 2, 8, 11 and 13. Candidate 8 is undetected in
397: the NICMOS image. For the other candidates, we measured the flux at radii
398: larger than 2 NIC3 pixels. The inclusion of this flux would amount to an
399: additional correction that is small compared to the standard aperture
400: correction (0.1 mag). We thus make no further adjustments to the aperture
401: corrections for our NIC3 data.
402:
403:
404: In Table 3 we present our photometric measurements for each of the candidate
405: star clusters. Column 1 is a serial ID. Column 2 shows the unprocessed (X,Y)
406: pixel locations on individual chips of the F606W frame in the upper row, and
407: the J2000.0 Right Ascension and declination in the lower row. Column 3 shows
408: which chip the cluster is located on in the F606W frame. The upper rows of
409: columns 4--7 give the apparent magnitudes in F300W (\emph{UV}$_{300}$), F606W
410: ($V_{606}$), F814W ($I_{814}$) and F160W ($H_{160}$) for the cluster
411: candidates, and columns 8--13 give the resulting colors. The errors on these
412: quantities are given in the lower rows.
413:
414: \subsubsection{Modelling of Cluster Photometry}
415:
416: We have analysed the photometry for the candidate clusters that are detected in
417: all four passbands with AnalySED (\citeauthor{clus03}\citeyear{clus03};
418: \citeauthor{clus04}\citeyear{clus04}). For our adopted distance and
419: metallicities of $Z=0.004$ and 0.008, this results in a set of ages,
420: extinctions, and masses for these candidate star clusters. As noted in \S 3.1,
421: above, the $Z=0.004$ are generally a better match to the single-star
422: photometry, and metallicities larger than 0.008 are clearly inconsistent with
423: the observed F300W magnitudes. We built models with both metallicities to
424: bracket the plausible values for the star clusters. The results are given in
425: Table 4. We generated fits using both the \citeauthor{ccm}(\citeyear{ccm}) and
426: the \citeauthor{calz}(\citeyear{calz}) extinction laws. The results for the
427: two extinction laws are generally consistent with one another at the 1$\sigma$
428: level. The values and errors quoted in Table 4 reflect the range of results
429: for the two extinction laws.
430:
431: The ages from AnalySED fall into three broad ranges. The youngest clusters
432: have ages of $\la$10 Myr (\#s 3 \& 5). There is an intermediate age group with
433: ages of $\sim$100 Myr (\#s 1, 4, 6 \& 12). Finally, there are two clusters
434: with ages $\ga$1 Gyr (\#s 7 \& 10). We note that the photometry for cluster 7
435: is consistent with a much younger age if $Z=0.008$. However, such a young age
436: also requires an extinction that is both much higher than the foreground
437: extinction (\citeauthor{sfd98}\citeyear{sfd98}), and the typical internal
438: extinction for low-luminosity late-type galaxies. Furthermore, the images
439: of NGC 1311 (see Fig.~1) show no evidence for regions of strong localized
440: extinction. For these reasons, we believe the age result for the $Z=0.004$ is
441: more plausible for cluster 7.
442:
443: In Figure 10, we plot cluster age against cluster mass from the AnalySED
444: results for $Z=0.004$ (the plot for $Z=0.008$ is similar). We include the
445: candidates detected in only two passbands (see Table 3). There is a clear
446: positive trend. Both the Spearman rank and the Kendall's $\tau$ tests return
447: probabilities of correlation of $>$99\%, despite the small sample. The line
448: is a simple linear bisector, showing that the data are well-described by a
449: power law. We hasten to point out that several effects can contribute to the
450: appearence of such a plot, and that the resulting fit parameters are,
451: therefore, unlikely to have a single physical interpretation: The scarcity of
452: old, low-mass clusters may reflect the detection limit of the sample, but can
453: also follow from the dynamics of cluster dissolution (e.g.,
454: \citeauthor{gbl}\citeyear{gbl}). NGC 1311 shows no signs of the massive, young
455: super star-clusters that form in strong starbursts (e.g.,
456: \citeauthor{whit99}\citeyear{whit99}). Its recent cluster formation history is
457: similar to that of other undisturbed, low-luminosity, late-type galaxies (e.g.,
458: \citeauthor{bhe}\citeyear{bhe}; \citeauthor{m07}\citeyear{m07}).
459:
460: We can also study the properties of the candidate clusters, including those
461: that are only detected in a subset of our pass-bands, with less data-intensive
462: techniques. In Figure 11 we present two color-color diagrams of the cluster
463: candidates, along with predictions of the \citeauthor{thiso}(\citeyear{thiso})
464: SSP models. The models shown in Fig.~11 all have Solar heavy-element abundance
465: ratios, and include convective overshooting. Comparisons with
466: $\alpha$-enhanced models do not change the qualitative results shown in
467: Fig.~11. Most of the candidate clusters are consistent with low-metallicity
468: models with ages in the range 3--100 Myr. Two cluster candidates (\#s 4 \& 12)
469: have colors that lie off all the SSP models. Consideration of all the
470: color-color plots indicate that both these objects are either too red compared
471: to SSP models (that is, they are too bright in both F814W and F160W), or too
472: bright in F300W. This argues against a calibration systematic, as the problem
473: appears in both the WFPC2 and NICMOS data. Both of these objects were
474: initially flagged as candidate clusters based on their colors. One of the two
475: objects (\#12) is unresolved, and the other (\#4) is marginally resolved. This
476: suggests that, perhaps, these are cases of close blends of bright stars with
477: significantly different colors. It is also possible that these objects are
478: examples of clusters that have experienced significant mass-segregation. As
479: noted in \S 4.3.1, above, we expect that the F606W aperture corrections would
480: {\it overcorrect} the F300W magnitudes for mass-segregated clusters. This
481: could lead to the blueward displacement that we find for these clusters in
482: Fig.~11.
483:
484: Two cluster candidates (\#s 7 \& 10) have implied ages of $\ga$1 Gyr from both
485: the AnalySED fits and the \citeauthor{thiso}(\citeyear{thiso}) SSP models.
486: The observed colors are consistent with \citeauthor{thiso}(\citeyear{thiso})
487: model ages as large as those of ancient Galactic globular clusters, although
488: the AnalySED fits and the observed colors argue for ages younger than a few
489: Gyr. Both objects are marginally resolved, and would have absolute magnitudes
490: of $M_{606} \approx -7.9$ and $-7.6$ at the distance of NGC 1311. Accounting
491: for the color term between F606W and the standard Johnson $V$-band, this is
492: well within the range of globular cluster absolute magnitudes
493: (\citeauthor{anz}\citeyear{anz}). These are thus candidate intermediate-age
494: globular star clusters. They could possibly be foreground stars, but the
495: absolute magnitudes implied by their colors ($M_{606} \approx +6$ to $+$7)
496: would place them at a distance of 5 to 6 kpc. This is highly unlikely for a
497: line of sight with $b \approx -53^{\circ}$.
498:
499: \subsection{Cluster Formation History}
500:
501: Studies of the star formation history of low-luminosity galaxies generally
502: conclude that star formation occurs in brief bursts separated by relatively
503: long quiescent periods (e.g., \citeauthor{h97}\citeyear{h97};
504: \citeauthor{m98}\citeyear{m98}; \citeauthor{he04}\citeyear{he04};
505: \citeauthor{ckj}\citeyear{ckj}), during which star formation can still continue
506: at a low level (\citeauthor{lvz}\citeyear{lvz}). In the most extreme cases,
507: the light from young massive star clusters dominates the bolometric output of
508: ultracompact blue dwarf galaxies (e.g., \citeauthor{bcd05}\citeyear{bcd05};
509: \citeauthor{bcd06}\citeyear{bcd06}), despite the presence of much more massive
510: old stellar populations. Typical late-type dwarf galaxies are also known to be
511: rich in populous star clusters (\citeauthor{bhe}\citeyear{bhe};
512: \citeauthor{a04}\citeyear{a04}). The Magellanic Clouds are our prototypes for
513: star-forming low-luminosity galaxies. As such, much of our understanding of
514: the importance of star clusters in such galaxies follows from studies of
515: Magellanic Cloud clusters (e.g., \citeauthor{dGA06}\citeyear{dGA06} and
516: references therein). Such studies can help us understand the factors governing
517: the onset of bursts of star formation in systems that are generally not
518: dominated by coherent large-scale phenomena like density waves. Both the
519: results of the detailed four-band AnalySED method
520: (\citeauthor{clus03}\citeyear{clus03}; \citeauthor{clus04}\citeyear{clus04}),
521: and those of the simpler SSP color-color plots argue for three epochs of
522: cluster formation in NGC 1311, with ages of $\sim$10 Myr, $\sim$100 Myr, and
523: $\ga$1 Gyr. Our data for the individual stars (see Fig.~3) show the two
524: younger episodes clearly, but cannot probe the oldest event, as $\ga$1 Gyr-old
525: stars are too faint and red to be detected in our data.
526:
527: \section{Summary and Conclusions}
528:
529: NGC 1311 is a nearby, but little studied, low-luminosity late-type spiral. It
530: has optical and \hi\ properties (see Table 1) typical for such galaxies
531: (\citeauthor{m98}\citeyear{m98}; \citeauthor{lvz}\citeyear{lvz}). It is a
532: member of a loose association of galaxies (\citeauthor{tully}\citeyear{tully}),
533: but displays no obvious sign of any recent interaction. We have used HST WFPC2
534: and NICMOS images of NGC 1311, that span the near-UV through the near-IR, to
535: identify a small population of 13 candidate star clusters. Their masses
536: increase systematically with cluster age, as would follow from the fading and
537: dissolution of old, low-mass clusters, and the lack of any young super star
538: clusters associated with strong starbursts. Half the cluster candidates are
539: significantly fainter than the turnover of the globular cluster luminosity
540: function. We are thus probing the range of luminosities typical of the faint
541: star clusters found in Local Group dwarf galaxies, and the open cluster
542: population of the Galactic disk. Analysis of the photometry of the candidate
543: star clusters suggests that NGC 1311 has had three cluster-forming episodes in
544: its history, occuring $\sim$10 Myr, $\sim$100 Myr, and $\ga$1 Gyr ago. This is
545: consistent with observational work on other nearby low-luminosity galaxies
546: indicating a bursting mode of star-formation. The recent star formation, as
547: traced by the NUV continuum (see Fig.~1a), is concentrated at the east and west
548: ends of the central bulge-like concentration. This is reminiscent of
549: stochastic star formation models (\citeauthor{ssg}\citeyear{ssg}) as well as
550: the observed properties of other low-luminosity star-forming galaxies (e.g.,
551: Sextans A; \citeauthor{rdp}\citeyear{rdp}). NGC 1311 is an excellent example
552: of a nearby, low-luminosity, star-forming, gas-rich galaxy that is evolving in
553: relative isolation. Understanding the star- and cluster-formation history and
554: chemical evolution of such galaxies is an essential part of unraveling the
555: problem of galaxy evolution.
556:
557: Our next step is a study of the resolved stellar populations of NGC 1311 with
558: our combined WFPC2/NICMOS HST data. The large wavelength range of our data
559: allows us to sample both the very recent star formation (dominating the UV
560: light) and the ancient stellar populations (from the red/near-IR light) that
561: appear ubiquitous even in very late-type galaxies (e.g.,
562: \citeauthor{baa}\citeyear{baa}; \citeauthor{vio}\citeyear{vio}). This should
563: give us a clearer picture of the star formation history in this system, and a
564: fuller understanding of the process of star formation in low-luminosity
565: late-type galaxies in general.
566:
567: \acknowledgments
568:
569: PBE would like to thank the Department of Physics \& Astronomy at Minnesota
570: State University for support during this project. We thank Andy Dolphin for
571: answering the first author's HSTPhot questions with patience. We are grateful
572: to our referee for a report that led up to significantly improve this paper.
573: This research has made use of NASA's Astrophysics Data System Bibliographic
574: Services, and the NASA/IPAC Extragalactic Database (NED) which is operated by
575: the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology, under
576: contract with the National Aeronautics and Space Administration. PA
577: acknowledges support by the DFG grant Fr 911/11-3. This work was supported in
578: part by NASA Hubble Space Telescope grants HST-GO-09124* and HST-GO-09824*
579: awarded by the Space Telescope Science Institute, which is operated by AURA for
580: NASA under contract NAS 5-26555.
581:
582: Facilities: \facility{HST}
583:
584: \begin{thebibliography}{}
585:
586: \bibitem[Anders et al.~(2007)]{a07}
587: Anders, P., Bissantz, N., Boysen, L., de Grijs, R., \& Fritze-v.~Alvensleben,
588: U., 2007, \mnras, 377, 91
589:
590: \bibitem[Anders et al.~(2004b)]{clus04}
591: Anders P., Bissantz N., Fritze--von Alvensleben U., \& de Grijs R., 2004b,
592: \mnras, 347, 196
593:
594: \bibitem[Anders et al.~(2004a)]{a04}
595: Anders, P., de Grijs, R., Fritze-v.~Alvensleben, U., \& Bissantz, N., 2004a,
596: \mnras, 347, 17
597:
598: \bibitem[Anders et al.~(2006)]{apcor}
599: Anders, P., Gieles, M., \& de Grijs, R., 2006, \aap, 451, 375
600:
601: \bibitem[Ashman \& Zepf (1998)]{anz}
602: Ashman, K.~M. \& Zepf, S.~E. 1998, Globular Cluster Systems (Cambridge,
603: Cambridge Univ.~Press).
604:
605: \bibitem[Baade (1958)]{baa}
606: Baade, W. 1958, in Ricerche Astronomiche, v.~5, Proceedings of a Conference
607: at Vatican Observatory, ed.~D.J.K. O'Connell (Amsterdam: Interscience), 303
608:
609: \bibitem[Bastian et al.~(2005)]{bas05}
610: Bastian, N., Gieles, M., Lamers, H.~J.~G.~L.~M., Scheepmaker, R.~A., \&
611: de Grijs, R. 2005, \aap, 431, 905
612:
613: \bibitem[Billett et al.~(2002)]{bhe}
614: Billett, O.~H., Hunter, D.~A., \& Elmegreen, B.~G., 2002, \aj, 123, 1454
615:
616: \bibitem[Binney \& Merrifield (1998)]{binmer}
617: Binney, J., \& Merrifield, M., 1998, Galactic Astronomy (Princeton
618: Univ.~Press: Princeton)
619:
620: \bibitem[Calzetti (1997)]{calz}
621: Calzetti, D., 1997, \aj, 113, 162
622:
623: \bibitem[Cardelli et al.~(1989)]{ccm}
624: Cardelli, J.~A., Clayton, G.~C., \& Mathis, J.~S. 1989, \apj, 345, 245
625:
626: \bibitem[Corbin et al.~(2007)]{ckj}
627: Corbin, M.~R., Kim, H., Jansen, R.~A., Windhorst, R.~A. \& Cid~Fernandes, R.
628: 2007, \apj, In press
629:
630: \bibitem[Corbin et al.~(2006)]{bcd06}
631: Corbin, M.~R., Vacca, W.~D., Cid Fernandes, R., Hibbard, J.~E., Somerville,
632: R.~S., \& Windhorst, R.~A. 2006, \apj, 651, 861
633:
634: \bibitem[Corbin et al.~(2005)]{bcd05}
635: Corbin, M.~R., Vacca, W.~D., Hibbard, J.~E., Somerville, R.~S., \& Windhorst,
636: R.~A. 2005, \apj, 629, L89
637:
638: \bibitem[de Grijs et al.~(2005)]{grijs}
639: de Grijs, R., Anders, P., Lamers, H.~J.~G.~L.~M., Bastian, N.,
640: Fritze-v.~Alvensleben, U., Parmentier, G., Sharina, M.~E., \& Yi, S. 2005,
641: \mnras, 359, 874
642:
643: \bibitem[de Grijs \& Anders (2006)]{dGA06}
644: de Grijs R. \& Anders, P. 2006, \mnras, 366, 295.
645:
646: \bibitem[de Grijs et al.~(2003a)]{clus03}
647: de Grijs R., Fritze--von Alvensleben U., Anders P., Gallagher J.~S. {\sc
648: iii}, Bastian N., Taylor V.~A., \& Windhorst R.~A., 2003, \mnras, 342, 259
649:
650: \bibitem[de Grijs et al.~(2003b)]{dGNA}
651: de Grijs, R., Lee, J.~T., Mora Herrera, M.~C., Fritze-v.~Alvensleben,
652: U., \& Anders, P., 2003, \na, 8, 155
653:
654: \bibitem[de Jong (2006)]{nonlin}
655: de Jong, R.~S. 2006, ``Correcting NICMOS Count-Rate Dependent
656: Non-linearity,'' NICMOS Instrument Science Report 2006-003 (Baltimore:
657: STScI).
658:
659: \bibitem[de Vaucouleurs et al.~(1991)]{rc3}
660: de Vaucouleurs, G., de Vaucouleurs A., Corwin, H.~G., Jr., Buta, R.~J.,
661: Paturel, G. \& Fouqu\'e, P. 1991, Third Reference Catalogue of Bright
662: Galaxies (Springer-Verlag: New York) (RC3)
663:
664: \bibitem[Dohm-Palmer et al.~(2002)]{rdp}
665: Dohm-Palmer, R.~C., Skillman, E.~D., Mateo, M., Saha, A., Dolphin, A.,
666: Tolstoy, E., Gallagher, J.~S., \& Cole, A.~A. 2002, \aj, 123, 813
667:
668: \bibitem[Dolphin (2000)]{hstpht}
669: Dolphin, A.~E. 2000, \pasp, 112, 1383
670:
671: \bibitem[Dolphin \& Kennicutt (2002a)]{dk1}
672: Dolphin, A.~E. \& Kennicutt, R.~C., Jr. 2002, \aj, 123, 207
673:
674: \bibitem[Dolphin \& Kennicutt (2002b)]{dk2}
675: Dolphin, A.~E. \& Kennicutt, R.~C., Jr. 2002, \aj, 124, 158
676:
677: \bibitem[Elson et al.~(1987)]{eff87}
678: Elson, R.~A.~W., Fall, S.~M., \& Freeman, K.~C. 1987, \apj, 323, 54
679:
680: \bibitem[Gallart et al.~(2003)]{carme}
681: Gallart, C., Zoccali, M., Bertelli, G., Chiosi, C., Demarque, P., Girardi,
682: L., Nasi, E., Woo, J.-H., Yi, S. 2003, \aj, 125, 742
683:
684: \bibitem[Gieles et al.~(2005)]{gbl}
685: Gieles, M., Bastian, N., Lamers, H.~J.~G.~L.~M., \& Mout, J.~N. 2005, \aap,
686: 441, 949
687:
688: \bibitem[Girardi et al.~(2002)]{thiso}
689: Girardi, L., Bertelli, G., Bressan, A., Chiosi, C., Groenewegen, M.~A.~T.,
690: Marigo, P., Salasnich, B., \& Weiss, A. 2002, \aap, 391, 195
691:
692: \bibitem[Harris (1996)]{hcat}
693: Harris, W.~E. 1996, \aj, 112, 1487
694:
695: \bibitem[Hodge (1961)]{h61}
696: Hodge, P.~W. 1961, \apj, 133, 413
697:
698: \bibitem[Holtzman et al.~(1995)]{holtz}
699: Holtzman, J.~A., Burrows, C.~J., Casertano, S., Hester, J.~J., Trauger, J.T.,
700: Watson, A.~M., \& Worthey, G. 1995, \pasp, 107, 1065
701:
702: \bibitem[Hunter (1997)]{h97}
703: Hunter, D.~A. 1997, \pasp, 109, 937
704:
705: \bibitem[Hunter \& Elmegreen (2004)]{he04}
706: Hunter, D.~A., \& Elmegreen, B.~G. 2004, \aj, 128, 2170
707:
708: \bibitem[Johnson et al.~(2001)]{j01}
709: Johnson, R.~A., Beaulieu, S.~F., Gilmore, G.~F., Hurley, J., Santiago, B.~X.,
710: Tanvir ,N.~R., Elson ,R.~A.~W. 2001, \mnras, 324, 367
711:
712: \bibitem[King (1962)]{king62}
713: King, I. 1962, \aj, 67, 471
714:
715: \bibitem[Koo \& Kron (1982)]{kk82}
716: Koo, D.~C. \& Kron, R.~G., 1982, \aap, 105, 107
717:
718: \bibitem[Koribalski et al.~(2004)]{hipass}
719: Koribalski, B.~S., Staveley-Smith, L., Kilborn, V.~A., Ryder, S.~D.,
720: Kraan-Korteweg, R.~C., Ryan-Weber, E.~V., Ekers, R.~D., Jerjen, H., Henning,
721: P.~A., Putman, M.~E., Zwaan, M.~A., de Blok, W.~J.~G., Calabretta, M.~R.,
722: Disney, M.~J., Minchin, R.~F., Bhathal, R., Boyce, P.~J., Drinkwater, M.~J.,
723: Freeman, K.~C., Gibson, B.~K., Green, A.~J., Haynes, R.~F., Juraszek, S.,
724: Kesteven, M.~J., Knezek, P.~M., Mader, S., Marquarding, M., Meyer, M., Mould,
725: J.~R., Oosterloo, T., O'Brien, J., Price, R.~M., Sadler, E.~M., Schr\"oder,
726: A., Stewart, I.~M., Stootman, F., Waugh, M., Warren, B.~E., Webster, R.~L.,
727: \& Wright, A.~E. 2004, \aj, 128, 16
728:
729: \bibitem[Larsen (2004)]{lar04}
730: Larsen, S.~S. 2004, \aap, 416, 537
731:
732: \bibitem[Mackey \& Gilmore (2003)]{mg03}
733: Mackey, A.~D. \& Gilmore, G.~F., 2003, \mnras, 338, 85
734:
735: \bibitem[Maraston (2005)]{m05}
736: Maraston, C. 2005, \mnras, 362, 799
737:
738: \bibitem[Mateo (1998)]{m98}
739: Mateo, M.~L. 1998, \araa, 36, 435
740:
741: \bibitem[Mora et al.~(2007)]{m07}
742: Mora, M.~D., Larsen, S.~S., \& Kissler-Patig, M. 2007, \aap, 464, 495
743:
744: \bibitem[Noll et al.~2004]{nic70}
745: Noll, K. et al.~2004 "NICMOS Instrument Handbook", Version 7.0, (Baltimore:
746: STScI).
747:
748: \bibitem[Persson et al.~(1983)]{p83}
749: Persson, S.~E., Aaronson, M., Cohen, J.~G., Frogel, J.~A. \& Matthews, K.
750: 1983, \apj, 266, 105
751:
752: \bibitem[Ratnatunga \& Bahcall (1985)]{rbm}
753: Ratnatunga, K.~U. \& Bahcall, J.~N., 1985, \apjs, 59, 63
754:
755: \bibitem[Schlegel et al.~(1998)]{sfd98}
756: Schlegel, D.~J., Finkbeiner, D.~P. \& Davis, M. 1998, \apj, 500, 525
757:
758: \bibitem[Seiden et al.~(1979)]{ssg}
759: Seiden, P.~E., Schulman, L.~S., \& Gerola, H. 1979, \apj, 232, 702
760:
761: \bibitem[Seth et al.~(2004)]{seth04}
762: Seth, A., Olsen, K., Miller, B., Lotz, J. \& Telford, R. 2004, \aj, 127, 798.
763:
764: \bibitem[Stetson (1987)]{hat87}
765: Stetson, P.~B. 1987, \pasp, 99, 191
766:
767: \bibitem[Stover (1988)]{stov88}
768: Stover, R.~J., 1988, in ``Instrumentation for Ground-based Optical Astronomy:
769: Present and Future,'' ed.~L.B.~Robinson (Springer: New York), p.~443
770:
771: \bibitem[Taylor et al.~(2005)]{vio}
772: Taylor, V.~A., Jansen, R.~A., Windhorst, R.~A., Odewahn, S.~C. \& Hibbard,
773: J.~E. 2005, \apj, 630, 784
774:
775: \bibitem[Tully et al.~(2006)]{tully}
776: Tully, R.~B., Rizzi, L., Dolphin, A.~E., Karachentsev, I.~D., Karachentseva,
777: V.~E., Makarov, D.~I., Makarova, L., Sakai, S., \& Shaya, E.~J., 2006 \aj,
778: 132, 729
779:
780: \bibitem[van Zee (2001)]{lvz}
781: van Zee, L. 2001, \aj, 121, 2003
782:
783: \bibitem[Whitmore et al.~(1999)]{whit99}
784: Whitmore, B.~C., Qing, Z., Leitherer, C., Fall, S.~M., Schweizer, F. \&
785: Miller, B.~W. 1999, \aj, 118, 1551.
786:
787: \bibitem[Windhorst et al.~(2002)]{wind02}
788: Windhorst, R.~A., Taylor, V.~A., Jansen, R.~A., Odewahn S.~C., Chiarenza,
789: C.~A.~T., de Grijs, R., de Jong, R.~S., Frogel, J.~A., Eskridge, P.~B.,
790: Gallagher, J.~S., Conselice, C., Hibbard, J.~E., Matthews, L.~D., MacKenty,
791: J. \& O'Connell, R.~W. 2002, \apjs, 143, 113
792:
793: \end{thebibliography}
794:
795: \vfill
796: \eject
797:
798: {
799: \begin{deluxetable}{lcc}
800: \tablewidth{0pt}
801: \tablecolumns{3}
802: \tablecaption{Basic Properties}
803: \tablehead{
804: \colhead{} & \colhead{} & \colhead{References}}
805: \startdata
806: $m_B$ & 13.22$\pm$0.21 & 1 \\
807: (B -- V) & 0.46$\pm$0.02 & 1 \\
808: $V_{\odot}$ & 568$\pm$5 km/sec & 2 \\
809: $A_V$ & 0.07 & 3 \\
810: $E{(B-V)}$ & 0.021 & 3 \\
811: D & 5.45$\pm$0.08 Mpc & 4 \\
812: $M_B$ & $-$15.5 & 1,4 \\
813: $S_{HI}$ & 15.4 Jy\,{km/sec} & 2 \\
814: $M_{HI}/L_B$ & 0.46 $M_{\odot} / L_{\odot}$ & 1,2,4 \\
815: \enddata
816: \tablerefs{
817: 1) de Vaucouleurs et al.~(1991);
818: 2) Koribalski et al.~(2004);
819: 3) Schlegel et al.~(1998);
820: 4) Tully et al.~(2006)
821: }
822: \end{deluxetable}
823: }
824:
825: {
826: \begin{deluxetable}{cclcc}
827: \tablewidth{0pt}
828: \tablecolumns{5}
829: \tablecaption{Log of Observations}
830: \tablehead{
831: \colhead{Data Set} & \colhead{PID} & \colhead{Camera/Filter} & \colhead{Date} &
832: \colhead{Exposure}}
833: \startdata
834: & & & dd-mm-yyyy & sec \\
835: \hline
836: u6dw7101m & 9124 & WFPC2/F300W & 27-08-2001 & 300 \\
837: u6dw7102m & 9124 & WFPC2/F300W & 27-08-2001 & 300 \\
838: u6g22403m & 9162 & WFPC2/F606W & 22-09-2001 & 300 \\
839: u6g22404m & 9162 & WFPC2/F606W & 22-09-2001 & 300 \\
840: u6dw7103m & 9124 & WFPC2/F814W & 27-08-2001 & ~40 \\
841: u6dw7104m & 9124 & WFPC2/F814W & 27-08-2001 & ~40 \\
842: n8ou36010 & 9824 & NIC3/F160W & 28-11-2003 & 512 \\
843: \hline
844: \enddata
845: \end{deluxetable}
846: }
847:
848: {
849: \begin{deluxetable}{rccrrrrrrrrrr}
850: \tabletypesize{\scriptsize}
851: \tablewidth{0pt}
852: \tablecolumns{13}
853: \tablecaption{Photometry of Cluster Candidates}
854: \tablehead{
855: \colhead{ID} & \colhead{($X_{606}$,$Y_{606}$)} & \colhead{chip} &
856: \colhead{$UV_{300}$} & \colhead{$V_{606}$} & \colhead{$I_{814}$} &
857: \colhead{$H_{160}$} & \colhead{(UV$-$V)} & \colhead{(UV$-$I)} &
858: \colhead{(UV$-$H)} & \colhead{(V$-$I)} & \colhead{(V$-$H)} & \colhead{(I$-$H)}}
859: \startdata
860: & RA,Dec (J2000.0) & & $e_{UV}$ & $e_V$ & $e_I$ & $e_H$ &
861: $e_{UV-V}$ & $e_{UV-I}$ & $e_{UV-H}$ & $e_{V-I}$ & $e_{V-H}$ & $e_{I-H}$
862: \\
863: \hline
864: 1 & 188.20,336.93 & WF2 & 20.44 & 20.27 & 20.02 & 18.89 & 0.18 & 0.43 & 1.55 & 0.25 & 1.38 & 1.13 \\
865: & 03:20:09.0,$-$52:10:39 & & 0.09 & 0.01 & 0.03 & 0.02 & 0.09 & 0.10 & 0.09 & 0.04 & 0.02 & 0.04 \\
866: 2 & 57.97, 96.31 & WF2 & & 20.97 & & 16.75 & & & & & 4.22 & \\
867: & 03:20:06.8,$-$52:10:56 & & & 0.01 & & 0.07 & & & & & 0.07 & \\
868: 3 & 195.21,130.89 & WF3 & 18.88 & 20.25 & 20.65 & 20.52 & $-$1.38 & $-$1.78 & $-$1.64 & $-$0.40 & $-$0.27 & 0.13 \\
869: & 03:20:08.0,$-$52:11:04 & & 0.04 & 0.02 & 0.11 & 0.06 & 0.05 & 0.11 & 0.08 & 0.11 & 0.07 & 0.12 \\
870: 4 & 203.02,170.29 & WF3 & 21.51 & 22.12 & 21.42 & 19.63 & $-$0.61 & 0.09 & 1.88 & 0.70 & 2.49 & 1.79 \\
871: & 03:20:08.2,$-$52:11:07 & & 0.12 & 0.02 & 0.12 & 0.03 & 0.12 & 0.17 & 0.13 & 0.12 & 0.04 & 0.13 \\
872: 5 & 154.26,143.11 & WF3 & 20.38 & 20.78 & 20.72 & 20.03 & $-$0.40 & $-$0.33 & 0.35 & 0.07 & 0.75 & 0.69 \\
873: & 03:20:07.6,$-$52:11:06 & & 0.05 & 0.01 & 0.06 & 0.04 & 0.05 & 0.08 & 0.07 & 0.06 & 0.05 & 0.07 \\
874: 6 & 125.77,141.02 & WF3 & 21.74 & 21.50 & 21.26 & 20.15 & 0.24 & 0.49 & 1.59 & 0.24 & 1.35 & 1.11 \\
875: & 03:20:07.3,$-$52:11:06 & & 0.12 & 0.01 & 0.08 & 0.05 & 0.12 & 0.14 & 0.13 & 0.08 & 0.05 & 0.09 \\
876: 7 & 171.41,208.14 & WF3 & 21.24 & 20.12 & 19.42 & 18.30 & 1.11 & 1.81 & 2.94 & 0.70 & 1.82 & 1.12 \\
877: & 03:20:07.9,$-$52:11:12 & & 0.11 & 0.01 & 0.04 & 0.02 & 0.11 & 0.12 & 0.11 & 0.04 & 0.02 & 0.04 \\
878: 8 & 90.50,236.72 & WF3 & 20.53 & 21.42 & & & $-$0.89 & & & & & \\
879: & 03:20:07.2,$-$52:11:17 & & 0.21 & 0.01 & & & 0.21 & & & & & \\
880: 9 & 113.51,265.14 & WF3 & & 21.55 & & 19.97 & & & & & 1.58 & \\
881: & 03:20:07.4,$-$52:11:19 & & & 0.01 & & 0.29 & & & & & 0.29 & \\
882: 10 & 87.64,268.90 & WF3 & 21.94 & 20.69 & 20.14 & 18.79 & 1.25 & 1.81 & 3.15 & 0.55 & 1.90 & 1.35 \\
883: & 03:20:07.2,$-$52:11:19 & & 0.16 & 0.02 & 0.08 & 0.02 & 0.16 & 0.18 & 0.16 & 0.08 & 0.03 & 0.08 \\
884: 11 & 76.61,273.71 & WF3 & & 23.05 & & 19.43 & & & & & 3.62 & \\
885: & 03:20:07.1,$-$52:11:20 & & & 0.01 & & 0.03 & & & & & 0.03 & \\
886: 12 & 209.90, 59.05 & WF4 & 21.17 & 22.02 & 21.08 & 19.34 & $-$0.84 & 0.10 & 1.83 & 0.94 & 2.68 & 1.74 \\
887: & 03:20:06.3,$-$52:11:15 & & 0.10 & 0.03 & 0.10 & 0.03 & 0.10 & 0.14 & 0.10 & 0.10 & 0.04 & 0.10 \\
888: 13 & 200.42,111.80 & WF4 & & 21.93 & & 19.89 & & & & & 2.04 & \\
889: & 03:20:05.7,$-$52:11:16 & & & 0.01 & & 0.25 & & & & & 0.25 & \\
890: \enddata
891: \end{deluxetable}
892: }
893:
894: {
895: \begin{deluxetable}{rcccc}
896: \tablewidth{0pt}
897: \tablecolumns{5}
898: \tablecaption{Candidate Cluster Properties from AnalySED}
899: \tablehead{
900: \colhead{ID} & \colhead{$Z$} & \colhead{Age} & \colhead{$E(B-V)$} &
901: \colhead{Mass}}
902: \startdata
903: & & Myr & & 10$^3$ $M_{\odot}$ \\
904: \hline
905: 1 & 0.004 & 92$_{-84}^{+10}$ & 0.13$_{-0.05}^{+0.25}$ & 40.9$_{-29.5}^{+3.2}$ \\
906: & 0.008 & 104$_{-67}^{+6}$ & 0.05$_{-0}^{+0.18}$ & 35.9$_{-15.9}^{+9.6}$ \\
907: 3 & 0.004 & 4$\pm$0 & 0.00$\pm$0 & 2.38$\pm$0 \\
908: & 0.008 & 4$\pm$0 & 0.05$\pm$0 & 3.52$\pm$0.06 \\
909: 4 & 0.004 & 128$\pm4$ & 0.00$\pm$0 & 8.18$_{-0.05}^{+0.14}$ \\
910: & 0.008 & 130$_{-6}^{+70}$ & 0.15$\pm$0.03 & 7.42$_{-0.14}^{+1.88}$ \\
911: 5 & 0.004 & 8$\pm$0 & 0.15$\pm$0 & 3.82$\pm$0.20 \\
912: & 0.008 & 4$_{-0}^{+2}$ & 0.38$_{-0}^{+0.03}$ & 6.29$_{-0}^{+5.44}$ \\
913: 6 & 0.004 & 54$\pm$46 & 0.25$_{-0.15}^{+0.13}$ & 8.24$_{-4.65}^{+5.81}$ \\
914: & 0.008 & 100$_{-61}^{+10}$ & 0.10$_{-0.05}^{+0.18}$ & 13.2$_{-6.90}^{+5.45}$ \\
915: 7 & 0.004 & 844$_{-90}^{+124}$ & 0.00$\pm$0 & 129$_{-9}^{+12}$ \\
916: & 0.008 & 4$_{-0}^{+846}$ & 0.88$_{-0.88}^{+0.07}$ & 50.4$_{-4.6}^{+23.3}$ \\
917: 10 & 0.004 & 976$_{-610}^{+150}$ & 0.00$_{-0}^{+0.40}$ & 79.7$_{-34.1}^{+2.7}$ \\
918: & 0.008 & 209$_{-35}^{+1800}$ & 0.64$_{-0.64}^{+0.01}$ & 47.8$_{-14.1}^{+82.7}$ \\
919: 12 & 0.004 & 128$_{-4}^{+0}$ & 0.00$\pm$0 & 10.5$_{-0.1}^{+0}$ \\
920: & 0.008 & 12$_{-0}^{+74}$ & 0.33$_{-0.33}^{+0.02}$ & 6.43$_{-0.26}^{+4.59}$ \\
921: \enddata
922: \end{deluxetable}
923: }
924:
925: \figcaption{42$'' \times$26$''$ images of NGC 1311 in a) F300W, b) F606W, c)
926: F814W, and d) F160W. The arrow in the upper-left corner of the F300W image
927: points North, the attached line-segment points East. The scale bar in the
928: lower-right corner of the F300W image is 10$''$, and applies to all four
929: panels.}
930:
931: \figcaption{Stellar color-color diagrams in a) $(UV_{300} - I_{814})$
932: vs.~$(V_{606} - I_{814})$, and b) $(UV_{300} - V_{606})$ vs.~$(UV_{300} -
933: I_{814})$. Solid circles with error-bars show the data. The arrows in each
934: plot show the foreground dereddening vectors. The isochrones (Girardi et
935: al.~2002) have Z=0.004, and cover a range in age from 4 Myr to 6 Gyr.}
936:
937: \figcaption{F606W vs.~(F606W -- F814W) Color-Magnitude diagram with symbols and
938: isochrones as in Fig.~2. The solid lines are the 10 Myr and 100 Myr
939: isochrones. The dotted lines are younger, intervening, and older isochrones,
940: sampled every 0.25 dex in age. The points surrounded by large circles indicate
941: objects with peculiar colors, as discussed in the text. The dashed line shows
942: $I_{814} = 22$. The points surrounded by large diamonds are objects with
943: peculiar colors, but fainter than this limit. The bold arrow shows the
944: foreground dereddening vector.}
945:
946: \figcaption{A 48$'' \times$80$''$ region of the F606W image in which the
947: photometrically selected candidate clusters are circled.}
948:
949: \figcaption{Sharpness vs.~$V_{606}$. Circled points are the photometrically
950: selected candidate clusters. Plus-signs are single-pixel objects that HSTPhot
951: classifies as either hot pixels or cosmic rays. Points enclosed in diamonds
952: are classified as ``extended sources'' by HSTPhot. The diamonds with large,
953: dark crosses overlayed appear to be background galaxies based on Figure 6.}
954:
955: \figcaption{The full WFPC2 F606W image, showing the photometrically selected
956: candidate clusters as in Fig.~4, and additional faint cluster candidates
957: enclosed in diamonds. Note that two of the four background objects are obvious
958: background spirals.}
959:
960: \figcaption{$6{''}\llap{.}5$ square ``postage stamps'' of the candidate
961: clusters shown in Fig.~6, not including the clear background spirals.}
962:
963: \figcaption{Radial profiles of cluster candidates along with stars from the
964: corresponding WF chips. The stellar profiles are the solid, bold lines. a)
965: WF2 clusters 1--2, b) WF3 clusters 3--6, c) WF3 cluster 7--11 d) WF4 clusters
966: 12-13.}
967:
968: \figcaption{Histogram of observed half-light radii of candidate clusters (solid
969: line) along with those of the comparison stars (dotted line).}
970:
971: \figcaption{Age vs.~mass from AnalySED with $Z=0.004$ for the candidate
972: clusters. The line is a simple linear bisector.}
973:
974: \figcaption{Color-color diagrams of the candidate clusters (large black
975: squares), along with the Girardi et al.~(2002) SSP models for a range of
976: metallicities (color-coded in the figure) and ages (symbols coded in the
977: figure) a) $(UV_{300} - V_{606})$ vs.~$(I_{814} - H_{160})$, b) $(UV_{300} -
978: V_{606})$ vs.~$(UV_{300} - H_{160})$.}
979:
980: \end{document}
981: