1: % mn2esample.tex
2: %
3: % v2.1 released 22nd May 2002 (G. Hutton)
4: %
5: % The mnsample.tex file has been amended to highlight
6: % the proper use of LaTeX2e code with the class file
7: % and using natbib cross-referencing. These changes
8: % do not reflect the original paper by A. V. Raveendran.
9: %
10: % Previous versions of this sample document were
11: % compatible with the LaTeX 2.09 style file mn.sty
12: % v1.2 released 5th September 1994 (M. Reed)
13: % v1.1 released 18th July 1994
14: % v1.0 released 28th January 1994
15:
16: \documentclass[useAMS,usenatbib]{mn2e}
17:
18: % If your system does not have the AMS fonts version 2.0 installed, then
19: % remove the useAMS option.
20: %
21: % useAMS allows you to obtain upright Greek characters.
22: % e.g. \umu, \upi etc. See the section on "Upright Greek characters" in
23: % this guide for further information.
24: %
25: % If you are using AMS 2.0 fonts, bold math letters/symbols are available
26: % at a larger range of sizes for NFSS release 1 and 2 (using \boldmath or
27: % preferably \bmath).
28: %
29: % The usenatbib command allows the use of Patrick Daly's natbib.sty for
30: % cross-referencing.
31: %
32: % If you wish to typeset the paper in Times font (if you do not have the
33: % PostScript Type 1 Computer Modern fonts you will need to do this to get
34: % smoother fonts in a PDF file) then uncomment the next line
35: % \usepackage{Times}
36:
37: %%%%% AUTHORS - PLACE YOUR OWN MACROS HERE %%%%%
38:
39: \usepackage{lscape}
40: \usepackage{epsfig}
41: \usepackage{eufrak}
42: \usepackage{rotating}
43:
44: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
45:
46: \title[A Comparison of Magellanic Cloud Star Cluster colours with SSP
47: Model Predictions]{A Comparison of Optical and Near-Infrared Colours
48: of Magellanic Cloud Star Clusters with Predictions of Simple
49: Stellar Population Models}
50:
51:
52: \author[P. Pessev et al.]{P. M. Pessev$^{1}$\thanks{E-mails:
53: pessev@stsci.edu (PMP); goudfroo@stsci.edu (PG); puziat@nrc.ca (THP); rupali.chandar@utoledo.edu (RC)}, P. Goudfrooij$^{1\star}$, T. H. Puzia$^{2\star}$ and R. Chandar$^{3,4\star}$\\
54: $^{1}$Space Telescope Science Institute, 3700 San Martin Drive,
55: Baltimore, MD 21218, U.S.A.\\
56: $^{2}$Herzberg Institute of Astrophysics, 5071 West Saanich Road,
57: Victoria, BC V9E 2E7, Canada\\
58: $^{3}$The Observatories of the Carnegie Institution of Washington, 813
59: Santa Barbara Street, Pasadena, CA 91101-1292, U.S.A.\\
60: $^{4}$Department of Physics and Astronomy, The University of Toledo,
61: 2801 West Bancroft Street, Toledo, OH 43606, U.S.A.\\
62: }
63: \begin{document}
64:
65: \date{Accepted .... Received ...; in original form ...}
66:
67: \pagerange{\pageref{firstpage}--\pageref{lastpage}} \pubyear{2007}
68:
69: \maketitle
70:
71: \label{firstpage}
72:
73: \begin{abstract}
74: We present integrated $JHK_s$ 2MASS photometry and a compilation of
75: integrated-light optical photoelectric measurements for 84 star
76: clusters in the Magellanic Clouds. These clusters range in age from
77: $\approx200$~Myr to $>10$~Gyr, and have [Fe/H] values from $-2.2$ to
78: $-0.1$ dex. We find a spread in the intrinsic colours of clusters
79: with similar ages and metallicities, at least some of which is due to
80: stochastic fluctuations in the number of bright stars residing in
81: low-mass clusters. We use 54 clusters with the most reliable age and
82: metallicity estimates as test particles to evaluate the performance of
83: four widely used SSP models in the optical/NIR colour-colour space.
84: All models reproduce the reddening-corrected colours of the old ($\ge$
85: 10 Gyr) globular clusters quite well, but model performance varies at
86: younger ages. In order to account for the effects of stochastic
87: fluctuations in individual clusters, we provide composite $B-V$,
88: $B-J$, $V-J$, $V-K_s$ and $J-K_s$ colours for Magellanic Cloud
89: clusters in several different age intervals.
90: The accumulated mass for most composite clusters are higher than
91: that needed to keep luminosity variations due to stochastic
92: fluctuations below the 10\% level.
93: The colours of the composite clusters are clearly distinct in
94: optical-NIR colour-colour space for the following intervals of age:
95: $>10$~Gyr, $2-9$~Gyr, $1-2$~Gyr, and $200$~Myr$-1$~Gyr. This suggests
96: that a combination of optical plus NIR colours can be used to
97: differentiate clusters of different age and metallicity.
98: \end{abstract}
99:
100: \begin{keywords}
101: Magellanic Clouds, galaxies: star clusters, infrared: general,
102: techniques: photometric
103: \end{keywords}
104:
105: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
106: \section{Introduction}
107:
108: The most efficient method to determine the age and metallicity for
109: unresolved stellar systems (especially at high redshift) is by comparing
110: their observed colours with the predictions of evolution synthesis models
111: \citep[e.g.][]{bc93, bc03, worthey94, vazdekis99, maraston98, maraston05,
112: af03}. Thus, it is important to test the integrated colours predicted by
113: recent models, based on objects which have accurate ages and metallicities
114: determined independently. In the present paper we focus our attention on
115: the combination of visual and near-infrared (NIR) photometry, which has
116: proven to be important for breaking the age-metallicity degeneracy,
117: particularly in stellar populations older than
118: $\approx {\rmn{a\ few\ times}} \times 100$~Myr
119: \citep[e.g.][]{goudfrooij01, puzia02, hempel04}.
120:
121: With the advent of the {\it Spitzer Space Telescope (Spitzer)\/} and
122: mid-infrared (MIR) instrumentation for some large ground-based telescopes,
123: the NIR spectral region is now accessible at intermediate-to-high redshifts.
124: In a recent paper based on {\it Spitzer\/} Infrared Array Camera
125: (IRAC) imaging, \cite{vanderwel2006} reported significant discrepancies
126: between some model predictions and the observed rest-frame $K$-band
127: properties of early-type galaxies at z $\approx 1$. Their results show
128: that the interpretation of NIR photometry is hampered by model
129: uncertainties.
130: As a consequence the determination of masses of distant
131: stellar systems based on such data can have uncertainties up to a factor
132: 2.5 \citep[see][]{bruzual07}.
133:
134: Unfortunately, providing accurate model predictions in the near-infrared
135: is challenging, since there are limitations imposed by the current lack of
136: understanding of certain stages of stellar evolution (e.g., thermally
137: pulsing asymptotic giant branch, or TP-AGB stars). These objects
138: significantly affect the spectral energy distribution (SED) in the NIR and
139: MIR for stellar populations with ages between $\approx200$ Myr to 3 Gyr.
140: Another possible complication is that the stellar
141: libraries used by population synthesis models contain mostly stars from
142: the solar neighborhood. These stars have a star formation history which
143: is not necessarily typical for extragalactic populations (e.g. relatively
144: little variation of [$\alpha$/Fe] ratios), and there are only a very
145: limited number of AGB spectra available.
146:
147: The Large and Small Magellanic Clouds (LMC and SMC respectively) provide
148: a unique opportunity to test the accuracy of most current SSP
149: models, since they contain a significant population of intermediate-age
150: massive star clusters which are not easily accessible in our Galaxy.
151: The ages and
152: metallicities of these star clusters can be determined from deep
153: colour-magnitude diagrams (CMDs) reaching below the main sequence turn-off
154: (MSTO)\footnote{Obtaining photometry with sufficient quality to secure reliable age and metallicity estimates for clusters in galaxies beyond the Magellanic Clouds requires a significant investment of observing time. To date only one such cluster, SKHB~312 in M31, has a CMD deep enough to probe the MSTO region \citep{brown2004}. The photometry for this object was obtained as a result of a program utilizing 126 {\it Hubble Space Telescope (HST)\/} orbits.
155: }. Medium and high-resolution spectroscopy of individual giants in these clusters also provides independent metallicity estimates.
156: Therefore their integrated-light properties (easily observed with small
157: and moderate-aperture telescopes) can be combined with the accurate
158: age/metallicity measurements and used to test (and calibrate) the SSP
159: models.
160:
161: In \cite{pessev2006} (hereafter Paper~I) we used the Two Micron All Sky
162: Survey (2MASS; \cite{skrutskie2006}) to derive NIR $(JHK_s)$
163: integrated-light magnitudes and colours for a large sample of Magellanic
164: Cloud star clusters, based on a homogeneous, accurately calibrated
165: dataset. In the present study we use the sample from Paper~I and new
166: photometry for 9 additional objects (forming the largest dataset of integrated
167: NIR magnitudes and colours of LMC/SMC star clusters to date) to test the
168: performance of several SSP models. We combine the 2MASS data with optical
169: photometry originating from the work of \cite{bica_et_al_96} and the
170: compilation of \cite{vdb81}. The technique adopted in Paper~I - measuring
171: $JHK_s$ curves of growth to large radii allows us to utilize rather
172: heterogeneous databases of optical photometry, usually performed with a
173: set of fixed apertures. We use 54 clusters from our sample as ``test
174: particles''. These clusters were chosen to have reliable age and
175: metallicity measurements, covering a wide parameter space.
176:
177: \setcounter{figure}{0}
178: \begin{figure}
179: \centering
180: \includegraphics[bb=14 14 256 256,width=8.15cm]{fig1.eps}
181: \caption{
182: A finding chart of the LMC showing the clusters in our sample. The $R$-band
183: image is centred on $\alpha_{2000} = 05^{h} 26^{m} 37.7^{s}$ and
184: $\delta_{2000} = -68^{o} 56' 57.5"$. The arrow near
185: the centre outlines the position of NGC~1928 ($\alpha_{2000} = 05^{h}
186: 20^{m} 57.7^{s}$ and $\delta_{2000} = -69^{\rmn{o}} 28' 40.2"$). This cluster
187: is located close to the geometrical centre of the LMC bar, and was adopted
188: by Bica et al.\ (1996) as a reference point for the relative coordinates of
189: the LMC cluster system. The labeled arrows show the direction towards the
190: clusters lying outside the boundaries of this chart. The $R$-band image
191: (G. Bothun 1997, private communication) covers $8^{\rmn{o}}$x$8^{\rmn{o}}$,
192: while the dimensions of the chart are $16^{\rmn{o}}$x$16^{\rmn{o}}$.}
193: \label{fig:lmc_map}
194: \end{figure}
195:
196: \setcounter{figure}{1}
197: \begin{figure}
198: \centering
199: \includegraphics[bb=14 14 256 256,width=8.15cm]{fig2.eps}
200: \caption{A finding chart of the SMC showing the clusters in our sample. The $R$-band
201: image (G. Bothun 1997, private communication) is centred
202: on $\alpha_{2000} = 01^{h} 04^{m} 42.8^{s}$ and
203: $\delta_{2000} = -72^{\rmn{o}} 52' 32.4''$. SMC clusters cover a smaller area than LMC objects. There is only one cluster outside the $R$ frame, but for illustrational purposes
204: the dimensions of this finder chart are identical to those of the LMC chart in
205: Figure~\ref{fig:lmc_map}.}
206: \label{fig:smc_map}
207: \end{figure}
208:
209: This paper is organized as follows: in \S 2 we define our extended sample
210: and present the new photometry along with the compilation of visual
211: magnitudes and colours. Four sets of SSP models are tested in \S 3,
212: followed by concluding remarks in \S 4. Information about the
213: properties of the cluster sample is presented in Appendices A and B. Transformations between the model grids in the
214: \cite{bb88} system and the photometric system of 2 MASS are provided in Appendix C.
215: \label{intro}
216:
217: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
218: \section{Photometry of Magellanic Cloud Clusters}
219: \subsection[]{Extending the Sample - New Near-Infrared Integrated Photometry of Magellanic Cloud Clusters}
220:
221: \setcounter{table}{0}
222: \begin{table*}
223: \centering
224: \begin{minipage}{140mm}
225: \caption{Extended Magellanic Cloud Cluster Sample}
226: \label{tab:ext}
227: \begin{tabular}{@{}lccrlllllllll@{}}
228: \hline
229: ID & $\alpha_{2000}$ & $\delta_{2000}$ & \multicolumn{4}{c}{Age, Errors \& Ref}&\multicolumn{3}{c}{[Fe/H], Err \& Ref} & $A_v$ & $\Delta A_v$ \\
230: (1) & (2) & (3) & (4) & (5) & (6) & (7) & (8) & (9) & (10) & (11) & (12)\\
231: \hline
232:
233: NGC265 & 00:47:12 & --73:28:38 & 8.5\hspace{4pt} & +0.3 &--0.3 & 2 & --0.62 & $^{+0.23}_{-0.61}$ & 2 & 0.34 & 0.02\\[3pt]
234: NGC1644 & 04:37:39 &--66:12:00 & 9.53 & +0.05 &--0.05 & 1 & --1.4 &$\pm$0.2 & 1 & 0.39 & 0.02\\[3pt]
235: NGC1928 & 05:20:58 &--69:28:40 & 10.11& +0.06 &--0.08 & 5 & --1.27 &$\pm$0.14 & 5 & 0.34 & 0.06\\[3pt]
236: NGC1994 & 05:28:22 &--69:08:30 & 7.06 & & & 4& & & & 0.41 & 0.02\\[3pt]
237: NGC2058 & 05:36:55 &--70:09:44 & 7.85 & +0.10 &--0.15 & 4 & & & & 0.39 & 0.02\\[3pt]
238: NGC2107 & 05:43:13 &--70:38:23 & 8.55 & +0.25 &--0.24 & 3 & & & & 0.36 & 0.04\\[3pt]
239: NGC2108 & 05:43:56 &--69:10:48 & 8.90 & +0.26 &--0.26 & 3 & & & & 0.50 & 0.05\\[3pt]
240: NGC2134 & 05:51:56 &--71:05:54 & 8.27 & & & 7 & --0.4 & & 7 & 0.62 & 0.03\\[3pt]
241: NGC2154 & 05:57:38 &--67:15:42 & 9.16 & +0.28 &--0.28 & 3 & --0.56 &$\pm$0.2 & 6 & 0.39 & 0.03\\[5pt]
242: \hline
243: \end{tabular}
244: {\it Notes to Table~\ref{tab:ext}:} Column~(1): Object ID. Columns~(2) and (3): Cluster coordinates - Right Ascension (given as hours, minutes, seconds) and Declination (degrees, minutes, seconds) in J2000 retrieved from Simbad Astronomical Database. Column~(4): age of the object given as {\it log(age)} with corresponding errors in columns~(5) and (6) and literature references (see bellow) in (7). Column~(8): metallicity values retrieved from the literature with their errors (9) and references (10). Column~(11): $V$ band reddening values for the objects with corresponding errors (12) retrieved from the MCPS reddening estimation tool.
245:
246: {\it References:} (1) \cite{bica86} (2) \cite{chiosi07} (3) \cite{elson_fall_85} (4) \cite{elson_fall_88} (5) \cite{mg04} (6) \cite{olszewski91} (7) \cite{vallenari94}
247:
248: \end{minipage}
249: \end{table*}
250:
251: \setcounter{table}{1}
252: \begin{table*}
253: \centering
254: \begin{minipage}{140mm}
255: \caption{2MASS Atlas Images of the Clusters in the Extended Sample.}
256: \label{tab:sampleAtl}
257: \begin{tabular}{@{}lcccc@{}}
258: \hline
259: ID & N & $J$ & $H$ & $K_s$\\
260: (1) & (2) & (3) & (4) & (5)\\
261: \hline
262: NGC265 & 1 & aJ\_asky\_980809s0810198.fits & aH\_asky\_980809s0810198.fits & aK\_asky\_980809s0810198.fits\\
263: NGC1644 & 1 & aJ\_asky\_991026s1140257.fits & aH\_asky\_991026s1140257.fits & aK\_asky\_991026s1140257.fits\\
264: NGC1928 & 1 & aJ\_asky\_981220s0850162.fits & aH\_asky\_981220s0850162.fits & aK\_asky\_981220s0850162.fits\\
265: NGC1994 & 1 & aJ\_asky\_000212s0190150.fits & aH\_asky\_000212s0190150.fits & aK\_asky\_000212s0190150.fits\\
266: NGC2058 & 1 & aJ\_asky\_000206s0240186.fits & aH\_asky\_000206s0240186.fits & aK\_asky\_000206s0240186.fits\\
267: NGC2107 & 1 & aJ\_asky\_980321s0080209.fits & aH\_asky\_980321s0080209.fits & aK\_asky\_980321s0080209.fits\\
268: NGC2108 & 1 & aJ\_asky\_980321s0080150.fits & aH\_asky\_980321s0080150.fits & aK\_asky\_980321s0080150.fits\\
269: NGC2134 & 1 & aJ\_asky\_981025s1000044.fits & aH\_asky\_981025s1000044.fits & aK\_asky\_981025s1000044.fits\\
270: NGC2154 & 1 & aJ\_asky\_981025s1110068.fits & aH\_asky\_981025s1110068.fits & aK\_asky\_981025s1110068.fits\\
271: \hline
272: \end{tabular}
273: {\it Notes to Table~\ref{tab:sampleAtl}:} Column~(1): Object ID. Column~(2): Number of image sets retrieved. Columns~(3), (4) and (5): designations of the individual $J,H$ and $K_s$ frames.
274: \end{minipage}
275: \end{table*}
276:
277: We selected nine objects (see Table~\ref{tab:ext} for details) to add to our
278: original sample which was presented in Paper~I.
279: The total sample now includes all of the old clusters in the Magellanic Clouds (with the
280: exception of the Reticulum cluster, which is excluded due to insufficient
281: depth of the available 2MASS images) and all of the "NIR-enhanced"
282: clusters from \cite{persson83}. Some objects were included in this
283: extended sample because they have new integrated-light optical magnitudes
284: and colours available. Overall the sample provides optimal coverage of the
285: age-metallicity parameter space of MC star clusters. We intend to add
286: 2MASS $JHK_s$ integrated photometry for additional clusters as new
287: information based on deep CMDs becomes available in the future.
288:
289: The 2MASS \citep{skrutskie2006} atlas images were recovered through the
290: interactive image service available on the survey
291: web-page\footnote{http://irsa.ipac.caltech.edu/applications/2MASS/IM/inter- active.html}
292: (see Table~\ref{tab:sampleAtl} for information about the
293: utilized images). We analysed these data following the reduction scheme
294: presented in Paper~I. Extinction corrections were derived using the online
295: tools provided by the Magellanic Clouds Photometric Survey
296: \citep[MCPS,][]{zaritsky97}; details about extinction estimates for SMC and LMC are
297: provided in \cite{zaritsky02} and \cite{zaritsky04} respectively. ($A_v$ values and their uncertainties are listed in the last two columns of Table~\ref{tab:ext}.)
298:
299: All of the MC clusters with $JHK_s$ NIR 2MASS photometry from Paper~I and
300: the present work are shown in the finder charts (see
301: Figures~\ref{fig:lmc_map} and \ref{fig:smc_map} for the LMC and SMC,
302: respectively). The cluster positions are marked by the centres of our
303: aperture sets, derived as described in Paper~I. Table~\ref{tab:phot}
304: contains $JHK_s$ photometry for the 9 new clusters\footnote{The listed
305: magnitudes are not corrected for reddening.}.
306: \label{samplext}
307:
308: \setcounter{table}{2}
309: \begin{table*}
310: \centering
311: \begin{minipage}{150mm}
312: \caption{New NIR photometry of Magellanic Cloud clusters}
313: \label{tab:phot}
314: \begin{tabular}{@{}lccccrlrrrrrr@{}}
315: \hline
316: ID & $\alpha_{2000}$ & $\delta_{2000} $ & d & Flag & D & & $J$ & $Jerr$ & $H$ & $Herr$ & $K_s$ & ${K_s}err$\\
317: (1) & (2) & (3) & (4) & (5) & (6) & & (7) & (8) & (9) & (10) & (11) & (12)\\
318: \hline
319: NGC265 & 00:47:09.9 & -73:28:39.3 & 7.5 & AAB & 20 & & 13.00 & 0.03 & 12.43 & 0.03 & 12.53 & 0.05\\
320: & & & & & 40 & & 11.80 & 0.03 & 10.48 & 0.02 & 10.41 & 0.02\\
321: & & & & & 60 & & 11.54 & 0.06 & 10.31 & 0.03 & 10.27 & 0.05\\
322: & & & & & 80 & & 11.35 & 0.08 & 10.15 & 0.05 & 10.04 & 0.06\\
323: & & & & & 100 & & 11.16 & 0.11 & 10.05 & 0.07 & 9.92 & 0.09\\
324: & & & & & 120 & & 10.96 & 0.13 & 9.90 & 0.09 & 9.79 & 0.12\\
325: & & & & & 140 & & 10.78 & 0.15 & 9.84 & 0.12 & 9.71 & 0.15\\
326: & & & & & 160 &: & 10.42 & 0.14 & 9.61 & 0.12 & 9.64 & 0.18\\
327: & & & & & 180 &: & 10.32 & 0.17 & 9.52 & 0.15 & 9.50 & 0.21\\
328: & & & & & 200 &: & 10.18 & 0.19 & 9.44 & 0.17 & 9.42 & 0.24\\[5pt]
329: NGC1644 & 04:37:39.8 & -66:11:55.5 & 6.5 & BBB & 20 & & 12.08 & 0.03 & 11.62 & 0.02 & 11.43 & 0.02\\
330: & & & & & 40 & & 11.51 & 0.06 & 11.05 & 0.05 & 10.84 & 0.05\\
331: & & & & & 60 & & 11.31 & 0.11 & 10.88 & 0.10 & 10.76 & 0.10\\
332: & & & & & 80 &: & 11.12 & 0.17 & 10.74 & 0.16 & 10.61 & 0.16\\
333: & & & & & 90 &: & 11.05 & 0.20 & 10.66 & 0.18 & 10.51 & 0.18\\[5pt]
334: NGC1928 & 05:20:57.8 & -69:28:41.2 & 1 & AAB & 20 & & 11.65 & 0.03 & 11.05 & 0.03 & 11.24 & 0.04\\
335: & & & & & 40 & & 11.04 & 0.05 & 10.51 & 0.06 & 10.56 & 0.09\\
336: & & & & & 60 & & 10.73 & 0.08 & 10.28 & 0.11 & 10.25 & 0.15\\
337: & & & & & 80 & & 10.54 & 0.12 & 10.10 & 0.17 & 9.34 & 0.11\\
338: & & & & & 100 & & 10.40 & 0.17 & 9.98 & 0.24 & 9.24 & 0.16\\
339: & & & & & 120 & & 10.17 & 0.20 & 9.73 & 0.28 & 9.06 & 0.20\\
340: & & & & & 140 & & 10.05 & 0.25 & 9.60 & 0.35 & 8.75 & 0.21\\
341: & & & & & 160 & & 9.73 & 0.24 & 9.16 & 0.30 & 8.69 & 0.26\\
342: & & & & & 180 & & 9.49 & 0.25 & 8.78 & 0.27 & 8.54 & 0.29\\
343: & & & & & 200 & & 9.35 & 0.28 & 8.70 & 0.32 & 8.47 & 0.34\\[5pt]
344: NGC1994 & 05:28:22.4 & -69:08:31.3 & 2 & BBA & 20 & & 8.33 & 0.01 & 7.63 & 0.01 & 7.45 & 0.01\\
345: & & & & & 40 & & 8.28 & 0.01 & 7.59 & 0.01 & 7.40 & 0.01\\
346: & & & & & 60 & & 8.25 & 0.01 & 7.57 & 0.01 & 7.38 & 0.01\\
347: & & & & & 80 & & 8.22 & 0.02 & 7.55 & 0.01 & 7.36 & 0.01\\
348: & & & & & 100 & & 8.14 & 0.02 & 7.47 & 0.01 & 7.35 & 0.02\\
349: & & & & & 120 & & 7.95 & 0.03 & 7.26 & 0.02 & 7.14 & 0.02\\
350: & & & & & 140 & & 7.80 & 0.03 & 7.10 & 0.02 & 6.95 & 0.03\\
351: & & & & & 160 & & 7.78 & 0.04 & 7.09 & 0.02 & 6.93 & 0.04\\
352: & & & & & 180 & & 7.76 & 0.05 & 7.07 & 0.03 & 6.92 & 0.04\\
353: & & & & & 200 & & 7.74 & 0.05 & 7.06 & 0.04 & 6.91 & 0.05\\[5pt]
354: NGC2058 & 05:36:54.0 & -70:09:42.0 & 10 & BBB & 20 & & 10.72 & 0.02 & 10.15 & 0.01 & 10.08 & 0.02\\
355: & & & & & 40 & & 9.82 & 0.03 & 9.22 & 0.02 & 9.17 & 0.03\\
356: & & & & & 60 & & 9.57 & 0.04 & 9.03 & 0.04 & 8.95 & 0.05\\
357: & & & & & 80 & & 9.26 & 0.06 & 8.76 & 0.06 & 8.60 & 0.07\\[5pt]
358: NGC2107 & 05:43:13.3 & -70:38:29.8 & 2.5 & BBB & 20 & & 10.81 & 0.03 & 9.98 & 0.02 & 9.70 & 0.02\\
359: & & & & & 40 & & 10.21 & 0.07 & 9.54 & 0.04 & 9.31 & 0.05\\
360: & & & & & 60 & & 10.05 & 0.13 & 9.43 & 0.08 & 9.20 & 0.11\\
361: & & & & & 80 & & 9.90 & 0.20 & 9.35 & 0.14 & 9.12 & 0.18\\
362: & & & & & 100 & & 9.70 & 0.26 & 9.14 & 0.18 & 8.92 & 0.24\\
363: & & & & & 120 & & 9.47 & 0.31 & 8.87 & 0.20 & 8.63 & 0.27\\
364: & & & & & 140 & & 9.34 & 0.39 & 8.72 & 0.24 & 8.32 & 0.27\\[5pt]
365: NGC2108 & 05:43:56.7 & -69:10:49.9 & 4 & BBB & 20 & & 12.31 & 0.02 & 11.23 & 0.01 & 10.97 & 0.01\\
366: & & & & & 40 & & 10.78 & 0.01 & 9.88 & 0.01 & 9.36 & 0.01\\
367: & & & & & 60 & & 10.48 & 0.02 & 9.71 & 0.02 & 9.25 & 0.01\\
368: & & & & & 80 & & 10.35 & 0.03 & 9.63 & 0.03 & 9.20 & 0.02\\
369: & & & & & 100 & & 10.26 & 0.03 & 9.56 & 0.04 & 9.15 & 0.03\\
370: & & & & & 120 & & 10.17 & 0.04 & 9.47 & 0.05 & 9.10 & 0.05\\
371: & & & & & 140 & & 10.00 & 0.05 & 9.31 & 0.06 & 9.00 & 0.06\\
372: & & & & & 160 & & 9.55 & 0.05 & 8.83 & 0.05 & 8.45 & 0.04\\
373: & & & & & 180 & & 9.50 & 0.05 & 8.81 & 0.06 & 8.41 & 0.06\\
374: & & & & & 200 & & 9.45 & 0.06 & 8.77 & 0.08 & 8.39 & 0.07\\[5pt]
375:
376: \hline
377: \end{tabular}
378: {\it Notes to Table~\ref{tab:phot}}. See next page
379: \end{minipage}
380: \end{table*}
381:
382: \setcounter{table}{2}
383: \begin{table*}
384: \centering
385: \begin{minipage}{150mm}
386: \caption{Continued}
387: \begin{tabular}{@{}lccccrlrrrrrr@{}}
388: \hline
389: ID & $\alpha_{2000}$ & $\delta_{2000} $ & d & Flag & D & & $J$ & $Jerr$ & $H$ & $Herr$ & $K_s$ & ${K_s}err$\\
390: (1) & (2) & (3) & (4) & (5) & (6) & & (7) & (8) & (9) & (10) & (11) & (12)\\
391: \hline
392: NGC2134 & 05:51:56.5 & -71:05:50.4 & 4.5 & BBB & 20 & & 10.80 & 0.01 & 10.16 & 0.01 & 10.10 & 0.01\\
393: & & & & & 40 & & 10.18 & 0.02 & 9.68 & 0.01 & 9.65 & 0.01\\
394: & & & & & 60 & & 9.94 & 0.03 & 9.50 & 0.02 & 9.43 & 0.02\\
395: & & & & & 80 & & 9.78 & 0.04 & 9.39 & 0.03 & 9.25 & 0.03\\
396: & & & & & 100 & & 9.46 & 0.04 & 8.96 & 0.03 & 8.77 & 0.03\\
397: & & & & & 120 & & 9.42 & 0.06 & 8.93 & 0.05 & 8.74 & 0.05\\
398: & & & & & 140 & & 8.95 & 0.05 & 8.31 & 0.04 & 8.01 & 0.03\\
399: & & & & & 160 & & 8.86 & 0.06 & 8.22 & 0.04 & 7.89 & 0.04\\
400: & & & & & 180 & & 8.82 & 0.08 & 8.16 & 0.05 & 7.85 & 0.05\\
401: & & & & & 200 & & 8.82 & 0.10 & 8.18 & 0.07 & 7.86 & 0.06\\[5pt]
402: NGC2154 & 05:57:37.9 & -67:15:43.7 & 2.0 & BAB & 20 & & 11.24 & 0.01 & 10.38 & 0.01 & 9.86 & 0.01\\
403: & & & & & 40 & & 10.44 & 0.01 & 9.64 & 0.01 & 9.18 & 0.01\\
404: & & & & & 60 & & 10.16 & 0.02 & 9.38 & 0.01 & 8.92 & 0.01\\
405: & & & & & 80 & & 9.94 & 0.02 & 9.22 & 0.02 & 8.79 & 0.01\\
406: & & & & & 100 & & 9.80 & 0.03 & 9.11 & 0.02 & 8.68 & 0.02\\
407: & & & & & 110 & & 9.78 & 0.04 & 9.11 & 0.03 & 8.68 & 0.02\\
408: \hline
409: \end{tabular}
410: {\it Notes to Table~\ref{tab:phot}:} Column~(1) is the cluster
411: designation, (2) and (3) are the right ascension and declination of
412: the position used to centre the apertures for the integral photometry
413: ((hh:mm:ss.s) and (dd:mm:ss.s) respectively). Column~(4) is the offset
414: (in arcseconds) measured on 2MASS images between that position and the
415: cluster coordinates retrieved from SIMBAD. Column~(5) contains a flag,
416: providing information about the age (first letter), metalicity
417: estimates (second letter) and the photometry (third letter) for each
418: cluster. A is corresponding to a reliable age, metallicity and
419: photometry, B denotes the cases when the age and metallicity values
420: are uncertain and when used in the third position B stands for the
421: cases described in Section~\ref{notes} and/or the photometry was
422: provided in aperture sizes smaller than 200\arcsec. The aperture
423: diameters (arcseconds) used for each measurement are listed in
424: column~(6), they are denoted with colon in case complications with
425: photometry were suspected. The photometry information (uncorrected for
426: reddening) is given in columns~(7) -- (12), in the order: $J$
427: magnitude, photometric uncertainty in $J$, and the same information for
428: the other two survey bands $H$ and $K_s$. The photometric uncertainty in
429: each band is calculated as the quadrature sum of the zero point uncertainty,
430: internal uncertainty of the photometry, and the uncertainty due to stochastic
431: fluctuations of the background stellar population.
432: \end{minipage}
433: \end{table*}
434:
435: \setcounter{table}{3}
436: \begin{table*}
437: \centering
438: \begin{minipage}{160mm}
439: \caption{Compilation of Optical Photometry}
440: \label{tab:comp}
441: \begin{tabular}{@{}lcrrrrrcrrr@{}}
442: \hline
443: ID & Galaxy & \multicolumn{1}{c}{D}& \multicolumn{1}{c}{$V$} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{$(B-V)$} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{$(U-B)$} & Ref. & $A_{V}$ & Ref. & SWB & Note\\
444: (1) & (2) & (3) & \multicolumn{1}{c}{(4)} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{(5)} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{(6)} & (7) & (8) & (9) & \multicolumn{1}{c}{(10)} & (11) \\
445: \hline
446: NGC121 & SMC & 62 & $11.24\pm0.01$ & $0.76\pm0.00$ & $ 0.10\pm0.01$ & 1 & $0.16\pm0.09$ & 11 & VII & \\
447: NGC152 & SMC & 62 & $12.94\pm0.04$ & $0.70\pm0.02$ & $ 0.18\pm0.02$ & 1 & $0.16\pm0.03$ & 7 & V & \\
448: NGC265 & SMC & 62 & $12.13\pm0.03$ & $0.30\pm0.01$ & $-0.11\pm0.05$ & 1 & $0.19^{\ +\ 0.15}_{\ -\ 0.13}$ & 6 & III & \\
449: NGC330 & SMC & 62 & $ 9.60\pm0.01$ & $0.15\pm0.01$ & $-0.46\pm0.00$ & 1 & $0.37\pm0.02$ & - & I & \\
450: NGC339 & SMC & 62 & $12.84\pm0.04$ & $0.73\pm0.01$ & $ 0.03\pm0.00$ & 1 & $0.09\pm0.12$ & 11 & VII & \\
451: NGC361 & SMC & 62 & $12.24\pm0.01$ & $0.78\pm0.00$ & $ 0.14\pm0.02$ & 1 & $0.22\pm0.09$ & 11 & VII & \\
452: NGC411 & SMC & 62 & $12.21\pm0.04$ & $0.62\pm0.01$ & $ 0.24\pm0.02$ & 1 & $0.37\pm0.03$ & 7 & V & \\
453: NGC416 & SMC & 62 & $11.42\pm0.00$ & $0.73\pm0.00$ & $ 0.12\pm0.00$ & 1 & $0.25\pm0.09$ & 10 & VII & \\
454: NGC419 & SMC & 62 & $10.61\pm0.01$ & $0.65\pm0.01$ & $ 0.24\pm0.01$ & 1 & $0.20\pm0.02$ & - & V & \\
455: NGC458 & SMC & 62 & $11.73\pm0.03$ & $0.16\pm0.00$ & $-0.17\pm0.01$ & 1 & $0.32\pm0.02$ & - & V & \\
456: NGC1466 & LMC & 60 & $11.59\pm0.03$ & $0.68\pm0.02$ & $ 0.13\pm0.03$ & 15 & $0.28\pm0.06$ & 16 & VII & \\
457: NGC1644 & LMC & 60 & $12.89\pm0.02$ & $0.60\pm0.03$ & $ 0.19\pm0.02$ & 15 & $0.39\pm0.02$ & - & V & \\
458: NGC1651 & LMC & 100 & $12.28\pm0.04$ & $0.71\pm0.04$ & $ 0.28\pm0.04$ & 4 & $0.34\pm0.03$ & 8 & V & \\
459: NGC$1711_{\rm (B)}$ & LMC & 50 & $12.50\pm0.04$ & $0.27\pm0.04$ & $-0.04\pm0.04$ & 4 & $0.56\pm0.01$ & - & III & 1\\
460: NGC$1711_{\rm (v)}$ & LMC & 60 & $10.11\pm0.03$ & $0.12\pm0.01$ & $-0.37\pm0.02$ & 15 & & & III & 1\\
461: NGC1718 & LMC & 62 & $12.25\pm0.01$ & $0.76\pm0.01$ & $ 0.26\pm0.02$ & 2 & $0.31\pm0.09$ & 8 & VI & \\
462: NGC1751 & LMC & 100 & $11.73\pm0.04$ & $0.79\pm0.04$ & $ 0.27\pm0.04$ & 4 & $0.65\pm0.06$ & - & VI & \\
463: NGC1754 & LMC & 100 & $11.57\pm0.04$ & $0.75\pm0.04$ & $ 0.15\pm0.04$ & 4 & $0.28\pm0.06$ & 12 & VII & \\
464: NGC1777 & LMC & 38 & $12.80\pm0.02$ & $0.60\pm0.03$ & $ 0.17\pm0.03$ & 4 & $0.31\pm0.09$ & 8 & IVB & \\
465: NGC1783 & LMC & 60 & $10.97\pm0.02$ & $0.63\pm0.02$ & $ 0.20\pm0.03$ & 15 & $0.30\pm0.03$ & - & V & \\
466: NGC$1786_{\rm (u)}$ & LMC & 60 & $10.16\pm0.04$ & $0.67\pm0.00$ & $ 0.06\pm0.02$ & 15 & $0.28\pm0.16$ & 5 & VII & 2\\
467: NGC$1786_{\rm (c)}$ & LMC & 60 & $10.88\pm0.04$ & $0.74\pm0.00$ & $ 0.10\pm0.02$ & 15 & & & VII & 2\\
468: NGC1805 & LMC & 60 & $10.63\pm0.03$ & $0.11\pm0.02$ & $-0.55\pm0.01$ & 15 & $0.32\pm0.02$ & - & I & \\
469: NGC1806 & LMC & 60 & $11.27\pm0.04$ & $0.26\pm0.02$ & $ 0.73\pm0.02$ & 15 & $0.25\pm0.04$ & - & V & \\
470: NGC1818 & LMC & 60 & $ 9.85\pm0.02$ & $0.18\pm0.02$ & $-0.46\pm0.00$ & 15 & $0.39\pm0.02$ & - & I & \\
471: NGC1831 & LMC & 60 & $11.18\pm0.02$ & $0.34\pm0.02$ & $ 0.13\pm0.02$ & 15 & $0.34\pm0.03$ & 8 & IVA & \\
472: NGC1835 & LMC & 60 & $10.16\pm0.05$ & $0.74\pm0.04$ & $ 0.11\pm0.03$ & 15 & $0.25\pm0.06$ & 12 & VII & \\
473: NGC1841 & LMC & 25 & \multicolumn{1}{l}{14.08} & \multicolumn{1}{l}{0.90} & \multicolumn{1}{l}{\ \ 0.50} & 14 & $0.62\pm0.09$ & 5 & VII & \\
474: NGC1846 & LMC & 60 & $11.40\pm0.02$ & $0.31\pm0.05$ & $ 0.74\pm0.03$ & 15 & $0.41\pm0.04$ & - & VI & \\
475: NGC1847 & LMC & 72 & $11.06\pm0.02$ & $0.20\pm0.02$ & $-0.33\pm0.03$ & 3 & $0.49\pm0.02$ & - & I & \\
476: NGC1850 & LMC & 60 & $ 9.36\pm0.06$ & $0.11\pm0.03$ & $-0.34\pm0.07$ & 15 & $0.33\pm0.01$ & - & II & \\
477: NGC1856 & LMC & 60 & $10.07\pm0.02$ & $0.34\pm0.01$ & $ 0.06\pm0.01$ & 15 & $0.65\pm0.06$ & 8 & IVA & \\
478: NGC1860 & LMC & 72 & $11.04\pm0.02$ & $0.14\pm0.02$ & $-0.39\pm0.03$ & 3 & $0.22\pm0.03$ & - & I & \\
479: NGC1866 & LMC & 60 & $ 9.89\pm0.01$ & $0.26\pm0.02$ & $-0.06\pm0.01$ & 15 & $0.28\pm0.06$ & - & III & \\
480: NGC1868 & LMC & 62 & $11.57\pm0.02$ & $0.45\pm0.02$ & $ 0.15\pm0.03$ & 3 & $0.12\pm0.03$ & 8 & IVA & \\
481: NGC1898 & LMC & 60 & $11.52\pm0.06$ & $0.75\pm0.02$ & $-0.03\pm0.03$ & 15 & $0.22\pm0.06$ & 12 & VII & \\
482: NGC1916 & LMC & 44 & $10.38\pm0.02$ & $0.78\pm0.02$ & $ 0.18\pm0.03$ & 3 & $0.42\pm0.05$ & - & VII & \\
483: NGC1928 & LMC & 62 & $11.88\pm0.02$ & $0.22\pm0.02$ & $-0.31\pm0.03$ & 3 & $0.20\pm0.05$ & 9 & VII & \\
484: NGC1939 & LMC & 38 & $11.78\pm0.05$ & $0.69\pm0.05$ & $ 0.09\pm0.05$ & 4 & $0.40\pm0.08$ & 9 & VII & \\
485: NGC1978 & LMC & 60 & $10.74\pm0.04$ & $0.78\pm0.04$ & $ 0.23\pm0.07$ & 15 & $0.76\pm0.05$ & - & VI & \\
486: NGC1984 & LMC & 50 & $ 9.99\pm0.04$ & $0.01\pm0.04$ & $-0.82\pm0.04$ & 4 & $0.36\pm0.02$ & - & 0 & \\
487: NGC1987 & LMC & 60 & $12.18\pm0.01$ & $0.51\pm0.01$ & $ 0.18\pm0.02$ & 15 & $0.28\pm0.03$ & - & IVB & \\
488: NGC1994 & LMC & 50 & $ 9.78\pm0.04$ & $0.09\pm0.04$ & $-0.69\pm0.04$ & 4 & $0.41\pm0.02$ & - & I & \\
489: NGC2004 & LMC & 72 & $ 9.60\pm0.02$ & $0.13\pm0.02$ & $-0.71\pm0.03$ & 3 & $0.33\pm0.02$ & - & I & \\
490: NGC2005 & LMC & 25 & $11.57\pm0.00$ & $0.73\pm0.00$ & $ 0.20\pm0.00$ & 14 & $0.37\pm0.06$ & 12 & VII & \\
491: NGC2011 & LMC & 45 & $10.58\pm0.02$ & $0.00\pm0.02$ & $-0.72\pm0.03$ & 3 & $0.47\pm0.02$ & - & I & \\
492: NGC2019 & LMC & 60 & $10.95\pm0.01$ & $0.77\pm0.01$ & $ 0.16\pm0.02$ & 15 & $0.37\pm0.06$ & 12 & VII & \\
493: NGC2031 & LMC & 72 & $10.83\pm0.02$ & $0.26\pm0.02$ & $-0.07\pm0.03$ & 3 & $0.40\pm0.03$ & - & III & \\
494: NGC$2058_{\rm (v)}$ & LMC & 60 & $11.85\pm0.04$ & $0.24\pm0.01$ & $-0.12\pm0.01$ & 15 & $0.39\pm0.02$ & - & III & 3\\
495: NGC$2058_{\rm (G)}$ & LMC & 60 & $10.73\pm0.03$ & $ $ & $ $ & & & & III & 3\\
496: NGC2100 & LMC & 60 & $ 9.60\pm0.04$ & $0.16\pm0.02$ & $-0.56\pm0.02$ & 15 & $0.80\pm0.02$ & - & I & \\
497: NGC2107 & LMC & 60 & $11.51\pm0.02$ & $0.38\pm0.03$ & $ 0.13\pm0.03$ & 15 & $0.36\pm0.04$ & - & IVA & \\
498: NGC2108 & LMC & 62 & $12.32\pm0.01$ & $0.58\pm0.01$ & $ 0.22\pm0.02$ & 2 & $0.50\pm0.05$ & - & IVB & \\
499: NGC2121 & LMC & 62 & $12.37\pm0.01$ & $0.84\pm0.01$ & $ 0.25\pm0.02$ & 2 & $0.22\pm0.06$ & 8 & VI & \\
500: NGC2134 & LMC & 60 & $11.05\pm0.04$ & $0.26\pm0.02$ & $-0.02\pm0.03$ & 15 & $0.62\pm0.03$ & - & III & \\
501: NGC2136 & LMC & 60 & $10.54\pm0.02$ & $0.28\pm0.02$ & $-0.13\pm0.02$ & 15 & $0.58\pm0.02$ & - & III & \\
502: NGC2153 & LMC & 100 & $13.05\pm0.04$ & $0.69\pm0.04$ & $ 0.03\pm0.04$ & 4 & $0.27\pm0.05$ & - & VII & \\
503: NGC2154 & LMC & 62 & $12.32\pm0.01$ & $0.68\pm0.01$ & $ 0.24\pm0.02$ & 2 & $0.39\pm0.03$ & - & V & \\
504: NGC2155 & LMC & 62 & $12.60\pm0.01$ & $0.81\pm0.01$ & $ 0.23\pm0.02$ & 2 & $0.06\pm0.03$ & 8 & VI & \\
505: NGC2156 & LMC & 72 & $11.38\pm0.02$ & $0.12\pm0.02$ & $-0.07\pm0.03$ & 3 & $0.20\pm0.02$ & - & III & \\
506: NGC2157 & LMC & 60 & $10.16\pm0.02$ & $0.19\pm0.02$ & $-0.16\pm0.01$ & 15 & $0.42\pm0.02$ & - & III & \\
507: \hline
508: \end{tabular}
509: {\it Notes to Table~\ref{tab:comp}}. See next page
510: \end{minipage}
511: \end{table*}
512:
513: \setcounter{table}{3}
514: \begin{table*}
515: \centering
516: \begin{minipage}{160mm}
517: \caption{Continued}
518: \begin{tabular}{@{}lcrrrrrcrrr@{}}
519: \hline
520: ID & Galaxy & \multicolumn{1}{c}{D}& \multicolumn{1}{c}{$V$} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{$(B-V)$} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{$(U-B)$} & Ref. & $A_{V}$ & Ref. & SWB & Note\\
521: (1) & (2) & (3) & \multicolumn{1}{c}{(4)} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{(5)} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{(6)} & (7) & (8) & (9) & \multicolumn{1}{c}{(10)} & (11) \\
522: \hline
523: NGC2159 & LMC & 72 & $11.38\pm0.02$ & $0.28\pm0.02$ & $-0.14\pm0.03$ & 3 & $0.29\pm0.03$ & - & III & \\
524: NGC2162 & LMC & 62 & $12.70\pm0.01$ & $0.68\pm0.01$ & $ 0.31\pm0.02$ & 2 & $0.09\pm0.06$ & 8 & V & \\
525: NGC2164 & LMC & 60 & $10.34\pm0.01$ & $0.10\pm0.01$ & $-0.24\pm0.01$ & 6 & $0.33\pm0.02$ & - & II & \\
526: NGC2172 & LMC & 72 & $11.75\pm0.02$ & $0.18\pm0.02$ & $-0.16\pm0.03$ & 3 & $0.26\pm0.03$ & - & III & \\
527: NGC2173 & LMC & 150 & $11.88\pm0.05$ & $0.82\pm0.05$ & $ 0.28\pm0.05$ & 4 & $0.22\pm0.06$ & 8 & VI & \\
528: NGC2190 & LMC & 61 & $12.94\pm0.02$ & $0.63\pm0.03$ & $ 0.29\pm0.03$ & 4 & $0.39\pm0.02$ & - & V & \\
529: NGC2193 & LMC & 38 & $13.42\pm0.02$ & $0.71\pm0.03$ & $ 0.20\pm0.03$ & 4 & $0.39\pm0.02$ & - & V & \\
530: NGC2203 & LMC & 150 & $11.29\pm0.04$ & $0.77\pm0.04$ & $ 0.26\pm0.04$ & 4 & $0.39\pm0.02$ & - & VI & \\
531: NGC2209 & LMC & 62 & $13.15\pm0.01$ & $0.52\pm0.01$ & $ 0.36\pm0.02$ & 2 & $0.47\pm0.09$ & 8 & IVB & \\
532: NGC2210 & LMC & 60 & $10.94\pm0.03$ & $0.71\pm0.03$ & $ 0.11\pm0.01$ & 6 & $0.28\pm0.09$ & 5 & VII & \\
533: NGC2213 & LMC & 62 & $12.38\pm0.01$ & $0.71\pm0.01$ & $ 0.28\pm0.02$ & 2 & $0.19\pm0.09$ & 8 & V & \\
534: NGC2214 & LMC & 60 & $10.93\pm0.01$ & $0.11\pm0.02$ & $-0.27\pm0.01$ & 6 & $0.39\pm0.02$ & - & II & \\
535: NGC2231 & LMC & 44 & $13.20\pm0.01$ & $0.67\pm0.01$ & $ 0.24\pm0.02$ & 2 & $0.39\pm0.02$ & - & V & \\
536: NGC2249 & LMC & 72 & $12.23\pm0.02$ & $0.43\pm0.02$ & $ 0.20\pm0.03$ & 3 & $0.03\pm0.06$ & 8 & IVB & \\
537: NGC2257 & LMC & 61 & $12.62\pm0.02$ & $0.62\pm0.03$ & $ 0.01\pm0.03$ & 4 & $0.00\pm0.00$ & 13 & VII & \\
538: ESO121-003 & LMC & 61 & $14.04\pm0.02$ & $0.87\pm0.03$ & $ 0.17\pm0.05$ & 4 & $0.10\pm0.05$ & 9 & VII & \\
539: Hodge4 & LMC & 38 & $13.33\pm0.02$ & $0.66\pm0.03$ & $ 0.16\pm0.05$ & 4 & $0.39\pm0.02$ & - & V & \\
540: Hodge11 & LMC & 62 & $11.98\pm0.01$ & $0.63\pm0.01$ & $ 0.00\pm0.02$ & 2 & $0.23\pm0.02$ & 10 & VII & \\
541: Hodge14 & LMC & 62 & $13.42\pm0.01$ & $0.72\pm0.01$ & $ 0.21\pm0.02$ & 2 & $0.25\pm0.06$ & 8 & V & \\
542: Kron3 & SMC & 62 & $12.05\pm0.02$ & $0.69\pm0.01$ & $ 0.05\pm0.02$ & 1 & $0.00\pm0.06$ & 11 & VII & \\
543: Lindsay1 & SMC & 62 & $13.32\pm0.05$ & $0.75\pm0.00$ & $ 0.17\pm0.05$ & 1 & $0.19\pm0.06$ & 11 & VII & \\
544: Lindsay113 & SMC & 62 & $13.61\pm0.04$ & $0.73\pm0.02$ & $ 0.05\pm0.09$ & 1 & $0.00\pm0.06$ & 11 & VII & \\
545: LW431 & LMC & 38 & $13.67\pm0.02$ & $0.74\pm0.03$ & $ 0.13\pm0.05$ & 4 & $0.39\pm0.02$ & - & VII & \\
546: SL842 & LMC & 38 & $14.15\pm0.02$ & $0.79\pm0.03$ & $ 0.11\pm0.05$ & 4 & $0.39\pm0.02$ & - & VII & \\\hline
547: \end{tabular}
548:
549: {\it Notes on Table~\ref{tab:comp}:} Column~(1) is the cluster
550: designation, (2) gives the galaxy in which the object resides. The
551: diameter of the aperture used for the integral visual magnitude and
552: colour measurements is given in column~(3). Column~(4) gives
553: the $V$ magnitude and it's uncertainty, while (5) and (6) list
554: $(B-V)$ and $(U-B)$ colours and their corresponding uncertainties. These
555: values are not reddening corrected. References
556: to the sources of the integrated-light measurements are listed in
557: column~(7). Column~(8) presents $A_{V}$ information and corresponding uncertainties. References to the reddening information are given in column~(9). Preference is given to extinction estimates based on deep CMDs. In case these were not available, extinction values retrieved from the website of Magellanic Clouds Photometric Survey are provided (marked with dashes in column~(9)). Column~(10) shows the SWB type of
558: the object, for the LMC clusters the information comes from
559: \cite{bica_et_al_96}, SWB types of SMC clusters were recovered from
560: from the $s$-parameter calibration of \cite{elson_fall_85}. Finally some remarks to the objects or the photometry
561: are given in column~(11).
562:
563: {\sc Notes on column~(11):} (1) The information about this object in
564: \cite{bica_et_al_96} and \cite{vdb_hagen_68} is completely
565: discrepant with each other. Both values are listed with lowercase "B" and "v" added in
566: parenthesis to the cluster designation.
567:
568: (2) There is a foreground star superposed on the object. The flux from the star and
569: part of the cluster were measured in a 15$''$ diaphragm and were subtracted from the flux of the larger (D=60\arcsec) aperture encompassing the object to derive the final colours and magnitudes.
570: The uncorrected and corrected values are listed in lowercase "u" and "c" in parenthesis
571: after the cluster designation, respectively. All the data is from
572: \cite{vdb_hagen_68}. The photometric uncertainties for the uncorrected mesurements
573: are also adopted for the corrected ones. They should be considered a lower
574: limit.
575:
576: (3) Measurements for NGC 2058 from \cite{goudfrooij06} and
577: \cite{vdb_hagen_68} are discrepant by more than one magnitude in
578: $V$. A possible explanation is misidentification of the object in the
579: earlier study. Inspection of a 14\arcmin~x~14\arcmin \ $V$ image
580: available in SIMBAD revealed several less luminous clusters in close proximity to the
581: object, which might have caused the overestimate of the $V$ magnitude
582: in \citeauthor{vdb_hagen_68}. The $V$ value from
583: \citeauthor{goudfrooij06} is also listed in the table. Lowercase "G"
584: and "v" are added in parenthesis to the cluster designation to
585: indicate the origin of the photometry (\cite{goudfrooij06} and
586: \cite{vdb_hagen_68} respectively).
587:
588:
589: {\it References:\/} (1)\cite{alcaino78} (2)\cite{bernard75} (3)\cite{bernard_bigay_74} (4)\cite{bica_et_al_96} (5)\cite{brocato96} (6)\cite{chiosi07} (7)\cite{crowl2001} (8)\cite{kerber07} (9)\cite{mg04} (10)\cite{mighell96} (11)\cite{mighell98b} (12)\cite{olsen98} (13)\cite{testa95} (14)\cite{vdb81} (15)\cite{vdb_hagen_68} (16)\cite{walker92}
590:
591: \end{minipage}
592: \end{table*}
593:
594: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
595: {\bf Notes on individual objects} -- All the objects that required special
596: attention during the reduction process are commented on below.
597:
598: {\bf NGC~265} -- This object is situated in a rich SMC star field and the
599: depth of the images decreases from $J$ to $K_s$. Analysis of the curves
600: of growth show that for aperture diameters larger than 140\arcsec\ this
601: trend causes some variation in the measured cluster colours. The photometry
602: is carried out with the full set of apertures, but results for sizes
603: exceeding 140\arcsec\ should be treated with caution.
604:
605: {\bf NGC~1644} -- This faint compact cluster is situated close to the edge of
606: the atlas image. The photometry is carried out up to 90\arcsec\ aperture
607: diameter. The curve of growth in $K_s$ shows evidence for
608: variations in the background level. Results for
609: aperture sizes larger than 60\arcsec\ could be affected by these
610: variations. Due to the proximity of the image edge our automated procedure
611: for deriving the aperture centres does not provide reliable results.
612: Therefore the cluster centre was chosen ``by eye'', but we consider this
613: position to be reliable due to the compactness of the object and lack of
614: stellar contamination in the surrounding field.
615:
616: {\bf NGC~1928} -- This is an old globular cluster
617: \citep[see][]{mg04}. Situated in the LMC bar region, this object
618: suffers from strong background/foreground contamination. Combined with
619: the limited depth of the cluster's image on the 2MASS atlas frames, this makes
620: the integrated photometry challenging. Due to the presence of
621: several relatively bright stars in the vicinity of the cluster, we
622: decided to use only the results based on the unresolved light from the
623: object to derive the aperture centres. Several bright stars in the
624: aperture set were subtracted after an analysis of their properties
625: based on the infrared colours explained in detail in Paper~I. The
626: resulting integrated-photometry curves of growth show residual effects
627: of the background removal and the NIR photometry should be treated
628: with caution in this case.
629:
630: {\bf NGC~2058} -- This cluster is located close to the edge of the atlas
631: image. Photometry is carried out with a set of apertures up to D=80\arcsec.
632:
633: {\bf NGC~2107} -- The cluster lies close to the edge of the atlas image.
634: In this case photometry was carried out with a set of aperture sizes up to
635: 140\arcsec. The curves of growth indicate that we obtain good
636: sampling of the flux from the object.
637:
638: {\bf NGC~2108} -- There are three luminous stars in the cluster. Their
639: colours are consistent with those expected for carbon stars. It is
640: noteworthy to mention that \cite{ferraro2004} found the same number of AGB
641: stars in their NIR photometric study of this object. The age estimates of
642: the cluster are also consistent with the presence of carbon stars, so they
643: are included in the final photometry.
644:
645: {\bf NGC~2134} -- Several luminous stars are present within the cluster
646: area. They affect the centring, so we use the results from the unresolved
647: component. The colours of these stars are consistent with those expected
648: for carbon stars, and they are included in the final integrated photometry
649: measurements.
650:
651: {\bf NGC~2154} -- Due to the proximity of the object to the edge of the
652: atlas image, the photometry is carried out with a set of apertures up to
653: 110\arcsec\ in diameter.
654: \label{notes}
655:
656: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
657: \subsection{Compiling a Catalog of Optical Cluster Photometry}
658:
659: We conducted an extensive literature search for appropriate integrated
660: optical cluster colours to combine with our NIR measurements. Our
661: compilation from the literature is presented in Table~\ref{tab:comp}. It
662: is based on integrated-light photoelectric observations and lists the $V$
663: magnitudes, $(B-V)$ and $(U-B)$ colours plus their uncertainties, reddening values towards the objects with their corresponding uncertainties are also included. The
664: photometry comes from different observers, so special care was taken to
665: ensure that the individual results are consistent. Recent independent CCD
666: datasets from \cite{goudfrooij06} and \cite{hunter03} were also used in
667: the consistency checks. The cases where discrepancies cannot be
668: readily explained
669: are listed as notes in the last column of Table~\ref{tab:comp}. As a rule,
670: we provide information about the largest aperture size available. This
671: reduces the effects of both the aperture centring (which could differ for
672: the optical and NIR data), the stochastic fluctuations of the background
673: stellar population and of the stars in the clusters themselves. The
674: photometry of all SMC clusters is taken from the homogeneous dataset of
675: \cite{alcaino78}, and is also listed in Table~\ref{tab:comp}. Reddening information is compiled from a number of sources (indicated in the table) and preference is given to values based on deep CMDs.
676: \label{comp}
677:
678: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
679: \section{Testing the Models}
680: In recent years significant improvements in modeling the properties of
681: Simple Stellar Populations have been achieved, and several independent
682: sets of SSP models have been published. Here, we will focus our
683: attention on comparing the models by Vazdekis, Bruzual \& Charlot,
684: Anders \& Fritze-v.\ Alvensleben, and Maraston with the integrated
685: photometry of Magellanic Cloud
686: clusters presented in paper I and in this work. Our main goals are
687: to: {\it (i)\/} determine which models best reproduce the
688: observed cluster colours; {\it (ii)\/} establish whether clusters of
689: different ages and metallicities can be accurately distinguished via a
690: combination of optical-NIR colours; and {\it (iii)\/} provide information that could help improve the model predictions.
691: Below, we first briefly discuss the colours we will use to compare observed
692: data with SSP model predictions as well as the NIR photometric system we
693: will adopt in that context. We then present the actual comparisons
694: between data and SSP model predictions for distinct age groups. The
695: selection of clusters for each age group is described in Appendices~A
696: and B.
697: \label{testmodels0}
698:
699: \subsection{Choice of Optical-NIR colours}
700: To select a set of optical-NIR colours that are most applicable
701: for a proper and meaningful comparison between observed data and SSP model
702: predictions, we look for colours that do a good job at breaking the
703: well-known age-metallicity degeneracy while typically delivering
704: photometry with adequate signal-to-noise (S/N) ratios. For this purpose we
705: follow the work of \cite{puzia07} who showed that the colour
706: combination $B-J$ vs.\ $J-K$ provides very good age resolution
707: (through $B-J$) while $J-K$ is much more sensitive to metallicity than
708: to age \citep[except during a brief age interval after the AGB phase
709: transition where $J-K$ shows a modest age dependence; see
710: also][]{ferraro00}.
711: In addition, we present $V-J$ vs. $J-K$
712: colour-colour diagrams since the $V$-band typically provides a higher
713: S/N in observations than the $B$ band.
714:
715: \subsection{Stochastic Effects in the Stellar Populations}
716: When a comparison between observations of star clusters and theoretical
717: predictions is performed, it is important to keep in mind that
718: models assume that clusters are sufficiently massive that
719: all stages of stellar evolution are well sampled. Predictions of any model based on
720: these assumptions will match the observations only in the limit of a
721: sufficiently large number of observed stars. The mass of real stellar systems thus drives the validity of
722: comparison with model predictions.
723:
724: The level of stochastic fluctuations which arise at different total
725: cluster masses has been addressed in a number of previous studies
726: \citep[e.g.][]{bruzual2002, lm2000, cl04}. Most notably,
727: \citeauthor{lm2000} calculate the minimum masses of a stellar
728: population with solar metallicity that ensure
729: that the luminosity fluctuations are less than 10\% of the mean
730: luminosity
731: (${\cal{M}}_{(10\%)}$),
732: $\sigma_{L}/L \le 10 \%$
733: (roughly corresponding to $\sigma = 0.1$ mag) for several photometric
734: passbands.
735: \cite{cl04} define a ``Lowest Luminosity Limit'' (LLL) which requires
736: that the total luminosity of a modeled cluster be larger than the
737: contribution of the brightest star included in the isochrones, and
738: show that the highest LLL masses are derived for the $K$ band.
739: Any object which complies with these mass limits provides a
740: meaningful comparison for the entire range of optical-NIR colours in
741: our study.
742: Below, we check whether our composite clusters are more massive than the
743: implied LLL masses by comparing the most luminous star in the isochrone
744: (at the mean age and metallicity of each composite cluster) with the
745: estimated cluster mass (described below). Using the on-line tool CMD
746: 1.2l\footnote{available at:
747: http://stev.oapd.inaf.it/~lgirardi/cgi-bin/cmd} provided by L. Girardi, we
748: adopt a \cite{kroupa2001} IMF corrected for binaries (his Equation~6), and
749: find that all of our composite cluster easily satisfy the less stringent
750: LLL criterion. The LLL masses that we use are given in
751: Table~\ref{tab:mod}, and have been corrected for the difference in the
752: adopted lower mass limits ($0.01~M_{\odot}$ in \citeauthor{cl04} and
753: $0.1~M_{\odot}$ in this work). \cite{cl04} compare their values of LLL
754: with the ${\cal{M}}_{(10\%)}$ masses derived by \citeauthor{lm2000},
755: scaled for differences in the adopted IMF between the two works. These
756: scaled values of ${\cal{M}}_{(10\%)}$ are also presented in
757: Table~\ref{tab:mod}.~This ${\cal{M}}_{(10\%)}$ limit is closely matched by
758: composite cluster (age bin: $2-4.6$ Gyr) and surpassed by all others,
759: ensuring a robust comparison between our measurements and model
760: predictions.
761: \label{stoceffects}
762:
763: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
764: \subsection{The Old Cluster Population}
765: Integrated $JHK_S$ magnitudes were measured within the apertures of the
766: optical photometry for all old clusters listed in Table~\ref{tab:all}. The
767: photometry is presented in Table~\ref{tab:ph}. We note that the data in the
768: table are {\it measured\/} magnitudes, not corrected for
769: reddening. A reddening correction {\it is\/} however applied when plotting
770: the objects on the model grids in
771: Figures~\ref{fig:oldvdat}\,--\,\ref{fig:agejk}. Reddening values
772: based on deep CMDs from the literature are used where available. For
773: the rest of the sample, reddening estimates based on photometric
774: information from the MCPS are applied.
775:
776:
777: \setcounter{figure}{2}
778: \begin{figure}
779: \centering
780: \includegraphics[bb=14 14 287 785,width=6.4cm]{fig3.eps}
781: \caption{$(V-J)$ vs. $(J-K_S)$ colour-colour diagrams for the old
782: clusters. Isochrones for 10 and 15 Gyr are plotted with solid
783: lines and metallicity values are marked along them. The panels present the
784: models of Maraston, Bruzual \& Charlot, Anders \& Fritze-v.\
785: Alvensleben and Vazdekis from top to bottom, respectively. The
786: reddening vector
787: is shown in the top panel. The two outliers are NGC~1928 (small red
788: diamond) and NGC~1939 (small blue circle). NGC~1916 (small black circle)
789: suffers from differential reddening (no age and metallicity
790: available).
791: The 9-Gyr-old cluster ESO121--SC03 is shown as a green triangle. Clusters with metallicities lower than the mean value for the sample are plotted as blue circles, the others are
792: denoted with red diamonds. The mean colours for each of
793: those sub-samples are shown as filled blue circle and red diamond
794: respectively. The corresponding mean [Fe/H] values are shown in the
795: second panel.}
796: \label{fig:oldvdat}
797: \end{figure}
798:
799: \setcounter{figure}{3}
800: \begin{figure}
801: \centering
802: \includegraphics[bb=14 14 287 785,width=6.4cm]{fig4.eps}
803: \caption{$(B-J)$ vs. $(J-K_S)$ colour-colour diagrams for the old
804: clusters. As in Figure~\ref{fig:oldvdat} two different isochrones are
805: plotted and metallicity values are marked. The panels are organized in
806: the same order, with an extinction vector shown in the top panel. The two
807: clusters NGC~1928 and NGC~1939, fall outside of the diagrams, and
808: the directions towards them are marked with red and blue arrow
809: respectively. NGC~1916 is shown as a small black circle. }
810: \label{fig:oldbdat}
811: \end{figure}
812:
813: In Figures \ref{fig:oldvdat} and \ref{fig:oldbdat} we show a comparison
814: between the model predictions and reddening corrected colours for the 15 old Magellanic
815: Cloud star clusters in our sample. The errorbars include uncertainties in the
816: photometry, reddening correction, and an estimate of the error due to the
817: statistical fluctuations within the field stellar population in the
818: vicinity of each cluster.
819: The most significant outliers, NGC~1928 and NGC~1939
820: (the two points in the lower left part of Figure~\ref{fig:oldvdat}),
821: suffer from significant crowding due to their location in the LMC bar (see
822: the remarks about NGC~1928 in Section~\ref{notes}). This likely affected
823: their optical photometry measurements, which were retrieved
824: from the literature\footnote{E.g., \cite{elson_fall_85} derived S = 22 (Age
825: $\sim$ 50 Myr) for NGC~1928 based on the integrated-light colours from
826: \cite{vdb81}. This contradicts the results of \cite{mg04} based on high-resolution
827: {\it HST/ACS\/} imaging, demonstrating clearly that the field contamination
828: in the LMC bar region can significantly affect the integrated-light
829: measurements if not properly accounted for.}. However, the measured colours
830: for most (other) clusters are generally in good agreement with the model
831: predictions.
832:
833: As mentioned in the previous section, it is possible that stochastic fluctuations in the number of
834: (e.g., giant) stars will cause a spread of cluster colours at any
835: given age and metallicity. In order to assess this effect, we estimate
836: the stellar mass which contributes to our integrated magnitudes for each Magellanic Cloud cluster as follows. We use
837: our extinction-corrected $J$- band magnitude (the 2MASS
838: and \citeauthor{bb88} photometric systems are closest in $J$ and the 2MASS
839: survey has its highest sensitivity in $J$), combined with the $J$ band $M/L$ ratios
840: predicted by the Maraston (2005) models
841: which assume a Kroupa (2001) IMF.
842: These estimates of the stellar mass
843: contributing to each observed colour are presented in Table~\ref{tab:ph}.
844: For comparison, we include mass estimates from \cite{mclvdm05} which
845: are determined from profile fitting (to determine the total cluster luminosity)
846: combined with $M/L_V$ ratios determined from SSP model fitting
847: of each cluster (assuming the BC03 models with a Chabrier-disk IMF).
848: While the two estimates are in
849: reasonable agreement, our
850: masses are systematically lower.
851: We found that the main driver of this difference are the systematically lower
852: total cluster luminosities compared to the values
853: determined by \cite{mclvdm05}. This effect could be predicted
854: since we do not extrapolate the cluster light outside of
855: the aperture size used for the optical photometry.
856: Secondary effects in the mass differences between the two works
857: come from differences in the adopted ages and metallicities, and hence
858: SSP $M/L$.
859:
860: We divide the old cluster sample by metallicity into two subsamples,
861: accumulating enough mass in each bin to render the effects of stochastic fluctuations
862: negligible.
863: Clusters with [Fe/H] $< -1.71$ are designated as ``metal-poor'' and
864: shown as open
865: blue circles on Figures~\ref{fig:oldvdat} and \ref{fig:oldbdat}), and
866: those with [Fe/H]$>-1.71$ are referred to as ``metal-rich'' (depicted as
867: open red diamonds). The mean magnitudes and colours corresponding to the objects of the sub-sample are calculated from the sum of the fluxes of individual objects in each bin.
868:
869: The metal-poor and metal-rich sub-samples
870: have mean [Fe/H] values of $-2.08$ and $-1.46$ dex, respectively,
871: and are presented along with the resulting metallicities (filled blue
872: circle for the metal-poor clusters and filled red diamond for the
873: metal-rich ones respectively). ESO121\,--\,SC03, the $\sim$\,9~Gyr cluster
874: in the LMC, is also shown on these figures as a green triangle. The metal-rich and metal-poor globular cluster colours clearly
875: separate in the optical-NIR colour-colour space, and generally follow the
876: model predictions.
877:
878: To provide a quantitative measure (and a summary) of the performance
879: of the different models in terms of fitting the average colours of the
880: various subsamples, we compiled the relevant information in
881: Table~\ref{tab:mod} (for {\it all\/} age groups). The mean colours of
882: the composite clusters are listed there along with the interpolated
883: model predictions for the ages and metallicities corresponding to the
884: composite points (using linear interpolation between adjacent model
885: isochrones and iso-metallicity grid lines), as well as the measured
886: colour differences between the data and the model predictions (we will
887: hereafter refer to these colour differences as ``absolute colour
888: residuals''). In Table~\ref{tab:mod} we also present the inferred
889: ages and metallicities of the composite clusters according to the
890: models. In some cases it is not possible to derive reliable stellar
891: population properties due to insufficient coverage of the model grids
892: (those are left blank in the table). For the old metal-rich cluster
893: sub-sample ($<$[Fe/H]$>=-1.46$) {\it all\/} models \citep{vazdekis99,
894: bc03, maraston05} infer ages exceeding the corresponding oldest model
895: isochrones. \citeauthor{maraston05} models with BHB are in a good
896: agreement with the mean composite cluster ages for the entire old
897: cluster sample and the metal-poor ($<$[Fe/H]$>=-2.08$) sub-sample,
898: although the inferred metallicities are a little lower than the mean
899: values for each composite point.
900:
901: Inspection of Table~\ref{tab:mod} shows that the models of
902: \cite{maraston05} (with BHB) provide the best overall match to the
903: observations of old clusters,
904: especially in terms of estimating their ages,
905: while the \cite{bc03}
906: models formally do the best job of estimating SSP metallicities.
907:
908: \label{oldclusters}
909:
910: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
911: \subsection{The 2 Gyr $\le$ Age $<$ 10 Gyr Cluster Population}
912:
913: Nine LMC and six SMC clusters with adequate age and metallicity
914: measurements were selected in this age interval. Information on the
915: cluster ages, metallicities, and masses
916: are compiled in Tables~B9 and B10. A comparison between our photometry
917: and the model tracks in $V-J$ vs.\ $J-K_S$ and $B-J$ vs.\ $J-K_S$
918: colour-colour diagrams are shown in Figures~\ref{fig:2_10vdat} and
919: \ref{fig:2_10bdat}, respectively. We further divide the $2-10$~Gyr
920: sample into two subsamples, with ages older than and younger than
921: 4.6 Gyr.
922: When compared with the \cite{maraston05} models,
923: these show that generally the younger subsample agrees with the
924: predicted location of the $2$~Gyr model, and that the older bin also
925: falls in the expected region of colour-colour space.
926:
927: Because this bin includes a large range of ages and some of the
928: individual clusters have stellar mass estimates lower than
929: $\cal{M}_{\it LLL}$ (see Section~\ref{stoceffects}), one can expect
930: some scatter among the individual measurements with respect to the
931: model predictions, which is indeed observed. Most of our mass
932: estimates in this age bin are systematically lower than those of
933: \cite{mclvdm05} (see \S~\ref{oldclusters} for possible
934: explanation). The composite clusters representing the entire sample in
935: this age range and the metal-poor older subpopulation (4.6 Gyr $\le$
936: Age $<$ 10 Gyr) both accumulate masses exceeding $\cal{M}_{\rm
937: (10\%)}$, so that the composite colours ought to yield meaningful
938: comparisons to the SSP model predictions. Unfortunately this is not
939: quite the case for the younger metal-rich subpopulation (2 Gyr $\le$
940: Age $<$ 4.6 Gyr).
941: These clusters do however,
942: exceed $\cal{M}_{\it LLL}$ by a factor
943: of $\sim10$, so while we might expect some bias in the colors
944: it is certainly worth presenting information in this age
945: range in Table~\ref{tab:mod}.
946: We point out that these results must
947: be treated with some caution (also noted in the table). Reliable ages
948: and metallicities are needed for more clusters in this particular age
949: interval in order to provide more accurate comparison between model
950: predictions and observed properties of the stellar populations.
951:
952: All four sets of models reproduce the mass-weighted average colours
953: reasonably well in terms of quantitative colour differences (see
954: Table~\ref{tab:mod}). Ages and metallicities inferred by {\it all\/}
955: SSP models for the three composite clusters in this age interval are
956: also listed in the table. There is some degeneracy present in the
957: \cite{maraston05} models in this regime due to the intersection of the
958: 10 Gyr and 4 Gyr isochrones in colour-colour space. Taking this into
959: account, it is not possible to infer a single value for the stellar
960: population's age or metallicity. Stellar population properties
961: measured with respect to different \citeauthor{maraston05} isochrones
962: are listed in Table~\ref{tab:mod}. There is good agreement between the
963: mean ages of the composite clusters and the ages infered by the model,
964: but the corresponding metallicities are typically lower. Generally all
965: models provide consistent stellar population properties between both
966: colour-colour diagrams typically showing somewhat lower ages and
967: higher metallicities. In some cases differences are observed in the
968: inferred properties of the stellar populations for some sub-samples in
969: this age interval (see Table~\ref{tab:mod}), when predictions are
970: based on $(V-J)$ vs.\ $(J-K_S)$ vs. the $(B-J)$ vs.\ $(J-K_S)$
971: colour-colour diagrams.
972: Note that all models
973: (except \citeauthor{maraston05}) infer super-solar metallicities for
974: the (2 Gyr $\le$ Age $<$ 4.6 Gyr) subpopulation. Further investigation
975: is needed to determine whether
976: it is a model ingredient or assumption that is responsible for
977: the mismatch, or whether this mismatch occurs
978: due to insufficient mass accumulated in the age bin.
979:
980: Overall the \cite{maraston05} models provide the best inference about
981: the properties of the stellar populations in this age range.
982:
983: \setcounter{figure}{4}
984: \begin{figure}
985: \centering
986: \includegraphics[bb=14 14 287 785,width=6.4cm]{fig5.eps}
987: \caption{$(V-J)$ vs. $(J-K_S)$ colour-colour diagrams for the clusters
988: between 2 and 10 Gyr. The isochrones for three different ages are
989: plotted with solid lines and metallicity values are marked along the
990: model tracks for 10 Gyr. Black dotted lines stand for equal
991: metallicity. The four panels show four SSP models as in
992: Figure~\ref{fig:oldvdat}. A reddening vector for $A_{V}=1^{m}$ is
993: shown in the
994: top panel. A legend to the individual symbols is provided in the
995: bottom panel. The composite sub-samples are marked with filled
996: symbols, along with their errors (colour-coded solid lines). The mean
997: age and metallicity for each sub-sample are indicated in the second
998: panel. The red arrow points to the position of {\bf Hodge 4},
999: falling outside the boundaries of the plotted colour-colour space.}
1000: \label{fig:2_10vdat}
1001: \end{figure}
1002:
1003: \setcounter{figure}{5}
1004: \begin{figure}
1005: \centering
1006: \includegraphics[bb=14 14 287 785,width=6.4cm]{fig6.eps}
1007: \caption{As Figure\ref{fig:2_10vdat}, but for $(B-J)$ vs. $(J-K_S)$.}
1008: \label{fig:2_10bdat}
1009: \end{figure}
1010:
1011: \label{2_10}
1012:
1013: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1014: \subsection{The 1 Gyr $\le$ Age $<$ 2 Gyr Cluster Population}
1015:
1016: Eleven LMC and two SMC
1017: clusters with adequate age and metallicity
1018: measurements from CMDs and/or spectroscopy of individual giant stars
1019: were selected in this age interval (see Tables~B9 and B10). Our
1020: photometry and the model tracks in $V-J$ vs.\ $J-K_S$ and $B-J$ vs.\
1021: $J-K_S$ colour-colour space are compared in Figures~\ref{fig:1_2vdat}
1022: and \ref{fig:1_2bdat}. This age interval covers a period after the
1023: ``AGB phase transition'', i.e., the onset of the AGB phase and
1024: coincides with the development of the RGB. Therefore a significant
1025: impact on the light output in the NIR (especially in the $K$-band) is
1026: expected. Hence it is important to maximize the number of objects so
1027: as to accumulate enough mass and decrease the effects of the
1028: stochastic fluctuations in the stellar population.
1029: We added five clusters to our composite based
1030: on their recalibrated
1031: `''S-parameter'' values (the S-parameter is an age indicator based
1032: on integrated $U-B$ and $B-V$ colours, \citep[see][]{elson_fall_85,girardi95}).
1033: Our recalibration of the S-parameter based on recent cluster age
1034: determinations is described in detail in Appendix~A.
1035: The total mass of the composite
1036: cluster with ages between 1 and 2 Gyr is
1037: ${\cal{M}}_{\rm tot} = 3.6 \times 10^5{\cal{M}}_{\odot}$, which exceeds ${\cal{M}}_{(10\%)}$.
1038:
1039: Overall, the colours of clusters in this age range agree reasonably
1040: well with the SSP model predictions. Maraston models
1041: most accurately reproduce
1042: the age of the composite cluster, although it indicates
1043: too low a metallicity. The latter is the reason why the Maraston model
1044: has the largest colour residual for this age range in
1045: Table~\ref{tab:mod}. The performance of the other three models in this
1046: age range are similar to one another: They all indicate an age that is
1047: somewhat too young and a metallicity that is somewhat too high, but
1048: the absolute colour residuals are smaller than that of the Maraston
1049: model. Quantitatively, the \citet{bc03} model comes out best in this
1050: age range in terms of absolute colour residuals.
1051:
1052: \setcounter{figure}{6}
1053: \begin{figure}
1054: \centering
1055: \includegraphics[bb=14 14 287 785,width=6.4cm]{fig7.eps}
1056: \caption{$(V-J)$ vs. $(J-K_S)$ colour-colour diagrams for the clusters
1057: between 1 and 2 Gyr. Isochrones for the different ages are plotted
1058: with solid lines and metallicity values are marked along the 2 Gyr
1059: isochrone. The four panels show four SSP models as in
1060: Figures~\ref{fig:oldvdat}\,--\,\ref{fig:2_10bdat}. The blue circles
1061: represent clusters with reliable age and metallicity estimates retrieved
1062: from the literature, while
1063: black circles denote the objects added to the sample on the basis of
1064: our S-parameter recalibration (see Appendix A). The composite cluster is
1065: marked by a filled circle, along with its error (solid blue lines). The mean age and
1066: metallicity are indicated in the second panel.}
1067: \label{fig:1_2vdat}
1068: \end{figure}
1069:
1070: \setcounter{figure}{7}
1071: \begin{figure}
1072: \centering
1073: \includegraphics[bb=14 14 287 785,width=6.4cm]{fig8.eps}
1074: \caption{Same as Figure~\ref{fig:1_2vdat}, but for $(B-J)$ vs. $(J-K_S)$}
1075: \label{fig:1_2bdat}
1076: \end{figure}
1077:
1078: \label{1_2}
1079:
1080: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1081:
1082: \subsection{The 200 Myr $\le$ Age $<$ 1 Gyr Cluster Population}
1083:
1084: \setcounter{figure}{8}
1085: \begin{figure}
1086: \centering
1087: \includegraphics[bb=14 14 287 787,width=6.4cm]{fig9.eps}
1088: \caption{$(V-J)$ vs. $(J-K_S)$ colour-colour diagrams for the clusters
1089: between 200 Myr and 1 Gyr. The information (order of presentation of
1090: the models, extinction) is shown as in the figures for the other age
1091: bins. Three isochrones are plotted for each model (except for V2000
1092: whose models do not include colour information for ages younger than 1
1093: Gyr). The dotted lines show equal metallicities, and their values are marked
1094: along the 1 Gyr isochrone. The red circles represent clusters with
1095: reliable age and metallicity estimates retrieved from the literature,
1096: black circles denotes the objects added to the sample on the basis of
1097: our S-parameter re-calibration. The composite cluster is marked with
1098: filled black symbol, along with its error (solid lines). Its mean age and
1099: metallicity are indicated at the top panel.}
1100: \label{fig:02_1vdat}
1101: \end{figure}
1102:
1103: \setcounter{figure}{9}
1104: \begin{figure}
1105: \centering
1106: \includegraphics[bb=14 14 287 785,width=6.4cm]{fig10.eps}
1107: \caption{$(B-J)$ vs. $(J-K_S)$ colour-colour diagrams for the clusters
1108: between 200 Myr and 1 Gyr. Generally the notes are the same as for the
1109: 200 Myr - 1 Gyr $(V-J)$ vs. $(J-K_S)$ colour-colour diagram. The only
1110: difference is the black arrow in the top panel, pointing toward the
1111: position of NGC2156, which in this case is located out of the colour
1112: boundaries of the panels.}
1113: \label{fig:02_1bdat}
1114: \end{figure}
1115:
1116: In this age range, we identified only three clusters (2 in the LMC and
1117: 1 in the SMC) with reliable age and metallicity estimates based on
1118: currently available deep CMDs
1119: (See Table~\ref{tab:all}). As in the previous
1120: age bin, we added other clusters based on our recalibration of
1121: the S parameter
1122: (see Appendix~A), resulting in the addition of 5
1123: objects to
1124: this age bin. Model tracks in the
1125: $V-J$ vs.\ $J-K_S$ and $B-J$ vs.\ $J-K_S$ colour-colour space are
1126: presented along with our photometry results
1127: in
1128: Figures~\ref{fig:02_1vdat} and \ref{fig:02_1bdat}. The total mass of
1129: the composite cluster of this age range is ${\cal{M}}_{\rm tot} = 1.1
1130: \times 10^5 {\cal M}_{\odot}$, as listed in
1131: Table~\ref{tab:mod}. Unfortunately this
1132: barely
1133: exceeds
1134: ${\cal{M}_{\rm (10\%)}}$. More reliable age and metallicity estimates
1135: are needed for Magellanic Cloud star clusters in this age interval to
1136: be able to provide calibration data that could be crucial to improve
1137: the treatment of the AGB phase and perform further tests of the
1138: models.
1139: Overall, the \cite{bc03}
1140: and \cite{maraston05} models perform best in this age range.
1141: The models of \cite{bc03} and \cite{maraston05} yield similar
1142: metallicity estimates, which are {\em too low\/}. \cite{bc03}
1143: overestimates slightly the mean age of the composite cluster,
1144: \cite{maraston05} infer age that is younger.
1145: The \cite{bc03} models have the smallest colour residuals
1146: in this age range.
1147:
1148: \label{02_1}
1149:
1150: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1151: \subsection{The Complete Sample}
1152:
1153: \setcounter{figure}{10}
1154: \begin{figure}
1155: \centering
1156: \includegraphics[bb=14 14 383 752,width=8.8cm]{fig11.eps}
1157: \caption{Data of all 54 clusters from our test sample on top of the grid of Maraston 2005 models in the $(V-J)$ vs. $(J-K_{S})$ and $(B-J)$ vs. $(J-K_{S})$ colour-colour space. The individual points are colour-coded according to the age of the object (see the legend). The mean colours for each age bin are presented with filled circles. The error bars show the corresponding error of the mean colour.}
1158: \label{fig:allobj}
1159: \end{figure}
1160:
1161: In Figure~\ref{fig:allobj} we present the entire cluster sample, from 200~Myr to
1162: 12~Gyr, studied in the previous sections. One of the main attractions
1163: for using a combination of reddening-corrected optical and NIR integrated colours is that
1164: it is supposed to break the age-metallicity degeneracy. Can it actually do
1165: this? First, we note the important caveat that in the Magellanic
1166: Clouds, the typical cluster mass increases with age. This is
1167: partly
1168: a statistical effect \citep[e.g.,][]{hunter03, whitmore07},
1169: due to the fact that the younger age bins cover shorter times, and
1170: fewer clusters formed originally in these shorter time intervals,
1171: leading statistically to a
1172: somewhat
1173: lower typical cluster mass at younger ages.
1174: The large spread in intrinsic colours among young clusters is due in part to the low masses of
1175: these clusters which naturally causes stochastic
1176: fluctuations in the numbers of massive IR-luminous stars. Another contributor to the larger spread in colours is the fact that the IR-luminous stars in these objects (i.e., the AGB stars) have shorter lifetimes and higher luminosities relative to their counterparts at older ages (i.e., RGB stars) .
1177: Despite these effects, we find that
1178: overall, clusters in different age bins do in fact, appear to occupy
1179: different regions of colour-colour space, although with a relatively
1180: large spread. The solid points reflect the mean colour for
1181: each age bin discussed in the previous sections, most of which
1182: have accumulated masses larger than
1183: $\cal{M}_{\rm(10\%)}$.
1184: The solid points in Figure~\ref{fig:allobj} suggest that the following
1185: conclusions can be safely drawn for massive SSPs based solely on the
1186: combination of $B-J$ and $J-K$ (or $V-J$ and $J-K$) colours:
1187: {\it (i)\/} ages older than roughly 9~Gyr can be
1188: separated from those younger than $\approx 5$~Gyr;
1189: {\it (ii)\/}
1190: ages of $\approx2$~Gyr can be adequately separated from those older than
1191: $\approx5$~Gyr ;
1192: and {\it (iii)\/} finally,
1193: ages younger than 1~Gyr separate nicely from those older than 1~Gyr.
1194:
1195:
1196: \setcounter{table}{4}
1197: \begin{landscape}
1198: \begin{table}
1199: \centering
1200: \caption{Information about the composite clusters and model performance.}
1201: \begin{minipage}{230mm}
1202: \label{tab:mod}
1203: \begin{tabular}{@{}cccrccccccrrrrrr@{}}
1204: \hline
1205: \multicolumn{3}{c}{COMPOSITE COLOURS (CC)} & \multicolumn{4}{c}{MODEL PREDICTIONS (MP)} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{CC -- MP}& \multicolumn{2}{c}{DISTANCE} & \multicolumn{4}{c}{POPULATION PROPERTIES}\\
1206: $(B-J)_{0}$ & $(V-J)_{0}$ & $(J-K_{S})_{0}$ & & & & & & & & & & \multicolumn{2}{c}{$(B-J)$ vs.} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{$(V-J)$ vs.}\\
1207: $\sigma_{(B-J)_{0}}$ & $\sigma_{(V-J)_{0}}$ & $\sigma_{(J-K_{S})_{0}}$ & & & & & & & & & & \multicolumn{2}{c}{$(J-K_{s})$} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{$(J-K_{s})$} \\
1208: & & & {\bf Mod.}$^{\bf (a)}$ & $(B-J)$ & $(V-J)$ & $(J-K_{S})$ & $\Delta(B-J)$ & $\Delta(V-J)$ & $\Delta(J-K_{S})$ & $R_{B}$ & $R_{V}$ & $log(\tau)$ & [Fe/H] & $log(\tau)$ & [Fe/H]\\[3pt]
1209: (1) & (2) & (3) & (4) & (5) & (6) & (7) & (8) & (9) & (10) & (11) & (12) & (13)\ \ & (14)\ \ & (15)\ \ & (16)\ \ \\
1210: \hline
1211: \multicolumn{16}{l}{{\bf Old globular clusters (Ages $\ge$ 10 Gyr):} 14 objects, $<[Fe/H]> = -1.71$, $log({\cal{M}}_{tot}) = 6.47^{+0.09}_{-0.11}$, $log({\cal{M}}_{LLL}) = 4.04$, $log({\cal{M}}_{(10\%)}) = 5.22$} \\[5pt]
1212: $2.11$ & $1.51$ & $0.56$ & {\bf AF03\ \ \ } & $2.24$ & $1.57$ & $0.60$ & $-0.13$ & $-0.06$ & $-0.04$ & $4.77$ & $4.27$ & $ $ & $ $ & $ $ & $ $\\
1213: $0.05$ & $0.04$ & $0.01$ & {\bf BC03\ \ \ } & $2.11$ & $1.44$ & $0.60$ & $\ \ 0.00$ & $+0.07$ & $-0.04$ & $4.00$ & $4.37$ & $>10.30$ & $-1.74$ & $>10.30$ & $-1.83$\\
1214: & & & {\bf M05\ \ \ } & $2.20$ & $1.53$ & $0.60$ & $-0.09$ & $-0.02$ & $-0.04$ & $4.39$ & $4.03$ & $10.18$ & $-2.25$ & $10.18$ & $\sim -2.25$\\ [5pt]
1215: \multicolumn{16}{l}{{\bf Old globular clusters (Ages $\ge$ 10 Gyr), [Fe/H] $<$ --1.71:} 5 objects$^{*}$, $<[Fe/H]> = -2.08$, $log({\cal{M}}_{tot}) = 6.01^{+0.11}_{-0.14}$, $log({\cal{M}}_{LLL}) = 4.00$, $log({\cal{M}}_{(10\%)}) = 5.18$} \\[5pt]
1216: $2.02$ & $1.43$ & $0.53$ & {\bf BC03\ \ \ } & $2.03$ & $1.42$ & $0.59$ & $-0.01$& $+0.01$ & $-0.06$ & $2.00$ & $2.00$ & $>10.30$ & $-2.10$ & $>10.30$ & $-2.34$\\
1217: $0.12$ & $0.09$ & $0.03$ & {\bf M05\ \ \ } & $2.12$ & $1.49$ & $0.57$ & $-0.10$ & $-0.06$ & $-0.04$ & $1.57$ & $1.49$ & $\sim 10.10$ & $<-2.25$ & $10.10$ & $<-2.25$\\ [5pt]
1218: \multicolumn{16}{l}{{\bf Old globular clusters (Ages $\ge$ 10 Gyr), [Fe/H] $\ge$ --1.71:} 7 objects$^{**}$, $<[Fe/H]> = -1.46$, $log({\cal{M}}_{tot}) = 6.24^{+0.08}_{-0.10}$, $log({\cal{M}}_{LLL}) = 4.07$, $log({\cal{M}}_{(10\%)}) = 5.26$} \\[5pt]
1219: $2.27$ & $1.61$ & $0.58$ & {\bf V00\ \ \ } & $2.16$ & $1.47$ & $0.61$ & $+0.11$ & $+0.14$ & $-0.03$ & $2.66$ & $3.81$ & $>10.25$ & $-1.50$ & $>10.25$ & $-1.28$\\
1220: $0.05$ & $0.04$ & $0.02$ & {\bf AF03\ \ \ } & $2.29$ & $1.60$ & $0.62$ & $-0.02$ & $+0.01$ & $-0.04$ & $2.04$ & $2.02$ & $>10.18$ & $<-1.70$ & $>10.18$ & $<-1.70$\\
1221: & & & {\bf BC03\ \ \ } & $2.19$ & $1.53$ & $0.68$ & $+0.08$ & $+0.08$ & $-0.10$ & $5.25$ & $5.39$ & $>10.30$ & $-1.42$ & $>10.30$ & $-1.19$\\
1222: & & & {\bf M05\ \ \ } & $2.30$ & $1.59$ & $0.63$ & $-0.03$ & $+0.02$ & $-0.05$ & $2.57$ & $2.55$ & $>10.18$ & $-1.66$ & $\sim 10.18$ & $-1.65$\\[5pt]
1223: \multicolumn{16}{l}{{\bf 10 Gyr $>$ Age $\ge$ 2 Gyr sample:} 15 objects, $<[Fe/H]> = -0.89$, $<log(t)>=9.66$, $log({\cal{M}}_{tot}) = 5.68^{+0.10}_{-0.13}$, $log({\cal{M}}_{LLL}) = 4.19$, $log({\cal{M}}_{(10\%)}) = 5.37$} \\[5pt]
1224: $2.34$ & $1.67$ & $0.83$ & {\bf V00\ \ \ } & $2.28$ & $1.61$ & $0.74$ & $+0.06$ & $+0.06$ & $+0.09$ & $9.12$ & $9.22$ & $9.30$ & $-0.54$ & $9.30$ & $-0.68$\\
1225: $0.04$ & $0.03$ & $0.01$ & {\bf AF03\ \ \ } & $2.36$ & $1.68$ & $0.73$ & $-0.02$ & $-0.01$ & $+0.10$ & $10.01$ & $10.01$ & $9.18$ & $-0.28$ & $9.18$ & $-0.70$\\
1226: & & & {\bf BC03\ \ \ } & $2.19$ & $1.53$ & $0.68$ & $+0.15$ & $+0.14$ & $+0.15$ & $15.46$ & $15.71$ & $9.22$ & $-0.12$ & $9.30$ & $-0.42$\\
1227: & & & {\bf M05}$^{\bf (b)}$ & $2.13$ & $1.48$ & $0.61$ & $+0.21$ & $+0.19$ & $+0.22$ & $22.62$ & $22.89$ & $9.71$ & $-0.65$ & $9.79$ & $-0.61$\\
1228: & & & & & & & & & & & & $9.42$ & $-0.80$ & $9.54$ & $-0.78$\\[5pt]
1229: \multicolumn{16}{l}{{\bf 10 Gyr $>$ Age $\ge$ 4.6 Gyr sample, [Fe/H] $<$ --0.88:} 7 objects, $<[Fe/H]> = -1.30$, $<log(t)>=9.86$, $log({\cal{M}}_{tot}) = 5.55^{+0.11}_{-0.14}$, $log({\cal{M}}_{LLL}) = 4.11$, $log({\cal{M}}_{(10\%)}) = 5.22$} \\[5pt]
1230: $2.25$ & $1.57$ & $0.71$ & {\bf V00\ \ \ } & $2.18$ & $1.52$ & $0.66$ & $+0.07$ & $+0.05$ & $+0.05$ & $2.76$ & $2.69$ & $9.74$ & $-1.05$ & $9.48$ & $-1.08$\\
1231: $0.06$ & $0.05$ & $0.02$ & {\bf AF03\ \ \ } & $2.26$ & $1.59$ & $0.65$ & $-0.01$ & $-0.02$ & $+0.06$ & $3.01$ & $3.03$ & $9.48$ & $-0.96$ & $9.30$ & $-0.96$\\
1232: & & & {\bf BC03\ \ \ } & $2.08$ & $1.43$ & $0.62$ & $+0.17$ & $+0.14$ & $+0.09$ & $5.32$ & $5.30$ & $9.43$ & $-0.73$ & $9.38$ & $-0.73$\\
1233: & & & {\bf M05}$^{\bf (b)}$ & $2.23$ & $1.53$ & $0.62$ & $+0.02$ & $+0.04$ & $+0.09$ & $4.51$ & $4.57$ & $9.91$ & $-0.74$ & $9.90$ & $-0.75$\\
1234: & & & & & & & & & & & & $9.52$ & $-1.35$ & $9.51$ & $-1.35$ \\[5pt]
1235: \multicolumn{16}{l}{{\bf 4.6 Gyr $>$ Age $\ge$ 2 Gyr sample, [Fe/H] $\ge$ --0.88:} 8 objects, $<[Fe/H]> = -0.52$, $<log(t)>=9.36$, $log({\cal{M}}_{tot}) = 5.08^{+0.08}_{-0.09}$, $log({\cal{M}}_{LLL}) = 3.98$, $log({\cal{M}}_{(10\%)}) = 5.28$} \\[5pt]
1236: $2.43$ & $1.77$ & $0.92$ & {\bf V00}$^{\bf (c)}$ & $2.31$ & $1.67$ & $0.76$ & $+0.12$ & $+0.10$ & $+0.16$ & $8.54$ & $8.67$ & $9.15$ & $0.20$ & $$ & $$ \\
1237: $0.04$ & $0.03$ & $0.02$ & {\bf AF03\ \ \ } & $2.56$ & $1.84$ & $0.83$ & $-0.13$ & $-0.07$ & $+0.09$ & $5.86$ & $5.07$ & $8.89$ & $0.40$ & $8.84$ & $0.00$ \\
1238: & & & {\bf BC03\ \ \ } & $2.40$ & $1.66$ & $0.77$ & $+0.03$ & $+0.11$ & $+0.15$ & $7.54$ & $8.35$ & $9.21$ & $0.21$ & $9.17$ & $0.20$ \\
1239: & & & {\bf M05}$^{\bf (d)}$ & $2.44$ & $1.74$ & $0.90$ & $-0.01$ & $+0.03$ & $+0.02$ & $1.03$ & $1.41$ & $9.50$ & $-0.59$ & $9.60$ & $-0.65$ \\
1240: & & & & & & & & & & & & $9.37$ & $-0.61$ & $9.38$ & $-0.57$ \\
1241: & & & & & & & & & & & & & & $8.62$ & $0.35$ \\[5pt]
1242: \multicolumn{16}{l}{{\bf 2 Gyr $>$ Age $\ge$ 1 Gyr sample:} 17 objects$^{***}$, $<[Fe/H]> = -0.45$, $<log(t)>=9.15$, $log({\cal{M}}_{tot}) = 5.55\pm0.06$ , $log({\cal{M}}_{LLL}) = 3.75$, $log({\cal{M}}_{(10\%)}) = 5.11$} \\[5pt]
1243: $2.13$ & $1.60$ & $0.88$ & {\bf V00\ \ \ } & $2.35$ & $1.74$ & $0.86$ & $-0.22$ & $-0.14$ & $+0.02$ & $7.40$ & $7.07$ & $9.00$ & $-0.21$ & $$ & $$\\
1244: $0.03$ & $0.02$ & $0.02$ & {\bf AF03\ \ \ } & $2.40$ & $1.75$ & $0.81$ & $-0.27$ & $-0.15$ & $+0.07$ & $9.06$ & $8.28$ & $8.88$ & $0.13$ & $8.80$ & $0.05$\\
1245: & & & {\bf BC03\ \ \ } & $2.24$ & $1.61$ & $0.83$ & $-0.11$ & $-0.01$ & $+0.05$ & $4.44$ & $2.55$ & $8.77$ & $0.15$ & $9.00$ & $0.15$\\
1246: & & & {\bf M05}$^{\bf (e)}$ & $2.64$ & $1.94$ & $1.14$ & $-0.51$ & $-0.34$ & $-0.26$ & $21.40$ & $21.40$ & $9.26$ & $-1.35$ & $9.26$ & $-1.35$\\
1247: & & & & & & & & & & & & $8.52$ & $0.24$ & $8.59$ & $0.00$\\
1248: \hline
1249: \end{tabular}
1250: {\it Notes to Table~5:\/} See page 18.
1251: \end{minipage}
1252: \end{table}
1253: \end{landscape}
1254:
1255: \setcounter{table}{4}
1256: \begin{landscape}
1257: \begin{table}
1258: \centering
1259: \caption{Information about the composite clusters and model performance.}
1260: \begin{minipage}{230mm}
1261: \label{tab:mod}
1262: \begin{tabular}{@{}cccrccccccrrrrrr@{}}
1263: \hline
1264: \multicolumn{3}{c}{COMPOSITE COLOURS (CC)} & \multicolumn{4}{c}{MODEL PREDICTIONS (MP)} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{CC -- MP}& \multicolumn{2}{c}{DISTANCE} & \multicolumn{4}{c}{POPULATION PROPERTIES}\\
1265: $(B-J)_{0}$ & $(V-J)_{0}$ & $(J-K_{S})_{0}$ & & & & & & & & & & \multicolumn{2}{c}{$(B-J)$ vs.} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{$(V-J)$ vs.}\\
1266: $\sigma_{(B-J)_{0}}$ & $\sigma_{(V-J)_{0}}$ & $\sigma_{(J-K_{S})_{0}}$ & & & & & & & & & & \multicolumn{2}{c}{$(J-K_{s})$} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{$(J-K_{s})$} \\
1267: & & & {\bf Mod.}$^{\bf (a)}$ & $(B-J)$ & $(V-J)$ & $(J-K_{S})$ & $\Delta(B-J)$ & $\Delta(V-J)$ & $\Delta(J-K_{S})$ & $R_{B}$ & $R_{V}$ & $log(\tau)$ & [Fe/H] & $log(\tau)$ & [Fe/H]\\[3pt]
1268: (1) & (2) & (3) & (4) & (5) & (6) & (7) & (8) & (9) & (10) & (11) & (12) & (13)\ \ & (14)\ \ & (15)\ \ & (16)\ \ \\
1269: \hline
1270: \multicolumn{16}{l}{{\bf 1 Gyr $>$ Age $\ge$ 200 Myr sample:} 8 objects, $<[Fe/H]> = -0.34$, $<log(t)>=8.60$, $log({\cal{M}}_{tot}) = 5.04^{+0.05}_{-0.06}$, $log({\cal{M}}_{LLL}) = 3.60$, $log({\cal{M}}_{(10\%)}) = 5.05$} \\[5pt]
1271: $1.09$ & $0.95$ & $0.60$ & {\bf AF03\ \ \ } & $1.85$ & $1.59$ & $0.95$ & $-0.76$ & $-0.64$ & $-0.35$ & $25.83$ & $27.59$ & $ $ & $$ & $ $ & $$\\
1272: $0.04$ & $0.03$ & $0.02$ & {\bf BC03\ \ \ } & $1.24$ & $1.01$ & $0.72$ & $-0.15$ & $-0.06$ & $-0.12$ & $7.08$ & $6.33$ & $8.64$ & $-0.89$ & $8.78$ & $-0.89$\\
1273: & & & {\bf M05\ \ \ } & $2.10$ & $1.66$ & $1.01$ & $-1.01$ & $-0.71$ & $-0.41$ & $32.52$ & $31.31$ & $8.40$ & $-1.35$ & $8.41$ & $-1.35$\\
1274: \hline
1275: \end{tabular}
1276:
1277: {\it Notes to Table~5:\/} Columns (1) -- (3) list the
1278: weighted mean colours of the composite clusters, along with their corresponding errors. The number of clusters
1279: combined in each composite, their mean ages and metallicities plus the
1280: total accumulated mass is shown on the line above the colours. Masses associated with the Lowest Luminosity Limit ${\cal{M}}_{\it LLL}$ and 10\% accuracy limit ${\cal{M}}_{\rm (10\%)}$ are presented for comparison. Columns
1281: (4) -- (12) show the results of the model and data comparison. Column
1282: (4) denotes the model: {\bf M05} stands for \cite{maraston05}, {\bf
1283: BC03} for \cite{bc03}, {\bf AF03} for \cite{af03}, and {\bf V00}
1284: for \cite{vazdekis99}. Columns (5) through (7) give the
1285: interpolated colours predicted by the models for the mean ages and
1286: metallicities of the composite clusters. The corresponding differences
1287: in colour space (data minus model predictions) are given in columns
1288: (8) -- (10). Finally columns (11) and (12) give a distance between the
1289: positions predicted by the models and the composite cluster locations
1290: calculated as $R_{X} = \sqrt{(\Delta C1/\sigma_{C1})^{2}+(\Delta
1291: C2/\sigma_{C2})^{2}}$, where $\Delta Ci$ is the corresponding colour
1292: difference and $\sigma_{Ci}$ is the uncertainty of the mean
1293: colour of the composite cluster. $R_{V}$ stands for the distance in
1294: the $(J-K_{S})$ vs. $(V-J)$ colour-colour space, and $R_{B}$ for the
1295: $(J-K_{S})$ vs. $(B-J)$ distance.
1296: The composite colours and corresponding uncertainties are
1297: calculated by summing the flux of the clusters in the corresponding subpopulation. The cumulative mass
1298: in each composite cluster is calculated as the sum of the individual
1299: cluster masses.
1300:
1301: The following objects were excluded from the corresponding composite clusters (marked with asterisks in the table) due to possible foreground/background contamination and/or small aperture diameters of the optical photometry.
1302:
1303: *\hspace{12pt}NGC1939 is excluded from the mean.
1304:
1305: **\hspace{7pt}NGC1928 is excluded from the mean.
1306:
1307: *** NGC1777 is excluded from the mean.
1308:
1309: (a) We did not extrapolate in cases when the ages and metallicities of
1310: the composite clusters were out of the parameter space covered by the
1311: models. This is affecting the comparisons in the cases of "old" globular
1312: clusters and for the youngest age bin. A rough estimate of the model
1313: performance in these cases can be obtained from the figures, showing
1314: the data for the corresponding age bins (see Fig.\ref{fig:oldvdat}, \ref{fig:oldbdat}, \ref{fig:1_2vdat} -- \ref{fig:02_1bdat}).
1315:
1316: (b) In this case there is degeneracy in the \cite{maraston05} model predictions, in sense that 10 and 4 Gyr isochrones are overlapping in the colour-colour space. The composite-cluster ages and metallicities inferred by the models with respect to the 4 Gyr isochrone are listed in the table on the row below the model predictions for the 10 Gyr isochrone.
1317:
1318: (c) Some degeneracy is present for the 1 Gyr isochrone of \cite{vazdekis99}, especially in the $(V-J)$ vs. $(J-K_{S})$ colour-colour space.
1319:
1320: (d) The properties of the composite cluster for the younger sub-sample in the 10 Gyr $>$ Age $\ge$ 2 Gyr age bin are derived taking into account the degeneracy due to the intercept of the 10 and 4 Gyr isochrones. In the $(V-J)$ vs. $(J-K_{S})$ colour-colour diagram, the corresponding data also falls in the parameter space covered by the clusters with ages between 200 Myr and 500 Myr. Ages and metallicities inferred by the {\bf M05} model for each of these cases are listed in columns (13) -- (16) of the table: the first line (with respect to the 10 Gyr isochrone), second (4 Gyr isochrone) and third (200 -- 500 Myr case).
1321:
1322: (e) Colour degeneracy between 1 -- 2 Gyr and 200 Myr -- 1 Gyr {\bf M05} models. The inferred stellar population properties are listed in the first (1 -- 2 Gyr case) and second (200 Myr -- 1 Gyr) line of columns (13) -- (16) in the table.
1323:
1324: \end{minipage}
1325: \end{table}
1326: \end{landscape}
1327:
1328: \label{sum}
1329:
1330: \subsection{Age-Colour Comparison}
1331:
1332: In this section we compare the observed cluster colours and the mean
1333: sub-sample colours with model predictions as a function of age.
1334: Integrated-light colour age evolution is a basic SSP model prediction and
1335: Magellanic Cloud clusters are the only objects that allow these
1336: predictions to be tested for intermediate ages. This information is shown
1337: here to provide feedback to model builders by identifying ages at which
1338: the discrepancies occur, hence pointing
1339: to the responsible stages of
1340: stellar evolution and model ingredients that need further attention and
1341: refinement. Results for several optical and NIR colours are presented in
1342: Figures~\ref{fig:agebv} $-$ \ref{fig:agejk}.
1343:
1344: The $(B\!-\!V)$ colour is presented in Figure~\ref{fig:agebv}. The
1345: clusters in our test sample comply with the LLL criterion (see
1346: Section~\ref{stoceffects}) in the optical and the distribution of the
1347: individual points around the model tracks is reasonably tight. There is
1348: good agreement between the properties of the composite clusters and the
1349: model predictions. The correlation between age and optical colours is well
1350: illustrated in this figure as well as the relatively poor metallicity
1351: resolution.
1352:
1353: Figures~\ref{fig:agebj}\,--\,\ref{fig:agejk} present combinations of
1354: optical-NIR colours (except for $(J-K_{S})$ on
1355: Figure~\ref{fig:agejk}). These illustrate that the majority of the
1356: models tested in the present paper show a ``bump'' towards
1357: redder colors between
1358: 1 and 2 Gyr, which is likely due to the development of the RGB. The
1359: exception appears to be the \cite{maraston05} model. However, the latter
1360: shows a relatively pronounced effect of the AGB phase transition
1361: (starting at a few hundred Myr). Note the steep increase of the
1362: predicted colours, due to the increased flux in the NIR passbands.
1363: This increased AGB contribution in the
1364: \citeauthor{maraston05} models may be a reason why the
1365: development of the RGB is not as visually prominent as in the other models.
1366:
1367: Also note that the colors of the composite and the individual clusters
1368: in the youngest age bin are in much better agreement with the
1369: predictions of the Maraston (2005) models if age estimates from
1370: Girardi et al. are used (these are the ages which were available at
1371: the time). Our recalibration of the S-parameter described in Appendix
1372: A shifts the ages in this interval to older values by ~0.2 dex,
1373: introducing a slight discrepancy with the Maraston (2005) models,
1374: but in good agreement with the Bruzual \& Charlot models.
1375: In
1376: other words, the models of \citeauthor{maraston05} seem to reflect our
1377: knowledge of the ages of Magellanic Cloud clusters
1378: prior to 2005. Our study may be used to make appropriate updates to the models.
1379:
1380:
1381: \setcounter{figure}{11}
1382: \begin{figure}
1383: \centering
1384: \includegraphics[bb=14 14 348 745,width=8.2cm]{fig12.eps}
1385: \caption{$(B-V)$ colour predicted by the models of Maraston 2005, Bruzual \& Charlot 2003, Anders \& Fritze 2003 and Vazdekis 1999 (from top to bottom) as a function of age for different metallicities (labeled at the end of the colour-coded lines). Vertical dashed lines depict the boundaries of the age bins adopted in the present study. The reddening-corrected colours of the individual clusters from our sample are represented with small green dots. Solid black points show the mean colours of the sub samples, labeled by corresponding mean metallicities. The positions of the clusters in the youngest age bin when taking into account the ages derived by the S parameter calibration of Girardi et al. (1995) are shown as magenta dots on the top panel (the magenta square stands for the mean colour in this case). The prominent outlier in the oldest age bin is NGC 1928.}
1386: \label{fig:agebv}
1387: \end{figure}
1388:
1389: \setcounter{figure}{12}
1390: \begin{figure}
1391: \centering
1392: \includegraphics[bb=14 14 348 745,width=8.2cm]{fig13.eps}
1393: \caption{The same as Figure~\ref{fig:agebv}, but for $(B-J)$ colour.}
1394: \label{fig:agebj}
1395: \end{figure}
1396:
1397: \setcounter{figure}{13}
1398: \begin{figure}
1399: \centering
1400: \includegraphics[bb=14 14 348 745,width=8.2cm]{fig14.eps}
1401: \caption{The same as Figure~\ref{fig:agebv}, but for $(V-J)$ colour.}
1402: \label{fig:agevj}
1403: \end{figure}
1404:
1405: \setcounter{figure}{14}
1406: \begin{figure}
1407: \centering
1408: \includegraphics[bb=14 14 348 745,width=8.2cm]{fig15.eps}
1409: \caption{The same as Figure~\ref{fig:agebv}, but for $(V-K_{s})$ colour.}
1410: \label{fig:agevk}
1411: \end{figure}
1412:
1413: \setcounter{figure}{15}
1414: \begin{figure}
1415: \centering
1416: \includegraphics[bb=14 14 348 745,width=8.2cm]{fig16.eps}
1417: \caption{The same as Figure~\ref{fig:agebv}, but for $(J-K_{s})$ colour.}
1418: \label{fig:agejk}
1419: \end{figure}
1420:
1421: \section{Concluding Remarks}
1422:
1423: We have presented new integrated $JHK_s$ 2MASS photometry for 9
1424: Magellanic Cloud clusters, bringing our total sample (when combined
1425: with the results of Paper I) to 54 clusters with reliable ages $\geq$200~Myr.
1426: In addition, we compile integrated-light $B$
1427: and $V$ photometric measurements, extinction estimates, and a
1428: database of reliable age and metallicity determinations (mostly
1429: recent results) from the literature for our sample clusters. We divide the clusters into
1430: different age (e.g., $\geq10$~Gyr, $3-9$~Gyr, $3-4$~Gyr, $1-2$~Gyr,
1431: and 200~Myr$-$1~Gyr) and metallicity (when possible), and
1432: quantify the observed spread in the intrinsic cluster colours in these
1433: ranges. Care was taken to account for the spread of the
1434: observational data around the model predictions due to the stochastic
1435: fluctuations in the stellar populations of the clusters. The smallest
1436: spread in intrinsic colours is found for clusters with ages
1437: $\ga 10$~Gyr, the colours of which are well-reproduced by all
1438: four sets of SSP model predictions. The systematic shift between the model
1439: predictions and the observed colours for a sample of old
1440: Milky Way globular clusters reported by \cite{cohen07} is not
1441: observed in our Magellanic Cloud cluster analysis. The largest
1442: spread in colour is found for clusters in the age range
1443: $2-4$~Gyr. We believe that much of the spread in the
1444: colours for {\it individual\/} clusters younger than 10~Gyr results from stochastic
1445: fluctuations in the numbers of infrared-luminous stars, since
1446: individual clusters tend to have less than ${\cal{M}}_{\rm (10\%)}$\footnote{stellar mass needed to decrease the the luminosity uncertainty due to stochastic effects in the stellar population to 10\%)}
1447: contributing to the observed colours.
1448:
1449: Composite $(B-J)_0$, $(V-J)_0$, and $(J-K_s)_0$ cluster colours are
1450: calculated for each age/metallicity interval, and compared with the
1451: predictions of four widely used population synthesis models
1452: \citep{maraston05, bc03, af03, vazdekis99}, in order to evaluate
1453: their performance. We interpolate the model grids to calculate the
1454: offset or distance in colour-colour space between the model predictions
1455: and the age and metallicity for our composite cluster colours. All
1456: four sets of models reproduce the colours of old ($\geq10$~Gyr)
1457: Magellanic Cloud clusters quite well, with the \citet{maraston05} and
1458: \citet{bc03} models giving slightly better fits than the other two.
1459:
1460: In
1461: the age range of 2\,--\,10 Gyr, the \citet{maraston05} models
1462: have the largest separation in optical-NIR colour-colour space between
1463: the 2~Gyr and 10~Gyr model tracks, which best reproduces our observed
1464: composite colours in the $2-3$~Gyr and $3-9$~Gyr ranges. While the
1465: composite colour for $2-3$~Gyr-old clusters falls just off the grid
1466: for the other three models, actual quantitative distances between
1467: the model predictions and composite cluster colours are not
1468: significantly different among the four models.
1469: In the $1-2$~Gyr and $0.2-1$~Gyr age ranges, the \cite{bc03} models
1470: generally give the best quantitative match to our composite Magellanic
1471: Cloud cluster colours.
1472: Taking into account the inferred ages and metallicities, there is little difference between the \cite{bc03} and \cite{maraston05} model performance.
1473: The cluster colours fall off the \citet{af03} and \citet{vazdekis99} model predictions in the two youngest age ranges, largely due to their limited coverage at low metallicities.
1474:
1475: Based on the comparisons presented in this work, it is found that each
1476: model has strong and weak points when used to analyse the optical$+$NIR
1477: colours of unresolved stellar populations. There is no model set that
1478: clearly outperforms the others in all respects. Overall, the \cite{bc03} and typically yield the best quantitative match to our composite cluster colors. The \cite{maraston05} models are a close second. The same two models also yield the best match to the composite cluster ages and metallicities.
1479:
1480: \section*{Acknowledgments}
1481:
1482: The authors would like to thank the anonymous referee for useful comments
1483: and suggestions that improved the paper. We thank D. Hunter for providing
1484: access to her LMC and SMC optical photometry data that was instrumental
1485: for the compilation of the optical photometry database used in the present
1486: study. T.H.P. acknowledges support in form of a Plaskett Fellowship at the
1487: Herzberg Institute of Astrophysics. This publication makes use of data
1488: products from the Two Micron All-Sky Survey, which is a joint project of
1489: the University of Massachusetts and the Infrared Processing and Analysis
1490: Center/California Institute of Technology, funded by the National
1491: Aeronautics and Space Administration and the National Science Foundation.
1492: This publication makes use of SIMBAD astronomical database.
1493:
1494:
1495: \begin{thebibliography}{}
1496: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Alcaino}{1978}]{alcaino78} Alcaino, G.\ 1978, A\&AS, 34, 431
1497: \bibitem[Alca{\'{\i}}no et al.(1999)]{alcaino99} Alca{\'{\i}}no, G., Liller, W., Alvarado, F., Kravtsov, V., Ipatov, A., Samus, N., \& Smirnov, O.\ 1999, A\&AS, 135, 103
1498: \bibitem[Alcaino et al.(2003)]{alcaino03} Alcaino, G., Alvarado, F., \& Kurtev, R.\ 2003, A\&A, 407, 919
1499: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Alves}{2004}]{alves2004} Alves, D.~R.\ 2004, New Astronomy Review, 48, 659
1500: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Alves \& Sarajedini}{1999}]{as99} Alves, D.~R., \& Sarajedini, A.\ 1999, ApJ, 511, 225
1501: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Anders \& Fritze-v.~Alvensleben}{2003}]{af03} Anders, P., \& Fritze-v.~Alvensleben, U.\ 2003, A\&A, 401, 1063
1502: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Bernard}{1975}]{bernard75} Bernard, A.\ 1975, A\&A, 40, 199
1503: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Bernard \& Bigay}{1974}]{bernard_bigay_74} Bernard, A., \& Bigay, J.~H.\ 1974, A\&A, 33, 123
1504: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Bertelli et al.}{1994}]{bertelli94} Bertelli, G., Bressan,
1505: A., Chiosi, C., Fagotto, F., \& Nasi, E.\ 1994, A\&AS, 106, 275
1506: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Bessell \& Brett}{1988}]{bb88} Bessell, M.~S., \& Brett, J.~M.\ 1988, PASP, 100, 1134
1507: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Bica et al.}{1986}]{bica86} Bica, E., Dottori, H., \& Pastoriza, M.\ 1986, A\&A, 156, 261
1508: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Bica et al.}{1996}]{bica_et_al_96} Bica, E., Claria, J.~J., Dottori, H., Santos, J.~F.~C., Jr., \& Piatti, A.~E.\ 1996, ApJS, 102, 57
1509: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Brocato et al.}{1996}]{brocato96} Brocato, E., Castellani, V., Ferraro, F.~R., Piersimoni, A.~M., \& Testa, V.\ 1996, MNRAS, 282, 614
1510: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Brown et al.}{2004}]{brown2004} Brown, T.~M., Ferguson, H.~C., Smith, E., Kimble, R.~A., Sweigart, A.~V., Renzini, A., Rich, R.~M., \& VandenBerg, D.~A.\ 2004, ApJ, 613, L125
1511: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Bruzual A.}{2002}]{bruzual2002} Bruzual A., G.\ 2002, IAU Symposium, 207, 616
1512: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Bruzual A.}{2007}]{bruzual07} Bruzual A, G.\ 2007, ArXiv Astrophysics e-prints, arXiv:astro-ph/0703052
1513: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Bruzual \& Charlot}{1993}]{bc93} Bruzual, A. G., \& Charlot, S.\ 1993, ApJ, 405, 538
1514: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Bruzual \& Charlot}{2003}]{bc03} Bruzual, G., \& Charlot, S.\ 2003, MNRAS, 344, 1000
1515: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Buzzoni}{1989}]{buzzoni89} Buzzoni, A.\ 1989, ApJS, 71, 817
1516: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Burstein \& Heiles}{1982}]{bh82} Burstein, D., \&
1517: Heiles, C.\ 1982, AJ, 87, 1165
1518: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Cardelli et al.}{1989}]{cardelli89} Cardelli, J.~A., Clayton, G.~C., \& Mathis, J.~S.\ 1989, ApJ, 345, 245
1519: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Carpenter}{2001}]{carpenter01} Carpenter, J.~M.\ 2001, AJ, 121, 2851
1520: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Carretta et al.}{2001}]{carretta2001} Carretta, E., Cohen, J.~G., Gratton, R.~G., \& Behr, B.~B.\ 2001, AJ, 122, 1469
1521: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Cervi{\~n}o \& Luridiana}{2004}]{cl04} Cervi{\~n}o, M., \& Luridiana, V.\ 2004, A\&A, 413, 145
1522: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Chabrier}{2003}]{chabrier2003} Chabrier, G.\ 2003, PASP, 115, 763
1523: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Chiosi et al.}{2006}]{chiosi06} Chiosi, E., Vallenari, A., Held, E.~V., Rizzi, L., \& Moretti, A.\ 2006, A\&A, 452, 179
1524: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Chiosi \& Vallenari}{2007}]{chiosi07} Chiosi, E., \& Vallenari, A.\ 2007, ArXiv Astrophysics e-prints, arXiv:astro-ph/0702281
1525: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Cohen et al.}{2007}]{cohen07} Cohen, J.~G., Hsieh, S., Metchev, S., Djorgovski, S.~G., \& Malkan, M.\ 2007, AJ, 133, 99
1526: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Crowl et al.}{2001}]{crowl2001} Crowl, H.~H., Sarajedini, A., Piatti, A.~E., Geisler, D., Bica, E., Clari{\'a}, J.~J., \& Santos, J.~F.~C., Jr.\ 2001, AJ, 122, 220
1527: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Da Costa \& Hatzidimitriou}{1998}]{dh98} Da Costa, G.~S., \& Hatzidimitriou, D.\ 1998, AJ, 115, 1934
1528: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Dirsch et al.}{2000}]{dirsch2000} Dirsch, B., Richtler, T., Gieren, W.~P., \& Hilker, M.\ 2000, A\&A, 360, 133
1529: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Elson \& Fall}{1985}]{elson_fall_85} Elson, R.~A.~W., \& Fall, S.~M.\ 1985, ApJ, 299, 211
1530: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Elson \& Fall}{1988}]{elson_fall_88} Elson, R.~A., \& Fall, S.~M.\ 1988, AJ, 96, 1383
1531: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Ferraro et al.}{2000}]{ferraro00} Ferraro, F.~R., Montegriffo, P., Origlia, L., \& Fusi Pecci, F.\ 2000, AJ, 119, 1282
1532: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Ferraro et al.}{2004}]{ferraro2004} Ferraro, F.~R., Origlia, L., Testa, V., \& Maraston, C.\ 2004, ApJ, 608, 772
1533: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Ferraro et al.}{2006}]{ferraro06} Ferraro, F.~R., Mucciarelli, A., Carretta, E., \& Origlia, L.\ 2006, ApJL, 645, L33
1534: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Frogel et al.}{1978}]{frogel78} Frogel, J.~A., Persson, S.~E., Matthews, K., \& Aaronson, M.\ 1978, ApJ, 220, 75
1535: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Geisler et al.}{1997}]{geisler97} Geisler, D., Bica, E., Dottori, H., Claria, J.~J., Piatti, A.~E., \& Santos, J.~F.~C., Jr.\ 1997, AJ, 114, 1920
1536: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Girardi et al.}{1995}]{girardi95} Girardi, L., Chiosi, C., Bertelli, G., \& Bressan, A.\ 1995, A\&A, 298, 87
1537: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Girardi et al.}{2002}]{girardi02} Girardi, L., Bertelli,
1538: G., Bressan, A., Chiosi, C., Groenewegen, M.~A.~T., Marigo, P., Salasnich,
1539: B., \& Weiss, A.\ 2002, A\&A , 391, 195
1540: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Glass}{1985}]{glass85} Glass, I.~S.\ 1985, Irish Astronomical Journal, 17, 1
1541: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Goudfrooij et al.}{2001}]{goudfrooij01} Goudfrooij, P.,
1542: Alonso, M.~V., Maraston, C., \& Minniti, D.\ 2001, MNRAS, 328, 237
1543: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Goudfrooij et al.}{2006}]{goudfrooij06} Goudfrooij, P., Gilmore, D., Kissler-Patig, M., \& Maraston, C.\ 2006, MNRAS, 369, 697
1544: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Grocholski et al.}{2006}]{grocholski06} Grocholski, A., Alonso, A., Sarajedini, A., Geisler,D., \& Smith, V.\ 2006, astro-ph/0607052
1545: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Harries et al.}{2003}]{harries2003} Harries, T.~J., Hilditch, R.~W., \& Howarth, I.~D.\ 2003, MNRAS, 339, 157
1546: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Harris}{1996}]{harris96} Harris, W.~E.\ 1996, AJ, 112, 1487
1547: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Hempel \& Kissler-Patig}{2004}]{hempel04} Hempel, M., \& Kissler-Patig, M.\ 2004, A\&A, 419, 863
1548: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Hill et al.}{2000}]{hill00} Hill, V., Fran{\c c}ois, P., Spite, M., Primas, F., \& Spite, F.\ 2000, A\&A, 364, L19
1549: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Hunter et al.}{2003}]{hunter03} Hunter, D.~A., Elmegreen, B.~G., Dupuy, T.~J., \& Mortonson, M.\ 2003, AJ, 126, 1836
1550: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Johnson}{1965}]{johnson65} Johnson, H.~L.\ 1965, Communications of the Lunar and Planetary Laboratory, 3, 73
1551: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{ Johnson}{1966}]{johnson66} Johnson, H.~L.\ 1966, ARA\&A, 4, 193
1552: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Johnson et al.}{1968}]{johnson68} Johnson, H.~L., MacArthur, J.~W., \& Mitchell, R.~I.\ 1968, ApJ, 152, 465
1553: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Johnson et al.}{1999}]{johnson99} Johnson, J.~A., Bolte, M., Stetson, P.~B., Hesser, J.~E., \& Somerville, R.~S.\ 1999, ApJ, 527, 199
1554: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Kerber et al.}{2007}]{kerber07} Kerber, L.~O., Santiago, B.~X., \& Brocato, E.\ 2007, A\&A, 462, 139
1555: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Kroupa}{2001}]{kroupa2001} Kroupa, P.\ 2001, MNRAS, 322, 231
1556: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Lan{\c c}on \& Mouhcine}{2000}]{lm2000} Lan{\c c}on, A., \& Mouhcine, M.\ 2000, Massive Stellar Clusters, 211, 34
1557: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Mackey \& Gilmore}{2004}]{mg04} Mackey, A.~D., \& Gilmore, G.~F.\ 2004, MNRAS, 352, 153
1558: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Mackey et al.}{2006}]{mpg2006} Mackey, A.~D., Payne, M.~J., \& Gilmore, G.~F.\ 2006, MNRAS, 369, 921
1559: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Maraston}{1998}]{maraston98} Maraston, C.\ 1998, MNRAS, 300, 872
1560: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Maraston}{2005}]{maraston05} Maraston, C.\ 2005, MNRAS, 362, 799
1561: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{McLaughlin \& van der Marel}{2005}]{mclvdm05} McLaughlin, D.~E., \& van der Marel, R.~P.\ 2005, ApJS, 161, 304
1562: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Mighell et al.}{1996}]{mighell96} Mighell, K.~J., Rich, R.~M., Shara, M., \& Fall, S.~M.\ 1996, AJ, 111, 2314
1563: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Mighell et al.}{1998a}]{mighell98a} Mighell, K.~J., Sarajedini, A., \& French, R.~S.\ 1998, ApJL, 494, L189
1564: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Mighell et al.}{1998b}]{mighell98b} Mighell, K.~J., Sarajedini, A., \& French, R.~S.\ 1998, AJ, 116, 2395
1565: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Mould et al.}{1993}]{mould93} Mould, J.~R., Xystus, D.~A., \& Da Costa, G.~S.\ 1993, ApJ, 408, 108
1566: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Mucciarelli et al.}{2007}]{mucciarelli07} Mucciarelli, A., Ferraro, F.~R., Origlia, L., \& Fusi Pecci, F.\ 2007, ArXiv Astrophysics e-prints, arXiv:astro-ph/0701649
1567: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Nantais et al.}{2006}]{nantais06} Nantais, J.~B., Huchra, J.~P., Barmby, P., Olsen, K.~A.~G., \& Jarrett, T.~H.\ 2006, AJ, 131, 1416
1568: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Olsen et al.}{1998}]{olsen98} Olsen, K.~A.~G., Hodge, P.~W., Mateo, M., Olszewski, E.~W., Schommer, R.~A., Suntzeff, N.~B., \& Walker, A.~R.\ 1998, MNRAS, 300, 665
1569: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Olszewski et al.}{1991}]{olszewski91} Olszewski, E.~W., Schommer, R.~A., Suntzeff, N.~B., \& Harris, H.~C.\ 1991, AJ, 101, 515
1570: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Olszewski et al.}{1996}]{olszewski96} Olszewski, E.~W., Suntzeff, N.~B., \& Mateo, M.\ 1996, ARA\&A, 34, 511
1571: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Persson et al.}{1983}]{persson83} Persson, S.~E., Aaronson, M., Cohen, J.~G., Frogel, J.~A., \& Matthews, K.\ 1983, ApJ, 266, 105
1572: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Pessev et al.}{2006}]{pessev2006} Pessev, P.~M., Goudfrooij, P., Puzia, T.~H., \& Chandar, R.\ 2006, AJ, 132, 781
1573: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Puzia et al.}{2002}]{puzia02} Puzia, T.~H., Zepf, S.~E., Kissler-Patig, M., Hilker, M., Minniti, D., \& Goudfrooij, P.\ 2002, A\&A, 391, 453
1574: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Puzia et al.}{2007}]{puzia07} Puzia, T.~H., Mobasher,
1575: B., \& Goudfrooij, P.\ 2007, ArXiv e-prints, 705, arXiv:0705.4092
1576: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Rich et al.}{2001}]{rich2001} Rich, R.~M., Shara, M.~M., \& Zurek, D.\ 2001, AJ, 122, 842
1577: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Salpeter}{1955}]{salpeter55} Salpeter, E.~E.\ 1955, ApJ, 121, 161
1578: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Sarajedini}{1994}]{sarajedini94} Sarajedini, A.\ 1994, AJ, 107, 618
1579: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Skrutskie et al.}{2006}]{skrutskie2006} Skrutskie, M.~F., et al.\ 2006, AJ, 131, 1163
1580: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Spergel et al.}{2006}]{spergel2006} Spergel, D.~N., et al.\ 2006, arXiv:astro-ph/0603449
1581: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Testa et al.}{1995}]{testa95} Testa, V., Ferraro, F.~R., Brocato, E., \& Castellani, V.\ 1995, MNRAS, 275, 454
1582: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Vandenberg}{1985}]{vdbd1985} Vandenberg, D.~A.\ 1985, ApJS, 58, 711
1583: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Vandenberg et al.}{1990}]{vdbd1990} Vandenberg, D.~A., Bolte, M., \& Stetson, P.~B.\ 1990, AJ, 100, 445
1584: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{van den Bergh}{1981}]{vdb81} van den Bergh, S.\ 1981, A\&AS, 46, 79
1585: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{van den Bergh \& Hagen}{1968}]{vdb_hagen_68} van den Bergh, S., \& Hagen, G.~L.\ 1968, AJ, 73, 569
1586: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{van der Wel et al.}{2006}]{vanderwel2006} van der Wel, A., Franx, M., van Dokkum, P.~G., Huang, J., Rix, H.-W., \& Illingworth, G.~D.\ 2006, ApJ, 636, L21
1587: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Vallenari et al.}{1994}]{vallenari94} Vallenari, A., Aparicio, A., Fagotto, F., \& Chiosi, C.\ 1994, A\&A, 284, 424
1588: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Vazdekis}{1999}]{vazdekis99} Vazdekis, A.\ 1999, ApJ, 513, 224
1589: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Walker}{1992}]{walker92} Walker, A.~R.\ 1992, AJ, 104, 1395
1590: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Whitmore et al.}{2007}]{whitmore07} Whitmore, B.~C.,
1591: Chandar, R., \& Fall, S.~M.\ 2007, AJ, 133, 1067
1592: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Wolf et al.}{2007}]{wolf07} Wolf, M.~J., Drory, N., Gebhardt, K., \& Hill, G.~J.\ 2007, ApJ, 655, 179
1593: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Woo et al.}{2003}]{woo03} Woo, J.-H., Gallart, C., Demarque, P., Yi, S., \& Zoccali, M.\ 2003, AJ, 125, 754
1594: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Worthey}{1994}]{worthey94} Worthey, G.\ 1994, ApJS, 95, 107
1595: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Zaritsky et al.}{(1997}]{zaritsky97} Zaritsky, D., Harris, J., \& Thompson, I.\ 1997, AJ, 114, 1002
1596: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Zaritsky et al.}{2002}]{zaritsky02} Zaritsky, D., Harris, J., Thompson, I.~B., Grebel, E.~K., \& Massey, P.\ 2002, AJ, 123, 855
1597: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Zaritsky et al.}{2004}]{zaritsky04} Zaritsky, D., Harris, J., Thompson, I.~B., \& Grebel, E.~K.\ 2004, AJ, 128, 1606
1598: \end{thebibliography}
1599:
1600: \appendix
1601:
1602: \section[]{S parameter - age re-calibration}
1603:
1604: There are currently very few CMD based ages for Magellanic Cloud
1605: clusters in our youngest age bin ($200$~Myr-1~Gyr). One possible
1606: solution is to use the "S-parameter" calibration for LMC clusters, which would
1607: allow us to select additional clusters for analysis in \S3.4. The
1608: S-parameter, introduced by \cite{elson_fall_85}, provides an empirical
1609: relation between the age of a cluster and its integrated $(U-B)$ vs.
1610: $(B-V)$ colours. \cite{girardi95} revised the S-parameter-age
1611: calibration based on 24 clusters which had age estimates from high
1612: quality {\it (at the time)\/} ground-based CCD observations. They obtained the following
1613: relation between S and cluster age (in log($\tau$)):
1614:
1615: \begin{equation}
1616: log(\tau / [years]) = (0.0733 \pm 0.0032)*S + 6.227 \pm 0.096
1617: \label{eq:a1}
1618: \end{equation}
1619: With a rms dispersion in log($\tau$) equal to 0.137.
1620:
1621:
1622:
1623:
1624: \setcounter{table}{5}
1625: \begin{table}
1626: \caption{Ages and S parameter values for the clusters from the Kerber et al. 2007 sample ( 25 $\le$ S $\le$ 40). }
1627: \label{tab:s}
1628: \begin{tabular}{@{}lcccc@{}}
1629: \hline
1630: & \multicolumn{2}{c}{Girardi et al.} & Kerber et al. & This paper \\
1631: & \multicolumn{2}{c}{1995} & 2007 & \\
1632: Cluster ID\ \ \ \ \ & S & log($\tau$) & log($\tau$) & log($\tau$)\\
1633: (1) & (2) & (3) & (4) & (5)\\
1634: \hline
1635: NGC1651 & 38 & $9.00\pm0.14$ & $9.30\pm0.03$ & $9.23\pm0.12$\\
1636: NGC1718 & 40 & $9.15\pm0.14$ & $9.31\pm0.03$ & $9.38\pm0.12$\\
1637: NGC1777 & 38 & $9.00\pm0.14$ & $9.06\pm0.04$ & $9.23\pm0.12$\\
1638: NGC1831 & 32 & $8.56\pm0.14$ & $8.85\pm0.05$ & $8.79\pm0.12$\\
1639: NGC1856 & 30 & $8.42\pm0.14$ & $8.47\pm0.04$ & $8.65\pm0.12$\\
1640: NGC1868 & 33 & $8.64\pm0.14$ & $9.05\pm0.03$ & $8.87\pm0.12$\\
1641: NGC2162 & 37 & $8.93\pm0.14$ & $9.10\pm0.03$ & $9.16\pm0.12$\\
1642: NGC2209 & 34 & $8.71\pm0.14$ & $9.08\pm0.03$ & $8.94\pm0.12$\\
1643: NGC2213 & 38 & $9.00\pm0.14$ & $9.23\pm0.04$ & $9.23\pm0.12$\\
1644: NGC2249 & 33 & $8.64\pm0.14$ & $9.00\pm0.03$ & $8.87\pm0.12$\\
1645: SL506 & 40 & $9.15\pm0.14$ & $9.35\pm0.03$ & $9.38\pm0.12$\\[3pt]
1646: NGC265 & 26 & $8.13\pm0.14$ & $8.5\ \pm0.3\ $ & $8.36\pm0.12$\\
1647: \hline
1648: \end{tabular}
1649:
1650: {\it Notes to Table~\ref{tab:s}:} Column~(1) is the cluster ID. The S
1651: parameter value and the corresponding age according to
1652: \cite{girardi95} are listed in columns~(2) and (3). Column~(4) is the
1653: log$(\tau)$ for the clusters from \cite{kerber07}. The age derived by
1654: our calibration are given in column~(5).
1655:
1656: \end{table}
1657:
1658: \setcounter{figure}{16}
1659: \begin{figure}
1660: \includegraphics[bb=14 14 256 264,width=8.4cm]{fig17.eps}
1661: \caption{Ages from Kerber et al. 2007 and
1662: Chiosi \& Vallenari 2007 as function of the S parameter. The dashed
1663: line represent Girardi et al. 1995 calibration. NGC265 (indicated
1664: with a diamond) was added to improve the sampling in the 200 Myr - 1
1665: Gyr age interval. The weighted mean offset of the data points with
1666: respect of the original relation is shown with a solid line.}
1667: \label{fig:s_logt} \end{figure}
1668:
1669:
1670: We performed an independent analysis of the S-parameter using new age
1671: estimates for Magellanic Cloud clusters derived from $HST$-based
1672: CMDs by \cite{kerber07}. These include the age range for which
1673: we have few CMD-based ages ($\sim$ 0.3 Gyr to $\sim$ 1 Gyr).
1674: The optical colours from Table~\ref{tab:comp} were used to derive S
1675: parameter values according to the definition given by \cite{girardi95}.
1676: A comparison between the \citeauthor{kerber07} and \citeauthor{girardi95}
1677: age estimates for 12 clusters shows that there is an offset, such
1678: that the \citeauthor{kerber07} ages are systematically older. The uncertainty weighted mean offset of the \citeauthor{kerber07} ages
1679: from the \citeauthor{girardi95} calibration is 0.235 in log($\tau$).
1680: We confirmed that the difference between the age estimates is {\it not\/} caused by the adoption of different stellar isochrones \citep[][respectively for studies of \citeauthor{girardi95} and \citeauthor{kerber07}]{bertelli94,girardi02}, since they are indistinguishable from each other in the $B$ and $V$ bands which were used by \citet{kerber07}. \citeauthor{kerber07} have better data and apply a more robust technique for age determination, therefore we recalibrate the cluster ages with the appropriate offset:
1681:
1682: \begin{equation}
1683: log(\tau / [years]) = 0.0733*S + 6.458
1684: \label{eq:a2}
1685: \end{equation}
1686:
1687: \noindent The standard deviation of \cite{kerber07} data around the
1688: new relation is $\sigma$ = 0.123.
1689:
1690: The objects selected to extend the sample based on the S parameter
1691: values from equation A2 are listed in Table~\ref{tab:s_ext}.
1692:
1693: \setcounter{table}{6}
1694: \begin{table}
1695: \caption{Extention of the sample based on the S parameter.}
1696: \label{tab:s_ext}
1697: \begin{tabular}{@{}lcclcc@{}}
1698: \hline
1699: ID & S & log($\tau$)& ID & S & log($\tau$)\\
1700: (1) & (2) & (3) & (1) & (2) & (3)\\
1701: \hline
1702: NGC1866 & 27 & $8.43\pm0.12$ & NGC1644 & 37 & $9.16\pm0.12$\\
1703: NGC2031 & 26 & $8.36\pm0.12$ & NGC1783 & 37 & $9.16\pm0.12$\\
1704: NGC2107 & 32 & $8.79\pm0.12$ & NGC1987 & 35 & $9.01\pm0.12$\\
1705: NGC2134 & 28 & $8.50\pm0.12$ & NGC2108 & 36 & $9.09\pm0.12$\\
1706: NGC2156 & 28 & $8.50\pm0.12$ & NGC2154 & 38 & $9.23\pm0.12$\\
1707: \hline
1708: \end{tabular}
1709: {\it Notes to Table~\ref{tab:s_ext}:} Column~(1) is the cluster ID. Column~(2) lists the derived S parameter values, along with the calculated ages in column~(3).
1710:
1711: \end{table}
1712:
1713: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1714: \section[]{Defining the Test Sample} In order to test the performance
1715: of SSP models we need to define a reliable test sample: Objects with
1716: age and metallicity measurements based on high-quality data, covering
1717: an appropriate parameter space. We prefer age and metallicity estimates
1718: based on CMDs, particularly those taken with $HST$, but also include
1719: metallicity estimates from individual stars, integrated spectroscopy
1720: and age estimates for the youngest two age bins from the S-parameter
1721: (described in Appendix A).
1722: In order to clarify possible age-related effects in the SSP models
1723: performance, we decided to split the sample into several age bins:
1724: {\it(i)} Globular clusters older than 10 Gyr; {\it(ii)} Clusters with
1725: ages between 2 and 10 Gyr; {\it(iii)} Clusters older than 1 Gyr and
1726: younger than 2 Gyr; {\it(iv)} Clusters with ages between 200 Myr and 1
1727: Gyr. The latter two age bins are where the effects of AGB and RGB stars on
1728: the NIR integrated-light properties are most pronounced.
1729:
1730: The intrinsic spread in integrated colours for clusters with a given
1731: age and metallicity increases with decreasing mass
1732: (\cite{bruzual2002}, due to stochastic fluctuations in the number of
1733: massive stars. Therefore, we consider clusters with masses exceeding $
1734: {\cal{M}}_{\rm (10\%)}$ to be reliable test particles. Since many clusters
1735: (particularly in the youngest age bins) have mass estimates lower than
1736: this value, we also present cumulative colours for each age bin, where the
1737: measured colours correspond to masses exceeding this limit.
1738:
1739: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1740: \subsection{The Old Cluster Population (Ages $\ge$ 10 Gyr)}
1741:
1742: \setcounter{table}{7}
1743: \begin{table*}
1744: \centering
1745: \begin{minipage}{170mm}
1746: \caption{Information about the cluster test sample.}
1747: \label{tab:all}
1748: \begin{tabular}{@{}llclclcccccc@{}}
1749: \hline
1750: Cluster ID & \ \ \ \ [Fe/H] & & \ \ \ Age & & $E(B-V)$ & & $E(V-I)$ & & $A_{V\rmn{(CMD)}}$ & $A_{V\rmn{(MCPS)}}$ & Note\\
1751: (1) & \ \ \ \ \ \ (2) & & \ \ \ \ (3) & & \ \ \ \ \ (4) & & (5) & & (6) & (7) & (8)\\
1752: \hline
1753: \multicolumn{5}{l}{\bf Old globular clusters (Ages $\ge$ 10 Gyr)}\\[3pt]
1754: $LMC$\\[3pt]
1755: NGC1466 & $-1.85\pm0.1\ $ & (22) & $15\ \ \pm3$ & (11) & $0.09\ \pm0.02$ & (22) & & & $0.28\pm0.06$ & $0.39\pm0.02$ & O\\[2pt]
1756: NGC1754 & $-1.42\pm0.15$ & (18) & $15.6\pm2.2$ & (18) & $0.09\ \pm0.02$ & (18) & & & $0.28\pm0.06$ & $0.40\pm0.04$ & I\\[2pt]
1757: NGC1786 & $-2.1\ \pm0.3\ $ & ( 2) & $15\ \ \pm3$ & ( 2) & $0.09\ \pm0.05$ & ( 2) & $0.12\pm0.05$ & ( 2) & $0.28\pm0.16$ & $0.62\pm0.04$ & I\\[2pt]
1758: NGC1835 & $-1.62\pm0.15$ & (18) & $16.2\pm2.8$ & (18) & $0.08\ \pm0.02$ & (18) & & & $0.25\pm0.06$ & $0.35\pm0.07$ & I\\[2pt]
1759: NGC1841 & $-2.2\ \pm0.2$ & ( 2) & $15\ \ \pm3$ & ( 2) & $0.20\ \pm0.03$ & ( 2) & $0.28\pm0.03$ & ( 2) & $0.62\pm0.09$ & $0.39\pm0.02$ & O\\[2pt]
1760: NGC1898 & $-1.18\pm0.16$ & (18) & $13.5\pm2.2$ & (18) & $0.07\ \pm0.02$ & (18) & & & $0.22\pm0.06$ & $0.43\pm0.05$ & I\\[2pt]
1761: NGC1916 & & & & & & & & & & $0.42\pm0.05$ & I\\[2pt]
1762: NGC1928 & $-1.27\pm0.14$ & (13) & $GC\pm2$ & (13) & & & $0.08\pm0.02$ & (13) & $0.20\pm0.05$ & $0.43\pm0.03$ & I\\[2pt]
1763: NGC1939 & $-2.10\pm0.19$ & (13) & $GC\pm2$ & (13) & & & $0.16\pm0.03$ & (13) & $0.40\pm0.08$ & $0.62\pm0.05$ & I\\[2pt]
1764: NGC2005 & $-1.35\pm0.16$ & (18) & $15.5\pm4.9$ & (18) & $0.12\ \pm0.02$ & (18) & & & $0.37\pm0.06$ & $0.47\pm0.04$ & I\\[2pt]
1765: NGC2019 & $-1.23\pm0.15$ & (18) & $16.3\pm3.1$ & (18) & $0.12\ \pm0.02$ & (18) & & & $0.37\pm0.06$ & $0.44\pm0.06$ & I\\[2pt]
1766: NGC2210 & $-2.2\ \pm0.2$ & ( 2) & $15\ \ \pm3$ & ( 2) & $0.09\ \pm0.03$ & ( 2) & $0.12\pm0.03$ & ( 2) & $0.28\pm0.09$ & $0.39\pm0.02$ & O\\[2pt]
1767: NGC2257 & $-1.7\ \pm0.2$ & (21) & $10 - 14$ & (21) & $\ \ \ \ \ \ 0.0 $ & (21) & & & $0.00\pm0.00$ & $0.39\pm0.02$ & O\\[2pt]
1768: Hodge11 & $-2.06 \pm0.2$ & (15) & $15\ \ \pm3$ & (15) & $0.075\pm0.005$ & (15) & & & $0.23\pm0.02$ & $0.39\pm0.02$ & O\\[2pt]
1769: Reticulum & $-1.66\pm0.12$ & (13) & $GC\pm2$ & (13) & & & $0.07\pm0.02$ & (13) & $0.18\pm0.05$ & $0.39\pm0.02$ & O\\[3pt]
1770: $SMC$\\[3pt]
1771: NGC121 & $-1.71\pm0.10$ & (16) & $10.6\pm0.7$ & (16) & $0.05\ \pm0.03$ & (16) & & & $0.16\pm0.09$ & $0.18\pm0.01$ & \\[5pt]
1772: \multicolumn{5}{l}{\bf Cluster with 2 Gyr $\le$ Ages $<$ 10 Gyr}\\[3pt]
1773: $LMC$\\[3pt]
1774: NGC1651 & $-0.53\pm0.03$ & ( 9) & $2.00\pm0.15$ & (12) & \ \ $0.11\pm0.01$ & (12) & & & $0.34\pm0.03$ & $0.35\pm0.05$ & \\[2pt]
1775: NGC1718 & $-0.80\pm0.03$ & ( 9) & $2.05\pm0.15$ & (12) & \ \ $0.10\pm0.03$ & (12) & & & $0.31\pm0.09$ & $0.51\pm0.06$ & \\[2pt]
1776: NGC2121 & $-0.50\pm0.03$ & ( 9) & $2.90\pm0.50$ & (12) & \ \ $0.07\pm0.02$ & (12) & & & $0.22\pm0.06$ & $0.53\pm0.04$ & \\[2pt]
1777: NGC2155 & $-0.50\pm0.05$ & ( 9) & $3.00\pm0.25$ & (12) & \ \ $0.02\pm0.01$ & (12) & & & $0.06\pm0.03$ & $0.43\pm0.04$ & \\[2pt]
1778: NGC2193 & $-0.49\pm0.05$ & ( 9) & $2.2\ \pm 0.5$ & (20) & & & & & & $0.39\pm0.02$ & \\[2pt]
1779: SL663 & $-0.54\pm0.05$ & ( 9) & $3.15\pm0.40$ & (12) & \ \ $0.07\pm0.02$ & (12) & & & $0.22\pm0.06$ & $0.38\pm0.04$ & \\[2pt]
1780: SL842 & $-0.36\pm0.20$ & (19) & $2.0 $ & ( 8) & & & & & & $0.39\pm0.02$ & \\[2pt]
1781: Hodge4 & $-0.55\pm0.06$ & ( 9) & $2.1\ \pm0.3$ & (23) & & & & & & $0.39\pm0.02$ & \\[2pt]
1782: Hodge14 & $-0.45\pm0.10$ & (12) & $2.25\pm0.15$ & (12) & \ \ $0.08\pm0.02$ & (12) & & & $0.25\pm0.06$ & $0.39\pm0.02$ & \\[2pt]
1783: ESO121-03 & $-0.97\pm0.10$ & (12) & $8.3 - 9.8$ & (12) & & & $0.04\pm0.02$ & (13) & $0.10\pm0.05$ & $0.39\pm0.02$ & \\[3pt]
1784: $SMC$\\[3pt]
1785: NGC339 & $-1.50\pm0.14$ & (16) & $6.3\pm1.3$ & (16) & \ \ $0.03\pm0.04$ & (16) & & & $0.09\pm0.12$ & $0.18\pm0.01$ & \\[2pt]
1786: NGC361 & $-1.45\pm0.11$ & (16) & $8.1\pm1.2$ & (16) & \ \ $0.07\pm0.03$ & (16) & & & $0.22\pm0.09$ & $0.17\pm0.02$ & \\[2pt]
1787: NGC416 & $-1.44\pm0.12$ & (15) & $6.6\pm0.5$ & (15) & \ \ $0.08\pm0.03 $ & (15) & & & $0.25\pm0.09$ & $0.20\pm0.02$ & \\[2pt]
1788: Kron3 & $-1.12\pm0.12$ & ( 6) & $6.0\pm1.3$ & (16) & $-0.03\pm0.02^{*}$ & (16) & & & $0.00\pm0.06$ & $0.18\pm0.01$ & \\[2pt]
1789: Lindsay1 & $-1.17\pm0.10$ & ( 6) & $9.0\pm1.0$ & (16) & \ \ $0.06\pm0.02$ & (16) & & & $0.19\pm0.06$ & $0.18\pm0.01$ & \\[2pt]
1790: Lindsay113& $-1.44\pm0.16$ & ( 6) & $5.3\pm1.3$ & (16) & \ \ $0.00\pm0.02$ & (16) & & & $0.00\pm0.06$ & $0.18\pm0.01$ & \\[5pt]
1791: \multicolumn{5}{l}{\bf Cluster with 1 Gyr $\le$ Ages $<$ 2 Gyr}\\[3pt]
1792: $LMC$\\[3pt]
1793: NGC1644 & $-0.3 $ & ( *) & $1.45^{+0.46}_{-0.35} $ & ( *) & & & & & & $0.39\pm0.02$ & \\[2pt]
1794: NGC1777 & $-0.60\pm0.10$ & (12) & $1.15\pm0.15$ & (12) & $0.10\pm0.03$ & (12) & & & $0.31\pm0.09$ & $0.39\pm0.02$ & \\[2pt]
1795: NGC1783 & $-0.3 $ & ( *) & $1.45^{+0.46}_{-0.35} $ & ( *) & & & & & & $0.30\pm0.03$ & \\[2pt]
1796: NGC1868 & $-0.70\pm0.10$ & (12) & $1.10\pm0.10$ & (12) & $0.04\pm0.01$ & (12) & & & $0.12\pm0.03$ & $0.39\pm0.02$ & \\[2pt]
1797: NGC1978 & $-0.38\pm0.07$ & ( 7) & $1.9\ \pm0.1$ & (17) & & & & & & $0.76\pm0.05$ & \\[2pt]
1798: NGC1987 & $-0.3 $ & ( *) & $1.02^{+0.33}_{-0.23} $ & ( *) & & & & & & $0.28\pm0.03$ & \\[2pt]
1799:
1800: NGC2108 & $-0.3 $ & ( *) & $1.23^{+0.39}_{-0.30} $ & ( *) & & & & & & $0.50\pm0.05$ & \\[2pt]
1801: NGC2154 & $-0.4 $ & ( *) & $1.70^{+0.54}_{-0.41} $ & ( *) & & & & & & $0.39\pm0.03$ & \\[2pt]
1802: NGC2162 & $-0.46\pm0.07$ & ( 9) & $1.25\pm0.10$ & (12) & $0.03\pm0.02$ & (12) & & & $0.09\pm0.06$ & $0.39\pm0.02$ & \\[2pt]
1803: NGC2173 & $-0.42\pm0.03$ & ( 9) & $1.60\pm0.20$ & (12) & $0.07\pm0.02$ & (12) & & & $0.22\pm0.06$ & $0.39\pm0.02$ & \\[2pt]
1804:
1805: \hline
1806: \end{tabular}
1807:
1808: {\it Notes to Table~\ref{tab:all}:} See next page.
1809:
1810: \end{minipage}
1811: \end{table*}
1812:
1813: \setcounter{table}{7}
1814: \begin{table*}
1815: \centering
1816: \begin{minipage}{170mm}
1817: \caption{Continued}
1818: \label{tab:all}
1819: \begin{tabular}{@{}llclclcccccc@{}}
1820: \hline
1821: Cluster ID & \ \ \ \ [Fe/H] & & \ \ \ Age & & $E(B-V)$ & & $E(V-I)$ & & $A_{V\rmn{(CMD)}}$ & $A_{V\rmn{(MCPS)}}$ & Note\\
1822: (1) & \ \ \ \ \ \ (2) & & \ \ \ \ (3) & & \ \ \ \ \ (4) & & (5) & & (6) & (7) & (8)\\
1823: \hline
1824: \multicolumn{5}{l}{\bf Cluster with 1 Gyr $\le$ Ages $<$ 2 Gyr}\\[3pt]
1825: $LMC$\\[3pt]
1826: NGC2190 & $-0.12\pm0.20$ & (19) & $1.1 $ & ( 8) & $ $ & & & & $ $ & $0.39\pm0.02$ & \\[2pt]
1827: NGC2203 & $-0.41\pm0.03$ & ( 9) & $1.8 $ & ( 8) & $ $ & & & & $ $ & $0.39\pm0.02$ & \\[3pt]
1828: NGC2209 & $-0.50\pm0.10$ & (12) & $1.20\pm0.10$ & (12) & $0.15\pm0.03$ & (12) & & & $0.47\pm0.09$ & $0.39\pm0.02$ & \\[2pt]
1829: NGC2213 & $-0.52\pm0.04$ & ( 9) & $1.70\pm0.20$ & (12) & $0.06\pm0.03$ & (12) & & & $0.19\pm0.09$ & $0.40\pm0.04$ & \\[2pt]
1830: NGC2231 & $-0.52\pm0.04$ & ( 9) & $1.5 $ & ( 8) & $ $ & & & & $ $ & $0.39\pm0.02$ & \\[2pt]
1831: NGC2249 & $-0.45\pm0.10$ & (12) & $1.00\pm0.10$ & (12) & $0.01\pm0.02$ & (12) & & & $0.03\pm0.06$ & $0.39\pm0.02$ & \\[3pt]
1832: $SMC$\\[3pt]
1833: NGC152 & $-0.94\pm0.15$ & ( 4) & $1.4\pm0.2$ & ( 4) & $0.05\pm0.01$ & ( 4) & & & $0.16\pm0.03$ & $0.19\pm0.02$ & \\[2pt]
1834: NGC411 & $-0.68\pm0.07$ & ( 1) & $1.4\pm0.2$ & ( 1) & $0.12\pm0.01$ & ( 4) & & & $0.37\pm0.03$ & $0.17\pm0.02$ & \\[5pt]
1835: \multicolumn{5}{l}{\bf Cluster with 0.2 Gyr $\le$ Ages $<$ 1 Gyr}\\[3pt]
1836: $LMC$\\[3pt]
1837: NGC1831 & $-0.10\pm0.10$ & (12) & $0.71^{+0.09}_{-0.08} $ & (12) & $0.11\pm0.01$ & (12) & & & $0.34\pm0.03$ & $0.39\pm0.02$ & \\[2pt]
1838: NGC1856 & $-0.40\pm0.10$ & (12) & $0.30\pm0.03 $ & (12) & $0.21\pm0.02$ & (12) & & & $0.65\pm0.06$ & $0.22\pm0.03$ & \\[2pt]
1839: NGC1866 & $-0.50\pm0.10$ & (10) & $0.33^{+0.09}_{-0.07} $ & ( *) & & & & & & $0.28\pm0.06$ & \\[2pt]
1840: NGC2031 & $-0.52\pm0.21$ & ( 5) & $0.23^{+0.07}_{-0.06} $ & ( *) & & & & & & $0.40\pm0.03$ & \\[2pt]
1841: NGC2107 & $-0.2 $ & ( *) & $0.62^{+0.19}_{-0.15} $ & ( *) & & & & & & $0.36\pm0.04$ & \\[2pt]
1842: NGC2134 & $-0.2 $ & ( *) & $0.32^{+0.10}_{-0.08} $ & ( *) & & & & & & $0.62\pm0.03$ & \\[2pt]
1843: NGC2156 & $-0.2 $ & ( *) & $0.32^{+0.10}_{-0.08} $ & ( *) & & & & & & $0.20\pm0.02$ & \\[3pt]
1844: SMC\\[3pt]
1845: NGC265 & $-0.62^{+0.23}_{-0.61}$ & ( 3) & $0.32^{+0.32}_{-0.16} $ & ( 3) & & & $0.06^{+0.05}_{-0.04}$ & ( 3) & $0.19^{+0.15}_{-0.13}$ & $0.34\pm0.02$ & \\[3pt]
1846: \hline
1847: \end{tabular}
1848:
1849: {\it Notes to Table~\ref{tab:all}:}
1850: Column~(1) - cluster designation. Columns (2) and (3) are the metallicity and the age of the cluster with corresponding references given in parenthesis. Reddening information based on CMDs plus corresponding references is listed in columns~(4), (5) and (6). $A_V$ retrieved from MCPS database is presented in column~(7). Finally, notes are given in column~(8)\\[5pt]
1851: In column~(8) I and O stands for the positions of the objects in the LMC. I means inner (bar) and O outer clusters. There are slight variations in this classification from author to author. Here we classify the objects as in \cite{mg04}.\\[5pt]
1852: \cite{mg04} concluded that NGC1928, NGC1939 and Reticulum are coeval in age with the oldest Milky Way globular clusters within 2 Gyr. In the table this result is denoted as "$GC \pm 2$".\\[5pt]
1853: ESO121-SC03 is the only object in the LMC age-metallicity gap. It is younger than the genuine old globular clusters, but significantly older than the intermediate-age massive clusters from this galaxy. It'll be compared with the model predictions alongside with the objects from the next age bin.\\[5pt]
1854: {\it References:} (1)\cite{as99} (2)\cite{brocato96} (3)\cite{chiosi07} (4)\cite{crowl2001} (5)\cite{dirsch2000} (6)\cite{dh98} (7)\cite{ferraro06} (8)\cite{geisler97} (9)\cite{grocholski06} (10)\cite{hill00} (11)\cite{johnson99} (12)\cite{kerber07} (13)\cite{mg04} (14)\cite{mpg2006} (15)\cite{mighell96} (16)\cite{mighell98b} (17)\cite{mucciarelli07} (18)\cite{olsen98} (19)\cite{olszewski91} (20)\cite{rich2001} (21)\cite{testa95} (22)\cite{walker92} (23)\cite{woo03}
1855:
1856: \end{minipage}
1857: \end{table*}
1858:
1859: \setcounter{table}{8}
1860: \begin{table*}
1861: \centering
1862: \begin{minipage}{120mm}
1863: \caption{2MASS integrated-light photometry and mass estimates.}
1864: \label{tab:ph}
1865: \begin{tabular}{@{}lrrrrll@{}}
1866: \hline
1867: Cluster ID & D\ \ & $J$\ \ \ \ \ \ \ & $H$ \ \ \ \ \ & $K_S$\ \ \ \ \ \ & $log(m)_{\rmn{NIR}}$ & $log(m)_{\rmn{Lit}}$ \\
1868: (1) & (2) & (3)\ \ \ \ \ \ & (4)\ \ \ \ \ \ & (5)\ \ \ \ \ \ &\ \ \ \ (6) & \ \ \ \ (7)\\
1869: \hline
1870: \multicolumn{5}{l}{\bf Old globular clusters (Ages $\ge$ 10 Gyr)}\\[3pt]
1871: $LMC$\\[3pt]
1872: NGC1466 & 60 & $ 9.83\pm0.02$ & $ 9.39\pm0.01$ & $ 9.30\pm0.01$ & $5.18\pm0.07 $ & $5.24\pm0.04 $ \\[2pt]
1873: NGC1754 & 100 & $ 9.74\pm0.06$ & $ 9.24\pm0.04$ & $ 9.08\pm0.05$ & $5.22^{+0.06}_{-0.08}$ & $5.07\pm0.05 $ \\[2pt]
1874: NGC1786 & 60 & $ 8.57\pm0.01$ & $ 8.09\pm0.01$ & $ 8.00\pm0.01$ & $5.70^{+0.14}_{-0.22}$ & $5.57\pm0.05 $ \\[2pt]
1875: NGC1835 & 60 & $ 8.34\pm0.01$ & $ 7.82\pm0.01$ & $ 7.71\pm0.01$ & $5.77\pm0.08 $ & $5.71\pm0.05 $ \\[2pt]
1876: NGC1841 & 25 & $12.23\pm0.02$ & $11.69\pm0.02$ & $11.48\pm0.02$ & $4.28^{+0.05}_{-0.06}$ & $5.31^{+0.07}_{-0.06}$ \\[2pt]
1877: NGC1898 & 62 & $ 9.52\pm0.02$ & $ 9.18\pm0.03$ & $ 9.00\pm0.03$ & $5.30^{+0.08}_{-0.09}$ & $5.35\pm0.06 $ \\[2pt]
1878: NGC1916 & 44 & $ 8.36\pm0.01$ & $ 7.91\pm0.01$ & $ 7.68\pm0.01$ & $5.79^{+0.04}_{-0.05}$ & $5.77\pm0.05 $ \\[2pt]
1879: NGC1928 & 62 & $10.71\pm0.09$ & $10.27\pm0.12$ & $10.20\pm0.15$ & $4.83^{+0.07}_{-0.09}$ & \\[2pt]
1880: NGC1939 & 38 & $10.34\pm0.02$ & $ 9.89\pm0.02$ & $ 9.83\pm0.02$ & $5.01^{+0.06}_{-0.07}$ & \\[2pt]
1881: NGC2005 & 25 & $ 9.93\pm0.01$ & $ 9.39\pm0.01$ & $ 9.27\pm0.01$ & $5.15\pm0.06 $ & $5.27\pm0.05 $ \\[2pt]
1882: NGC2019 & 60 & $ 9.10\pm0.02$ & $ 8.65\pm0.02$ & $ 8.54\pm0.02$ & $5.49^{+0.05}_{-0.07}$ & $5.47\pm0.05 $ \\[2pt]
1883: NGC2210 & 62 & $ 9.25\pm0.01$ & $ 8.72\pm0.01$ & $ 8.66\pm0.01$ & $5.43^{+0.09}_{-0.11}$ & $5.40\pm0.05 $ \\[2pt]
1884: NGC2257 & 61 & $10.98\pm0.02$ & $10.60\pm0.03$ & $10.50\pm0.03$ & $4.71^{+0.03}_{-0.04}$ & $5.00^{+0.12}_{-0.07}$ \\[2pt]
1885: Hodge11 & 62 & $10.48\pm0.02$ & $ 9.88\pm0.02$ & $ 9.86\pm0.02$ & $4.93\pm0.03 $ & $5.17^{+0.07}_{-0.06}$ \\[3pt]
1886: $SMC$\\[3pt]
1887: NGC121 & 62 & $ 9.52\pm0.01$ & $ 8.90\pm0.01$ & $ 8.81\pm0.01$ & $5.45^{+0.15}_{-0.21}$ & $5.57\pm0.04 $ \\[5pt]
1888: \multicolumn{5}{l}{\bf Cluster with 2 Gyr $\le$ Ages $<$ 10 Gyr}\\[3pt]
1889: $LMC$\\[3pt]
1890: NGC1651 & 100 & $10.00\pm0.02$ & $ 9.23\pm0.02$ & $ 9.10\pm0.02$ & $4.43\pm0.04 $ & $4.53^{+0.11}_{-0.09}$ \\[2pt]
1891: NGC1718 & 62 & $10.01\pm0.01$ & $ 9.13\pm0.01$ & $ 8.94\pm0.01$ & $4.44^{+0.08}_{-0.10}$ & $4.57\pm0.22 $ \\[2pt]
1892: NGC2121 & 62 & $10.40\pm0.03$ & $ 9.73\pm0.03$ & $ 9.20\pm0.02$ & $4.50^{+0.08}_{-0.10}$ & $5.00^{+0.08}_{-0.07}$ \\[2pt]
1893: NGC2155 & 62 & $10.98\pm0.02$ & $10.31\pm0.11$ & $10.37\pm0.03$ & $4.25^{+0.13}_{-0.18}$ & $4.56^{+0.09}_{-0.08}$ \\[2pt]
1894: NGC2193 & 38 & $12.01\pm0.05$ & $11.36\pm0.04$ & $11.27\pm0.04$ & $3.64^{+0.03}_{-0.04}$ & $4.13\pm0.08 $ \\[2pt]
1895: SL$663^{*}$ & 60 & $11.22\pm0.02$ & $11.08\pm0.04$ & $11.02\pm0.04$ & $4.18^{+0.08}_{-0.10}$ & $4.67^{+2.49}_{-0.45}$ \\[2pt]
1896: SL842 & 38 & $11.89\pm0.07$ & $11.14\pm0.05$ & $10.86\pm0.05$ & $3.67^{+0.03}_{-0.04}$ & $3.91\pm0.10 $ \\[2pt]
1897: Hodge4 & 38 & $12.10\pm0.02$ & $11.78\pm0.06$ & $11.44\pm0.05$ & $3.60^{+0.03}_{-0.04}$ & $5.31^{+1.91}_{-0.45}$ \\[2pt]
1898: Hodge14 & 62 & $12.05\pm0.03$ & $11.37\pm0.03$ & $11.47\pm0.04$ & $3.61^{+0.07}_{-0.08}$ & $4.00\pm0.09 $ \\[2pt]
1899: ESO121-03 & 61 & $12.34\pm0.09$ & $11.59\pm0.07$ & $11.70\pm0.08$ & $4.02^{+0.14}_{-0.18}$ & \\[3pt]
1900: $SMC$\\[3pt]
1901: NGC339 & 62 & $11.06\pm0.02$ & $10.70\pm0.02$ & $10.43\pm0.02$ & $4.57^{+0.28}_{-0.99}$ & $4.90\pm0.07 $ \\[2pt]
1902: NGC361 & 62 & $10.76\pm0.02$ & $ 9.97\pm0.01$ & $ 9.83\pm0.02$ & $4.78^{+0.11}_{-0.15}$ & $5.30^{+0.10}_{-0.08}$ \\[2pt]
1903: NGC416 & 62 & $ 9.77\pm0.01$ & $ 9.16\pm0.01$ & $ 9.08\pm0.01$ & $5.10^{+0.10}_{-0.13}$ & $5.21\pm0.05 $ \\[2pt]
1904: Kron3 & 62 & $10.31\pm0.01$ & $ 9.69\pm0.01$ & $ 9.68\pm0.01$ & $4.85\pm0.03 $ & $5.15\pm0.06 $ \\[2pt]
1905: Lindsay1 & 62 & $11.64\pm0.03$ & $11.26\pm0.03$ & $11.14\pm0.04$ & $4.45^{+0.09}_{-0.11}$ & \\[2pt]
1906: Lindsay113 & 62 & $11.46\pm0.02$ & $10.49\pm0.01$ & $10.32\pm0.01$ & $4.35\pm0.03 $ & \\[5pt]
1907: \multicolumn{5}{l}{\bf Cluster with 1 Gyr $\le$ Ages $<$ 2 Gyr}\\[3pt]
1908: $LMC$\\[3pt]
1909: NGC1644 & 60 & $11.31\pm0.11$ & $10.88\pm0.10$ & $10.76\pm0.10$ & $3.96^{+0.03}_{-0.04}$ & \\[2pt]
1910: NGC1777 & 38 & $ 9.06\pm0.01$ & $ 8.59\pm0.01$ & $ 8.46\pm0.01$ & $4.52^{+0.08}_{-0.10}$ & $4.28\pm0.11 $ \\[2pt]
1911: NGC1783 & 60 & $ 9.23\pm0.01$ & $ 8.62\pm0.01$ & $ 8.52\pm0.01$ & $4.77^{+0.04}_{-0.05}$ & \\[2pt]
1912: NGC1868 & 62 & $10.19\pm0.01$ & $ 9.71\pm0.01$ & $ 9.56\pm0.01$ & $4.10^{+0.07}_{-0.09}$ & $4.33\pm0.18 $ \\[2pt]
1913: NGC1978 & 60 & $ 8.74\pm0.02$ & $ 8.04\pm0.01$ & $ 7.81\pm0.02$ & $4.97\pm0.04$ & \\[2pt]
1914: NGC1987 & 60 & $10.16\pm0.02$ & $ 9.48\pm0.01$ & $ 9.04\pm0.01$ & $4.21^{+0.04}_{-0.05}$ & \\[2pt]
1915: NGC2108 & 62 & $10.46\pm0.02$ & $ 9.70\pm0.02$ & $ 9.25\pm0.02$ & $4.22^{+0.04}_{-0.05}$ & \\[2pt]
1916: NGC2154 & 62 & $10.14\pm0.02$ & $ 9.36\pm0.01$ & $ 8.90\pm0.01$ & $4.30\pm0.04$ & \\[2pt]
1917: NGC2162 & 62 & $10.89\pm0.04$ & $10.21\pm0.03$ & $10.01\pm0.03$ & $3.74^{+0.16}_{-0.26}$ & $4.02\pm0.15 $ \\[2pt]
1918: NGC2173 & 150 & $ 9.76\pm0.10$ & $ 9.10\pm0.07$ & $ 8.91\pm0.07$ & $4.38^{+0.07}_{-0.09}$ & $4.70\pm0.07 $ \\[3pt]
1919: \hline
1920: \end{tabular}
1921:
1922: {\it Notes to Table~\ref{tab:ph}:} See next page.
1923: \end{minipage}
1924: \end{table*}
1925:
1926: \setcounter{table}{8}
1927: \begin{table*}
1928: \centering
1929: \begin{minipage}{120mm}
1930: \caption{2MASS integrated-light photometry and mass estimates.}
1931: \label{tab:ph}
1932: \begin{tabular}{@{}lrrrrll@{}}
1933: \hline
1934: Cluster ID & D\ \ & $J$\ \ \ \ \ \ \ & $H$ \ \ \ \ \ & $K_S$\ \ \ \ \ \ & $log(m)_{\rmn{NIR}}$ & $log(m)_{\rmn{Lit}}$ \\
1935: (1) & (2) & (3)\ \ \ \ \ \ & (4)\ \ \ \ \ \ & (5)\ \ \ \ \ \ &\ \ \ \ (6) & \ \ \ \ (7)\\
1936: \hline
1937: \multicolumn{5}{l}{\bf Cluster with 1 Gyr $\le$ Ages $<$ 2 Gyr}\\[3pt]
1938: $LMC$\\[3pt]
1939: NGC2190 & 61 & $11.42\pm0.04$ & $10.79\pm0.04$ & $10.57\pm0.04$ & $3.64^{+0.03}_{-0.04}$ & \\[2pt]
1940: NGC2203 & 150 & $ 9.28\pm0.07$ & $ 8.61\pm0.05$ & $ 8.40\pm0.05$ & $4.42^{+0.03}_{-0.04}$ & \\[2pt]
1941: NGC2209 & 62 & $10.77\pm0.04$ & $ 9.90\pm0.04$ & $ 9.38\pm0.03$ & $3.84^{+0.06}_{-0.07}$ & $4.36^{+2.59}_{-0.31}$ \\[2pt]
1942: NGC2213 & 62 & $10.40\pm0.02$ & $ 9.55\pm0.01$ & $ 9.25\pm0.01$ & $4.13^{+0.12}_{-0.17}$ & $4.30\pm0.10 $ \\[2pt]
1943: NGC2231 & 44 & $11.33\pm0.08$ & $10.51\pm0.05$ & $10.19\pm0.04$ & $3.78^{+0.03}_{-0.04}$ & $4.36\pm0.12 $ \\[2pt]
1944: NGC2249 & 36 & $11.06\pm0.05$ & $10.57\pm0.05$ & $10.25\pm0.04$ & $3.67^{+0.37}_{-....}$ & $4.03\pm0.20 $ \\[3pt]
1945: $SMC$\\[3pt]
1946: NGC152 & 62 & $10.78\pm0.02$ & $ 9.95\pm0.01$ & $ 9.62\pm0.01$ & $4.17^{+0.06}_{-0.07}$ & $4.56\pm0.09 $ \\[2pt]
1947: NGC411 & 62 & $10.49\pm0.03$ & $ 9.84\pm0.03$ & $ 9.61\pm0.03$ & $4.28\pm0.04 $ & $4.47\pm0.10 $ \\[5pt]
1948: \multicolumn{5}{l}{\bf Cluster with 0.2 Gyr $\le$ Ages $<$ 1 Gyr}\\[3pt]
1949: $LMC$\\[3pt]
1950: NGC1831 & 60 & $ 9.86\pm0.01$ & $ 9.34\pm0.01$ & $ 9.15\pm0.01$ & $4.16\pm0.04 $ & $4.59\pm0.18 $ \\[2pt]
1951: NGC1856 & 60 & $ 8.98\pm0.02$ & $ 8.59\pm0.02$ & $ 8.44\pm0.02$ & $4.26\pm0.04 $ & $4.88\pm0.12 $ \\[2pt]
1952: NGC1866 & 60 & $ 8.72\pm0.01$ & $ 8.28\pm0.01$ & $ 8.11\pm0.01$ & $4.34^{+0.07}_{-0.08}$ & $4.91\pm0.12 $ \\[2pt]
1953: NGC2031 & 72 & $ 8.95\pm0.03$ & $ 8.28\pm0.03$ & $ 8.16\pm0.04$ & $4.45\pm0.04 $ & $4.48^{+0.06}_{-0.05}$ \\[2pt]
1954: NGC2107 & 60 & $10.05\pm0.13$ & $ 9.43\pm0.08$ & $ 9.20\pm0.11$ & $4.01^{+0.04}_{-0.05}$ & \\[2pt]
1955: NGC2134 & 60 & $ 9.94\pm0.03$ & $ 9.50\pm0.02$ & $ 9.43\pm0.02$ & $3.98^{+0.03}_{-0.04}$ & \\[2pt]
1956: NGC2156 & 72 & $10.81\pm0.17$ & $10.43\pm0.22$ & $10.43\pm0.26$ & $3.59^{+0.04}_{-0.05}$ & $3.65\pm0.08 $ \\[2pt]
1957: SMC\\
1958: NGC265 & 62 & $10.90\pm0.13$ & $ 9.88\pm0.09$ & $ 9.76\pm0.12$ & $3.41^{+0.18}_{-0.30}$ & \\[3pt]
1959:
1960: \hline
1961: \end{tabular}
1962:
1963: {\it Notes to Table~\ref{tab:ph}:} Column~(1) is the cluster
1964: identification. Column~(2) gives the diameter of the used aperture (to
1965: match the optical photometry). $J,H$ and $K_S$ integrated magnitudes
1966: with corresponding errors are listed in columns~(3) through
1967: (5). Column~(6) presents an estimate of the stellar mass which contributes
1968: to the measured integrated colours. These are typically lower than
1969: the total cluster mass. The mass estimates are based on the
1970: cluster age, metallicity, observed J band magnitude, and the
1971: model predictions of \cite{maraston05}. Column~(7) lists the total
1972: mass estimates of the objects in common between present study and
1973: \cite{mclvdm05}.
1974:
1975: * No integrated-light optical photometry was recovered from the literature for SL663. NIR measurements are presented for aperture diameter of 60\arcsec.
1976:
1977: \end{minipage}
1978: \end{table*}
1979:
1980: \cite{olszewski96} listed 14 LMC clusters believed to be as old as the
1981: oldest Galactic globulars. More recent studies have established that
1982: ESO 121-SC03 should be excluded from their original list, since it is
1983: somewhat younger at 8.3-9.8 Gyr \citep{mpg2006}, (given that the typical age
1984: of a Galactic globular cluster exceeds 10 Gyr). On the other hand the
1985: two "suspected" old globulars, NGC~1928 and NGC~1939, were confirmed
1986: (see references below), giving a total of 15 ancient globular clusters
1987: in the LMC. NGC~121 is the only known old globular cluster in the SMC
1988: \citep{mighell98b}. The adopted age and metallicity for each cluster,
1989: with associated references, are listed in Table~\ref{tab:all}. The
1990: table is supplemented with extinction information based on individual
1991: cluster CMDs and values retrieved from MCPS \cite{zaritsky97}. The
1992: estimated stellar mass which contributes to the integrated-light
1993: measurements for each cluster (based on our 2MASS $J$ band
1994: integrated-light photometry and mass-to-light ratios from
1995: \cite{maraston05}) are listed in Column~7 of Table~\ref{tab:ph}, and
1996: are lower than the total cluster masses.
1997: Total cluster mass estimates from \cite{mclvdm05} are also given.
1998:
1999: We believe that the following
2000: ten old clusters are reliable test particles: 4 inner LMC objects
2001: (NGC1786, NGC1835, NGC1898, NGC2019); one
2002: outer LMC cluster (NGC2210), and NGC121 in the SMC. The
2003: other three outer objects (NGC1841, NGC2257, Hodge11) have integrated
2004: light measurements taken in apertures (set by the optical dataset)
2005: which sample only a fraction of the total stellar population in each
2006: cluster. The stellar mass which contributes to the
2007: integrated light measurements are lower than $
2008: {\cal{M}}_{\rm (10\%)}$, and therefore these
2009: clusters may have a larger spread in colour-colour space.
2010:
2011: Here, we provide more details on the available cluster age and
2012: metallicity information. \cite{olsen98} studied NGC 1754, 1835, 1898,
2013: 1916, 2005 and 2019. Their F555W and F814W WFPC2 CMDs reach an
2014: apparent magnitude $ V\approx25$, well below the MSTO point. The
2015: metallicities were derived using the technique of \citep[][; hereafter
2016: S94]{sarajedini94}. In most cases there is good agreement between the
2017: photometric results of \cite{olsen98} and the spectroscopy of
2018: individual cluster members of \cite{olszewski91}. For the clusters
2019: showing large discrepancies (NGC 2005 and NGC 2019) the metallicities
2020: in \citeauthor{olszewski91} are significantly lower, although
2021: \citeauthor{olszewski91} do note that the measurements for these
2022: clusters are uncertain. \cite{grocholski06} recently estimated [Fe/H]
2023: = $-1.31\pm0.05$ for NGC 2019 based on moderate resolution Ca II
2024: Triplet spectroscopy of 5 cluster stars, in good agreement with the
2025: result of \citeauthor{olsen98} ([Fe/H]=$-1.23\pm0.15$). Age estimates
2026: relative to those of MW GCs with similar metallicity were measured
2027: according to the method of \cite{vdbd1990}.
2028:
2029: Another three old LMC clusters (NGC1466, NGC2257, and Hodge11) were
2030: observed with WFPC2 F555W and F814W filters by \cite{johnson99}. In
2031: this case the authors did not attempt to derive their own metallicity
2032: estimates, but adopted already published values instead.
2033:
2034: \cite{mg04} published ACS Wide Field Channel (WFC) F555W and F814W
2035: photometry for NGC 1928, 1939 (clusters located in the LMC bar
2036: region), and for the remote outer cluster Reticulum. Employing the S94
2037: method, \citeauthor{mg04} derived metallicities that are consistent
2038: with earlier measurements. \citeauthor{grocholski06} also published
2039: [Fe/H]=$-1.57\pm0.03$ for Reticulum, which is in very good agreement
2040: with [Fe/H]=$-1.66\pm0.12$ given by \citeauthor{mg04}. The relative
2041: ages of the three clusters with respect to MW clusters with a similar
2042: metallicity were derived using the techniques of
2043: \cite{vdbd1990}.
2044:
2045: \label{test1}
2046:
2047: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
2048: \subsection{Cluster in the 2 Gyr $\le$ Age $<$ 10 Gyr interval}
2049:
2050: \setcounter{figure}{17}
2051: \begin{figure*}
2052: \centering
2053: \begin{minipage}{180mm}
2054: \includegraphics[bb=14 14 605 452,width=18.0cm]{fig18.eps}
2055: \caption{Global properties of our test sample. The cumulative mass and number of objects in each age bin is shown on the age histogram. The objects from the S parameter extension are presented in black and their contribution to the histograms is shown in gray. Also in gray are given the number of objects and total mass for the age bins when the extended sample is taken into account.}
2056: \end{minipage}
2057: \label{fig:sample}
2058: \end{figure*}
2059:
2060: A survey of the literature revealed 15 SMC/LMC clusters in this age
2061: range. Their ages and metallicities alongside with the corresponding
2062: references are listed in Table~\ref{tab:all}. Most of the LMC cluster
2063: metallicity estimates comes from \cite{grocholski06}. Their results
2064: are based on CaT spectroscopy of multiple stars in each cluster and
2065: generally are in a good agreement with earlier studies
2066: \citep[e.g.][]{olszewski91}. Cluster metallicities based on
2067: spectroscopic measurements also agree with the CMD-based metallicity
2068: estimates of \cite{kerber07}. The latter work is the source of the
2069: age and extinction estimates for the majority of the LMC objects.
2070:
2071: All six of the SMC clusters included in the $2-10$~Gyr bin fall within
2072: the age range between $5-8$~Gyr; no LMC clusters with these ages are known.
2073: Most of the information about
2074: these SMC clusters was retrieved from the papers of
2075: \cite{mighell98a,mighell98b}, based on deep {\it HST} WFPC2
2076: observations. Metallicities and reddening for the objects were derived
2077: applying the S94 method. The age estimates listed in Table~\ref{tab:all}
2078: are assuming an age of 9.0 Gyr for Lindsay1. Independent estimates of
2079: \cite{alcaino03} confirm this value. Spectroscopic metallicities for
2080: three SMC clusters were recovered from \cite{dh98}.
2081:
2082: Integrated-light NIR photometry and mass estimates for the (2 Gyr
2083: $\le$ Age $<$ 10 Gyr) sub-sample are presented in
2084: Table~\ref{tab:ph}. We should note that the masses of the LMC objects
2085: are in the order of $10^4{\cal{M}}_{\odot}$, therefore a relatively
2086: large spread relative to the model predictions is not unexpected. Only
2087: NGC416 has an estimated mass $>10^5{\cal{M}}_{\odot}$.
2088:
2089: \label{test2}
2090: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
2091: \subsection{Clusters in the 1 Gyr $\le$ Age $<$ 2 Gyr interval} As in
2092: the previous section, the bulk of the LMC cluster properties in this
2093: age range come from \cite{grocholski06} and \cite{kerber07}. The
2094: adopted values are presented in Table~\ref{tab:all}. Occasionally we
2095: supplement age information from \cite{geisler97} and
2096: metallicity information from \cite{olszewski91}.
2097: The clusters in this age range have sampled stellar masses
2098: around $10^4{\cal{M}}_{\odot}$, and again some spread is expected in
2099: the individual data points. Only NGC~1978 is close to
2100: $10^5{\cal{M}}_{\odot}$.
2101:
2102: Some details on individual clusters in this age interval are provided
2103: below. \cite{ferraro06} showed that despite its large observed
2104: ellipticity and suspected metallicity spread \citep{alcaino99,hill00},
2105: NGC 1978 is not the product of merged clusters. They derived
2106: metallicities for 11 gaint stars cluster in NGC~1978 from
2107: high-resolution UVES/FLAMES VLT spectroscopy. No
2108: significant variations in the giant's metal abundance were found
2109: (resulting mean [Fe/H] is listed in Table~\ref{tab:all}). We conclude
2110: that NGC 1978 can be used as a test particle in our analysis. The
2111: age of this object was derived by \cite{mucciarelli07} applying fit of
2112: theoretical isochrones to {\it HST} ACS data. Information for the two
2113: SMC objects is retrieved from the works of \cite{as99} and
2114: \cite{crowl2001}. Five additional objects were added using the calibration presented in Appendix~A.
2115: \label{test3}
2116:
2117: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
2118: \subsection{Clusters in the 200 Myr $\le$ Age $<$ 1 Gyr interval}
2119: Based a search of the literature, we only identified three clusters in
2120: the 200~Myr$-$1~Gyr age range, with age estimates based on deep CMDs.
2121: In order to expand our test sample, we use the S-parameter
2122: recalibration from Appendix A.
2123: information. Based on equation A2, five more clusters were added to
2124: this age bin. The properties of the sample are also summarized in
2125: Table~\ref{tab:all}.
2126:
2127: There are age and metallicity estimates for some of the objects from
2128: this sub-sample available in the literature. \cite{dirsch2000}
2129: presented data for six LMC clusters based on CCD Str{\" o}mgren
2130: photometry. We adopt their metallicity estimate for NGC2031.
2131:
2132: Information for several more clusters in the 200 Myr - 1 Gyr age
2133: interval is available in the recent study of \cite{wolf07} The
2134: authors use Bruzual-Charlot high-resolution stellar population
2135: synthesis models to fit the SEDs and simultaneously estimate ages and metallicities
2136: of globular clusters in the Magellanic Clouds and M31. Their age
2137: results are in a good agreement with our S parameter ages.
2138: \label{test4}
2139:
2140: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
2141: \section{Transformation of Model Colours to the 2MASS System}
2142:
2143: \setcounter{figure}{18}
2144: \begin{figure}
2145: \includegraphics[bb=14 14 256 328,width=8.4cm]{fig19.eps}
2146: \caption{Filter transmission curves of the Johnson (1965), Bessell \&
2147: Brett (1988) and 2MASS photometric systems. The atmospheric
2148: transmission for the south 2MASS facility (CTIO), is plotted in
2149: blue. Red represents the thermal emission of the atmosphere at
2150: $20\degr$C (scaled to reach unity at $2.6\mu$m for illustrational
2151: purposes). It is obvious that the "$K$-short" $(K_{S})$ filter
2152: significantly reduces the influence of the thermal background compared
2153: to the Johnson and Bessel \& Brett systems.
2154: The 2MASS $J$ is broader than the atmospheric window, and the transmission variability was accounted for during the extensive calibration observations.
2155: The $H$ filter was
2156: introduced to the Johnson 1965 system somewhat later (Johnson 1968) and the
2157: transmission curve was never published. The NIR colours for the
2158: majority of the SSP models use the
2159: filter transmissions of Bessell \& Brett (1988).}
2160: \label{fig:nir_sys}
2161: \end{figure}
2162:
2163: \setcounter{figure}{19}
2164: \begin{figure}
2165: \includegraphics[bb=14 14 256 336,width=8.4cm]{fig20.eps}
2166: \caption{The differences between 2MASS and Bessell \& Brett (1988) NIR
2167: magnitudes as a function of ($J-K_{s})_{\rmn{2MASS}}$. The dependence of
2168: the age and metallicity is also shown (diamonds represent age of 0.2
2169: Gyr for each metallicity (colour coded) and the following circles on
2170: the line correspond to 0.5, 1, 2, 5, 10, 15 Gyr respectively). Note
2171: the scatter for $K_{s{\rmn{2MASS}}} - K$, illustrating the need of
2172: independent fits for the different stellar populations.}
2173: \label{fig:bb_trans}
2174: \end{figure}
2175:
2176: Today's SSP model predictions for NIR colours are provided in various
2177: photometric systems. In order to avoid systematic offsets, observations
2178: and model predictions should be compared in the same photometric system.
2179:
2180: \cite{johnson65} defined a photometric system, in both the optical and
2181: NIR, which is currently perhaps the most widely used. Unfortunately
2182: however, the NIR passbands of \citeauthor{johnson65} are broader than
2183: the atmospheric transmission windows. This can lead to substantial
2184: variations in sky background levels (which can also vary on short
2185: timescales). Hence there can be significant differences between
2186: observations conducted in the original \cite{johnson65} filter set and
2187: more recent NIR systems, which have been developed to fit within the
2188: atmospheric windows and to decrease the thermal background at
2189: longer wavelengths ($K$ band).
2190:
2191: \cite{bb88} examined the relations between the NIR photometric systems of
2192: several different observatories and introduced a homogenized NIR system
2193: based on the works of \cite{glass85} and \cite{johnson66}. The filter
2194: transmission curves of the \cite{johnson65} and the \cite{bb88} systems
2195: are shown in the top and middle panel of Figure~\ref{fig:nir_sys}. In the
2196: bottom panel we plot the 2MASS filter system \citep{skrutskie2006}. The
2197: estimated mean atmospheric transmission for CTIO taken from the online
2198: 2MASS All-sky Release Explanatory
2199: Supplement\footnote{$\rmn{http://www.ipac.caltech.edu/2mass/releases/allsk
2200: y/doc/}$ $\rmn{sec3\_1b1.tbl16.html}$} and the thermal emission of Earth's
2201: atmosphere (blackbody with a temperature of $20\degr$C) are overplotted in
2202: blue and red. Differences between the systems are clearly visible. The
2203: 2MASS photometric system by \citeauthor{skrutskie2006} appears to be least
2204: affected by the Earth's atmosphere and by the thermal background. It is also
2205: clear that observations in these different systems will result in
2206: different NIR colours.
2207:
2208: The 2MASS system seems to be a natural choice, given the extensive sky
2209: coverage and the precise internal photometric calibration.
2210: Among the SSP models being considered here, only \cite{bc03}
2211: provide 2MASS NIR colours.
2212: The other models use NIR passbands on the \citeauthor{bb88} photometric
2213: system, although they are sometimes referred to as Johnson $JHK$
2214: passbands. However it is clear that the system of \cite{bb88} has
2215: different filter throughputs from \citeauthor{johnson65} (as illustrated
2216: in Figure~\ref{fig:nir_sys}). Given the advantages of the 2MASS
2217: photometric system, we encourage the SSP model builders to provide
2218: output in the 2MASS system. For the purposes of
2219: the present work we transform the NIR colours predicted by the
2220: models to the 2MASS system.
2221: To do so, we convolved spectral energy distributions (SEDs) provided by
2222: \cite{bc03} with the filter transition curves from \cite{bb88} and
2223: \citep{skrutskie2006} using the IRAF/STSDAS SYNPHOT package. Synthetic
2224: NIR colours and magnitude differences were derived for a wide
2225: age/metallicity parameter space. The
2226: differences between the synthetic 2MASS and \citeauthor{bb88} magnitudes
2227: as a function of $(J-K_{S})_{\rmn{2MASS}}$ colour is presented in
2228: Figure~\ref{fig:bb_trans}. It is obvious that different transformation
2229: equations should be applied for the different populations as a function of
2230: metallicity, especially for $K$ and $K_s$. We derived a set of
2231: transformation equations adequate for our purposes:
2232: \begin{equation}
2233: J_{\rmn{2MASS}} = J_{\rmn{BB88}} + (a_{J}(J-K)_{\rmn{BB88}} + b_{J})
2234: \end{equation}
2235: \begin{equation}
2236: H_{\rmn{2MASS}} = H_{\rmn{BB88}} + (a_{H}(J-K)_{\rmn{BB88}} + b_{H})
2237: \end{equation}
2238: \begin{equation}
2239: K_{S \rmn{2MASS}} = K_{\rmn{BB88}} + (a_{K_{S}}(J-K)_{\rmn{BB88}} + b_{K_{S}})
2240: \end{equation}
2241:
2242: The transformation coefficients as function of metallicity are listed in
2243: Table~\ref{tab:coef}. These transformations were used to recompute the
2244: model colours. As an example the differences between the original and
2245: the transformed model grids are shown in $(V-J)$ vs. $(J-K)$
2246: colour-colour space in Figure~\ref{fig:modshift}. The grids for the
2247: \citet{bb88} {\it JHK\/} system used by the \citet{maraston05},
2248: \citet{af03}, and \citet{vazdekis99} models are shown in cyan and
2249: the corresponding grids using the 2MASS system are shown in
2250: black. We use the 2MASS system for the subsequent analysis.
2251:
2252: \setcounter{figure}{20}
2253: \begin{figure}
2254: \centering
2255: \includegraphics[bb=14 14 256 718,width=6.4cm]{fig21.eps}
2256: \caption{Illustration of the variance of model grids computed in the
2257: photometric systems of Bessel \& Brett (1988; in cyan) and 2MASS (in
2258: black). $(V-J)$ vs.\ $(J-K)$ (resp. $(J-K_S)$ for 2MASS) for the
2259: models of Maraston (M2005), Anders \& Fritze (A\&F2003) and Vazdekis
2260: (V2000) are presented. The models of Bruzual \& Charlot (B\&C2003)
2261: were originally computed in the 2MASS photometric system. The ages
2262: are given on the right of the isochrones and the metallicities are
2263: labeled along the oldest isochrone for each model. A reddening
2264: vector corresponding to one magnitude of visual extinction is shown
2265: in the top panel.}
2266: \label{fig:modshift}
2267: \end{figure}
2268:
2269: \setcounter{table}{9}
2270: \begin{table}
2271: \centering
2272: \caption{Transformation coefficients between 2MASS and Bessell \&
2273: Brett systems for Equations~(1), (2), and (3).}
2274: \label{tab:coef}
2275: \begin{tabular}{@{}lllllll@{}}
2276: \hline
2277: [Fe/H] & $\ \ a_J$ & $\ \ b_J$ & $\ \ a_H$ & $\ \ b_H$ & $\ a_{K_S}$ & $\ b_{K_S}$ \\
2278: \hline
2279: -2.34 & -0.011& 0.005& -0.008& -0.004& -0.037&\ 0.026\\
2280: -1.74 & -0.014& 0.006& -0.015&\ 0.000& -0.023&\ 0.016\\
2281: -0.73 & -0.023& 0.012& -0.003& -0.009& -0.100&\ 0.067\\
2282: -0.42 & -0.011& 0.005& -0.014& -0.001& -0.098&\ 0.072\\
2283: \ 0.0 & -0.014& 0.007& -0.022&\ 0.006 & -0.198&\ 0.158\\
2284: \ 0.47 & -0.008& 0.001& -0.033&\ 0.017 &\ 0.015 & -0.029\\
2285: \hline
2286: \end{tabular}
2287: \end{table}
2288: \label{transformation}
2289:
2290: \bsp
2291:
2292: \label{lastpage}
2293:
2294: \end{document}