1: %&latex
2: \documentclass[preprint2]{aastex}
3: %\documentclass[12pt,preprint]{aastex}
4: %\documentclass[12pt,typeset]{asstex}
5: \def\kms{\rm{km \ s^{-1}}}
6: \def\etal{\rm{et al. }}
7: \def\deg{^\circ }
8: \def\solar{_\odot }
9: %\tighten
10: % The \tighten command merely resets the \baselinestretch to a
11: % smaller factor, resulting in single-column text that is more closely
12: % spaced. (This will always work.)
13: %
14: %\begin{document}
15:
16: %\usepackage{psfig}
17: \clearpage
18:
19: \begin{document}
20:
21: \title{
22: Distances from Stellar Kinematics for Peculiar Virgo Cluster Spiral Galaxies
23: }
24: \author{Juan R. Cort\'es}
25: \affil{Departamento de Astronom\'{\i}a, Universidad de Chile}
26: \affil{Casilla 36-D, Santiago, Chile}
27: \email{jcortes@das.uchile.cl}
28: \affil{National Astronomical Observatory of Japan}
29: \affil{2-21-1 Osawa, Mitaka, Tokyo, 181-8588}
30: \author{Jeffrey D. P. Kenney}
31: \affil{Department of Astronomy, Yale University}
32: \affil{P.0. Box 208101, New Haven, CT 06520-8101}
33: \email{kenney@astro.yale.edu}
34: \author{Eduardo Hardy\altaffilmark{1}}
35: \affil{National Radio Astronomy Observatory}
36: \affil{Casilla El Golf 16-10, Las Condes, Santiago, Chile}
37: \email{ehardy@nrao.edu }
38: \affil{Departamento de Astronom\'{\i}a, Universidad de Chile\altaffilmark{2}}
39: \affil{Casilla 36-D, Santiago, Chile}
40:
41: \altaffiltext{1}{The National Radio Astronomy Observatory is a facility of the National
42: Science Foundation operated under cooperative agreement by Associated
43: Universities, Inc.}
44: \altaffiltext{2}{Adjoint Professor}
45: \received{someday}
46:
47: \shorttitle{Some title}
48: \shortauthors{Cort\'es, Kenney \& Hardy}
49:
50:
51: \begin{abstract}
52:
53: We present distance estimates for eleven peculiar Virgo
54: cluster spiral galaxies based on measurements of the stellar kinematics of their
55: central 2 kpc.
56: Stellar circular velocities were obtained using two-integral dynamical models.
57: Distances were obtained by comparing, at each radius,
58: the stellar circular velocities with synthetic H$\alpha$ rotation curves
59: derived from NIR Tully-Fisher relations.
60: The results show that most of our galaxies are located within 4 Mpc of
61: the core of the cluster.
62: Three of these galaxies, previously classified as
63: ``low rotator galaxies" or with ``Truncated/Compact" H$\alpha$ radial
64: distributions,
65: have stellar kinematics-based distances that are discrepant with HI-based
66: distances by at least 60\%,
67: and are likely to be located within the virial radius of the cluster.
68: These discrepancies appear due to very truncated
69: gas distributions plus non-circular gas motions or gas motions not in
70: the plane
71: of the stellar disk, perhaps as the result of gravitational interactions.
72: Our results show that
73: environmental effects can significantly reduce the measured HI linewidths
74: for some disturbed cluster galaxies, thus affecting
75: the accurate determination of distances based on gas kinematics methods.
76:
77:
78: \end{abstract}
79:
80: \keywords{
81: galaxies: clusters: individual (Virgo) ---
82: galaxies: distances and redshifts ---
83: galaxies: fundamental parameters (classification, colors, luminosities, masses, radii, etc.) ---
84: galaxies: ISM ------
85: galaxies: stars ----
86: galaxies: kinematics and dynamics
87: galaxies: nuclei ---
88: galaxies: evolution ----
89: galaxies: interactions ----
90: galaxies: peculiar}
91:
92: \bigskip
93: \newpage
94:
95: \section{Introduction}
96:
97: For many years, the Tully-Fisher relation (Tully \& Fisher, 1977)
98: has been used to estimate
99: distances to the Virgo Cluster. These studies were based on optical or near
100: infrared photometry (Gavazzi \etal 1999), together with gas kinematics from
101: HI linewidths
102: (e.g., Yasuda \etal 1997) or H$\alpha$ rotation curves (Rubin \etal 1999).
103: These techniques have been useful in the determination of distances to
104: individual galaxies within the cluster, allowing attempts to determine
105: its 3-D structure (i.e. Yasuda \etal 1997, Gavazzi \etal 1999, and more
106: recently Solanes \etal 2002).
107:
108: Recent results show that there is a population of galaxies in Virgo with HI
109: line--widths narrower
110: than those expected from the mean Tully-Fisher relation derived for the
111: cluster. We
112: refer to these as ``Tully-Fisher deviant" galaxies.
113: Either these galaxies are foreground to the Virgo cluster,
114: or they have peculiarities which make their observed gas line--widths
115: poor tracers of galaxy mass, and hence luminosity.
116:
117: The Rubin \etal (1999) study of H$\alpha$ rotation curves of 89 Virgo disk
118: galaxies identified a population ( $\sim$ 6\% of total sample)
119: which appears to deviate
120: significantly from the Tully-Fisher relation, showing anomalously ``low
121: gas rotation" velocities at apparently every radius, which they called ``low rotators galaxies''.
122: Solanes \etal (2002) studied the 3-D structure of the cluster using
123: the Tully--Fisher relation based on HI linewidths and, most recently,
124: 13 HI deficient spiral galaxies with apparently large 3-D barycentric
125: distances located far away in front and behind the core of Virgo
126: (Sanchis et al. 2004).
127: Seven galaxies were identified as being
128: in the foreground of the cluster core ($D <$ 13 Mpc),
129: supposedly in areas where the ICM
130: is too tenuous to be responsible for the stripping of the ISM gas from these
131: galaxies. Of these galaxies
132: only three had large projected distances ($\theta >$ 7$\deg$)
133: , whereas the rest had small projected
134: distance ($\theta <$ 4$\deg$). Some of the Solanes's
135: small HI line--width galaxies are also H$\alpha$ Rubin ``low rotator" galaxies.
136:
137: In subsequent studies by the Sanchis \etal group
138: (Sanchis \etal 2002, Mamon \etal 2004, and Sanchis \etal 2004),
139: the possibility was analyzed that
140: these 13 HI-deficient objects had crossed the core of the cluster, losing
141: their gas content as a result of
142: ICM-ISM stripping. They concluded these galaxies
143: lie farther away than the maximum radius
144: to which these galaxies
145: can bounce out, making core-crossing improbable, and thus difficult for
146: ICM-ISM stripping to be the cause of the observed HI-deficiency. These authors
147: suggested alternative scenarios including the possibility of erroneous distance
148: estimations, HI-deficiency caused by tidal-interactions, heating of the gas by
149: mergers, and even questioned the claims for HI-deficiency.
150:
151: The application of the techniques discussed above to HI deficient galaxies
152: suffers from the possibility that environmental effects can reduce the
153: spatial extent of
154: the atomic gas, cause non-circular motions or other disturbances,
155: thus reducing the measured
156: line-widths and therefore causing derived distances
157: to be underestimated
158: (Guhathakurta \etal 1988 and Teerikorpi \etal 1992). Indeed these small
159: line-widths could be caused either by truncation of the gas disks by ICM-ISM
160: stripping, or because the gas velocities are intrinsically small at every
161: radius (e.g. Rubin \etal 1999), which can happen if the gas motion is
162: non-equilibrium or non-circular,
163: or the gas geometry is not understood.
164:
165: These conclusions raise obvious questions about these objects, such as:
166: Could these ``Tully-Fisher deviant'' galaxies be the result of an
167: underestimation of the distances produced by environmental effects,
168: leading to an artificial distortion of the true cluster shape?
169:
170:
171: We have carried out an extensive study of the kinematics and morphology of
172: 13 peculiar Virgo Cluster
173: galaxies
174: (Cort\'es \etal 2006; Cort\'es \etal 2008 in prep).
175: Six galaxies within our sample, which includes four tentative
176: foreground galaxies, are objects with small HI line-widths and therefore
177: ``Tully-Fisher deviant''. In order to answer these questions, in this paper
178: distances to
179: these galaxies are estimated through an approach that relies on stellar
180: kinematics\footnote{
181: Unfortunately, two of the original sample galaxies; NGC 4457 and NGC 4698, are unsuitable for
182: deriving their distances using
183: stellar kinematics since NGC 4457 is almost face--on, so its rotation curve is
184: uncertain, and NGC 4698
185: has complex kinematics (see Bertola \etal 1999; Falc\'on-Barroso \etal 2006
186: ; Cort\'es \etal 2008 in prep) which makes its dynamical modelling
187: challenging, and escapes the scope of this work.} and is therefore less affected by environmental effects.
188:
189:
190:
191: This paper is structured as follows. We describe in \S 2 the galaxy sample.
192: In \S 3,
193: the method for estimating distances via stellar kinematics is introduced.
194: The detailed application of this method to our data, the results on the distances to individual
195: galaxies of the sample, and the nature of
196: the ``Tully-Fisher deviant'' galaxies is studied in \S4.
197: A discussion about the
198: existence of the putative foreground group of galaxies in Virgo as well as of
199: the causes for these galaxies HI-deficiency is presented in \S 5.
200: Finally, suggested improvements to the technique,
201: summary and concluding remarks are found in \S 8.
202:
203: \section{The galaxy sample}
204:
205: The sample consists of eleven
206: peculiar Virgo cluster spiral galaxies,
207: spanning a variety of optical
208: morphologies (Table $\ref{table1}$). Our sample includes more
209: early type than late type galaxies, since most of the strongly
210: disturbed cluster galaxies are early types.
211: Morphological selection was made using the R and H$\alpha$
212: atlas of Virgo cluster galaxies of
213: Koopmann \etal (2001), whereas the kinematical selection made use of
214: the published
215: H$\alpha$ kinematics on 89 Virgo cluster spirals by Rubin \etal (1999).
216:
217: The Virgo cluster has about 110 spiral and lenticular galaxies brighter
218: than 0.1 $L^{*}_{\odot}$
219: (Bingelli \etal 1985, BST), so we have observed about 12\%
220: of the brightest Virgo cluster spiral galaxies. The
221: sample galaxies are spread around the cluster core, spanning projected distances
222: ranging from a few hundred kiloparsecs to 2.5 Mpc (Fig. $\ref{virgosampletully}$).
223:
224: While the sample selection is not uniform, it is
225: designed to include bright Virgo spirals
226: whose peculiarities are most poorly understood, and to
227: include representatives of the different H$\alpha$ types identified
228: by Koopmann \& Kenney (2004).
229: In choosing sample galaxies within a given H$\alpha$ type,
230: we gave preference to those with kinematical peculiarities.
231:
232:
233:
234: Following the use of the star formation classes introduced
235: by Koopmann \& Kenney (2004),
236: we can group our sample galaxies as follow
237:
238: \begin{itemize}
239:
240: \item {\em Normal galaxies:} NGC 4651.
241:
242: \item {\em Truncated/Normal galaxies:} NGC 4351, NGC 4569, NGC 4580,
243: and NGC 4694.
244:
245: \item {\em Truncated/Compact galaxies:} NGC 4064, NGC 4424, and NGC 4606.
246:
247: \item {\em Anemic or Truncated/Anemic galaxies:} NGC 4293, NGC 4429, and NGC 4450.
248:
249: \end{itemize}
250:
251: Although our main goal is to study galaxy morphological evolution in the
252: cluster,
253: we have at least six galaxies in the sample with small HI linewidths
254: (NGC 4064, NGC 4351, NGC 4424,
255: NGC 4580, NGC 4606, and NGC 4694), including four galaxies
256: that Sanchis \etal (2004) suggest may belong to a foreground group.
257:
258:
259:
260: \section{Distance estimations by using stellar kinematics}
261:
262:
263: The determination of distances to HI-deficient galaxies using HI line-widths is vulnerable to the reduction in the spatial extension
264: of the HI disks resulting from environmental effects, and by the possibility that gas velocities be intrinsically smaller at every radius.
265: On the other hand, the use of stellar kinematics for distance determination
266: (``stellar kinematics based distances", hereafter SKB distances)
267: has the advantage that it is in principle unaffected by physical processes other than gravitational processes,
268: whereas
269: as we have seen, the kinematics of the gaseous content can be affected by a number of non-gravitational physical
270: processes resulting from environmental interactions (e.g. ICM-ISM stripping).
271: However, stellar kinematics are far more difficult to measure and analyze than gas velocities,
272: on account of the faintness of the stellar component as well as the collisionless nature of the stars
273: which makes the pressure supported component important. The latter implies that rotation velocities
274: are no longer fully representative of the gradient of the potential.
275: Star velocities however, are as good tracers of the mass of the galaxy as gas velocities are,
276: provided one is able to properly handle their physical complexities.
277:
278: We must therefore remember that; a) it is important to take into account the contribution of
279: the stellar velocity dispersion $\sigma$ to the real circular velocity, and b)
280: we have to restrict the Tully-Fisher analysis to a region within the galaxy where the surface brightness
281: is high enough to allow reliable measurement of stellar velocities.
282:
283: We have devised a distance estimation
284: method based on stellar kinematics rather than gas velocities. This method consists of the evaluation of
285: the circular velocity from the stellar kinematics through the use of two-integral dynamical models
286: (see Binney, Davies \& Illingworth 1990; van der Marel \etal 1990; Cinzano \& van der Marel 1994;
287: Magorrian \etal 1998; Cretton
288: \etal 1999) which are then used in a Tully-Fisher relation. The method can be summarized as follow:
289:
290: 1) The stellar kinematics are modeled via two-integral dynamical models, to yield the true circular velocity $V_{c}$.
291:
292: 2) Because this circular velocity is valid only within the region that we have measured
293: reliably it cannot be used in a traditional Tully-Fisher
294: relation which requires sampling to large galactocentric distances. To resolve
295: this we construct synthetic ionized gas rotation
296: curves for galaxies spanning a range of absolute magnitudes, using near infrared
297: Tully-Fisher diagrams at each radius, as in Rubin \etal (1985). These synthetic rotation curves represent the typical rotation curves as a function of absolute magnitude for ``normal'' galaxies.
298:
299: 3) Finally, we compare these synthetic rotation curves with the circular
300: velocities derived in 1). The best match gives the absolute
301: magnitude, and therefore the distance modulus.
302:
303: In the following sections we provide a more detailed explanation of
304: the estimation of the circular velocity and the construction of the
305: synthetic rotation curves.
306:
307: \subsection{Estimation of the circular velocity from stellar rotation curves}
308:
309: The Multi-Gaussian Expansion MGE formalism
310: (Emsellem \etal 1994; Cappellari 2002) provides one of the
311: simplest ways to build reliable two-integral dynamical models.
312: The MGE formalism allows us to parametrize the surface brightness of a galaxy as a sum of gaussians
313: with major axis widths $\sigma_{i}$, axial ratios $q'_{i}$, and
314: luminosities $L_{i}$,
315: from which we can find a unique luminosity density $\nu$ (Cappellari 2002), assuming axisymmetry.
316: This approach offers advantages over
317: the standard bulge + disk decomposition as a description of the light distribution.
318: It provides an analytical
319: and efficient way to do the luminosity deprojection, and it allows
320: kinematical quantities such as the gravitational potential, velocity dispersion,
321: and circular velocity to be estimated with a simple integration, thus simplifying
322: the calculations.
323: These models can succesfully reproduce the observed stellar kinematics in (presumably)
324: axisymmetric galaxies.
325: However, we must keep in mind that issues such as dust obscuration,
326: triaxiality, kinematically distinct features in the stellar disks,
327: and the assumed lack of dark matter can easily make these models
328: discordant with the observed kinematics. The bias introduced by these
329: issues are discussed in \S 3.3.
330:
331: To estimate the circular velocity, two-integral self-consistent models under the
332: MGE formalism were built for eleven galaxies of the sample.
333: These models assume axisymmetry and $\sigma_{R} = \sigma_{z}$.
334: They probably do not reproduce properly the kinematics, since the galaxies
335: can exhibit important anisotropies in their velocity ellipsoid,
336: but for the purposes of this work these models are acceptable since our
337: aim is to estimate the circular velocity rather than fully reproduce the
338: internal kinematics.
339: It is important to notice, that these models are purely stellar
340: and do not include the contribution
341: from dark matter. In most of our galaxies our measurements are
342: restricted to the inner parts
343: ($\sim$ 20\% of the optical radius) making it impossible to
344: constraint properly the dark matter halo
345: parameters. Thus, these SKB distances must in all the cases
346: represent a lower limit to the distances.
347: However, precisely because we are sampling the central regions
348: where dark matter is the least important
349: its
350: effect on our distances is probably minor.
351: The detailed modeling proceeded as follows:
352:
353: 1) The MGE formalism was used to find the luminosity density $\nu(R,z)$ from
354: R-band flux--calibrated images (Koopmann \etal 2001), assuming an oblate system. The dust lanes were
355: carefully masked to minimize the effects of dust obscuration.
356: For a given surface brightness $\Sigma(x,y)$,
357: the formalism finds the best MGE model (Fig $\ref{fig4}$), which can be de-projected to yield a
358: unique luminosity density. The inclination was assumed to be the minimum required for an oblate distribution. In most cases this inclination was consistent with the inclination obtained by Koopmann \etal (2001).
359:
360: 2) If we consider the axisymmetric case, following Cappellari (2002),
361: the MGE mass density can be written as
362: \begin{equation}
363: \rho(R,z)= \Upsilon \sum_{i=1}^{N}\frac{L_{i}}{(\sigma_{i} \sqrt{2 \pi})^{3}q_{i}} \exp{\left[- \frac{1}{2 \sigma_{i}^{2}} \left(R^{2} + \frac{z^{2}}{q_{i}^{2}} \right)\right]},
364: \end{equation}
365: where, $\Upsilon$ is the stellar mass-to-light ratio, $N$ is the number
366: of adopted Gaussian components, each with
367: major axis width $\sigma_{i}$, intrisic axial ratio $q_{i}$,
368: and luminosity $L_{i}$.
369:
370:
371: Also, the MGE gravitational potential
372: can be written as
373: \begin{equation}
374: \Phi(R,z)=\sqrt{\frac{2}{\pi}} G\Upsilon \sum_{i=1}^{N} \frac{L_{i}}{\sigma_{i}} \int_{0}^{1} {\cal H}_{i}(T) dT,
375: \end{equation}
376: where, $G$ is the gravitional constant, and ${\cal H}_{i}$ is
377: an dimensionless function
378: given by
379: \begin{equation}
380: {\cal H}_{i}(T) = \frac{\exp{\left[-\frac{T^{2}}{2{\sigma}_{i}^{2}} \left(R^{2}+\frac{z^{2}}{1-\epsilon_{i}T^{2}} \right) \right]}}{\sqrt{1 - \epsilon_{i} T^{2}}},
381: \end{equation}
382: with $\epsilon_{i}=1-q_{i}^{2}$.
383:
384: The circular velocity at each radius in the plane of the galaxies was
385: calculated directly from the potential.
386: The models have as input parameters the mass-to-light ratio
387: $\Upsilon$ and the distance $d$, but the luminosity scales with
388: the distance as $L \propto d^{2}$. This
389: lead us to conclude that the circular velocity
390: obeys
391: \begin{equation}
392: V_{c}^{2}(R)=R \frac{\partial \Phi}{\partial R}= \alpha {\cal F}(R).
393: \end{equation}
394: Here $\alpha \equiv \Upsilon d$, and ${\cal F}(R)$ is
395: \begin{equation}
396: {\cal F}(R) \equiv \sqrt{\frac{2}{\pi}} G\sum_{i=1}^{N} \left(\frac{L_{i}}{\sigma_{i}^{3}} \frac{R^{2}}{d} \right) \int_{0}^{1} {\cal H}_{i}(T) T^{2} dT,
397: \end{equation}
398: which represents the radial variation of the circular velocity,
399: and doesn't depend on the distance. Thus, the models can be
400: rescaled to any desired value of $\alpha$.
401:
402:
403: 3) The $\mu_{2} \equiv \sqrt{v_{LOS}^{2}+\sigma_{LOS}^{2}}$ moment was
404: calculated, for any point in the sky, following equations 61--63 from
405: Emsellem \etal (1994), after taking into account the typo error noticed by
406: Cappellari \etal (2006). To include the effects of seeing in the
407: computation of $\mu_{2}$, we weighted the data
408: when appropriate by the seeing convolved surface brightness. This moment has the advantage that
409: along the major axis it does not depend on the shape of the velocity
410: ellipsoid\footnote{Unfortunately,
411: along the minor axis it
412: depends critically on the ratio $\beta \equiv \sigma_{R}/\sigma_{z}$.}.
413:
414: It can be shown that $\mu_{2}^{2}$ scales
415: with $\alpha$, which is the quantity we wish to determine. Thus, we
416: can choose a model with an initial guess for $\alpha$ (called
417: $\alpha_{0}$, see table $\ref{table5}$ for the
418: value of $\alpha_{0}$ used in each case ),
419: based on reasonable guesses for the galaxy distance
420: and $\Upsilon$, and rescale it to any mass-to-light ratio $\Upsilon$
421: and distance $d$ as
422: \begin{equation}
423: \mu_{2}^{2}(\alpha)=\frac{\alpha}{\alpha_{0}} \mu_{2}^{2}(\alpha_{0}).
424: \end{equation}
425:
426: 4) Finally, the observed $\mu_{2}$ was calculated using the stellar
427: kinematics data from Cort\'es \etal 2008 (Fig. $\ref{kindata1}$).
428: The model-derived $\mu_{2}(\alpha_{0})$
429: moment and the observed $\mu_{2}$ were compared, and $\alpha$ was
430: calculated along the major axis of the galaxy as
431: \begin{equation}
432: \alpha = \alpha_{0} \left< \frac{{\mu_{2}^{2}}_{\rm obs}(R)}{\mu_{2}^{2}(\alpha_{0}, R)}\right>
433: \end{equation}
434: yielding the mean $\alpha$ factor (e.g. Fig $\ref{fig6}$). Errors were estimated as
435: the standard deviation in $\alpha$. Therefore, the sought-after circular
436: velocity in equation (4) corresponds to that of the model which best
437: matches the observed $\mu_{2}$ giving the
438: best $\alpha$. It is important to notice that here we have derived
439: $\alpha$, but not $\Upsilon$ and $d$ independently. These should be
440: disentangled from $\alpha$.
441:
442:
443: \subsection{The Tully-Fisher relation for radii smaller than $R(V_{\rm max})$ }
444:
445: So far we have derived the best circular velocity using two-integral dynamical
446: models. In what follows we focus on making use of these velocities to obtain the distances to our galaxies.
447: In placing our circular velocities on a Tully-Fisher plot to derive
448: the distance and additionally disentangle $\Upsilon$ from the $\alpha$ factor, we must remember that we have
449: measured velocities only until $R \sim$ 0.4 $R_{20.5}$ (where $R_{20.5}$
450: is the radius at which the galaxy has a surface brightness in H-band of
451: 20.5 mag arcsec$^{-2}$). This makes it impossible, as discussed, to place
452: our velocities on the usual Tully-Fisher relation, usually determined at
453: $\sim$$R_{20.5}$, in order to obtain reliable distances. To overcome this problem,
454: we use the approach of building synthetic rotation curves based on
455: H$\alpha$ gas velocities as in Rubin \etal (1985). These synthetic rotation
456: curves represent the mean rotation curves for galaxies with different absolute magnitudes.
457:
458:
459: The procedure to derive the synthetic rotation curves was the following:
460:
461: 1) We constructed $H_{c}$-band infrared Pseudo Tully-Fisher (PTF)
462: relations for different normalized radii (0.05, 0.1, 0.2, 0.3, 0.6, 0.7, 0.8,
463: 0.9 R$_{20.5}$), using the H$\alpha$ rotation curves for Virgo cluster galaxies
464: obtained by Rubin \etal 1999. (Fig. $\ref{ptf}$). The PTFs were determined
465: using the H-band magnitudes (Table $\ref{table4}$) derived by Gavazzi \etal
466: (1999), and Jarrett \etal (2003) for the galaxies of the Rubin's sample.
467: The advantages of using infrared magnitudes rather than $B$ magnitudes lie
468: in the reduction of the dependence of the Tully-Fisher relation on Hubble type,
469: in the reduction of the spread due to dust absorption and stellar population
470: variations, and in the improved ability to trace the luminous matter
471: (e.g. Pierce \& Tully 1998, and Gavazzi \etal 1996). We excluded from the
472: T-F sample those galaxies that were identified as belonging to possible
473: background groups ($d > 23$ Mpc) by Solanes \etal (2002), whose could have
474: introduced undesirable systematic errors. We finally ended up with
475: 34 galaxies, all with H$\alpha$ kinematics and infrared photometry,
476: which we used to build the PTFs. We supposed that
477: all these galaxies were located at a mean distance of 16.8 Mpc, which
478: corresponds
479: to the distance to M 87 (Gavazzi \etal 1999; Nielsen \& Tsvetanov 2000; Tonry \etal 2001). The usual standard Tully-Fisher relation corresponds
480: to a PTF measured at $\sim$$R_{20.5}$.
481:
482: 2) We fitted a straight line to each of the above PTF relations corresponding
483: to a given radius. Then, for every magnitude, we derived an interpolated gas
484: velocity foe each radius from the family of fitted straight lines (Fig
485: $\ref{ptf1}$, top panel).
486:
487: 3) The final curves for each magnitude (and thus mass) were constructed using
488: the gas velocities obtained for each radius (Fig $\ref{ptf1},$ bottom panel).
489: These synthetic curves represent the expected shapes of the rotation curves
490: for galaxies with different luminosities (mass) belonging to the Virgo Cluster,
491: and obeying the Tully-Fisher relation. As we see in the graph, the synthetic
492: rotation curves do not overlap, depending only on the absolute magnitude.
493:
494:
495: The absolute magnitude corresponding to each synthetic curve was calculated by
496: assuming that each curve correspond to a galaxy located at a distance
497: $D_{V}=16.8$ Mpc.
498: Finally, the absolute magnitudes $M$ of our sample galaxies could be
499: found by locating the synthetic
500: rotation curve that best matches the stellar circular velocity curve for each sample galaxy. The latter
501: can be determined by
502: minimizing the $\chi^{2}$ (Figure $\ref{fig9}$) between the stellar
503: circular velocity and the synthetic rotation curves.
504: The distance modulus follows from the observed apparent magnitude $m$. Errors were estimated using the variation
505: $\Delta \chi^{2}$, as 3--$\sigma$ errors ($\Delta \chi^{2}$=9).
506:
507: Having derived the absolute magnitude by matching the best model
508: circular velocity and the synthetic rotation curves, the distance $d$ is
509: simply derived as
510: \begin{equation}
511: d=10^{\frac{m-M+5}{5}}.
512: \end{equation}
513: Moreover, after deriving $d$ we can obtain the mass-to-light ratio
514: as $\Upsilon = \alpha/d$.
515:
516:
517:
518: The comparison between gas-based synthetic rotation curves and
519: stellar circular velocities is justified,
520: if we exclude the galaxies with peculiar rotation curves such as the low rotators,
521: since gas-based synthetic rotation curves represent the typical rotation curve, and thus the gradient
522: of the potential.
523: It is
524: important to notice however that discrepancies between gas-based synthetic rotation curves, and stellar
525: circular velocities could be found in the inner parts of the galaxies ($r \leq$ 0.1 $R_{20.5}$), where the
526: gas velocity dispersion or non-circular gas motions could be important enough to affect the determination of the gas-based
527: synthetic rotation curves, and peculiar stellar structures as circumnuclear disk can be found. Thus we
528: restrict our comparision between stellar circular velocity and gas-based synthetic rotation curves to
529: radii greater than 0.1 $R_{20.5}$.
530:
531:
532: \subsection{Biases in the stellar kinematics-based distance estimations}
533:
534: Our SKB distances are not free of systematic effects. We recall that these effects
535: are:
536:
537: 1) The presence of dust
538: in our galaxies can reduce the amount of luminous
539: mass that contributes to the potential, so we could underestimate the
540: expected circular velocity. This problem arises preferently in
541: galaxies with prominent dust lanes.
542:
543: 2) Triaxiality and non-axisymmetric structures are ignored in the pursuit of oblate models. This in turn introduces either an overestimate or underestimate of the mass
544: by altering the amplitude and shape of the
545: rotation curve. Galaxies with strong bars could be seriously affected.
546: Moreover, triaxial features are very difficult to model and their inclusion
547: is beyond the scope of this work.
548:
549: 3) Kinematically distinct components are also important. Some galaxies
550: have circumnuclear stellar disks (e.g. NGC 4429) or counter-rotating disks
551: which can be easily detected in the velocity fields but
552: are hard to detect photometrically. The latter makes the inclusion of such
553: components in the models difficult making our models discordant with the
554: observations in regions dominated by such features. Thus, we must exclude in
555: our comparison the regions where these features are important.
556:
557: 4) The dark matter halo is an important component of the potential
558: of the galaxy especially in the outer parts.
559: The dark matter
560: contribution can be
561: represented by a logarithmic potential,
562: \begin{equation}
563: \Phi_{DM}=\frac{v_{0}^{2}}{2} \ln (r^{2} + r_{0}^{2}),
564: \end{equation}
565: which is the simplest potential producing a flat circular velocity $v_{0}$ at larger radii ($r >> r_{0}$).
566: In figure $\ref{figdm}$, we show the effect of the dark matter halo in two sample
567: galaxies; NGC 4450 and NGC 4569. The parameters $r_{0}$ and $v_{0}$ were chosen in
568: order to match the observed H$\alpha$ rotation curve from Rubin \etal (1999). This figure shows that
569: the dark matter halo is indeed important in the outer parts, but our observations are limited to
570: the inner 30", so we are unable to constrain the dark matter halo
571: parameters properly, implying that we are underestimating the circular velocity.
572:
573: Most of these problems imply an underestimation of the circular velocity. For example, dust and dark matter have the similar effect of hiding the amount of mass that contributes to the potential. This translates to an underestimate of the luminosity and therefore the model masses. Thus, we should consider these SKB distances as lower limits to the real distance;
574: galaxies will tend to be somewhat further away than estimated here.
575:
576:
577:
578: \section{Distances to the peculiar Virgo cluster galaxies}
579:
580: \subsection{The actual fittings}
581:
582:
583: Now that we have discussed in detail the methodology, we focus on the actual
584: fittings and their errors. The MGE fits to the light distribution
585: are presented in Fig. $\ref{fig4}$.
586: We see that most galaxies are reasonably well fit by the MGE algorithm.
587: Differences in surface brightness between the galaxy images and the MGE model
588: are less than 10\%, which translates to velocity
589: uncertainties of the order of 5-10\%. Galaxies such as NGC 4064 and
590: NGC 4450 present bigger uncertainties resulting from the existence of a
591: central bar that obviously cannot be accounted by an axisymmetric
592: decomposition.
593:
594:
595: The $\alpha/\alpha_{0}$ ratio salong the major axis are displayed in Fig $\ref{fig6}$. In most
596: galaxies, the values are roughly constant along the major axis outside
597: the central 5", except in NGC 4293, NGC 4424, NGC 4429, and NGC 4450. In NGC
598: 4429 there is a prominent circumnuclear disk which cannot
599: be reproduced with these simple models. The best $\alpha/\alpha_{0}$ ratios,
600: therefore $\alpha$, were
601: determined (Table $\ref{table5}$) as the average along the major axis outside the central 5",
602: except for NGC 4429 where we use distances greater
603: than 12" in order to exclude the circumnuclear disk. The average $\alpha/\alpha_{0}$ ratio is displayed as a solid line in figure $\ref{fig6}$ (left panels),
604: while the errors appear displayed as dashed lines.
605: The comparisons between the observed and best model $\mu_{2}$ moments along the
606: major axis for the galaxies are displayed in Fig $\ref{fig6}$ (right panels)
607: On these plots,
608: the solid line represents the best model defined by the mean $\alpha$
609: factor, the shaded region represents the range of uncertainty given
610: by the standard deviation
611: in $\alpha$. Along
612: the major axis, the model and the observed $\mu_{2}$ in most cases
613: agree reasonably.
614:
615: To compare the synthetic rotation curves with the circular velocity curves,
616: the latter were rescaled in radius in terms of $R_{20.5}$ in the H-band (Gavazzi \etal 1999). The exceptions were
617: NGC 4064 and NGC 4424 whose values were determined from H-band surface
618: brightness profiles derived by Jarrett \etal (2003), since Gavazzi \etal (1999) do not
619: have measurements for these galaxies. This is shown in Fig. $\ref{fig9}$. The model-based circular velocities
620: extend further than the stellar kinematic data. This is justified since the circular
621: velocities are derived from self-consistent models
622: based on optical images which extend into the outer galaxies.
623:
624: The comparison between the stellar circular velocities and the
625: synthetic rotation curves were performed by monitoring the $\chi^{2}$
626: between the synthetic rotation curves and the stellar circular velocities,
627: within the range of 0.1 -- 0.8 $R_{20.5}$. This range was chosen in order
628: to avoid
629: large variations in velocity existing within the inner 0.05 $R_{20.5}$ (e.g.
630: NGC 4429, NGC 4450, and NGC 4569), and to minimize the
631: effect of not including a dark matter halo, which can be significant
632: if we compare only the outer parts (i.e., using a range of radii of
633: 0.6 -- 0.8 $R_{20.5}$).
634: Comparison between the present circular
635: velocities with those derived by Rubin in H$\alpha$ show that in most cases
636: Rubin's values are of the order of or lower than our circular velocities.
637: The exceptions are NGC 4450, and NGC 4569. In both cases, this
638: implies that
639: the galaxies are more massive than predicted by our models. In the case of
640: NGC 4450, the MGE fit
641: (Fig. $\ref{fig4})$ exhibits a big discrepancy in P.A on one of the isophotes,
642: indicating the presence of an important non-axisymmetric structure which might
643: account for the missing mass. In NGC 4569, dust lanes are prominent until at
644: least 5 kpc through the disk, which prevented us from including all the
645: luminous mass.
646:
647: \subsection{The SKB distances}
648: Once the absolute magnitudes M$_{H}$ for each galaxy is determined as is described in
649: section \S 3.2, the line-of-sight distance can be found from the distance
650: modulus. $\Upsilon$ can also be derived from $d$ and $\alpha \ $(Table
651: $\ref{table6}$). To test whether the results on $\Upsilon$ are physically meaningful,
652: we plot in Fig $\ref{virial}$ the relation between the R-band luminosity, and
653: the R-band mass-to-light ratio. The best fit straight line in $\log L$, $\log \Upsilon$ space is
654: \begin{equation}
655: \log(\Upsilon/\Upsilon_{\odot})=-3.2 \pm 0.6 +(0.35 \pm 0.05) \log(L/L_{\odot})
656: \end{equation}
657: This fit is roughly consistent within the errors with the fundamental plane
658: correlation
659: $\Upsilon \propto L^{0.2}$ predicted from the virial theorem (e.g., Faber \etal 1987; Bender, Burstein, \& Faber 1992). This consistency lends credibility
660: to the modelling presented here. The observed variations in $\Upsilon$ are mostly due to the variation in $L$. However, there are galaxies that present very low $\Upsilon$.
661: For example, NGC 4694 has a value of $\Upsilon$ of 1.1 $\pm$ 0.3 $\Upsilon\solar$, which is a factor $\sim$ 2 lower than the expected. This low value and its
662: $B-V$ color ($\sim$ 0.62), suggest a recent starburst.
663:
664:
665:
666:
667:
668: Figure $\ref{fig11}$ which displays the galaxy distance distribution shows that
669: our sample galaxies are located between 10 to 27 Mpc from us,
670: with the majority of them between 13 and 20 Mpc. Two galaxies,
671: NGC 4450 and NGC 4569, have model locations in front of the Virgo main core at about
672: 10--12 Mpc from us, although the models underestimate the mass for these
673: galaxies, so it is likely that these galaxies
674: are not foreground (see notes in table $\ref{table6}$). On the other hand,
675: NGC 4651 is located at 27 Mpc and is clearly
676: a background galaxy.
677:
678: It is interesting to compare our stellar kinematics-based distance estimates
679: with Solanes's HI-based distance estimates.
680: In figure $\ref{statdiff}$, we show the correlation between Solanes's
681: distances and the ratio between the SKB distances and Solanes's, with 3--$\sigma$ error bars.
682: >From inspection of this figure, we conclude that
683: NGC 4293, NGC 4450, NGC 4569, NGC 4580, and NGC 4651 have SKB distances
684: that agree within the errors with those of Solanes. But others such as
685: NGC 4064,
686: NGC 4351, NGC 4424, and NGC 4606 have significant
687: discrepancies worthy of further analysis.
688:
689:
690: \subsubsection{The cases of NGC 4064, NGC 4424 and NGC 4694: Rubin's low rotators}
691:
692: NGC 4064 and NGC 4424 are particularly interesting because both galaxies have
693: been regarded as possible foreground galaxies.
694: Moreover, both galaxies, together with NGC 4694, belong to the
695: class of Rubin's ``low rotator" galaxies, although
696: for the case of NGC 4064 Rubin's H$\alpha$ velocities are much smaller
697: than our ionized gas velocity measurements (Cort\'es \etal 2006). Solanes's distance estimations
698: indicate a distance of
699: 9.8 $\pm$ 0.4 Mpc for NGC 4064, and 4.1 $\pm$ 0.2 Mpc for
700: NGC 4424\footnote{ 1$\sigma$ errors} in stark contrast with our
701: estimations of 18.0 $\pm_{0.8}^{1.3}$ Mpc, and 15.2$\pm 1.9$ Mpc respectively.
702: The discrepancies are of a factor 1.8 for NGC 4064 and 3.7 for NGC 4424,
703: which are statistically significant.
704: In the case of the other ``low rotator", NGC 4694, we determine a distance of
705: 13.4 $\pm_{1.0}^{1.3}$ Mpc. Clearly, NGC 4064 and NGC 4424 belong to
706: the Virgo cluster. NGC 4694 might be affected by the dark matter bias in our
707: models, so its distance should be considered a lower limit. All these galaxies
708: present truncated H$\alpha$ disks (Koopmann \& Kenney 2004), and their gas
709: kinematics are peculiar (see Cort\'es \etal 2006), indicating that they are
710: heavily disturbed by the environment.
711: They all show evidence for strong gravitational interactions or mergers,
712: which may account for their low gas velocities.
713: This is cautionary of the risk of
714: using gas velocities as distance estimators for HI deficient and/or disturbed
715: galaxies. We conclude that the ``low rotators" found by Rubin do not exhibit
716: a low gas rotation velocity because they are intrinsically faint and thus
717: closer to us, but rather because they have been heavily affected by
718: gravitational interactions perhaps in addition to ram pressure stripping.
719:
720:
721: \subsubsection{NGC 4351 and NGC 4606}
722: Consider now the cases of NGC 4351, and NGC 4606. Both galaxies
723: belong to Rubin's sample but they were not classified as ``low rotators".
724: Solanes's estimation gives
725: distances of 11.2 $\pm$ 1.3 Mpc, and 12.7 $\pm$
726: 0.3 Mpc respectively which again differ from our results of
727: 20.3 $\pm_{1.2}^{0.8}$ Mpc, and 19.9 $\pm_{0.5}^{1.0}$ Mpc.
728: In NGC 4351 the discrepancy, could be due to truncation of the HI disk via
729: ICM-ISM stripping, a very likely effect on this galaxy considering its high
730: relative velocity with respect to the cluster mean
731: ($\sim$ 1200 $\kms$). NGC 4606 has a star formation class ``Truncated/Compact",
732: same as NGC 4064, and NGC 4424, and as these galaxies it has features that
733: suggest gravitational interactions (Cort\'es \etal 2006), so again its
734: small line-width could be due to the action of environmental effects.
735:
736: \subsubsection{NGC 4569}
737:
738: This galaxy has a SKB estimated distance of
739: 9.9 $\pm 0.2$ Mpc, still in front of Virgo.
740: However, the SKB distance for NGC~4569 may be an underestimate,
741: because of its strong dust lanes and possibly large influence of its
742: dark matter halo (Fig $\ref{figdm}$). If we include
743: the dark matter halo in order to match the Rubin's H$\alpha$ rotation curve we
744: find a barycentric distance of 3.8 Mpc, locating this galaxy inside the
745: maximum rebound radius. The SKB distance is slightly bigger than
746: Solanes's HI-based distances, although there are different HI linewidths
747: reported in the literature for NGC 4569, and one gets a different
748: distance depending on which linewidths one uses.
749: The HI linewidth in figure $\ref{fig9}$ comes from the Arecibo General
750: Catalogue, a private database mantained by Riccardo Giovanelli and Martha P.
751: Haynes, partially published by Solanes \etal (2002). This is not necessarly
752: consistent with the homogenized HI-distance of Solanes \etal (2002), which is
753: an {\em average} between different Tully-Fisher (TF) catalogues. If fact, the
754: HI-distance in the TF catalogues used by Solanes \etal can be as low as
755: 7.9 Mpc (Kraan-Korteweg \etal 1988) and as high as 16.1 Mpc (Ekholm \etal 2000).
756:
757:
758: \subsection{SKB distances and star formation classes}
759:
760: As it was shown in \S 4.2, in the cases of NGC 4293, NGC 4450, NGC 4569, NGC 4580,
761: and NGC 4651, HI-based distances agree with our SKB distances. These galaxies
762: have star formation classes (Koopmann \& Kenney 2004) ranging from
763: ``Truncated/Anemic" for NGC 4293, and NGC 4450, to ``Truncated/Normal" for
764: NGC 4569 and NGC 4580, and to ``Normal" in the case of NGC 4651.
765: In contrast for the ``Truncated/Compact" galaxies the SKB distances
766: don't agree with HI-based distances. This suggests that ``Truncated/Compact" galaxies are
767: not only very truncated in their gas content, but that they also have non-circular
768: gas kinematics or gas motions which are not in the plane of the stellar disk.
769:
770: Here we comment on the possible existence of several galaxies in the foreground
771: of Virgo at $\sim$10 Mpc (Solanes \etal 2002), which were tentatively identified as a group by
772: Sanchis \etal (2002). Four of our sample galaxies are considered foreground
773: by Solanes. All of them except for NGC 4569 are ``Truncated/Compact"
774: (i.e., NGC 4064, NGC 4424, and NGC 4606) with SKB distances in the range 16--20
775: Mpc. NGC 4569 has a stellar-kinematics estimated distance of
776: 9.9 $\pm 0.2$ Mpc, still in front of Virgo.
777: However, this galaxy shows strong evidence for ongoing ICM-ISM stripping (Vollmer \etal 2004;
778: Kenney \etal 2008 in prep), and its angular distance
779: (1.7$\deg$) suggests that it lies within a region where the ICM medium is
780: dense enough for efficient stripping of its gas. It is important to recall that
781: our SKB distances should be considered as a lower limit due to the biases.
782: We should expect that the real distances are larger than our estimates, so
783: the discrepancies between Solanes' and our determinations should
784: increase if we correct for the biases.
785:
786: We conclude, on the basis of our overlapping sample (we have analyzed
787: 60\% (4/7) of their foreground candidates), that there is no
788: compelling evidence for the existence of multiple foreground galaxies at D$\simeq$10 Mpc,
789: as suggested by Solanes \etal (2002).
790:
791:
792: \section{Barycentric distances and the origin of HI-deficient galaxies in the outskirts of the cluster}
793:
794: In order to determine how far these galaxies are with respect to the core of
795: the Virgo Cluster, we calculated their barycentric distances $r$ to M87,
796: assumed to be at a distance of
797: $D_{V}$=16.8 Mpc (Gavazzi \etal 1999; Nielsen \& Tsvetanov 2000; Tonry \etal
798: 2001). These distances can be derived from
799: \begin{equation}
800: r^{2}=D_{V}^{2}+d^{2}-2 D_{V}d \cos{\theta}
801: \end{equation}
802: where $d$ is the line-of-sight distance of the galaxies, and $\theta$ the
803: angular distance to M87. The results can be found in Table $\ref{table6}$ and
804: are shown in Fig $\ref{fig11}$. All galaxies are plotted on a P-V diagram.
805: The solid line represents the ``virial radius'' ($r_{\rm V} = $ 1.65 $h_{2/3}^{-1}$ Mpc, where $h_{2/3} = H_{0}$/(66.7 km s$^{-1}$ Mpc$^{-1}$)) derived by Mamon \etal (2004),
806: and the dashed line represents the largest``maximum rebound radius'' ($r_{reb} = $ 1--2.5 $r_{V}$)
807: of all the sample galaxies.
808: The latter corresponds to the maximum radius to which particles that cross the
809: core can bounce to. In their calculations Mamon \etal (2004) considered only
810: one single halo, the M 87 subcluster, which is the most massive substructure
811: in Virgo.
812:
813:
814:
815: We see in Fig $\ref{fig11}$ that most of our galaxies are within the largest maximum
816: rebound radius, and such galaxies could have crossed the
817: core of the cluster and suffered ICM-ISM stripping,
818: which reducing the size of their gas disks.
819: While many of the HI-deficient spirals in the outer cluster probably lost most of their gas
820: during a core passage, others have apparently experienced ICM-ISM stripping in the cluster outskirts.
821: The Virgo spiral NGC 4522 is a clear example of outer cluster ICM-ISM stripping
822: (Kenney \etal 2004, Crowl \& Kenney 2006), which is thought to be caused
823: by ram pressure which is enhanced due to an ICM which is dynamic and lumpy rather than static and smooth.
824:
825: Others likely owe their HI-deficiency
826: to gravitational interactions, such as NGC 4064 (Cort\'es \etal 2006) and NGC 4293,
827: which exhibit kinematical peculiarities and disturbed dust distributions,
828: both signatures of gravitational interactions.
829:
830: NGC 4450, NGC 4569, NGC 4580, and NGC 4651 are galaxies further out from the
831: maximum rebound radius, according the SKB distances.
832: The first three galaxies are HI deficient.
833: NGC 4450 is an anemic galaxy with no evidence of recent ICM stripping.
834: Its maximum circular velocity as
835: determined by us is lower than the maximum H$\alpha$ velocity, indicating that our
836: model contains less mass than needed for reproducing the observed H$\alpha$
837: velocities, probably due to either non-axisymmetric features which
838: were not included or a significant dark matter halo.
839: If we include a dark matter halo in order to match the H$\alpha$ rotation
840: curve (Fig $\ref{figdm}$), it is likely located inside
841: the maximum rebound radius ($d_{\rm bary} =$ 3.3 Mpc).
842: NGC 4580 has a ``Truncated/Normal"
843: star formation class, so it is likely to have been affected by ICM--ISM
844: stripping.
845: However it couldn't have crossed the core according to the simple cluster model, and
846: the age of stellar population in outer disk reveals that it must have
847: been stripped outside the cluster core (Crowl \& Kenney 2008).
848: This galaxy is closer (in the plane of the sky) to M49 than M87, so perhaps it is
849: bound to the M49 subcluster rather than the M87 subcluster, and affected by the M49 environment.
850: The M49 subcluster is 4 times less massive than the M87 subcluster, and has a less dense ICM,
851: so it is unlikely to strip the gas from a galaxy if the ICM is static and smooth, but could if
852: the ICM were dynamic and lumpy.
853: In general substructures in the cluster can be important in several ways: by
854: stirring up the ICM through sub-cluster mergers and locally increasing the strength of
855: ram pressure, by changing the value of the maximum rebound radius,
856: or by the pre-processing of galaxies in infalling groups.
857:
858: %%This is the only galaxy
859: %%in this sample HI-deficient and gas truncated surprisingly far from the core.
860: %% not true! n4064 has same properties!
861:
862: The case of NGC 4651 is clearer: this galaxy is very far from the core of
863: Virgo (+10.3 $\pm_{1.2}^{0.5}$ Mpc), and its star formation class is ``Normal",
864: indicating that it
865: has not been affected by the ICM medium, so it probably correspond to a
866: background galaxy rather than a Virgo member.
867:
868: \newpage
869:
870: Finally, the case of NGC 4569 is the most complicated. The SKB distance places
871: this galaxy
872: outside of the maximum rebound radius ($r =$ -7.0 $\pm $0.2 Mpc), and
873: in front of the cluster. Its high HI deficiency, truncated HI and
874: H$\alpha$ distribution, and extraplanar gas arm (Vollmer etal 2004; Kenney etal 2008) are
875: clear evidence for recent ICM--ISM stripping. Simulations (Vollmer \etal 2004)
876: suggest that peak pressure occurred 300 Myrs ago. Its extreme line-of-sight
877: velocity (-1200 $\kms$ relative to the cluster mean) is consistent with a
878: galaxy after peak pressure located on the
879: near side of the core, but it is hard to understand how it could
880: be as much as 6 Mpc closer than the core.
881: The prominent dust lanes are an issue here, biasing the distance determination, so it
882: might simply happen that this galaxy actually lies inside the maximum rebound
883: radius. Also, if we test the inclusion of a dark matter halo in order to match
884: the H$\alpha$ rotation curve (Fig $\ref{figdm}$), the corrected distance is about 13 Mpc,
885: putting this galaxy inside the maximum rebound radius.
886:
887:
888:
889: \section{Conclusions}
890:
891: In this paper, we have shown that stellar kinematics can be reliably used
892: for determining distances to spiral and peculiar galaxies.
893: This technique presents a considerable
894: advantage with respect to gas kinematics based techniques since, unlike the latter, it is in
895: principle unaffected by physical processes other than gravity.
896:
897:
898: This technique can be considerably improved provided we are able
899: to overcome the biases described in \S 3.3:
900: \begin{itemize}
901: \item {\em Overcoming dust obscuration} by using near-infrared imaging.
902:
903: \item {\em Extending observations of galaxies further out}. This
904: has the advantage of going beyond bars, and bulges, and getting a
905: better constraint on the dark matter halo.
906:
907: \item {\em Improving the reliability of synthetic rotation curves} by
908: increasing the number of sample galaxies used
909: to build these curves, and extend the sample to non-cluster undisturbed galaxies.
910: \end{itemize}
911:
912: Using stellar kinematics techniques, we have obtained SKB distances to 11
913: peculiar Virgo Cluster galaxies. Our results can be summarized as follows:\\
914: \\
915: 1.- Of the four galaxies in our sample with HI line-of-sight distances
916: estimated by Solanes \etal (2002) to be significantly foreground to Virgo,
917: three galaxies have SKB distances within 4 Mpc of the cluster core,
918: only one (NGC 4569) has an SKB distance (within 3$\sigma$) consistent
919: with the HI LOS distance.\\
920: \\
921: 2.- Galaxies with star-formation classes other than ``Truncated/Compact" have
922: SKB distances that agree with the HI-based
923: distances within
924: 3$\sigma$ errors.
925: On the other hand, the ``Truncated/Compact" galaxies NGC 4064 and NGC 4424
926: exhibit large discrepancies
927: between HI-based and SKB distances. SKB predicts distances 2 to 4
928: times farther away than HI-based distances. Thus, environmental effects can
929: indeed affect both their gas content and kinematics, rendering HI-based
930: distances unreliable.\\
931: \\
932: 3.- SKB distance determinations show that ``low rotator" galaxies
933: belong to the
934: cluster, strongly suggesting that environmental effects are the cause of the
935: their low
936: gas velocity. Galaxies with highly truncated gas disks and other peculiarities
937: such as disturbed stellar disks and non-circular or non-planar gas motions give
938: gas-based distances smaller than SKB distances. These galaxies
939: were perhaps subject to gravitational interactions plus ICM--ISM stripping.
940: On the other hand, galaxies with normal or truncated gas disks, and normal
941: stellar disks,
942: presumably affected only by ICM--ISM stripping, have SKB distances
943: consistent within the errors.with gas based distances.\\
944: \\
945: 4.- Most of the galaxies in our sample are within the bounce--back zone
946: (e.g. distances within 4 Mpc of M87),
947: indicating they could have crossed the core of the cluster. If this is
948: the case,
949: ICM-ISM stripping could explain the existence of HI-deficient galaxies
950: in the outskirts of the cluster, although there are some galaxies
951: that were clearly stripped outside of the core. This is probably due
952: to the existence of a dynamic lumpy ICM stirred up by sub-cluster
953: mergers, or gravitational interactions plus associated gas stripping.\\
954: \bigskip
955: \bigskip
956: \bigskip
957:
958: We thank Roeland van der Marel for invaluable comments, crucial to this work and an anonymous referee for useful suggestions. Funding for this research has been provided
959: by Fundaci\'on Andes Chile, FONDAP project grant 15010003, Chile,
960: and NSF grant AST-0071251.
961:
962:
963:
964:
965:
966:
967: \begin{references}
968: \reference{} Bertola, F., Corsini, E. M., Vega Beltr\'an, J. C., Pizella, A., Sarzi, M., Cappellari, M., \& Funes, J. G. 1999, ApJ, 519, L127
969: \reference{} Bender, R., Burstein, D., \& Faber, S. M. 1992, ApJ, 399, 462
970: \reference{} Bingelli, B., Tammann, G. A., \& Sandage, A. (BST) 1987, AJ, 94, 241
971: \reference{} Binney, J., J., Davies, R. L., \& Illingworth, G. D. 1990, ApJ, 361, 78
972: \reference{} Bohringer, H., Briel, U. G., Schwarz, R. A., Voges, W., Hartner G., \& Trumper J. 1994, Nature, 368, 828
973: \reference{} Bottema, R. 1993, A\&A, 275, 16
974: \reference{} Cappellari, M. 2002, MNRAS, 333, 400
975: \reference{} Cappellari, M., \etal 2006, MNRAS, 366, 1126
976: \reference{} Cinzano, P., \& van der Marel, R. P. 1994, MNRAS, 270, 325
977: \reference{} Cort\'es, J. R., Kenney J. D. P., \& Hardy, E. 2006, AJ, 131, 747
978: \reference{} Cretton, N., van den Bosch, F. C. 1999, ApJ, 514, 704
979: \reference{} Crowl, H. H., \& Kenney, J. D. P. 2006, ApJ, 649, L75
980: \reference{} Crowl, H. H., \& Kenney, J. D. P. 2008, ApJ, in press
981: \reference{} Ekholm, Lanoix, P., Teerikorpi, P., Fouqu\'e, P., \& Paturel, G. 2000, A\&A, 335, 835
982: \reference{} Emsellem, E., Monnet, G., \& Bacon, R. 1994, A\&A, 285, 723
983: \reference{} deVaucouleurs, G., deVaucouleurs, A., Corwin, H. G., Buta, R. J., Paturel, G., Fouqu\'e, P. 1991, {\em Third Reference Catalog of Bright Galaxies}, (New York: Springer-Verlag)
984: \reference{} Faber, S. M., Dressler, A., Davies, R. L., Burstein, D., Lyndell-Bell, D., Terlevich, R., \& Wegner, G. 1987, in Nearly Normal Galaxies, ed. S. M. Faber (New York: Springer), 317
985: \reference{} Falc\'on-Barroso, J. \etal 2006, MNRAS, 369, 529
986: \reference{} Gavazzi, G., Pierini, D., \& Boselli, A. 1996, A\&A, 312, 397
987: \reference{} Gavazzi, G., Boselli, A., Scodeggio, M., Pierini, D., \& Belsole, E. 1999, MNRAS, 304, 595
988: \reference{} Guhathakurta, P., van Gorkom, J. H., Kotanyi, C. G., \& Balkowski, C. 1988, AJ, 96, 851
989: \reference{} Jarrett, T.H., Chester, T., Cutri, R., Schneider, S. E.,\& Huchra, J. P. 2003, AJ, 125, 525
990: \reference{} Kenney, J. D. P., van Gorkom, J. H., \& Vollmer, B. 2004, AJ, 127, 3361
991: \reference{} Koopmann, R. A., Kenney, J. D. P., \& Young, J. 2001, ApJS, 135, 125
992: \reference{} Koopmann, R. A., \& Kenney, J. D. P. 2004, ApJ, 613, 866
993: \reference{} Kraan-Korteweg, R. C, Cameron, L. M., \& Tammann, G. A. 1998, ApJ, 331, 620
994: \reference{} Magorrian, J., Tremaine, S., Richstone, D., Bender, R., Bower, G.,
995: Dressler, A., Faber, S. M., Gebhardt, K., Green, R., Grillmair, C., Kormendy, J., \& Lauer,
996: T. 1998, AJ, 115, 2285
997: \reference{} Mamon, G. A., Sanchis, T., Salvador-Sol\'e, E., \& Solanes, J. M. 2004, A\&A, 414, 445
998: \reference{} van der Marel, R., Binney, J., \& Davies R. L 1990, MNRAS, 245, 582
999: \reference{} Neilsen, E. H., \& Tsvetanov, Z. I. 2000, ApJ, 536, 255
1000: \reference{} Pierce, M. J., \& Tully, R. B. 1988, ApJ, 330, 579
1001: \reference{} Rubin, V. C., Burstein, D., Ford, W. K., Jr., \& Thonnard, N. 1985, ApJ, 289, 81
1002: \reference{} Rubin, V. C., Waterman, A. H., \& Kenney, J. D. P. 1999, AJ, 118, 236
1003: \reference{} Sanchis, T., Solanes, J. M., Salvador-Sol\'e, E., Fouqu\'e, P., \& Manrique, A. 2002, ApJ, 580, 164
1004: \reference{} Sanchis, T., Mamon, G. A., Salvador-Sol\'e, E. \& Solanes J. M. 2004, A\&A, 418, 393
1005: \reference{} Sandage, A., \& Becdke, J. 1994, {\em The Carnegie Atlas of Galaxies}, (Washington: Carnegie)
1006: \reference{} Sandage, A., \& Tammann, G. 1987, {\em A Revised Shapley-Ames Catalog of Bright Galaxies}, (Washington: Carnegie)
1007: \reference{} Solanes, J. M., Sanchis, T., Salvador-Sol\'e, R., Giovanelli R., \& Haynes, M. P. 2002, AJ, 124, 2440
1008: \reference{} Teerikorpi, P., Bottinelli, L., Gouguenheim, L., \& Paturel, G. 1992, A\&A, 260,17
1009: \reference{} Tonry, J. L., Dressler, A., Blakeslee, J. P., \etal 2001, ApJ, 546, 681
1010: \reference{} Tully, R. B., \& Fisher, J. R. 1977, AA, 54, 661
1011: \reference{} Vollmer, B., Balkowski, C., Cayatte, V., van Driel, W., \& Huchtmeier, W. 2004, A\&A, 419, 35
1012: \reference{} Yasuda, N., Ohamura, S., Fukugita, M., \& Ohamura, S. 1997, ApJS, 108, 417
1013:
1014: \end{references}
1015:
1016: \onecolumn
1017: \newpage
1018:
1019:
1020: \begin{figure}
1021: \centerline{
1022: \plotone{fig1-bitmap.eps}
1023: }
1024: \caption
1025: {
1026: Sample galaxies and their location in the Virgo cluster.
1027: \rm
1028: Contour map represent the ROSAT X-ray emission in the cluster (Bohringer \etal 1994).
1029: Sample galaxies are represented by a black cross and its NGC name. Solanes's foreground galaxies
1030: are represented by a circle, whereas background galaxies are represented by a
1031: diamond. Four sample galaxies overlap with Solane's foreground galaxies, and one with
1032: Solanes's background galaxies. Black circle represent the virial radius ($\sim$ 5.6$^{\circ}$)
1033: around M 87.}
1034: \label{virgosampletully}
1035: \end{figure}
1036: \clearpage
1037:
1038: \begin{figure}
1039: \epsscale{0.8}
1040: \plotone{fig2-bitmap.eps}
1041: \caption{MGE fits to sample galaxy R-band images.
1042: MGE model contours are overplotted on R-band contours.}
1043: \label{fig4}
1044: \end{figure}
1045: \clearpage
1046:
1047:
1048: %\begin{figure}
1049: %\figurenum{2}
1050: %\psfig{bbllx=55pt,bblly=425pt,bburx=494pt,bbury=649pt,clip=,file=figures/mgeset2.ps}
1051: %\caption{Continuated.
1052: %From
1053: %{\em left} to {\em right}; NGC 4651,
1054: %and NGC 4694.}\label{fig5}
1055: % \end{figure}
1056: %\clearpage
1057:
1058: \begin{figure}
1059: \figurenum{3}
1060: \includegraphics[width=1.0\textwidth, clip]{fig3a.eps}
1061: \caption{Stellar kinematics along the major axes of the sample galaxies.
1062: From left to right: the stellar velocity, the velocity dispersion, and
1063: the $\mu_{2}$ moment.
1064: }\label{kindata1}
1065: \end{figure}
1066: \clearpage
1067: %\begin{figure}
1068: %\figurenum{3}
1069: {\includegraphics[width=1.0\textwidth,clip]{fig3b.eps}}\\
1070: \centerline{Fig. 3. --- Continued.}
1071: %\caption{Continued.
1072: %From {\em top} to {\em bottom}; NGC 4429, NGC 4450, NGC 4569, and NGC 4580.}
1073: \label{kindata2}
1074: %\end{figure}
1075: \clearpage
1076: %\begin{figure}
1077: %\figurenum{3}
1078: {\includegraphics[width=1.0\textwidth,clip]{fig3c.eps}}\\
1079: \centerline{Fig. 3. --- Continued.}
1080: %\caption{Continued.
1081: %From {\em top} to {\em bottom}; NGC 4606, NGC 4651, and NGC 4694.}
1082: \label{kindata3}
1083: %\end{figure}
1084: \clearpage
1085:
1086: \begin{figure}
1087: \figurenum{4}
1088: \plotone{fig4a.eps}
1089: \caption{$\alpha/\alpha_{0}$ ratios (left panels) and $\mu_{2}$ moments (right panels) along the major axes.
1090: The best fit model is represented by thick solid lines, and the model uncertainties
1091: are indicated by dashed lines (left) or shaded areas (right).
1092: }\label{fig6}
1093: \end{figure}
1094: \clearpage
1095: {\plotone{fig4b.eps}}\\
1096: \centerline{Fig. 4. --- Continued.}
1097: \label{fig7}
1098: \clearpage
1099: {\plotone{fig4c.eps}}\\
1100: \centerline{Fig. 4. --- Continued.}
1101: \label{fig8}
1102: \clearpage
1103:
1104:
1105: \begin{figure}
1106: \figurenum{5}
1107: \centerline{
1108: \plotone{fig5.eps}
1109: }
1110: \caption{Pseudo Tully-Fisher relations for different radii. Solid circles represent Rubin's H$\alpha$ velocities for Rubin's galaxy sample.
1111: The lines represents linear fits to the Pseudo Tully-Fisher relations.}
1112: \label{ptf}
1113: \end{figure}
1114:
1115:
1116: \begin{figure}
1117: \figurenum{6}
1118: \centerline{
1119: \plotone{fig6.eps}
1120: }
1121: \caption{
1122: Pseudo Tully-Fisher relations and synthetic rotation curves.
1123: {\em Top Panel:} Lines fitted to the Pseudo Tully-Fisher relation for different radii
1124: (0.05, 0.1, 0.2, 0.4, 0.8 $R_{20.5}$). From the interception between those lines and
1125: the line for constant magnitude, we find the corresponding rotational velocity for each radius.
1126: {\em Bottom Panel:} Synthetic rotation curves derived from Pseudo Tully-Fisher relations labelled with corresponding values of absolute magnitudes $M_{H}$.}
1127: \label{ptf1}
1128: \end{figure}
1129:
1130: \begin{figure}
1131: \figurenum{7}
1132: \centerline{
1133: \includegraphics[width=0.7\textwidth,clip]{fig7a.eps}
1134: }
1135: \caption{MGE stellar circular velocities and synthetic rotation curves.
1136: {\em Left panels;} stellar circular velocities.
1137: Circular velocities (thick solid line with shaded area representing uncertainty) roughly match with one synthetic rotation curve (solid lines).
1138: H$\alpha$ gas rotation curves are represented by open symbols. HI maximum velocities (Solanes
1139: \etal 2002) are represented by the dashed line.
1140: The numbers to the right of the synthetic rotation curves represent the absolute $H$ magnitudes for a
1141: galaxy having such a rotation curve at the distance of the Virgo cluster.
1142: {\em Right panels;} $\Delta \chi^{2}$ between the MGE circular velocity and
1143: synthetic rotation curves, dashed lines represent the 3--$\sigma$ confidence
1144: level.
1145: }\label{fig9}
1146: \end{figure}
1147: \clearpage
1148: {\includegraphics[width=0.7\textwidth,clip]{fig7b.eps}
1149: }\\
1150: \centerline{Fig. 7. --- Continued.}
1151: \label{fig10}
1152: \clearpage
1153: {\includegraphics[width=0.7\textwidth,clip]{fig7c.eps}
1154: }\\
1155: \centerline{Fig. 7. --- Continued.}
1156:
1157:
1158:
1159: \begin{figure}
1160: \figurenum{8}
1161: \centerline{
1162: \plotone{fig8.eps}
1163: }
1164:
1165: \caption{Effect of the dark matter halo in two sample galaxies. Solid lines
1166: represent the circular velocities for different dark matter halo parameters.
1167: Open symbols represent the Rubin etal (1999) H$\alpha$ rotation velocities, and shaded areas represent the uncertainties in the pure stellar circular velocities. Our stellar
1168: kinematics data is limited to the inner 30", so we cannot constrain the
1169: dark matter halo parameters without using the ionized gas rotation curves, but even including them the dark matter halo parameters are too uncertain.}
1170: \label{figdm}
1171: \end{figure}
1172: \clearpage
1173:
1174: \begin{figure}
1175: \figurenum{9}
1176: \centerline{
1177: \plotone{fig9.eps}
1178: }
1179:
1180: \caption{Correlation
1181: between the R-band stellar mass-to-light ratio $\Upsilon$ and the
1182: luminosity $L$.
1183: Solid line represents the fit of a straight line, which roughly
1184: follows the fundamental plane relation $\Upsilon \propto L^{0.2}$.}
1185: \label{virial}
1186: \end{figure}
1187: \clearpage
1188:
1189:
1190: \begin{figure}
1191: \figurenum{10}
1192: \centerline{
1193: %\psfig{bbllx=45pt,bblly=350pt,bburx=553pt,bbury=740pt,clip=,file=figures/virgopecpvd.ps,height=5.5in}
1194: \includegraphics[width=1.0\textwidth,clip]{fig10.eps}
1195: %\plotone{fig10.eps}
1196: }
1197: \caption
1198: {
1199: Position-Velocity diagrams for sample galaxies in the Virgo cluster.
1200: {\em Top panel:} LOS distances versus systemic velocities. Dashed line represents the systemic velocity of M87.
1201: Cross represents the location of the core of the Virgo cluster (M87). {\em Bottom panel:}
1202: Barycentric distances versus projected relative velocity with respect to M87. Solid line represents the virial radius, and
1203: dash line represents the maximum rebound radius. Arrows represent
1204: the expected location of NGC 4450 and NGC 4569 if a dark matter halo
1205: is included. }\label{fig11}
1206: \end{figure}
1207: \clearpage
1208:
1209: \begin{figure}
1210: \figurenum{11}
1211: \centerline{
1212: %\psfig{bbllx=45pt,bblly=350pt,bburx=553pt,bbury=740pt,clip=,file=figures/discrepancyhI.ps,height=5.5in}
1213: \includegraphics[width=1.0\textwidth,clip]{fig11.eps}
1214: }
1215:
1216: \caption
1217: {Ratio of SKB to HI based distances versus HI based distance.
1218: Galaxies with small LOS HI based distances tend to have SKB distances at least 50\% higher.
1219: This shows that HI based distances can be biased by environmental effects.}\label{statdiff}
1220: \end{figure}
1221: \clearpage
1222:
1223: \newpage
1224:
1225: \begin{deluxetable}{ccccccccccc}
1226: \tabletypesize{\scriptsize}
1227: \tablecolumns{11}
1228: %\tablenum{1}
1229: \tablewidth{0pc}
1230: \tablecaption{Galaxy Sample Properties \label{table1}}
1231: \tablehead{
1232: \colhead{} & \colhead{} & \colhead{} & \colhead{} & \colhead{} & \colhead{} & \colhead{ } & \colhead{Inc.} & \colhead{P.A} & \colhead{V$_{helio}$} & \colhead{D$_{M87}$} \\
1233: \colhead{Name} & \colhead{R.A. (J2000)} & \colhead{Decl. (J200)} & \colhead{RSA/BST} & \colhead{RC3} & \colhead{SFC} & \colhead{B$_{T}^{0}$} & \colhead{(deg)} & \colhead{(deg)} & \colhead{($\kms$)} & \colhead{(deg)} \\
1234: \colhead{(1)} & \colhead {(2)} & \colhead{(3)} & \colhead{(4)} & \colhead{(5)} & \colhead{(6)} & \colhead{(7)} & \colhead{(8)} & \colhead{(9)} & \colhead{(10)} & \colhead{11}}
1235:
1236: \startdata
1237: NGC 4064 & 12 04 11.2 & 18 26 36 & SBc(s): & SB(s)a:pec & T/C & 12.30 & 70 & 150 & 931 $\pm$ 12 & 8.8 \\
1238: NGC 4293 & 12 21 12.8 & 18 22 57 & Sa pec & (R)SB(s)0/a & T/A & 11.20 & 67 & 66 & 930 $\pm$ 14 & 6.4\\
1239: NGC 4351 & 12 24 01.6 & 12 12 18 & Sc(s) II.3 &SB(rs)ab: pec &T/N[s] & 13.0 4& 47 & 80 & 2317 $\pm$ 16 & 1.7 \\
1240: NGC 4424 & 12 27 11.5 & 09 25 15 & Sa pec & SB(s)a: & T/C & 12.32 & 60 & 90 & 440 $\pm$ 6 & 3.1 \\
1241: NGC 4429 & 12 27 26.4 & 11 06 29 & S0$_{3}$(6)/Sa pec &SA(r)0$^{+}$& \nodata & 10.9 & 62 & 90 & 1127 $\pm$ 31 & 1.5 \\
1242: NGC 4450 & 12 28 29.3 & 17 05 07 & Sab pec & SA(s)ab & T/A & 10.93 & 46 & 175 & 1958 $\pm$ 6 & 4.7 \\
1243: NGC 4569 & 12 36 49.8 & 13 09 46 & Sab(s) I-II & SAB(rs)ab & T/N[s] & 10.2 5& 64 & 23 & -232 $\pm$ 22 & 1.7\\
1244: NGC 4580 & 12 37 48.6 & 05 22 06 & Sc/Sa & SAB(rs)a pec &T/N[s] & 12.49 & 45 & 158 & 1036 $\pm$ 7 & 7.2\\
1245: NGC 4606 & 12 40 57.6 & 11 54 44 & Sa pec & SB(s)a: & T/C & 12.69 & 67 & 40 & 1655 $\pm$ 16 & 2.5\\
1246: NGC 4651 & 12 43 42.6 & 16 23 36 & Sc(r) I-II & SA(rs)c & N & 11.36& 51 & 71 & 804 $\pm$ 10 & 5.1 \\
1247: NGC 4694 & 12 48 15.1 & 10 59 00 & Amorph & SB0 pec & T/N & 12.19 & 42 & 140 & 1177 $\pm$ 11 & 4.5 \\
1248: \enddata
1249: \tablecomments{(1) Galaxy name; (2) Right Ascension in hours, minutes, and seconds; (3) Declination in degrees,
1250: minutes, and seconds; (4) Hubble Types from BST, Sandage \& Tammann 1987, or Sandage \& Bedke 1994; (5)
1251: Hubble type from RC3; (6) Star formation class from Koopmann \& Kenney 2004; (7) The total, face-on blue magnitude
1252: from RC3; (8) Inclination from Koopmann \etal 2001; (9) Optical P.A from Koopmann \etal 2001; (10) Heliocentric
1253: radial velocity from HyperLEDA; (11) The projected angular distance in degrees of thegalaxy from M87.}
1254: \end{deluxetable}
1255:
1256:
1257:
1258: \clearpage
1259:
1260:
1261: \begin{deluxetable}{ccc}
1262: %\tablecolumns{11}
1263: %\tablenum{6.1}
1264: \tablewidth{0pc}
1265: \tablecaption{NIR Properties of Sample Galaxies \label{table4}}
1266: \tablehead{
1267: \colhead{} & \colhead{$H_{c}$} & \colhead{$R_{20.5}$} \\
1268: \colhead{Name} & \colhead{mag} & \colhead{arcsec} \\
1269: \colhead{(1)} & \colhead{(2)} & \colhead{(3)}}
1270: \startdata
1271: NGC 4064 & 8.78 & 64.0\tablenotemark{a} \\
1272: NGC 4293 & 7.35 & 156.30 \\
1273: NGC 4351 & 10.44 & 35.50 \\
1274: NGC 4424 & 9.17 & 75.69\tablenotemark{a} \\
1275: NGC 4429 & 6.76 & 166.50 \\
1276: NGC 4450 & 6.90 & 147.4 \\
1277: NGC 4569 & 6.77 & 195.00 \\
1278: NGC 4580 & 8.77 & 58.79 \\
1279: NGC 4606 & 9.30 & 60.93 \\
1280: NGC 4651 & 8.25 & 69.06 \\
1281: NGC 4694 & 9.03 & 61.30 \\
1282: \enddata
1283: \tablenotetext{a}{2MASS Galaxy Atlas, Jarrett \etal 2003.}
1284: \tablecomments{(1) Galaxy name; (2) Apparent magnitude in H-band (Gavazzi \etal 1999);
1285: (3) Radius where the surface brightness is 20.5 mag arcsec$^{-2}$}
1286: \end{deluxetable}
1287:
1288: \clearpage
1289:
1290: \begin{deluxetable}{cccccc}
1291: \tablewidth{0pc}
1292: \tablecaption{Best Model Parameters of Sample Galaxies \label{table5}}
1293: \tablehead{
1294: \colhead{} & \colhead{inc} & \colhead{} & \colhead{$\alpha_{0}$} & \colhead{$\alpha$} & \colhead{} \\
1295: \colhead{Name} & \colhead{($\deg$)} & \colhead{$\alpha/\alpha_{0}$} & \colhead{$\Upsilon_{\odot}$ Mpc} & \colhead{$\Upsilon_{\odot}$ Mpc} & \colhead{Comments} \\
1296: \colhead{(1)} & \colhead{(2)} & \colhead{(3)} & \colhead{(4)} & \colhead{(5)} & \colhead{(6)}}
1297: \startdata
1298: NGC 4064 & 70 & 1.82 $\pm$ 0.26 & 32 & 58 $\pm$ 8 & Major axis, mean $x \geq$ 5"\\
1299: NGC 4293 & 70 & 2.68 $\pm$ 0.72 & 32 & 86 $\pm$ 23 & Major axis, mean $x \geq$ 5"\\
1300: NGC 4351 & 47 & 1.12 $\pm$ 0.13 & 32 & 36 $\pm$ 4 & Major axis, mean $x \geq$ 5"\\
1301: NGC 4424 & 72 & 1.17 $\pm$ 0.33 & 32 & 37 $\pm$ 11 & Major axis, mean $x \geq$ 5"\\
1302: NGC 4429 & 66 & 3.0 $\pm$ 0.5 & 32 & 96 $\pm$ 16 & Major axis, mean $x \geq$ 12"\tablenotemark{a}\\
1303: NGC 4450 & 50 & 2.02 $\pm$ 0.34 & 32 & 65 $\pm$ 1 & Major axis, mean $x \geq$ 5"\\
1304: NGC 4569 & 66 & 1.14 $\pm$ 0.09 & 40 & 46 $\pm$ 4 & Major axis, mean $x \geq$ 5"\\
1305: NGC 4580 & 46 & 2.19 $\pm$ 0.09 & 32 & 70 $\pm$ 3 & Major axis, mean $x \geq$ 5"
1306: \\
1307: NGC 4606 & 68 & 1.35 $\pm$ 0.15 & 32 & 43 $\pm$ 5 & Major axis, mean $x \geq$ 5"\\
1308: NGC 4651 & 51 & 1.53 $\pm$ 0.15 & 55 & 84 $\pm$ 8 & Major axis, mean $x \geq$ 5"\\
1309: NGC 4694 & 59 & 0.43 $\pm$ 0.09 & 32 & 14 $\pm$ 3 & Major axis, mean $x \geq$ 5"\\
1310: \enddata
1311: \tablenotetext{a}{Region dominated by circumnuclear disk was avoided}
1312: \tablecomments{(1) Galaxy name; (2) Inclination used for obtaining oblate models; (3) Mean $\alpha/\alpha_{0}$ ratio; (4) Model $\alpha_{0}$; (5) Best $\alpha$ parameter; (6) Comments.}
1313: \end{deluxetable}
1314:
1315: \begin{deluxetable}{cccccccccc}
1316: %\rotate
1317: \tabletypesize{\scriptsize}
1318: \tablewidth{0pc}
1319:
1320: \tablecaption{Magnitudes and Distance Estimates\label{table6}}
1321: \tablehead{
1322: \colhead{} & \colhead{$M_{H}$} & \colhead{$\mu$} & \colhead{$d_{\rm stellar}$} & \colhead{$\Upsilon$} & \colhead{$\theta$} & \colhead{$d_{\rm bary}$} & \colhead{$d_{\rm HI}$} & \colhead{$V_{\rm sys}$} & \colhead{ }\\
1323: \colhead{Name} & \colhead{mag} & \colhead{mag} & \colhead{Mpc} & \colhead{$\Upsilon_{\odot}$} & \colhead{($\deg$)} & \colhead{Mpc} & \colhead{Mpc} & \colhead{km s$^{-1}$} & \colhead{$d_{\rm stellar}/d_{\rm HI}$} \\
1324: \colhead{(1)} & \colhead{(2)} & \colhead{(3)} & \colhead{(4)} & \colhead{(5)} & \colhead{(6)} & \colhead{(7)} & \colhead{(8)} & \colhead{(9)} & \colhead{(10)}}
1325: \startdata
1326: NGC 4064 & -22.5 $\pm_{0.2}^{0.1}$ & 31.3$\pm_{0.1}^{0.2}$ & 18.0 $\pm_{0.8}^{1.3}$ & 3.2 $\pm_{0.4}^{0.5}$ & 8.8 & 2.9 $\pm_{0.4}^{0.6}$ & 9.8 $\pm$ 0.4 & 929 $\pm$ 3 & 1.84 $\pm_{0.24}^{0.26}$ \\
1327: NGC 4293 & -23.4 $\pm_{0.2}^{0.3}$ &30.8 $\pm_{0.3}^{0.2}$ & 14.1 $\pm_{1.5}^{1.0}$ & 6.1 $\pm_{1.8}^{1.7}$ & 6.4 & 3.2 $\pm_{0.8}^{1.2}$ & 14.2 $\pm_{1.9}^{2.3}$ & 926 $\pm$ 4 & 0.99 $\pm_{0.41}^{0.49}$ \\
1328: NGC 4351 & -21.1 $\pm$ 0.1 & 31.5 $\pm$ 0.1 & 20.3 $\pm_{1.2}^{0.8}$ & 1.8 $\pm$ 0.2 & 1.7 & 3.6 $\pm_{1.8}^{0.8}$ & 11.2 $\pm_{1.3}^{1.1}$ & 2310 $\pm$ 2 & 1.8 $\pm_{0.6}^{0.5}$\\
1329: NGC 4424 & -21.7 $\pm$ 0.3 & 30.9 $\pm$ 0.3 & 15.2 $\pm$ 1.9 & 2.4 $\pm$ 0.8 & 3.1 & 1.8 $\pm$ 1.6 & 4.1 $\pm$ 0.2 & 442 $\pm$ 4 & 3.7 $\pm$ 0.7\\
1330: NGC 4429 & -24.3 $\pm$ 0.1 & 31.1 $\pm$ 0.1 & 16.3 $\pm$ 0.9 & 7.0 $\pm$ 1.9 & 1.5 & 0.7 $\pm$ 0.7 & \nodata & 1094 $\pm$ 6 & \nodata\\
1331: NGC 4450\tablenotemark{a} & -23.6 $\pm_{0.2}^{0.1}$ & 30.5 $\pm_{0.1}^{0.2}$ & 12.6 $\pm_{0.6}^{1.0}$ & 5.9 $\pm$ 1.0 & 4.7 & 4.4 $\pm_{0.9}^{0.6}$ & 14.1 $\pm_{2.6}^{2.2}$ & 1953 $\pm$ 2 & 0.89 $\pm_{0.49}^{0.42}$\\
1332: NGC 4569\tablenotemark{b} & -23.20 $\pm_{0.05}^{0.04}$ & 29.97 $\pm_{0.04}^{0.05}$ &9.9 $\pm$ 0.2 & 4.7 $\pm$ 0.4 & 1.7 & 7.0 $\pm$ 0.2 & 9.4 $\pm_{1.8}^{1.5}$ & -222 $\pm$ 6 & 1.1 $\pm_{0.6}^{0.5}$ \\
1333: NGC 4580 & -22.95 $\pm$ 0.05 & 31.72 $\pm$ 0.05 & 22.1 $\pm$ 0.5 & 3.2 $\pm$ 0.2 & 7.2 & 5.8 $\pm$ 0.5 & 19.3 $\pm$ 1.1 & 1031 $\pm$ 4 & 1.1 $\pm$ 0.1 \\
1334: NGC 4606 & -22.20 $\pm_{0.11}^{0.05}$ & 31.50 $\pm_{0.05}^{0.10}$ & 19.9 $\pm_{0.5}^{1.0}$ & 2.16 $\pm$ 0.3 & 2.5 & 3.25 $\pm_{0.4}^{1.0}$ & 12.7 $\pm_{0.3}^{0.2}$ & 1636 $\pm$ 5 & 1.6 $\pm$ 0.1 \\
1335: NGC 4651 & -23.90 $\pm_{0.04}^{0.10}$ & 32.15 $\pm_{0.10}^{0.04}$ & 26.9 $\pm_{1.2}^{0.5}$ & 3.1 $\pm$ 0.3 & 5.1 & 10.3 $\pm_{1.2}^{0.5}$ & 22.3 $\pm_{2.7}^{2.5}$ & 784 $\pm$ 2 & 1.2 $\pm$ 0.4 \\
1336: NGC 4694 & -21.6 $\pm$ 0.2 & 30.6 $\pm$ 0.2 & 13.4 $\pm_{1.0}^{1.3}$ & 1.1 $\pm$ 0.3 & 4.5 & 3.6 $\pm_{1.2}^{0.9}$ & \nodata & 1174 $\pm$ 22 & \nodata \\
1337: \enddata
1338: \tablenotetext{a}{If we add a dark matter halo in order to match the H$\alpha$ rotation curve we have that $M_{H} =$ -23.8 $\pm$ 0.1 mag, $\mu =$ 30.7 $\pm$ 0.1mag , and $d_{\rm stellar} =$ 13.8 $\pm_{0.6}^{0.8}$ Mpc }
1339: \tablenotetext{b}{If we add a dark matter halo in order to match the H$\alpha$ rotation curve we have that $M_{H} =$ -23.8 $\pm$ 0.01 mag, $\mu =$ 30.57 $\pm$ 0.01 mag , and $d_{\rm stellar} =$ 13.0 $\pm$ 0.1 Mpc }
1340: \tablecomments{(1) Galaxy name; (2) Absolute magnitude in H-band; (3) Distance modulus; (4) SKB distance; (5) Mass-luminosity ratio in the R-band; (6) Angular distance to M 87; (7) Barycentric SKB distance to M 87; (8) HI based distance; (9) Stellar systemic velocity; (10) Ratio between de SKB distance and HI based distance.}
1341: \end{deluxetable}
1342:
1343: \end{document}
1344:
1345:
1346: