1: %\documentclass[12pt,preprint]{aastex}
2: \documentclass[apj]{emulateapj}
3: \usepackage{apjfonts}
4: \usepackage{epsfig}
5: \usepackage{amsmath}
6: \usepackage{amssymb}
7: \usepackage{amsfonts}
8: \usepackage{natbib} % This is required to use the apj.bst
9: \citestyle{aa} % and be able to use the AASTEX 5.x
10: % citations (\citep, \citet, etc.) - bph
11: \bibliographystyle{apj}
12:
13: \shorttitle{X-RAY AGN IN ABELL 85 \& ABELL 754}
14: \shortauthors{SIVAKOFF ET AL.}
15:
16: \newcommand\mion[2]{\textrm{\ion{#1}{#2}}}
17:
18:
19: \defcitealias{MKK+2006}{M06}
20: \defcitealias{MMK2007}{M07}
21: \defcitealias{CZ2003}{CZ03}
22:
23: \slugcomment{Accepted for publication in ApJ}
24:
25:
26: \begin{document}
27:
28: \title{Wide-Field Chandra X-Ray Observations of AGN in Abell 85 \& Abell 754}
29:
30: \author{
31: Gregory R. Sivakoff\altaffilmark{1},
32: Paul Martini\altaffilmark{1},
33: Ann I. Zabludoff\altaffilmark{2},
34: Daniel D. Kelson\altaffilmark{3},
35: John S. Mulchaey\altaffilmark{3}
36: }
37:
38: \altaffiltext{1}{
39: Department of Astronomy,
40: The Ohio State University,
41: 4055 McPherson Laboratory
42: 140 W. 18th Avenue, Columbus, OH 43210-1173, USA;
43: sivakoff@astronomy.ohio-state.edu
44: }
45: \altaffiltext{2}{
46: Steward Observatory,
47: University of Arizona,
48: 933 N Cherry Ave., Rm. N204
49: Tucson, AZ 85721-0065, USA
50: }
51: \altaffiltext{3}{
52: Carnegie Observatories,
53: 813 Santa Barbara St.,
54: Pasadena, CA 91101-1292, USA
55: }
56:
57:
58: \begin{abstract}
59: To better understand the mechanism or mechanisms that lead to AGN activity
60: today, we measure the X-ray AGN fraction in a new sample of nearby clusters and
61: examine how it varies with galaxy properties, projected cluster-centric
62: radius, and cluster velocity dispersion. We present new wide-field {\it
63: Chandra X-ray Observatory} observations of Abell 85, Abell 754 and the
64: background cluster Abell 89B out to their virial radii. Out of seventeen X-ray
65: sources associated with galaxies in these clusters, we classify seven as X-ray
66: AGN with $L_{X,B} > 10^{41} {\rm \, erg \, s}^{-1}$. Only two of these would be
67: classified as AGN based on their optical spectra. We combine these observations
68: with archival data to create a sample of X-ray AGN from six $z < 0.08$ clusters
69: and find that $3.4^{+1.1}_{-0.8}\%$ of $M_R < -20$ galaxies host X-ray AGN with
70: $L_{X,B} > 10^{41} {\rm \, erg \, s}^{-1}$. We find that more X-ray AGN are
71: detected in more luminous galaxies and attribute this to larger spheriods in
72: more luminous galaxies and increased sensitivity to lower Eddington-rate
73: accretion from black holes in those spheroids. At a given X-ray luminosity
74: limit, more massive black holes can be accreting less efficiently, yet still be
75: detected. If interactions between galaxies are the principal drivers of AGN
76: activity, then the AGN fraction should be higher in lower velocity dispersion
77: clusters and the outskirts of clusters. However, the tendency of the most
78: massive and early-type galaxies to lie in the centers of the richest clusters
79: could dilute such trends. While we find no variation in the AGN fraction with
80: projected cluster-centric radius, we do find that the AGN fraction increases
81: significantly from $2.6^{+1.0}_{-0.8}\%$ in rich clusters to
82: $10.0^{+6.2}_{-4.3}\%$ in those with lower velocity dispersions.
83: \end{abstract}
84: \keywords{
85: galaxies: active ---
86: galaxies: clusters: general ---
87: galaxies: general ---
88: X-rays: galaxies ---
89: X-rays: galaxies: clusters ---
90: X-rays: general
91: }
92:
93:
94: \section{Introduction}
95:
96: \setcounter{footnote}{0}
97:
98: What is the principal driver of Active Galactic Nuclei (AGN) in the nearby
99: Universe? Major mergers between gas-rich galaxies are largely accepted as the
100: dominant fueling mechanism \citep[e.g.,][]{BH1992} for the luminous quasar
101: population. Galaxy harassment, where dynamical instabilities driven by
102: high-speed fly-by interactions efficiently channel gas to the centers of
103: galaxies, has also been invoked as a mechanism for fueling AGN \citep{MKL+1996,
104: LKM1998}. In both scenarios, higher AGN fractions are predicted for environments
105: where gas-rich galaxies are likely to interact with one another. Although galaxy
106: densities are high, such interactions are not favored in the centers of rich
107: clusters, whose galaxies are less (cold) gas-rich than their counterparts in the
108: field \citep[e.g.,][]{GH1985} and where the large relative velocities betweens
109: galaxies inhibits actual mergers. Higher fractions of AGN are expected for lower
110: velocity dispersion structures. The AGN fraction at the outskirts of clusters
111: should also be larger as a higher fraction of gas-rich galaxies are found toward
112: the outskirts of clusters and infalling structures with lower velocity
113: dispersions may not yet have virialized. Some of this picture has been supported
114: by numerous studies of clusters that identified AGN by their optical spectra
115: observed a substantial decrease in the number of cluster AGN relative to the
116: field \citep{G1978}. Specifically, \citet{DTS1985} measured a decrease from
117: $5\%$ to $1\%$ in AGN residing in bright galaxies.
118:
119: On the other hand, a large fraction of elliptical galaxies
120: ($\sim 35$--$45\%$) contain low-ionization nuclear emission-regions
121: \citep[LINERs;][]{HFS1997c}, many of which may be ionized by the accretion
122: disk of a low-luminosity AGN \citep{HFS1993}. These elliptical galaxies comprise
123: a higher fraction of the galaxy populations in the high surface density regions
124: at the centers of clusters \citep{D1980}, and in particular the most luminous
125: elliptical galaxies ($M_R < -22$) that are much more centrally concentrated
126: \citep{TK2006}. Toward the outskirts of clusters, progressively higher fractions
127: of poststarburst and starforming galaxies are found
128: \citep[e.g.,][]{D1980,FFF+1998}. Therefore, a relation between AGN and
129: early-type galaxies could dilute or even reverse the trends predicted by
130: gas-rich mergers or galaxy harassment.
131:
132: To gain leverage on these issues, it is critical to improve on the range of
133: environments probed by past studies. We are continuing a program that measures
134: the AGN fraction with environment, probing cluster environments for these
135: indirect signatures of AGN fueling mechanisms. To identify the AGN we use X-ray
136: observations. Galaxy studies in the nearby Universe
137: \citep[e.g.,][]{GGS2003,KF2004,SJF+2007} indicate that contributions from the
138: other potential sources of luminous X-ray emission besides an AGN, namely X-ray
139: binaries and the hot interstellar medium (ISM), only exceed X-ray luminosities
140: of $\sim 10^{41} {\rm \, erg \, s}^{-1}$ for the most massive or massively
141: star-forming galaxies. Thus, AGN can be identified down to relatively low X-ray
142: luminosities by considering galactic parameters such as their optical luminosity
143: and star formation rate. In addition, X-ray observations can identify AGN that
144: lack obvious spectral signatures in visible wavelength spectra. Such signatures
145: could potentially be absent due to selection effects \citep[e.g., optical
146: dilution of low-luminosity AGN,][]{MKM+2002,MFC2002}, obscuration
147: \citep[e.g.,][]{M2002}, or different accretion modes \citep[e.g., radiatively
148: inefficient accretion flows that do not produce emission lines,][]{YN2004}.
149:
150: In the most detailed study of
151: X-ray AGN in clusters to date, \citet[][hereafter M06]{MKK+2006} studied eight
152: low-redshift ($0.06 < z < 0.31$) galaxy clusters and found that $\sim 5\%$ of
153: bright ($M_R < -20$) cluster galaxies contain AGN with $L_{X,B} > 10^{41} {\rm
154: \, erg \, s^{-1}}$, where $L_{X,B}$ is the broad ($0.3$--$8 {\rm \, keV}$) band
155: X-ray luminosity. Most of these X-ray identified AGN lacked obvious AGN spectral
156: signatures in visible wavelength spectra. In this sample, the $L_{X,B} > 10^{42}
157: {\rm \, erg \, s^{-1}}$ X-ray AGN were centrally concentrated \citep[hereafter
158: M07]{MMK2007}. When fainter X-ray AGN with $L_{X,B} > 10^{41} {\rm
159: \, erg \, s^{-1}}$ were included, no central concentration was found, although
160: they had limited sensitivity to radial variations in their more distant
161: clusters. While the increase in AGN fraction of bright X-ray AGN is more
162: consistent with the increased concentration of bright elliptical galaxies
163: outlined above as opposed to predictions from galaxy interactions, it is
164: somewhat surprising that the lower luminosity AGN are not also centrally
165: concentrated under such a model.
166:
167: While X-ray AGN fractions in nearby clusters have been previously measured, past
168: observations have concentrated on the cores of clusters. In \citet[hereafter
169: M07]{MMK2007}, 90\% of the galaxies were within $0.5 \, r_{200}$, where
170: $r_{200}$ is the physical radius within which the mean density of a virialized
171: cluster exceeds the critical density at that redshift by a factor of 200. The
172: outskirts of clusters, and their different environment, are relatively
173: unexplored. This highlights the value for X-ray observations that can identify
174: X-ray AGN beyond the cores of clusters. Nearby clusters allow the most sensitive
175: measurements at both visible and X-ray wavelengths. But such observations must
176: be made over wide fields-of-view (FOVs) to cover the entire cluster. With its
177: superb spatial resolution, the {\it Chandra X-ray Observatory} is ideal for
178: detecting a central AGN; however, its widest FOV (using the ACIS-I detectors) is
179: only $\sim 17\arcmin \times 17
180: \arcmin$. For nearby clusters, this does not provide adequate coverage out to
181: $r_{200}$.
182:
183: To attain the best measurements on the radial distribution of AGN for comparison
184: to the opposing predictions, we undertook wide-field {\it Chandra} observations
185: of two $z \sim 0.06$ clusters, Abell 85 and Abell 754. In X-rays, both Abell 85
186: \citep{KSR2002,DLF2005} and Abell 754 \citep[e.g.,][]{MMV+2003} show evidence of
187: recent mergers of multiple components; both clusters show evidence of cold
188: fronts in their intracluster medium (ICM). In particular, Abell 754 is often
189: used as a prototype of a major cluster - cluster merger, with the peak of its
190: X-ray emission well offset from the major galaxy clumps identified by optical
191: data \citep{ZZ1995}, while there is no such offset in Abell 85, where smaller
192: structures appear to be falling on to the major component of Abell 85
193: \citep{DFG+1998}. Both clusters already have detailed optical spectroscopy
194: \citep[hereafter CZ03]{CZ2003} that established cluster membership and
195: measured other spectral properties.
196: We present the analysis of these observations in \S~\ref{sec:obs}. We add these
197: clusters and Abell 89B, an additional cluster in the Abell 85 FOV, to three
198: clusters from the \citetalias{MKK+2006} study to form a sample of $z \lesssim
199: 0.08$ clusters in \S~\ref{sec:sample}.
200: In \S~\ref{sec:galaxy}, we detail the
201: identification of sources as X-ray AGN and spectroscopically identified AGN, and
202: compare their properties (photometric and radial distribution) to the
203: underlying cluster population. We present the dependence of AGN fraction on
204: velocity dispersion and redshift in \S~\ref{sec:cluster}.
205: Finally, we discuss our conclusions
206: in \S~\ref{sec:end}.
207: All errors presented indicate
208: the double-sided $1\sigma$ confidence interval%
209: \footnote{We note that previous error bars on the AGN fraction presented
210: single-sided $90\%$ confidence intervals, which are slightly larger
211: \citepalias{MKK+2006,MMK2007}.}.
212: Throughout this paper we assume that the cosmological parameters are
213: $(\Omega_{\rm M}, \Omega_{\rm \Lambda}, h) = (0.3, 0.7, 0.7)$, where $H_0 = 100
214: \, h {\rm \, km \, s}^{-1} {\rm \, Mpc}^{-1}$. All absolute magnitudes and
215: luminosities are presented in their rest-frame.
216:
217: \section{{\it Chandra} Observations}
218: \label{sec:obs}
219:
220: \begin{figure*}
221: \plotone{f1.eps}
222: \caption{
223: Adaptively smoothed {\it Chandra} mosaic of Abell 85 with individual {\it
224: Chandra} FOVs indicated. An arcsinh scaling has been applied to bring out both
225: point sources and intracluster gas. Inner and outer circles are used to display
226: the 1 Mpc radius and $r_{200}$, respectively, for both the Abell 85 (center) and
227: Abell 89B (east). Diamonds indicate galaxies detected as X-ray AGN, while
228: squares indicated X-ray detected galaxies that are not considered X-ray AGN.
229: \label{fig:x_img_85}}
230: \end{figure*}
231:
232: \begin{figure*}
233: \plotone{f2.eps}
234: \caption{
235: Adaptively smoothed {\it Chandra} mosaic of Abell 754. Overlays follow the same
236: conventions as Figure~\ref{fig:x_img_85}.
237: \label{fig:x_img_754}}
238: \end{figure*}
239:
240: \begin{deluxetable}{lrrrc}
241: \tabletypesize{\footnotesize}
242: \tablewidth{0pt}
243: \tablecaption{{\it Chandra} ACIS-I Observation Logs\label{tab:xobs}}
244: \tablehead{
245: \colhead{Field} &
246: \colhead{OBSID} &
247: \colhead{Date} &
248: \colhead{T} &
249: \colhead{$L_{X,{\rm Lim}}$} \\
250: &
251: &
252: &
253: (ks) &
254: ($10^{40} {\rm \, erg \, s}^{-1}$)\\
255: \colhead{(1)} &
256: \colhead{(2)} &
257: \colhead{(3)} &
258: \colhead{(4)} &
259: \colhead{(5)}
260: }
261: \startdata
262: Abell 85-C & \dataset[ADS/Sa.CXO#obs/00904]{0904} & 2000-08-19 & 38.4 & $1.2$ \\
263: Abell 85-SE & \dataset[ADS/Sa.CXO#obs/04881]{4881} & 2004-09-03 & 9.8 & $4.6$ \\
264: Abell 85-S & \dataset[ADS/Sa.CXO#obs/04882]{4882} & 2004-09-03 & 9.6 & $4.7$ \\
265: Abell 85-SW & \dataset[ADS/Sa.CXO#obs/04883]{4883} & 2004-09-03 & 9.6 & $4.7$ \\
266: Abell 85-E & \dataset[ADS/Sa.CXO#obs/04884]{4884} & 2004-09-03 & 9.6 & $4.7$ \\
267: Abell 85-W & \dataset[ADS/Sa.CXO#obs/04885]{4885} & 2004-09-03 & 9.6 & $4.7$ \\
268: Abell 85-NE & \dataset[ADS/Sa.CXO#obs/04886]{4886} & 2004-09-03 & 9.6 & $4.7$ \\
269: Abell 85-N & \dataset[ADS/Sa.CXO#obs/04887]{4887} & 2004-09-04 & 10.1 & $4.5$ \\
270: Abell 85-NW & \dataset[ADS/Sa.CXO#obs/04888]{4888} & 2004-09-04 & 9.6 & $4.7$ \\
271: Abell 754-C & \dataset[ADS/Sa.CXO#obs/00507]{0507} & 1999-10-30 & 29.8 & $1.3$ \\
272: Abell 754-SE & \dataset[ADS/Sa.CXO#obs/06793]{6793} & 2006-01-18 & 9.9 & $4.6$ \\
273: Abell 754-S & \dataset[ADS/Sa.CXO#obs/06794]{6794} & 2006-01-27 & 9.9 & $4.6$ \\
274: Abell 754-SW & \dataset[ADS/Sa.CXO#obs/06795]{6795} & 2006-01-28 & 9.6 & $4.7$ \\
275: Abell 754-E & \dataset[ADS/Sa.CXO#obs/06796]{6796} & 2006-01-18 & 9.6 & $4.7$ \\
276: Abell 754-W & \dataset[ADS/Sa.CXO#obs/06797]{6797} & 2006-01-25 & 10.0 & $4.5$ \\
277: Abell 754-NE & \dataset[ADS/Sa.CXO#obs/06798]{6798} & 2006-01-28 & 10.0 & $4.6$ \\
278: Abell 754-N & \dataset[ADS/Sa.CXO#obs/06799]{6799} & 2006-01-28 & 9.6 & $4.7$ \\
279: Abell 754-NW & \dataset[ADS/Sa.CXO#obs/06800]{6800} & 2006-02-15 & 10.2 & $4.5$
280: \enddata
281: \tablecomments{{\it Chandra} ACIS-I Observation Log. Columns are:
282: (1) Field targeted;
283: (2) Observation ID of {\it Chandra} data;
284: (3) Observation date;
285: (4) Usable exposure;
286: (5) Estimate of the $0.3$--$8.0 {\rm \, keV}$ luminosity limit of the observation for a $z=0.055$ galaxy.}
287: \end{deluxetable}
288:
289: \subsection{Data Reduction}
290:
291: For both Abell 85 (Figure~\ref{fig:x_img_85}) and Abell 754
292: (Figure~\ref{fig:x_img_754}), our wide-field {\it Chandra} ACIS-I observations
293: consist of a $\sim 40 {\rm \, ks}$ central archival field flanked by eight new,
294: $\sim 10 {\rm \, ks}$ fields. We list these observations in
295: Table~\ref{tab:xobs}.
296:
297: We reduced all data as uniformly as possible using {\sc ciao 3.4}%
298: \footnote{See \url{http://asc.harvard.edu/ciao/}.}
299: with {\sc caldb 3.3.0.1} and NASA's {\sc ftools 6.0}%
300: \footnote{See
301: \url{http://heasarc.gsfc.nasa.gov/docs/software/lheasoft/}%
302: \label{ftn:heasoft}.}.
303: Since these observations represent a combination of archival and new
304: observations spanning over 6 years, there were minor differences in their
305: reduction. For Observations 0577, 0944, and 4881-4888, the frame times were $3.2
306: {\rm \, s}$, while for Observations 6793-6800, the frame times were $3.1 {\rm \,
307: s}$. Both Observation 0577 and 0944 were telemetered and cleaned in Faint mode.
308: The new observations were telemetered and cleaned in Very-Faint mode, which
309: leads to a reduced background. Observation 0577 was operated at $-110 ^{\circ}
310: \,{\rm C}$, while the remaining observations were operated at $-120 ^{\circ}
311: \,{\rm C}$. Thus for Observation 0577, no corrections were made for time
312: dependence of the gain or the charge-transfer inefficiency and photon energies
313: were determined using the gain file acisD1999-09-16gainN0005.fits. The other
314: observations were all corrected for the time dependence of the gain and the
315: charge-transfer inefficiency with their photon energies determined using the
316: gain file acisD2000-01-29gain$\_$ctiN0006.fits. For Observation 0577 and 0944, we
317: recreated bad pixel files using the newest tools to detect hot pixels and cosmic
318: ray afterglows. For all observations, we only consider events with ASCA grades
319: of 0, 2, 3, 4, and 6 detected by ACIS-I. Known aspect offsets were applied for
320: each observation. All observations were corrected for quantum efficiency
321: degradation and had exposure maps determined at $1.5 {\rm \, keV}$. We excluded
322: bad pixels, bad columns, and columns adjacent to bad columns or chip node
323: boundaries.
324:
325: Since we use local backgrounds and small extraction regions to analyze point
326: sources, this analysis is not very sensitive to the periods of high background
327: (``background flares'') that {\it Chandra} may encounter. To avoid periods with
328: extreme flaring, we excluded times where the blank-sky rate was more than three
329: times the expected blank-sky rate derived from calibrated blank-sky backgrounds.
330: We only removed $\sim 14 {\rm \, ks}$ from Observation 0507. Final
331: flare-filtered live exposure times for the five observations are listed in
332: Table~\ref{tab:xobs}.
333:
334: \begin{figure}[t]
335: \plotone{f3.eps}
336: \caption{
337: Second Palomar Observatory Sky Survey (Red) image centered on the BCG of
338: Abell 89B. Overlays follow the same conventions as Figure~\ref{fig:x_img_85},
339: with small circles indicating $M_R < -20$ cluster members in the {\it Chandra} FOV.
340: \label{fig:o_img_85}}
341: \end{figure}
342:
343: In Figures~\ref{fig:x_img_85} and \ref{fig:x_img_754}, we display the adaptively
344: smoothed, exposure-corrected {\it Chandra} X-ray image of both fields using a
345: minimum signal-to-noise ratio (S/N) per smoothing beam of 3. The FOVs of the
346: individual observations are overlaid. Both clusters have ICM in the central
347: archival field; however, only a little diffuse gas extends into the flanking
348: fields. There are point sources seen in these images; however, most are
349: unassociated with the clusters. On these figures we also display the radii
350: corresponding to $1 {\rm \, Mpc}$ and $r_{200}$. Abell 85 has nearly complete
351: coverage to $1 {\rm \, Mpc}$ and partial coverage out to just beyond $r_{200}$.
352: Although the coverage for Abell 754 is similar, there are more holes due to the
353: unmatched roll angles of the observations. The Abell 85 fields also provide
354: coverage for two other nearby large-scale structures, Abell 89B and Abell 89C
355: \citep{DFG+1998}. We include Abell 89B in this analysis, the less distant and
356: richer of the two structures. Our {\it Chandra} data covers most of Abell 89B to
357: its $r_{200}$ radius (Figure~\ref{fig:o_img_85}).
358: Abell 89C is not included as
359: our sample of $M_R < -20$ galaxies is incomplete at its redshift ($z \sim
360: 0.096$) and we were unable to self-consistently identify group members using the
361: redshift and positions of candidate members (See \S~\ref{sec:sample}).
362:
363: \subsection{Source Detection and Analysis}
364: \label{sec:obs_analysis}
365:
366: For each observation, we applied the wavelet detection algorithm ({\sc ciao
367: wavdetect} program) with scales ranging from 1 to 64 pixels in steps of
368: $\sqrt{2}$ factors, requiring a source detection threshold of $10^{-6}$ to
369: identify discrete X-ray sources that are potential X-ray AGN in these clusters.
370: Source detection was not performed in regions with an exposure of less than 10\%
371: of the total for the observation. The numbers of total detected X-ray sources are
372: 350 and 365 in Abell 85 and Abell 754, respectively, with only a few sources
373: multiply detected where the FOVs overlap. Our source detection threshold
374: corresponds to $\la 4$ falsely detected X-ray sources (due to a statistical
375: fluctuation) for each observation.
376:
377: There are two potential ways an X-ray source could be incorrectly associated
378: with an optical source: First, an associated X-ray detection could be a false
379: detection. Second, the positions from an X-ray detected source and an optical
380: counterpart could randomly overlap.
381: The magnitude of both effects depends on the
382: number of optical sources and the matching radius used to associate X-ray and
383: optical sources. There are 172, 21, and 270 optical members of Abell 85,
384: Abell 89B, and Abell 754, respectively, from \citetalias{CZ2003} in the {\it
385: Chandra} FOVs, and 50, 4, and 10 additional members from other sources. We first
386: considered a very generous $5\arcsec$ matching radius for identifying potential
387: X-ray emitting galaxies. This radius is large due to a $\sim3\arcsec$
388: uncertainty in the position of optical sources from fiber positioning
389: \citepalias{CZ2003} and potential poor localization of the X-ray position due to
390: low-count X-ray data. At this radius, we expect $\la 0.08$ and $\la 0.09$ false
391: associations in the Abell 85 and Abell 754 FOVs, respectively, due to
392: statistical fluctuations above our source detection threshold. By replacing the
393: source detection threshold with the average number of real X-ray sources per
394: pixel, we can calculate the number of false associations due to random overlap.
395: We estimate $\la 0.7$ and $\la 0.9$ false associations in the Abell 85 and Abell
396: 754 FOVs, respectively, from randomly overlapping sources. Since X-ray AGN must
397: be at the galaxy centers of cluster members, we apply a stricter requirement
398: ($<2\arcsec$ offset from the 2MASS galaxy position) in \S~\ref{sec:galaxy} to
399: classify a source as an X-ray AGN. Thus, we estimate the expected number of
400: optical galaxies falsely identified as X-ray AGN is $\la 0.2$ per cluster FOV.
401: In addition, this expected number drops by a factor of two if we only consider
402: galaxies with $M_R < -20$.
403:
404: \begin{deluxetable*}{llllrrr}
405: \tabletypesize{\footnotesize}
406: \tablewidth{0pt}
407: \tablecaption{X-ray Properties of Abell 85, Abell 89B, \& Abell 754 Galaxies
408: \label{tab:xgals}}
409: \tablehead{
410: \colhead{ID} &
411: \colhead{CXOU XID} &
412: \colhead{CZ2003 ID} &
413: \colhead{2MASX ID} &
414: \colhead{Offset} &
415: \colhead{Net Counts} &
416: \colhead{$L_{X,B}$} \\
417: \colhead{(1)} &
418: \colhead{(2)} &
419: \colhead{(3)} &
420: \colhead{(4)} &
421: \colhead{(5)} &
422: \colhead{(6)} &
423: \colhead{(7)}
424: }
425: \startdata
426: A85-1 & J004130.2$-$091546 & 85A\_993[6] & J00413032$-$0915459 & $1\farcs0$ ($0\farcs3$) & $ 160.3 ^{+ 15.8}_{- 14.8}$ & $ 4.2^{+\phn\phn0.4}_{-\phn\phn0.4}$ \\ % 0904_058
427: A85-2 & J004142.9$-$092621 & 85A\_993[13] & J00414302$-$0926219 & $0\farcs8$ ($0\farcs4$) & $ 21.0 ^{+\phn7.1}_{-\phn6.1}$ & $ 0.5^{+\phn\phn0.2}_{-\phn\phn0.4}$ \\ % 0904_055
428: A85-3 & J004146.7$-$092313 & 85A\_993[12] & J00414681$-$0923129 & $0\farcs8$ ($0\farcs3$) & $ 7.6 ^{+\phn4.2}_{-\phn3.0}$ & $ 0.2^{+\phn\phn0.1}_{-\phn\phn0.1}$ \\ % 0904_043
429: A85-4 & J004244.7$-$093312 & 85A\_993[86] & J00424470$-$0933162 & $3\farcs4$ ($1\farcs1$) & $ 5.8 ^{+\phn3.6}_{-\phn2.4}$ & $ 0.6^{+\phn\phn0.4}_{-\phn\phn0.3}$ \\ % 4881_038
430: A85-5 & J004311.5$-$093816 & 85A\_993[47] & J00431162$-$0938163 & $0\farcs5$ ($0\farcs4$) & $ 30.0 ^{+\phn6.5}_{-\phn5.5}$ & $ 5.2^{+\phn\phn1.1}_{-\phn\phn0.9}$ \\ % 4881_004
431: %
432: A89B-1& J004242.0$-$091731 & 85A\_993[80] & J00424193$-$0917312 & $1\farcs7$ ($1\farcs2$) & $ 7.0 ^{+\phn4.0}_{-\phn2.8}$ & $ 1.5^{+\phn\phn0.9}_{-\phn\phn0.6}$ \\ % 4884_024
433: A89B-2& J004254.8$-$091349 & 85A\_993[81] & J00425466$-$0913493 & $2\farcs3$ ($1\farcs4$) & $ 13.0 ^{+\phn4.9}_{-\phn3.8}$ & $ 3.2^{+\phn\phn1.2}_{-\phn\phn0.9}$ \\ % 4886_030
434: A89B-3& J004300.6$-$091346 & 85A\_993[57] & J00430067$-$0913463 & $0\farcs9$ ($0\farcs6$) & $ 64.0 ^{+\phn9.1}_{-\phn8.1}$ & $ 14.3^{+\phn\phn2.0}_{-\phn\phn1.8}$ \\ % 4886_013
435: A89B-4& J004302.7$-$092151 & 85A\_993[59] & J00430270$-$0921513 & $0\farcs5$ ($1\farcs3$) & $ 3.0 ^{+\phn2.9}_{-\phn1.7}$ & $ 0.6^{+\phn\phn0.6}_{-\phn\phn0.3}$ \\ % 4884_005
436: A89B-5& J004314.0$-$092144 & 85A\_993[60] & J00431418$-$0921453 & $1\farcs6$ ($0\farcs6$) & $ 8.6 ^{+\phn4.1}_{-\phn3.0}$ & $ 1.8^{+\phn\phn0.9}_{-\phn\phn0.6}$ \\ % 4884_014
437: %
438: A754-1& J090802.1$-$095937 & 754A\_494[25] & J09080217$-$0959378 & $0\farcs5$ ($0\farcs1$) & $1697.0 ^{+ 42.3}_{- 41.3}$ & $389.7^{+ 233.8}_{- 155.8}$\tablenotemark{a} \\ % 6795_003
439: A754-2& J090852.2$-$093149 & 754A\_494[100] & J09085229$-$0931507 & $1\farcs9$ ($0\farcs9$) & $ 38.8 ^{+\phn8.5}_{-\phn7.5}$ & $ 1.2^{+\phn\phn0.3}_{-\phn\phn0.2}$ \\ % 0577_049
440: A754-3& J090919.2$-$094159 & 754A\_494[9] & J09091923$-$0941591 & $0\farcs2$ ($0\farcs4$) & $ 13.5 ^{+\phn5.8}_{-\phn4.8}$ & $ 0.4^{+\phn\phn0.2}_{-\phn\phn0.1}$ \\ % 0577_046
441: A754-4& J090926.3$-$092247 & 754A\_494[93] & J09092633$-$0922471 & $0\farcs6$ ($0\farcs3$) & $ 40.4 ^{+\phn7.5}_{-\phn6.4}$ & $ 4.0^{+\phn\phn0.7}_{-\phn\phn0.6}$ \\ % 6799_004
442: A754-5& J090939.0$-$094321 & 754A\_494[106] & J09093913$-$0943233 & $3\farcs0$ ($1\farcs1$) & $ 21.2 ^{+\phn7.6}_{-\phn6.6}$ & $ 0.6^{+\phn\phn0.2}_{-\phn\phn0.2}$ \\ % 0577_042
443: A754-6& J090956.8$-$095409 & 754A\_393[55] & J09095685$-$0954093 & $0\farcs8$ ($0\farcs4$) & $ 32.4 ^{+\phn6.8}_{-\phn5.7}$ & $ 3.5^{+\phn\phn0.7}_{-\phn\phn0.6}$ \\ % 6793_002
444: A754-7& J091017.3$-$093707 & 754A\_494[76] & J09101737$-$0937068 & $1\farcs2$ ($0\farcs4$) & $ 14.6 ^{+\phn5.0}_{-\phn3.9}$ & $ 1.4^{+\phn\phn0.5}_{-\phn\phn0.4}$ \\ % 6796_006
445: \enddata
446: \tablecomments{X-ray Measurements. Columns are:
447: (1) ID used in this paper;
448: (2) X-ray object ID;
449: (3) ID from \citetalias{CZ2003};
450: (4) 2MASS Extended Source Catalog ID of counterpart;
451: (5) Offset between X-ray and near-IR position with the an estimate of the $1\sigma$ statistical uncertainty of
452: the X-ray position in the parentheses;
453: (6) Net X-ray counts detected in observed frame $0.3$--$8.0 {\rm \, keV}$ band
454: with exact Gehrel's errors \citet{G1986};
455: (7) X-ray luminosity in rest frame $0.3$--$8.0 {\rm \, keV}$ band in units of
456: $10^{41} {\rm \, erg \, s}^{-1}$. The X-ray luminosity was calculated assuming a
457: $\Gamma=1.7$ power-law with corrections for Galactic absorption and the enclosed
458: fraction of the PSF used to extract the counts.}
459: \tablenotetext{a}{X-ray analysis affected by pileup. The luminosity
460: correction factor of $\sim2.4$ is uncertain to $\sim60\%$.}
461: \end{deluxetable*}
462:
463:
464: We used the coordinate list generated by {\sc wavdetect} and the positions of
465: optical galaxies from \citetalias{CZ2003} to identify X-ray detections within
466: $5\arcsec$ of optical counterparts. Due to the sensitivity of the flanking field
467: observations, we only considered detections and optical galaxies in regions
468: where the local exposure was at least half of the maximum exposure; this
469: eliminates the edges of the ACIS-I chips and the gaps between them. To determine
470: cluster membership, we adopted the velocity range in \citet{CZ2003} for Abell 85
471: and Abell 754. For Abell 89B, we determined its cluster properties ourselves
472: (see \S~\ref{sec:sample}). We found no additional matches when we added
473: additional cluster members from the NASA/IPAC Extragalactic Database (NED). In
474: Table~\ref{tab:xgals}, we list the 17 detections that correspond to a galaxy in
475: Abell 85, Abell 89B, or Abell 754. These galaxies are also indicated in
476: Figures~\ref{fig:x_img_85} and \ref{fig:x_img_754}. We label the sources in RA
477: order by cluster and list their X-ray position and optical counterpart from
478: \citetalias{CZ2003}. For each optical counterpart, we adopted the 2MASS position
479: in the Extended Source Catalog \citep{SCS+2006}, and recalculated the offset
480: between the X-ray detection and the galaxy center. Using
481: \citet{KKW+2007}, we have estimated the X-ray positional uncertainty (1$\sigma$)
482: due to {\sc wavdetect}. Our first criteria for an X-ray AGN is that the offset
483: between the X-ray detection and the galaxy is less than $2\arcsec$, consistent
484: with that used in \citetalias{MKK+2006}. Since all three detections that fail
485: this criterion have $\sim 1\arcsec$ positional uncertainty, they are still likely
486: associated with the identified galaxies.
487: We have excluded a detection consistent
488: with the brightest cluster galaxy (BCG) of Abell 85, as this detection also
489: corresponds to the peak in the X-ray flux from ICM.
490: We also note that a
491: detection corresponding to an Abell 85 member that is likely an X-ray AGN with
492: $L_{X,B} \sim 1.2 \times 10^{41} {\rm \, erg \, s}^{-1}$ (2MASX J00415019-0925469) was
493: excluded since it fell in a chip gap of Observation 0904 and the photometry is
494: therefore highly uncertain.
495:
496: \begin{deluxetable*}{lrrrrrrc}
497: \tabletypesize{\footnotesize}
498: \tablewidth{0pt}
499: \tablecaption{Cluster Properties
500: \label{tab:cluster}}
501: \tablehead{
502: \colhead{Cluster} &
503: \colhead{$\alpha_c$} &
504: \colhead{$\delta_c$} &
505: \colhead{$z$} &
506: \colhead{$z_1$,$z_2$}&
507: \colhead{$\sigma$}&
508: \colhead{$r_{200}$}&
509: \colhead{Reference} \\
510: \colhead{(1)}&
511: \colhead{(2)}&
512: \colhead{(3)}&
513: \colhead{(4)}&
514: \colhead{(5)}&
515: \colhead{(6)}&
516: \colhead{(7)}&
517: \colhead{(8)}
518: }
519: \startdata
520: Abell 85 & 00:41:50.4 & $-09$:18:11 & 0.0554 & 0.0448,0.0658 & 993 (\phn85) & 2.4 & 1 \\
521: Abell 89B & 00:42:54.6 & $-09$:13:50 & 0.077\phn & 0.0692,0.0850 & 474 (155) & 1.1 & 2 \\
522: Abell 3125 & 03:25:17.9 & $-53$:29:37 & 0.0616 & 0.0530,0.0700 & 475 (\phn94) & 1.1 & 3 \\
523: Abell 3128 & 03:30:43.8 & $-52$:31:30 & 0.0595 & 0.0435,0.0755 & 906 (\phn74) & 2.1 & 3 \\
524: Abell 754 & 09:09:18.0 & $-09$:41:17 & 0.0546 & 0.0446,0.0632 & 953 (\phn64) & 2.3 & 1 \\
525: Abell 644 & 08:17:25.6 & $-07$:30:45 & 0.0701 & 0.0531,0.0871 & 952 (382) & 2.2 & 3 \\
526: \enddata
527: \tablecomments{
528: Sample of $z \lesssim 0.08$ clusters with X-ray identified AGN. Columns are: (1) Cluster
529: name; (2 and 3) RA and DEC of the cluster center for epoch J2000; (4) Redshift;
530: (5) Redshift range of cluster members; (6) Velocity dispersion and uncertainty (90\%);
531: (7) $r_{200}$ in Mpc;
532: (8) Reference for velocity information.
533: }
534: \tablerefs
535: {
536: (1) \citetalias{CZ2003};
537: (2) this paper;
538: (3) \citetalias{MMK2007};
539: }
540: \end{deluxetable*}
541:
542: For all detections in Table~\ref{tab:xgals}, we used ACIS Extract 3.131 to
543: create source extraction regions enclosing 90\% of the flux in the X-ray PSF and
544: to determine a masking radius that encircled 97\% of the flux. For most of the
545: sources, whose photons had median energies of $\sim 0.6$--$2.6 {\rm \, keV}$, we
546: determined the regions assuming the PSF at $1.497 {\rm \, keV}$. Since the
547: events for A754-6 had a median energy of $\sim 4.7 {\rm \, keV}$, we used the
548: PSF determined at $4.51 {\rm \, keV}$. For each source, we created background
549: regions just beyond the masking radius with an area five times that of the
550: source extraction region. Column (6) of Table~\ref{tab:xgals} indicates the net
551: counts for each source in the $0.3$--$8.0 {\rm \, keV}$ band, with proper
552: Poisson errors \citep{G1986}. To estimate the rest-frame $0.3$--$8.0 {\rm \,
553: keV}$ X-ray luminosity, column (7), we folded a power-law spectrum with
554: $\Gamma=1.7$ absorbed by the Galactic column ($3.3\times10^{20} {\rm cm}^2$ for
555: Abell 85 and Abell 89B; $4.4\times10^{20} {\rm cm}^2$ for Abell 754) through the
556: spectral response at the location of each source. We set the model normalization
557: using {\sc xspec}\footnotemark[\ref{ftn:heasoft}] to match the observed net
558: counts, corrected for the mean redshift of the cluster and the enclosed fraction
559: of the flux in the source extraction region.
560:
561: We note that A754-1 is bright enough that it suffers from events lost to pileup.
562: At $\sim 0.55$ counts per frame, pileup can be relatively minor and require only
563: a small correction or pileup can be more severe and require a larger correction.
564: Since there is no readout-streak and the source is shaped like the PSF, the
565: branch with less pileup is more likely correct. Therefore, the luminosity in
566: Table~\ref{tab:xgals} has been corrected assuming that our spectral model has
567: been affected by pileup with a typical grade-migration parameter, $\alpha=0.5$
568: \citep{D2001}. We estimate that the correction factor of $\sim2.4$ is accurate
569: to a factor of $\sim 60\%$. If the source is more extremely effected by pileup,
570: this will only increase its X-ray luminosity.
571:
572: By combining the luminosities and counts from Table~\ref{tab:xgals} with our
573: exposure maps, we estimated the limiting X-ray luminosity for each observation.
574: This is listed in Table~\ref{tab:xobs} assuming a redshift of $z=0.055$ near
575: that of Abell 85 and Abell 754. For the more distant Abell 89B, the limiting
576: luminosity is a factor of two higher. For consistency with
577: \citetalias{MKK+2006}, we have calculated this number corresponding to five
578: counts on-axis.
579: However, we caution that this limit is optimistic over an entire
580: ACIS-I FOV for two reasons. First, at $1.5 {\rm \, keV}$ the spatial structure
581: to the quantum efficiency degradation leads to 15\% lower exposure at
582: approximately $10\arcmin$ off-axis in the latest observations. More importantly,
583: the larger off-axis PSF makes detection of weak sources more difficult.
584: \citet{KF2003} show that at $5\arcmin$ and $10\arcmin$ off-axis, 70\%
585: completeness can be expected for 7 and 11 counts sources respectively.
586: We estimate that completeness limits over the entire ACIS-I FOV are about a
587: factor of four higher than reported in Table~1 of \citetalias{MKK+2006} and
588: Table~\ref{tab:xgals} of this work.
589: This means that the AGN fraction above $10^{41} {\rm \, erg \, s}^{-1}$ may be
590: underestimated; however, we estimate that this is a smaller effect than the
591: current error due to the small numbers of AGN.
592:
593: \section{$z \lesssim 0.08$ Cluster Sample}
594: \label{sec:sample}
595:
596: We required a sample large enough to statistically test which galaxy and cluster
597: properties lead to X-ray AGN activity. This is especially important as not all
598: detected X-ray sources will be X-ray AGN. To supplement the sample of 17
599: potential X-ray AGN in Abell 85, Abell 89B, and Abell 754, we have also included
600: three other $z \lesssim 0.08$ clusters with
601: X-ray identified AGN, Abell 644, Abell 3125, and Abell 3128
602: \citepalias{MKK+2006,MMK2007}.
603: We list the cluster properties in
604: Table~\ref{tab:cluster}, adopting the \citetalias{MMK2007} values for the latter
605: three clusters.
606:
607: In columns (2) and (3) , we list the cluster positions. For Abell 85 and Abell
608: 754, we adopted the peak of the ICM as the cluster position. The BCG of Abell 85
609: is coincident with this peak. In Abell 754, the third brightest galaxy (in
610: $R$-band), A754-3, is embedded in the ICM $\sim46\arcsec$ away from this
611: position. This galaxy is located near one of the concentrations of Abell 754
612: member galaxies.
613:
614: We list the mean cluster redshift, redshift range of cluster members, and
615: velocity dispersion, with 90\% confidence limit, in columns (4)--(6). We adopted
616: the values of \citetalias{CZ2003} for Abell 85 and Abell 754; however, we
617: increased their $1\sigma$ uncertainties in velocity dispersion by a factor of
618: 1.6 to match our confidence limits. For Abell 89B, the
619: \citet{CZ2003} data suggested that its members were in the
620: $0.06 < z < 0.09$ range. We calculated membership via the biweight estimator for
621: center and scale, following \citetalias{MMK2007}, adding additional nearby
622: galaxies with velocity data in the NED to the \citetalias{CZ2003} sample. We
623: iteratively determined 29 galaxies were within 5$\sigma$ of the cluster mean
624: velocity and the $r_{200}$, assuming the BCG was the center of the cluster. Of
625: the 29 galaxies, our FOV overlapped with 25. We used the jackknife of the
626: biweight estimator to determine the 90\% confidence limit for the velocity
627: dispersion. The symmetric confidence limit \citep[eq.\ 22 of ][]{BFG1990} was
628: chosen for consistency with \citetalias{MKK+2006,MMK2007}.
629:
630: To characterize the extent of the clusters and best compare the spatial
631: distributions of cluster AGN, we determined the $r_{200}$ of each cluster
632: following equation A1 of \citet{TEK+2003}. These are listed in column (7).
633:
634: \section{Galaxy Properties of X-ray Sources}
635: \label{sec:galaxy}
636:
637: \subsection{X-ray AGN Identification}
638:
639: Near the luminosity limits of these observations, there are three potential
640: sources of X-ray emission: X-ray binaries, hot ISM, and a central AGN
641: \citep[e.g.,][]{SSI2003,SSC2004}. X-ray
642: binaries with low-mass companions (LMXBs) are sensitive to the total stellar
643: mass of a galaxy, while X-ray binaries with high-mass companions (HMXBs) are
644: sensitive to recent star formation
645: \citep{GGS2003,KF2004}.
646: From a sample of fourteen nearby galaxies,
647: \citet{KF2004} derived a (linear) relation between the total X-ray luminosity of
648: LMXBs within the galaxy and the $B$-band or $K_s$-band luminosity. We prefer the
649: latter relation as $K_s$-band is a better tracer of stellar mass, and the
650: relation has a smaller dispersion;
651: \begin{equation}
652: \label{eq:l_x_lmxbs}
653: L_{X,B} = (2.0 \pm 0.8) \times 10^{29} {\rm \, erg \, s}^{-1}
654: / L_{K_{s},K20,\odot},
655: \end{equation}
656: where $L_{K_{s},K20,\odot}$ is the $K_s$-band luminosity within the $K_s = 20
657: {\rm \, mag \, arcsec}^2$ isophote, assuming $M_{\odot,K_s} = 3.33$.
658: We caution that most of these galaxies in this archival sample were originally
659: targeted due to their X-ray properties. These galaxies are roughly divided into
660: X-ray bright galaxies, galaxies with significantly higher X-ray to optical flux
661: ratios that are dominated by the diffuse gas, and X-ray faint galaxies, galaxies
662: with lower X-ray to optical flux ratios that are dominated by the X-ray
663: binaries. The X-ray bright galaxies should be relatively free from a bias on the
664: total LMXB X-ray luminosities in these systems. As studying LMXBs was often the
665: primary science driver for targeting the X-ray faint galaxies, these galaxies
666: were often selected
667: based on their X-ray luminosities or X-ray
668: to optical flux ratios. Due to such selection criteria, X-ray faint galaxies
669: whose X-ray luminosities are towards the lower-end of the intrinsic relation
670: between X-ray luminosity from LMXBs and stellar mass are less likely to be
671: targeted by observers. Thus, the above relation may overestimate the intrinsic
672: relation.
673: To estimate the X-ray luminosity from HMXBs, the star-formation rate
674: (SFR) is needed. Assuming a $\Gamma=1.7$ X-ray spectrum, we can convert the
675: relation found in
676: \citet{GGS2003} to a $L_{X,B}$, such that
677: \begin{equation}
678: L_{X,B} = 1.0 \times 10^{40}
679: \frac{{\rm SFR}}{{\rm M}_\odot {\rm \, yr}^{-1}}
680: {\rm \, erg \, s}^{-1}.
681: \end{equation}
682:
683: Since the ISM is thought to have a stellar origin, a rough
684: correspondence with stellar mass is expected; however, at a given stellar mass
685: there is a wide-range of ISM luminosities and the relation to stellar mass is
686: known to be non-linear. We adopt the \citet{SJF+2007} relation
687: \begin{equation}
688: \label{eq:l_x_gas}
689: \log L_{X,S} = 39.40 + (1.63\pm0.13) \log \left(\frac{L_{K_{s},{\rm ttl},\odot}}{10^{11}}\right),
690: \end{equation}
691: where the soft ($0.5$--$2.0 {\rm \, keV}$) band X-ray luminosity,
692: $L_{X,S}$ is calculated assuming an ISM spectral model and
693: $L_{K_{s},{\rm ttl},\odot}$ is the total $K_s$-band luminosity.
694: This relation is derived including the effects of upper limits for
695: non-detections of the ISM. For the galaxies in our cluster sample, we have
696: estimated that $L_{K_{s},{\rm ttl}} \sim 1.23 L_{K_{s},K20}$ and that the
697: $L_{X,B}$ for a $\Gamma =1.7$ power-law is $\sim 1.9$ times the $L_{X,S}$ for
698: $kT = 0.7 {\rm \, keV}$ gas with 0.8 solar abundance when requiring that the
699: observed $0.3$--$8.0 {\rm \, keV}$ count-rates match.
700: Note that applying just a
701: luminosity cut of $L_{X,B} = 10^{41} {\rm \, erg \, s}^{-1}$ to identify AGN can
702: be contaminated by galaxies without AGN if either $L_{K_s,\odot} \gtrsim 2.5
703: \times 10^{11}$ or ${\rm SFR}
704: \gtrsim 10 {\rm \, M}_\odot {\rm \, yr}^{-1}$.
705:
706: \begin{deluxetable}{lrrrr}
707: \tabletypesize{\scriptsize}
708: \tablewidth{0pt}
709: \tablecaption{Optical/Near-IR Magnitudes of X-ray Galaxies
710: \label{tab:ogals}}
711: \tablehead{
712: \colhead{ID} &
713: \colhead{$m_{R}$} &
714: \colhead{$M_{R}$} &
715: \colhead{$M_{K_s,K20}$} &
716: \colhead{Ref.} \\
717: \colhead{(1)} &
718: \colhead{(2)} &
719: \colhead{(3)} &
720: \colhead{(4)} &
721: \colhead{(5)}
722: }
723: \startdata
724: A85-1\tablenotemark{a} & 14.32 & $-22.81$ & $-25.14$ & 1 \\
725: A85-2 & 14.43 & $-22.70$ & $-25.43$ & 1 \\
726: A85-3 & 15.86 & $-21.27$ & $-24.05$ & 1 \\
727: A85-4 & 14.81 & $-22.10$ & $-24.98$ & 1 \\
728: A85-5 \tablenotemark{a} & 15.03 & $-22.22$ & $-24.75$ & 1 \\
729: %
730: A89B-1 & 14.18 & $-23.08$ & $-25.81$ & 1 \\
731: A89B-2 & 15.03 & $-23.71$ & $-26.37$ & 1 \\
732: A89B-3\tablenotemark{a} & 15.17 & $-22.85$ & $-25.51$ & 1 \\
733: A89B-4 & 14.92 & $-22.72$ & $-25.81$ & 1 \\
734: A89B-5\tablenotemark{a} & 14.09 & $-22.03$ & $-25.19$ & 1 \\
735: %
736: A754-1\tablenotemark{a} & 14.40 & $-22.79$ & $-25.69$ & 1 \\
737: A754-2 & 14.60 & $-22.54$ & $-25.30$ & 1 \\
738: A754-3 & 14.05 & $-23.13$ & $-25.63$ & 1 \\
739: A754-4\tablenotemark{a} & 14.24 & $-22.90$ & $-25.79$ & 1 \\
740: A754-5 & 14.28 & $-22.87$ & $-25.60$ & 1 \\
741: A754-6\tablenotemark{a} & 15.84 & $-21.33$ & $-24.10$ & 1 \\
742: A754-7 & 13.93 & $-23.19$ & $-26.00$ & 1 \\
743: %
744: A3125-1\tablenotemark{a} & 15.77 & $-21.56$ & $-24.66$ & 2 \\
745: A3125-2 & 14.93 & $-22.39$ & $-25.62$ & 2 \\
746: A3125-3 & 15.24 & $-22.08$ & $-25.43$ & 2 \\
747: A3125-4 & 15.16 & $-22.17$ & $-25.42$ & 2 \\
748: A3125-5\tablenotemark{a} & 15.97 & $-21.36$ & $-24.54$ & 2 \\
749: A3125-6\tablenotemark{a} & 14.97 & $-22.36$ & $-24.18$ & 3 \\
750: %
751: A3128-1 & 15.24 & $-22.01$ & \nodata & 2 \\
752: A3128-2\tablenotemark{a} & 17.17 & $-20.08$ & \nodata & 2 \\
753: A3128-3 & 16.21 & $-21.04$ & $-24.16$ & 4 \\
754: A3128-4\tablenotemark{a} & 14.81 & $-22.43$ & $-26.09$ & 2 \\
755: A3128-5 & 15.65 & $-21.60$ & $-24.62$ & 5 \\
756: A3128-6\tablenotemark{a} & 16.82 & $-20.43$ & $-23.22$ & 2 \\
757: A3128-7 & 15.01 & $-22.23$ & $-25.77$ & 2 \\
758: A3128-8 & 15.28 & $-21.97$ & $-26.02$ & 2 \\
759: A3128-9\tablenotemark{a} & 16.41 & $-20.83$ & $-23.76$ & 2 \\
760: A3128-10 & 14.60 & $-22.65$ & $-26.33$ & 2 \\
761: %
762: A644-1\tablenotemark{a} & 16.63 & $-21.94$ & $-24.80$ & 2 \\
763: A644-2\tablenotemark{a} & 15.90 & $-21.23$ & $-24.22$ & 2 \\
764: \enddata
765: \tablecomments{Optical/Near-IR Measurements of X-ray Identified Galaxies in Six $z<0.08$ Clusters.
766: Columns are:
767: (1) ID from this paper or \citetalias{MKK+2006};
768: (2) Observed $R$-band magnitude;
769: (3) Extinction corrected rest-frame absolute $R$-band magnitude;
770: (4) Extinction corrected rest-frame absolute $K_s$-band magnitude within the $K_s = 20 {\rm
771: \, mag \, arcsec}^2$ isophote;
772: (5) Reference for $R$-band magnitude
773: }
774: \tablenotetext{a}{Galaxy selected as X-ray AGN.}
775: \tablerefs
776: {
777: (1) \citetalias{CZ2003};
778: (2) \citetalias{MKK+2006};
779: (3) \citealt{LV1989};
780: (4) \citealt{CR1997};
781: (5) \citealt{KMH+1998}
782: }
783: \end{deluxetable}
784:
785: In Table~\ref{tab:ogals}, we list the optical/near-IR magnitudes for galaxies in
786: our sample of clusters. In column (2), we list the observed $R$-band magnitude.
787: We list the references for these magnitudes in column (5). The absolute $R$-band
788: magnitude, including extinction corrections \citep[$A_R=2.64 \
789: \nobreak{E(B-V)}$;][]{SFD1998}, are listed in column (3), assuming a distance
790: corresponding to the mean redshift of each cluster.
791: As in \citet{MKK+2006}, we applied corrections for
792: bandpass shifting and stellar evolution based on a simple stellar population
793: model with solar metallicity and formation redshift of $z=3$ \citep{BC2003}.
794: At these redshifts the corrections to the $R$-band magnitudes are small
795: (0.06--0.08).
796: All X-ray sources are in
797: galaxies with $M_R < -20$.
798: For comparison, we note that the knee of local galaxy luminosity functions occurs at
799: $M^*_R = -21.15$ \citepalias{CZ2003}. In column (4), we list the absolute $K_s$-band
800: magnitude with extinction corrections \citep[$A_{K_s}=0.28 \
801: \nobreak{E(B-V)}$;][]{MSW+2003}, where we have used the 2MASS magnitude within
802: the $K_s = 20 {\rm \, mag \, arcsec}^2$ isophote
803: \citep{SCS+2006}.
804: The correction for bandpass shifting and stellar evolution to the $K$-band magnitudes
805: are larger (0.24--0.32) than those applied to the $R$-band magnitudes.
806: While we do not have robustly measured SFR for these galaxies, we place rough
807: limits on the SFR in \S~\ref{sec:SFR}.
808:
809: In Figure~\ref{fig:lx_lk}, we plot the X-ray luminosity versus the $K_s$-band
810: luminosity for galaxies in our cluster sample. The errors for the X-ray
811: luminosity are calculated from the errors in the count-rates alone, except for
812: A754-1 whose errors arise from uncertainty in the pileup correction. To
813: estimate the near-IR luminosity for the two galaxies that were not in the 2MASS
814: Extended Source Catalog, we used the relation between the standard aperture
815: $K_s$ magnitude in the Point Source Catalog and the $K_s$-band isophotal
816: magnitude for the other galaxies. These two galaxies are indicated with their
817: larger {\it dashed} error bars. Galaxies with X-ray luminosities newly measured
818: by this paper are indicated with filled symbols in Figure~\ref{fig:lx_lk}. We
819: overlay the $1\sigma$ ranges of the \citet{KF2004} and \citet{SJF+2007}
820: relations after correcting the latter to isophotal optical luminosities and
821: $L_{X,B}$ assuming a $\Gamma=1.7$ power-law. The {\it solid} line indicates the
822: sum of the upper limits from both relations.
823:
824:
825: \begin{figure}
826: \plotone{f4.eps}
827: \caption{
828: Broad band X-ray luminosity, $L_{X,B}$, versus the near-IR luminosity enclosed
829: in the $K_s = 20 {\rm \, mag \, arcsec}^2$ isophote, $L_{K_{s},K20}$, for X-ray
830: detected galaxies in the cluster sample from Table~\ref{tab:cluster}. The
831: $1\sigma$ range of X-ray emission expected from LMXBs \citep[{\itshape dotted}
832: line,][]{KF2004} and diffuse gas \citep[{\itshape dash-dotted} line,][]{SJF+2007} are
833: displayed. Galaxies that have $L_{X,B}$ brighter than $10^{41} {\rm \, erg \,
834: s}^{-1}$ and more than $1\sigma$ away from the sum of the upper limits for LMXBs
835: and diffuse gas ({\itshape solid} line are considered X-ray AGN and are marked
836: by stars. Filled and open symbols indicate galaxies from this paper and
837: \citet{MKK+2006}, respectively. Two of the galaxies from \citetalias{MKK+2006}
838: had no 2MASS Extended Source Catalog counterpart and have estimated
839: $L_{K_{S,K20}}$ and larger errors ({\it thick dotted} bars). The most luminous X-ray
840: source, A754-1, has been corrected for pileup, which is uncertain to $\sim60\%$.
841: \label{fig:lx_lk}}
842: \end{figure}
843:
844: We classify a galaxy as an X-ray AGN if the following conditions are met:
845: $L_{X,B} > 10^{41} {\rm \, erg \, s}^{-1}$,
846: $L_{X,B}$ more than $1\sigma$ higher than the sum of the $1\sigma$ upper limits to the
847: \citet{KF2004} and \citet{SJF+2007} relations, and an optical counterpart within
848: $2\arcsec$. These galaxies are indicated by a note in
849: Table~\ref{tab:ogals} and with a star in Figure~\ref{fig:lx_lk}.
850: One source is marginally above the sum of the $1.3\sigma$ upper limits to the
851: \citet{KF2004} and \citet{SJF+2007} relations, A89B-5; all other sources are
852: above the sum of the $2.7\sigma$ upper limits of the relations.
853: Since our X-ray luminosity is
854: derived for a point-source, and not the entire galaxy, we note that the total
855: galaxy X-ray luminosity will be even larger than that in Figure~\ref{fig:lx_lk}
856: if there is a contribution from the extended emission of the distribution of
857: LMXBs or ISM. Thus, the only likely contaminating sources in this sample of
858: X-ray AGN are galaxies with ${\rm SFR}
859: \gtrsim 10 {\rm \, M}_\odot {\rm \, yr}^{-1}$. We argue below that such
860: contamination does not seem likely for our sample.
861: We also note that A3128-3 is an X-ray AGN if we do not impose an X-ray
862: luminosity cut, i.e., it has a close optical counterpart, is above the sum of
863: the LMXB and ISM relations, but has $L_{X,B} < 10^{41} {\rm \, erg \, s}^{-1}$.
864:
865:
866: Although one could consider adding additional requirements to classify a source
867: as an X-ray AGN based on its X-ray data, in particular estimates of its spectrum
868: (e.g., through hardness ratios or quantiles) and spatial decomposition into a
869: point source and extended galactic emission, the quality of the data for the
870: lower luminosity sources is insufficient. First, only 20\% of the X-ray detected
871: galaxies have more than 50 counts.
872: There would be little to no discriminating
873: power for the vast majority of our sample.
874: Second, it is unclear that a
875: spectral selection using hardness ratios or quantiles is appropriate.
876: \citetalias{MKK+2006} found that the spectroscopically identified AGNs were those
877: least consistent with unobscured, $\Gamma = 1.7$, power-law emission. While one
878: might hope to discriminate the soft emission of diffuse gas from harder
879: power-law emission, some AGNs have ultrasoft spectra, that corresponds to steep
880: power-law photon indices, $\Gamma \gtrsim 3$ \citep{PMC+1992}. This highlights
881: the need for deep enough observations where spectral modeling can be done to
882: detect the iron L-shell hump characteristic of diffuse gas
883: \citep[e.g.,][]{SJF+2007}.
884: Since most of our X-ray detected galaxies have less than 50 counts,
885: spatial decomposition of the X-ray emission would also not be useful
886: for the vast majority of galaxies in our sample.
887:
888: Based on \citet{KF2003}, we estimate that the completeness limits over the
889: entire ACIS-I FOV is approximately four times the X-ray luminosity in Table~1 of
890: \citetalias{MKK+2006} and Table~\ref{tab:xgals} of this work.
891: This suggests that the central observation of Abell 85 and Abell 754 are
892: incomplete at $L_{X,B} \lesssim 5 \times 10^{40} {\rm \, erg \, s}^{-1}$, while the
893: flanking field observations are incomplete for $L_{X,B} \lesssim 2\times 10^{41} {\rm
894: \, erg \, s}^{-1}$. Since Abell 89B is in flanking field observations of Abell
895: 85 and is more distant, it is incomplete for $L_{X,B} \lesssim 4\times 10^{41} {\rm \,
896: erg \, s}^{-1}$. Abell 644 and Abell 3128 are incomplete for $L_{X,B} \lesssim 10^{41}
897: {\rm \, erg \, s}^{-1}$, while Abell 3125 is incomplete for $L_{X,B} \lesssim 2\times
898: 10^{41} {\rm \, erg \, s}^{-1}$. Although there is a gap between $10^{41}
899: {\rm \, erg \, s}^{-1}$ and the completeness limits in some areas of the clusters, we
900: estimate that the completeness in this gap is above 50\%.
901: Since only one X-ray AGN is detected in the gap between
902: $L_{X,B} > 10^{41} {\rm \, erg \, s}^{-1}$ and its completeness limit, A89B-5,
903: we estimate that we are not likely to be missing more than one or two X-ray AGN
904: due to incompleteness.
905:
906: \subsection{Spectroscopically Identified AGN in Abell 85, Abell 89B, and Abell 754}
907:
908:
909: \begin{deluxetable}{lrrr}
910: \tabletypesize{\footnotesize}
911: \tablewidth{0pt}
912: \tablecaption{Optical Spectral Properties of X-ray Galaxies
913: \label{tab:spgals}}
914: \tablehead{
915: \colhead{ID} &
916: \colhead{EW [\ion{O}{2}]} &
917: \colhead{EW [\ion{O}{3}]} &
918: \colhead{EW H$\beta$}\\
919: \colhead{(1)} &
920: \colhead{(2)} &
921: \colhead{(3)} &
922: \colhead{(4)}
923: }
924: \startdata
925: % OII OIII H_beta
926: A85-1 &$37.88\pm2.31$&$84.88\pm3.20$&$ 4.61\pm5.04$\\
927: A85-2 &$-0.21\pm0.69$&$ 0.15\pm0.32$&$-0.41\pm0.18$\\
928: A85-3 &$ 1.53\pm1.11$&$ 0.02\pm0.51$&$-0.29\pm0.31$\\
929: A85-4 &$ 4.06\pm2.53$&$ 0.21\pm0.25$&$-0.08\pm0.28$\\
930: A85-5 &$ 1.08\pm1.04$&$-0.36\pm0.48$&$-0.34\pm0.27$\\
931: %
932: A89B-1&$-0.49\pm0.59$&$ 0.14\pm0.51$&$-0.03\pm0.22$\\
933: A89B-2&$ 3.30\pm1.90$&$-0.29\pm0.28$&$ 0.00\pm0.25$\\
934: A89B-3&$ 1.29\pm1.03$&$-0.15\pm0.24$&$-0.59\pm0.19$\\
935: A89B-4&$ 4.29\pm1.79$&$ 1.40\pm0.66$&$-0.09\pm0.26$\\
936: A89B-5&$21.99\pm2.45$&$25.47\pm1.65$&$-0.11\pm0.63$\\
937: %
938: A754-1&$ 3.41\pm2.06$&$-0.18\pm0.30$&$-0.25\pm0.26$\\
939: A754-2&$ 4.24\pm2.38$&$-0.23\pm0.30$&$-0.34\pm0.22$\\
940: A754-3&$-0.30\pm0.64$&$-0.10\pm0.16$&$-0.39\pm0.13$\\
941: A754-4&$ 1.51\pm1.20$&$ 0.36\pm0.46$&$-0.22\pm0.19$\\
942: A754-5&$-0.42\pm0.60$&$ 0.28\pm0.32$&$-0.10\pm0.15$\\
943: A754-6&$10.36\pm1.42$&$11.05\pm1.37$&$ 0.20\pm0.55$\\
944: \enddata
945: \tablecomments{Optical Spectral Properties of X-ray Identified Galaxies in Abell 85, Abell 89B, and Abell 754.
946: Columns are:
947: (1) ID from this paper;
948: (2) Equivalent width of [\ion{O}{2}] emission;
949: (3) Equivalent width of [\ion{O}{3}] emission;
950: (4) Equivalent width of H$\beta$ emission without correction for absorption.
951: Abell 754-7 is not included due to its spectrum having low signal-to-noise.
952: }
953: \end{deluxetable}
954:
955: In addition to measuring the redshifts of galaxies in Abell 85, Abell 89B, and
956: Abell 754, the spectroscopy described in \citetalias{CZ2003} and
957: \citet{CZ2005} yielded measurements of the equivalent widths of
958: the [\ion{O}{2}] $\lambda 3727$ doublet, [\ion{O}{3}] $\lambda 5007$, and
959: H$\beta$\ $\lambda 4861$ emission lines.
960: The last is not corrected for any H$\beta$ absorption.
961: These emission lines can be indicative of ionization from an AGN and/or current,
962: unobscured star-formation. These values are listed in Table~\ref{tab:spgals} for
963: X-ray detected galaxies. We used our spectroscopic measurements to check for AGN
964: identifiable by their optical spectra among our X-ray detected galaxies in Abell
965: 85, Abell 89B, and Abell 754. The spectroscopic identification of AGN in our
966: other clusters was previously discussed in \citetalias{MKK+2006}.
967:
968: Only three of the X-ray detected galaxies, A85-1, A89B-5, and A754-6, show
969: emission lines detected at $>3\sigma$. All three galaxies, which are classified
970: as X-ray AGN, have significant detections of [\ion{O}{2}] and [\ion{O}{3}];
971: however, none of them have H$\beta$ emission. To conservatively correct for
972: potential absorption, we have added the emission-corrected H$\beta$ absorption
973: equivalent widths of 5 \AA\ found for post-starburst galaxies in the Sloan
974: Digital Sky Survey (C. Tremonti, private communication) to all measurements of
975: H$\beta$. Both A85-1 and A89B-5 are spectroscopically classified as AGN via the
976: [\ion{O}{3}]/H$\beta$ versus [\ion{O}{2}]/H$\beta$ diagnostic
977: \citep{RTT1997,LMC+2004};
978: \begin{equation}
979: \log \left(\frac{[\mion{O}{3}]}{{\rm H}\beta}\right) >
980: \frac{0.14}{[\mion{O}{2}]/{\rm H}\beta-1.45}+0.83.
981: \end{equation}
982: No other galaxies in the {\it Chandra} FOVs of these clusters are
983: spectroscopically identified as AGN with our emission line data.
984: Since A85-1 has been previously identified as a Seyfert galaxy
985: \citep{DLF2005} and A89B-5 has been classified as a QSO by SDSS
986: \citep{SDSS_DR5}, their identifications as spectroscopically identified AGN
987: appear secure.
988:
989: In addition to the galaxies we identify as spectroscopic AGN, two
990: other X-ray detected galaxies have been previously identified as AGN based on
991: their optical spectral properties. A85-2 was identified as a Seyfert 2
992: \citep{HB1991}; however, we note that the redshift associated with this
993: identification (0.0453) does not match our measured redshift of the galaxy
994: (0.0564). A85-3 was identified as an AGN based on the limit to its
995: [\ion{N}{2}]/H$\alpha$ ratio \citep{HHP+2005}. Both A85-2 and A85-3 were not
996: identified as X-ray AGN because their low X-ray luminosities ($L_{X,B} < 10^{41}
997: {\rm \, erg \, s}^{-1}$) were consistent with emission from their LMXB
998: populations. These sources illustrate that although current X-ray observations
999: allow identification of low-luminosity AGN, some lower-luminosity AGN are still
1000: being missed. Another famous example is that the X-ray emission from the core
1001: and jet of M87 \citep[e.g.,][]{MMD+2002} would not be luminous enough to be
1002: classified as an X-ray AGN with our criteria.
1003:
1004: \subsection{Star Formation Rates}
1005: \label{sec:SFR}
1006:
1007: Since HMXBs associated with star formation may also lead to
1008: X-ray emission, it is important to evaluate whether an X-ray detected galaxy has
1009: a high SFR. We use optical spectroscopy to constrain the current SFR through the
1010: [\ion{O}{2}] equivalent width. Rough limits on the SFR for X-ray galaxies can be
1011: estimated from detections and limits based on the Infrared Astronomy Satellite
1012: {\it IRAS} Faint Source Catalog \citep{M+1990}. For Abell 85, Abell 89B, Abell
1013: 754, and Abell 644, radio fluxes and limits from the NRAO VLA Sky Survey
1014: \citep[NVSS,][]{CCG+1998} are also available to constrain the current SFR.
1015:
1016: In the absence of an AGN component, the [\ion{O}{2}] equivalent width can be
1017: used to estimate the SFR that is unobscured,
1018: \begin{equation}
1019: {\rm SFR}_{[{\rm O \, II}]} = 8.8 \times 10^{-12} \ L_{B,\odot} \,
1020: {\rm EW}[\mion{O}{2}]
1021: {\rm \, M}_\odot {\rm \, yr}^{-1},
1022: \end{equation}
1023: where $L_{B,\odot}$ is the $B$-band luminosity in solar luminosities
1024: \citep{K1992b,BP1997}.
1025: Among X-ray sources in Abell 644, Abell 3125, and Abell 3128, only A3125-5 and
1026: A3128-2 have measurable [\ion{O}{2}] emission \citepalias{MKK+2006}; however,
1027: the implied SFR$_{[{\rm O \, II}]}$ for both sources is small ($\lesssim 1 {\rm
1028: \, M}_\odot {\rm \, yr}^{-1}$). For galaxies in Abell 85, Abell 89B, and Abell
1029: 754, we estimate $L_{B,\odot}$ assuming $B-R = 1$, which is appropriate for
1030: cluster X-ray sources with [\ion{O}{2}] emission \citepalias{MKK+2006}. Among
1031: the galaxies with $3\sigma$ detections of [\ion{O}{2}], two have SFR$_{[{\rm O
1032: \, II}]} > 5 {\rm \, M}_\odot {\rm \, yr}^{-1}$, A85-1 ($26 {\rm \, M}_\odot
1033: {\rm \, yr}^{-1}$) and A89B-5 ($7 {\rm \, M}_\odot {\rm \, yr}^{-1}$). A85-1 is
1034: an Sbc galaxy \citep{PPP+2003} whose peculiar velocity ($-3.2$ times the
1035: velocity dispersion of Abell 85) suggests it is an infalling galaxy towards the
1036: edge of the Abell 85 despite its small projected cluster-centric distance ($0.15
1037: {\rm \,} r_{200}$). A89B-5 is also a late type-galaxy \citep[S?;][]{PPP+2003}
1038: at the edge of Abell 89B ($0.73 {\rm \,} r_{200}$). If the [\ion{O}{2}]
1039: equivalent widths of A85-1 and A89B-5 were indicative of their SFR, then
1040: approximately 60\% and 40\% of their X-ray emission could come from HMXBs.
1041: However, our identification of both as spectroscopic AGN suggests their
1042: [\ion{O}{2}] likely includes a considerable AGN component. This would lead to an
1043: overestimate of their SFR$_{[{\rm O \, II}]}$ and implied HMXB X-ray luminosity.
1044:
1045: For galaxies without $3\sigma$ detections of [\ion{O}{2}], we conservatively
1046: adopted three times the measurement error of [\ion{O}{2}]. We have excluded
1047: A754-7 because its spectra had low signal-to-noise. Only one remaining galaxy
1048: had a large implied SFR$_{[{\rm O \, II}]}$, A89B-2 ($<8.8 {\rm \, M}_\odot {\rm
1049: \, yr}^{-1} $). A89B-2 was already excluded as an X-ray AGN due to the expected
1050: X-ray emission from diffuse gas and the large offset between the X-ray and
1051: optical positions; however, HMXBs could account for 30\% of the X-ray emission
1052: from A89B-2. From the combined detections and limits on the SFR from
1053: [\ion{O}{2}], we conclude that unobscured star formation is not likely to be
1054: responsible for the X-ray emission used to identify our X-ray AGN.
1055:
1056: Since [\ion{O}{2}] emission can be obscured, one must also consider wavelengths
1057: where obscuration is less of an issue. In the far-infrared (FIR), reradiating
1058: dust reveals obscured star formation. If one considers the far-infrared SFR
1059: relation \citep{K1998}, corrected to the Infrared Astronomy Satellite ({\it
1060: IRAS}) bands \citep{CAB+2000}, the obscured SFR can be estimated from
1061: \begin{equation}
1062: {\rm SFR}_{\rm FIR} \approx 7.9 \times 10^{-44} \,
1063: \frac{L_{\rm FIR}}{\rm erg \, s^{-1}}
1064: {\rm \, M}_\odot {\rm \, yr}^{-1},
1065: \end{equation}
1066: where $L_{\rm FIR}$ is calculated from the luminosity distance, $D_{L}$, and the
1067: the {\it IRAS} 60 and 100 $\mu$m fluxes in Janskys,
1068: \begin{equation}
1069: L_{\rm FIR} = 4 \pi D^{2}_{L} \,
1070: 1.26 \times 10 ^{-14} \, (2.58 F_{60} + F_{100}).
1071: \end{equation}
1072: Only two of the X-ray detected galaxies are detected by {\it IRAS}, A85-1 and
1073: A754-6, both X-ray AGN. For A85-1, there are detections at both 60 and 100
1074: $\mu$m, while A754-6 is only detected at 60 $\mu$m. Their predicted SFR$_{\rm
1075: FIR}$ of about 9 and $<16 {\rm \, M}_\odot {\rm \, yr}^{-1}$, respectively imply
1076: approximately 20\% and $<50\%$ of their X-ray emission could come from HMXBs.
1077: The hard median X-ray energy of A754-6 suggests that whatever source is emitting
1078: X-rays is obscured; an obscured AGN would also reradiate in the FIR. Although
1079: some star formation might be ongoing in these two sources, their identification
1080: as X-ray AGN appears secure.
1081:
1082: Given the typical minimum fluxes of detected sources, $F_{60} \sim 0.2 {\rm \,
1083: Jy}$ and $F_{100} \sim 1 {\rm \, Jy}$ in the {\it IRAS} Faint Source Catalog
1084: \citep{M+1990}, rough upper limits to the SFR$_{\rm FIR}$ of about $<11$, $<11$,
1085: $<13$, $<14$, $<18$, and $<22 {\rm \, M}_\odot {\rm \, yr}^{-1}$ can be set for
1086: FIR undetected galaxies in Abell 754, Abell 85, Abell 3128, Abell 3125, Abell
1087: 644, and Abell 89B, respectively. Since a SFR of $10 {\rm \, M}_\odot {\rm \,
1088: yr}^{-1}$ could account for X-ray luminosities from HMXBs of $10^{41} {\rm \,
1089: erg \, s}^{-1}$, current SFR limits from {\it IRAS} are too shallow to rule out
1090: a 100\% HMXB origin of the X-ray emission for three of the X-ray AGN, A89B-5,
1091: A644-2, and A3128-9.
1092:
1093: In galaxies without a radio AGN, the radio emission at frequencies
1094: below tens of GHz can be a direct probe of the current star formation
1095: of massive stars \citep[$M \ge 5 M\odot$,][]{C1992};
1096: \begin{multline}
1097: {\rm SFR}_{\rm GHz} \approx \frac{L_{\rm GHz}}{{\rm W \, Hz}^{-1}} \times \\
1098: \left[ 5.3 \times 10^{21}
1099: \left(\frac{\nu}{\rm GHz}\right)^{-0.8} +
1100: 5.5 \times 10^{20}
1101: \left(\frac{\nu}{\rm GHz}\right)^{-0.1}
1102: \right] ^{-1}
1103: \end{multline}
1104: where $L_{\rm GHz}$ is the radio luminosity measured at frequency $\nu$. The
1105: X-ray detected galaxies that have NVSS counterparts are A85-1 ($7.5 {\rm \,
1106: mJy}$), A89B-3 ($64.6 {\rm \, mJy}$), A754-1 ($158.7 {\rm \, mJy}$), A754-2
1107: ($3.2 {\rm \, mJy}$), A754-3 ($7.3 {\rm \, mJy}$), A754-4 ($71.3 {\rm \, mJy}$),
1108: and A754-7 ($81.2 {\rm \, mJy}$). Three of the sources, A754-1, A754-4, and
1109: A754-7, have multiple NVSS components and have been identified as narrow-angle
1110: tail radio AGN \citep{ZBO1989}%
1111: \footnote{Only one narrow-angle tail candidate in Abell 754, PGC 025746,
1112: is undetected in our X-ray observations \citep{ZBO1989}.}. As such, they are not
1113: suitable for placing limits on the SFR and the extended radio sources
1114: unambiguously reveal the presence of AGN. Since the NVSS counterparts to A89B-3
1115: and A754-2 are offset by $19\farcs4$ and $36\farcs1$ , respectively, they too
1116: are unlikely to be due to star formation. In fact, catalog results from the
1117: higher resolution 1.4 GHz FIRST survey \citep{WBH+1997} indicates that the
1118: A89B-3 is a narrow-angle tail radio AGN, while no FIRST data for A754-2 are
1119: available. Only two of the sources have radio emission that could arise from the
1120: core of a radio jet or galactic star formation, A85-1 and A754-3. If the radio
1121: emission from A85-1 arises from star-formation, its ${\rm SFR}_{\rm GHz} \sim 12
1122: {\rm \, M}_\odot {\rm \, yr}^{-1}$. However, the joint radio and FIR detection
1123: allows calculation of its $q$ parameter
1124: \citep[e.g.,][]{CAH1991,YRC2001}. With $q=1.717\pm0.096$, A85-1 is
1125: well away from the typical value of $q=2.34 $ for star forming galaxies
1126: \citep{YRC2001}, indicative of a radio excess with a likely AGN origin. This
1127: suggests its SFR would be lower than what we measure.
1128: Given its additional classification as a spectroscopic AGN, its identification
1129: as an X-ray AGN seems robust against the effects of star formation. A754-3,
1130: whose detection could be consistent with $11 {\rm \, M}_\odot {\rm \, yr}^{-1}$
1131: of star formation, was not classified as an X-ray AGN due to its low X-ray
1132: luminosity that could be due to LMXBs or diffuse gas.
1133: Since A754-3 is an early-type galaxy \citep[E-S0;][]{PPP+2003} at the center of
1134: Abell 754, the radio emission appears more likely to arise from a low-luminosity
1135: AGN than from star-formation. If star-formation is ongoing, X-ray emission from
1136: HMXBs could also be responsible for the X-ray emission.
1137:
1138: With a detection limit of $2.5 {\rm \, mJy}$, the 1.4 GHz NRAO VLA Sky Survey
1139: (NVSS) can place tighter constraints on the current SFR than the FIR. For
1140: sources undetected in the NVSS, upper limits to the SFR of about $<3.9$, $<4.0$,
1141: $<6.5$, and $<7.9 {\rm \, M}_\odot {\rm \, yr}^{-1}$ can be set for galaxies in
1142: Abell 754, Abell 85, Abell 644, and Abell 89B, respectively; Abell 3125 and
1143: Abell 3128 are too far south to have been included in the survey. These limits
1144: are low enough to rule out a strong HMXB origin of the X-ray emission among our
1145: sample of X-ray AGN undetected by NVSS, A85-5 ($<8\%$) , A89B-5 ($<44\%$),
1146: A644-1 ($<5\%$), A644-2 ($<38\%$), and A754-6 ($<10\%$).
1147:
1148:
1149: From the combined constraints on star formation in our X-ray detected galaxies,
1150: we conclude that star formation is not likely to be responsible for the X-ray
1151: emission used to identify our X-ray AGN. We also conclude that there is not
1152: strong evidence for more than a few highly star-forming galaxies ($ {\rm SFR}
1153: \gtrsim 10 {\rm \, M}_\odot {\rm \, yr}^{-1}$) in these clusters.
1154:
1155: \subsection{AGN Fraction and Host Galaxy Magnitude}
1156:
1157: \begin{figure*}
1158: \plottwo{f5a.eps}{f5b.eps}
1159: \caption{
1160: ({\it Top}) The cumulative fraction of galaxies with ({\it dashed} line) and
1161: without ({\it solid} line) X-ray AGN as a function of $M_R < -20$ ({\it left}) and
1162: $M_{K_s,K20} < -23.0$ ({\it right}) for galaxies in the cluster sample from
1163: Table~\ref{tab:cluster}. ({\it Bottom}) The fraction of galaxies with an X-ray
1164: AGN, $f_{\rm A}$, in bins of approximately 50 galaxies.
1165: In both panels, the {\it dotted} line indicates the fraction summing over all $M_R < -20$
1166: galaxies in the sample, $3.4^{+1.1}_{-0.8}$\%.
1167: It is clear that more luminous galaxies are more likely to
1168: contain X-ray AGN.
1169: \label{fig:frac_mag}}
1170: \end{figure*}
1171:
1172: For $L_{X,B} > 10^{41} {\rm \, erg \, s}^{-1}$ and $M_R < -20$, the X-ray
1173: identified AGN fraction, $f_{\rm A}(M_R<-20;L_{X,B}>10^{41})$, summing over
1174: galaxies in eight $z\lesssim 0.3$ clusters was 2.2\%, and $f_{\rm
1175: A}(M_R<-21.3;L_{X,B}>10^{41}) = 9.8\%$ \citepalias{MKK+2006}. \citet{SJF+2007}
1176: found $f_{\rm A}(M_R<-21.3;L_{X,B}>10^{41}) \sim 5\%$ for $0.01 < z < 0.05$
1177: clusters.
1178: This presents an indication that the optical luminosity of a host galaxy affects
1179: whether an X-ray AGN is detected at these X-ray luminosities. In determining
1180: these AGN fractions, both samples did not eliminate luminous X-ray galaxies
1181: whose emission could actually be due to diffuse gas. This may affect the
1182: \citet{SJF+2007} X-ray AGN sample more, as half of them were in BCGs, while none
1183: of the \citetalias{MKK+2006} X-ray AGN were. In the following section, we
1184: explore the magnitude dependence of $f_{\rm A}$ for galaxies in our sample,
1185: after applying the $L_X/L_{K_s}$ relations to select X-ray AGN.
1186:
1187: We calculated the extinction-corrected, absolute $M_R$ and $M_{K_s,K20}$
1188: rest-frame magnitudes for all available cluster galaxies, as in
1189: \S~\ref{sec:obs_analysis} and
1190: Table~\ref{tab:ogals}.
1191: Based on all cluster galaxies with both magnitudes, we find the
1192: distribution of rest-frame colors $M_{R}-M_{K_s}$ is consistent with a Gaussian
1193: distribution centered on 2.82 with a dispersion of 0.26.
1194: Since we were unable to determine if the BCG of Abell 85 contained an X-ray AGN,
1195: we removed it from the sample. In the top panels of Figure~\ref{fig:frac_mag},
1196: we compare the $M_R$ ({\it left}) and $M_{K_s}$ ({\it right}) distributions of
1197: galaxies with AGN ({\it dashed}) and without AGN ({\it solid}).
1198: The
1199: distributions are clearly different; KS tests indicate the probabilities they are
1200: the same are $1.9\times10^{-3}$ and $5.7\times10^{-3}$, respectively. In the
1201: bottom panels of Figure~\ref{fig:frac_mag}, we display $f_{\rm
1202: A}(L_{X,B}>10^{41})$ in magnitude bins. For the galaxies in Abell 644 and Abell
1203: 3125, we applied a correction ($\sim 3.9$ and 1.4, respectively; see
1204: Table~\ref{tab:f_a}) to the number of galaxies at a given magnitude to account
1205: for their incomplete membership information \citepalias{MMK2007}.
1206: This was necessary because membership is incomplete at these optical magnitudes,
1207: but any X-ray detected optical source was always targeted for spectroscopy in
1208: \citetalias{MMK2007}.
1209: The spectroscopic measurements for Abell 85, Abell 89B, and Abell 754 are 100\%
1210: complete at $m_R < 16$, but completeness does drop to $\sim 20$--$50\%$ by $m_R
1211: = 18$ \citepalias{CZ2003}. We note that $M_R = -20$ corresponds to $m_r \sim
1212: 17.5$ for Abell 89B and $m_r \sim 16.9$ for Abell 85 and Abell 754. Since these
1213: measurements were made prior to our analysis of the X-ray data, the
1214: spectroscopic completeness should be largely independent of the X-ray properties
1215: of galaxies; any completeness correction would equally correct the numerator and
1216: denominator in the fractions involved. Although one might be concerned that AGN
1217: with emission lines are more likely to have a measured redshift, we note that
1218: only a small fraction, $\sim 20\%$ of X-ray AGN have such emission lines. Any
1219: correction for such an effect would be smaller than the current error bars on
1220: AGN fractions, which are limited by the small numbers of AGN. We further note
1221: that we found no X-ray source matched to a photometric object without a redshift
1222: that would be consistent with $M_R < -20$.
1223:
1224: Since it is difficult to construct a clear situation where the X-ray
1225: completeness depends on the optical/near-IR host magnitude of the galaxy, we do not
1226: expect that sources not detected as X-ray AGN due to X-ray
1227: incompleteness are the cause of this discrepancy. To explicitly test this, we
1228: considered two sets of X-ray AGN at brighter luminosities, X-ray AGN with
1229: $L_{X,B} > 4\times 10^{41} {\rm \, erg \, s}^{-1}$ over the entire sample, and
1230: X-ray AGN with $L_{X,B} > 2\times 10^{41} {\rm \, erg \, s}^{-1}$ when removing
1231: all A89B galaxies from consideration. In both case, we still find that the
1232: optical/near-IR magnitudes of galaxies with and without X-ray AGN are drawn from
1233: different distributions using the KS test.
1234:
1235: \begin{deluxetable*}{lrrcrrcrr}
1236: \tabletypesize{\footnotesize}
1237: \tablewidth{0pt}
1238: \tablecaption{AGN Fraction
1239: \label{tab:f_a}}
1240: \tablehead{
1241: \colhead{Cluster} &
1242: \multicolumn{2}{c}{--- $N_{\rm XAGN} (M_R<-20)$ ---}&
1243: &
1244: \multicolumn{2}{c}{--- Members $(M_R<-20)$ --- }&
1245: &
1246: \multicolumn{2}{c}{--------- $f_{\rm A}$ --------- }\\
1247: \colhead{Name} &
1248: \colhead{$L_{X,B}>10^{41}$} &
1249: \colhead{$L_{X,B}>10^{42}$} &
1250: &
1251: \colhead{Confirmed} &
1252: \colhead{Corrected} &
1253: &
1254: \colhead{$L_{X,B}>10^{41}$} &
1255: \colhead{$L_{X,B}>10^{42}$}\\
1256: \colhead{(1)} &
1257: \colhead{(2)} &
1258: \colhead{(3)} &
1259: &
1260: \colhead{(4)} &
1261: \colhead{(5)} &
1262: &
1263: \colhead{(6)} &
1264: \colhead{(7)}
1265: }
1266: \startdata
1267: Abell 85 & 2 & 0 & & 109 & 109 & & $0.018^{+0.024}_{-0.012}$ & $0.000^{+0.010}_{-0.000}$ \\
1268: Abell 89B & 2 & 1 & & 22 & 22 & & $0.091^{+0.108}_{-0.058}$ & $0.045^{+0.097}_{-0.038}$ \\
1269: Abell 3125 & 3 & 0 & & 20 & 28 & & $0.107^{+0.093}_{-0.058}$ & $0.000^{+0.040}_{-0.000}$ \\
1270: Abell 3128 & 4 & 1 & & 67 & 67 & & $0.060^{+0.045}_{-0.028}$ & $0.015^{+0.033}_{-0.012}$ \\
1271: Abell 754 & 3 & 1 & & 171 & 171 & & $0.018^{+0.017}_{-0.010}$ & $0.006^{+0.013}_{-0.005}$ \\
1272: Abell 644 & 2 & 1 & & 19 & 75 & & $0.027^{+0.034}_{-0.017}$ & $0.013^{+0.030}_{-0.011}$ \\
1273: \\
1274: Average & & & & & & & $0.031^{+0.011}_{-0.011}$ & $0.009^{+0.006}_{-0.006}$ \\
1275: Sum & 17 & 4 & & 408 & 472 & & $0.034^{+0.011}_{-0.008}$ & $0.008^{+0.007}_{-0.004}$ \\
1276:
1277: \enddata
1278: \tablecomments{AGN fractions for $M_R < -20$ galaxies in six $z<0.08$ clusters.
1279: Columns are:
1280: (1) Cluster Name;
1281: (2) Number of X-ray AGN with $L_{X,B} > 10^{41} {\rm \, erg \, s}^{-1}$;
1282: (3) Number of X-ray AGN with $L_{X,B} > 10^{42} {\rm \, erg \, s}^{-1}$;
1283: (4) Number of $M_R < -20$ galaxies with spectroscopically confirmed redshifts within {\it Chandra} FOV;
1284: (5) Number of $M_R < -20$ galaxies within {\it Chandra} FOV, corrected for
1285: preferential spectroscopic targetting of X-ray detections;
1286: (6) X-ray AGN fraction with $L_{X,B} > 10^{41} {\rm \, erg \, s}^{-1}$;
1287: (7) X-ray AGN fraction with $L_{X,B} > 10^{42} {\rm \, erg \, s}^{-1}$;
1288: }
1289: \end{deluxetable*}
1290:
1291: Since the X-ray emission from LMXBs and diffuse gas also increases with optical/near-IR
1292: magnitude, one concern is that the higher fractions of X-ray AGN at brighter
1293: magnitudes is due to normal X-ray emitting galaxies that are misidentified as
1294: X-ray AGN. To address this, we have performed Monte Carlo simulations to
1295: determine how severely our AGN sample could be contaminated by the combination of
1296: X-ray emission from LMXBs and diffuse gas.
1297:
1298: \begin{figure}
1299: \plotone{f6.eps}
1300: \caption{
1301: Probability a cluster galaxy would be falsely identified as an X-ray AGN
1302: as a function of $M_{K_sK20}$. For the vast majority of cluster galaxies
1303: the probability that X-ray emission from LMXBs and diffuse gas would be
1304: misclassified as an X-ray AGN is small. The total number of falsely
1305: identified AGN over the entire sample is $<1.1$.
1306: \label{fig:false}}
1307: \end{figure}
1308:
1309: We performed $10^5$ realizations of the X-ray to near-IR luminosity relations for
1310: both LMXBs (eq.\ \ref {eq:l_x_lmxbs}) and diffuse gas (eq.\ \ref {eq:l_x_gas}, with
1311: proper corrections), assuming that the reported errors in the relations
1312: follow Gaussian statistics. Within each realization, we combined the two simulated
1313: relations to predict the X-ray luminosity from LMXBs and diffuse gas for each cluster
1314: galaxy. Since our measured luminosities were for point sources, while
1315: the predicted luminosities were for entire galaxies, we needed to determine and
1316: apply a correction factor. Comparisons of the point-source counts and the counts
1317: within the $K_s = 20 {\rm \, mag \, arcsec}^2$ isophote for the X-ray detected
1318: galaxies not classified as X-ray AGN indicated that the average luminosity of
1319: the entire galaxy was 1.5 times that for a point source. We applied this
1320: correction to the predicted luminosities and then converted to an expected
1321: number of counts for each realization assuming an exposure time appropriate for
1322: the flanking field observations.
1323: This expected number of counts was used to create a simulated output number of
1324: counts assuming random deviations drawn from Poisson distributions with the
1325: expected number of counts as its mean. The output number of counts and its
1326: error were then converted back into luminosity, $L_{X,B,MC}$, and we performed
1327: the same (luminosity) selection criteria to identify a source as an X-ray AGN:
1328: $L_{X,B,MC} > 10^{41} {\rm \, erg \, s}^{-1}$ and $L_{X,B,MC}$ more than
1329: $1\sigma$ higher than the sum of the upper limits to the \citet{KF2004} and
1330: \citet{SJF+2007} relations. Thus, for each cluster galaxy we could calculate the
1331: probability that a source was misidentified as an X-ray AGN, $p_{\rm false}$
1332: (Figure~\ref{fig:false}).
1333:
1334: For $M_{K_s} \gtrsim -24.8$,
1335: $p_{\rm false} \lesssim 0.02$ and drops as host galaxy optical luminosity
1336: decreases due to the $10^{41} {\rm \, erg \, s}^{-1}$ minimum X-ray luminosity
1337: for X-ray AGN classification. For $M_{K_s} \lesssim -25.2$, $p_{\rm false}
1338: \lesssim 0.01$, and roughly drops as host galaxy optical luminosity increases.
1339: This is due to the X-ray AGN selection criteria set by the X-ray emission
1340: expected from LMXBs and gas. The roughly diagonal line up to $M_{K_s} \gtrsim
1341: -24.8$ corresponds to a minimum of 5 counts. Similar rough diagonal lines at
1342: increasing galaxy optical luminosity corresponds to an increasing minimum number
1343: of counts that satisfy our criteria. As the exposure times are made larger, as
1344: in our central field observations, the values of $p_{\rm false}$ drop at a given
1345: $M_{K_s}$. Therefore, calculations based on Figure~\ref{fig:false}
1346: represent the most conservative, i.e., highest, estimate of the number of
1347: sources in our entire sample that are falsely identified as X-ray AGN due to
1348: their LMXB and diffuse gas emission. By summing the probabilities, we estimate
1349: that there are $<1.1$ such false sources.
1350: Approximately 0.3, 0.6, and 0.2 falsely indentified sources are predicted for
1351: the three brightest bins, respectively, in each of the bottom panels of
1352: Figure~\ref{fig:frac_mag}. This would reduce their fractions by $\lesssim
1353: 0.005$, 0.010, and 0.003, which is much less than the current error bars.
1354: In addition, we note that even after removing the three AGN closest to the
1355: expected relation combining LMXBs and diffuse gas, the KS test still indicates
1356: that the $M_R$ ({\it left}) and $M_{K_s}$ ({\it right}) distributions of
1357: galaxies with and without AGN are not drawn from the same distributions. We
1358: conclude that misidentified X-ray emission from LMXBs and diffuse gas are not
1359: responsible for X-ray detected AGN being more likely to be found in more
1360: luminous galaxies.
1361:
1362: \begin{figure}
1363: \plotone{f7.eps}
1364: \caption{
1365: ({\it Top}) Approximate Eddington-normalized accretion rates, $\eta_{Edd}$,
1366: of detected X-ray AGN as a function of $M_{K_sK20}$. We assume
1367: a bolometric correction to the X-ray luminosity, ${\rm BC}=10$. Since
1368: we assumed all galaxies are spheroids, their black hole mass may be lower
1369: and the normalized accretion rates may be higher at a given $M_{K_sK20}$.
1370: The {\it solid} line indicates the limit set by
1371: $L_{X,B} > 10^{41} {\rm \, erg \, s}^{-1}$.
1372: The {\it dashed} line indicates the limit set to exclude potential contributions
1373: from LMXBs and diffuse gas.
1374: The changing AGN fraction with host
1375: galaxy luminosity, Figure~\ref{fig:frac_mag}, is likely due to a selection bias
1376: where lower Eddington accretion efficient sources are only detectable in
1377: more luminous galaxies, which are more likely to have more
1378: massive black holes. ({\it Bottom}) The histogram of $M_{K_sK20}$ cluster
1379: member galaxies is shown for reference.
1380: \label{fig:eff}}
1381: \end{figure}
1382:
1383: Our results that X-ray detected AGN are more likely to be found in more luminous
1384: galaxies
1385: for $M_R$
1386: are consistent with results from the XMM detections of AGN in
1387: the Abell 901/902 supercluster \citep[$z\sim0.17$][]{GGO+2007}. Both show a
1388: nearly constant fraction of X-ray AGN of $\sim1\%$ for $-21.5 \lesssim M_R
1389: \lesssim -20$ galaxies. For brighter galaxies, this increases to a maximum of
1390: $\sim 10$--$20\%$. We can use $M_{K_{s},K20}$ to derive galactic stellar masses
1391: for these galaxies.
1392: If we use
1393: \citet{BC2003}, assuming their Padova 1994 evolutionary tracks for a $13 {\rm \,
1394: Gyr}$, solar abundance single stellar population with the
1395: \citet{C2003} initial mass function, and correct the isophotal magnitude to a
1396: total magnitude, the magnitudes in Figure~\ref{fig:frac_mag} ({\it right})
1397: correspond to about $5 \times 10^{10}$ -- $2 \times 10^{12} {\rm \, M}_\odot$. A
1398: similar trend has been observed for radio-loud AGN, where the fraction of
1399: radio-loud AGN increases with stellar mass, $f \propto M_*^{2.5}$ up to $\sim
1400: 10^{12} {\rm \, M}_\odot$ \citep{BKH+2005}.
1401: On the other hand, the fraction of strong ($L[\mion{O}{3}] > 10^7 {\rm \,
1402: L}_\odot)$, optically identified AGN drops from $\sim 12\%$ at $10^{11} {\rm \,
1403: M}_\odot$ to $\sim 2\%$ at $10^{10} {\rm \, M}_\odot$ and $10^{12} {\rm \,
1404: M}_\odot$ \citep{KHT+2003}. The physically relevant question that these trends
1405: raise is whether AGN are more likely to reside in more luminous (massive) host
1406: galaxies.
1407:
1408: In the case of our X-ray AGN, much of the signal may actually be due to a
1409: physical selection bias.
1410: For each of our X-ray AGN, we
1411: can roughly estimate the accretion rate relative to the Eddington value, divided
1412: by the bolometric correction , $\eta_{\rm Edd} / {\rm BC}$, from $L_{X,B}$.
1413: As near-IR light is a better tracer of mass and subject to less extinction than
1414: visible light, we converted the detected near-IR luminosity to a black hole mass
1415: \citep{MH2003} under the assumption that all the luminosity is from a bulge
1416: component, $\log M_{\rm BH} = 8.21+1.13 (\log L_{K_s,{\rm ttl}})$.
1417: Since these sources are likely to have a range of disk contributions
1418: to their luminosities
1419: our derived $\eta_{\rm Edd} / {\rm BC}$ are underestimated; however, our
1420: results are still illustrative. Although BC is uncertain, especially if the
1421: mechanism for low and high luminosity X-ray AGN differ, we assume ${\rm BC} =
1422: 10$ and display, $\eta_{{\rm Edd,BC}=10}$ in Figure~\ref{fig:eff}.
1423: This assumption is reasonable given derived values of BC at
1424: these X-ray luminosities \citep[in the $2$--$10 {\rm \, keV}$ band;][]{VF2007}.
1425: The detected
1426: sources cover ranges of $1\times 10^{-5}
1427: \lesssim \eta_{{\rm Edd,BC}=10} \lesssim 3\times 10^{-3}$. Given our requirement
1428: that $L_{X,B} > 10^{41} {\rm \, erg \, s}^{-1}$, we can calculate the minimum
1429: $\eta_{{\rm Edd,BC}=10}$.
1430: It is clear that at higher luminosities, X-ray AGN at
1431: lower $\eta_{{\rm Edd,BC}=10}$ can, and are, detected.
1432: Similar results are also
1433: seen in Abell 901/902 \citep{GGO+2007}; their $\eta_{\rm
1434: Edd}$ are $\sim5$ higher because they adopted the
1435: $R$-band host-galaxy luminosity black hole mass
1436: relation of \cite{MD2002}.
1437: Calculated AGN fractions will only be independent of the galaxy
1438: luminosity function when they are sensitive to the same $\eta_{\rm Edd}$.
1439:
1440: \begin{figure*}
1441: \plottwo{f8a.eps}{f8b.eps}
1442: \caption{
1443: ({\it Top}) The cumulative fraction of $M_R < -20$ galaxies with ({\it dashed}
1444: line) and without ({\it solid} line) X-ray AGN as a function of cluster-centric
1445: distance, $D_{CC}$, in Mpc ({\it left}) and units of $r_{200}$ ({\it right}) for
1446: galaxies in the cluster sample from Table~\ref{tab:cluster}. ({\it Bottom}) The
1447: fraction of galaxies with an X-ray AGN, $f_{\rm A}$, in bins of approximately 50
1448: galaxies. The {\it dotted} line indicates the fraction for the $M_R < -20$
1449: sample.
1450: The radial distributions of galaxies with and without an X-ray AGN are
1451: comparable, consistent with \citetalias{MMK2007} results for $L_{X,B} > 10^{41}
1452: {\rm \, erg \, s}^{-1}$ and \citet{RE2005} results for disturbed clusters.
1453: \label{fig:frac_dist}}
1454: \end{figure*}
1455:
1456: Since more massive galaxies tend to be more centrally concentrated
1457: \citep[e.g.,][]{KHW+2003}, indicative of a more dominant bulge component,
1458: our $\eta_{{\rm Edd,BC}=10}$ are likely to represent larger underestimates at
1459: lower near-IR luminosities than at higher luminosities. Thus, the disparity
1460: between the $\eta_{{\rm Edd,BC}=10}$ probed by a given X-ray luminosity
1461: at lower and higher near-IR luminosities is even larger than that suggested by
1462: Figure~\ref{fig:eff}.
1463:
1464: There are two implication of this selection bias. First, this bias
1465: makes it essential that comparisons of AGN fractions make the same assumptions
1466: in both their X-ray luminosity and optical magnitude cuts,
1467: and that host galaxy morphology (spheroid mass) may also be important.
1468: More importantly,
1469: $\eta_{\rm Edd} / {\rm BC}$ is a more physical measure of AGN activity than
1470: the X-ray luminosity. The true fraction of $M_R < -20$ galaxies that host
1471: X-ray AGN with $\eta_{\rm Edd} / {\rm BC} \gtrsim 10^{-6}$ will be larger than
1472: the $\sim3\%$ we measure.
1473:
1474: \subsection{Radial Distribution of AGN}
1475:
1476: One of the goals of the new observations of Abell 85 and Abell 754 was to
1477: measure the spatial distribution of X-ray detected AGN. Along with Abell 89B,
1478: these three clusters have partial coverage out to $\sim r_{200}$. Although the
1479: radial coverage of the other three clusters is smaller, we include them in our
1480: measurement of the radial distribution. The {\it Chandra} observations of Abell
1481: 644 and Abell 3128 have coverage out to $\sim 0.4 r_{200}$, while the one of
1482: Abell 3125 extends farther to $\sim 0.7 r_{200}$.
1483: Since we never include
1484: galaxies outside of the {\it Chandra} FOVs, including all six clusters
1485: will improve the statistical determination of the AGN fraction with radius,
1486: particularly for smaller radii.
1487:
1488: In the top panels of Figure~\ref{fig:frac_dist}, we compare the (projected)
1489: spatial distributions of $M_R < -20$ galaxies with AGN ({\it dashed}) and
1490: without AGN ({\it solid}). We consider the distributions as a function of
1491: physical distance ({\it left}) and distance scaled to $r_{200}$ ({\it right}).
1492: In the bottom panels of Figure~\ref{fig:frac_dist}, we display
1493: $f_{\rm A}(M_R<-20;L_{X,B}>10^{41})$ in spatial bins, correcting for membership
1494: completeness. For this sample of galaxies, the spatial distributions of galaxies
1495: with X-ray AGN are the same as galaxies without X-ray AGN.
1496:
1497: As X-ray incompleteness is only a minor issue at the edges of the flanking field
1498: observations of Abell 85 and Abell 754 and the single observation of Abell 3125,
1499: we do not believe it is masking an increased contribution of AGN at
1500: the outskirts of clusters. The upper error bars presented
1501: in any single bin in the bottom panels of Figure~\ref{fig:frac_dist} correspond
1502: to missing $\sim1$--3 sources in a given bin. Since the edges of the flanking
1503: fields cover a wide range of cluster-centric distances, any missing sources should
1504: be spread over multiple bins. Thus, the effect from missing only one or two sources
1505: over the entire sample is well within our current noise level.
1506: In addition, we do not find any radial
1507: dependence in the smaller samples of AGN where we are complete; $L_{X,B} >
1508: 4\times 10^{41} {\rm \, erg \, s}^{-1}$ in the entire sample or $L_{X,B} >
1509: 2\times 10^{41} {\rm \, erg \, s}^{-1}$ when removing all A89B galaxies from
1510: consideration.
1511:
1512: In \citetalias{MMK2007}, the spatial distribution of
1513: $L_{X,B} > 10^{41} {\rm \, erg \, s}^{-1}$ X-ray AGN was also consistent
1514: with the other cluster members. We do note that our and their distribution are not
1515: independent as they share Abell 644, Abell 3125, and 3128. There are too few X-ray AGN with
1516: $L_{X,B} > 10^{42} {\rm \, erg \, s}^{-1}$ in our sample to test their
1517: result that the more X-ray luminous AGN are more centrally concentrated.
1518:
1519: \begin{figure}
1520: \plotone{f9.eps}
1521: \caption{
1522: Radial velocities of cluster $M_R < -20$ galaxies relative to the mean velocity
1523: of each cluster and normalized by the cluster velocity dispersion as a function
1524: of cluster-centric distance, $D_{CC}$, in units of $r_{200}$. Diamonds indicate
1525: galaxies detected as X-ray AGN. Filled diamonds indicate $L_{X,B} > 10^{42} {\rm
1526: \, erg \, s}^{-1}$. The two-dimensional distributions of galaxies with and
1527: without an X-ray AGN are comparable.
1528: \label{fig:vel_pos}}
1529: \end{figure}
1530:
1531: One concern is that galaxies with a small projected distance may actually be
1532: infalling galaxies at large physical distances close to the line-of-sight to the
1533: cluster. In Figure~\ref{fig:vel_pos}, we plot the infall velocity relative to
1534: the mean cluster velocity scaled by the cluster velocity dispersion against the
1535: projected distance scaled to $r_{200}$ for $M_R < -20$ galaxies with AGN ({\it
1536: circles}) and without AGN ({\it diamonds}). Although there are two AGN with
1537: large infall velocities at small projected distances, A85-1 and A644-2, a
1538: two-dimensional KS test \citep{PTV+1992} indicates that the galaxies with and
1539: without AGN are not likely to be drawn from samples with different two
1540: dimensional distributions.
1541:
1542: If AGN are fueled by galaxy-galaxy interactions, one expects AGN should
1543: be more prevalent in the outskirts of clusters. However, a significant fraction
1544: of early type galaxies, which tend to lie in the centers of richest clusters,
1545: are known to harbor low-luminosity AGN and LINERs. A relation between AGN and
1546: early-type galaxies could dilute or even reverse the trends predicted by
1547: gas-rich mergers or galaxy harassment. In addition, our detected X-ray AGN are
1548: detected more often in more luminous host galaxies. Since more massive galaxies
1549: tend to be early-type galaxies, any observed radial trend due to low-luminosity
1550: AGN and LINERs should be larger than it is intrinsically. The combination of all
1551: three effects could explain why the radial distribution of X-ray AGN is not
1552: markedly different from that of all galaxies in our sample. Another potential
1553: explanation is that radial-averaging over the substructure in the cluster
1554: masks any underlying signal. Finally, there could actually be no preferred
1555: radial distribution for X-ray AGN.
1556:
1557: \section{AGN Fraction and Cluster Properties}
1558: \label{sec:cluster}
1559:
1560: \citetalias{MMK2007} found some evidence that the AGN fraction varies with the
1561: properties of the host cluster. When summing over galaxies, their $f_{\rm
1562: A}(M_R<-20;L_{X,B}>10^{41})$ is 2.2\%; however their cluster-averaged $f_{\rm
1563: A}(M_R<-20;L_{X,B}>10^{41})$ is 4.9\%. Compared to the cluster-by-cluster
1564: $f_{\rm A}(M_R<-20;L_{X,B}>10^{41})$, a $\chi^2 = 17.8$ for 7 degrees of freedom
1565: (dof) indicates that cluster variations of the AGN fraction are significant.
1566: They find weak evidence that the AGN fraction is higher at lower redshift, in
1567: lower velocity-dispersion clusters, in clusters with substantial substructure,
1568: and in clusters with a smaller fraction of Butcher-Oemler galaxies. However,
1569: they caution that correlations between several of these parameters
1570: preclude identification of which cluster property or properties most strongly
1571: influence the AGN fraction.
1572:
1573: In Table~\ref{tab:f_a} we summarize the AGN fractions for each cluster in our
1574: sample. We first list the number of X-ray AGN more luminous than $10^{41} {\rm
1575: \, erg \, s}^{-1}$ (column 2) and $10^{42} {\rm \, erg \, s}^{-1}$ (column 3).
1576: We then list the number of spectroscopically confirmed, $M_R < -20$ members in
1577: each cluster (column 4). Since some of the galaxies within \citetalias{MKK+2006}
1578: clusters were preferentially targeted for spectroscopy based on X-ray
1579: detections, and completeness for membership of two of the clusters (Abell 644
1580: and Abell 3125) is not 100\%, we also list a corrected number of $M_R < -20$
1581: galaxies members in each cluster (column 5). We use these numbers to calculate
1582: the X-ray AGN fraction above $10^{41} {\rm \, erg \, s}^{-1}$ (column 6) and
1583: $10^{42} {\rm \, erg \, s}^{-1}$ (column 7). As in \citetalias{MMK2007}, we also
1584: calculate the cluster-by-cluster average AGN fractions, and the AGN fraction
1585: assuming it is independent of cluster properties. We find that the AGN fractions
1586: summing over galaxies, $f_{\rm A}(M_R<-20;L_{X,B}>10^{41})= 3.1^{+1.1}_{-1.1}\%$
1587: and $f_{\rm A}(M_R<-20;L_{X,B}>10^{42})= 0.9^{+0.6}_{-0.6}\%$, are consistent
1588: with the cluster-averaged AGN fractions $f_{\rm A}(M_R<-20;L_{X,B}>10^{41})=
1589: 3.4^{+1.1}_{-0.8}\%$ and $f_{\rm A}(M_R<-20;L_{X,B}>10^{42})=
1590: 0.8^{+0.7}_{-0.4}\%$. Comparing $f_{\rm A}(M_R<-20;L_{X,B}>10^{41})$
1591: of each cluster to the cluster-averaged AGN fraction, the $\chi^2 = 4.8$ for 5
1592: dof. We note that these numbers have not been corrected for
1593: the one or two sources that may be missed due to X-ray incompleteness. This
1594: change is minimal as the upper error bars due to the small number of X-ray AGN
1595: correspond to missing $\sim2$--3 sources for any given cluster, and $\sim5$
1596: sources for the entire sample.
1597:
1598: With our current data for Abell 85, Abell 89, and Abell 754, we choose to
1599: concentrate on the relation between AGN fraction and two cluster properties,
1600: redshift and velocity dispersion, in the paragraphs below. With the narrow
1601: redshift range, but wide velocity dispersion range, we have a greater ability to
1602: break the degeneracy between the two that was present in \citetalias{MMK2007}.
1603:
1604: \subsection{AGN Fraction and Redshift}
1605: \label{sec:cluster_z}
1606:
1607: Since our sample spans a narrow redshift range, we consider other samples to test
1608: whether there is any redshift evolution of the X-ray AGN fraction. To compare
1609: the AGN fractions we determine to those in \citetalias{MMK2007}, the overlapping
1610: clusters, Abell 644, Abell 3125, and Abell 3128 must be removed from
1611: \citetalias{MMK2007}. The remaining five clusters form a $0.15 < z < 0.32$
1612: sample. In this sample, the AGN fractions summing over galaxies, $f_{\rm
1613: A}(M_R<-20;L_{X,B}>10^{41})= 1.4^{+0.4}_{-0.3}\%$ and $f_{\rm
1614: A}(M_R<-20;L_{X,B}>10^{42})= 0.8^{+0.4}_{-0.3}\%$, are consistent with the
1615: cluster-averaged AGN fraction $f_{\rm A}(M_R<-20;L_{X,B}>10^{41})=
1616: 1.2^{+0.5}_{-0.5}\%$ and $f_{\rm A}(M_R<-20;L_{X,B}>10^{42})=
1617: 0.9^{+0.4}_{-0.4}\%$. One might then conclude that the AGN fraction at lower
1618: redshifts is indeed higher based on $f_{\rm A}(M_R<-20;L_{X,B}>10^{41})$, as
1619: suggested in \citetalias{MMK2007}; however, \citetalias{MMK2007} also note that
1620: most of the higher redshift sample is not X-ray complete down to $10^{41} {\rm
1621: \, erg \, s}^{-1}$. At $L_{X,B} >10^{42} {\rm \, erg \, s}^{-1}$, where the
1622: sample should be complete, there is no evidence for redshift evolution in
1623: $f_{\rm A}(M_R<-20;L_{X,B}>10^{42})$. We also compare our AGN fraction to that
1624: of the $0.01 < z < 0.05$ sample of \citet{SJF+2007}. We measure $f_{\rm
1625: A}(M_R<-21.3;L_{X,B}>10^{41}) = 6.7^{+2.4}_{-1.9}\%$, while \citet{SJF+2007}
1626: find $f_{\rm A}(M_R<-21.3;L_{X,B}>10^{41}) = 5.5^{+2.4}_{-1.8}\%$. Thus, we
1627: believe that there is no measurable redshift evolution in the X-ray AGN fraction
1628: for $z\lesssim 0.3$ in the current samples. As the \citet{SJF+2007} sample is of
1629: more nearby clusters, it samples a more centrally concentrated population of
1630: galaxies than the sample in this paper. Due to the combination of our errors
1631: being limited by small numbers of AGN and our result that there is no preferred
1632: radial distribution of AGN, this mismatch is not likely to play a large role in
1633: this conclusion.
1634:
1635: Recently, a large fraction of luminous X-ray AGN in $z \sim 0.6$ clusters was
1636: measured \citep{EMS+2007}. Due to the redshift of these clusters and the
1637: sensitivity of the observations, fractions were measured for hard
1638: ($2.0$--$10.0$) band X-ray luminosities, $L_{X,H}$ above $10^{42} {\rm \, and \,
1639: } 10^{43} {\rm \, erg \, s}^{-1}$. They find $f_{\rm A}(M_R<-20;L_{X,H}>10^{42})
1640: = 2.8^{+1.5}_{-1.0}\%$ $f_{\rm A}(M_R<-20;L_{X,H}>10^{43}) =
1641: 2.0^{+1.0}_{-0.7}\%$, and that these fractions were $\sim20$ times that of
1642: $z\sim0.2$ clusters, which is much larger than the expected increases, factors of
1643: 1.5 and 3.3, from the measured evolution of the field AGN space density
1644: \citep{UAO+2003}. The largest statistical uncertainty came from the lower
1645: redshift sample. Although we note that there are issues left to explore
1646: regarding the evolution of the AGN fraction in clusters (e.g., the $z \sim 0.6$
1647: clusters are not necessarily the progenitors of the $z \sim 0.2$ clusters;
1648: $M^*_R$ is $\sim 0.4$ brighter at $z\sim0.6$ than at $z\sim0.2$), we can add the
1649: results of Abell 85, Abell 89B, and Abell 754 to \citet{MMK2007} to refine the
1650: estimate for $z\sim0.2$ clusters. In the hard-band, A754-1 is $\sim 9.9
1651: \times 10^{42} {\rm \, erg \, s}^{-1}$ before pileup corrections. These
1652: corrections are likely to make it more luminous than $10^{43} {\rm \, erg \,
1653: s}^{-1}$. No other AGN in these clusters has $L_{X,H}>10^{42} {\rm \, erg \,
1654: s}^{-1}$. Thus for $z \sim 0.2$ clusters, we find $f_{\rm
1655: A}(M_R<-20;L_{X,H}>10^{42}) = 0.18^{+0.17}_{-0.10}\%$ and $f_{\rm
1656: A}(M_R<-20;L_{X,H}>10^{43}) = 0.12^{+0.16}_{-0.08}\%$. These fractions are
1657: consistent with the fractions reported in \citet{EMS+2007}, but with
1658: smaller confidence intervals.
1659: We note that the increased spatial coverage provided by the clusters in this
1660: paper also provides a better match to the more distant clusters, which are
1661: sampled out to their projected $r_{200}$.
1662:
1663: \subsection{AGN Fraction and Velocity Dispersion}
1664:
1665: The lack of a radial dependence of X-ray AGN fraction in our sample may be
1666: due to the true absence of a trend or the masking of the expected increasing
1667: trend with radius by several other factors, including our increased sensitivity
1668: to AGN in massive galaxies, which tend to lie in cluster cores, and the
1669: significant population of known low-luminosity AGN/LINERs in early-type
1670: galaxies, which are also more numerous in cluster cores. Any trend might also
1671: have been diluted by our averaging over any substructures at a given radius.
1672: With better AGN statistics, it may be possible to consider whether the AGN
1673: fraction increases in group-like substructures in the cluster relative to the
1674: cluster core, a truer test of the hypothesis that mergers drive AGN today. For
1675: now, we employ another test of the effect of environment on AGN fraction and
1676: thus of the merger scenario: is there a change in X-ray AGN fraction as the
1677: velocity dispersions of clusters increase?
1678:
1679: \begin{figure}
1680: \plotone{f10.eps}
1681: \caption{
1682: ({\it Left}) The fraction of $M_R < -20$ galaxies with X-ray AGN, $f_{\rm A}$,
1683: versus cluster velocity dispersion in the cluster sample from
1684: Table~\ref{tab:cluster}. The {\it dotted} line indicates the fraction summing
1685: over all $M_R < -20$ galaxies in the sample.
1686: ({\it Right}) Values of $f_{\rm A}$
1687: summing over galaxies in clusters with velocity dispersions under and over $500
1688: {\rm \, km s}^{-1}$ are indicated with large symbols. The clusters with the
1689: lowest velocity dispersion have the highest fractions, consistent with a
1690: preference for X-ray AGN in the regions with a group-like environments from the
1691: Abell 901/902 supercluster \citep{GGO+2007}.
1692: \label{fig:frac_cl}}
1693: \end{figure}
1694:
1695: We display $f_{\rm A}(M_R<-20;L_{X,B}>10^{41})$ as a function of cluster
1696: velocity-dispersion for our $z \lesssim 0.08$ cluster sample in
1697: Figure~\ref{fig:frac_cl}. In our sample, comparing the AGN fraction of each
1698: cluster to the cluster-averaged AGN fraction does not indicate a strong
1699: variation. However, we find a correlation between AGN fraction and velocity
1700: dispersion. Clusters with lower velocity dispersion have larger $f_{\rm
1701: A}(M_R<-20;L_{X,B}>10^{41})$ in our data. In particular, the two clusters with
1702: the highest AGN fraction, Abell 89B and Abell 3125 have velocity dispersions of
1703: $\sim 500 {\rm \, km s}^{-1}$, more typical of rich groups. In the {\it right}
1704: panel of Figure~\ref{fig:frac_cl}, we compare the combined fractions of the two
1705: low velocity dispersion clusters, $f_{\rm A}(M_R<-20;L_{X,B}>10^{41};\sigma<500)
1706: = 0.100^{+0.062}_{-0.043}$, to the four higher velocity dispersion clusters,
1707: $f_{\rm A}(M_R<-20;L_{X,B}>10^{41};\sigma>500) = 0.026^{+0.010}_{-0.008}$. Using
1708: the binomial theorem to calculate the confidence intervals on the fractions
1709: \citep[e.g.,][]{G1986}, we find that the probability the two above
1710: fractions overlap is very small, $\sim 0.3\%$. However, this could overestimate
1711: the significance of the result as there are fifteen different combinations of
1712: two cluster groups we could make from our cluster sample. Therefore, we
1713: conservatively estimate that the AGN fraction is higher in lower velocity
1714: dispersion clusters at the $\sim95\%$ confidence level. A similar trend appears
1715: in the Abell 901/902 supercluster \citet{GGO+2007}. There, X-ray AGN prefer to
1716: be in regions with group-like environments (mainly based on galaxy density), as
1717: compared to field-like or cluster-like environments. An anticorrelation between
1718: optical AGN fraction and velocity dispersion
1719: \citep{PB2006} and a correlation between radio AGN fraction and larger
1720: environmental densities \citep{BKH+2005} have also been observed.
1721: We do not expect that this result is sensitive to the varying radial coverage
1722: between individual clusters. First, we found no radial dependence in the AGN
1723: fraction at these luminosities. Second, the discrepancy between the fractions is
1724: even more significant if we exclude Abell 644 and Abell 3128, the two clusters
1725: with the least complete radial coverage.
1726:
1727: Smaller X-ray AGN fractions than that found in our low velocity dispersion
1728: clusters are measured in less dense environments. \citet{SMR+2007} only found
1729: one X-ray AGN (out of 50 $M_R < -20$ galaxies) in a sample of eight $z \sim
1730: 0.06$ poor groups ($\sigma < 500 {\rm \, km s}^{-1}$), $f_{\rm
1731: A}(M_R<-20;L_{X,B}>10^{41}) = 0.020^{+0.044}_{-0.017}$, where the majority of
1732: these groups had smaller velocity dispersion than Abell 89B and Abell 3125. The
1733: X-ray AGN fraction of early-type field galaxies in the Extended Chandra Deep
1734: Field-South has also been measured \citep{LBA+2007}. They find $f_{\rm
1735: A}(M_R<-20;L_{X,B}>10^{41}) = 0.066^{+0.034}_{-0.024}$ (B. Lehmer 2006, private
1736: communication). We note that the X-ray AGN fraction for all $M_R < -20$ galaxies
1737: drops by a factor of $\sim 2$ compared to the fraction for just early-type
1738: galaxies in nearby clusters (T. Arnold et~al., in preparation). Since late-type
1739: galaxies are more prevalent in the field than in clusters, one expects the field
1740: X-ray AGN fraction for all galaxies to drop more rapidly compared to the $\sim
1741: 7\%$ measured for early-type galaxies.
1742:
1743: We note that any additional obscuration associated with gas-rich galaxies will
1744: be more prevalent where the fraction of late-type galaxies is higher. The effect
1745: of missing AGN due to obscuration will be strongest in the field and weakest in
1746: the highest velocity dispersion clusters. Thus, obscuration is unlikely to
1747: explain the apparent prevalence of X-ray AGN in rich groups and poor clusters.
1748:
1749: The likelihood of galaxy mergers increases with increasing galaxy density and
1750: decreasing relative velocity. Compared to poor groups and the field, the
1751: galaxy densities of rich groups are higher. Compared to galaxies in clusters,
1752: the relative velocities of galaxies in rich groups are lower.
1753: Thus, it is not surprising that AGN may form preferentially in group-like
1754: environments. A larger sample of groups and clusters, particularly those with
1755: velocity dispersions of poor clusters or rich groups at $\sigma \sim 500 {\rm \,
1756: km/s}$, are needed to determine the preferred environment for AGN and use this
1757: information to determine how they are fueled. Larger datasets of comparably
1758: selected X-ray AGN in the field would also be valuable.
1759:
1760: \section{Conclusions}
1761: \label{sec:end}
1762:
1763: To better understand the factors that may drive the evolution of AGN today, we
1764: measure the AGN fraction in a new sample of nearby rich clusters, compare it to
1765: more distant samples, and examine how it varies with environment. We present new
1766: wide-field {\it Chandra} Observations of AGN in Abell 85 and Abell 754.
1767: Seventeen X-ray sources associated with galaxies in Abell 85, Abell 89B, and
1768: Abell 754 are detected. Using $L_{X}/L_{K_s}$ relations we classify seven of
1769: these galaxies as X-ray AGN with $L_{X,B} > 10^{41} {\rm \, erg \, s}^{-1}$.
1770: Only two of these X-ray AGN are classified as AGN based on their optical
1771: spectra. Two of the X-ray galaxies not classified as X-ray AGN have been
1772: previously spectroscopically identified as AGN. These sources are examples of
1773: the additional AGN we expect are present in these clusters below our luminosity
1774: threshold.
1775:
1776: We add detections of X-ray AGN in three other $z \lesssim 0.08$ clusters, Abell
1777: 644, Abell 3125, and Abell 3128 to create a sample of sixteen X-ray AGN. We
1778: find that $3.4^{+1.1}_{-0.8}\%$ of $M_R < -20$ galaxies host X-ray AGN with $L_{X,B} >
1779: 10^{41} {\rm \, erg \, s}^{-1}$. These results are consistent with the $\sim5\%$
1780: fractions from \citetalias{MKK+2006,MMK2007}.
1781: When compared to other samples \citep[e.g.,
1782: \citetalias{MMK2007},][]{SJF+2007} at the same rest-frame X-ray luminosity and
1783: absolute magnitude limits, there is no evidence for an evolving X-ray
1784: AGN fraction for $z \lesssim 0.3$.
1785:
1786: Our three most important results are as follows:
1787:
1788: \begin{itemize}
1789: \item
1790: {\bf X-ray AGN are detected more often in more luminous host galaxies.} This
1791: observed trend of X-ray AGN fraction highlights the importance of using the same
1792: X-ray luminosity and absolute magnitude cuts when comparing fractions.
1793: This trend is due at least partially to a physical selection effect. Two
1794: galaxies can have the same accretion rate relative to the Eddington limit, but
1795: the galaxy with the more massive black hole will have a higher X-ray luminosity.
1796: More luminous host galaxies tend to have more massive black holes for a
1797: combination of two reasons. First, the mass of a black hole scales with the mass
1798: of a bulge component, and at a given bulge-to-disk ratio, a more luminous galaxy
1799: will have a more massive bulge. Second, more luminous host galaxies are more
1800: likely to be dominated by their spheroid.
1801: Thus, it is not surprising that at a given X-ray luminosity one can detect less
1802: efficient X-ray AGN in more luminous galaxies.
1803: We require an understanding of
1804: the distribution of accretion rates relative to the Eddington limit in X-ray AGN
1805: to determine whether X-ray AGN are more likely to reside in more luminous host
1806: galaxies for reasons beyond this physical selection effect.
1807:
1808: \item
1809: {\bf We do not find an excess fraction of X-ray AGN in the outskirts of
1810: clusters.} The radial distribution of X-ray AGN appears to follow the same
1811: distribution as cluster members without X-ray AGN. \citet{RE2005} also found a
1812: relatively flat distribution of X-ray sources around massive, disturbed
1813: clusters. The expectation from the major-merger or galaxy harassment pictures
1814: for AGN fueling is that more AGN should be found in the outskirts of clusters.
1815: Acting against this expectation is our increased sensitivity to AGN in the most
1816: luminous spheroids, as well as the significant fraction of early type galaxies
1817: known to harbor low-luminosity AGN and LINERs. Thus, the tendency of the most
1818: massive and early-type galaxies to lie in the centers of richest clusters could
1819: dilute or even reverse AGN trends due to galaxy interactions. For instance,
1820: \citet{RE2005} also found that massive, relaxed clusters had an excess
1821: number of X-ray AGN in their central $0.5 {\rm \, Mpc}$ and near their virial
1822: radius. The lack of any trend in our results could arise from the combination of
1823: effects listed above, radial-averaging over the substructure in the cluster, or
1824: that there is actually no preferred radial distribution for X-ray AGN.
1825:
1826: \item
1827: {\bf There is increasing evidence for higher AGN fractions in low velocity
1828: dispersion clusters.} We find that the fraction of X-ray AGN is larger (at the
1829: $\sim95\%$ confidence level) in lower velocity dispersion clusters or large
1830: groups ($10.0^{+6.2}_{-4.3}\%$) than in richer clusters ($2.6^{+1.0}_{-0.8}\%$).
1831: Combined with results for the Abell 901/902 supercluster \citep{GGO+2007}, poor
1832: groups \citep{SMR+2007}, and the field \citep{LBA+2007}, one can form a picture
1833: where X-ray AGN in the local Universe are preferentially found in rich group
1834: environments. If gas-rich mergers between galaxies are the principal driver of
1835: AGN, then there should be more AGN in groups, where the galaxies tend to have
1836: higher gas fractions and smaller relative velocities than in richer clusters,
1837: but galaxy densities are higher than in the field. Because the most massive and
1838: early type galaxies tend to lie in the richest clusters, and these galaxies
1839: often harbor detectable LINERs that may be low-luminosity AGN, any increase in
1840: AGN fraction due to galaxy-galaxy interactions could be even larger than what
1841: we measure.
1842: Finally, we note that obscuration of X-ray AGN in gas-rich galaxies is
1843: not likely to be responsible for this trend, as more gas-rich galaxies are
1844: expected in lower density environments.
1845: \end{itemize}
1846:
1847: These issues can be addressed through larger samples of X-ray AGN for clusters,
1848: groups, and the field. For clusters, there are a couple of key properties that
1849: need to be better sampled: an increased number of lower velocity dispersion
1850: clusters and a larger number of disturbed and relaxed clusters observed out to
1851: their virial radius. Such samples would directly address the radial distribution
1852: of X-ray AGN and whether there is a preferred host environment. Specifically,
1853: such data would be valuable to resolve the potential inconsistency between our
1854: second and third highlighted results, which may be due to small number
1855: statistics in the outskirts of clusters or our averaging over the substructure
1856: in clusters. In addition, larger numbers of X-ray
1857: AGN will constrain the underlying Eddington accretion efficiency distribution
1858: and (host luminosity dependent?) AGN fraction by convolving these properties
1859: with the galaxy luminosity function and comparing to the observed AGN fractions.
1860: These constraints in turn can be tested against AGN fueling mechanisms.
1861:
1862: \acknowledgments
1863:
1864: We thank Francesco Shankar for a useful discussion on accretion efficiency.
1865: %
1866: Support for this work was provided by the National Aeronautics and Space
1867: Administration through {\it Chandra} awards GO4-5122A and GO6-7091X,
1868: issued by the Chandra X-ray Observatory, which is operated by the Smithsonian
1869: Astrophysical Observatory for and on behalf of NASA under contract NAS8-03060.
1870: %
1871: This research has made use of the NASA/IPAC Extragalactic Database (NED) which
1872: is operated by the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of
1873: Technology, under contract with the National Aeronautics and Space
1874: Administration.
1875: %
1876: The Second Palomar Observatory Sky Survey (POSS-II) was made by the California Institute of Technology with funds from the National Science Foundation, the National Geographic Society, the Sloan Foundation, the Samuel Oschin Foundation, and the Eastman Kodak Corporation.
1877:
1878: {\it Facilities:} \facility{CXO (ACIS)}
1879:
1880:
1881: %%% BIBLIOGRAPHY
1882:
1883: \bibliography{ms}
1884:
1885:
1886:
1887: \end{document}
1888:
1889: