1: \documentclass[11pt]{aastex}
2: \usepackage{graphicx,emulateapj5,apjfonts}
3: \usepackage{onecolfloat}
4: \usepackage{epsf}
5: \usepackage[hyperindex,breaklinks]{hyperref}
6:
7: % MS 72829
8: \shortauthors{Bell}
9: \shorttitle{Galaxy bulges and quenching}
10:
11: \slugcomment{{\sc The Astrophysical Journal: } to appear August 1, 2008 }
12:
13: \begin{document}
14:
15: %%%%% Added the \def\head{ lark.
16:
17: \def\head{
18:
19: \title{Galaxy bulges and their black holes: a requirement
20: for the quenching of star formation}
21:
22: \author{Eric F.\ Bell}
23: \affil{Max-Planck-Institut f\"ur Astronomie,
24: K\"onigstuhl 17, D-69117 Heidelberg, Germany; \texttt{bell@mpia.de}}
25:
26: \begin{abstract}
27:
28:
29: One of the central features of the last 8 to 10 billion years of
30: cosmic history has been the emergence of a well-populated
31: red sequence of non-star-forming galaxies. A number of models of galaxy
32: formation and evolution have been devised to attempt to explain
33: this behavior. Most current models require
34: feedback from supermassive black holes (AGN feedback) to
35: quench star formation in galaxies in the centers of their
36: dark matter halos (central galaxies).
37: Such models make
38: the strong prediction that
39: all quenched central galaxies must have
40: a large supermassive black hole (and, by association, a prominent bulge
41: component). I show using data from the
42: Sloan Digital Sky Survey that the observations are consistent
43: with this prediction.
44: Over 99.5\% of red sequence galaxies with
45: stellar masses in excess of $10^{10} M_{\sun}$ have a prominent
46: bulge component (as defined by having a S\'ersic index $n$ above
47: 1.5). Those very rare red sequence central
48: galaxies with little or no bulge ($n<1.5$) usually
49: have detectable star formation or AGN activity; the fraction of
50: truly quenched bulgeless central galaxies is
51: $<0.1\%$ of the total red sequence population.
52: I conclude that a bulge, and by implication a supermassive black
53: hole, is an absolute requirement for full quenching of
54: star formation in central galaxies. This is in agreement with the
55: most basic prediction of the AGN feedback paradigm.
56: \end{abstract}
57:
58: \keywords{galaxies: evolution --- galaxies: bulges ---
59: galaxies: spiral --- galaxies: general ---
60: galaxies: stellar content }
61: }%%%end head
62:
63: \twocolumn[\head]
64:
65:
66: \section{Introduction}
67:
68: A key feature of the last 8--10 billion years of galaxy
69: evolution is the emergence of a well-populated red sequence of
70: non-star forming galaxies \citep[e.g.,][]{bell04c17,faber06,brown07}.
71: The present-day red sequence has little scatter in color at
72: a given magnitude, and appears to be largely composed of bulge-dominated
73: and early-type spiral galaxies \citep{vis,ble2}.
74: Theoretical models of galaxy evolution
75: have had difficulty in reproducing the properties of red sequence
76: galaxies using standard recipes for the cooling of
77: gas, star formation and stellar feedback
78: \citep[see, e.g.,][for discussions of this issue]{bower06,croton06,cattaneo07}.
79: In such `standard' models, star formation is insufficiently quenched, leading
80: to a dramatic overabundance of massive blue star-forming galaxies.
81:
82: Current models have attempted to remedy this shortcoming by quenching
83: star formation in galaxies through
84: two main classes of mechanism. The first mechanism,
85: which affects only satellite
86: galaxies (i.e., the non-central galaxies in groups and clusters), is
87: a shutoff of gas cooling in galaxies once they
88: fall into a larger halo. Such a recipe has been in at least semi-analytic
89: models for some time \citep[see, e.g.,][]{cole00}
90: and produces a population of relatively low-mass highly-clustered
91: red sequence galaxies. These prescriptions are
92: being currently tested using the SDSS and other
93: surveys (e.g., \citealp{baldry06}, \citealp{weinmann06}, \citealp{haines07}),
94: and I will not touch further on this issue in this paper.
95:
96: Another mechanism (or mechanisms) has been required
97: by the models to shut off star formation in central
98: galaxies (i.e., the galaxies lying in the center
99: of their dark matter halos, and presumably at the focus of
100: any inflow of gas).
101: An important candidate (I will touch upon others later)
102: is feedback from accretion of matter
103: onto supermassive black holes, which
104: either disrupts gas cooling in the galaxy
105: halo (e.g., `radio mode AGN feedback', \citealp{croton06}, \citealp{fabian06})
106: or drives gas out of
107: the central galaxy (e.g., `quasar mode AGN feedback'; \citealp{kauf00};
108: \citealp{hopkins06}, \citealp{tremonti07})\footnote{It is expected
109: that such mechanisms act together; e.g., stellar or quasar-powered
110: winds may expel the gas from the galaxy originally, while
111: low-level AGN activity may suppress future gas cooling. Most models
112: include both types of feedback. }.
113: In this picture, given
114: the existence of a tight correlation between black hole mass
115: and bulge mass \citep[e.g.,][]{mag98,haering04}, it is natural to expect
116: that quenching and the existence of a large bulge would be
117: tightly linked.
118:
119: Indeed, such a correlation is well-documented, at least in a broad sense
120: (see, e.g., \citealp{strateva01} or Fig.\ 7 of \citealp{blanton03prop}).
121: Yet, if AGN feedback is the only way for central galaxies
122: to quench their star formation, such a paradigm makes a strong prediction:
123: {\it bulgeless quenched central galaxies cannot exist.} In this sense,
124: the small but non-negligible population of bulgeless (low S\'ersic index)
125: galaxies with red colors in Fig.\ 7 of \citet{blanton03prop} is
126: of key importance. Are these galaxies all satellite galaxies and/or
127: dust-obscured edge-on galaxies? Or, is there indeed a significant
128: population of red, central bulgeless disk galaxies?
129: In the latter case, one would
130: be driven to prefer, at least in certain circumstances,
131: other possible mechanisms for quenching star formation
132: (see, e.g., \citealp{naab07}, \citealp{db07}, \citealp{khochfar07},
133: \citealp{dekel06}, \citealp{birnboim07} or
134: \citealp{guo07} on gravitational heating, the influence of the development
135: of virial shocks, and the
136: heating of large halos with cosmic ray energy).
137:
138:
139: \begin{figure*}[t]
140: \begin{center}
141: \epsfxsize 18.0cm
142: \epsfbox{f1.eps}
143: \end{center}
144: \caption{\label{fig:colmass}
145: The color--mass distribution for {\it central} galaxies with $b/a > 0.5$ and
146: $0.02<z<0.06$. Galaxies are separated into those lacking
147: significant bulges (S\'ersic index $n<1.5$; left), those with
148: intermediate bulge-to-disk ratio ($1.5 < n < 3$), and those
149: with significant bulges ($n > 3$; right). Colors
150: denote the emission-line classification classes
151: from \protect\citet{brinchmann04}. Red denotes galaxies unclassified
152: because of a lack of line emission; the bulk of these galaxies are not
153: forming stars. Hues of blue show galaxies with line emission characteristic
154: of being powered by star formation; green shades show star formation/AGN
155: composites or AGN. There are very few $n<1.5$ central red sequence galaxies,
156: and almost all of these have an AGN. It would appear that in order
157: to quench star formation completely, central galaxies must have
158: a significant bulge and/or supermassive black hole.
159: }
160: \end{figure*}
161:
162:
163: \begin{figure*}[t]
164: \begin{center}
165: \includegraphics[width=3.5cm]{f2a.eps}
166: \includegraphics[width=3.5cm]{f2b.eps}
167: \includegraphics[width=3.5cm]{f2c.eps}
168: \includegraphics[width=3.5cm]{f2d.eps}
169: \includegraphics[width=3.5cm]{f2e.eps}
170: \includegraphics[width=3.5cm]{f2f.eps}
171: \includegraphics[width=3.5cm]{f2g.eps}
172: \includegraphics[width=3.5cm]{f2h.eps}
173: \includegraphics[width=3.5cm]{f2i.eps}
174: \includegraphics[width=3.5cm]{f2j.eps}
175: \includegraphics[width=3.5cm]{f2k.eps}
176: \includegraphics[width=3.5cm]{f2l.eps}
177: \includegraphics[width=3.5cm]{f2m.eps}
178: \includegraphics[width=3.5cm]{f2n.eps}
179: \includegraphics[width=3.5cm]{f2o.eps}
180: \end{center}
181: \caption{\label{fig:pictures}
182: SDSS cutouts of galaxies in the sample with $M_* > 10^{10} M_{\sun}$.
183: {\it Top:} Blue $n<1.5$ central galaxies. {\it Middle:} Red $n<1.5$
184: central galaxies. {\it Bottom:} Red $1.5\le n < 2.5$ central galaxies.
185: The rightmost galaxy in the middle row is the only red $n<1.5$
186: central galaxy lacking line emission. Cutouts are roughly 40$"$ on a side.
187: There is a tendency for the red $n<1.5$ central galaxies to appear rather
188: more concentrated than their blue counterparts, lending weight to the
189: notion that a significant bulge component is a requirement for
190: quenching of star formation in central galaxies.
191: }
192: \end{figure*}
193:
194:
195:
196:
197: The goal of this paper is to attempt to test
198: the key prediction of AGN feedback --- namely, that bulgeless quenched central
199: galaxies do not exist --- using the Sloan Digital Sky Survey's
200: Data Release 2 \citep{dr2}.
201: In \S \ref{sec:data}, I describe
202: the data and derived parameters that I use in this investigation.
203: In \S \ref{sec:res}, I describe the results, showing the
204: properties of the galaxy population as a function of galaxy
205: morphology for central galaxies. In sections \ref{sec:disc} and
206: \ref{sec:conc}, I discuss the results and present my conclusion.
207: I adopt
208: $H_{0}=70$\,km\,s$^{-1}$\,Mpc$^{-1}$,
209: $\Omega_\Lambda=0.7$ and $\Omega_{\rm m}=0.3$ in what follows.
210:
211: \section{The Data} \label{sec:data}
212:
213:
214:
215:
216: I use publicly-available catalogs
217: derived from the Sloan Digital Sky Survey's (SDSS) Data Release
218: Two \citep{dr2}\footnote{DR2 is used in preference to
219: larger, later SDSS data releases because it is the only
220: data release to have publicly-available galaxy density
221: estimates, group catalogs, S\'ersic fits and star formation rate
222: estimates.}. The SDSS is an imaging and spectroscopic survey that has
223: so far mapped $\sim 1/4$ of the sky. Imaging data are produced simultaneously
224: in five photometric bands, namely $u$, $g$, $r$, $i$, and
225: $z$~\citep{fu96,gunn98,hogg01,gunn06}. The data are processed through
226: pipelines to measure photometric and astrometric properties
227: \citep{lupton99,st02,smith02,pier03,iv04,tucker06} and to select targets for
228: spectroscopic follow-up \citep{blanton03tiling,strauss02}.
229: DR2 includes spectroscopy
230: over an area of $\sim 2600$ square degrees, and imaging for a larger
231: area.
232:
233: For this paper, I use the sample of galaxies in
234: the New York University Value Added Galaxy Catalog (NYU VAGC;
235: \citealp{vagc}). For galaxies with spectroscopic
236: redshifts, I use absolute magnitudes
237: $k$-corrected to the rest-frame $g$ and $r$ passbands \citep{kcorrect}
238: and corrected for Galactic foreground extinction following \citet{sfb98}.
239: I adopt the $r$ absolute Petrosian magnitude for the
240: galaxy absolute magnitude (random and systematic
241: uncertainties $\la 0.15$\,mag), and the $(g-r)$ model
242: color for a higher S/N estimate of galaxy color
243: (uncertainties $\la 0.05$\,mag). Stellar
244: masses were estimated under the assumption
245: of a universally-applicable \citet{chabrier} stellar IMF
246: using the following
247: color--stellar M/L relation:
248: \begin{equation}
249: \log_{10} {\rm M/L_r} = -0.406 + 1.097(g-r),
250: \end{equation}
251: where an offset of $-0.1$ dex has been applied to the
252: relation from \citet{bell03mf} to convert from a diet
253: Salpeter IMF to a \citet{chabrier} IMF.
254: These stellar masses have random uncertainties of $\sim 0.1$\,dex;
255: systematic uncertainties from recent bursts of star formation
256: and other sources may exceed this estimate in cases where the
257: bursts contribute a significant fraction of the
258: galaxy's light \citep{bdj}.
259:
260:
261: In order to
262: gain a more complete understanding of star formation and AGN
263: activity in the sample galaxies, star formation and AGN
264: classifications and estimates of total star formation rate
265: were taken from \citet{brinchmann04}, using emission
266: line measurements described in \citet{tremonti04}. Galaxies are classified
267: as star forming, AGN, composites, or are left unclassified (typically
268: because the galaxies lack line emission in their SDSS spectra).
269:
270:
271: Disk galaxies were selected by selecting
272: galaxies with nearly an exponential light profile. \citet{blanton03prop}
273: fit the light profile of galaxies in the SDSS with a seeing-convolved
274: \citet{sersic} profile $\Sigma(r) \propto exp[-\kappa(\frac{r}{r_0}^{1/n}-1)]$.
275: The S\'ersic index $n$ describes the shape of the light
276: profile, where $n=1$ corresponds to an exponential light profile
277: and $n=4$ corresponds to a $r^{1/4}$ law profile characteristic
278: of massive early-type galaxies. In what follows, I apply a cut to
279: the S\'ersic indices in $r$-band
280: $n<1.5$ to select disk galaxies with little or no contribution
281: from a bulge to the light profile of the galaxy; I apply a further
282: cut that the half-light radius should be larger than $0.4"$ to
283: discard all galaxies with little/no structural information in the NYU
284: VAGC\footnote{The S\'ersic fits are used in preference to the more
285: frequently used concentration parameter $c_r$ because the S\'ersic
286: fits are convolved with the point spread function (i.e., the S\'ersic fits
287: should be less dependent on seeing than the seeing-dependent concentrations).}.
288:
289: Finally, in order to test the model predictions for the properties
290: of central and satellite galaxies separately, I use a volume-limited
291: catalog of galaxy groups complete to
292: $\log_{10} M_{\rm group}/M_{\sun} > 11.7$ for group redshifts $z<0.06$
293: from \citet{yang05}.
294: Groups are identified using an iterative method which adopts a trial
295: mass and identifies galaxies within a group mass-dependent transverse
296: radius and velocity difference. Then based on the total $r$-band luminosity
297: of all candidate group members the group mass is adjusted and
298: the process repeated until one converges on a final group mass.
299: The group mass is assigned based on the total $r$-band
300: group luminosity of all members; in a cosmological simulation with the same
301: volume as the observed sample, the most luminous group is assigned
302: the largest halo mass, the second most luminous group the second
303: largest mass, etc.
304: Such groups are $\sim 90\%$ complete and contaminated at the
305: $\sim 20\%$ level. In this group catalog, the majority
306: of galaxies reside in single galaxy `groups'; i.e., they
307: are the central galaxies in their own halos, with no satellites
308: above the luminosity limit of the sample.
309: For the purposes of this paper, I am almost completely
310: unaffected by group mass uncertainties, as the primary purpose in using the
311: catalogs is to separate the galaxy population into central
312: galaxies and satellites; obviously, for single galaxy groups
313: the identification of the central galaxy is trivial.
314: For all multi-galaxy
315: groups, Yang et al.\ identify the brightest galaxy in the group as the central
316: galaxy. Comparison with mock group catalogs derived using this
317: method demonstrates that $>97.5\%$ of central galaxies are indeed
318: the brightest galaxy in their group \citep{weinmann06}.
319: Satellites are defined to be
320: all other galaxies in groups.
321:
322:
323: \section{Results} \label{sec:res}
324:
325:
326:
327:
328:
329: The goal of this paper is to test the generic prediction
330: of AGN feedback that there should be no
331: bulgeless central galaxies with quenched star
332: formation. In order to test this prediction, I select galaxies
333: with $0.02<z<0.06$ from the above sample. I further select
334: galaxies with $\la 60\arcdeg$ inclination ($b/a > 0.5$).
335: This is a selection cut of some importance, as it minimizes
336: the effects of dust extinction on galaxy colors and
337: emission line-derived estimates of star formation rates;
338: low-inclination galaxies
339: with red colors and/or low star formation rates
340: become then a reasonably clean probe of quenching\footnote{A further
341: advantage of the selection of low-inclination systems
342: is that the circular apertures used for the SDSS model and S\'ersic fits
343: are more appropriate for these more
344: circular systems than they are for higher inclination systems.}.
345:
346: The key result of this study
347: is shown in Fig.\ \ref{fig:colmass}.
348: The left-hand panel shows the
349: properties of central galaxies without
350: significant bulges, selected by requiring
351: that the S\'ersic index $n<1.5$\footnote{The referee
352: pointed out that there are a number of examples
353: of low-mass red sequence early-type (E/S0) galaxies with $n<1.5$,
354: e.g., in the Virgo cluster. Indeed, in the current sample,
355: the vast majority of the red, non-star-forming $n<1.5$
356: galaxies are low-mass ($M_* < 10^{10} M_{\sun}$)
357: satellites, primarily of groups with group masses in excess of
358: $10^{13} M_{\sun}$. There are no $n<1.5$ non-star-forming
359: central galaxies with $M_* < 10^{10} M_{\sun}$ (Fig.\
360: \ref{fig:colmass}, left panel), lending weight to the notion that
361: while non-star-forming $n<1.5$ E/S0 galaxies exist, they
362: exist almost exclusively as satellites of reasonably
363: massive groups, and are the product of (primarily
364: hydrodynamical) stripping of late-type disk-dominated galaxies.
365: }.
366: The right-hand panel shows the
367: properties of central galaxies with large bulges, selected using
368: $n>3$. It is to be noted that the $n>3$ bin contains a number of
369: galaxies with prominent (even dominant) disks; the $n>3$ is
370: reflecting primarily the existence of a large
371: bulge. The middle panel shows the intermediate $1.5 < n < 3$ bin.
372: One can see that {\it there are very
373: few bulgeless galaxies on the red sequence}; adopting
374: a definition of red sequence of $(g-r) > 0.57+0.0575\log_{10}(M_*/10^8M_{\sun})$
375: (i.e., a line 0.05\,mag
376: bluewards of the red sequence locus described by the thick
377: line) and restricting our attention only to galaxies with
378: $\log_{10} M_*/M_{\sun} > 10$, only $0.5\%$ (14/2744) of red sequence central
379: galaxies have $n < 1.5$ (14/725, or 1.9\%, of $n<1.5$ galaxies
380: are on the red sequence)\footnote{There are 16 red sequence
381: central galaxies with values of $b/a > 0.5$ and $n<1.5$; two
382: of these (SDSS J142922.73$-$004939.1 and SDSS J084958.78$+$381203.2) are
383: clearly edge-on and should have not been included in the sample (their
384: catalog values of $b/a$ are simply incorrect) and they were excluded
385: from the sample.}.
386:
387: Fig.\ \ref{fig:pictures} shows example $gri$ SDSS cutouts for subsamples
388: of central galaxies with $M_* > 10^{10} M_{\sun}$. The top panels
389: show five of the 711 blue central $n<1.5$ galaxies; one can clearly
390: see that the typical galaxy in this subsample is a late-type disk
391: galaxy with a small or nonexistent bulge. The middle panels
392: show five of the 14 red central $n<1.5$ galaxies. One can see in
393: some cases a prominent bar and possible bulge. The lower panels
394: show five of the 163 red central galaxies with $1.5 \le n < 2.5$.
395: There is a tendency towards better defined bulges than for the
396: $n<1.5$ red central galaxy subsample; however, it is clear that at
397: least some fraction of the low-$n$ red subsample have structures
398: similar to the higher $n$ subsample, lending weight to the notion
399: that some of the 14 $n<1.5$ red central galaxies have
400: incorrect $n$ estimates --- 0.5\% is an {\it upper limit}
401: to the fraction of bulgeless red sequence galaxies. Taking
402: Figs.\ \ref{fig:colmass} and \ref{fig:pictures} together, it
403: is clear that there are very few, if any, bona fide bulgeless
404: red central galaxies --- in agreement with the most basic
405: expectation of the AGN feedback paradigm.
406:
407: One may have the concern that perhaps this result was an artifact
408: of the way in which central and satellite galaxies are chosen by
409: the group finding algorithm. One can repeat the analysis
410: using cylindrical overdensities from the NYU VAGC (i.e., overdensities measured
411: in cylinders of 1.4\,Mpc radius and 1600\,kms$^{-1}$ extent along the line
412: of sight; \citealp{blanton03prop}), which are simpler and
413: more conventional measures of environment.
414: Isolated galaxies (defined
415: as having overdensities $\delta < 0$) are likely to reside as centrals
416: in their own halos. When repeating the analysis using isolated
417: galaxies as a (conceptually less optimal) proxy for central
418: galaxies, one finds that the fraction of $M_* > 10^{10} M_{\sun}$
419: red sequence galaxies in isolated environments with $n<1.5$ is
420: 1.0\% (18/1842). So one finds, using a completely different technique
421: for identifying likely central galaxies, the same result: in central
422: galaxies, quenching is empirically correlated with the existence
423: of a prominent bulge component.
424:
425: \section{Discussion}
426: \label{sec:disc}
427:
428:
429:
430: \begin{figure}[t]
431: \begin{center}
432: \plotone{f3.eps}
433: \end{center}
434: \caption{\label{fig:coldens}
435: The color--surface density distribution for
436: central galaxies with $b/a > 0.5$ and
437: $0.02<z<0.06$. Galaxies with large bulges ($n>3$) are shown in
438: gray, and bulgeless galaxies ($n<1.5$) are shown in black.
439: Quenching is not driven by surface density; at all surface densities, galaxies
440: with prominent bulges $n>3$ have much redder colors than $n<1.5$ systems.
441: }
442: \end{figure}
443:
444:
445: \begin{figure}[t]
446: \begin{center}
447: \plotone{f4.eps}
448: \end{center}
449: \caption{\label{fig:nhist}
450: The upper panel shows the
451: histogram of S\'ersic values for all central galaxies
452: (gray), red central galaxies (dark gray), and
453: galaxies with no detected emission lines (black).
454: In the lower panel, the fraction of central galaxies
455: that is red (dark gray) and that have no emission lines
456: (black) is shown as a function of S\'ersic index.
457: }
458: \end{figure}
459:
460:
461:
462: It is worth asking if this empirical association between having a bulge and
463: the ability to quench is a truly bulge-specific association, or if
464: it reflects a third, unexplored parameter. An obvious candidate
465: parameter is surface density. In \citet{kauf03_dens} and \citet{BelldeJ00}
466: it was found that the stellar surface density of a galaxy was
467: correlated strongly with star formation history, inasmuch as
468: galaxies with high surface densities appeared to form the
469: bulk of their stars at earlier epochs than galaxies with
470: lower surface densities. In Fig.\ \ref{fig:coldens},
471: I plot optical $g-r$ rest-frame color as a function
472: of the stellar surface density $\mu_*$ within the half
473: light radius for bulgeless galaxies ($n<1.5$; black) and
474: galaxies with large bulges ($n>3$; gray). While $g-r$
475: is indeed a function of surface density for the $n<1.5$ galaxies,
476: it is clear that at a given surface density (e.g., in the range around
477: $\sim 10^9 {\rm M_{\sun}kpc^{-2}}$) that galaxies with strong
478: bulges are primarily quenched, whereas bulgeless galaxies
479: at that same density still actively form stars. Such a conclusion
480: was also reached by \citet[see their Fig.\ 14]{kauffmann06}, who explored
481: this star formation rate per unit stellar mass as a function of
482: surface density for a samples of galaxy split by concentration.
483: Thus, one can rule out that the correlation seen in Fig.\
484: \ref{fig:colmass} is driven by underlying correlations with
485: stellar surface density.
486:
487: Fig.\ \ref{fig:nhist} shows the distribution of the S\'ersic indices
488: of the sample of central galaxies. One can see that the fraction
489: of the sample that is red is a strong function of the S\'ersic index,
490: with a small red fraction for $n<2$ smoothly increasing to
491: $n \sim 4$\footnote{The red fraction does not asymptotically approach unity
492: for the high $n$ systems because of
493: the combined influence of our somewhat restrictive red sequence cut
494: and the scatter of a small fraction of high $n$ systems towards the blue,
495: as seen in Fig.\ \ref{fig:colmass}.}. Interestingly,
496: only a small fraction ($\sim 1/4$) of red galaxies
497: have no emission lines at all (the fraction of galaxies which are
498: completely quenched, at least to the detection limits characteristic of
499: the SDSS; see \citealp{haines07rs} for the same result
500: using GALEX data in conjunction with the SDSS).
501: Put differently, complete quenching of gas infall into
502: in central galaxies is a relatively uncommon occurrence; most red sequence
503: centrals have some modest AGN activity or low-level star formation.
504: In particular, only 1 out of the 14 red central $n<1.5$ galaxies
505: with stellar masses above $10^{10} M_{\sun}$ lacks
506: line emission Fig.\ \ref{fig:colmass}; i.e., complete quenching of bulgeless
507: galaxies is a very rare occurrence\footnote{The right-most panel
508: of the middle row of Fig.\ \ref{fig:pictures} shows this galaxy; this
509: galaxy appears to be significantly more compact and concentrated
510: than its $n<1.5$ would imply.}.
511:
512: Finally, it is obvious that while bulges appear to be a {\it necessary}
513: condition for the suppression of star formation, the simple
514: existence of a bulge is not a {\it sufficient}
515: condition to suppress star formation.
516: There are a number of suggestions as to what this
517: `second parameter' could be: pseudobulges vs.\ classical
518: bulges \citep{drory07}, the transition to a hot virialized halo
519: at halo masses $\sim 10^{12} M_{\sun}$ \citep{dekel06,cattaneo06},
520: or the rate at which cosmological infall can deposit energy into
521: the halo \citep{naab07,khochfar07}. In this context,
522: it is noteworthy that for group masses $> 10^{13} M_{\sun}$ 23\% of
523: the $n>3$ central galaxies are blue\footnote{Most of these
524: blue $n>3$ central galaxies are spiral galaxies with large bulges (70\%), 20\%
525: appear to be relatively undisturbed early-type (E/S0) galaxies, and 10\%
526: of them are highly disturbed, with asymmetries or tidal tails indicative
527: of a previous interaction or merger.} (as opposed to 35\% for
528: halos with masses below $10^{13} M_{\sun}$). Thus although
529: models which assume quenching is complete above
530: a given mass cut (e.g., $10^{12} M_{\sun}$ in the work of
531: \citealp{cattaneo06}) offer a qualitatively interesting
532: and computationally convenient approximation for the evolution
533: of the galaxy population, it is clear that such an approximation
534: is not correct in detail --- even at group masses $>10^{13} M_{\sun}$
535: quenching is incomplete.
536:
537: \section{Concluding Remarks} \label{sec:conc}
538:
539: The main message of this paper is simple. Galaxy evolution models
540: with AGN feedback predict that quenching of star formation in central
541: galaxies should occur only in those central galaxies with
542: prominent bulges (therefore, large supermassive black holes).
543: I have shown that this prediction was essentially correct, using
544: data from the SDSS DR2.
545: I choose to analyze only relatively low-inclination galaxies with $b/a>0.5$;
546: while the general conclusions of this paper would hold also
547: if higher inclination galaxies were included, the scattering
548: of $n<1.5$ galaxies onto the red sequence by dust extinction
549: considerably dilutes the significance and impact of the results.
550: I found that at least $99.5\%$ of red sequence
551: galaxies with stellar masses $>10^{10} M_{\sun}$
552: have prominent bulges (S\'ersic indices $n>1.5$).
553: Furthermore, most the 0.5\% of
554: bulgeless red sequence central galaxies had
555: detectable line emission;
556: there is only 1 $n<1.5$ central galaxy without detectable star formation
557: out of the 6036 central galaxies in this mass-limited sample. This almost
558: perfect empirical
559: association between having a prominent bulge and quenching is in
560: excellent agreement with the basic expectation of AGN
561: feedback.
562:
563:
564:
565:
566: \acknowledgements
567: I thank the referee for their constructive comments and questions.
568: I wish to particularly thank Julianne Dalcanton
569: for long and fruitful discussions and comments on early drafts
570: of this paper; I wish to acknowledge also useful discussions with
571: Frank van den Bosch,
572: Eva Schinnerer, Hans-Walter Rix, David Hogg and
573: Darren Croton. I also wish to extend my deep
574: appreciation to
575: Michael Blanton, Jarle Brinchmann, Xiaohu Yang,
576: and the teams which produced and
577: tested the value-added
578: public data products which made this work possible.
579: This work was supported by the Emmy Noether Programme of the Deutsche
580: Forschungsgemeinschaft.
581:
582: Funding for the Sloan Digital Sky Survey (SDSS) has been provided by the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation, the Participating Institutions, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, the National Science Foundation, the U.S. Department of Energy, the Japanese Monbukagakusho, and the Max Planck Society. The SDSS Web site is http://www.sdss.org/.
583:
584: The SDSS is managed by the Astrophysical Research Consortium (ARC) for the Participating Institutions. The Participating Institutions are The University of Chicago, Fermilab, the Institute for Advanced Study, the Japan Participation Group, The Johns Hopkins University, Los Alamos National Laboratory, the Max-Planck-Institute for Astronomy (MPIA), the Max-Planck-Institute for Astrophysics (MPA), New Mexico State University, University of Pittsburgh, Princeton University, the United States Naval Observatory, and the University of Washington.
585:
586: \begin{thebibliography}{54}
587:
588: \bibitem[{{Abazajian} {et~al.}(2004){Abazajian}, {et~al.}}]{dr2}
589: {Abazajian}, K., {et al.} 2004, \aj, 128, 502
590:
591: \bibitem[{{Baldry} {et~al.}(2006){Baldry}, {Balogh}, {Bower}, {Glazebrook},
592: {Nichol}, {Bamford}, \& {Budavari}}]{baldry06}
593: {Baldry}, I.~K., {Balogh}, M.~L., {Bower}, R.~G., {Glazebrook}, K., {Nichol},
594: R.~C., {Bamford}, S.~P., \& {Budavari}, T. 2006, \mnras, 373, 469
595:
596: \bibitem[{{Bell} \& {de Jong}(2000)}]{BelldeJ00}
597: {Bell}, E.~F., \& {de Jong}, R.~S. 2000, \mnras, 312, 497
598:
599: \bibitem[{{Bell} \& {de Jong}(2001)}]{bdj}
600: ---. 2001, \apj, 550, 212
601:
602: \bibitem[{{Bell} {et~al.}(2003){Bell}, {McIntosh}, {Katz}, \&
603: {Weinberg}}]{bell03mf}
604: {Bell}, E.~F., {McIntosh}, D.~H., {Katz}, N., \& {Weinberg}, M.~D. 2003, \apjs,
605: 149, 289
606:
607: \bibitem[{{Bell} {et~al.}(2004){Bell}, {Wolf}, {Meisenheimer}, {Rix}, {Borch},
608: {Dye}, {Kleinheinrich}, {Wisotzki}, \& {McIntosh}}]{bell04c17}
609: {Bell}, E.~F., {Wolf}, C., {Meisenheimer}, K., {Rix}, H.-W., {Borch}, A.,
610: {Dye}, S., {Kleinheinrich}, M., {Wisotzki}, L., \& {McIntosh}, D.~H. 2004,
611: \apj, 608, 752
612:
613: \bibitem[{{Birnboim} {et~al.}(2007){Birnboim}, {Dekel}, \&
614: {Neistein}}]{birnboim07}
615: {Birnboim}, Y., {Dekel}, A., \& {Neistein}, E. 2007, submitted to MNRAS
616: (astro-ph/0703435)
617:
618: \bibitem[{{Blanton} {et~al.}(2005){Blanton}, {et al.}}]{vagc}
619: {Blanton}, M.~R., {et al.} 2005, \aj, 129, 2562
620:
621: \bibitem[{{Blanton} {et~al.}(2003{\natexlab{a}}){Blanton}, {Brinkmann},
622: {Csabai}, {Doi}, {Eisenstein}, {Fukugita}, {Gunn}, {Hogg}, \&
623: {Schlegel}}]{kcorrect}
624: {Blanton}, M.~R., {Brinkmann}, J., {Csabai}, I., {Doi}, M., {Eisenstein}, D.,
625: {Fukugita}, M., {Gunn}, J.~E., {Hogg}, D.~W., \& {Schlegel}, D.~J.
626: 2003{\natexlab{a}}, \aj, 125, 2348
627:
628: \bibitem[{{Blanton} {et~al.}(2003{\natexlab{b}}){Blanton}, {Hogg}, {Bahcall},
629: \& {et al.}}]{blanton03prop}
630: {Blanton}, M.~R., {et al.}
631: 2003{\natexlab{b}}, \apj, 594, 186
632:
633: \bibitem[{{Blanton} {et~al.}(2003{\natexlab{c}}){Blanton}, {Lin}, {Lupton},
634: {Maley}, {Young}, {Zehavi}, \& {Loveday}}]{blanton03tiling}
635: {Blanton}, M.~R., {Lin}, H., {Lupton}, R.~H., {Maley}, F.~M., {Young}, N.,
636: {Zehavi}, I., \& {Loveday}, J. 2003{\natexlab{c}}, \aj, 125, 2276
637:
638: \bibitem[{{Bower} {et~al.}(2006){Bower}, {Benson}, {Malbon}, {Helly}, {Frenk},
639: {Baugh}, {Cole}, \& {Lacey}}]{bower06}
640: {Bower}, R.~G., {Benson}, A.~J., {Malbon}, R., {Helly}, J.~C., {Frenk}, C.~S.,
641: {Baugh}, C.~M., {Cole}, S., \& {Lacey}, C.~G. 2006, \mnras, 370, 645
642:
643: \bibitem[{{Bower} {et~al.}(1992){Bower}, {Lucey}, \& {Ellis}}]{ble2}
644: {Bower}, R.~G., {Lucey}, J.~R., \& {Ellis}, R.~S. 1992, \mnras, 254, 601
645:
646: \bibitem[{{Brinchmann} {et~al.}(2004){Brinchmann}, {Charlot}, {White},
647: {Tremonti}, {Kauffmann}, {Heckman}, \& {Brinkmann}}]{brinchmann04}
648: {Brinchmann}, J., {Charlot}, S., {White}, S.~D.~M., {Tremonti}, C.,
649: {Kauffmann}, G., {Heckman}, T., \& {Brinkmann}, J. 2004, \mnras, 351, 1151
650:
651: \bibitem[{{Brown} {et~al.}(2007){Brown}, {Dey}, {Jannuzi}, {Brand}, {Benson},
652: {Brodwin}, {Croton}, \& {Eisenhardt}}]{brown07}
653: {Brown}, M.~J.~I., {Dey}, A., {Jannuzi}, B.~T., {Brand}, K., {Benson}, A.~J.,
654: {Brodwin}, M., {Croton}, D.~J., \& {Eisenhardt}, P.~R. 2007, \apj, 654, 858
655:
656: \bibitem[{{Cattaneo} {et~al.}(2007){Cattaneo}, {Blaizot}, {Weinberg}, {Kere{\v
657: s}}, {Colombi}, {Dav{\'e}}, {Devriendt}, {Guiderdoni}, \&
658: {Katz}}]{cattaneo07}
659: {Cattaneo}, A., {Blaizot}, J., {Weinberg}, D.~H., {Kere{\v s}}, D., {Colombi},
660: S., {Dav{\'e}}, R., {Devriendt}, J., {Guiderdoni}, B., \& {Katz}, N. 2007,
661: \mnras, 377, 63
662:
663: \bibitem[{{Cattaneo} {et~al.}(2006){Cattaneo}, {Dekel}, {Devriendt},
664: {Guiderdoni}, \& {Blaizot}}]{cattaneo06}
665: {Cattaneo}, A., {Dekel}, A., {Devriendt}, J., {Guiderdoni}, B., \& {Blaizot},
666: J. 2006, \mnras, 370, 1651
667:
668: \bibitem[{{Chabrier}(2003)}]{chabrier}
669: {Chabrier}, G. 2003, \pasp, 115, 763
670:
671: \bibitem[{{Cole} {et~al.}(2000){Cole}, {Lacey}, {Baugh}, \& {Frenk}}]{cole00}
672: {Cole}, S., {Lacey}, C.~G., {Baugh}, C.~M., \& {Frenk}, C.~S. 2000, \mnras,
673: 319, 168
674:
675: \bibitem[{{Croton} {et~al.}(2006){Croton}, {Springel}, {White}, {De Lucia},
676: {Frenk}, {Gao}, {Jenkins}, {Kauffmann}, {Navarro}, \& {Yoshida}}]{croton06}
677: {Croton}, D.~J., {Springel}, V., {White}, S.~D.~M., {De Lucia}, G., {Frenk},
678: C.~S., {Gao}, L., {Jenkins}, A., {Kauffmann}, G., {Navarro}, J.~F., \&
679: {Yoshida}, N. 2006, \mnras, 365, 11
680:
681: \bibitem[{{Dekel} \& {Birnboim}(2006)}]{dekel06}
682: {Dekel}, A., \& {Birnboim}, Y. 2006, \mnras, 368, 2
683:
684: \bibitem[{{Dekel} \& {Birnboim}(2007)}]{db07}
685: ---. 2007, arXiv 0707.1214
686:
687: \bibitem[{{Drory} \& {Fisher}(2007)}]{drory07}
688: {Drory}, N., \& {Fisher}, D.~B. 2007, \apj, 664, 640
689:
690: \bibitem[{{Faber} {et~al.}(2007){Faber}, {et al.}}]{faber06}
691: {Faber}, S.~M., {et al.} 2007, \apj, 665, 265
692:
693: \bibitem[{{Fabian} {et~al.}(2006){Fabian}, {Sanders}, {Taylor}, {Allen},
694: {Crawford}, {Johnstone}, \& {Iwasawa}}]{fabian06}
695: {Fabian}, A.~C., {Sanders}, J.~S., {Taylor}, G.~B., {Allen}, S.~W., {Crawford},
696: C.~S., {Johnstone}, R.~M., \& {Iwasawa}, K. 2006, \mnras, 366, 417
697:
698: \bibitem[{{Fukugita} {et~al.}(1996){Fukugita}, {Ichikawa}, {Gunn}, {Doi},
699: {Shimasaku}, \& {Schneider}}]{fu96}
700: {Fukugita}, M., {Ichikawa}, T., {Gunn}, J.~E., {Doi}, M., {Shimasaku}, K., \&
701: {Schneider}, D.~P. 1996, \aj, 111, 1748
702:
703: \bibitem[{{Gunn} {et~al.}(1998){Gunn}, {et al.}}]{gunn98}
704: {Gunn}, J.~E., {et al.} 1998, \aj, 116, 3040
705:
706: \bibitem[{{Gunn} {et~al.}(2006){Gunn}, { }, { }, \& {et al.}}]{gunn06}
707: ---. 2006, \aj, 131, 2332
708:
709: \bibitem[{{Guo} \& {Oh}(2007)}]{guo07}
710: {Guo}, F., \& {Oh}, S.~P. 2007, ArXiv e-prints, 706
711:
712: \bibitem[{{Haines} {et~al.}(2007a){Haines}, {Gargiulo}, {La Barbera},
713: {Mercurio}, {Merluzzi}, \& {Busarello}}]{haines07}
714: {Haines}, C.~P., {Gargiulo}, A., {La Barbera}, F., {Mercurio}, A., {Merluzzi},
715: P., \& {Busarello}, G. 2007a, \mnras, in press (arXiv 0707.1262)
716:
717: \bibitem[Haines et al.(2007b)]{haines07rs}
718: Haines, C.\ P., Gargiulo, A., \& Merluzzi, P., 2007b, submitted to MNRAS
719: (arXiv 0707.2361)
720:
721: \bibitem[{{H{\"a}ring} \& {Rix}(2004)}]{haering04}
722: {H{\"a}ring}, N., \& {Rix}, H.-W. 2004, \apjl, 604, L89
723:
724: \bibitem[{{Hogg} {et~al.}(2001){Hogg}, {Finkbeiner}, {Schlegel}, \&
725: {Gunn}}]{hogg01}
726: {Hogg}, D.~W., {Finkbeiner}, D.~P., {Schlegel}, D.~J., \& {Gunn}, J.~E. 2001,
727: \aj, 122, 2129
728:
729: \bibitem[{{Hopkins} {et~al.}(2006){Hopkins}, {Hernquist}, {Cox}, {Di Matteo},
730: {Robertson}, \& {Springel}}]{hopkins06}
731: {Hopkins}, P.~F., {Hernquist}, L., {Cox}, T.~J., {Di Matteo}, T., {Robertson},
732: B., \& {Springel}, V. 2006, \apjs, 163, 1
733:
734: \bibitem[{{Ivezi{\'c}} {et~al.}(2004){Ivezi{\'c}}, {et
735: al.}}]{iv04}
736: {Ivezi{\'c}}, {\v Z}., {et al.} 2004, Astronomische Nachrichten,
737: 325, 583
738:
739: \bibitem[{{Kauffmann} \& {Haehnelt}(2000)}]{kauf00}
740: {Kauffmann}, G., \& {Haehnelt}, M. 2000, \mnras, 311, 576
741:
742: \bibitem[{{Kauffmann} {et~al.}(2006){Kauffmann}, {Heckman}, {De Lucia},
743: {Brinchmann}, {Charlot}, {Tremonti}, {White}, \& {Brinkmann}}]{kauffmann06}
744: {Kauffmann}, G., {Heckman}, T.~M., {De Lucia}, G., {Brinchmann}, J., {Charlot},
745: S., {Tremonti}, C., {White}, S.~D.~M., \& {Brinkmann}, J. 2006, \mnras, 367,
746: 1394
747:
748: \bibitem[{{Kauffmann} {et~al.}(2003){Kauffmann}, {Heckman}, {White}, {Charlot},
749: {Tremonti}, {Peng}, {Seibert}, {Brinkmann}, {Nichol}, {SubbaRao}, \&
750: {York}}]{kauf03_dens}
751: {Kauffmann}, G., {Heckman}, T.~M., {White}, S.~D.~M., {Charlot}, S.,
752: {Tremonti}, C., {Peng}, E.~W., {Seibert}, M., {Brinkmann}, J., {Nichol},
753: R.~C., {SubbaRao}, M., \& {York}, D. 2003, \mnras, 341, 54
754:
755: \bibitem[{{Khochfar} \& {Ostriker}(2007)}]{khochfar07}
756: {Khochfar}, S., \& {Ostriker}, J.~P. 2007, submitted to ApJ (arXiv 0704.2418)
757:
758: \bibitem[{{Lupton} {et~al.}(1999){Lupton}, {Gunn}, \& {Szalay}}]{lupton99}
759: {Lupton}, R.~H., {Gunn}, J.~E., \& {Szalay}, A.~S. 1999, \aj, 118, 1406
760:
761: \bibitem[Magorrian et al.(1998)]{mag98}
762: Magorrian, J., et al. 1998, \aj, 115, 2285
763:
764: \bibitem[{{Naab} {et~al.}(2007){Naab}, {Johansson}, {Ostriker}, \&
765: {Efstathiou}}]{naab07}
766: {Naab}, T., {Johansson}, P.~H., {Ostriker}, J.~P., \& {Efstathiou}, G. 2007,
767: \apj, 658, 710
768:
769: \bibitem[{{Pier} {et~al.}(2003){Pier}, {Munn}, {Hindsley}, {Hennessy}, {Kent},
770: {Lupton}, \& {Ivezi{\'c}}}]{pier03}
771: {Pier}, J.~R., {Munn}, J.~A., {Hindsley}, R.~B., {Hennessy}, G.~S., {Kent},
772: S.~M., {Lupton}, R.~H., \& {Ivezi{\'c}}, {\v Z}. 2003, \aj, 125, 1559
773:
774: \bibitem[{{Schlegel} {et~al.}(1998){Schlegel}, {Finkbeiner}, \&
775: {Davis}}]{sfb98}
776: {Schlegel}, D.~J., {Finkbeiner}, D.~P., \& {Davis}, M. 1998, \apj, 500, 525
777:
778: \bibitem[{{S\'ersic}(1968)}]{sersic}
779: {S\'ersic}, J.~L. 1968, {Atlas de galaxias australes} (Cordoba, Argentina:
780: Observatorio Astronomico, 1968)
781:
782: \bibitem[{{Smith} {et~al.}(2002){Smith}, {et al.}}]{smith02}
783: {Smith}, J.~A., {et al.} 2002, \aj, 123, 2121
784:
785: \bibitem[{{Stoughton} {et~al.}(2002){Stoughton}, {et al.}}]{st02}
786: {Stoughton}, C., {et al.} 2002, \aj, 123, 485
787:
788: \bibitem[{{Strateva} {et~al.}(2001){Strateva}, {Ivezi{\'c}}, {Knapp}, \& {et
789: al.}}]{strateva01}
790: {Strateva}, I., {et al.} 2001, \aj,
791: 122, 1861
792:
793: \bibitem[{{Strauss} {et~al.}(2002){Strauss}, {et al.}}]{strauss02}
794: {Strauss}, M.~A., {et al.} 2002, \aj, 124, 1810
795:
796: \bibitem[{{Tremonti} {et~al.}(2004){Tremonti}, {et
797: al.}}]{tremonti04}
798: {Tremonti}, C.~A., {et al.} 2004, \apj, 613, 898
799:
800: \bibitem[{{Tremonti} {et~al.}(2007){Tremonti}, {Moustakas}, \&
801: {Diamond-Stanic}}]{tremonti07}
802: {Tremonti}, C.~A., {Moustakas}, J., \& {Diamond-Stanic}, A.~M. 2007, \apjl,
803: 663, L77
804:
805: \bibitem[{{Tucker} {et~al.}(2006){Tucker}, {et al.}}]{tucker06}
806: {Tucker}, D.~L., {et al.} 2006, Astronomische Nachrichten, 327,
807: 821
808:
809: \bibitem[{{Visvanathan} \& {Sandage}(1977)}]{vis}
810: {Visvanathan}, N., \& {Sandage}, A. 1977, \apj, 216, 214
811:
812: \bibitem[{{Weinmann} {et~al.}(2006){Weinmann}, {van den Bosch}, {Yang}, {Mo},
813: {Croton}, \& {Moore}}]{weinmann06}
814: {Weinmann}, S.~M., {van den Bosch}, F.~C., {Yang}, X., {Mo}, H.~J., {Croton},
815: D.~J., \& {Moore}, B. 2006, \mnras, 372, 1161
816:
817: \bibitem[{{Yang} {et~al.}(2005){Yang}, {Mo}, {van den Bosch}, \&
818: {Jing}}]{yang05}
819: {Yang}, X., {Mo}, H.~J., {van den Bosch}, F.~C., \& {Jing}, Y.~P. 2005, \mnras,
820: 356, 1293
821:
822:
823: \end{thebibliography}
824: \end{document}
825: