1: %\documentclass[12pt,preprint]{aastex}
2: \documentclass[letterpaper]{emulateapj}
3: \usepackage{apjfonts}
4: %\usepackage{draftcopy}
5:
6: %%% Custom Definitions %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
7: \newcommand{\hl}{} %\bf}
8: \newcommand{\fig}[1]{\mbox{Fig.~\ref{#1}}}
9: \newcommand{\sect}[1]{\mbox{\S~\ref{#1}}}
10: \newcommand{\tab}[1]{\mbox{Table~\ref{#1}}}
11:
12: \newcommand{\ang}{\mbox{\AA}}
13: \newcommand{\km}{\mbox{km}}
14:
15: \newcommand{\s}{\mbox{s}}
16: \newcommand{\yr}{\mbox{yr}}
17: \newcommand{\Myr}{\mbox{Myr}}
18: \newcommand{\Gyr}{\mbox{Gyr}}
19:
20: \newcommand{\kpc}{\mbox{kpc}}
21: \newcommand{\Mpc}{\mbox{Mpc}}
22:
23: \newcommand{\Jy}{\mbox{Jy}}
24:
25: \newcommand{\Ha}{\mbox{H$\alpha$}}
26: \newcommand{\Hb}{\mbox{H$\beta$}}
27: \newcommand{\Hc}{\mbox{H$\gamma$}}
28: \newcommand{\Hd}{\mbox{H$\delta$}}
29:
30: \newcommand{\HI}{\mbox{H\,{\sc i}}}
31: \newcommand{\HII}{\mbox{H\,{\sc ii}}}
32: \newcommand{\HeI}{\mbox{He\,{\sc i}}}
33: \newcommand{\Mg}{\mbox{Mg}}
34: \newcommand{\MgIb}{\mbox{Mg\,{\sc i}~b}}
35: \newcommand{\MgII}{\mbox{Mg\,{\sc ii}}}
36: \newcommand{\NII}{\mbox{N\,{\sc ii}}}
37: \newcommand{\fNII}{\mbox{[N\,{\sc ii}]}}
38: \newcommand{\fOIII}{\mbox{[O\,{\sc iii}]}}
39: \newcommand{\Na}{\mbox{Na}}
40: \newcommand{\NaI}{\mbox{Na\,{\sc i}}}
41: \newcommand{\NaD}{\mbox{Na~D}}
42: \newcommand{\NaID}{\mbox{Na\,{\sc i}~D}}
43:
44: \newcommand{\eV}{\mbox{eV}}
45: \newcommand{\lam}{\mbox{$\lambda$}}
46:
47: \newcommand{\chisq}{\mbox{$\chi^2$}}
48: \newcommand{\snr}{\mbox{S/N}}
49: \newcommand{\snrpp}{\mbox{$(\snr)_{\rm pix}$}}
50:
51: \newcommand{\LCDM}{\mbox{$\Lambda$CDM}}
52:
53: \newcommand{\Cf}{\mbox{$C_f$}}
54:
55: \newcommand{\NUV}{\mbox{NUV}}
56:
57: \newcommand{\Lir}{\mbox{$L_{\rm IR}$}}
58: \newcommand{\Msun}{\mbox{$M_\odot$}}
59:
60: \newcommand{\pblue}{\mbox{$p_{\rm blue}$}}
61:
62: \newcommand{\scalefigure}{} %\epsscale{1.15}}
63:
64: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
65:
66: \shorttitle{LOW-IONIZATION OUTFLOWS IN AEGIS}
67: \shortauthors{SATO ET AL.}
68:
69:
70: \begin{document}
71:
72: \title{AEGIS: The Nature of the Host Galaxies of Low-ionization
73: Outflows at $z < 0.6$}
74:
75: \author{Taro Sato\altaffilmark{1,2},
76: Crystal L. Martin\altaffilmark{2,3},
77: Kai G. Noeske\altaffilmark{4},
78: David C. Koo\altaffilmark{5},
79: Jennifer M. Lotz\altaffilmark{6}
80: }
81:
82: \altaffiltext{1}{nomo17k@gmail.com}
83:
84: \altaffiltext{2}{Department of Physics, University of California,
85: Santa Barbara, CA 93106-9530, U.S.A.}
86:
87: \altaffiltext{3}{Packard Fellow}
88:
89: \altaffiltext{4}{Keck Foundation Fellow; Harvard-Smithsonian Center
90: for Astrophysics, Cambridge, MA, U.S.A.}
91:
92: \altaffiltext{5}{UCO/Lick Observatory, Department of Astronomy \&
93: Astrophysics, University of California, Santa Cruz, U.S.A.}
94:
95: \altaffiltext{6}{Leo Goldberg Fellow; National Optical Astronomical
96: Observatories, Tucson, AZ, U.S.A}
97:
98:
99: \begin{abstract}
100: We report on a signal-to-noise (\snr) limited search for
101: low-ionization gas outflows in the spectra of the $0.11 < z < 0.54$
102: objects in the Extended Groth Strip (EGS) portion of the Deep
103: Extragalactic Evolutionary Probe 2 (DEEP2) survey. Doppler shifts
104: from the host galaxy redshifts are systematically searched for in the
105: $\NaI~\lam~5890,96$ doublet (\NaID). Although the spectral resolution
106: and \snr\ limit us to study the interstellar gas kinematics from
107: fitting a single doublet component to each observed \NaID\ profile,
108: the typical outflow often seen in local luminous-infrared galaxies
109: (LIRGs) should be detected at $\ga 6\sigma$ in absorption equivalent
110: width down to the survey limiting \snr\ ($\sim 5$ pixel$^{-1}$) in the
111: continuum around \NaID. The detection rate of LIRG-like outflow
112: clearly shows an increasing trend with star-forming activity and
113: infrared luminosity. However, by virtue of not selecting our sample
114: on star formation, we also find a majority of outflows in galaxies on
115: the red sequence in the rest-frame ($U-B$, $M_B$) color-magnitude
116: diagram. Most of these red-sequence galaxies hosting outflows are of
117: early-type morphology and show the sign of recent star formation in
118: their UV-optical colors; some show enhanced Balmer \Hb\ absorption
119: lines indicative of poststarburst as well as high dust extinction.
120: These findings demonstrate that outflows outlive starbursts and
121: suggest that galactic-scale outflows play a role in quenching star
122: formation in the host galaxies on their way to the red sequence. The
123: fate of relic winds, as well as the observational constraints on
124: gaseous feedback models, may be studied in galaxies during their
125: poststarburst phase. We also note the presence of inflow candidates
126: in red, early-type galaxies, some with signs of active galactic
127: nuclei/LINERs but little evidence for star formation.
128: \end{abstract}
129:
130: \keywords{galaxies: active --- galaxies: evolution --- galaxies:
131: formation --- galaxies: stellar content --- ISM: jets and outflows}
132:
133: \journalinfo{To appear in Astrophysical Journal}
134: %\submitted{DJ}
135: %\slugcomment{D}
136: \received{April 27, 2008}
137: \accepted{February 9, 2009}
138:
139:
140: \section{Introduction}
141:
142: A number of large-scale galaxy surveys of unprecedented volume and
143: depth are steadily mapping out the luminous constituents of the
144: universe out to higher redshifts. The lambda cold dark matter (\LCDM)
145: cosmological paradigm describes the gravity-driven assembly history of
146: the universe quite successfully on the largest physical scales. Yet
147: our understanding of the universe remains largely incomplete on the
148: galaxy scales where the astrophysical processes involving stellar
149: evolution and feedback of interstellar and intergalactic matter are
150: essential --- baryons can cycle through these in an intricate,
151: multiphase manner. Gaseous feedback processes have been gaining
152: serious attention, since theoretical predictions of the growth of
153: luminous structure are highly sensitive to the ``prescriptions'' for
154: these small-scale, subgrid physics \citep[e.g.,][]{crot06, bowe06,
155: hopk06}, yet the observational constraints are still relatively
156: scarce.
157:
158: Absorption-line probes of the gas entrained in galactic ``superwinds''
159: \citep[e.g.,][]{chev85, heck90} have been effective in constraining
160: how much matter could be carried by outflows through the lines in the
161: rest-frame optical \citep[e.g.,][]{heck00, rupk02, rupk05p2, mart05}
162: and ultraviolet \citep[e.g.,][]{heck01, schw06}, which may pollute
163: intergalactic media and eventually deplete host galaxies of fuel for
164: further star formation. The low-ionization absorption line studies
165: suggest that a considerable amount of neutral gas may be carried away
166: by outflows, $\sim 10^4$--$10^7~\Msun$ in dwarfs \citep{schw04} and
167: $\sim 10^8$--$10^{10}~\Msun$ in ultraluminous infrared galaxies
168: \citep[ULIRGs;][]{mart05, rupk05p2}. The column density of outflowing
169: cool matter, however, can only be estimated after making a series of
170: crude assumptions on its geometry, ionization state, dust-depletion
171: factor, and metallicity. Although the reliability of such mass
172: outflow estimates could therefore be questioned, an unambiguous
173: detection of outflow is relatively straightforward in finding a
174: Doppler-shifted absorption component in a line complex of interest.
175: So far, a vast majority of existing studies of outflows have focused
176: on galaxies selected a priori to have high star formation rates
177: (SFRs), from dwarf starburst galaxies \citep[e.g.,][]{schw04} and
178: luminous infrared galaxies \citep[e.g.,][]{mart05, mart06, rupk05p1,
179: rupk05p2} in the local universe to Lyman-break galaxies at high
180: redshifts \citep[e.g.,][]{shap03}; see \citet{veil05} for a recent
181: review. Although winds have been unambiguously detected in these
182: systems, much work remains to be done in characterizing outflows in
183: terms of their host galaxy properties in a large, relatively unbiased
184: sample.
185:
186: The $\NaI~\lam~5890,96$ doublet (\NaID) absorption can be stellar or
187: interstellar in origin yet is a useful line for a census of cool winds
188: in the interstellar medium (ISM). Since it is an absorption line
189: measured against the background light of host galaxies, its Doppler
190: shift relative to the systemic redshift can be measured reasonably
191: well. The \NaID\ absorption line directly traces cool ($T \sim 100$
192: K) gas which may directly fuel star formation. In (U)LIRGs, $\sim
193: 10\%$ of the dynamical mass can be entrained in cool outflows
194: \citep{rupk05p2, mart06}, suggesting that the bulk of outflowing mass
195: resides at the cool phase. The \NaID\ doublet is a resonance line and
196: forms among the most prominent absorption lines detectable out to $z
197: \sim 0.5$ in optical spectra.
198:
199: There is a pressing need to extend the study of outflows to the
200: systems with lower SFRs as well as at later stages of star formation.
201: For one thing, the observed spatial extent of outflows in local ULIRGs
202: and a simple dynamical argument suggest that outflowing gas clouds may
203: outlive starbursts or active galactic nuclei (AGNs) which may drive
204: outflows \citep{mart06}. Recently, \citet{trem07} found that $z \sim
205: 0.5$ massive poststarburst galaxies, observed at up to $1.5~\Gyr$
206: after intense episodes of star formation, host outflows almost as fast
207: as or even faster than those observed in local ULIRGs. Since outflows
208: may carry away from galaxies a significant fraction of gas mass that
209: would otherwise be available for further star formation, knowing the
210: ``fate'' of outflowing matter is clearly of interest.
211:
212: In this paper, we present the result from a systematic search for
213: \NaID\ outflows in a flux-limited sample of galaxies, drawn from the
214: Extended Groth Strip (EGS) portion of the Deep Extragalactic
215: Evolutionary Probe 2 survey \citep[DEEP2;][]{davi03}. Since the EGS
216: field has been extensively observed by a wide array of
217: multiwavelength missions as part of the All-wavelength Extended Groth
218: Strip Survey \citep[AEGIS;][]{davi07}, we are able to characterize our
219: spectroscopically selected sample in view of various physical
220: quantities. Although \NaID\ is a resonance line and among the most
221: prominent of absorption lines in the visible, rigorous absorption
222: analysis needs high signal-to-noise (\snr) continuum, which is a
223: requirement not quite satisfied by the vast majority of 1 hr
224: integration spectra from the DEEP2 survey. Co-adding a number of
225: low-\snr\ spectra from a set of subsamples to improve the effective
226: \snr\ is a sensible approach. Yet even such stacking analyses are
227: limited a priori by numerous ways in which subsamples can be
228: constructed; some prior knowledge must be gained about the subsampling
229: schemes in which the desired information can best be elucidated. In
230: order to initiate an effort to carry out an unbiased census of
231: outflows in modern spectroscopic galaxy surveys, as well as to
232: motivate ensuing stacking analysis with proper subsampling schemes, it
233: is still beneficial to take an approach to seek evidence of outflows
234: in individual spectra.
235:
236: An ambitious goal would be to estimate the quantities that are useful
237: for improving the prescriptions of cosmological semianalytical
238: simulations, such as outflow detection rate and mass-loading factor in
239: a robust volume-limited sample. In this paper, however, our focus is
240: on simply characterizing the property of galaxies that host LIRG-like
241: outflows, using a rich set of multiwavelength observations from the
242: AEGIS survey. We first describe the data, selection, and analysis
243: method for the \NaID\ sample in \sect{Data and Analysis}. The host
244: galaxies of outflows, as defined from the \NaID\ kinematics, are then
245: studied in view of their UV, optical, and infrared properties in
246: \sect{Host Galaxies of Outflows}. We then note a few caveats, frame
247: our findings in the larger context of galaxy evolution
248: (\sect{Discussion}), and summarize the paper (\sect{Summary}).
249: Throughout this paper, we adopt the standard \LCDM\ cosmology,
250: $(\Omega_m, \Omega_\Lambda) = (0.3, 0.7)$, with $H_0 =
251: 70~\km~\s^{-1}~\Mpc^{-1}$.
252:
253:
254: \section{Data and Analysis}
255: \label{Data and Analysis}
256:
257: \subsection{DEEP2 Spectra}
258:
259: The EGS, covering $\approx 0.5~{\rm deg}^{2}$, is one of the four
260: fields observed in the DEEP2 survey \citep[see][for the descriptions
261: of the survey]{coil04, davi03, davi04}, in which the spectroscopic
262: targets are preselected by the Canada-France-Hawaii Telescope (CFHT)
263: $BRI$ photometry \citep{cuil01}. While the targets in the other three
264: fields are preselected to the apparent magnitude limit of $R_{\rm AB}
265: \le 24.1$ and by color cuts to the galaxies likely to be at $z \ga
266: 0.7$, such a color cut was used in the EGS to slightly down-weight
267: galaxies at $z \la 0.7$, resulting by design in roughly equal numbers
268: of galaxies above and below $z = 0.7$. The spectra for $\simeq
269: 13,570$ EGS objects are obtained with the DEIMOS spectrograph on the
270: Keck II telescope \citep{fabe03}. The $1200$ lines mm$^{-1}$ grating
271: centered at $7800~\ang$ and the OG550 order-blocking filter with $1''$
272: slit widths are used, which leads to the spectral coverage roughly of
273: $6500$--$9100~\ang$. The spectral resolution in FWHM is $\sim
274: 68~\km~\s^{-1}$. The data are processed by an automated pipeline to
275: produce (unfluxed) one-dimensional spectra (Newman et al., in
276: preparation). The DEEP2 DEIMOS
277: pipeline\footnote{http://astro.berkeley.edu/\~{}cooper/deep/spec2d/}
278: produces an inverse-variance vector for each spectrum. In this paper,
279: we use the spectra extracted via a variant of the optimal extraction
280: algorithm presented in \citet{horn86}. Throughout this paper, we only
281: use spectra which are tagged DEEP2 ZQUALITY flag of four.
282:
283:
284: \subsection{Systemic Redshifts}
285: \label{Systemic Redshifts}
286:
287: An outflow velocity is measured relative to a systemic redshift of a
288: host galaxy. A major contribution to the uncertainty of outflow
289: velocity therefore comes from the uncertainty in the systemic redshift
290: measurement. Each DEEP2 spectrum is assigned a spectroscopic redshift
291: from \chisq\ minimization with a few template spectra and has the
292: accuracy well quantified from repeat observations
293: \citep[$30~\km~\s^{-1}$ in RMS;][]{will06}. Each redshift measurement
294: has been visually inspected and assigned a redshift quality
295: flag.\footnote{See http://deep.berkeley.edu/ for the DEEP2 survey
296: detail.} Nevertheless, we carry out independent redshift measurements
297: using IRAF software package XCSAO \citep{kurt98}. The primary
298: motivation for an independent set of redshift measurements is to mask
299: the \NaID\ complex. The \NaID\ absorption line is among the most
300: prominent features in the visible part of the galaxy spectrum. In the
301: case where a systemic redshift should only reflect the centroid of the
302: stellar motions, \NaID\ should be excluded from cross correlation with
303: stellar spectral templates, in order to avoid the interstellar
304: components, which may be redshifted or blueshifted from the systemic
305: redshift of the galaxy, to affect the result.
306:
307: We adapt the cross-correlation templates (ID: 24--30) from the fifth
308: data release of the Sloan Digital Sky Survey \citep[SDSS;][]{adel06}.
309: The template which yields the smallest uncertainty is generally picked
310: and designated as the systemic redshift of the galaxy. An uncertainty
311: in each redshift measurement is derived from the $r$ statistics, which
312: roughly corresponds to the \snr\ of cross-correlation peak from which
313: the best redshift estimate is computed \citep{tonr79}. The agreement
314: between XCSAO and DEEP2 redshifts is generally good; for most
315: purposes, the systematic redshift disparity of $cz({\rm XCSAO}) -
316: cz({\rm DEEP2})\approx 10~\km~\s^{-1}$ is much less than the
317: instrumental resolution and is insignificant. Where precise systemic
318: redshifts are critical, we use XCSAO measurements, since the
319: uncertainty is empirically calibrated and well understood among our
320: sample. The redshift measurement stored in each DEEP2 spectrum almost
321: certainly underestimates the uncertainty in case of gross template
322: mismatch, since only three components are used to generate a template
323: for cross correlation, and $\chi^2$ statistics was computed after
324: continua are removed from them. Each redshift measurement for which
325: $\left| cz({\rm XCSAO}) - cz({\rm DEEP2}) \right| > 2\sigma_v({\rm
326: XCSAO})$ is visually inspected, and the spectrum is either reassigned
327: a redshift from another template or removed from the sample. Only one
328: object dropped out of the sample because of the failure in the
329: cross-correlation redshift measurement.
330:
331:
332: \subsubsection{Spectral Line Indices}
333: \label{Spectral Line Indices}
334:
335: \begin{figure*}
336: \scalefigure
337: \plotone{f1.eps}
338: \caption{ \MgIb-\NaID\ spectral index plane for the objects with
339: the measurements of \NaID\ velocity (\emph{left}) and the infrared
340: luminosity (\emph{right}). See \sect{Spectral Line Indices} for the
341: definition of spectral indices. In the left panel, the points are
342: denoted by \NaID\ kinematics into outflow (\emph{blue filled circle}),
343: systemic (\emph{gray cross}), inflow (\emph{red open circle}), and
344: low \snr\ (\emph{light gray dot}); see \sect{NaID Velocity and
345: Blueshift Probability} for the detail on \NaID\ kinematics.
346: Outflows/inflow data points are color-mapped with the blueshift
347: probability (\sect{NaID Velocity and Blueshift Probability}), where
348: bluer (redder) marks indicate stronger blueshift (redshift) of \NaID\
349: absorption line; see the inset of \fig{fig.dv_nad_vs_csnr_w_inset} for
350: the exact color-mapping scheme with the blueshift probability. The
351: error bars shown for the spectral indices are the medians for high- and
352: low-\snr\ samples. In the right panel, the symbols indicate LIRGs
353: (\emph{red open circle}), non-LIRGs (\emph{blue crosses}), and objects
354: below flux limit of the \emph{Spitzer}/MIPS $24~ \mu m$ survey
355: (\emph{gray dot}). \citet{rupk05p1} found most of their
356: infrared-selected objects lying below the gray dotted line, $W(\NaID)
357: = 3W(\MgIb)$, to host outflows, whereas most objects above did not.
358: The long gray dashed line indicates the fiducial stellar loci,
359: $W(\NaID) = 0.4 W(\MgIb)$, where the slope was chosen to roughly match
360: the evolutionary track of the solar-metallicity, single stellar
361: population model from \citet[][\emph{solid green line}]{delg05}. For
362: each object the differences between the observed and fiducial stellar
363: \NaID\ indices presumably indicate the interstellar contribution (see
364: \fig{fig.v_nad_vs_sfrac_nad_w_outflow_frac}). (\emph{A color version of this figure is available in the online journal.})}
365: \label{fig.index_mgb_vs_index_nad}
366: \end{figure*}
367:
368:
369: Using the rest-frame band definitions in \tab{tab.line_index}, we
370: measure the spectral indices (denoted $W_0$, with the subscript
371: ``$0$'' meaning rest frame) of some lines as estimates of their
372: equivalent widths. Each spectral line index is computed via the
373: ``flux-summing'' method. First, a straight line ``pseudocontinuum''
374: is fitted to the variance-weighted pixel flux values from the blue and
375: red straddling continua as defined in \tab{tab.line_index}, via the
376: standard Levenberg-Marquardt algorithm. The covariance matrix is used
377: to estimate the uncertainty in the pseudocontinuum. Then at each
378: pixel $i$ with a pixel width $\Delta\lambda_i$ in wavelength falling
379: within the spectral bandpass defined as ``line'' in
380: \tab{tab.line_index}, the observed flux $f_o$ and the pseudocontinuum
381: flux $f_c$ is used to compute the flux excess or depletion, such that
382: \[
383: W = -\sum_i \left( \frac{f_o - f_c}{f_c} \right)_i \Delta\lambda_i
384: \]
385: yields the equivalent width index in the observed frame. The
386: rest-frame value is computed simply from $W_0 = W / (1 + z)$ where $z$
387: is the redshift of the galaxy. The uncertainty in the index is
388: estimated by formal propagation of uncertainties in $f_o$ and $f_c$
389: using the above relation. By construction, $W_0 > 0~\ang$ ($<
390: 0~\ang$) corresponds to a line flux seen in absorption (emission),
391: although the physical interpretation is slightly complicated by the
392: fact that both emission and absorption may exist in a line feature,
393: sometimes called emission filling. Although not perfect, a line index
394: gives a good estimate of true equivalent width, when emission filling
395: is not significant.
396:
397: Previous studies have used the equivalent width of the
398: $\MgIb\lam5167,73,85$ triplet to estimate the stellar contribution to
399: the \NaID\ absorption line \citep{heck00, rupk02, schw04, rupk05p1,
400: mart05}. The correlation between \NaID\ and \MgIb\ equivalent widths
401: in stellar spectra is expected based on the similar mechanisms from
402: which \Na\ and \Mg\ are produced in stars and their roughly similar
403: ionization potentials ($5.14~\eV$ and $7.65~\eV$ for \Na\ and \Mg,
404: respectively). \citet{heck00}, \citet{mart05}, and \citet{rupk05p1}
405: all showed high equivalent width ratios of \NaID\ to \MgIb\ to be a
406: good indicator of the presence of winds from their samples of
407: infrared-luminous galaxies. This assumption is reasonable provided
408: that a presence of a large column density from the interstellar \NaI\
409: is required for a secure detection of outflow. In
410: \fig{fig.index_mgb_vs_index_nad}, however, we see evidence that a
411: population of galaxies with outflows would be missed by a high
412: $W_0(\NaID) / W_0(\MgIb)$ selection scheme. The figure is meant to
413: facilitate a comparison to the existing studies, in which the samples
414: are selected by a high level of star formation (i.e., a high infrared
415: luminosity). As will be discussed later, outflows appear to outlive
416: starbursts, and the relic winds may present significant columns to be
417: detected in poststarburst or post--star-forming galaxies.
418:
419:
420: \subsection{Sample Selection}
421: \label{Sample Selection}
422:
423: \begin{deluxetable}{cccc}
424: \tablecaption{Spectral Line Index Definitions}
425: \tablewidth{0pt}
426: \footnotesize
427: \tablehead{
428: \colhead{Line} &
429: \colhead{Blue continuum} &
430: \colhead{Line} &
431: \colhead{Red continuum}\nl
432: \colhead{} &
433: \colhead{(\AA)} &
434: \colhead{(\AA)} &
435: \colhead{(\AA)}
436: }
437: \startdata
438: \Hb & 4836--4846 & 4846--4878 & 4878--4888\\
439: \MgIb & 5112--5142 & 5150--5200 & 5209--5239\\
440: \NaID & 5822--5842 & 5881--5910 & 5910--5930
441: \enddata
442: \label{tab.line_index}
443: \end{deluxetable}
444:
445:
446: We systematically search DEEP2 spectra in the EGS field for the
447: coverage of \NaID\ absorption line and continuum around it
448: (\tab{tab.line_index}). An object is removed from our sample if the
449: redshifted \NaID\ spectral range is at least partially outside the
450: edge or falls on the gap between the blue and red CCD chips. This
451: process reduces the sample to 2248 objects. The spectral baseline of
452: DEEP2 observations restricts our sample to $0.11 < z <
453: 0.54$.\footnote{Over the redshift range, the physical scale
454: corresponding to $1''$ slit varies from $2~\kpc$ to $9.5~\kpc$.} For
455: each DEEP2 spectrum, {\hl the continuum \snr\ per pixel [\snrpp] in
456: the region} around \NaID\ is defined to be the median \snrpp\ computed
457: from the pixel flux values and their inverse variances registered
458: within the blue and red continua (\tab{tab.line_index}). The main
459: selection cut is made at $\snrpp > 5$ around \NaID, reducing the
460: sample to 493 objects. We also remove the objects whose \NaID\
461: feature is severely compromised by sky emission or atmospheric
462: absorption lines after visual inspection, reducing the sample to 431
463: objects. The latter cut tends to remove objects at specific redshifts
464: where the redshifted \NaID\ overlaps with telluric features.
465: %(e.g., the $z \approx 0.32$ gap in \fig{figs.mass_star_vs_z}).
466:
467: The particular choice of continuum \snr\ cut is a compromise between
468: the inclusion of more objects for better statistics and the
469: reliability of \NaID\ velocity measurements. Given the limited
470: spectroscopic \snr, our desire to probe fainter objects is motivated
471: by the well-known, downsizing nature of star formation
472: \citep[e.g.,][]{cowi96} and the apparent correlation between the
473: presence of galactic-scale wind and the strength of star formation
474: \citep[e.g.,][]{mart05, rupk05p2}. At low $z$, star formation is
475: expected in optically fainter, low surface brightness galaxies. At
476: high $z$, increasingly brighter galaxies are host to star formation
477: yet become faint in their apparent brightness in the visible. We also
478: expect that the high-\snr\ spectra are obtained from passive,
479: early-type galaxies, which are generally of high surface brightness.
480: All these effects conspire to make the galaxy population of interest
481: to be somewhat elusive in the optical selection used here.
482: Furthermore, the strength of \NaID\ absorption, both stellar and
483: interstellar, varies widely from galaxy to galaxy, and our ability to
484: detect an outflow depends on the strength of continuum as well as the
485: absorption feature. It is therefore important to get some idea as to
486: what kind of \NaID\ outflow to which our measurements are sensitive in
487: this study.
488:
489: \begin{figure}
490: \scalefigure
491: \plotone{f2.eps}
492: \caption{ \snr\ (\emph{top}) and spectral line index
493: (\emph{bottom}) as a function of continuum \snrpp\ around \NaID. The
494: points are denoted by \NaID\ kinematics: outflow (\emph{blue filled
495: circle}), systemic (\emph{gray cross}), inflow (\emph{red open
496: circle}), and low \snr\ (\emph{light gray dot}); see \sect{NaID
497: Velocity and Blueshift Probability} for the detail on \NaID\
498: kinematics. Outflows/inflow data points are color-mapped with the
499: blueshift probability (\sect{NaID Velocity and Blueshift
500: Probability}), where bluer (redder) marks indicate stronger blueshift
501: (redshift) of \NaID\ absorption line. The green lines are the loci of
502: \NaID\ indices measured in the simulated DEEP2 spectra assuming
503: fiducial \NaID\ absorption profiles expected from the fixed optical
504: depth and covering fraction ($\tau = 1.1$ and $\Cf = 0.4$) at three
505: different Doppler widths [$b_D = 50$ (dotted green line), $150$
506: (dashed green line), and $350~\km~\s^{-1}$ (dash-dotted green line)],
507: which are varied to simulate the effect of broadening in the
508: absorption profile (\emph{not} convolved with the instrumental
509: resolution of $\approx 42~\km~\s^{-1}$ here); see the Appendix for the
510: definitions of the variables. The model with $b_D = 150~\km~\s^{-1}$
511: roughly reflects the mean \NaID\ property of LIRGs reported by
512: \citet{rupk05p2}; i.e., the long dashed line in the upper panel
513: indicates the significance of detection for a typical LIRG wind. For
514: each model, a number of realizations are generated at a given \snr\
515: (i.e., a spectrum is degraded by Gaussian noise assuming that \snr) to
516: obtain the uncertainty in the spectral index. (\emph{A color version of this figure is available in the online journal.})
517: }
518: \label{fig.snr_index_nad_vs_csnr}
519: \end{figure}
520:
521:
522: In \fig{fig.snr_index_nad_vs_csnr}, the distribution of spectral index
523: measurements as a function of continuum \snrpp\ around \NaID\ is shown
524: and demonstrates that we cannot obtain reliable \NaID\ velocity
525: measurements in most spectra (i.e., constitutes the low-\snr\ sample;
526: see \sect{Modeling NaID Absorption Lines} for detail) at $\snrpp \la
527: 6.5$. The detection limit as a function of \snrpp\ for a fiducial
528: LIRG wind indicate that we are reaching the $\sim 6\sigma$ detection
529: limit for a typical LIRG-type wind in our sample at that continuum
530: \snr\ level. The distribution of low-\snr\ measurements suggests that
531: we lose the ability to detect and measure the kinematics of LIRG-like
532: outflows at $\snrpp \approx 5$. Thus the selection cut at $\snrpp =
533: 5$ seems justified, in terms of detecting LIRG-like winds at high
534: ($\ga 5\sigma$) confidence. \fig{fig.snr_index_nad_vs_csnr} shows
535: that the success rate of \NaID\ velocity measurement is a strong
536: function of continuum \snrpp. Overall, there are 205 objects with
537: successful \NaID\ velocity measurements, and 226 objects without. We
538: will describe what constitutes a ``successful'' (i.e., high \snr)
539: velocity measurement in \sect{NaID Velocity and Blueshift
540: Probability}.
541:
542:
543: \subsection{Modeling \NaID\ Absorption Lines}
544: \label{Modeling NaID Absorption Lines}
545:
546: In principle, countless possible configurations of the geometry of
547: individual absorbers along a sightline give rise to an unlimited
548: variety of observed \NaID\ absorption line profiles; from numerical
549: simulations, several absorbers entrained in a starburst wind are
550: expected to lie along a single sight line (A. Fujita et al. 2008, in
551: preparation). In practice, however, the spectral resolution and
552: moderate \snr\ limit our ability to study more than one component of
553: \NaID\ doublet in the DEEP2 spectra; multiple absorption components
554: would be seen blended even at a sufficient \snr. Due to the
555: limitation, the physical quantities derived from a \NaID\ line profile
556: in general may not be uniquely determined. Nonetheless, the modeling
557: of the absorption line should be physically motivated, and in this
558: respect we closely follow the method presented by \citet{rupk02,
559: rupk05p1}; readers are highly encouraged to find the detail of their
560: absorption line analysis method in those papers. An absorption line
561: is modeled with the wavelength ($\lambda_c$) and the optical depth
562: ($\tau_0$) at the line center, Doppler width ($b_D$), and the covering
563: fraction ($\Cf$) in a self-consistent manner. Our confidence
564: intervals on \NaID\ velocity measurements, however, are obtained via
565: directly carrying out the Markov chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) analysis on
566: the observed spectra with the \citeauthor{rupk05p1}-type line-profile
567: modeling, rather than what \citet{rupk05p1} outlines. In the
568: Appendix, we give a summary of the technique, the analysis method, and
569: the pipeline software developed for the task.
570:
571: MCMC sampling generates a probability density for each model parameter
572: which allows us to visually inspect the quality of our measurements.
573: Except for a couple dozen high \snr\ spectra, the optical depths
574: cannot be constrained at all, i.e., the probability density for the
575: central optical depth $\tau_0$ usually ends up being distributed
576: roughly uniformly over the allowed range ($0 < \tau_0 < 999$) with a
577: slight enhancement toward the lowest optical depths. In turn, the
578: highly saturated profile tends to let the covering fraction \Cf\ be
579: distributed near the level of minimum intensity of a \NaID\ profile.
580: This degeneracy between $\tau_0$ and $\Cf$ at a low \snr\ regime is a
581: well-understood property of the model profile employed by
582: \citeauthor{rupk05p1} and in this paper; extracting an optical depth
583: in general requires a line shape to be very well sampled. The
584: distributions of \NaID\ central wavelengths $\lambda_c$ and Doppler
585: widths $b_D$, on the other hand, are relatively well behaving even at
586: lower \snr\s, where their probability densities roughly become
587: Gaussian.
588:
589: One especially important caveat of our \NaID\ velocity measurement is
590: in order. Our interest is in studying the interstellar gas
591: kinematics, so ideally stellar contributions to \NaID\ should be
592: removed via such a method as fitting template spectra generated from
593: population synthesis models \citep[e.g.,][]{trem04}. The DEEP2
594: spectra are not rigorously fluxed, however, and we are unable to carry
595: out a similar procedure. This is a substantial limitation in the
596: analysis of galaxy spectra of intermediate- and old-age stellar
597: populations, since their stellar absorption at \NaID\ becomes strong
598: (\fig{fig.index_mgb_vs_index_nad}; the stellar loci are from
599: \citet{delg05}). The implication on our definition of outflow
600: velocity will be discussed in \sect{Definition of Outflow}.
601:
602: We also do not take any special care of the nebular emission line
603: $\HeI~\lam~5876$, found $\sim 15~\ang$ blueward of \NaID\ in some
604: spectra. The \HeI\ emission line can contaminate the high-velocity
605: tail of strong \NaID\ outflows in (U)LIRGs \citep[e.g.,][]{rupk05p1,
606: mart05}. Upon visual inspection, however, few galaxies in our
607: sample with a good \NaID\ velocity measurement are found to have their
608: \NaID\ contaminated by the presence of the \HeI\ emission line.
609:
610:
611: \subsubsection{\NaID\ Velocity and Blueshift Probability}
612: \label{NaID Velocity and Blueshift Probability}
613:
614: Each \NaID\ central wavelength $\lambda_c$ is converted to the \NaID\
615: velocity offset
616: \begin{equation}
617: v(\NaID) = c\frac{\lambda_c - \lambda_{\rm sys}}{\lambda_{\rm sys}} \ ,
618: \label{eqn.def_v}
619: \end{equation}
620: where $c$ is the speed of light and $\lambda_{\rm sys} = 5895.9243
621: (1+z)~\ang$ is the line center of \NaID\ shifted to the observed frame
622: using the cross-correlation redshift $z$. (The redder line of the
623: doublet, $\NaI~\lam~5896$, is used as the reference line throughout.)
624: Using the above equation, the probability distribution of $v(\NaID)$
625: is directly obtained from the probability distribution of $\lambda_c$
626: from the MCMC sampling for each spectrum. In order to take into
627: account the systemic redshift uncertainty, the probability
628: distribution is further convolved by a Gaussian kernel having a width
629: corresponding to the $1\sigma$ uncertainty in the cross-correlation
630: redshift (in the velocity space) for each object. From each
631: probability distribution, the best estimate for \NaID\ velocity is
632: taken from the median, and the $68\%$ confidence interval is likewise
633: obtained.
634:
635: \begin{figure}
636: \scalefigure
637: \plotone{f3.eps}
638: \caption{ Distribution of \NaID\ velocity confidence intervals as a
639: function of continuum \snrpp\ around \NaID. Here $\Delta v_{68\%}$ is
640: the difference of upper and lower $68\%$ confidence limits in \NaID\
641: velocity. The symbols are as in \fig{fig.snr_index_nad_vs_csnr}.
642: \emph{Inset}: the \NaID\ velocity measurement with the error bar
643: indicating the $68\%$ confidence interval as a function of blueshift
644: probability \pblue. Outflows and inflows from the high-\snr\ sample
645: are color-coded by blue and red, respectively, in gradient according
646: to \pblue\ (sect{NaID Velocity and Blueshift Probability}); those at
647: the systemic velocity are in gray. The low-\snr\ velocity sample
648: (\sect{NaID Velocity and Blueshift Probability}) are in light gray.
649: High- and low-\snr\ velocity measurements are effectively separated in
650: the ways that they are distributed in these plots, indicating the
651: efficacy of the visual inspection scheme; see the text for detail.
652: (\emph{A color version of this figure is available in the online journal.})
653: }
654: \label{fig.dv_nad_vs_csnr_w_inset}
655: \end{figure}
656:
657:
658: For the purpose of measuring the \NaID\ velocity, the absorption
659: feature detected at a sufficient \snr\ for such a measurement
660: generally reveals itself as a normally distributed probability density
661: in $v(\NaID)$ well bounded within the parameter range, $v(\NaID) = \pm
662: 700~\km~\s^{-1}$.\footnote{ While the \NaID\ outflow velocities
663: outside this interval have been reported in literature
664: \citep[e.g.,][]{rupk05p2, mart05}, the visual inspection of the
665: velocity measurements indicates that the range of $\pm
666: 700~\km~\s^{-1}$ is sufficient for our sample, which does not
667: include ULIRGs (with signs of AGN activities) in which the most very
668: high velocity outflows are observed. } At a lower \snr, a
669: probability distribution for $v(\NaID)$ exhibits high- and
670: low-velocity tails reaching the boundary values. Hence, after visual
671: inspection, we divide our $v(\NaID)$ measurements into two classes
672: based on the behavior of $v(\NaID)$ probability distribution:
673: ``high-\snr'' velocity sample ($N=205$) for which the distribution is well
674: within $\pm 700~\km~\s^{-1}$ and ``low-\snr'' velocity sample
675: ($N=226$) for which the distribution either extends to the boundary or
676: is ill-behaving. Visual inspection also guards against the sampling
677: results latching on to unwanted noise features, which usually show up
678: as an abnormal probability distribution function. The MCMC
679: measurement pipeline also allows a fitted absorption-line profile to
680: be inspected for an interactively picked set of model parameters, so
681: the integrity of the fitting result has also been visually checked at
682: various points in the distributions of model parameters; see the
683: Appendix for detail. \fig{fig.dv_nad_vs_csnr_w_inset} shows the
684: velocity width of confidence intervals ($\Delta v_{68\%}$; i.e., the
685: difference between the upper and lower $68\%$ confidence intervals) as
686: a function of \NaID\ continuum \snrpp. Since $\Delta v_{68\%}$ is a
687: measure of the width of the probability distribution for $v(\NaID)$,
688: the figure shows that our strategy effectively distinguishes and
689: separates out high- and low-\snr\ velocity measurements, which tend to
690: appear at low and high $\Delta v_{68\%}$ regions, respectively.
691:
692: \begin{figure}
693: \scalefigure
694: \plotone{f4.eps}
695: \caption{ \emph{Top}: examples of continuum-normalized spectra around
696: \NaID\ (\emph{black line}) and the best-fit models for the blueshift
697: probability $\pblue \simeq 1$ (\emph{blue}), $0.5$ (\emph{gray}), and
698: $0.01$ (\emph{red}). The vertical gray dashed line indicates the
699: systemic velocity. The vertical dotted lines indicate the line center
700: of $\NaI~\lam~5896$ from the best-fit model for each spectrum. The
701: $0~\km~\s^{-1}$ corresponds to the systemic velocity of the red line
702: of a blended doublet, and thus appears shifted toward red with respect
703: to the centroid of a line profile even if the doublet itself is at
704: systemic. \emph{Bottom}: the probability distributions of \NaID\
705: velocity from the MCMC sampling; see \sect{NaID Velocity and Blueshift
706: Probability} for the detail on how the distributions are obtained.
707: For the object showing a very strong outflow (\emph{blue}), the
708: probability distribution is entirely found at $< 0~\km~\s^{-1}$, so
709: the blueshift probability \pblue\ approaches unity. For a majority of
710: galaxies, the distributions are roughly symmetric about
711: $0~\km~\s^{-1}$, for which \pblue\ is about $0.5$ (\emph{black}).
712: (\emph{A color version of this figure is available in the online journal.})
713: }
714: \label{fig.outflow_prob_and_nad_spectra}
715: \end{figure}
716:
717:
718: Since we have robust probability density functions for $v(\NaID)$, it
719: is desirable to incorporate these into our definition of outflow
720: detection, rather than relying heavily on the best estimates for
721: $v(\NaID)$. To do this, we introduce the \emph{blueshift probability}
722: \pblue\ for each velocity measurement, which is simply given by
723: \[
724: \pblue \equiv \int_{-\infty}^{0} dv \rho(v) \ ,
725: \]
726: where $\rho(v)$ is the probability distribution function obtained from
727: the MCMC sampling; recall that a blueshift yields a negative velocity
728: in Eq.~(\ref{eqn.def_v}), so the distribution function needs to be
729: integrated out to negative infinity to obtain the probability that a
730: \NaID\ is seen blueshifted in a given spectrum. A few examples of
731: observed \NaID\ absorption spectra, along with the probability
732: distributions of \NaID\ velocity, are shown in
733: \fig{fig.outflow_prob_and_nad_spectra} for the cases of $\pblue \simeq
734: 1$ (certainly an outflow), $0.5$ (likely at systemic), and $0.01$
735: (almost certainly ``inflow''). The value of \pblue\ is a measure of
736: how likely that a ``real'' \NaID\ velocity is blueshifted from the
737: systemic velocity, given the result of MCMC sampling and the
738: uncertainty in the systemic redshift of a host galaxy.
739:
740:
741: \subsection{Definition of Outflow}
742: \label{Definition of Outflow}
743:
744: To define what constitutes an outflow (``inflow'') detection for the
745: current analysis, we use a \NaID\ velocity cut of $v(\NaID) <
746: -50~\km~\s^{-1}$ ($> +50~\km~\s^{-1}$) and a blueshift probability cut
747: of $\pblue > 0.75$ ($< 0.25$). Readers are cautioned that, based on
748: instrumental effects and data quality, precise definitions of outflows
749: necessarily vary in the literature. The specific choice for the
750: velocity cutoff is primarily motivated by the typical $v(\NaID)$
751: uncertainty of $\sim 50~\km~\s^{-1}$
752: (\fig{fig.dv_nad_vs_csnr_w_inset}) and the visual inspection of
753: fitting results in relation to the values of $v(\NaID)$ and \pblue.
754: Although a blueshift probability, by construction, should be an
755: indicator of the likelihood of detecting an in/outflow at a desired
756: confidence level, the additional velocity cutoff is used to guard
757: against both the random and systematic errors in the redshift and the
758: velocity measurements. For example, when the width of probability
759: distribution function is narrow, i.e., $\Delta v_{68\%}$ is small,
760: \pblue\ becomes more sensitive to the particular value of the systemic
761: velocity. Upon visual inspection, we found that this often happened
762: when a \NaID\ doublet line shape was less blended, and therefore the
763: velocity moment could be determined more precisely. In such a case,
764: an outflow as defined solely by a $v(\NaID)$ distribution function
765: looks dubious, having a tendency to be thrown off by an error in a
766: \emph{single} measurement of systemic redshift. Ideally, our systemic
767: redshifts should also be scrutinized under rigorous MCMC analysis,
768: which we did not carry out. For now, the additional velocity cut
769: adequately achieves the same goal. The similar velocity cutoff was
770: employed by \citet{rupk05p2} to define outflow.
771:
772: While employing a more stringent \pblue\ cut would yield a sample of
773: outflows detected with higher confidence, we then seriously have to
774: compromise our sample size. In order to take advantage of the large
775: amount of data available in the AEGIS survey, our approach is to push
776: the limit of detections down to an acceptably low confidence level.
777: Hence our goal in this study is not to find individual cases of
778: outflows or inflows \emph{securely} but to give ourselves some
779: statistical power to characterize the general properties of host
780: galaxies. This is a compromise that we opt to consciously make.
781:
782: \begin{figure}
783: \scalefigure
784: \plotone{f5.eps}
785: \caption{ \emph{Top}: \NaID\ velocity as a function of stellar
786: fraction in the \NaID\ absorption index. The stellar fraction is
787: given by $W_*(\NaID) / W_0(\NaID)$, where the stellar absorption
788: index is assumed to be $W_*(\NaID) = 0.4 W_*(\MgIb)$, so only the
789: objects with both \NaID\ and \MgIb\ measurements are plotted; see
790: the \MgIb-\NaID\ index plane (\fig{fig.index_mgb_vs_index_nad}).
791: For each object, the $1\sigma$ uncertainty in the stellar absorption
792: fraction is estimated from resampling its locations on the
793: \MgIb-\NaID\ index plane, drawn from a two-dimensional probability
794: distribution to match the known $W_0$ uncertainties in \NaID\ and
795: \MgIb. The objects for which the uncertainty in their stellar
796: fraction is greater than $0.25$ are not plotted. This removes three
797: outflows that appear to the left of stellar loci in
798: \fig{fig.index_mgb_vs_index_nad}; either \NaID\ or \MgIb\ is
799: contaminated by sky residuals in those objects, which cause their
800: stellar fraction uncertainties to be very high (greater than $0.7$). \emph{Bottom}: the fraction of objects hosting outflows as a
801: function of stellar fraction in the \NaID\ absorption index. The
802: outflow fraction is computed at the sliding median of 10 adjacent
803: objects. (\emph{A color version of this figure is available in the
804: online journal.}) }
805: \label{fig.v_nad_vs_sfrac_nad_w_outflow_frac}
806: \end{figure}
807:
808:
809: As emphasized earlier, one caveat of the \NaID\ absorption analysis in
810: this paper is our inability to remove the stellar contribution in the
811: \NaID\ absorption (\sect{Modeling NaID Absorption Lines}); a stellar
812: fraction can only be estimated indirectly from such an index as \MgIb\
813: whose strength is known to correlate well with that of \NaID. Since
814: the presence of interstellar absorber(s) is a necessary condition for
815: outflows seen in absorption, some trend is expected to exist between
816: the outflow detection rate and the interstellar fraction of the total
817: \NaI\ column. \fig{fig.v_nad_vs_sfrac_nad_w_outflow_frac} shows that
818: such a trend does exist, in which the objects with low \NaID\ stellar
819: absorption fractions are more likely to host outflows (that we can
820: detect). Without the explicit removal of stellar absorption
821: components, however, the figure does not necessarily imply the paucity
822: of outflows in galaxies whose \NaID\ is dominated by the stellar
823: contribution. It is important to note again that our census is only
824: sensitive to fairly strong outflows of the kind expected in LIRGs
825: (\fig{fig.snr_index_nad_vs_csnr}). The kind of weak outflows observed
826: by \citet{schw04} in dwarf starbursts is certainly below the detection
827: level of the present survey. Furthermore, since only one \NaID\
828: doublet component is fitted, the measured \NaID\ velocities are likely
829: the lower limits to the kinematic component with the highest outflow
830: velocity; each \NaID\ velocity is sensitive to the ``moment'' of
831: multiple absorption components, at least one of which is stellar in
832: origin and should exist at a systemic redshift. In high-\snr\
833: spectroscopy of (U)LIRGs, \citet{rupk05p1} and \citet{mart05}, for
834: example, could fit more than one component of \NaID\ absorption in
835: some spectra, provided that line profiles are not overly ``smooth''
836: due to blending and instrumental smearing.
837: \fig{fig.v_nad_vs_sfrac_nad_w_outflow_frac} indicates that our
838: velocity measurements appear sensitive to outflows in \NaID\ when $\ga
839: 50\%$ of the absorption equivalent width is interstellar in origin.
840: Given these limitations, attaching a physical meaning to a \NaID\
841: velocity would be misleading, since it is only the \emph{shift in the
842: moment} of the absorption profile, not the isolated absorption from
843: the outflowing/inflowing gas, to which our measurements are really
844: sensitive. We thus avoid emphasis on the exact \NaID\ velocity
845: values.
846:
847:
848: \subsubsection{Reality of ``Inflows''}
849:
850: The sensible cuts in the \NaID\ velocity and blueshift probability
851: \pblue\ give rise to a population of galaxies with ``inflows.'' While
852: it would not be surprising to see an inflow from a sightline through
853: an interacting system, ``inflows'' in our sample are seen mostly in
854: luminous, massive galaxies in the red sequence (\sect{Color Magnitude
855: Diagram}). The presence of inflows in these objects is striking.
856: Given that these ``inflow'' detections are almost exclusively in
857: early-type galaxies presumably with relatively little interstellar
858: gas, we speculate whether factors other than interstellar absorption
859: can cause potential systematics.
860:
861: First, the precision of cross-correlation redshifts is generally worse
862: with templates dominated by absorption lines, from which the redshifts
863: of galaxies with ``inflows'' are obtained. It is also difficult to
864: visually inspect redshift systematics in absorption-dominated spectra
865: due to the lack of narrow, high-\snr\ features. As mentioned in
866: \sect{Systemic Redshifts}, a systematic velocity difference of order
867: $10~\km~\s^{-1}$ also exists between cross-correlation and DEEP2
868: redshifts, although this is small compared to inflow velocities. We
869: do, however, take the redshift uncertainty into account in our
870: definition of inflows (\sect{NaID Velocity and Blueshift
871: Probability}). Second, it might be possible that some unaccounted
872: metal absorption features redward of \NaID\ may be causing
873: systematics, redshifting the single-component \NaID\ profile fit. The
874: experimentation with synthesis spectra from \citet{bruz03} and
875: \citet{delg05} indicates that the degree of systematics would not be
876: as strong as observed, assuming that \NaID\ and nearby metal lines are
877: properly modeled. Third, as a significant fraction of galaxies with
878: inflows appear to have lenticular morphology (Tremonti et al. 2007, private
879: communication), another possibility is that a distinct kinematic
880: component of \emph{stellar} motion might be detected in these systems,
881: perhaps from a faint disk.
882:
883: While some of the above listed concerns are equally valid for
884: outflows, in following sections we show compelling evidence that the
885: detections of outflows are physically associated with star formation (or
886: AGNs/LINERs). Such a clear physical connection cannot be made for
887: inflows at present, and a preliminary investigation to explore the
888: nature of the ``inflow'' population is underway. In radio
889: ellipticals, neutral hydrogen is often seen in inflow, plausibly
890: feeding the nuclear activity \citep[e.g.,][]{vang89}; we do find some
891: consistency with this scenario in our inflows. If these inflows are
892: indeed associated with such feeding of AGNs, our method could provide
893: an effective means of identifying the massive, early-type galaxies
894: going through the ``maintenance-mode'' of AGN feedback. Nonetheless,
895: we mostly defer the discussions of inflows to future papers.
896:
897:
898: \subsection{On Selection Effects}
899:
900: \emph{Dependence on \NaID\ absorption strength}. Our ability to
901: measure a \NaID\ velocity depends primarily on the combination of the
902: absorption and the continuum strengths, which introduces selection
903: biases. Our main selection cut on continuum \snr\ around \NaID\
904: feature favors luminous, high surface brightness objects, which tend
905: to be early-type galaxies on the red sequence (\sect{Color Magnitude
906: Diagram}). Star-forming galaxies in the blue cloud are much fainter
907: at $z \la 0.5$ from which our sample is drawn. In
908: \fig{fig.index_mgb_vs_index_nad}, we see that high $W_0(\NaID)$
909: objects tend to be old galaxies with a high stellar fraction or young
910: galaxies with a high interstellar fraction in their \NaID\ absorption.
911: Our survey lacks sensitivity to absorption lines in less luminous
912: star-forming galaxies, where much of star formation occurs at $z \la
913: 0.5$. Therefore, that a significant fraction of our outflow
914: detections is in red-sequence galaxies (\sect{Color Magnitude
915: Diagram}) is partially a selection effect. Nonetheless, our sample
916: nicely complements the existing studies of \NaID\ outflows which have
917: focused on starburst galaxies.
918:
919: \begin{figure}
920: \scalefigure
921: \plotone{f6.eps}
922: \caption{ Stellar mass of galaxy as a function of redshift for the
923: sample in this study. Each galaxy is coded by the \NaID\ kinematics
924: (\fig{fig.dv_nad_vs_csnr_w_inset}): outflow (\emph{blue filled
925: circle}), systemic (\emph{gray cross}), inflow (\emph{red open
926: circle}), and low \snr\ (\emph{light gray dot}). The horizontal
927: dashed lines roughly indicate the $95\%$ completeness limit in stellar
928: mass computed at the centers of redshift intervals for $0.2 < z <
929: 0.45$ and $0.45 < z < 0.7$ from \citet{noes07a}. The green dotted
930: curve indicates the ``quenching mass limit'' as presented in
931: \citet{bund07}.
932: (\emph{A color version of this figure is available in the online journal.})
933: }
934: \label{figs.mass_star_vs_z}
935: \end{figure}
936:
937:
938: \emph{Redshift dependence}. Our sample consists of objects
939: distributed over a fairly large redshift interval of $0.11 < z <
940: 0.54$, and the analysis suffers from the problem typically encountered
941: by a flux-limited survey. First, the observation becomes increasingly
942: insensitive to fainter populations at higher redshift. Second, given
943: a fixed opening angle, the survey volume tends to be smaller at lower
944: $z$, and the sample variance (i.e., cosmic variance as galaxy
945: enthusiasts like to say) becomes a serious issue; the survey field of
946: view changes by a factor of $\approx 10$ in physical area over the
947: redshift interval. Third, the lookback time difference of several
948: \Gyr\ means that the galaxies experience a significant evolution over
949: that redshift interval, so the lower- and higher-$z$ populations
950: characterized by one ``fixed'' physical property may not be of the
951: same kind when looked at in view of other properties.
952:
953: Some insights into these effects are gained from
954: \fig{figs.mass_star_vs_z}. Apparently, the high-\snr\ sample
955: (\sect{NaID Velocity and Blueshift Probability}) does not come close
956: to the completeness limit in stellar mass of the parent AEGIS survey,
957: except at the lowest redshifts. The lower sampling rate of high-mass
958: galaxies (e.g., $\log{\left(M_*/M_\odot\right)} \ga 11$) at low
959: redshift may be a result of the smaller survey volume; that is,
960: luminous early-type galaxies tend to be highly clustered
961: \citep[e.g.,][]{coil07}, and a smaller number of overdense regions
962: with bright ellipticals fall in the field of view toward lower
963: redshift. The effect of the changing physical aperture size, from
964: $2~\kpc$ to $9.5~\kpc$ corresponding to the $1''$ slit, on the
965: detectability of outflow is difficult to assess. The work by
966: \citet{mart06} on the spatially resolved \NaID\ outflows in local
967: ULIRGs indicates that the extended blueshifted interstellar absorption
968: is found over the scale of $\ga 15~\kpc$, in which case a significant
969: column should remain available within the regions covered by the slit
970: over the redshift range covered in this study.
971:
972:
973: \section{Host Galaxies of Outflows}
974: \label{Host Galaxies of Outflows}
975:
976:
977: \subsection{Trends with Star Formation}
978: \label{Trends with Star Formation}
979:
980: \begin{deluxetable}{lccc}
981: \tablecaption{Detection Rates for \NaID\ Outflows Selected by \Lir}
982: \tablewidth{0pt}
983: \footnotesize
984: \tablehead{
985: \colhead{Criterion} &
986: \colhead{$N_{\rm subsample}$} &
987: \colhead{$N_{\rm outflow}$} &
988: \colhead{Detection Rate}%\nl
989: %\colhead{} &
990: %\colhead{(\AA)} &
991: %\colhead{(\AA)} &
992: %\colhead{(\AA)}
993: }
994: \startdata
995: Within MIPS coverage & 169 & 24 & $0.14 \pm 0.03$ \\
996: $\log{(\Lir/L_\odot)} > 11$ & 21 & 8 & $0.38 \pm 0.11$ \\
997: $\log{(\Lir/L_\odot)} \le 11$ & 64 & 5 & $0.08 \pm 0.03$ \\
998: No $24\mu$ detection & 84 & 11 & $0.13 \pm 0.04$
999: \enddata
1000:
1001: \tablecomments{ The conventional cut for LIRGs is
1002: $\log{(\Lir/L_\odot)} > 11$. Only the objects with high-\snr\ \NaID\
1003: velocities are included for the calculation of detection rates; i.e.,
1004: the objects in the low-\snr\ sample (\sect{NaID Velocity and Blueshift
1005: Probability}) are treated as if they are not detected. The
1006: uncertainties are estimated from binomial statistics. }
1007:
1008: \label{tab.detection_rates}
1009: \end{deluxetable}
1010:
1011:
1012: \begin{figure}
1013: \scalefigure
1014: \plotone{f7.eps}
1015: \caption{ \NaID\ velocity as a function of infrared luminosity for the
1016: objects in the high-\snr\ sample (\sect{NaID Velocity and Blueshift
1017: Probability}). The figure includes only the objects that are
1018: covered by the \emph{Spitzer}/MIPS
1019: observations and are detected above the flux limit ($S_{24} \sim 83
1020: \mu~\Jy$) to yield the measurements of \Lir. The symbols are as in
1021: \fig{fig.snr_index_nad_vs_csnr}.
1022: (\emph{A color version of this figure is available in the online journal.})
1023: }
1024: \label{fig.v_nad_vs_lir}
1025: \end{figure}
1026:
1027:
1028: Since the recent advance in the detailed knowledge of starburst-driven
1029: galactic winds have been gained through the studies of local LIRGs
1030: \citep[e.g.,][]{heck00, rupk02, rupk05p1, rupk05p2, mart05}, the
1031: \NaID\ velocity measurements as a function of infrared luminosities
1032: $\Lir$ naturally provide a starting point for comparison. Since for
1033: star-forming galaxies the infrared is dominated by the thermal dust
1034: emission of reprocessed starlight from hot, young massive stars, a
1035: tight correlation exists between \Lir\ and SFR in dusty star-forming
1036: galaxies \citep{kenn98}. For a subset of our sample, the far-infrared
1037: photometry from \emph{Spitzer}/Multiband Imaging Photometer
1038: \citep[MIPS;][]{riek04} is used to derive the total infrared
1039: luminosity \Lir, following \citet{lefl05} and using the \citet{char01}
1040: spectral energy distribution (SED) templates.
1041:
1042: In \fig{fig.v_nad_vs_lir}, a clear tendency is observed for high
1043: \Lir\ objects to host outflows. Indeed, a majority of outflows are
1044: found in LIRGs ($\Lir > 10^{11}~L_\odot$) in the figure.
1045: \tab{tab.detection_rates} presents the outflow detection rates for the
1046: subsampling based on \Lir. The outflow detection rate of $38 \% \pm
1047: 11 \%$ for LIRGs is similar to those reported by low-$z$ surveys of
1048: infrared-selected galaxies; e.g., $42 \% \pm 8 \%$ in \citet{rupk05p2}
1049: and $32 \% \pm 12 \%$ in \citet{heck00}. Hence we confirm the results
1050: reported by others that the detection rate of outflow in
1051: infrared-selected galaxies correlates well with their infrared
1052: luminosity. We note, however, that the exact values for the detection
1053: rates, especially among the galaxies with lower \Lir, may not be
1054: robust against selection effects and incompleteness, since our primary
1055: selection cut is made by the strength of continuum around
1056: \NaID\ (\sect{Sample Selection}). There are no ULIRGs
1057: [$\log{(\Lir/L_\odot)} > 12$] in our sample, which is
1058: reasonable given the expected number of ULIRGs in the survey
1059: volume is very small ($\la 10$), assuming redshift-dependent
1060: luminosity functions of infrared sources \citep{lefl05} and the
1061: completeness of the DEEP2 survey.
1062:
1063: \begin{figure}
1064: \scalefigure
1065: \plotone{f8.eps}
1066: \caption{ \NaID\ velocity as a function of total SFR, i.e., the sum of
1067: SFRs from the infrared emission and optical emission lines
1068: (\sect{Trends with Star Formation}). The symbols are as in
1069: \fig{fig.snr_index_nad_vs_csnr}. The SFR corresponding to that of
1070: LIRG ($\Lir > 10^{11}~L_\odot$) is $\approx
1071: 17~\dot{M}_\odot~\yr^{-1}$; see \fig{fig.v_nad_vs_lir} for comparison.
1072: (\emph{A color version of this figure is available in the online journal.})
1073: }
1074: \label{fig.v_nad_vs_sfr_tot}
1075: \end{figure}
1076:
1077:
1078: In \fig{fig.v_nad_vs_sfr_tot}, the \NaID\ velocity as a function of
1079: the total SFR (i.e., the sum of SFRs derived from infrared SED and
1080: optical emission lines; see \citet{noes07a} for details) is shown.
1081: The similar dependence of $v(\NaID)$ on \Lir\ and the total SFR is
1082: expected due to the tight correlation between \Lir\ and the total SFR,
1083: which is often dominated by the infrared contribution. Again, a
1084: majority of outflows are seen in galaxies with SFR $\ga
1085: 20~M_\odot~\yr^{-1}$, which correspond to the amount of SFR expected
1086: in LIRGs. As a caveat, it should be mentioned that some of the
1087: infrared luminosity might be from (obscured) infrared-bright AGN, and
1088: not from star formation. We lack the diagnostics to distinguish star
1089: formation from AGN, but the simple relation between \Lir\ and SFR may
1090: not hold for the cases in which AGN contributions to the infrared
1091: luminosities are high. {\hl Local studies of LIRGs suggest that
1092: strong AGN contamination may be small, though low-luminosity AGN
1093: could be common \citep[e.g.,][]{veil95}.}
1094:
1095: \begin{figure}
1096: \scalefigure
1097: \plotone{f9.eps}
1098: \caption{ Specific SFR as a function of stellar mass for blue-cloud
1099: (\emph{top}) and red-sequence (\emph{bottom}) galaxies; see
1100: \sect{Color Magnitude Diagram} for the color cut scheme. The symbols
1101: are as in \fig{fig.snr_index_nad_vs_csnr}. The figure is comparable
1102: to Fig.~1 of \citet{noes07b}, except that red AGN/LINER candidates are
1103: not removed. An SFR estimate from optical line emission suffers
1104: significantly from AGN/LINER contamination \citep{yan06, wein07};
1105: therefore, their specific SFRs are likely overestimates here,
1106: especially for the red-sequence galaxies.
1107: (\emph{A color version of this figure is available in the online journal.})
1108: }
1109: \label{fig.ssfr_vs_mass_star}
1110: \end{figure}
1111:
1112:
1113: Since the SFR scales almost proportionally with galaxy mass
1114: \citep[e.g.,][]{brin04}, its inference with respect to the specific
1115: amount of star-forming activity may be misleading. The birthrate
1116: parameter, $b \equiv {\rm SFR}/\langle{\rm SFR}\rangle$
1117: \citep{kenn98}, is a better indicator which takes into account the
1118: star formation history yet is difficult to estimate due to its
1119: dependence on the timescale over which the galaxy has been forming
1120: stars as well as on the fraction of gas recycled in the past. It is
1121: still desirable to remove the first-order effect of galaxy mass, since
1122: our sample is drawn over the redshift interval where downsizing
1123: affects star formation particularly strongly. Specific SFR, defined
1124: as ${\rm SFR} / M_*$ (i.e., SFR per unit stellar mass) is easier to
1125: compute and a reasonable proxy for birthrate parameter.
1126: \fig{fig.ssfr_vs_mass_star} shows how the specific SFRs are
1127: distributed as a function of galaxy stellar mass $M_*$, obtained from
1128: fitting SEDs to optical and near-infrared photometry \citep{bund06}.
1129: For the red-sequence galaxies (\fig{fig.ub_0_vs_m_b}), the specific
1130: SFRs may be overestimated due to AGN/LINER contamination \citep{yan06,
1131: wein07}. Focusing on the blue-cloud galaxies, an interesting
1132: feature is that, at a fixed mass, a majority of the objects with
1133: outflows are seen at the upper envelope of the distribution of
1134: specific SFRs. The analysis of the parent AEGIS sample by
1135: \citet{noes07a, noes07b} indicates that, in the redshift interval
1136: $0.11 \la z \la 0.55$ from which our sample is drawn, $M_* \sim
1137: 10^{11}~M_\odot$ is roughly where star formation is seen to be
1138: quenched in the most massive galaxies. In the full \citet{noes07b}
1139: sample, the distribution of star-forming galaxies is fairly tight; the
1140: loci in \fig{fig.ssfr_vs_mass_star} suggest that host galaxies of
1141: outflows are undergoing an enhanced episode of star formation,
1142: relative to the star-forming galaxies without outflows at the same
1143: epoch.
1144:
1145: It is emphasized that star formation may not be the only source of
1146: optical/infrared emission in the presence of an AGN. We see that
1147: quite a few red-sequence galaxies with \emph{inflows} show up in the
1148: figures involving SFRs presented in this section. As discussed in the
1149: next section, these objects show little evidence of ongoing star
1150: formation in UV diagnostics, and most are either quiescent or show
1151: Seyfert/LINER-like excitation in their $\fNII/\Ha$ emission line
1152: ratios (\sect{Star Formation versus AGN}). Hence inflows in general
1153: are more likely to be associated with AGN/LINERs than star formation.
1154:
1155:
1156: \subsection{Color Magnitude Diagram}
1157: \label{Color Magnitude Diagram}
1158:
1159: Although optical photometry only tells an incomplete history, dividing
1160: galaxies into blue and red populations by optical colors still is very
1161: useful for capturing the essence of galaxy evolution with a bird's-eye
1162: view, since the bimodality of galaxy color distribution is among the
1163: most prominent features that persist over wide ranges of parameters,
1164: such as galaxy mass, luminosity, environment, and redshift
1165: \citep[e.g.,][]{bald04, balo04, will06, coop07a}. Over the past few
1166: decades, numerous studies of local galaxies have shown that the ``red
1167: sequence'' is generally populated by red, dead, passively evolving
1168: galaxies with old stellar populations, while the ``blue cloud'' is
1169: populated by blue, actively star-forming galaxies. These two densely
1170: populated regions are divided by a sparsely populated area, sometimes
1171: called the ``green valley''; see \citet{fabe07} and references therein
1172: for a comprehensive account.
1173:
1174: \begin{figure}
1175: \scalefigure
1176: \plotone{f10.eps}
1177: \caption{ Rest-frame $(U-B)$-$M_B$ color-magnitude diagram. The
1178: photometry, on the Vega system, is corrected for Galactic extinction
1179: but not for the internal extinction of galaxies; see \citet{will06}
1180: for detail. The symbols are as in \fig{fig.snr_index_nad_vs_csnr}.
1181: The dashed line indicates the $U-B$ color cut used to divide
1182: red-sequence and blue-cloud galaxies; see \citet{fabe07}. [\emph{See
1183: the electronic edition of the paper for a color version of this
1184: figure.}]}
1185: \label{fig.ub_0_vs_m_b}
1186: \end{figure}
1187:
1188:
1189: \fig{fig.ub_0_vs_m_b} presents the rest-frame $(U-B, M_B)$
1190: color-magnitude diagram, in which the host galaxies of outflows are
1191: seen in relation to the red sequence and the blue cloud. The catalog
1192: of rest-frame photometry was constructed as described in
1193: \citet{will06}.\footnote{ The optical photometry are on the Vega
1194: system. See \citet{will06} for the conversion procedure between
1195: Vega and AB magnitudes. } Given that the low-$z$ red sequence
1196: galaxies are characterized as inactive and quiescent, that a majority
1197: of outflows are found in red galaxies comes as a surprise; among 32
1198: outflows, 21 of them are found on the red sequence.
1199: Non--star-forming, quiescent galaxies are red in the rest-frame
1200: optical due to their intrinsic SEDs; the rest-frame $U-B$ in
1201: particular brackets the $4000~\ang$ feature, which is sensitive to the
1202: ``break'' caused by the Balmer limit, as well as the high metal
1203: opacity in the cool stellar atmosphere of old stars. Nonetheless,
1204: high dust reddening can push some star-forming galaxies into the red
1205: sequence, especially at higher redshift \citep[e.g.,][]{wein05,
1206: bell05}. The rest-frame photometry in \fig{fig.ub_0_vs_m_b} are not
1207: corrected for the internal extinction of galaxies, so the
1208: ``contamination'' from dust-reddened star-forming galaxies can happen
1209: though expected to be small at $z < 0.5$. We also reiterate that, due
1210: to the fixed continuum \snr\ cut, our sample is naturally biased for
1211: red-sequence galaxies, which tend to have high surface brightness
1212: (\sect{Sample Selection}). {\hl This selection bias due to the
1213: continuum strength can be inferred from the difference in the
1214: outflow detection rates for red and blue subpopulations. Among the
1215: full sample ($N = 431$), the outflow detection rates are $11/205 =
1216: 0.05 \pm 0.02$ and $21/226 = 0.09 \pm 0.02$ for blue and red
1217: objects, while they are $11/51 = 0.22 \pm 0.06$ and $21/154 = 0.14
1218: \pm 0.03$ among the high-\snr\ sample ($N = 205$). }
1219:
1220: \begin{figure}
1221: \scalefigure
1222: \plotone{f11.eps}
1223: \caption{ Rest-frame $(U-B)$-$M_B$ color-magnitude diagram for objects
1224: at $z \ge 0.35$ (\emph{top}) and $z < 0.35$ (\emph{bottom}). The gray
1225: dashed lines divide red and blue galaxies (\fig{fig.ub_0_vs_m_b}).
1226: The symbol indicates the infrared luminosity \Lir: below flux limit
1227: (\emph{dot}), $\log{(\Lir/L_\odot)} \le 10.5$ (\emph{cross}), $10.5 <
1228: \log{(\Lir/L_\odot)} \le 11$ (\emph{open circle}), and
1229: $\log{(\Lir/L_\odot)} > 11$ (\emph{open square}). The color scheme
1230: for the symbols is similar to \fig{fig.snr_index_nad_vs_csnr} and
1231: indicates \NaID\ kinematics: outflow (\emph{blue}), inflow
1232: (\emph{red}), systemic (\emph{gray}), and low \snr\ (\emph{light
1233: gray}). There are roughly equal number of objects above and below the
1234: redshift cut at $z = 0.35$. [\emph{See the electronic edition of the
1235: paper for a color version of this figure.}]}
1236: \label{fig.ub_0_vs_m_b_w_lir}
1237: \end{figure}
1238:
1239:
1240: \fig{fig.ub_0_vs_m_b_w_lir} shows the color-magnitude diagram in which
1241: the objects are denoted by their infrared luminosity and offers
1242: evidence that star-forming galaxies do reside in the red
1243: sequence, though relatively small in fraction. The sample is
1244: divided at $z = 0.35$ into low- and high-redshift subsamples, which
1245: makes clear that the infrared-luminous galaxy fraction is much greater
1246: at higher redshift, consistent with lookback-time studies of
1247: star-forming, infrared-luminous galaxies \citep[e.g.,][]{bell05,
1248: lefl05, noes07a}. Outflows are mostly observed in $z > 0.35$
1249: objects. A comparison of the top and bottom panels shows quite
1250: strikingly that the $z > 0.35$ red sequence has a substantial number
1251: of infrared-luminous galaxies, some of which are LIRGs, which is
1252: absent in the $z < 0.35$ red sequence. The red-sequence outflows,
1253: however, are also found in the objects without significant $24~\mu{\rm
1254: m}$ flux.
1255:
1256: \begin{figure}
1257: \scalefigure
1258: \plotone{f12.eps}
1259: \caption{ Rest-frame $U-B$ color as a function of the UV spectral
1260: slope $\beta$ for a subset of objects with GALEX photometry. The
1261: $\beta$ follows the definition given by \citet{seib05}, $f_\lambda
1262: \propto \lambda^\beta$; star-forming galaxies have smaller values
1263: of $\beta$ due to their rising continua toward shorter wavelengths.
1264: The symbols are as in \fig{fig.snr_index_nad_vs_csnr}. A majority of
1265: blue-sequence galaxies are classified as low-\snr; they are bright in
1266: UV but fainter in the visible, making it difficult to obtain their
1267: high-\snr\ spectra.
1268: (\emph{A color version of this figure is available in the online journal.})
1269: }
1270: \label{fig.ub_0_vs_beta}
1271: \end{figure}
1272:
1273:
1274: \begin{figure}
1275: \scalefigure
1276: \plotone{f13.eps}
1277: \caption{ \emph{Top}: rest-frame $U-B$ color as a function of
1278: rest-frame $\NUV - R_{\rm AB}$ color. The horizontal dashed line at
1279: $U-B = 0.15$ roughly divides red-sequence and blue-cloud galaxies
1280: (\fig{fig.ub_0_vs_m_b}). The vertical dashed line at $\NUV - R_{\rm
1281: AB} = 5.4$ follows the delineation of star-forming and
1282: non--star-forming galaxies employed by \citet{scha06}, who used $\NUV
1283: - r$; $r$ is roughly comparable to $R_{\rm AB}$. The symbols are as
1284: in \fig{fig.snr_index_nad_vs_csnr}. \emph{Bottom}: \Hb\ spectral line
1285: index as a function of rest-frame $\NUV - R_{\rm AB}$ color for a
1286: subset of objects with the \Hb\ coverage. The strength of \Hb\
1287: absorption [i.e., $W_0(\Hb) \ga 0~\ang$] is sensitive to a starburst
1288: occurred within $\sim 10^7~\Myr$--$2~\Gyr$ ago (see the inset of
1289: \fig{fig.v_nad_vs_index_hb}). A negative $W_0(\Hb)$ indicates the
1290: presence of emission at \Hb, i.e., $W_0$ is an estimate of the sum of
1291: emission and absorption equivalent widths (\sect{Spectral Line
1292: Indices}).
1293: (\emph{A color version of this figure is available in the online journal.})
1294: }
1295: \label{fig.ub_0_and_index_hb_vs_m_nuv}
1296: \end{figure}
1297:
1298:
1299: While the narrow spectral baseline of DEEP2 makes the Balmer decrement
1300: unavailable, the UV spectral slopes $\beta$ from the \emph{Galaxy
1301: Evolution Explorer} (GALEX) photometry are measured for a subset of
1302: our sample.\footnote{The images were processed using ver. 4.1 of
1303: \emph{GALEX} pipeline; see http://www.galex.caltech.edu.} The UV spectral
1304: slope is generally a good measure of dust reddening, since it is a
1305: direct measure of continuum slope in ultraviolet, where dust optical
1306: depth is particularly high. \fig{fig.ub_0_vs_beta} shows that some
1307: red galaxies with outflows have $\beta \la 0$, comparable to typical
1308: blue star-forming galaxies. None of these with $24~\mu{\rm m}$
1309: detection, however, are LIRGs. Another look into their identity is
1310: given by the top panel of \fig{fig.ub_0_and_index_hb_vs_m_nuv}, where
1311: the distribution of galaxies in their rest-frame $U-B$ color is
1312: compared to that of the rest-frame $\NUV - R_{\rm AB}$ color. The
1313: UV-optical color is much more sensitive to a small fraction of young
1314: stellar populations and in turn the current as well as recent
1315: star-forming activity than optical colors alone. The particular $\NUV
1316: - R_{\rm AB}$ cut delineating star formation from no star formation is
1317: from \citet{scha06}, who used $\NUV - r$ colors; SDSS $r$ is close to
1318: CFHT $R_{\rm AB}$. In this empirical color cut, early-type galaxies
1319: with the strongest UV upturn observed locally should not contaminate
1320: the star-forming classification; this makes inevitable that some
1321: objects in the ``no star formation'' region may actually be
1322: star forming. Based on the cut, \citeauthor{scha06} found that $\sim
1323: 30\%$ of visually classified $z < 0.1$ early-type galaxies brighter
1324: than $M_r = -21.5$ showed signs of recent star formation. Strikingly,
1325: most optically red galaxies with outflows have $\NUV - R_{\rm AB} <
1326: 5.4$, suggestive of recent star formation.
1327:
1328: These results give rise to an interpretation that the arrival on the
1329: red sequence of the galaxies with outflows happened only recently;
1330: i.e., red sequence outflows are found predominantly in
1331: post--star-forming galaxies with detectable residual star formation or
1332: dusty star-forming galaxies with high infrared emission. The redness
1333: in their visible colors might also arise partly from the presence of
1334: dust; the strong correlation between reddening $E(B-V)$ and the
1335: equivalent width of low-ionization absorption lines are often reported
1336: \citep[e.g.,][]{armu89, veil95, heck00}. Poststarburst galaxies,
1337: identified spectroscopically by their strong Balmer absorption, are
1338: generally found to be dusty as well \citep[e.g.,][]{pogg00, pogg01,
1339: balo05, sato06}. The appearance of the post--star-forming phase also
1340: fits well with the scenario that it is observed when star-forming
1341: galaxies in the blue cloud make the transition to the red-sequence
1342: after some mechanism triggered an enhanced episode of star formation,
1343: which then gets shut off. The $\NUV - R_{\rm AB}$ color alone,
1344: however, does not rule out low-level star formation in these galaxies,
1345: since whether a galaxy goes through poststarburst depends on the
1346: fraction of mass that has formed in the most recent star formation
1347: event as well as its timescale. It is also worth noting the clear
1348: separation between outflows and inflows in $\NUV - R_{\rm AB}$; most
1349: inflows are observed in red galaxies in which little or no star
1350: formation is detected.
1351:
1352:
1353: \subsection{Evidence for Poststarburst}
1354: \label{Evidence for Poststarburst}
1355:
1356: \begin{figure}
1357: \scalefigure
1358: \plotone{f14.eps}
1359: \caption{ \NaID\ velocity as a function of \Hb\ spectral line index.
1360: The symbols are as in \fig{fig.snr_index_nad_vs_csnr}. Since the \Hb\
1361: index measures the sum of absorption and emission lines, the \Hb\
1362: index becomes a lower limit to the strength of \Hb\ absorption
1363: equivalent width, if emission filling is significant. In turn,
1364: $W_0(\Hb) \la 0~\ang$ indicates that the emission line flux is greater
1365: than that of absorption line. See \sect{Spectral Line Indices} for
1366: detail on the definition of the spectral line index. \emph{Inset}:
1367: the stellar spectral line index at \Ha\ (\emph{red dashed line}) and
1368: \Hb\ (\emph{blue solid line}) as a function of stellar ages. The
1369: indices are measured from a single stellar population model from
1370: \citet{delg05}. A stellar population with the age $\ga 10~\Gyr$ has
1371: $W_0(\Hb) \approx 2~\ang$. An \Hb\ index $\ga 3~\ang$ is expected for
1372: a stellar population during a poststarburst phase from $\sim 10~\Myr$
1373: up to $\sim 2~\Gyr$.
1374: (\emph{A color version of this figure is available in the online journal.})
1375: }
1376: \label{fig.v_nad_vs_index_hb}
1377: \end{figure}
1378:
1379:
1380: The Balmer absorption lines are sensitive to the age of the underlying
1381: stellar population and become prominent in the spectrum in which A to
1382: early-F stars, living up to $\sim 1.5~\Gyr$, contribute significantly.
1383: This feature has been exploited to find the signature of
1384: poststarbursts in distant galaxies, often using \Hd\ and/or \Hc\
1385: absorption due to less contamination from emission filling
1386: \citep[e.g.,][]{dres83, zabl96, dres04, goto07}. The limited spectral
1387: baseline makes only low-lying Balmer lines available for our sample.
1388: \fig{fig.v_nad_vs_index_hb} shows the \NaID\ velocity as a function of
1389: the \Hb\ spectral line index $W_0(\Hb)$. A spectral line index is an
1390: estimate of the sum of emission and absorption equivalent widths
1391: (\sect{Spectral Line Indices}). In the figure, outflows are seen in
1392: the following two classes of objects. One class is those with $W_0(\Hb) <
1393: 0~\ang$, meaning that \Hb\ is seen in emission, so they are the
1394: outflows seen in star-forming galaxies in the blue cloud
1395: (\fig{fig.ub_0_vs_m_b}). Another is those with $W_0(\Hb) \ga 3~\ang$,
1396: slightly offset from a concentration of objects with systemic \NaID\
1397: velocity around $W_0(\Hb) \approx 2~\ang$. To put this in
1398: perspective, the inset of \fig{fig.v_nad_vs_index_hb} shows the
1399: evolution of \emph{stellar} \Hb\ absorption index over a range of
1400: stellar ages. A stellar population with the age $\ga 10~\Gyr$ has its
1401: $W_*(\Hb)$ asympototing to $\approx 2~\ang$. The \Hb\ absorption
1402: would be seen at $W_0(\Hb) \ga 3~\ang$ during the poststarburst phase
1403: from $10~\Myr$ to $\sim 2~\Gyr$. In practice, a measured \Hb\ index
1404: from a galaxy spectrum includes some nebular emission line flux
1405: originating from the \HII\ regions surrounding hot, young stars in the
1406: presence of residual star formation, pushing a Balmer absorption index
1407: to a smaller, less positive value. Therefore, $W_0(\Hb) \ga 3~\ang$
1408: objects are likely to be in the poststarburst phase. A large number
1409: of systemic \NaID\ velocity objects around $W_0(\Hb) \approx 2~\ang$
1410: is also consistent with old, quiescent galaxies not hosting outflows.
1411:
1412: The bottom panel of \fig{fig.ub_0_and_index_hb_vs_m_nuv} shows the
1413: relation between the $\NUV - R_{\rm AB}$ color and the \Hb\ spectral
1414: line index for the subset of sample with both measurements. Although
1415: the small statistics make interpretation difficult, we can see that
1416: the red-sequence objects with outflows appear to have a slightly
1417: higher $W_0(\Hb)$ in general compared to those without. A few
1418: blue-sequence objects having $\NUV - R_{\rm AB} < 5.4$, both with and
1419: without outflows, also move to the $W_0(\Hb) > 0~\ang$ regime. If
1420: these objects host residual star formation, inferred from their blue
1421: $\NUV - R_{\rm AB}$ color, their emission fluxes may fill \Hb\
1422: absorption, making the observed $W_0(\Hb) \approx 2$--$3~\ang$ only
1423: lower limits to their absorption equivalent strength. This would make
1424: the case stronger for the poststarburst identity.
1425:
1426: The combination of selection cuts from our sample yields a small
1427: number of fully overlapping objects across a variety of measurements
1428: and makes it difficult to reach generalizing conclusions with
1429: statistical rigor. Nevertheless we do find overwhelming consistency
1430: in the evidence that our LIRG-type outflows are mostly seen either in
1431: starburst or poststarburst objects. This naturally fits into the
1432: currently favored scenario of galaxy evolution between blue-cloud and
1433: red-sequence galaxies, in which some mechanism (e.g., merger) triggers
1434: a starburst in a blue galaxy which then gets ``quenched'' by some
1435: feedback mechanism, such as by an AGN or supernovae, by the time the
1436: galaxy joins the red sequence. The outflows may be the result of such
1437: feedback process observed in ``transition'' objects.
1438:
1439: However, we must also note that stronger Balmer absorption only
1440: indicates that there was certainly a detectable \emph{enhancement},
1441: relative to the present, of star formation in the recent past; whether
1442: or not an individual case makes the criteria for a conventional
1443: \emph{starbusrt} is admittedly unclear, especially given our crude
1444: diagnostics. There are plausible ways for galaxies to quench star
1445: formation without going through a starburst phase, and such mechanisms
1446: could generate outflows and detectable enhancement of Balmer
1447: absorption, if quenching occurs quickly. This possibility can be
1448: explored further only through better diagnostics.
1449: \footnote{ {\hl With our sample, no robust way exists for directly
1450: connecting poststarburst to the kind of star formation detected in
1451: NUV. The advantage of NUV diagnostics here is its sensitivity to
1452: low-level star formation that normally eludes detection in the
1453: visible, due to much larger light contribution from old stars to the
1454: visible region of galaxy spectrum, and may not tell us much about the
1455: timescale over which such low-level star formation has been in
1456: existence. Therefore the star formation seen in NUV could be
1457: ``residual'' star formation from a recent starburst/star-forming event
1458: or it could just be a small amount of continuous star formation.} }
1459:
1460: \subsection{Host Morphology}
1461: \label{Host Morphology}
1462:
1463: \begin{figure}
1464: \scalefigure
1465: \plotone{f15.eps}
1466: \caption{ Quantitative morphology measure (Gini coefficient $G$ and
1467: the second-order moment of the brightest $20\%$ of the total galaxy
1468: flux $M_{20}$) from the analysis of \emph{HST}/ACS images by
1469: \citet{lotz06a}. The morphological cuts (\emph{dashed gray lines}) to
1470: the ``traditional'' classes are from \citet{lotz06a}, calibrated with
1471: the $z = 0$ rest-frame $B$-band morphology of their sample. The
1472: symbols are as in \fig{fig.snr_index_nad_vs_csnr}.
1473: (\emph{A color version of this figure is available in the online journal.})
1474: }
1475: \label{fig.gini_vs_m20_w_kinematics}
1476: \end{figure}
1477:
1478:
1479: \begin{figure}
1480: \scalefigure
1481: \plotone{f16.eps}
1482: \caption{ Morphology of objects in terms of the rest-frame $(U-B,
1483: \NUV-R_{\rm AB})$ color-color diagram; see
1484: \fig{fig.ub_0_and_index_hb_vs_m_nuv}. The morphology, from the
1485: analysis of \emph{HST}/ACS images by \citet{lotz06a}, is divided into
1486: early-type (E/S0/Sa; \emph{circle}), late-type (Sb--Ir;
1487: \emph{square}), and merger-candidates (\emph{star}). The filled symbols
1488: indicate host galaxies of outflows. The symbol colors are as in
1489: \fig{fig.snr_index_nad_vs_csnr}. Only the objects from the high-\snr\
1490: \NaID\ velocity sample (\sect{NaID Velocity and Blueshift
1491: Probability}) with \NUV\ measurements are plotted.
1492: (\emph{A color version of this figure is available in the online journal.})
1493: }
1494: \label{fig.ub_0_vs_m_nuv_w_qmorph}
1495: \end{figure}
1496:
1497:
1498: \fig{fig.gini_vs_m20_w_kinematics} shows a subset of galaxies with
1499: \NaID\ measurements for which we have the quantitative morphology from
1500: the \emph{HST}/ACS imaging analysis by \citet{lotz06a}. A set of new
1501: nonparametric morphology measures, Gini coefficient $G$ which measures
1502: the distribution of flux among pixels over a galaxy and the
1503: second-order moment of the brightest $20\%$ of the total galaxy flux
1504: $M_{20}$, is calibrated visually to the traditional morphological
1505: classifications \citep{lotz04}: early-type (E/S0/Sa), late-type
1506: (Sb--Ir), and merger candidates. Our survey is more sensitive to
1507: luminous, high surface brightness galaxies (\sect{Sample Selection}),
1508: and \fig{fig.gini_vs_m20_w_kinematics} shows that the sampling is
1509: biased against objects with late-type (i.e., lower surface brightness)
1510: morphology; see \citet{lotz06a} for the analysis of complete samples
1511: drawn from the parent AEGIS survey, which shows that the many objects
1512: with low surface brightness, late-type morphology, which would appear
1513: toward the bottom-left corner, did not make our selection cut.
1514:
1515: The transition between a LIRG to a ULIRG is physically plausible
1516: in the merger sequence \citep{sand04}, so the high outflow detection
1517: rate ($3/6 = 0.5 \pm 0.2$) in merger candidates is not surprising.
1518: Outflows are detected in almost all local ULIRGs \citep{mart05,
1519: mart06, rupk05p2}. Although all three merger candidates with outflows
1520: are detected at $24~\mu{\rm m}$, only one is a LIRG. Since the
1521: dynamical timescale of merger, $\sim 1~ \Gyr$, exceeds that of gas
1522: consumption, $\sim 100~\Myr$, it is likely that we miss the (U)LIRG
1523: phase due to its short duty cycle. It should be noted, however, the
1524: nature of the association between mergers/interactions and (U)LIRGs is
1525: not as well established for objects at $z \sim 0.5$.
1526:
1527: %% A high fraction ($3/6 = 0.5 \pm 0.2$) of merger candidates are host to
1528: %% outflows, although the sample is admittedly very small.
1529: %% \citet{lotz04} showed that their morphological classification
1530: %% effectively identify nearby ULIRGs as mergers. Most local ULIRGs are
1531: %% known to be associated with some sort of interaction
1532: %% \citep[e.g.,][]{murp96, born00, cui01}. None of our objects are
1533: %% ULIRGs, and, although all three merger candidates with outflows are
1534: %% detected at $24~\mu{\rm m}$, only one is a LIRG. Since the dynamical
1535: %% timescale of merger, $\sim 1~ \Gyr$, exceeds that of gas consumption,
1536: %% $\sim 100~\Myr$, it is likely that we miss the ULIRG phase due to its
1537: %% short duty cycle. Nonetheless, outflows are detected in almost all
1538: %% ULIRGs \citep{mart05, mart06, rupk05p2}, and the strongest winds
1539: %% appear to be seen near the perigalactic passage \citet{mart05}. Since
1540: %% the transition from a LIRG to a ULIRG (which eventually may become a
1541: %% quasar) may be physically plausible in the merger sequence
1542: %% \citep{sand04}, the high outflow detection rate in merger candidates
1543: %% is not surprising. It should be noted, however, the nature of the
1544: %% association between mergers/interactions and (U)LIRGs is not as well
1545: %% established for objects at $z \sim 0.5$.
1546:
1547: A majority ($9/14 = 0.64 \pm 0.13$) of outflows are seen in the
1548: objects with early-type morphology (E/S0/Sa). An insight on the order
1549: of morphological transformation may be given by
1550: \fig{fig.ub_0_vs_m_nuv_w_qmorph}, which plots the distribution of
1551: morphology in terms of the rest-frame $(U-B, \NUV-R_{\rm AB})$
1552: color-color diagram. Consistent with the common knowledge, most
1553: late-type galaxies are in the blue cloud, while most early-type
1554: galaxies are in the red sequence. The distribution of outflow hosts
1555: roughly follows that of the parent sample. Although the small sample
1556: size does not allow a statistically robust conclusion, outflows appear
1557: to be seen more preferentially where merger candidates are also seen.
1558: Previously we find evidence that some outflows are seen in
1559: poststarburst objects (\sect{Evidence for Poststarburst}). The
1560: early-type morphology, coupled with the signs of interaction in a few
1561: of the red-sequence outflows, is consistent with the existing studies
1562: of poststarburst galaxies as \emph{transition} objects in the
1563: morphology sequence, which conclude that they are spheroidal, often
1564: showing signs of interaction \citep[e.g.,][]{yang04, goto05}.
1565:
1566: We find only two outflows with late-type morphology, at $z > 0.35$.
1567: \fig{fig.gini_vs_m20_w_kinematics} makes clear that our selection is
1568: highly biased toward high surface brightness galaxies; we have missed
1569: a large population of low surface brightness star-forming galaxies
1570: that are dim in the rest-frame visible continuum, with which our
1571: primary selection cut was made. These outflows with late-type
1572: morphology are detected significantly in the infrared, having
1573: $\log{(\Lir / L_\odot)} \approx 11.1$ and $10.4$. Unlike ULIRGs, the
1574: morphology of LIRGs appears to be a mixed bag. At $z \sim 0.7$,
1575: however, more than half of their LIRGs have disk morphology
1576: \citep[e.g.,][]{bell05, melb05}, suggesting that the abundant LIRG
1577: population simply reflects an elevated level of star formation in
1578: normal galaxies at an earlier lookback time. All our objects are at
1579: lower redshifts, and it is unclear if we are observing disky LIRGs of
1580: the type seen at higher redshifts.
1581:
1582:
1583: \section{Discussion}
1584: \label{Discussion}
1585:
1586: We have seen that the detection rate of LIRG-like outflows is a strong
1587: function of infrared luminosity or star formation rate (\sect{Trends
1588: with Star Formation}). The distribution of specific star formation
1589: rates at a fixed stellar mass (\fig{fig.ssfr_vs_mass_star}) might
1590: imply that the frequency of outflows may be higher for the objects in
1591: which ongoing star-forming activity is enhanced relative to the past
1592: average (i.e., high birthrate parameter). The distribution in the
1593: optical color magnitude diagram shows that outflows are abundant both
1594: in the blue cloud and the red sequence (\sect{Color Magnitude
1595: Diagram}). The NUV photometry reveals that the red-sequence outflows
1596: are hosted by the objects that have gone through recent star formation
1597: (\fig{fig.ub_0_and_index_hb_vs_m_nuv}). There is evidence that some
1598: of the red-sequence outflows are in dusty (\fig{fig.ub_0_vs_beta}),
1599: star-forming galaxies (\fig{fig.ub_0_vs_m_b_w_lir}). Yet some may be
1600: poststarburst galaxies (\sect{Evidence for Poststarburst}) just
1601: arriving the red sequence, which is consistent with their early-type
1602: morphology (\sect{Host Morphology}). We now discuss a few fine points
1603: that need attention, and describe how our finding of \NaID\ outflows
1604: might fit into the current understanding of galaxy formation and
1605: evolution.
1606:
1607:
1608: \subsection{Redshift Evolution of Outflows}
1609: \label{Redshift Evolution of Outflows}
1610:
1611: \fig{figs.mass_star_vs_z} shows the detection of outflows as a
1612: function of redshift in our sample. Over the redshift range,
1613: star-forming properties of galaxies are expected to change and so do
1614: the detection rates of outflows. In the figure, no $M_* \approx
1615: 10^{11} M_\odot$ galaxies at $z \approx 0.2$ show signs of an outflow,
1616: yet a significant fraction of galaxies with the similar mass at $z
1617: \approx 0.5$ do. This is consistent with the known trend of the star
1618: formation history of galaxies and the increasing trend of outflow
1619: detection rate with SFR (\sect{Trends with Star Formation}).
1620: \citet{noes07a} shows that star-forming galaxies with $M_* \approx
1621: 10^{11} M_\odot$ are rare at $z < 0.45$ but are abundant and most are
1622: LIRGs at $z > 0.45$. \fig{figs.mass_star_vs_z} shows that the
1623: outflows detected in our sample are typically seen in high-$M_*$
1624: galaxies at higher $z$ with an SFR expected in a LIRG ($\ga
1625: 20~M_*~\yr^{-1}$). Due to low \snr, however, we cannot say whether or
1626: not lower-$M_*$ galaxies at $z \sim 0.5$ host outflows. Nevertheless,
1627: at the high $M_*$ end, we clearly observe that the ``downsizing''
1628: effect extends to the detection rate of LIRG-like outflows, i.e., the
1629: typical mass of galaxies that host outflows move to a lower mass
1630: toward lower redshift, much like the trend seen in cosmic star
1631: formation history of galaxies \citep[e.g.,][]{mada96, lill96, lefl05,
1632: fabe07, noes07a, coop07b}. \citet{bund06} qunatify the evolving
1633: trend in terms of the ``quenching mass limit,'' which is shown in
1634: \fig{figs.mass_star_vs_z} for a crude comparison. An important
1635: connection is likely to exist between quenching events and gaseous
1636: feedback, so the redshift evolution of outflows needs to be explored
1637: in view of host galaxy properties.
1638:
1639:
1640: \subsection{Merger-Triggered Activities and Outflows}
1641:
1642: Merger-driven galaxy evolution has been a prominent paradigm over the
1643: past decades, and the current success of the \LCDM\ theory in
1644: describing the hierarchical structure formation certainly points to
1645: its significant roles in galaxy-scale phenomena. The relevance of
1646: mergers in shaping the cosmic star formation history of galaxies,
1647: however, is under intense scrutiny. The difficulty arises from the
1648: fact that direct identification of mergers and quantifying their
1649: frequency from the observation of high-redshift galaxies remains very
1650: challenging, due to a number of factors including surface brightness
1651: dimming and shifting passbands. Galaxy mergers of star-forming disk
1652: galaxies have attracted much attention, because they are a mechanism
1653: widely known to cause enhanced star formation, after which merger
1654: remnants dynamically relax into spheroids \citep[e.g.,][]{miho96,
1655: cox06}. Along with the expected increase of the merger rate with the
1656: lookback time from numerical simulations \citep[e.g.,][]{gott01},
1657: mergers have been invoked as a mechanism responsible for the declining
1658: trend of the comoving star formation density since $z \sim 2$
1659: \citep[e.g.,][]{lill96, mada96}, although exactly how much mergers
1660: contribute to the trend is still debated \citep[e.g.,][]{brid07,
1661: lotz06a}. Galaxy merger is appealing also for it affects star-forming
1662: as well as morphological properties of galaxies in ways that naturally
1663: explain the observed transition of young (i.e., blue and disky) into
1664: old (i.e., red and spheroidal) galaxy populations. In principle, a
1665: variety of such transient phenomena as starburst and quasars can also
1666: be integrated into a coherent picture of merger-driven galaxy
1667: evolution \citep[e.g.,][]{sand96, hopk06}.
1668:
1669: The correlation of the outflow detection rate with the degree of
1670: elevation in star-forming activity certainly indicates that starbursts
1671: are an important component of galactic superwind phenomenon. However,
1672: outflow is exciting not because it is associated with such a spectacular
1673: starburst event, but because it may carry away from the host galaxy
1674: the bulk of ``fuel'' for further star formation, which may contribute
1675: to the ``quenching'' of star formation. In fact, ULIRGs (i.e.,
1676: gas-rich mergers) show dynamical evidence for spheroids in formation
1677: \citep[e.g.,][]{genz01}, and the star formation history of
1678: poststarburst galaxy is consistent with the (U)LIRG origin
1679: \citep[e.g.,][]{pogg00, bekk01, kavi07}. Our detection of \NaID\
1680: outflows in poststarburst galaxies strongly suggests that feedback
1681: mechanism affects the kinematics of cool interstellar gas well after
1682: the most intense phase of star formation. The fact that quite a few
1683: red-sequence galaxies host winds may not be surprising yet still a
1684: striking result. A vast majority of absorption-line studies of
1685: outflows in literature has been on vigorously star-forming systems.
1686: Using a plot similar to \fig{fig.index_mgb_vs_index_nad},
1687: \citet{rupk05p1} showed that most outflows in infrared-selected
1688: galaxies were detected in the loci of low \MgIb\ and high \NaID\
1689: absorption indices, i.e., young galaxies with high interstellar \NaID\
1690: column (their Fig.~8). In contrast, the red-sequence galaxies with
1691: outflows in our sample can have a high \MgIb\ absorption index,
1692: reflecting the presence of intermediate to old stellar population, and
1693: are not clearly distinct from other red-sequence galaxies in an
1694: optical color magnitude diagram (\fig{fig.ub_0_vs_m_b}). The apparent
1695: connection between outflows and high $M_*$ poststarburst galaxies
1696: provides circumstantial evidence that outflows of cool gas contributes
1697: to or is a consequence of more effective quenching of star formation.
1698:
1699: How the progenitors of spheroidal galaxies in the local universe
1700: evolve into their current state remains a topic under vigorous
1701: investigation. While their stellar contents suggest that massive
1702: spheroids have been passively evolving and that their stellar mass
1703: changes little since $z \sim 1$ \citep[e.g.,][]{brin00, bund05}, the
1704: evolution of the luminosity function suggests that the number density
1705: of luminous red galaxies has increased by a factor of $\sim 2$ over
1706: the same period \citep[e.g.,][]{bell04, brow07, fabe07}. Over the
1707: similar redshift range, star-forming galaxies have a relatively small
1708: spread in SFRs at a fixed mass in the blue sequence
1709: \citep[e.g.,][]{noes07a}, leading to a paucity of objects presumably
1710: in transition between the blue and red sequences. Furthermore, less
1711: massive spheroids have younger stellar contents
1712: \citep[e.g.,][]{treu05, kavi08} and the characteristic galaxy mass
1713: above which the star formation in galaxies quenched evolves over
1714: redshift in a downsizing fashion \citep{bund06}, indicating that
1715: catastrophic transition events occur at a progressively lower mass
1716: toward lower redshift. The exact rate of transition is very difficult
1717: to estimate, yet indirect arguments favor rare and/or fast
1718: mechanism(s) \citep[e.g.,][]{blan06}. Gas-rich mergers perhaps
1719: contribute to some but not all of these blue-red transitions
1720: \citep{bund07}. The qualitatively similar downsizing trend in
1721: star-forming galaxies and outflow hosts over $z < 0.5$ (\sect{Redshift
1722: Evolution of Outflows}), however, may imply that the mechanism
1723: responsible for downsizing of star formation may also accompany
1724: outflows. A rigorous conclusion must await the quantitative analysis
1725: of the sample which suffers less from small number statistics,
1726: selection effects, and incompleteness.
1727:
1728: We must also note that it is not clear that merger per se is a
1729: necessary precursor for outflows. The direct morphological
1730: evidence for interaction is not very strong in our outflows (a
1731: majority of outflows are in early-type galaxies; \sect{Host
1732: Morphology}). A circumstantial evidence is provided only through an
1733: indirect argument that a spheroidal formation follows a merger-induced
1734: starburst with a poststarburst signature. Since the timescale for
1735: mergers at high redshift to remain identifiable is shorter than a
1736: poststarburst phase, the scarcity of direct evidence may not
1737: immediately discount the importance of mergers. However, it is
1738: possible that low-level star formation in early-type galaxies could
1739: drive outflows, perhaps via the accretion of gas-rich satellites or
1740: minor mergers. Early-type galaxies also have reservoirs of hot gas,
1741: which could provide fuel for star formation via condensation. It has
1742: been suggested that the early-type galaxy population itself shows
1743: bimodality in their UV-visible color distribution, reflecting the
1744: richness in their star formation histories; low-level star formation
1745: appears to continue in less-massive early-type galaxies
1746: \citep{kavi08}. The origin of outflows in the red galaxies may not be
1747: as simple as a quenching event followed by passive evolution.
1748:
1749: Furthermore, the mounting evidence now shows that a majority of
1750: $z \sim 1$ LIRGs are normal disk galaxies whose elevated star
1751: formation is \emph{not} caused by interaction \citep[e.g.,][]{bell05,
1752: lotz06a}. The gradual decline of star-forming efficiency in their
1753: disks may be responsible for much of the global trend seen in comoving
1754: SFR density. From our study alone, whether or not these disky LIRGs
1755: at high-redshift host outflows is not clear; the nature of
1756: outflows in these objects may be different from merger-induced ones.
1757:
1758: It would be interesting to see how the presence of outflows at $z \la
1759: 1$ contribute to the fate of $z \sim 1$ LIRGs down to $z \sim 0$,
1760: which may either stay but fade gradually within the blue sequence or
1761: go through rapid quenching of star formation to migrate to the red
1762: sequence. Given the strong evolution of galaxy properties in general
1763: (\sect{Redshift Evolution of Outflows}), our knowledge from the local
1764: study of LIRG-like outflows might not be relevant for high-$z$, disky
1765: LIRGs. On the other hand, if the outflow strength correlates with
1766: some parameter such as the presence of nuclear activity or their
1767: degree of interaction in relation to their morphology among high-$z$
1768: LIRGs [as observed in local ULIRGs by \citet{mart05}], deprivation of
1769: (cool) gas via superwind may be important in transforming star-forming
1770: disks into quiescent spheroids in catastrophic events at those
1771: redshifts. The detection rate of outflows in view of host galaxy
1772: morphology at $z \la 1$ may provide some insight on the physical
1773: mechanism that maintains the bimodality in galaxy population since $z
1774: \sim 1$. A comparison of mass outflow rates in $z \sim 1$ LIRGs with
1775: different morphology would also make an interesting exercise to put
1776: some constraint on the role of mass loading in the evolutionary
1777: histories of morphology and star formation. Fortunately, several
1778: useful UV resonance lines at different ionization states shift into
1779: visible window for $z \sim 1$ objects \citep[e.g.,][]{wein08},
1780: so future surveys are in a better position to constrain mass loading
1781: from these lines \citep[e.g.,][]{murr07}.
1782:
1783:
1784: \subsection{Star Formation Versus AGN}
1785: \label{Star Formation versus AGN}
1786:
1787: It is usually assumed that superwinds are driven by thermalized energy
1788: output from supernovae. In principle, AGNs offer much larger
1789: repository of energy than supernovae, and the ubiquity of
1790: supermassive black holes in galactic spheroids inferred from the
1791: $M_{\rm bh}$-$\sigma_v$ relation \citep[e.g.,][]{trem02} and their
1792: co-evolution with the lookback time \citep[e.g.,][]{woo06} suggests
1793: that the energy output from AGNs may play important roles in galaxy
1794: formation. While AGNs offer increasingly attractive solutions to the
1795: yet elusive mechanism for shutting off star formation in massive
1796: objects, where and how their energy output couples to the gas in and
1797: around galaxies remains to be identified. Recently, however, several
1798: observational studies have elucidated the connection between
1799: poststarburst and nuclear activity: host galaxies of quasars often
1800: show poststarburst signature in their continuum emission
1801: \citep[e.g.,][]{cana06}; the morphology of poststarburst galaxies
1802: often show a blue core, which produces a LINER spectrum
1803: \citep{yang06}; the optical emission-line ratios classify a majority
1804: of poststarburst galaxies into Seyfert/LINERs \citep{trem05, yan06,
1805: yan06aas}.
1806:
1807: \begin{figure}
1808: \scalefigure
1809: \plotone{f17.eps}
1810: \caption{ Rest-frame ($U-B$, $M_B$) color-magnitude diagram for the
1811: objects in the high-\snr\ sample with $\fNII/\Ha$ emission equivalent
1812: width ratio; see \sect{Star Formation versus AGN}. The spectral
1813: baseline restricts the $\fNII/\Ha$ measurements to $z < 0.39$ objects.
1814: The symbols indicate the equivalent width ratio of Seyfert/LINER
1815: [$\log{(\fNII/\Ha)} \ge -0.3$; \emph{circle}] and \HII-region
1816: [$\log{(\fNII/\Ha)} < -0.3$; \emph{star}]; the objects without
1817: detectable \Ha\ emission do not have equivalent width ratios
1818: (\emph{square}). The colors are as in
1819: \fig{fig.snr_index_nad_vs_csnr}, and outflows are marked by filled
1820: symbols.
1821: (\emph{A color version of this figure is available in the online journal.})
1822: }
1823: \label{fig.ub_0_vs_m_b_w_ha_n2}
1824: \end{figure}
1825:
1826:
1827: Low-ionization outflows are found to be faster in starburst galaxies
1828: with some indication of AGN \citep{mart05, rupk05p2}. In $z \sim 0.5$
1829: poststarburst galaxy sample, \citet{trem07} find \MgII\ outflows of
1830: $\sim 1000~\km~\s^{-1}$, much faster than the typical \NaID\ outflows
1831: in ULIRGs ($\sim 300$--$400~\km~\s^{-1}$). These fast outflows in the
1832: galaxies at their \emph{postquasar} phase provide compelling evidence
1833: for AGN-driven outflows in poststarbursts. It is worth noting that,
1834: due to the difference in sample selection, our poststarburst outflows
1835: in general are likely to be of a more typical kind than those of
1836: \citeauthor{trem07}, i.e., the event which led to the suppression of
1837: star formation does not have to accompany quasar activity for us to
1838: classify them as poststarbursts. Although the exact values are
1839: physically meaningless (\sect{Definition of Outflow}), our
1840: measurements imply \NaID\ outflow velocities of $\sim
1841: 100~\km~\s^{-1}$, which do not favor one scenario over others as to
1842: the outflow driving mechanism. It is plausible that some of our
1843: red-sequence outflows have gone through the kind of postquasar phase
1844: that \citeauthor{trem07} observed, but they do not all have to be.
1845:
1846: Nonetheless, the fact that typical poststarburst galaxies show
1847: low-level nuclear activity seems convincing, given the recent studies
1848: of the line emission from red-sequence galaxies. In
1849: \fig{fig.ub_0_vs_m_b_w_ha_n2}, we show the classification of
1850: Seyfert/LINER versus star formation using the $\fNII/\Ha$ emission
1851: \emph{equivalent width} ratio, such that $\log{(\fNII/\Ha)} = -0.3$
1852: divides the two classes.\footnote{Unfluxed DEEP2 spectra force us to
1853: use equivalent widths in place of line fluxes, yet the adjacent lines
1854: forming the ratios are so close that they give similar results
1855: \citep{kobu03}. The \Ha-\fNII\ complex is fitted with three Gaussians
1856: for emission lines. When \Ha\ absorption is obviously present,
1857: another Gaussian is fitted; otherwise, a fiducial rest-frame
1858: equivalent width of $2 \pm 1~\ang$ is added to the \Ha\ emission
1859: flux.} The spectral baseline restricts the $\fNII/\Ha$ measurements to
1860: $z < 0.39$ objects. The use of $\fOIII/\Hb$ allows us to extend the
1861: classification to $z > 0.39$ objects in which we see a majority of
1862: outflows, but the delineation of Seyfert/LINER and star formation
1863: becomes notoriously ambiguous when only that ratio is used. A
1864: comparison to \citet{wein07} shows that \emph{all} $z > 0.35$ outflows
1865: in our sample have \HII-region--like ratios in $\fOIII/\Hb$, which is
1866: rather puzzling, given many of them are red galaxies where line
1867: emissions tend to originate from AGN/LINERs, according to local
1868: studies. Using $\fNII/\Ha$, \fig{fig.ub_0_vs_m_b_w_ha_n2} shows a
1869: distribution of objects grossly consistent with \citet{yan06}; i.e.,
1870: line emission from the red sequence is dominated by Seyfert/LINER,
1871: while that from the blue cloud is mostly from star formation. Host
1872: galaxies of outflows appear to follow the parent distribution, yet the
1873: analysis suffers from small number statistics.
1874:
1875: \begin{figure}
1876: \scalefigure
1877: \plotone{f18.eps}
1878: \caption{ Rest-frame $(U-B, \NUV-R_{\rm AB})$ color-color diagram
1879: for the objects in the high-\snr\ sample with $\fNII/\Ha$ emission
1880: equivalent width ratio. Symbol shapes are as in
1881: \fig{fig.ub_0_vs_m_b_w_ha_n2}. Symbol colors are as in
1882: \fig{fig.snr_index_nad_vs_csnr}, and outflows are marked by the filled
1883: symbols. The photometric color delineations are described in the
1884: caption of \fig{fig.ub_0_and_index_hb_vs_m_nuv}. The spectral
1885: baseline restricts the $\fNII/\Ha$ measurements to $z < 0.39$ objects.
1886: (\emph{A color version of this figure is available in the online journal.})
1887: }
1888: \label{fig.ub_0_vs_m_nuv_w_ha_n2}
1889: \end{figure}
1890:
1891:
1892: In \fig{fig.ub_0_vs_m_nuv_w_ha_n2}, we have a slightly different view
1893: on the color distribution of galaxies in terms of the emission
1894: excitation. The advantage of adding the near-UV photometry to detect
1895: low-level star formation has been discussed in \sect{Color Magnitude
1896: Diagram}. The small number of outflow host galaxies at $z < 0.39$
1897: still limits our interpretation. Nevertheless, it is quite
1898: interesting that the transition from star formation to Seyfert/LINER,
1899: and then to no \Ha\ emission appears to happen along the stellar age
1900: sequence, and the abundance of Seyferts/LINERs is observed in the
1901: region occupied by the galaxies in transition, a significant fraction
1902: of which appears to host outflows at $z \sim 0.5$
1903: (\fig{fig.ub_0_and_index_hb_vs_m_nuv}). Although the temporal
1904: co-existence of relic outflows and current nuclear activity does not
1905: necessarily imply any causal connection, extending this analysis to
1906: higher redshift, where more outflows are expected, could help us
1907: understand the potential impact of winds in establishing the observed
1908: trend in terms of their driving mechanisms.
1909:
1910: The presence of inflows in red, early-type
1911: (\fig{fig.gini_vs_m20_w_kinematics}) galaxies in the above figures is
1912: also remarkably consistent with their host either being quiescent or
1913: having their optical emission lines excited by AGN/LINERs, with little
1914: evidence for star formation. It remains to be seen whether any
1915: evidence exists to directly connect the inflows and the nuclear
1916: activities. On the other side of outflows, the nature of inflows also
1917: needs to be explored, since it has been long speculated that some
1918: mechanism, an AGN being a prime suspect, is preventing more stars from
1919: being formed than observed in massive elliptical galaxies.
1920:
1921:
1922: \section{Summary}
1923: \label{Summary}
1924:
1925: We reported on a \snr-limited search for low-ionization
1926: outflows using the DEEP2 spectra of the $0.11 < z < 0.54$ objects in
1927: the AEGIS survey. Doppler shifts from the host galaxy redshifts were
1928: systematically searched for in the \NaID\ optical resonance absorption
1929: doublet. This was the very first time that a signature of galactic
1930: superwind was systematically looked for in the individual galaxy
1931: spectra from a modern, large spectroscopic redshift survey.
1932:
1933: Our \NaID\ profile fitting method closely followed that of
1934: \citet{rupk05p1}, explicitly fitting the absorption line model
1935: parameterized by the wavelength and the optical depth at the line
1936: center, Doppler width, and covering fraction in a self-consistent
1937: manner. The confidence intervals in the \NaID\ velocities were
1938: estimated through the MCMC sampling technique. This allowed us to
1939: evaluate the quality of \NaID\ velocity measurements visually in terms
1940: of probability distributions of model parameters. Although the
1941: spectral resolution and \snr\ limited us to studying the
1942: interstellar gas kinematics by fitting a single doublet component to
1943: each observed \NaID\ profile, LIRG-like outflows should have been
1944: detected at $\ga 6\sigma$ in absorption equivalent width down to the
1945: survey limiting \snr\ ($\sim 5$ pixel$^{-1}$) in the
1946: continuum around \NaID. This meant that, if a \NaID\ outflow of a
1947: comparable strength to the LIRGs detected by the \citet{rupk05p2}
1948: survey left its signature in a spectrum, we were able to detect the
1949: presence in our survey. We discussed the challenges involved in
1950: recovering physically important parameters from a moderate \snr\
1951: spectrum yet argued that a Doppler shift could be measured robustly.
1952:
1953: The detection rate of LIRG-like outflow clearly showed an increasing
1954: trend with star-forming activity and infrared luminosity. However, by
1955: virtue of not selecting our sample on star formation, we also found a
1956: significant fraction of outflows in galaxies on the red sequence in
1957: the rest-frame ($U-B$, $M_B$) color-magnitude diagram. Most of these
1958: red-sequence outflows were of early-type morphology and showed the
1959: sign of recent star formation in their UV-optical colors; some showed
1960: enhanced Balmer \Hb\ absorption lines indicative of poststarburst as
1961: well as high dust extinction.
1962:
1963: We also note that inflows were detected in some red, early-type
1964: galaxies. Although the definition of an inflow in this study was just
1965: symmetrically opposite to that of an outflow, the fact that we
1966: observed them in very distinct subsets of galaxies strongly indicated
1967: that our outflow/inflow detections were not spurious. However,
1968: with the difficulty in removing stellar absorption component at \NaID\
1969: as well as the lack of immediate explanations for their driving
1970: mechanisms, the investigation of inflows was beyond the scope of this
1971: paper and will be explored in future AEGIS studies. We merely note
1972: that a connection is suspected between an inflow and the feeding of
1973: nuclear activity in the maintenance mode of AGN feedback.
1974:
1975: The fact that many of our outflows have been found in galaxies
1976: presumably in transition suggests that galactic superwinds could
1977: outlive starbursts and play a role in quenching star formation in the
1978: host galaxies on their way to the red sequence. The detectable
1979: imprints of gaseous feedback in these galaxies provide us a means to
1980: observationally constrain different feedback models. Despite that
1981: the small number statistics as well as selection effects hindered our
1982: ability to rigorously characterize the nature of the host galaxies of
1983: outflows across a wide array of physical parameters accessible in the
1984: AEGIS survey, the initial analysis presented in this paper will help
1985: design future experiments on the impact of superwinds on galaxy
1986: evolution in the epoch when the star-forming properties of galaxies
1987: drastically change since $z \sim 1$. Gaseous kinematics adds to
1988: future studies a useful dimension to explore and opens up a promising
1989: avenue for constraining the driving mechanisms of baryons cycling
1990: through the components that constitute the luminous part of the
1991: universe, as well as for directly quantifying how much gas joins in
1992: such process.
1993:
1994:
1995: \acknowledgments
1996:
1997: T.S.~would like to thank the following scientists for inspirations:
1998: Christy Tremonti for sharing her stimulating results on SDSS \NaID\
1999: outflows, as well as her hospitality during his visits to Steward;
2000: Philip Marshall for enlightenment with the Bayesian statistical
2001: methods; and David Rupke and his coworkers for the series of detailed
2002: work on \NaID\ outflows. T.S. gratefully acknowledges Alison Coil for
2003: her thorough reading of the manuscript and her very insightful
2004: suggestions and also wishes to extend his thanks to Ben Weiner, Sandy
2005: Faber, and Fran\c{c}ois Schweizer for helpful discussions. We thank
2006: the anonymous referee for his or her thorough reading, constructive
2007: feedback, as well as patience. This work was never possible without
2008: the dedicated efforts, contributions, as well as the generosity from
2009: all the AEGIS/DEEP2 members.
2010:
2011: The research presented in this paper made an extensive use of the
2012: Python programming language and the associated tools. PyRAF and
2013: PyFITS are products of the Space Telescope Science Institute, which is
2014: operated by AURA for NASA. The figures in this paper are all prepared
2015: by PyTioga\footnote{PyTioga is available at
2016: http://pytioga.sourceforge.net/.}, an open source software for
2017: creating figures and plots using Python, PDF, and TeX.
2018:
2019: % ADS
2020: This research has made use of the NASA Astrophysics Data System
2021: abstract service.
2022:
2023: % Grants
2024: Financial support was provided by the David and Lucille Packard
2025: Foundation.
2026:
2027: % For DEEP2
2028: Funding for the DEEP2 survey has been provided by NSF grant
2029: AST-0071048 and AST-0071198. Some of the data presented herein were
2030: obtained at the W.M. Keck Observatory, which is operated as a
2031: scientific partnership among the California Institute of Technology,
2032: the University of California and the National Aeronautics and Space
2033: Administration. The Observatory was made possible by the generous
2034: financial support of the W.M. Keck Foundation.
2035:
2036: % For GALEX
2037: We gratefully acknowledge NASA's support for construction, operation,
2038: and science analysis of the \emph{GALEX} mission, developed in
2039: cooperation with the Centre National d'Etudes Spatiales of France and
2040: the Korean Ministry of Science and Technology.
2041:
2042: % For other AEGIS
2043: For the full acknowledgement of the AEGIS data set, please refer to
2044: \citet{davi07}.
2045:
2046: % For Keck
2047: Last but not least, we recognize and acknowledge the very
2048: significant cultural role and reverence that the summit of Mauna Kea
2049: has always had within the indigenous Hawaiian community. We are most
2050: fortunate to have the opportunity to conduct observations from this
2051: mountain.
2052:
2053:
2054: %{\it Facilities:} \facility{\facility{Keck:II (DEIMOS)}}
2055:
2056:
2057:
2058: \appendix
2059: \section{Modeling the \NaID\ Absorption Line}
2060:
2061: We closely follow the model presented by \citet{rupk02, rupk05p1};
2062: readers are strongly encouraged to refer to these papers for a
2063: thorough discussion. Only a single component of the \NaID\ doublet is
2064: fitted in each spectrum; that is, we assume that our fitting of one
2065: absorption doublet is sensitive to the bulk property of the multiple
2066: \NaID\ absorbing clouds integrated along the sightline. While this is
2067: certainly an oversimplification \citep[see, e.g.,][for how complex an
2068: absorption profile with several kinematic components can
2069: appear]{rupk02}, the limited \snr\ does not allow more detailed
2070: analysis; for the cases in which observed \NaID\ absorption lines are
2071: well defined, the fitting results are reliable. For the sole purpose
2072: of detecting a Doppler shift from a systemic redshift (and \emph{not}
2073: measuring the exact velocity value), a single component fit is an
2074: acceptable compromise. We are effectively addressing whether an
2075: observed \NaID\ line profile can accommodate a single Doppler-shifted
2076: \NaID\ absorber.
2077:
2078: The observed intensity profile $I(\lambda)$ of an absorption line is
2079: fitted by a model profile parameterized in the optical depth space.
2080: That is, if the (velocity-independent) partial covering fraction is
2081: \Cf, each \NaID\ doublet is modeled by
2082: \[
2083: I(\lambda) = 1 - \Cf \left[1 - e^{-\tau_{\rm blue}(\lambda)-\tau_{\rm
2084: red}(\lambda)} \right] \ ,
2085: \]
2086: where $\tau_{\rm blue}(\lambda)$ and $\tau_{\rm red}(\lambda)$ are the
2087: optical depths of blue and red components of the doublet as a function
2088: of wavelength $\lambda$. (This expression is appropriate for a
2089: continuum-divided spectrum.) We assume that the velocity distribution
2090: of absorbing atoms within a cloud is Maxwellian, such that each
2091: absorption line is modeled as
2092: \[
2093: \tau(\lambda) = \tau_0 e^{-(\lambda-\lambda_0)^2/(\lambda_0b_D/c)^2}
2094: \ ,
2095: \]
2096: where $\tau_0$ is the optical depth at the line center $\lambda_0$,
2097: $c$ the speed of light, and $b_D$ is the Doppler parameter in units of
2098: speed. Since the ratio of oscillator strengths for blue and red sides
2099: of the \NaID\ doublet is two \citep{mort91}, we may assume that the
2100: central optical depths are related via $\tau_{0,{\rm blue}} / 2 =
2101: \tau_{0,{\rm red}}$. Hence the intensity profile of each \NaID\
2102: doublet component is
2103: \[
2104: I(\lambda) = 1 - \Cf
2105: \left\{ 1 - \exp{\left[
2106: -2\tau_0 e^{-(\lambda -\lambda_{\rm blue})^2
2107: /(\lambda_{\rm blue} b_D / c)^2}
2108: - \tau_0 e^{-(\lambda - \lambda_{\rm red})^2
2109: /(\lambda_{\rm red} b_D / c)^2}
2110: \right]} \right\} \ ,
2111: \]
2112: where $\lambda_{\rm blue} = 5889.9512~\ang$ and $\lambda_{\rm red} =
2113: 5895.9243~\ang$ are the rest-frame central wavelengths (in air) of
2114: blue and red lines of \NaID\ doublet. As noted by \citet{rupk05p1},
2115: the Maxwellian velocity distribution and velocity-independence of
2116: partial covering fraction are significant assumptions. In case there
2117: is an outflow, an observed \NaID\ absorption profile likely arises
2118: from several absorbing clouds entrained in a superwind
2119: (e.g., A. Fujita et al. 2008, in preparation), so their bulk kinematics would not be
2120: described simply by a Maxwellian distribution. Furthermore, if for
2121: example a spherical virialized cloud cuts through a sightline, the
2122: covering fraction must depend on the velocity of the constituent
2123: particles in the cloud; thus the assumption of velocity independence
2124: for covering fraction is not physically consistent in detail.
2125: Nevertheless, our analysis does not benefit from relaxing these
2126: constraints, as the quality of data does not warrant that such
2127: detailed information can be extracted.
2128:
2129: Before the above model is fitted, each spectrum around \NaID\ is
2130: divided by the pseudocontinuum, a straight line fitted to the
2131: variance-weighted spectra within the rest-frame regions of
2132: $5822$--$5842~\ang$ and $5910$--$5930~\ang$; the ranges are
2133: chosen after visual inspection for the best continuum normalization
2134: centered around \NaID, while avoiding other prominent stellar
2135: absorption features as much as possible. In a very strong outflow,
2136: the nebular emission line $\HeI~\lam~5876$ can contaminate the bluest
2137: wing of a Doppler-shifted \NaID\ component. Visual inspection
2138: indicates that few spectra suffer from such a contamination, so no
2139: account is taken for the \HeI\ emission in our measurements.
2140:
2141: We take $\lambda_{\rm red}$, $b_D$, $\tau_0$, and $\Cf$ as model
2142: parameters to be estimated via the Metropolis-Hastings algorithm
2143: \citep{metr53, hast70}, which yields a more robust confidence interval
2144: on a model parameter than that derived from a covariance matrix, when
2145: the probability distribution of the model parameter cannot be
2146: described as Gaussian. The sampling method also improves over
2147: \citeauthor{rupk05p1} in a sense that each Monte Carlo realization is
2148: not drawn from the ``best'' model which needs to be chosen a priori
2149: via least-square fitting, for example. The priors for the model
2150: parameters are assumed to have a uniform probability density over
2151: their upper and lower limits: $42~\km~\s^{-1} < b_D <
2152: 700~\km~\s^{-1}$, $0 < \tau_0 < 10^3$, $0 < \Cf < 1$, and $\lam_0$ is
2153: constrained to be within $\pm 700~\km~\s^{-1}$ of the systemic
2154: velocity. The \chisq\ probability distribution for the given degrees
2155: of freedom (i.e., the number of data points fitted minus the number of
2156: model parameters) is assumed for the likelihood function. Each
2157: sampling consists of $10^5$ iterations.
2158:
2159: \begin{figure}
2160: \scalefigure
2161: \plotone{f19.eps}
2162: \caption{ Few output windows from the \NaID\ measurement pipeline.
2163: In this figure, the distributions of model parameters are shown as the
2164: two-dimensional intensity color maps. Any location on the graphical
2165: user interface (\emph{left}) can be clicked on to extract the model
2166: spectrum overlayed on top of the data spectrum (\emph{right}). The
2167: relatively high-\snrpp\ spectrum yields well-behaving parameter
2168: distributions here. The figure also gives an example of typical model
2169: parameter distributions. On the left, the parameters plotted are
2170: $\tau_0$-$\lambda_{\rm red}$ (\emph{top left}), $b_D$-$\lambda_{\rm
2171: red}$ (\emph{top right}), $\Cf$-$\lambda_{\rm red}$ (\emph{bottom
2172: left}), and $\Cf$-$\tau_0$ (\emph{bottom right}). If marginalized
2173: over the parameter against which they are plotted, the distributions
2174: of $\lambda_{\rm red}$ and $b_D$ become roughly Gaussian, where as
2175: those of $\Cf$ and $\tau_0$ are not. It is apparent that \Cf\ is not
2176: well constrained for $\Cf \ga 0.45$, and $\tau_0$, while relatively
2177: well constrained, is highly correlated with \Cf. See \sect{Modeling
2178: NaID Absorption Lines} for detail.
2179: (\emph{A color version of this figure is available in the online journal.})
2180: }
2181: \label{fig.mcmc}
2182: \end{figure}
2183:
2184:
2185: The measurement pipeline is built on top of PyMC,\footnote{The code
2186: and documentation are available at http://trichech.us/.} which
2187: implements the Metropolis-Hasting algorithm as an MCMC sampler, and
2188: developed in Python. The distributions of model parameters are
2189: visually inspected with a graphical user interface (GUI) along various
2190: dimensions; see \fig{fig.mcmc}. The integrity of fitting to the data
2191: spectrum is checked at several interactively picked points on the
2192: two-dimensional intensity map of the distributions of model
2193: parameters. The GUI-driven visual inspection guards against the fits
2194: latching on to low-\snr\ features and helps to identify unphysical fit
2195: results. The distribution of $\lambda_{\rm red}$, marginalized over
2196: all the other parameters and convolved with the redshift uncertainty,
2197: needs to be roughly Gaussian and well bounded within $\pm
2198: 700~\km~\s^{-1}$ to make it into the high-\snr\ \NaID\ velocity sample
2199: (\sect{Modeling NaID Absorption Lines}). {\hl The software may be
2200: open sourced at a later date.}
2201:
2202:
2203: \begin{thebibliography}{}
2204:
2205: \bibitem[Adelman-McCarthy et al.(2006)]{adel06}
2206: Adelman-McCarthy, J.~K., et al.\ 2006, \apjs, 162, 38
2207:
2208: \bibitem[Armus et al.(1989)]{armu89} Armus, L., Heckman, T.~M., \&
2209: Miley, G.~K.\ 1989, \apj, 347, 727
2210:
2211: \bibitem[Baldry et al.(2004)]{bald04} Baldry, I.~K., Glazebrook, K.,
2212: Brinkmann, J., Ivezi{\'c}, {\v Z}., Lupton, R.~H., Nichol, R.~C., \&
2213: Szalay, A.~S.\ 2004, \apj, 600, 681
2214:
2215: \bibitem[Balogh et al.(2004)]{balo04} Balogh, M.~L., Baldry, I.~K.,
2216: Nichol, R., Miller, C., Bower, R., \& Glazebrook, K.\ 2004, \apjl,
2217: 615, L101
2218:
2219: \bibitem[Balogh et al.(2005)]{balo05} Balogh, M.~L., Miller, C.,
2220: Nichol, R., Zabludoff, A., \& Goto, T.\ 2005, \mnras, 360, 587
2221:
2222: \bibitem[Bekki et al.(2001)]{bekk01} Bekki, K., Shioya, Y., \& Couch,
2223: W.~J.\ 2001, \apjl, 547, L17
2224:
2225: \bibitem[Bell et al.(2004)]{bell04} Bell, E.~F., et al.\ 2004, \apj,
2226: 608, 752
2227:
2228: \bibitem[Bell et al.(2005)]{bell05} Bell, E.~F., et al.\ 2005, \apj,
2229: 625, 23
2230:
2231: \bibitem[Blanton(2006)]{blan06} Blanton, M.~R.\ 2006, \apj, 648, 268
2232:
2233: %\bibitem[Borne et al.(2000)]{born00} Borne, K.~D., Bushouse, H.,
2234: %Lucas, R.~A., \& Colina, L.\ 2000, \apjl, 529, L77
2235:
2236: \bibitem[Bower et al.(2006)]{bowe06} Bower, R.~G., Benson, A.~J.,
2237: Malbon, R., Helly, J.~C., Frenk, C.~S., Baugh, C.~M., Cole, S., \&
2238: Lacey, C.~G.\ 2006, \mnras, 370, 645
2239:
2240: \bibitem[Bridge et al.(2007)]{brid07} Bridge, C.~R., et al.\ 2007,
2241: \apj, 659, 931
2242:
2243: \bibitem[Brinchmann et al.(2004)]{brin04} Brinchmann, J., Charlot, S.,
2244: White, S.~D.~M., Tremonti, C., Kauffmann, G., Heckman, T., \&
2245: Brinkmann, J.\ 2004, \mnras, 351, 1151
2246:
2247: \bibitem[Brinchmann \& Ellis(2000)]{brin00} Brinchmann, J., \& Ellis,
2248: R.~S.\ 2000, \apjl, 536, L77
2249:
2250: \bibitem[Brown et al.(2007)]{brow07} Brown, M.~J.~I., Dey, A.,
2251: Jannuzi, B.~T., Brand, K., Benson, A.~J., Brodwin, M., Croton, D.~J.,
2252: \& Eisenhardt, P.~R.\ 2007, \apj, 654, 858
2253:
2254: \bibitem[Bruzual \& Charlot(2003)]{bruz03} Bruzual, G., \& Charlot,
2255: S.\ 2003, \mnras, 344, 1000
2256:
2257: \bibitem[Bundy et al.(2005)]{bund05} Bundy, K., Ellis, R.~S., \&
2258: Conselice, C.~J.\ 2005, \apj, 625, 621
2259:
2260: \bibitem[Bundy et al.(2007)]{bund07} Bundy, K., Treu, T., \& Ellis,
2261: R.~S.\ 2007, \apjl, 665, L5
2262:
2263: \bibitem[Bundy et al.(2006)]{bund06} Bundy, K., et al.\ 2006, \apj,
2264: 651, 120
2265:
2266: \bibitem[Canalizo et al.(2006)]{cana06} Canalizo, G., Stockton, A.,
2267: Brotherton, M.~S., \& Lacy, M.\ 2006, New Astronomy Review, 50, 650
2268:
2269: \bibitem[Chary \& Elbaz(2001)]{char01} Chary, R., \& Elbaz, D.\ 2001,
2270: \apj, 556, 562
2271:
2272: \bibitem[Chevalier \& Clegg(1985)]{chev85} Chevalier, R.~A., \& Clegg,
2273: A.~W.\ 1985, \nat, 317, 44
2274:
2275: \bibitem[Coil et al.(2004)]{coil04} Coil, A.~L., et al.\ 2004,
2276: \apj, 609, 525
2277:
2278: \bibitem[Coil et al.(2008)]{coil07} Coil, A.~L., et al.\ 2008,
2279: \apj, 672, 153
2280:
2281: \bibitem[Cooper et al.(2007)]{coop07a} Cooper, M.~C., et al.\
2282: 2007, \mnras, 376, 1445
2283:
2284: \bibitem[Cooper et al.(2008)]{coop07b} Cooper, M.~C., et al.\
2285: 2008, \mnras, 383, 1058
2286:
2287: \bibitem[Cowie et al.(1996)]{cowi96} Cowie, L.~L., Songaila, A., Hu,
2288: E.~M., \& Cohen, J.~G.\ 1996, \aj, 112, 839
2289:
2290: \bibitem[Cox et al.(2006)]{cox06} Cox, T.~J., Jonsson, P., Primack,
2291: J.~R., \& Somerville, R.~S.\ 2006, \mnras, 373, 1013
2292:
2293: \bibitem[Croton et al.(2006)]{crot06} Croton, D.~J., et al.\ 2006,
2294: \mnras, 365, 11
2295:
2296: %\bibitem[Cui et al.(2001)]{cui01} Cui, J., Xia, X.-Y., Deng, Z.-G.,
2297: %Mao, S., \& Zou, Z.-L.\ 2001, \aj, 122, 63
2298:
2299: \bibitem[Cuillandre et al.(2001)]{cuil01} Cuillandre, J.-C., Luppino,
2300: G., Starr, B., \& Isani, S.\ 2001, SF2A-2001: Semaine de
2301: l'Astrophysique Francaise, 605
2302:
2303: \bibitem[Davis et al.(2004)]{davi04} Davis, M., Gerke, B.~F.,
2304: \& Newman, J.~A.\ 2004, ArXiv Astrophysics e-prints, arXiv:astro-ph/0408344
2305:
2306: \bibitem[Davis et al.(2003)]{davi03} Davis, M., et al.\ 2003,
2307: \procspie, 4834, 161
2308:
2309: \bibitem[Davis et al.(2007)]{davi07} Davis, M., et al.\ 2007, \apjl,
2310: 660, L1
2311:
2312: \bibitem[Delgado et al.(2005)]{delg05} Delgado, R.~M.~G., Cervi{\~n}o,
2313: M., Martins, L.~P., Leitherer, C., \& Hauschildt, P.~H.\ 2005, \mnras,
2314: 357, 945
2315:
2316: \bibitem[Dressler \& Gunn(1983)]{dres83} Dressler, A., \& Gunn,
2317: J.~E.\ 1983, \apj, 270, 7
2318:
2319: \bibitem[Dressler et al.(2004)]{dres04} Dressler, A., Oemler, A.~J.,
2320: Poggianti, B.~M., Smail, I., Trager, S., Shectman, S.~A., Couch,
2321: W.~J., \& Ellis, R.~S.\ 2004, \apj, 617, 867
2322:
2323: \bibitem[Faber et al.(2003)]{fabe03} Faber, S.~M., et al.\
2324: 2003, \procspie, 4841, 1657
2325:
2326: \bibitem[Faber et al.(2007)]{fabe07} Faber, S.~M., et al.\ 2007, \apj,
2327: 665, 265
2328:
2329: \bibitem[Genzel et al.(2001)]{genz01} Genzel, R., Tacconi, L.~J.,
2330: Rigopoulou, D., Lutz, D., \& Tecza, M.\ 2001, \apj, 563, 527
2331:
2332: \bibitem[Goto(2005)]{goto05} Goto, T.\ 2005, \mnras, 357, 937
2333:
2334: \bibitem[Goto(2007)]{goto07} Goto, T.\ 2007, \mnras, 381, 187
2335:
2336: \bibitem[Gottl{\"o}ber et al.(2001)]{gott01} Gottl{\"o}ber, S.,
2337: Klypin, A., \& Kravtsov, A.~V.\ 2001, \apj, 546, 223
2338:
2339: \bibitem[Hastings(1970)]{hast70} Hastings, W.~K.\ 1970, Biometrika,
2340: 57, 97
2341:
2342: \bibitem[Heckman et al.(1990)]{heck90} Heckman, T.~M., Armus, L., \&
2343: Miley, G.~K.\ 1990, \apjs, 74, 833
2344:
2345: \bibitem[Heckman et al.(2000)]{heck00} Heckman, T.~M.,
2346: Lehnert, M.~D., Strickland, D.~K., \& Armus, L.\ 2000, \apjs, 129, 493
2347:
2348: \bibitem[Heckman et al.(2001)]{heck01} Heckman, T.~M., Sembach, K.~R.,
2349: Meurer, G.~R., Strickland, D.~K., Martin, C.~L., Calzetti, D., \&
2350: Leitherer, C.\ 2001, \apj, 554, 1021
2351:
2352: \bibitem[Hopkins et al.(2006)]{hopk06} Hopkins, P.~F., Hernquist, L.,
2353: Cox, T.~J., Di Matteo, T., Robertson, B., \& Springel, V.\ 2006,
2354: \apjs, 163, 1
2355:
2356: \bibitem[Horne(1986)]{horn86} Horne, K.\ 1986, \pasp, 98, 609
2357:
2358: %\bibitem[Jacoby et al.(1984)]{jaco84} Jacoby, G.~H., Hunter, D.~A., \&
2359: %Christian, C.~A.\ 1984, \apjs, 56, 257
2360:
2361: \bibitem[Kaviraj et al.(2007)]{kavi07} Kaviraj, S., Kirkby,
2362: L.~A., Silk, J., \& Sarzi, M.\ 2007, \mnras, 382, 960
2363:
2364: \bibitem[Kaviraj et al.(2008)]{kavi08} Kaviraj, S., et al.\
2365: 2008, \mnras, 388, 67
2366:
2367: \bibitem[Kennicutt(1998)]{kenn98} Kennicutt, R.~C., Jr.\ 1998, \araa,
2368: 36, 189
2369:
2370: \bibitem[Kobulnicky \& Phillips(2003)]{kobu03} Kobulnicky, H.~A., \&
2371: Phillips, A.~C.\ 2003, \apj, 599, 1031
2372:
2373: \bibitem[Kurtz \& Mink(1998)]{kurt98} Kurtz, M.~J., \& Mink,
2374: D.~J.\ 1998, \pasp, 110, 934
2375:
2376: \bibitem[Le Floc'h et al.(2005)]{lefl05} Le Floc'h, E., et al.\ 2005,
2377: \apj, 632, 169
2378:
2379: \bibitem[Lilly et al.(1996)]{lill96} Lilly, S.~J., Le Fevre, O.,
2380: Hammer, F., \& Crampton, D.\ 1996, \apjl, 460, L1
2381:
2382: \bibitem[Lotz et al.(2004)]{lotz04} Lotz, J.~M., Primack, J., \&
2383: Madau, P.\ 2004, \aj, 128, 163
2384:
2385: \bibitem[Lotz et al.(2008)]{lotz06a} Lotz, J.~M., et al.\ 2008,
2386: \apj, 672, 177
2387:
2388: %\bibitem[Lotz et al.(2006b)]{lotz06b} Lotz, J.~M., Madau, P.,
2389: %Giavalisco, M., Primack, J., \& Ferguson, H.~C.\ 2006, \apj, 636, 592
2390:
2391: \bibitem[Madau et al.(1996)]{mada96} Madau, P., Ferguson, H.~C.,
2392: Dickinson, M.~E., Giavalisco, M., Steidel, C.~C., \& Fruchter, A.\
2393: 1996, \mnras, 283, 1388
2394:
2395: \bibitem[Martin(2005)]{mart05} Martin, C.~L.\ 2005, \apj, 621,
2396: 227
2397:
2398: \bibitem[Martin(2006)]{mart06} Martin, C.~L.\ 2006, \apj, 647, 222
2399:
2400: \bibitem[Melbourne et al.(2005)]{melb05} Melbourne, J., Koo, D.~C., \&
2401: Le Floc'h, E.\ 2005, \apjl, 632, L65
2402:
2403: \bibitem[Metropolis et al.(1953)]{metr53} Metropolis, N., et al.\
2404: 1953, J.~Chem.~Phys., 21, 1087
2405:
2406: \bibitem[Mihos \& Hernquist(1996)]{miho96} Mihos, J.~C., \& Hernquist,
2407: L.\ 1996, \apj, 464, 641
2408:
2409: \bibitem[Morton(1991)]{mort91} Morton, D.~C.\ 1991, \apjs, 77,
2410: 119
2411:
2412: %\bibitem[Murphy et al.(1996)]{murp96} Murphy, T.~W., Jr., Armus, L.,
2413: %Matthews, K., Soifer, B.~T., Mazzarella, J.~M., Shupe, D.~L., Strauss,
2414: %M.~A., \& Neugebauer, G.\ 1996, \aj, 111, 1025
2415:
2416: \bibitem[Murray et al.(2007)]{murr07} Murray, N., Martin, C.~L.,
2417: Quataert, E., \& Thompson, T.~A.\ 2007, \apj, 660, 211
2418:
2419: \bibitem[Noeske et al.(2007a)]{noes07a} Noeske, K.~G., et al.\ 2007,
2420: \apjl, 660, L43
2421:
2422: \bibitem[Noeske et al.(2007b)]{noes07b} Noeske, K.~G., et al.\ 2007,
2423: \apjl, 660, L47
2424:
2425: \bibitem[Poggianti et al.(2001)]{pogg01} Poggianti, B.~M., Bressan,
2426: A., \& Franceschini, A.\ 2001, \apj, 550, 195
2427:
2428: \bibitem[Poggianti \& Wu(2000)]{pogg00} Poggianti, B.~M., \& Wu, H.\
2429: 2000, \apj, 529, 157
2430:
2431: \bibitem[Rieke et al.(2004)]{riek04} Rieke, G.~H., et al.\ 2004,
2432: \apjs, 154, 25
2433:
2434: %\bibitem[Rupke \& Veilleux(2005)]{rupk05a} Rupke, D.~S., \&
2435: %Veilleux, S.\ 2005, \apjl, 631, L37
2436:
2437: \bibitem[Rupke et al.(2002)]{rupk02} Rupke, D.~S., Veilleux,
2438: S., \& Sanders, D.~B.\ 2002, \apj, 570, 588
2439:
2440: \bibitem[Rupke et al.(2005a)]{rupk05p1} Rupke, D.~S., Veilleux, S., \&
2441: Sanders, D.~B.\ 2005, \apjs, 160, 87
2442:
2443: \bibitem[Rupke et al.(2005b)]{rupk05p2} Rupke, D.~S., Veilleux, S., \&
2444: Sanders, D.~B.\ 2005, \apjs, 160, 115
2445:
2446: \bibitem[Sanders(2004)]{sand04} Sanders, D.~B.\ 2004, Advances in
2447: Space Research, 34, 535
2448:
2449: \bibitem[Sanders \& Mirabel(1996)]{sand96} Sanders, D.~B., \& Mirabel,
2450: I.~F.\ 1996, \araa, 34, 749
2451:
2452: \bibitem[Sato \& Martin(2006)]{sato06} Sato, T., \& Martin, C.~L.\
2453: 2006, \apj, 647, 946
2454:
2455: \bibitem[Schawinski et al.(2006)]{scha06} Schawinski, K., et al.\
2456: 2006, ArXiv Astrophysics e-prints, arXiv:astro-ph/0601036
2457:
2458: \bibitem[Schwartz \& Martin(2004)]{schw04} Schwartz, C.~M., \& Martin,
2459: C.~L.\ 2004, \apj, 610, 201
2460:
2461: \bibitem[Schwartz et al.(2006)]{schw06} Schwartz, C.~M., Martin,
2462: C.~L., Chandar, R., Leitherer, C., Heckman, T.~M., \& Oey, M.~S.\
2463: 2006, \apj, 646, 858
2464:
2465: \bibitem[Seibert et al.(2005)]{seib05} Seibert, M., et al.\ 2005,
2466: \apjl, 619, L55
2467:
2468: \bibitem[Shapley et al.(2003)]{shap03} Shapley, A.~E., Steidel, C.~C.,
2469: Pettini, M., \& Adelberger, K.~L.\ 2003, \apj, 588, 65
2470:
2471: %\bibitem[Stewart et al.(2000)]{stew00} Stewart, S.~G., et al.\
2472: %2000, \apj, 529, 201
2473:
2474: %\bibitem[Struck(1999)]{stru99} Struck, C.\ 1999, \physrep, 321, 1
2475:
2476: \bibitem[Tonry \& Davis(1979)]{tonr79} Tonry, J., \& Davis, M.\ 1979,
2477: \aj, 84, 1511
2478:
2479: \bibitem[Tremaine et al.(2002)]{trem02} Tremaine, S., et al.\ 2002,
2480: \apj, 574, 740
2481:
2482: \bibitem[Tremonti et al.(2005)]{trem05} Tremonti, C., Kennicutt, R.,
2483: \& Heckman, T.\ 2005, Starbursts: From 30 Doradus to Lyman Break
2484: Galaxies, 329, 80P
2485:
2486: \bibitem[Tremonti et al.(2007)]{trem07} Tremonti, C.~A.,
2487: Moustakas, J., \& Diamond-Stanic, A.~M.\ 2007, \apjl, 663, L77
2488:
2489: \bibitem[Tremonti et al.(2004)]{trem04} Tremonti, C.~A., et al.\ 2004,
2490: \apj, 613, 898
2491:
2492: \bibitem[Treu et al.(2005)]{treu05} Treu, T., et al.\ 2005, \apj, 633,
2493: 174
2494:
2495: \bibitem[van Gorkom et al.(1989)]{vang89} van Gorkom, J.~H., Knapp,
2496: G.~R., Ekers, R.~D., Ekers, D.~D., Laing, R.~A., \& Polk, K.~S.\ 1989,
2497: \aj, 97, 708
2498:
2499: \bibitem[Veilleux et al.(2005)]{veil05} Veilleux, S., Cecil,
2500: G., \& Bland-Hawthorn, J.\ 2005, \araa, 43, 769
2501:
2502: \bibitem[Veilleux et al.(1995)]{veil95} Veilleux, S., Kim, D.-C.,
2503: Sanders, D.~B., Mazzarella, J.~M., \& Soifer, B.~T.\ 1995, \apjs, 98,
2504: 171
2505:
2506: \bibitem[Weiner et al.(2005)]{wein05} Weiner, B.~J., et al.\ 2005,
2507: \apj, 620, 595
2508:
2509: \bibitem[Weiner et al.(2007)]{wein07} Weiner, B.~J., et al.\ 2007,
2510: \apjl, 660, L39
2511:
2512: \bibitem[Weiner et al.(2009)]{wein08} Weiner, B.~J., et al.\
2513: 2009, \apj, 692, 187
2514:
2515: \bibitem[Willmer et al.(2006)]{will06} Willmer, C.~N.~A., et al.\
2516: 2006, \apj, 647, 853
2517:
2518: \bibitem[Woo et al.(2006)]{woo06} Woo, J.-H., Treu, T., Malkan, M.~A.,
2519: \& Blandford, R.~D.\ 2006, \apj, 645, 900
2520:
2521: \bibitem[Yan \& DEEP2 Team(2006)]{yan06aas} Yan, R., \& DEEP2 Team
2522: 2006, Bulletin of the American Astronomical Society, 38, 1159
2523:
2524: \bibitem[Yan et al.(2006)]{yan06} Yan, R., Newman, J.~A., Faber,
2525: S.~M., Konidaris, N., Koo, D., \& Davis, M.\ 2006, \apj, 648, 281
2526:
2527: \bibitem[Yang et al.(2006)]{yang06} Yang, Y., Tremonti, C.~A.,
2528: Zabludoff, A.~I., \& Zaritsky, D.\ 2006, \apjl, 646, L33
2529:
2530: \bibitem[Yang et al.(2004)]{yang04} Yang, Y., Zabludoff, A.~I.,
2531: Zaritsky, D., Lauer, T.~R., \& Mihos, J.~C.\ 2004, \apj, 607, 258
2532:
2533: \bibitem[Zabludoff et al.(1996)]{zabl96} Zabludoff, A.~I., Zaritsky,
2534: D., Lin, H., Tucker, D., Hashimoto, Y., Shectman, S.~A., Oemler, A.,
2535: \& Kirshner, R.~P.\ 1996, \apj, 466, 104
2536:
2537: \end{thebibliography}
2538:
2539:
2540: \end{document}
2541:
2542: