1: %\documentstyle[12pt,aasms4]{article}
2: %\documentstyle[12pt,aaspp4]{article}
3: \documentclass[12pt,preprint]{aastex}
4: \begin{document}
5: \newcommand{\up}[1]{\ifmmode^{\rm #1}\else$^{\rm #1}$\fi}
6: \newcommand{\zdot}{\makebox[0pt][l]{.}}
7: \newcommand{\upd}{\up{d}}
8: \newcommand{\uph}{\up{h}}
9: \newcommand{\upm}{\up{m}}
10: \newcommand{\ups}{\up{s}}
11: \newcommand{\arcd}{\ifmmode^{\circ}\else$^{\circ}$\fi}
12: \newcommand{\arcm}{\ifmmode{'}\else$'$\fi}
13: \newcommand{\arcs}{\ifmmode{''}\else$''$\fi}
14:
15: \title{The Araucaria Project. The Distance to the Local Group Galaxy WLM
16: from Near-Infrared Photometry of Cepheid Variables
17: \footnote{Based on observations obtained with the ESO NTT for
18: Programmes 077.D-0423 and 080.D-0047(B) and with the Magellan telescope
19: at the Las Campanas Observatory}
20: }
21: \author{Wolfgang Gieren}
22: \affil{Universidad de Concepci{\'o}n, Departamento de Fisica, Astronomy Group,
23: Casilla 160-C, Concepci{\'o}n, Chile}
24: \authoremail{wgieren@astro-udec.cl}
25: \author{Grzegorz Pietrzy{\'n}ski}
26: \affil{Universidad de Concepci{\'o}n, Departamento de Fisica, Astronomy
27: Group,
28: Casilla 160-C,
29: Concepci{\'o}n, Chile}
30: \affil{Warsaw University Observatory, Al. Ujazdowskie 4, 00-478, Warsaw,
31: Poland}
32: \authoremail{pietrzyn@astrouw.edu.pl}
33: \author{Olaf Szewczyk}
34: \affil{Universidad de Concepci{\'o}n, Departamento de Fisica, Astronomy
35: Group,
36: Casilla 160-C, Concepci{\'o}n, Chile}
37: \authoremail{szewczyk@astro-udec.cl}
38: \author{Igor Soszy{\'n}ski}
39: \affil{Warsaw University Observatory, Al. Ujazdowskie 4, 00-478, Warsaw,
40: Poland}
41: \authoremail{soszynsk@astrouw.edu.pl}
42: \author{Fabio Bresolin}
43: \affil{Institute for Astronomy, University of Hawaii at Manoa, 2680 Woodlawn
44: Drive,
45: Honolulu HI 96822, USA}
46: \authoremail{bresolin@ifa.hawaii.edu}
47: \author{Rolf-Peter Kudritzki}
48: \affil{Institute for Astronomy, University of Hawaii at Manoa, 2680 Woodlawn
49: Drive,
50: Honolulu HI 96822, USA}
51: \authoremail{kud@ifa.hawaii.edu}
52: \author{Miguel A. Urbaneja}
53: \affil{Institute for Astronomy, University of Hawaii at Manoa, 2680 Woodlawn
54: Drive,
55: Honolulu HI 96822, USA}
56: \authoremail{urbaneja@ifa.hawaii.edu}
57: \author{Jesper Storm}
58: \affil{Astrophysikalisches Institut Potsdam, An der Sternwarte 16, D-14482
59: Potsdam, Germany}
60: \authoremail{jstorm@aip.de}
61: \author{Dante Minniti}
62: \affil{Departamento de Astronomia y Astrofisica, Pontificia Universidad Cat{\'o}lica
63: de Chile, Casilla 306, Santiago 22, Chile}
64: \authoremail{dante@astro.puc.cl}
65:
66:
67: \begin{abstract}
68: We have obtained deep images in the near-infrared J and K filters for several fields
69: in the Local Group galaxy WLM. We report intensity mean magnitudes for 31 Cepheids
70: located in these fields which we previously discovered in a wide-field optical imaging
71: survey of WLM. The data define tight period-luminosity relations in both near-infrared bands
72: which we use to derive the total reddening of the Cepheids in WLM and the true distance modulus
73: of the galaxy from a multiwavelength analysis of the reddened distance moduli
74: in the VIJK bands. From this, we
75: obtain the values E(B-V) = 0.082 $\pm$ 0.02, and $(m-M)_{0} = 24.924 \pm 0.042$
76: mag, with a systematic uncertainty in the distance of about $\pm$ 3\%. This Cepheid distance agrees extremely
77: well with the distance of WLM determined from the I-band TRGB method by ourselves
78: and others. Most of the reddening of the Cepheids in WLM (0.06 mag) is produced inside
79: the galaxy, demonstrating again the need for an accurate determination of the
80: total reddening and/or the use of infrared photometry to derive Cepheid
81: distances which are accurate to 3\% or better, even for small irregular galaxies
82: like WLM.
83: \end{abstract}
84:
85: \keywords{distance scale - galaxies: distances and redshifts - galaxies:
86: individual(WLM) - stars: Cepheids - infrared photometry}
87:
88: \section{Introduction}
89:
90: The effectiveness of using multiwavelength optical and near-infrared (NIR) observations
91: of Cepheid variables for distance determination of galaxies has been known for a long
92: time (McGonegal et al. 1982; Madore \& Freedman 1991). Only recently however the
93: technical problems with obtaining accurate and reliable NIR photometry for faint objects
94: in dense regions have been solved. Using NIR observations of Cepheids provides a number
95: of advantages for accurate distance work. First, the total and differential reddening
96: is significantly reduced in comparison to the optical bandpasses. Second, the Cepheid
97: period-luminosity (PL) relation becomes steeper toward longer wavelengths, and its intrinsic dispersion
98: becomes smaller (e.g. Fouqu{\'e} et al. 2007), both factors helping in deriving a more accurate distance. Third,
99: metallicity effects on the PL relation in the near-IR are expected to be less important than at
100: optical wavelengths (Bono et al. 1999). Fourth, and very importantly from an observational
101: point of view, the amplitudes of variability are significantly smaller in the NIR
102: than at optical wavelengths, so even random single-epoch observations
103: approximate the mean magnitude reasonably well. If the period and optical light curve
104: of a Cepheid is accurately known, it is possible to derive its mean magnitude in the NIR bands
105: with an impressive 1-2\% accuracy from just one single-epoch observation (Soszy{\'n}ski
106: et al. 2005).
107:
108: Simultaneously studying NIR and optical PL relations of Cepheids provides another
109: important advantage. By combining the reddened distance moduli in the optical
110: and NIR it is possible to derive both the total reddening and the true distance modulus
111: with very good accuracy. This has been demonstrated in the previous papers of our ongoing
112: Araucaria Project which reported the distances to NGC 300 (Gieren et al. 2005b), IC 1613
113: (Pietrzy{\'n}ski et al. 2006), NGC 6822 (Gieren et al. 2006), NGC 3109 (Soszy{\'n}ski
114: et al. 2006) and NGC 55 (Gieren et al. 2008)
115: derived by this method. For all these galaxies, we were able to determine
116: their distances {\it with respect to the LMC} with a 3-5\% accuracy from our technique.
117: The possibility to
118: measure the reddening produced {\it inside} these galaxies has been a fundamental step
119: towards achieving this accuracy. We recall here that the principal purpose of the Araucaria
120: Project is to measure the distances to a sample of nearby galaxies with widely different
121: environmental properties with different stellar distance indicators, and compare the results
122: to determine the metallicity and age dependences of each standard candle.
123:
124: In a previous paper (Pietrzy{\'n}ski et al. 2007; hereafter Paper I),
125: we reported on an extensive wide-field imaging survey for Cepheids in the WLM irregular
126: galaxy carried out in the optical V and I bands in which we have discovered 60 variables, greatly extending
127: the small sample of 15 Cepheids
128: which had been previously discovered in WLM by Sandage \& Carlson (1985). The WLM irregular galaxy
129: is an important target of the Araucaria Project because of its low metallicity
130: environment which allows to study the behavior of stellar
131: distances indicators in the very low-metallicity regime. Indeed, the young stellar population of WLM
132: with a mean metallicity of -0.8 dex (Bresolin et al. 2006; Urbaneja et al. 2008), is
133: slightly more metal-poor than that of the SMC.
134: From the VI optical
135: photometry of the Cepheids we obtained in Paper I a true distance modulus of 25.144 mag for WLM.
136: In the course of the work for the present paper, we discovered that unfortunately
137: we had confused in Paper I the distance moduli for the V and Wesenheit bands; actually our
138: adopted best value for the WLM true distance modulus from the reddening-free Wesenheit index in Paper I
139: is 25.014 mag (and not 25.144 mag). In order to improve on the distance value derived from optical
140: photometry of the Cepheids,
141: it was clearly in order to extend the Cepheid distance work to the near-infrared
142: domain and obtain a result which is unaffected by reddening. This
143: is the strategy we have been employing in all the Araucaria work
144: we have been conducting so far. In this paper, we therefore extend the
145: light curve coverage for 31 Cepheids in WLM to the NIR J and K bands. We then utilize the
146: multiband data available for these stars for an accurate determination of the total (average)
147: interstellar extinction to the Cepheids in WLM, and determine an improved Cepheid distance
148: to the galaxy from the multiwavelength method.
149:
150: The paper is organized as follows. In section 2 we describe the NIR observations, data reductions
151: and calibration of our photometry. In section 3 we derive the J- and K-band Cepheid PL relations
152: in WLM from our data and determine the true distance modulus to the galaxy from a multiwavelength
153: analysis. In section 4, we discuss our results, and in section 5 we summarize our conclusions.
154:
155:
156:
157: \section{Observations, Data Reduction and Calibration}
158:
159: The near-infrared data presented in this paper were collected during three observing runs in
160: 2006 and 2007. We have been using two different telescopes and cameras for the data acqisition.
161: On September 22 and 23, 2006, and on November 24 and 25, 2007 we used the SOFI infrared camera
162: at the NTT at La Silla Observatory with a $4.9 \times 4.9$ arcmin field of view and a pixel scale of
163: 0.288 arcsec/pixel, while on 22 and 23 November 2007 the PANIC infrared camera attached to the
164: Baade Magellan Telescope at Las Campanas Observatory was used. For the PANIC observations, the
165: field of view was $2.1 \times 2.1$ arcmin, and the pixel scale was 0.125 arcsec/pixel.
166:
167: During the four nights at La Silla which were all photometric, we obtained deep $Js$ and $Ks$
168: observations of one field in WLM containing 23 Cepheid variables for which previous optical light curves
169: were presented in Paper I. With the PANIC camera we were able to observe three additional smaller fields partly
170: overlapping with the SOFI field, under photometric conditions.
171: The locations of all these fields are shown in Fig. 1 and their coordinates are given in Table 1.
172: Alltogether, the four observed fields in WLM contain 31 Cepheids.
173: In order to account for the rapid
174: variations of the sky brightness in the near-infrared bands we used a dithering technique,
175: as described in the previous papers of the Araucaria Project reporting infrared photometry
176: of Cepheid variables. Total integration times were 15 min in the $J$ and 60 min in the $K$ band.
177:
178: All the reductions and calibrations were performed with the pipeline developed in the course
179: of the Araucaria Project and described in detail in earlier papers of this series. The subtraction of the
180: sky brightness was done in a two-step process which included the masking of stars with the
181: IRAF xdimsum package (Pietrzynski \& Gieren 2002). Next, each single image was flat-fielded and stacked
182: into the final deep field image. PSF photometry and aperture corrections were performed as desribed in
183: Pietrzynski et al. (2002). The calibration of the photometry onto the standard system was based
184: on the observations of 22 standard stars from the UKIRT list (Hawarden et al. 2001). All of them
185: were observed along with the target fields in WLM at different airmasses and under photometric
186: conditions. The large number of standard stars observed on each of the six photometric nights
187: for this programme allowed us to obtain the absolute photometric zero points with an accuracy
188: close to 0.01 mag, in both filters. Deviations of the photometric zero points obtained independently for different
189: nights never exceeded 0.02 mag, for both SOFI and PANIC data. This is demonstrated in Fig. 2.
190: For an external check of our photometry, we compared our calibrated magnitudes with those
191: of the 2MASS catalog for the (small) sample of common stars, not finding any evidence for a significant
192: zero point difference in J and/or K (see Fig. 3).
193:
194: We present the calibrated individual near-infrared magnitudes for all Cepheids located in the observed fields
195: in Table 2 which lists the stars' IDs, heliocentric Julian days of the observations (mid-integrations), and the
196: measurements in J and K with their standard deviations. Depending on the positions of the Cepheids
197: in the galaxy, the number of individual JK observations range from one to six. On average, we were able
198: to collect 3 JK observations per star. The WLM Cepheids observed in the near-infrared span a period
199: range from 54 down to 2.5 days.
200:
201:
202:
203: \section{Near-Infrared Period-Luminosity Relations}
204:
205: The intensity mean magnitudes of the Cepheids were derived by taking a straight average of the
206: individual random-phase fluxes measured of each variable, and converting the average fluxes back into
207: magnitudes. In principle a more accurate procedure to determine the mean magnitudes
208: in J and K would be the recipy described by Soszynski et al. (2005) which uses the V and I light
209: curves of the variables and the known phases of the near-infrared observations. However, in the
210: present case of WLM the epoch difference between the near-infrared data reported in this
211: paper, and the previous VI data reported in Paper I is so large, typically some 200 pulsation cycles,
212: that with the limited
213: accuracy of the periods of the variables derived in Paper I the phasing of the near-IR data becomes very
214: uncertain. While this is unfortunate, the simple taking of a straight average of several random-phase
215: magnitudes in a near-IR band of a Cepheid still does produce a rather accurate mean magnitude,
216: given the low light curve amplitudes of Cepheid variables at these wavelengths of typically
217: 0.3 mag for stars with periods less than 10 days (e.g. Persson et al. 2004). For the one
218: long-period Cepheid in WLM, cep001 with a period of 54 days, the amplitude of the K-band
219: light curve is expected to be about 0.5 mag, but for this variable we have obtained six observations
220: at different phases which makes us expect that their mean value is very close to the
221: true mean magnitude of the variable, in the two bands we observed.
222:
223: Table 3 gives the intensity mean J and K magnitudes of the individual Cepheids, with their
224: estimated uncertainties from the number and accuracy of the individual observations leading
225: to the adopted mean magnitude. We also provide the periods (adopted from Paper I). In Figures 4 and 5
226: we show the period-mean magnitude relations in the J and K bands as defined by the data
227: in Table 3. There is
228: one Cepheid, cep038, which is clearly over-luminous in both PL diagrams, by about 1.5 mag in J
229: and about 2 mag in K. We assume that the very bright magnitude of this variable is caused
230: by a nearby bright object which is not resolved in our images. Since the V and I magnitudes
231: of cep038 are normal for its period (see Paper I), the blend must be a very red object.
232: The ocurrence of at least one strongly blended Cepheid in WLM in a sample of about 30 stars is quite
233: expected from the result obtained by Bresolin et al. (2005) who studied the blending
234: of Cepheids in NGC 300, at about twice the distance of WLM,
235: from a comparison of ground-based and HST/ACS photometry, finding three
236: strongly blended Cepheids in a sample of 16 Cepheids in this galaxy. For the
237: following distance analysis, we exclude star cep038.
238:
239: For the reasons discussed in Paper I, and in conformity with the approach adopted there,
240: we adopt a period cutoff of log P (days) = 0.5 for the distance analysis, retaining only the
241: Cepheids with longer periods in the sample. This ensures that
242: possible overtone pulsators are likely to be excluded in the sample adopted for
243: the distance determination, and it eliminates the variables with the lowest signal-to-noise
244: ratio in the photometry. The final sample consists of Cepheids 001-033 in Table 3 (24 stars). Note
245: that the strongly blended Cepheid cep038 is eliminated from the final sample also on the basis of the
246: adopted period cutoff.
247:
248: >From the 24 Cepheids in the final sample, least-squares fits to a line yield slopes
249: of -3.067 $\pm$ 0.204 in K, and -3.073 $\pm$ 0.233
250: in J, respectively. These slope values are shallower than, but within 1 $\sigma$ consistent with
251: the slopes for the Cepheid PL relations in the LMC, which are -3.261 in K, and -3.153 in J (Persson et al. 2004).
252: Following the procedure we have used in our previous papers, we adopt the LMC
253: slopes of Persson et al. (2004) in our fits. This yields the following PL relations for WLM in the J and K bands: \\
254:
255:
256: J = -3.153 log P + (22.795 $\pm$ 0.055) $\sigma$ = 0.256 \\
257:
258:
259: K = -3.261 log P + (22.436 $\pm$ 0.048) $\sigma$ = 0.223 \\
260:
261:
262:
263: The dispersions are larger than the dispersions of the J and K band PL relations found in the LMC
264: by Persson et al. (2004), which are 0.12 mag in both bands. These values should closely resemble the
265: {\it intrinsic} dispersions of these relations, given that they are based on almost a hundred Cepheids
266: whose mean magnitudes were derived from full infrared light curves. The dispersions of the present
267: PL relations observed in WLM are larger mainly because they are based on a smaller number of stars,
268: and on mean magnitudes which are less precise than in the LMC work of Persson et al. due to the existence
269: of a few phase points only for each Cepheid.
270: In order to determine the relative distance moduli between WLM and the LMC, we need to convert the NICMOS (LCO)
271: photometric system used by Persson et al. (2004) to the UKIRT system utilized in this paper.
272: According to Hawarden et al. (2001),
273: there are just zero point offsets between the UKIRT and NICMOS systems (e.g. no color dependences)
274: in the J and K filters, which amount to 0.034 and 0.015 mag, respectively. Applying
275: these offsets, and assuming an LMC true distance modulus of 18.50 as in our previous
276: work in the Araucaria Project, we derive distance moduli for WLM of 24.993 $\pm$ 0.055 mag
277: in the J band, and 24.915 $\pm$ 0.045 mag in the K band.
278:
279: As in our previous work, we will combine the distance moduli obtained from the near-infrared
280: photometry with the values we had previously derived in the optical VI bands in Paper I, to obtain
281: a very robust determination of both the true distance modulus of WLM, and the total (mean) reddening
282: of the WLM Cepheids in our sample. When re-analyzing the results of Paper I in the course of this work, we detected that
283: by accident we had interchanged the distance modulus results reported for the V and Wesenheit bands (p. 601 of Paper I). The
284: correct values for the reddened distance moduli in V and I derived from our photometry in Paper I
285: are 25.156 $\pm$ 0.04 mag and 25.121 $\pm$ 0.03 mag, respectively.
286: As in our previous papers in this series
287: we adopt the extinction law of Schlegel et al. (1998) and fit a straight line to the relation
288: $(m-M)_{0} = (m-M)_{\lambda} - A_{\lambda} = (m-M)_{\lambda} - E(B-V) * R_{\lambda}$.
289: Using the corrected, reddened distance moduli in the V and I photometric bands as given above, together with
290: the values for the J and K bands obtained in this paper, we obtain the following values
291: for the reddening and the true distance modulus of WLM from the multiwavelength analysis: \\
292:
293: $ E(B-V) = 0.082 \pm 0.020$
294:
295: $(m-M)_{0} = 24.924 \pm 0.042$,
296:
297: This corresponds to a distance of WLM of 0.97 $\pm$ 0.02 Mpc.
298:
299: In Table 4, we give the adopted values of $R_{\lambda}$ and the unreddened, true distance moduli
300: in each band which are obtained with the reddening value determined in our multi-wavelength
301: solution. The agreement between the unreddened distance moduli obtained in each band is very good.
302: In Fig. 6, we plot the apparent Cepheid distance moduli for WLM in VIJK as a function of $R_{\lambda}$, and the
303: best fitting straight line to the data. It is appreciated that the total reddening, and the true distance
304: modulus of WLM are indeed very well determined from this fit. By comparison with the foreground
305: reddening of 0.02 mag (Schlegel et al. 1998) it is seen that most of the total average reddening
306: of the WLM Cepheids is produced inside their host galaxy.
307:
308:
309: \section{Discussion}
310: As in the previous distance determinations of Local and Sculptor Group irregular and spiral galaxies
311: from combined Cepheid near-infrared and optical photometry (see references cited in the Introduction)
312: obtained in the Araucaria Project, our combined near-infrared and optical data for a sample of
313: 31 Cepheids in WLM have led to a very robust distance determination for this relatively distant
314: Local Group galaxy. Again, as for the other galaxies we have studied so far, we find that the
315: slopes of the Cepheid PL relations in WLM in the near-infrared J and K bands are statistically in
316: agreement with the one defined by the LMC Cepheids (Persson et al. 2004). Indeed, the free fits
317: to the data discussed in section 3 of this paper yield slopes in both J and K which agree
318: within 1 $\sigma$ with the adopted slope of Persson et al. (2004) from the LMC Cepheids. If we
319: exclude the long-period Cepheid in the fits which carries a strong weight in the linear regression,
320: the resulting values for the slopes of the PL relation in J and K become -2.868 $\pm$ 0.426,
321: and -2.756 $\pm$ 0.368, respectively. Due to their large uncertainties, which is a consequence
322: of the now very restricted period range of the remaining 23 Cepheid sample, these values still
323: agree within 1.5 $\sigma$ with the slopes of the Cepheid PL relation as determined in the LMC
324: by Persson et al. (2004). The observed slopes
325: of the IR PL relations in WLM are therefore consistent with the claim made by Gieren et al. (2005a)
326: and others that the slope of the Cepheid PL relation is metallicity-independent, at least
327: in near-infrared bands and for metallicities in the range
328: from -0.35 dex appropriate for the LMC Cepheids (Luck et al. 1998) down to -0.8 to -1.0 dex, which is the
329: metallicity of the young stellar population in WLM (Urbaneja et al. 2008), IC 1613 (Bresolin et al. 2007)
330: and NGC 3109 (Evans et al. 2007) as determined from quantitative spectroscopy of blue supergiants.
331: These results from our project support our adopted procedure to use the extremely well-determined slopes
332: of the LMC Cepheid PL relations for the distance determination of our target galaxies.
333:
334: The distance of WLM derived in this paper is 0.09 mag shorter than the one derived in Paper I from
335: the Wesenheit index and agrees more closely with the distance for this galaxy derived from
336: the I-band magnitude of the tip of the red giant branch. Indeed, Lee et al. (1993) obtained
337: 24.87 $\pm$ 0.08 mag for the distance of WLM from the TRGB method, while Minniti \& Zijlstra
338: measured 24.75 $\pm$ 0.1 from their data. More recent results from the same method are
339: 24.85 $\pm$ 0.08 mag obtained by McConnachie et al. (2005), and
340: 24.93 $\pm$ 0.04 mag, obtained by Rizzi et al. (2007).
341: Our own TRGB distance modulus of WLM reported in Paper I
342: is 24.91 $\pm$ 0.08. All these values are in excellent agreement with the WLM distance modulus
343: of 24.92 obtained in this paper from the Cepheid VIJK photometry. Our Cepheid distance modulus
344: is also in excellent agreement with the WLM distance modulus of 24.99 $\pm$ 0.10 mag
345: derived very recently by Urbaneja et al. (2008) from
346: a quantitative analysis of low resolution spectra of A and B supergiants via the flux-weighted
347: gravity-luminosity relation of Kudritzki et al. (2003, 2008). Other distance measurements reported
348: for WLM include the work of Valcheva et al. (2007) who obtained 24.84 $\pm$ 0.14 mag from IR photometry
349: of 4 Cepheids, Rejkuba et al. (2000) who measured 24.95 $\pm$ 0.13 mag from the V magnitude
350: of the horizontal branch in WLM, and Dolphin (2000) who obtained 24.88 $\pm$ 0.09 mag from
351: fitting the V, I color-magnitude diagram of the galaxy. All these distance measurements agree
352: within the uncertainties with the present Cepheid result.
353:
354: In the previous Cepheid
355: studies of our project in other Araucaria target galaxies the agreement between the distance
356: obtained from the VI Wesenheit index, and the full multiwavelength solution including
357: the near-infrared bands was usually better (in the order of 2 \%). Probably our result for WLM just demonstrates
358: that a truly reliable and robust distance determination from Cepheids definitively requires
359: the use of near-infrared photometry, and that the result from the (in principle) reddening-free
360: VI Wesenheit magnitude might yield a result which is still biased to some extent, particularly
361: when blending with unresolved stars in the optical images becomes a problem. Once we have
362: finished our VIJK distance analyses for all the target galaxies in our project, we will
363: analyze this problem more exhaustively.
364:
365: The distance modulus of WLM derived in this paper is not affected by any significant amount
366: by the choice of the cutoff period adopted in the PL diagrams in Figs. 4 and 5. The
367: zero points in the WLM PL relations in both J and K change by less than 0.03 mag if we
368: use a longer period cutoff of log P (days) = 0.7 (leaving the 14 longest-period stars in the
369: sample), or if we use the full sample of 30 Cepheids (excluding the one strongly
370: blended Cepheid cep038). Specifically, retaining the full Cepheid sample yields a distance
371: modulus of 24.902 $\pm$ 0.042 mag, whereas the sample of the 14 longest-period stars
372: yields 24.947 $\pm$ 0.042 mag. Both values agree within their statistical 1 $\sigma$ errors
373: with our adopted best distance modulus of 24.924 $\pm$ 0.042 mag. This probably demonstrates that
374: our WLM Cepheid sample is large enough to fill the Cepheid instability strip in the HRD rather
375: homogeneously, and that there are no overtone Cepheids among the shortest period variables
376: in the sample, a conclusion which is supported by the asymmetric light curve shapes in V
377: of all these variables.
378:
379: We estimate that the combined effect of the different sources which contribute to the
380: systematic uncertainty of our present multiwavelength Cepheid distance result for WLM
381: generate an uncertainty not exceeding $\pm$ 0.06 mag, or 3\%. These factors include
382: the accuracy of the photometric zero points, the effect of blending on the Cepheid
383: photometry, the effect of errors in the adopted reddening and a possible metallicity
384: dependence of the Cepheid PL relation. The typical impact of these factors on the
385: distance result has been discussed quite exhaustively in the previous papers of this
386: series. Here we only want to stress that the zero point of the near-infrared photometry
387: for WLM reported in this paper is probably even more accurate (0.01 mag) than for the
388: other, previously studied target galaxies of our project, as a consequence of having
389: data and independent photometric calibrations from 6 different photometric nights,
390: which has been an especially fortunate circumstance. The impact of blending of the
391: Cepheids on the distance was found to be less than 2\% in the case of NGC 300 (Bresolin et al. 2005)
392: which is at twice the distance of WLM, which allows us to conclude that its effect
393: in the present case of WLM is certainly not larger than 2\%, or 0.04 mag, and very likely smaller
394: than this. We adopt 0.03 mag for this source of systematic error.
395: Regarding the effect of reddening, our analysis and the results presented
396: in Fig. 6 and Table 4 convincingly demonstrate that the total reddening suffered by
397: the WLM Cepheids has been very accurately determined in this study, and any residual
398: effect of reddening on our distance result is clearly less than 2\%, or 0.04 mag. We want to stress
399: again that this elimination of reddening as a very serious source of systematic error
400: in Cepheid distances to galaxies based on optical photometry alone is probably
401: the single most important advantage offered by our combined optical-infrared
402: procedure to measure Cepheid distances to late-type galaxies in our project. The influence
403: of metallicity effects on our distance result is harder to estimate, at the present time.
404: While we have presented evidence that the effect of metallicity differences on the slope of the
405: PL relation is probably negligible, its effect on the zero points of the PL relation
406: is not well established yet. We will investigate this question in detail in a forthcoming
407: paper in which we will compare the distance results for all our target galaxies from
408: the different stellar methods. However, previous work, like the one of Storm et al. (2004),
409: seem to indicate that the metallicity effect on the PL relation zero point is quite small.
410: We estimate its contribution to the systematic error of our WLM distance modulus to be
411: 0.04 mag. Summing up the different contributions, we arrive at an estimated total $\pm$ 0.06 mag
412: systematic uncertainty of our present WLM distance modulus.
413:
414: As in the previous papers of this series, our distance result for WLM is tied to an {\it assumed}
415: LMC distance modulus of 18.50 mag, which probably constitutes the single most important
416: source of systematic uncertainty (e.g. Benedict et al. 2002, Schaefer 2008). If
417: future work changes this adopted value of the LMC distance, we can easily adapt
418: the distances of the target galaxies of our project to the new value. The {\it relative}
419: distances between our different target galaxies will remain unaffected.
420:
421: Finally, as remarked already before, our analyses of a number of galaxies with large differences
422: in the metallicities of their young stellar populations keep indicating us
423: so far that the slopes of the Cepheid PL relations in the various optical and
424: particularly in the near-infrared J and K bands are identical and thus not dependent
425: on metallicity. Subtle effects like the possible nonlinearity of the PL relation
426: at 10 days as reported by Ngeow et al. (2008) do not seem to have any appreciable
427: effect on the distance measurement with this tool, particularly in the near-infrared domain.
428: The possible dependence of the zero points
429: of the PL relation in different bands on metallicity will be studied in detail
430: in a forthcoming paper of this series by comparison with the results from other
431: distance indicators.
432:
433:
434: \section{Conclusions}
435:
436: The main conclusions of this paper can be summarized as follows:
437:
438: 1. We have obtained deep near-infrared photometry of a sizeable sample (31 stars)
439: of Cepheid variables in the Local Group galaxy WLM which were previously discovered
440: in a wide-field imaging survey conducted in the optical V and I bands.
441:
442: 2. From our calibrated infrared photometry in J and K we derive tight period-luminosity
443: relations for the Cepheids in WLM which are very well fitted by the slopes of the
444: LMC Cepheid PL relations in these bands of Persson et al. (2004), supporting the
445: conclusion that for a broad range of metallicities the Cepheid PL relation
446: in near-infrared bands is independent of metallicity.
447:
448: 3. Combining the reddened distance moduli in the J and K bands obtained in this paper
449: with those obtained in Paper I in the V and I bands we derive a total reddening
450: of the WLM Cepheids of E(B-V) = 0.082 $\pm$ 0.02, and a absorption corrected,
451: true distance modulus for WLM of 24.92 $\pm$ 0.04 mag (random error) $\pm$ 0.06 mag
452: (systematic error).
453:
454: 4. We report on an error in Paper I where we had confused the distance modulus
455: in the V band with the one in the Wesenheit band. For our present distance determination,
456: we have obviously used the correct value of the reddened distance modulus in V as obtained
457: from the data in Paper I. The true distance modulus from the Wesenheit magnitude
458: obtained in that paper must read 25.014 $\pm$ 0.036 mag, rather than the erroneosly
459: given value of 25.144 mag.
460:
461: 5. The WLM distance derived from the multiwavelength VIJK Cepheid analysis in this
462: paper is in excellent agreement with the various determinations of the WLM distance
463: from the I-band tip of the red giant branch method and from other techniques
464: which have been reported in the literature.
465:
466: 6. With the completion of the Cepheid multiwavelength distance determination for WLM
467: there are now six late-type galaxies in the Araucaria Project for which such
468: distance determinations have been carried out (WLM, IC 1613, NGC 3109 and NGC 6822 in
469: the Local Group and NGC 300 and NGC 55 in the Sculptor Group; see references in the
470: Introduction). Corresponding work for two more Sculptor Group galaxies, NGC 247
471: and NGC 7793, is underway. A comparison of these distances with those derived for
472: the same galaxies from the other techniques we are using in our project
473: will be conducted in due time and is expected to lead to an improved determination
474: of the metallicity dependence of the different techniques. This will finally yield a
475: set of very accurate distances to a number of nearby galaxies in the 0.05-4 Mpc
476: range which can be used to calibrate more accurately other techniques which
477: reach out to distances large enough for an improved determination of the
478: Hubble constant.
479:
480:
481:
482: \acknowledgments
483: WG, GP and DM gratefully acknowledge financial support for this
484: work from the Chilean Center for Astrophysics FONDAP 15010003, and from
485: the BASAL Centro de Astrofisica y Tecnologias Afines (CATA).
486: Support from the Polish grant N203 002 31/046 and the FOCUS
487: subsidy of the Fundation for Polish Science (FNP)
488: is also acknowledged. It is a great pleasure
489: to thank the support astronomers at ESO-La Silla and at Las Campanas Observatory
490: for their expert help in the observations. We also thank the ESO OPC and CNTAC
491: for allotting generous amounts of observing time to this project.
492: Helpful comments of a referee on a previous version of this paper
493: are appreciated.
494:
495:
496: \begin{references}
497: \reference{} Benedict, G.F., McArthur, B.E., Fredrick, L.W., et al., 2002, \aj, 123, 473
498:
499: \reference{} Bono, G., Caputo, F., Castellani, V., and Marconi, M., 1999, \apj, 512, 711
500:
501: \reference{} Bresolin, F., Pietrzy{\'n}ski, G., Gieren, W., and Kudritzki, R.-P., 2005, \apj, 634, 1020
502:
503: \reference{} Bresolin, F., Pietrzy{\'n}ski, G., Urbaneja, M.A., Gieren, W., Kudritzki, R.P.,
504: and Venn, K., 2006, \apj, 648, 1007
505:
506: \reference{} Bresolin, F., Urbaneja, M.A., Gieren, W., Pietrzy{\'n}ski, G., and Kudritzki, R.P.,
507: 2007, \apj, 671, 2028
508:
509: \reference{} Dolphin, A.E., 2000, \apj, 531, 804
510:
511: \reference{} Evans, C.J., Bresolin, F., Urbaneja, M.A., Pietrzy{\'n}ski, G., Gieren, W.,
512: and Kudritzki, R.P., 2007, \apj, 659, 1198
513:
514: \reference{} Fouqu{\'e}, P., Arriagada, P., Storm, J., Barnes, T.G., Nardetto, N., Merand, A.,
515: Kervella, P., Gieren, W., Bersier, D., Benedict, G.F., and McArthur, B.E., 2007, A\&A, 476, 73
516:
517: \reference{} Gieren, W., Storm, J., Barnes III, T.G., Fouqu{\'e}, P., Pietrzy{\'n}ski, G.,
518: and Kienzle, F., 2005a, \apj, 627, 224
519:
520: \reference{} Gieren, W., Pietrzy{\'n}ski, G., Soszy{\'n}ski, I., Bresolin, F., Kudritzki, R.-P.,
521: Minniti, D., and Storm, J., 2005b, \apj, 628, 695
522:
523: \reference{} Gieren, W., Pietrzy{\'n}ski, G., Nalewajko, K., et al., 2006, \apj, 647, 1056
524:
525: \reference{} Gieren, W., Pietrzy{\'n}ski, G., Soszy{\'n}ski, I., Bresolin, F., Kudritzki, R.P.,
526: Storm, J., and Minniti, D., 2008, \apj, 672, 266
527:
528: \reference{} Hawarden, T.G., Leggett, S.K., Letawsky, M.B., et al., 2001, MNRAS, 325, 563
529:
530: \reference{} Kudritzki, R.P., Bresolin, F., and Przybilla, N., 2003, \apj, 582, L83
531:
532: \reference{} Kudritzki, R.P., Urbaneja, M.A., Bresolin, F., Przybilla, N., Gieren, W., and
533: Pietrzy{\'n}ski, G., 2008, \apj, in press
534:
535: \reference{} Lee, M.G., Freedman, W.L., and Madore, B.F., 1993, \apj, 417, 553
536:
537: \reference{} Luck, E., Moffett, T.J., Barnes, T.G., and Gieren, W., 1998, \aj, 115, 605
538:
539: \reference{} Madore, B.F., and Freedman, W.L., 1991, PASP, 103, 933
540:
541: \reference{} McConnachie, A.W., Irwin, M.J., Ferguson, A.M.N., Ibata, R.A., Lewis, G.F.,
542: and Tanvir, N., 2005, MNRAS, 356, 979
543:
544: \reference{} McGonegal, R., McAlary, C.W., Madore, B.F., and McLaren, R.A., 1982, \apj,
545: 257, L33
546:
547: \reference{} Minniti, D., and Zijlstra, A.A., 1997, \aj, 114, 147
548:
549: \reference{} Ngeow, C.C., Kanbur, S.M., and Nanthakumar, A., 2008, A\&A, 477, 621
550:
551: \reference{} Persson, S.E., Madore, B.F., Krzeminski, W., Freedman, W.L., Roth, M, and Murphy, D.C.,
552: 2004, \aj, 128, 2239
553:
554: \reference{} Pietrzy{\'n}ski, G., and Gieren, W., 2002, \aj, 124, 2633
555:
556: \reference{} Pietrzy{\'n}ski, G., Gieren, W., Soszy{\'n}ski, I., Bresolin, F., Kudritzki, R.-P.,
557: Dall'Ora, M., Storm, J., and Bono, G., 2006, \apj, 642, 216
558:
559: \reference{} Pietrzy{\'n}ski, G., Gieren, W., Udalski, A., et al., 2007, \aj, 134, 594 (Paper I)
560:
561: \reference{} Rejkuba, M., Minniti, D., Gregg, M.D., Zijlstra, A.A., Alonso, M.V.,
562: and Goudfrooij, P., 2000, \aj, 120, 801
563:
564: \reference{} Rizzi, L., Tully, R.B., Makarov, D., et al., 2007, \apj, 661, 815
565:
566: \reference{} Sandage, A., and Carlson, G., 1985, \aj, 90, 1464
567:
568: \reference{} Schaefer, B.E., 2008, \aj, 135, 112
569:
570: \reference{} Schlegel, D.J., Finkbeiner, D.P., and Davis, M., 1998, \apj, 500, 525
571:
572: \reference{} Soszy{\'n}ski, I., Gieren, W., and Pietrzy{\'n}ski, G., 2005, PASP, 117, 823
573:
574: \reference{} Soszy{\'n}ski, I., Gieren, W., Pietrzy{\'n}ski, G., Bresolin, F., Kudritzki, R.P,
575: and Storm, J., 2006, \apj, 648, 375
576:
577: \reference{} Storm, J., Carney, B.W., Gieren, W., Fouqu{\'e}, P., Fry, A.M., and Latham, D.W.,
578: 2004, A\&A, 415, 531
579:
580: \reference{} Urbaneja, M.A., Kudritzki, R.P., Bresolin, F., Przybilla, N., Gieren, W.
581: and Pietrzy{\'n}ski, G., 2008, \apj, submitted
582:
583: \reference{} Valcheva, A.T., Ivanov, V.D., Ovcharov, E.P., and Nedialkov, P., 2007, A\&A, 466, 501
584: \end{references}
585:
586:
587: \begin{figure}[p]
588: \vspace*{18cm}
589: \special{psfile=fig1.ps hoffset=-20 voffset=0 hscale=65 vscale=65}
590: \caption{The location of the observed fields in WLM on the DSS
591: blue plate. We observed one NTT/SOFI field, and three Magellan/PANIC fields (see text).
592: The fields contain 31 Cepheid
593: variables. The size of the SOFI field (S1) is $4.9 \times 4.9$ arcmin.}
594: \end{figure}
595:
596:
597: \begin{figure}[p]
598: \vspace*{18cm}
599: \special{psfile=fig2.ps hoffset=-20 voffset=0 hscale=95 vscale=90}
600: \caption{An example of the comparison of the photometric zero points
601: in the K and J bands of WLM obtained with the NTT
602: and SOFI on two different nights and calibrated
603: completely independently. The difference in zero points for the data
604: obtained for other nights with SOFI and PANIC are very similar and
605: are always smaller than 0.02 mag, which reflects the very good quality of
606: our calibrations.
607: }
608: \end{figure}
609:
610: \begin{figure}[p]
611: \vspace*{18cm}
612: \special{psfile=fig3.ps hoffset=-20 voffset=0 hscale=95 vscale=90}
613: \caption{Comparison of our photometry with the 2MASS data. In spite
614: of the large scatter towards the fainter magnitudes caused by the
615: low accuracy of the 2MASS photometry of faint stars, no clear evidence
616: for significant offsets in the zero points is present.
617: }
618: \end{figure}
619:
620:
621: \begin{figure}[htb]
622: \vspace*{15cm}
623: \special{psfile=fig4.ps hoffset=0 voffset=80 hscale=100 vscale=100}
624: \caption{Cepheid period-luminosity relations for WLM in the J band. The 24 variables
625: with periods larger than 3.16 days (filled circles) have been adopted for the
626: distance determination. The slope of the fit to a line has been adopted from
627: the work of Persson et al. on the LMC Cepheids, and fits the WLM Cepheid data
628: very well.}
629: \end{figure}
630:
631: \begin{figure}[htb]
632: \vspace*{15cm}
633: \special{psfile=fig5.ps hoffset=0 voffset=80 hscale=100 vscale=100}
634: \caption{Same as Fig. 4, for the K band.}
635: \end{figure}
636:
637:
638: \begin{figure}[p]
639: \special{psfile=fig6.ps hoffset=-40 voffset=-350 hscale=85 vscale=85}
640: \vspace{10cm}
641: \caption{Apparent distance moduli to WLM as derived in different photometric bands,
642: plotted against the ratio of total to selective extinction as adopted from
643: the Schlegel et al. reddening law. The intersection and
644: slope of the best-fitting line give the true distance modulus of WLM, and the
645: total mean reddening of its Cepheids, respectively.
646: }
647: \end{figure}
648:
649:
650: \clearpage
651: \begin{deluxetable}{ccccc}
652: \tablecaption{}
653: \tablehead{\colhead{Field ID} & \colhead{Field name} & \colhead{RA 2000}
654: & \colhead{DEC 2000} & \colhead{Instrument} }
655: \startdata
656: S1 & WLM-F1 & 00:01:57.67 & -15:25:29.5 & SOFI \\
657: P1 & WLM-F1 & 00:01:58.26 & -15:24:40.2 & PANIC \\
658: P2 & WLM-F2 & 00:01:54.98 & -15:27:01.8 & PANIC \\
659: P3 & WLM-F3 & 00:01:54.87 & -15:29:48.9 & PANIC \\
660: \enddata
661: \end{deluxetable}
662:
663: \begin{deluxetable}{ccccccccc}
664: \rotate
665: \tabletypesize{\footnotesize}
666: \tablecaption{Journal of the Individual J and K band Observations of WLM}
667: \tablehead{\colhead{Star ID} & \colhead{Field ID} & \colhead{Period} & \colhead{J MJD} & \colhead{J} & \colhead{$\sigma$} & \colhead{K MJD} & \colhead{K} & \colhead{$\sigma$} \\
668: \colhead{} & \colhead{} & \colhead{(days)} & \colhead{-2400000} & \colhead{(mag)} & \colhead{(mag)} & \colhead{-2400000} & \colhead{(mag)} & \colhead{(mag)} }
669: \startdata
670: cep001 & S1 & 54.17118 & 54001.08144853 & 17.309 & 0.024 & 54001.09783376 & 16.955 & 0.018 \\
671: cep001 & S1 & 54.17118 & 54002.10563506 & 17.327 & 0.019 & 54002.11759493 & 16.802 & 0.017 \\
672: cep001 & P1 & 54.17118 & 54427.06900000 & 17.341 & 0.004 & 54427.08676000 & 16.781 & 0.007 \\
673: cep001 & P1 & 54.17118 & 54428.14376000 & 17.326 & 0.004 & 54428.15841000 & 16.854 & 0.006 \\
674: cep001 & S1 & 54.17118 & 54429.01840384 & 17.313 & 0.014 & 54429.03095727 & 16.813 & 0.027 \\
675: cep001 & S1 & 54.17118 & 54430.01460106 & 17.292 & 0.013 & 54430.02712407 & 16.807 & 0.023 \\
676: cep002 & P3 & 10.34249 & 54428.06006000 & 19.737 & 0.020 & 54428.07505000 & 19.344 & 0.034 \\
677: cep003 & P2 & 10.33645 & 54427.15887000 & 19.677 & 0.025 & 54427.17380000 & 19.277 & 0.062 \\
678: cep005 & P3 & 8.63110 & 54428.06006000 & 19.916 & 0.020 & 54428.07505000 & 19.469 & 0.039 \\
679: cep007 & S1 & 8.12051 & 54001.08144853 & 19.927 & 0.083 & 54001.09783376 & 19.463 & 0.077 \\
680: cep007 & S1 & 8.12051 & 54002.10563506 & 19.984 & 0.063 & 54002.11759493 & 19.561 & 0.100 \\
681: cep007 & P1 & 8.12051 & 54427.06900000 & 20.182 & 0.019 & 54427.08676000 & 19.814 & 0.048 \\
682: cep007 & P1 & 8.12051 & 54428.14376000 & 20.126 & 0.022 & 54428.15841000 & 19.620 & 0.054 \\
683: cep007 & S1 & 8.12051 & 54429.01840384 & 19.840 & 0.078 & 54429.03095727 & 19.511 & 0.192 \\
684: cep007 & S1 & 8.12051 & 54430.01460106 & 20.001 & 0.104 & 54430.02712407 & 19.383 & 0.150 \\
685: cep008 & P2 & 7.49672 & 54427.15887000 & 20.040 & 0.029 & 54427.17380000 & 19.351 & 0.048 \\
686: cep010 & S1 & 7.32485 & 54001.08144853 & 20.167 & 0.092 & 54001.09783376 & 19.858 & 0.088 \\
687: cep010 & S1 & 7.32485 & 54002.10563506 & 19.868 & 0.050 & 54002.11759493 & 19.472 & 0.107 \\
688: cep010 & P1 & 7.32485 & 54427.06900000 & 19.955 & 0.024 & 54427.08676000 & 19.654 & 0.054 \\
689: cep010 & P1 & 7.32485 & 54428.14376000 & 19.899 & 0.030 & 54428.15841000 & 19.525 & 0.056 \\
690: cep011 & P3 & 6.64055 & 54428.06006000 & 20.187 & 0.018 & 54428.07505000 & 19.895 & 0.042 \\
691: cep012 & S1 & 6.15754 & 54001.08144853 & 19.841 & 0.083 & 54001.09783376 & 19.263 & 0.065 \\
692: cep012 & S1 & 6.15754 & 54002.10563506 & 19.930 & 0.071 & 54002.11759493 & 19.388 & 0.087 \\
693: cep012 & P1 & 6.15754 & 54427.06900000 & 99.999 & 9.999 & 54427.08676000 & 19.438 & 0.051 \\
694: cep012 & P1 & 6.15754 & 54428.14376000 & 20.131 & 0.040 & 54428.15841000 & 19.549 & 0.054 \\
695: cep012 & S1 & 6.15754 & 54429.01840384 & 19.770 & 0.075 & 54429.03095727 & 19.141 & 0.147 \\
696: cep013 & P3 & 6.05309 & 54428.06006000 & 20.339 & 0.027 & 54428.07505000 & 19.989 & 0.062 \\
697: cep015 & S1 & 5.43153 & 54001.08144853 & 20.626 & 0.124 & 54001.09783376 & 20.284 & 0.138 \\
698: cep015 & S1 & 5.43153 & 54002.10563506 & 20.638 & 0.091 & 54002.11759493 & 20.322 & 0.190 \\
699: cep015 & P1 & 5.43153 & 54427.06900000 & 20.574 & 0.028 & 54427.08676000 & 20.320 & 0.093 \\
700: cep015 & P1 & 5.43153 & 54428.14376000 & 20.677 & 0.036 & 54428.15841000 & 20.280 & 0.087 \\
701: cep015 & S1 & 5.43153 & 54430.01460106 & 20.386 & 0.131 & 54430.02712407 & 19.793 & 0.209 \\
702: cep016 & S1 & 5.20796 & 54001.08144853 & 20.664 & 0.120 & 54001.09783376 & 20.099 & 0.102 \\
703: cep016 & S1 & 5.20796 & 54002.10563506 & 20.582 & 0.071 & 54002.11759493 & 20.016 & 0.131 \\
704: cep016 & P1 & 5.20796 & 54427.06900000 & 20.385 & 0.022 & 54427.08676000 & 20.090 & 0.078 \\
705: cep016 & P1 & 5.20796 & 54428.14376000 & 20.493 & 0.035 & 54428.15841000 & 19.980 & 0.071 \\
706: cep016 & S1 & 5.20796 & 54430.01460106 & 20.404 & 0.134 & 54430.02712407 & 20.163 & 0.274 \\
707: cep017 & P3 & 5.12851 & 54428.06006000 & 20.727 & 0.025 & 54428.07505000 & 20.332 & 0.060 \\
708: cep018 & S1 & 5.02134 & 54001.08144853 & 20.555 & 0.118 & 54001.09783376 & 20.402 & 0.140 \\
709: cep018 & S1 & 5.02134 & 54002.10563506 & 20.567 & 0.080 & 54002.11759493 & 20.328 & 0.173 \\
710: cep018 & S1 & 5.02134 & 54429.01840384 & 20.555 & 0.149 & 54429.03095727 & 19.730 & 0.226 \\
711: cep019 & S1 & 4.92341 & 54001.08144853 & 20.338 & 0.107 & 54001.09783376 & 20.217 & 0.138 \\
712: cep019 & S1 & 4.92341 & 54002.10563506 & 20.494 & 0.086 & 54002.11759493 & 19.990 & 0.141 \\
713: cep019 & P1 & 4.92341 & 54427.06900000 & 20.379 & 0.031 & 54427.08676000 & 19.964 & 0.070 \\
714: cep019 & P1 & 4.92341 & 54428.14376000 & 20.626 & 0.037 & 54428.15841000 & 20.379 & 0.098 \\
715: cep019 & S1 & 4.92341 & 54429.01840384 & 20.265 & 0.113 & 54429.03095727 & 19.828 & 0.260 \\
716: cep020 & S1 & 4.91559 & 54429.01840384 & 99.999 & 9.999 & 54429.03095727 & 20.413 & 0.409 \\
717: cep021 & S1 & 4.86831 & 54002.10563506 & 21.096 & 0.115 & 54002.11759493 & 20.345 & 0.186 \\
718: cep022 & S1 & 4.71140 & 54001.08144853 & 20.726 & 0.136 & 54001.09783376 & 20.232 & 0.141 \\
719: cep022 & S1 & 4.71140 & 54002.10563506 & 20.735 & 0.097 & 54002.11759493 & 20.234 & 0.160 \\
720: cep022 & P1 & 4.71140 & 54427.06900000 & 20.782 & 0.040 & 54427.08676000 & 20.301 & 0.079 \\
721: cep022 & P1 & 4.71140 & 54428.14376000 & 20.511 & 0.032 & 54428.15841000 & 20.492 & 0.098 \\
722: cep023 & S1 & 4.61967 & 54001.08144853 & 20.597 & 0.122 & 54001.09783376 & 20.607 & 0.171 \\
723: cep023 & S1 & 4.61967 & 54002.10563506 & 20.669 & 0.093 & 54002.11759493 & 20.222 & 0.177 \\
724: cep023 & P1 & 4.61967 & 54427.06900000 & 20.630 & 0.026 & 54427.08676000 & 20.316 & 0.085 \\
725: cep023 & P1 & 4.61967 & 54428.14376000 & 20.646 & 0.039 & 54428.15841000 & 20.328 & 0.086 \\
726: cep024 & P2 & 4.36958 & 54427.15887000 & 20.594 & 0.048 & 54427.17380000 & 20.307 & 0.148 \\
727: cep024 & S1 & 4.36958 & 54430.01460106 & 99.999 & 9.999 & 54430.02712407 & 19.658 & 0.174 \\
728: cep026 & S1 & 3.97606 & 54001.08144853 & 21.726 & 0.299 & 54001.09783376 & 21.334 & 0.333 \\
729: cep026 & S1 & 3.97606 & 54002.10563506 & 21.617 & 0.180 & 54002.11759493 & 21.026 & 0.307 \\
730: cep026 & S1 & 3.97606 & 54429.01840384 & 99.999 & 9.999 & 54429.03095727 & 20.454 & 0.468 \\
731: cep026 & S1 & 3.97606 & 54430.01460106 & 99.999 & 9.999 & 54430.02712407 & 20.631 & 0.387 \\
732: cep027 & P2 & 3.86503 & 54427.15887000 & 20.770 & 0.048 & 54427.17380000 & 20.654 & 0.178 \\
733: cep027 & S1 & 3.86503 & 54429.01840384 & 99.999 & 9.999 & 54429.03095727 & 20.116 & 0.335 \\
734: cep031 & S1 & 3.65377 & 54001.08144853 & 20.290 & 0.092 & 54001.09783376 & 20.067 & 0.098 \\
735: cep031 & S1 & 3.65377 & 54002.10563506 & 20.487 & 0.064 & 54002.11759493 & 20.049 & 0.126 \\
736: cep031 & P1 & 3.65377 & 54427.06900000 & 20.401 & 0.029 & 54427.08676000 & 19.914 & 0.072 \\
737: cep031 & P1 & 3.65377 & 54428.14376000 & 20.533 & 0.045 & 54428.15841000 & 20.201 & 0.102 \\
738: cep031 & S1 & 3.65377 & 54429.01840384 & 20.684 & 0.154 & 54429.03095727 & 20.014 & 0.290 \\
739: cep031 & S1 & 3.65377 & 54430.01460106 & 20.169 & 0.106 & 54430.02712407 & 19.756 & 0.181 \\
740: cep033 & S1 & 3.30475 & 54001.08144853 & 99.999 & 9.999 & 54001.09783376 & 20.533 & 0.155 \\
741: cep033 & P1 & 3.30475 & 54428.14376000 & 21.006 & 0.074 & 54428.15841000 & 20.300 & 0.112 \\
742: cep033 & S1 & 3.30475 & 54430.01460106 & 99.999 & 9.999 & 54430.02712407 & 20.861 & 0.512 \\
743: cep036 & S1 & 3.13908 & 54001.08144853 & 21.178 & 0.182 & 54001.09783376 & 20.372 & 0.136 \\
744: cep036 & P1 & 3.13908 & 54427.06900000 & 21.180 & 0.051 & 54427.08676000 & 21.031 & 0.166 \\
745: cep037 & S1 & 3.13102 & 54001.08144853 & 21.301 & 0.205 & 54001.09783376 & 20.643 & 0.169 \\
746: cep037 & P1 & 3.13102 & 54427.06900000 & 21.067 & 0.040 & 54427.08676000 & 20.774 & 0.123 \\
747: cep037 & P1 & 3.13102 & 54428.14376000 & 21.264 & 0.058 & 54428.15841000 & 20.769 & 0.136 \\
748: cep037 & S1 & 3.13102 & 54429.01840384 & 99.999 & 9.999 & 54429.03095727 & 20.195 & 0.357 \\
749: cep038 & P1 & 3.03891 & 54427.06900000 & 19.839 & 0.018 & 54427.08676000 & 18.954 & 0.029 \\
750: cep038 & P1 & 3.03891 & 54428.14376000 & 19.834 & 0.019 & 54428.15841000 & 19.022 & 0.028 \\
751: cep038 & S1 & 3.03891 & 54429.01840384 & 19.957 & 0.084 & 54429.03095727 & 19.021 & 0.132 \\
752: cep038 & S1 & 3.03891 & 54430.01460106 & 19.899 & 0.093 & 54430.02712407 & 19.091 & 0.118 \\
753: cep039 & S1 & 3.02576 & 54001.08144853 & 21.155 & 0.184 & 54001.09783376 & 21.439 & 0.374 \\
754: cep039 & P1 & 3.02576 & 54427.06900000 & 21.061 & 0.044 & 54427.08676000 & 20.562 & 0.164 \\
755: cep039 & S1 & 3.02576 & 54429.01840384 & 21.796 & 0.431 & 54429.03095727 & 20.483 & 0.428 \\
756: cep041 & P3 & 2.92899 & 54428.06006000 & 21.333 & 0.072 & 54428.07505000 & 21.107 & 0.154 \\
757: cep043 & P3 & 2.88896 & 54428.06006000 & 20.906 & 0.051 & 54428.07505000 & 20.723 & 0.130 \\
758: cep049 & S1 & 2.51004 & 54001.08144853 & 21.440 & 0.235 & 54001.09783376 & 21.382 & 0.377 \\
759: cep049 & P1 & 2.51004 & 54427.06900000 & 20.947 & 0.037 & 54427.08676000 & 20.796 & 0.133 \\
760: cep049 & P1 & 2.51004 & 54428.14376000 & 21.108 & 0.052 & 54428.15841000 & 20.838 & 0.127 \\
761: \enddata
762: \end{deluxetable}
763:
764: \begin{deluxetable}{cccccc}
765: \tablecaption{Intensity mean J and K magnitudes for 30 Cepheid variables in WLM}
766: \tablehead{\colhead{Star ID} & \colhead{Period} & \colhead{J} & \colhead{$\sigma$} & \colhead{K} & \colhead{$\sigma$} \\
767: \colhead{} & \colhead{(days)} & \colhead{(mag)} & \colhead{(mag)} & \colhead{(mag)} & \colhead{(mag)} }
768: \startdata
769: cep001 & 54.17118 & 17.318 & 0.015 & 16.835 & 0.018 \\
770: cep002 & 10.34249 & 19.737 & 0.020 & 19.344 & 0.034 \\
771: cep003 & 10.33645 & 19.677 & 0.025 & 19.277 & 0.062 \\
772: cep005 & 8.63110 & 19.916 & 0.020 & 19.469 & 0.039 \\
773: cep007 & 8.12051 & 20.010 & 0.069 & 19.559 & 0.116 \\
774: cep008 & 7.49672 & 20.040 & 0.029 & 19.351 & 0.048 \\
775: cep010 & 7.32485 & 19.972 & 0.056 & 19.627 & 0.079 \\
776: cep011 & 6.64055 & 20.187 & 0.018 & 19.895 & 0.042 \\
777: cep012 & 6.15754 & 19.918 & 0.062 & 19.356 & 0.088 \\
778: cep013 & 6.05309 & 20.339 & 0.027 & 19.989 & 0.062 \\
779: cep015 & 5.43153 & 20.580 & 0.093 & 20.200 & 0.152 \\
780: cep016 & 5.20796 & 20.506 & 0.088 & 20.070 & 0.151 \\
781: cep017 & 5.12851 & 20.727 & 0.025 & 20.332 & 0.060 \\
782: cep018 & 5.02134 & 20.559 & 0.119 & 20.153 & 0.183 \\
783: cep019 & 4.92341 & 20.420 & 0.082 & 20.076 & 0.156 \\
784: cep020 & 4.91559 & 99.999 & 9.999 & 20.413 & 0.409 \\
785: cep021 & 4.86831 & 21.096 & 0.115 & 20.345 & 0.186 \\
786: cep022 & 4.71140 & 20.689 & 0.087 & 20.315 & 0.124 \\
787: cep023 & 4.61967 & 20.636 & 0.080 & 20.368 & 0.137 \\
788: cep024 & 4.36958 & 20.594 & 0.034 & 19.983 & 0.162 \\
789: cep026 & 3.97606 & 21.672 & 0.175 & 20.861 & 0.379 \\
790: cep027 & 3.86503 & 20.770 & 0.034 & 20.385 & 0.268 \\
791: cep031 & 3.65377 & 20.427 & 0.092 & 20.000 & 0.162 \\
792: cep033 & 3.30475 & 21.006 & 0.043 & 20.565 & 0.316 \\
793: cep036 & 3.13908 & 21.179 & 0.134 & 20.702 & 0.152 \\
794: cep037 & 3.13102 & 21.211 & 0.108 & 20.595 & 0.218 \\
795: cep038 & 3.03891 & 19.882 & 0.064 & 19.022 & 0.091 \\
796: cep039 & 3.02576 & 21.337 & 0.272 & 20.828 & 0.342 \\
797: cep041 & 2.92899 & 21.333 & 0.072 & 21.107 & 0.154 \\
798: cep043 & 2.88896 & 20.906 & 0.051 & 20.723 & 0.130 \\
799: cep049 & 2.51004 & 21.165 & 0.141 & 21.005 & 0.242 \\
800: \enddata
801: \end{deluxetable}
802:
803:
804: \begin{deluxetable}{cccccc}
805: \tablewidth{0pc}
806: \tablecaption{Reddened and Absorption-Corrected Distance Moduli for
807: WLM in Optical and Near-Infrared Bands}
808: \tablehead{ \colhead{Band} & $V$ & $I$ & $J$ & $K$ & $E(B-V)$ }
809: \startdata
810: $m-M$ & 25.156 & 25.121 & 24.993 & 24.915 & -- \nl
811: ${\rm R}_{\lambda}$ & 3.24 & 1.96 & 0.902 & 0.367 & -- \nl
812: $(m-M)_{0}$ & 24.896 & 24.964 & 24.920 & 24.885 & 0.08 \nl
813: \enddata
814: \end{deluxetable}
815:
816: \end{document}
817:
818:
819: