1: %\documentclass[12pt,preprint]{aastex}

2: %\documentstyle[emulateapj5,epsf]{aastex}

3: %\documentstyle[12pt,preprint]{emulateapj}

4: \documentclass{emulateapj}

5: 

6: %\voffset=-5mm

7: \usepackage{epsfig}

8: \usepackage{longtable}

9: 

10: \def \farcs{\hbox{$.\!\!^{\prime\prime}$}}

11: \def \farcm{\hbox{$.\!\!^{\prime}$}}

12: \def \moverl{\hbox{${\rm M}_\odot/{\rm L}_{{\rm B}\odot}$}}

13: \def \lumstar{{${\rm L}^*_{\rm B}(z=0)=5.6\times10^9~h^{-2} {\rm L}_{\rm {B}\odot}~$}}

14: 

15: \begin{document}

16: 

17: \title{The Evolution of Dusty Star Formation and Stellar Mass Assembly in

18:   Clusters:  Results from the IRAC 3.6$\micron$, 4.5$\micron$, 5.8$\micron$

19:   and 8.0$\micron$ Cluster Luminosity Functions}

20: %Clusters of Galaxies in the Spitzer First Look Survey: Cluster

21: %  Catalogue and the Evolution of the Near and Mid-Infrared Cluster Luminosity Functions} 

22: 

23: \author{Adam Muzzin\altaffilmark{1,2,3}, Gillian

24:   Wilson\altaffilmark{4,5}, Mark Lacy\altaffilmark{4},

25:   H.K.C. Yee\altaffilmark{6}, \& S. A. Stanford\altaffilmark{7,8}}

26: %\affil{Dept. of Astronomy \& Astrophysics, University of Toronto} 

27: 

28: \altaffiltext{1}{Department. of Astronomy \& Astrophysics, University

29:   of Toronto, 50 St. George St., Toronto, Ontario, Canada, M5S 3H4} 

30: \altaffiltext{2}{Visitor, Spitzer Science Center, California Institute

31:   of Technology, 220-6, Pasadena, CA, 91125} 

32: \altaffiltext{3}{Current Address: Department of Astronomy, Yale

33:   University, New Haven, CT, 06520-8101; adam.muzzin@yale.edu} 

34: \altaffiltext{4}{Spitzer Science Center, California Institute of

35:   Technology, 220-6, Pasadena, CA, 91125} 

36: \altaffiltext{5}{Department of Physics and Astronomy,

37: University of California, Riverside, CA 92521}

38: \altaffiltext{6}{Department. of Astronomy \& Astrophysics, University

39:   of Toronto, 50 St. George St., Toronto, Ontario, Canada, M5S 3H4} 

40: \altaffiltext{7}{University of California, Davis, CA, 95616} 

41: \altaffiltext{8}{Institute of Geophysics and Planetary Physics,

42:   Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Livermore, CA, 94551} 

43: 

44: %\author{Gillian Wilson}

45: %\affil{Spitzer Science Center, California Institute of Technology} 

46: 

47: %\author{Gillian Wilson}

48: %\affil{Spitzer Science Center, California Institute of Technology} 

49: 

50: %\author{H. K. C. Yee}

51: %\affil{Dept. of Astronomy \& Astrophysics, University of Toronto} 

52: 

53: \begin{abstract}

54: We present a catalogue of 99 candidate clusters and groups of galaxies in the

55: redshift range 0.1 $<

56: z_{phot} <$ 1.3 discovered in the $Spitzer$ First

57: Look Survey (FLS).  The clusters are selected by their R$_{c}$ - 3.6$\micron$

58: galaxy color-magnitude relation using the cluster red sequence algorithm.

59: Spectroscopic redshifts from numerous FLS followup projects confirm

60: the photometric redshifts of 29 clusters and demonstrate that the R$_{c}$ -

61: 3.6$\micron$ red sequence color

62: provides photometric redshifts with an accuracy of $\Delta$z = 0.04 in

63: the redshift range 0.1 $< z <$ 1.0.  Using this cluster sample we

64: compute the 3.6$\micron$, 4.5$\micron$, 5.8$\micron$, \&

65: 8.0$\micron$ cluster luminosity

66: functions (LFs).  Similar to previous studies, we find that for the bands

67: that trace stellar mass at these redshifts (3.6$\micron$, 4.5$\micron$) the evolution in

68: M$^*$ is consistent with a passively evolving population of galaxies

69: with a high formation redshift ($z_{f}$ $>$ 1.5).  

70: %MIR color-color

71: %diagrams suggest that only 1\%$\pm$1\% of the total cluster population

72: %are MIR-bright AGN and therefore we use the

73: %3.6$\micron$ LF as a proxy for stellar luminosity we

74: %remove this component from the MIR (5.8$\micron$ \& 8.0$\micron$) cluster LF and measure the

75: %LF of dusty star formation in clusters.  

76: Using the 3.6$\micron$ LF as a proxy for stellar luminosity we

77: remove this component from the MIR (5.8$\micron$ \& 8.0$\micron$) cluster LFs and measure the

78: LF of dusty star formation/AGN in clusters. We find that at $z <$ 0.4 the

79: bright end of the cluster 8.0$\micron$ LF is well-described by a composite population of quiescent galaxies and

80: regular star forming galaxies with a mix consistent with typical cluster

81: blue fractions; however, at $z >$ 0.4, regular star forming galaxies

82: are insufficient to

83: account for the excess of 8.0$\micron$ galaxies,

84: and an additional population of dusty starburst galaxies is required to properly model the 8.0$\micron$ LFs.  

85: Comparison to field studies at similar redshifts shows a strong

86: differential evolution in the field and cluster 8.0$\micron$ LFs

87: with redshift. At $z \sim$ 0.65 

88: 8.0$\micron$-detected galaxies are more abundant in clusters compared to the

89: field, but thereafter the number of 8.0$\micron$ sources

90: in clusters declines with decreasing redshift and by  $z\sim$ 0.15,

91: clusters are underdense relative to the

92: field by a factor of $\sim$ 5.  The rapid differential evolution

93: between the cluster and field LFs is qualitatively consistent with recent

94: field galaxy studies that show the star formation rates of galaxies in high density environments are larger than those in low density

95: environments at higher redshift.

96: \end{abstract}

97: 

98: \keywords{infrared: galaxies, 

99: %\\ \hspace{15.0cm} 

100: galaxies: clusters: photometry $-$ evolution $-$

101: starburst $-$ fundamental parameters}

102: 

103: \section{Introduction}

104: %-ideas

105: %I think that the key bit of analysis needed here is to understand what

106: %the E+A fraction of bright M < M* galaxies is.  Only because if

107: %Dressler and Balogh are talking about primarily fainter galaxies, that

108: %doesn't say much about the population.

109: %-Want to say something about ``rejuvenation from Ellis+Moran and

110: %infalling 2 galaxies.  Want to say something about Owen paper showing

111: %range in star formation properties which may depend on dynamical state,

112: %also the ISO LFs show this.

113: %-Also add about higher-z starbursts like Marcillac and Tran

114: 

115: Since the compilation of the first large samples of galaxy clusters

116: almost 50 years ago (Zwicky 1961; Abell 1958), clusters have been used as fundamental 

117: probes of the effect of environment on the evolution of galaxies.

118: Over this time, our understanding of this phenomenon has grown significantly, and a basic picture 

119: of the formation and evolution of cluster galaxies between 0 $< z <$ 1 has

120: emerged.  Studies of the stellar populations of cluster galaxies via

121: the fundamental plane (e.g., van Dokkum et al. 1998; van Dokkum \& Stanford 2003; Holden et

122: al. 2005) and the evolution of the

123: cluster color-magnitude relation (e.g., Ellis et al. 1997; Stanford et al. 1998; Gladders et

124: al. 1998; Blakeslee et al. 2003; Holden et al. 2004; Mei et al. 2006;

125: Homeier et al. 2006; Tran et al. 2007) have shown

126: that the majority of stars in cluster galaxies are formed at high-redshift

127: ($z >$ 2) and that most of the evolution thereafter is the passive

128: aging of these stellar populations.  Studies of the evolution of the

129: near-infrared (NIR)

130: luminosity functions (LFs) of clusters have shown that not only are the stellar

131: populations old, but that the bulk of the stellar mass is already

132: assembled into massive galaxies at high-redshift (e.g., De Propris et

133: al. 1999; Toft et al. 2003; Strazullo et al. 2006; Lin et al. 2006; Muzzin et

134: al. 2007a).  Furthermore, it appears that the cluster

135: scaling relations seen locally ($z <$ 0.1, e.g., Lin et al. 2004;

136: Rines et al. 2004; Lin et al. 2003), such as the Halo Occupation

137: Distribution, Mass-to-Light ratio, and the galaxy number/luminosity density profile are already in place by at least

138: $z \sim$ 0.5 (e.g., Muzzin et al. 2007b; Lin et al. 2006).

139: \newline\indent

140: These studies suggest a picture where the formation of the stars

141: in cluster galaxies, as well as the

142: assembly of the galaxies themselves occurs at a higher redshift

143: than has yet been studied in detail; and that, other than the passive

144: aging of the stellar populations, clusters and cluster

145: galaxies have changed relatively little since $z \sim$ 1.  This 

146: picture appears to be a reasonable

147: zeroth-order description of the evolution of cluster galaxies;

148: however, there are still properties of

149: the cluster population which cannot be explained within this context. 

150: In particular, there are significant changes in the morphology

151: (Dressler et al. 1997; Postman et al. 2005, Smith et al., 2005),

152: color (e.g., Butcher \& Oemler 1984; Rakos \&

153: Schombert 1995; Smail et al. 1998; Ellingson et al. 2001; Margoniner

154: et al. 2001; Loh et al. 2008) and star-formation properties (e.g., Balogh et

155: al. 1999; Dressler et al. 1999;

156: Poggianti et al. 1999; Dressler et al. 2004; Tran et al. 2005a; Poggianti et

157: al. 2006, although see Kodama et al. 2004) of cluster 

158: galaxies since $z \sim$ 1.  The fraction of

159: blue, star forming galaxies increases from almost zero at $z =$ 0 to

160: as much as 50\% at

161: $z \sim 0.5$ (the so-called Butcher-Oemler Effect), and correspondingly,

162: the fraction of S0

163: galaxies in clusters drops by a factor of 2-3, with similar increase

164: in the number of spiral/irregular galaxies over the same redshift

165: range (Dressler et al. 1997).  Naively, these results suggest that gas-rich, star-forming

166: galaxies at high-redshift have their star-formation truncated by the

167: cluster environment at moderate redshift and become the

168: dominate S0 population seen locally.  How such a transformation occurs,

169: and how it avoids leaving a notable imprint on the stellar

170: populations, is still not well-understood.  

171: \newline\indent

172: Citing an abundance of post-starburst

173: (k+a) galaxies in clusters at $z \sim$ 0.4, Poggianti et al. (1999) and Dressler et

174: al. (2004) suggested that

175: there may be an abundance of dusty starburst galaxies in clusters at

176: moderate redshift,

177: and that the dusty starburst and k+a galaxies may represent the intermediate stages between regular

178: star forming late-type galaxies and S0 galaxies (e.g., Shioya et al. 2004; Bekki \& Couch 2003).  In

179: particular, they suggested that the cluster e(a)\footnote{An e(a)

180:   galaxy is defined as a galaxy with EW([OII]) $<$ -5\AA$ $ and

181:   EW(H$\delta$) $>$ 4\AA$ $ by Dressler et al. (1999). These are

182:   emission line galaxies with a

183:   strong A star component to their spectrum suggesting a recent,

184:   possibly obscured, burst

185:   of star formation.} galaxies

186: would be the best candidates for dusty starburst galaxies because

187: their inferred star formation rates appear larger from H$\alpha$

188: emission than from [OII] emission.  If the cluster environment

189: excites a dusty starburst from harassment, tidal interaction, or

190: ram-pressure stripping, then this may quickly deplete a star forming

191: galaxy of its gas, transforming it first into a k+a galaxy, and then leaving it an S0.  More detailed work on two $z \sim$

192: 0.5 clusters by Moran et al. (2005) also showed an abundance of

193: starbursting galaxies conspicuously near the cluster virial radius,

194: suggesting a environmental origin to their ``rejuvenation''. $ISO$

195: observations of relatively nearby clusters have detected significant amounts of

196: dust-obscured star formation (e.g., Fadda et al. 2000; Duc et

197: al. 2002; Biviano et al. 2004; Coia et al. 2005), and this has recently been confirmed at

198: even higher redshift ($z =$ 0.2 - 0.8) by $Spitzer$ observations

199: (Geach et al. 2006; Marcillac et al. 2007; Bai et al. 2007; Fadda et

200: al. 2007; Saintonge et al. 2008; Dressler et al. 2008).  Despite this, it is currently unclear whether

201: there is a  population of dusty starbursts which is sufficiently abundant to be the progenitors of the

202: large number of cluster k+a galaxies.  

203: \newline\indent

204: Alternatively, there is evidence from other cluster samples that the

205: S0 population may simply be the result of the truncation of star formation in

206: infalling late-type galaxies via gas strangulation (e.g., Abraham et

207: al. 1996; Balogh et al. 1999; Treu et al. 2003; Moran et al. 2006) and that no

208: accompanying starburst occurs.  Most likely, the star formation and

209: morphology of galaxies are transformed

210: both ``actively'' (as in a starburst triggered from merging/harassment/tidal

211: forces) and ``passively'' (from gas strangulation or ram-pressure

212: stripping), and that the magnitude of each effect varies significantly from cluster-to-cluster

213: and possibly by epoch, which may explain why studies of small numbers of

214: clusters have found discrepant results.  Interestingly, both

215: processes can be active within massive clusters as was

216: demonstrated by Cortese et al. (2007), who found two interesting

217: galaxies in Abell 1689 and Abell 2667, one of which seems to be undergoing gas

218: strangulation and ram-pressure stripping, while the other is experiencing

219: an induced starburst. There is evidence that galaxies in clusters

220: that are less dynamically relaxed have larger star formation rates

221: (e.g.,  Owen et al. 1999; Metevier et al. 2000; Moss \& Whittle 2000; Owen et al. 2005; Moran et al. 2005; Coia et

222: al. 2005, and numerous others) and that

223: the accretion of large substructures induces starbursts from harassment

224: and tidal forces.

225: \newline\indent

226: The most obvious way to understand whether dusty starbursts

227: are important in the evolution of cluster galaxies is to observe their

228: abundances directly in the mid-infrared (MIR).  In particular, differences in the

229: MIR LFs of the cluster and field environments can be used to

230: determine if dusty starbursts are more common in the cluster

231: environment.  If so, it would suggest that environmental processes may

232: be responsible for triggering these events.

233: \newline\indent

234: The InfraRed Array Camera (IRAC) onboard $Spitzer$ provides a unique tool for studying this

235: problem.  IRAC

236: images in 4 bands simultaneously (3.6$\micron$, 4.5$\micron$,

237: 5.8$\micron$, 8.0$\micron$) and this is particularly advantageous because 3.6$\micron$ and 4.5$\micron$

238: observations are a good proxy for the stellar mass of cluster galaxies

239: between $0 < z < 1$, and 5.8$\micron$ and 8.0$\micron$ are sensitive to

240: emission from warm dust (i.e., from dusty star forming regions) over

241: the same redshift range.  In particular, the Polycyclic Aromatic

242: Hydrocarbons (PAHs) emit strong line emission at rest frame 3.3$\micron$,

243: 6.2$\micron$, 7.7$\micron$, 8.6$\micron$, and 11.3$\micron$

244: (e.g., Gillett et al. 1973; Willner et al. 1977).  These features,

245: in addition to the warm dust continuum, are sensitive indicators of dusty

246: star formation, and several studies have already shown a good

247: correlation between 8.0$\micron$ flux and star formation

248: rate (SFR\footnote{Although there is a direct correlation between

249:   8$\micron$ flux and SFR, the scatter in the correlation is

250:   approximately a factor of 2 for metal rich galaxies in the local universe, and metal

251:   poor galaxies can deviate by as much as a factor of 50 (e.g., Calzetti et

252:   al. 2007).  Because of the large scatter and metallicity dependence,

253:   throught this paper we do not use

254:   the 8$\micron$ data to quantitatively measure SFRs. Instead, we use

255:   the presence of enhanced

256:   8$\micron$ flux as a qualitative indicator of increased dusty star formation.};

257: e.g., Calzetti et al. 2005; Wu et al. 2005; Calzetti et al. 2007).  Therefore,

258: examining the suite of IRAC cluster LFs at redshifts 0 $< z <$ 1 shows

259: both the evolution of the majority of stellar mass in cluster

260: galaxies, as well as the evolution of dusty star formation in the same

261: galaxies.

262: \newline\indent

263: The obvious approach to measuring the presence of dusty star formation in

264: clusters is to observe

265: a handful of ``canonical'' galaxy clusters with IRAC.  However, given

266: that determining the LF from a single cluster suffers

267: significantly from Poisson noise, and perhaps most importantly,  is not necessarily representative of the average

268: cluster population at a given mass/epoch, a better approach would be

269: to stack large numbers of clusters in

270: order to improve the statistical errors, and avoid peculiarities

271: associated with individual clusters.  This approach requires targeted

272: observations of numerous clusters, which is time-consuming compared to other

273: alternatives.  For example, large-area $Spitzer$ surveys such as the

274: 50 deg$^2$ $Spitzer$ Wide-area

275: Infrared Extragalactic Survey (SWIRE\footnote{SWIRE data are publically available at

276:   http://swire.ipac.caltech.edu/swire/}, Lonsdale et al. 2003), the

277: 8.5 deg$^2$ IRAC Shallow

278: Survey (Eisenhardt et al. 2004), and the 3.8 deg$^2$ $Spitzer$ First Look

279: Survey (FLS\footnote{The FLS data are publically available at

280:   http://ssc.spitzer.caltech.edu/fls/}, Lacy et al. 2005) are

281: now, or soon-to-be, publically available and these 

282: fields already contain significant amounts of optical photometry.  These wide optical-IRAC

283: datasets can be employed to find clusters in the survey area itself 

284: using optical cluster detection methods such as the cluster red sequence (CRS) technique

285: (Gladders \& Yee 2000, hereafter GY00), or photometric redshifts

286: (e.g., Eisenhardt et al. 2008; Brodwin et al. 2006).  Subsequently, the IRAC survey data can be used to

287: study the LFs of clusters at a much larger range of masses and

288: redshifts than could be reasonably followed up by $Spitzer$.

289: Furthermore, these surveys also provide panoramic

290: imaging of clusters out to many virial radii, something that has thus far

291: rarely been attempted because it is time-consuming.

292: \newline\indent

293: Finding clusters with the CRS algorithm is relatively straightforward

294: with the ancillary data available from these surveys.  The technique exploits the fact that

295: the cluster population is dominated by early type galaxies, and that

296: these galaxies form a tight red sequence in color-magnitude

297: space.  If two filters which span the 4000\AA$ $ break are used to construct color-magnitude diagrams, 

298: early types are always the brightest, reddest galaxies at any redshift

299: (e.g., GY00) and therefore provide significant contrast

300: from the field.  The CRS technique is well-tested and provides

301: photometric redshifts accurate to $\sim$ 5\% (Gilbank et al. 2007a; Blindert et

302: al. 2004) as well as a low false-positive rate ($<$5\%, e.g., Gilbank et al. 2007a; Blindert et al. 2004;

303: Gladders \& Yee 2005).  The method has been used for the 100

304: deg$^2$ red sequence Cluster Survey (RCS-1, Gladders \& Yee 2005) and is also being used for

305: the next generation, 1000 deg$^2$ RCS-2 survey (Yee et al. 2007).  Variations of

306: the red sequence method have also been used to detect clusters in the

307: Sloan Digital Sky Survey (the ``BCGmax'' algorithm, Koester et

308: al. 2007; Bahcall et

309: al. 2003) as well as in the fields of X-ray surveys (e.g. Gilbank et

310: al. 2004; Barkhouse et al. 2006).  

311: \newline\indent

312: In this paper we combine the $Spitzer$ FLS R$_{c}$-band and 3.6$\micron$

313: photometry and use it to detect clusters with the CRS algorithm.

314: Given the depth of the data, and that the R$_{c}$ - 3.6$\micron$ filter combination

315: spans the rest-frame 4000\AA$ $ break to $z >$ 1, we are capable of

316: detecting a richness-limited sample of clusters out to $z \sim$ 1.

317: %This work

318: %represents the first attempt to apply a red sequence technique using a

319: %combination of optical/infrared data.  

320: Using the sample of clusters

321: discovered in the FLS we compute the 3.6$\micron$, 4.5$\micron$, 5.8$\micron$, and 8.0$\micron$

322: LFs of clusters 0.1 $< z <$ 1.0 and study the role of dusty

323: star formation in cluster galaxy evolution.  A second paper on the

324: abundance of dusty starburst galaxies detected at 24$\micron$ in the same clusters using

325: the FLS MIPS data is

326: currently in preparation by Muzzin et al. (2008).

327: \newline\indent

328: %I think at some level you should stress the importance of a large

329: %sample.  One thing that is clear from the ISO work (and early Spitzer)

330: %is that the MIR properties are quite different from cluster to

331: %cluster.  They depend possibly on dynamical state, mass etc. (Biviano

332: %et al. 2004).  The advantage to our approach is that we use many

333: %clusters, which is a better way to understand what the ``average''

334: %cluster is doing as a function of redshift.  Also along those lines,

335: %the Marcillac et al (2006) points out that their clusters is a

336: %merging cluster (two parts).  This is also potentially a biased

337: %object.  So large statistical studies tells us again the average.

338: %Although 4 sq deg is still subject to cosmic variance in terms of a

339: %cluster catalogue, this project provides a {\it much} less biased look

340: %at the average dusty properties of clusters galaxies than observing a

341: %handful of clusters.  Those studies complement this work in that the

342: %detailed ancillary data can be used to understand the processes

343: %involved; however, without this study, it is unclear whether the few

344: %clusters studies thus far are representative, or are somehow biased.

345: %Given the wild variation in dusty star formation results, this suggests

346: %the latter.

347: The structure of this paper is as follows.  In \S 2 we give a brief

348: overview of the optical, IRAC, and spectroscopic data used in the

349: paper.  Section 3 describes the cluster-finding algorithm used to

350: detect clusters and \S 4 contains the FLS cluster catalogue, and a

351: basic description of its properties.  In \S 5 we present the IRAC

352: cluster LFs and \S 6 contains a discussion of these results as well as

353: a comparison of the cluster and field LFs.  We

354: conclude with a summary in \S 7.  Throughout this paper we assume an 

355: $\Omega_{m}$ = 0.3, $\Omega_{\Lambda}$ = 0.7, H$_{0}$ = 70 km s$^{-1}$

356:   Mpc $^{-1}$ cosmology.  All magnitudes are on the Vega

357:   system.

358: 

359: %Our picture of the evolution of galaxy clusters and their

360: %constituent galaxies has changed dramatically over the last 15

361: %years.  The seminal paper of Bower, Lucey \& Ellis (1992) showed that

362: %the tight color-magnitude relation of early type galaxies in the Coma

363: %and Virgo clusters implied that cluster ellipiticals must be

364: %extremely old, passively evolving systems.  Subsequently, X-ray

365: %surveys (e.g. the Eienstien Medium Sensitivity Survey, EMSS, Gioa et

366: %al 1990) revealed the first samples of clusters at redshifts $>$ 0.3.

367: %Followup analysis of these systems using the cluster color-magnitude

368: %diagram (e.g. Stanford et al., 1998; Ellis et al., 1997), the cluster

369: %luminosity function (e.g. De Propris et al., 1999) and the

370: %fundamental plane (e.g. van Dokkum et al. 1999) confirmed the results

371: %of lower redshift studies; namely that cluster light is dominated

372: %old, passively evolving stellar populations contained primarily

373: %within early type galaxies.  This result, coupled with fact that the

374: %X-ray emission from most clusters appeared to be uniform led to the

375: %paradigm that clusters are dynamically well-relaxed systems formed

376: %early in cosmic history, and that the bulk of the stars within them

377: %are also correspondingly old. 

378: %\newline\indent

379: %Since that time, there have been clues that this paradigm may need

380: %refinement.  The observation that the number of blue galaxies in

381: %clusters increases with redshift (i.e. the Butcher-Oemler effect) by

382: %as much as a factor of $\sim$ 5 is difficult to reconcile with the

383: %notion that the cluster population is primarily quiescent to at least

384: %z $\sim$ 1.0.  Furthermore, the significant change in the abundance

385: %of S0 galaxies in clusters from {\it z} $\sim$ 0 to z $\sim$ 0.6

386: %(Dressler et al., 1997) indicates that a real morphological evolution

387: %of cluster galaxies is occurring.  Furthermore, spectroscopic studies

388: %have demonstrated that a significant population of post-starburst

389: %(i.e. Balmer-strong) ellipticals (K+A galaxies) and emission-line

390: %galaxies (e(a)) exist in moderate-redshift clusters (e.g. Poggianti

391: %et al., 1999; Ellingson et al., 2001, Dressler et al., 2004).

392: %Clearly, a significant evolution in the cluster galaxy population is

393: %being observed from redshift 1 to the present.  It has however been

394: %difficult to connect this rapidly evolving population with the

395: %quiescent population.  

396: %\newline\indent

397: %In addition to this, the advent of high resolution X-ray telescopes

398: %(e.g. Chandra and XMM-Newton) as well as wide field multi-object

399: %spectrographs have revealed that clusters may not be as dynamically

400: %relaxed as previously thought.  Large numbers of massive clusters

401: %(e.g. XXX) show evidence of significant substructure.  It is becoming

402: %more apparent that galaxy clusters may no longer be considered a

403: %homologous group.  As larger cluster galaxy surveys are undertaken,

404: %and the total sample of clusters grows, the picture that appears to

405: %be emerging is that the cluster population is more like a ``zoo''.

406: %Namely that the formation epoch of the cluster, as well as its

407: %history of mergers with smaller galaxy groups may set the properties

408: %of the cluster population more than the global properties such as the

409: %mass, richness, or nature of the ICM.  To this end, many authors are

410: %now exploring the correlations of SFR, blue fraction etc with the

411: %{\it local} environment, rather than the global properties. 

412: %\newline\indent

413: %While important insights have been gained from the detailed study of

414: %individual systems (particularly at high redshift, where deep

415: %photometry \& spectroscopy are required), this emerging picture of a

416: %cluster ``zoo'' begs the question: Can a single cluster be considered

417: %a strong analogy for the bulk of the clusters at a particular

418: %redshift?  Are selection biases (especially at high redshift) skewing

419: %our interpretation of the evolution of cluster galaxies? 

420: 

421: \section{Data Set}

422: %\subsection{Photometric Data}

423: %The photometric data used in this study is publically available and has already been discussed in detail in

424: %several papers.  In particular, the FLS IRAC and MIPS imaging data are

425: %presented in Lacy et al. (2006) and Fadda et al. (2007).  The FLS

426: %R-band data are presented in Fadda et al. (2005).  

427: %For complete details of data

428: %acquisition and reduction we refer to those papers.  Here we present only a quick summary of the data and note any

429: %changes that have been made from the original catalogues.  

430: \subsection{{\it Spitzer} IRAC Data and Photometry}

431: The IRAC imaging data for this project  was observed as part

432: of the publically available, {\it Spitzer} First Look Survey (FLS; see Lacy et

433: al. 2005 for details of the data acquisition and reduction).  The FLS

434: was the first science

435: survey program undertaken after the telescope's in-orbit-checkout was

436: completed.  It covers 3.8 square degrees and has imaging in the four IRAC

437: bandpasses (3.6$\micron$, 4.5$\micron$, 5.8$\micron$,

438: 8.0$\micron$).  The FLS is a shallow survey with a total

439: integration time of only 60 seconds per pixel.  Because IRAC images all four channels

440: simultaneously,  the total integration time is identical in each channel.

441: The resulting 5$\sigma$ limiting flux densities are

442: 20, 25, 100, and 100 $\mu$Jy in the 3.6$\micron$, 4.5$\micron$, 5.8$\micron$, 8.0$\micron$ bandpasses, respectively.

443: These flux densities correspond to Vega magnitudes of 18.0, 17.2,

444: 15.2, and 14.6 mag, respectively.  The 50\% completeness limits for

445: the 4 channels are 18.5, 18.0, 16.0, 15.4 mag and hereafter we use

446: these limits for the cluster finding algorithm (\S 3) and computing

447: the cluster LFs (\S 5).  The data was corrected for completeness using

448: a third-order polynomial fit to

449: the survey completeness as a function of magnitude determined by

450: Lacy et al. (2005).  Lacy et al. compared their completeness

451: estimates, made

452: using artifical galaxies, to  completeness estimates determined

453: by comparing the recovery of sources in the FLS to a deeper

454: ``verification strip''.  The completeness was similar using both

455: methods; however, in some cases the latter suggested it might be higher

456: by $\sim$ 10-15\%.  When counting galaxies we have

457: multiplied the formal uncertainties by an additional $\pm$

458: 20\% of the completeness correction to account for this additional uncertainty.  

459: \newline\indent

460: Photometry for the IRAC data was performed using the SExtractor (Bertin \& Arnouts 1996)

461: package.  For each channel, four aperture magnitudes plus an isophotal

462: magnitude are computed.  The four apertures used are 3, 5, 10, and 20

463: IRAC pixels in diameter (3.66$''$, 6.10$''$, 12.20$''$, 24.40$''$).  The

464: aperture magnitudes are corrected for the flux lost outside the

465: aperture due to the large diffraction-limit of the telescope and 

466: the significant wings of the IRAC point spread function (PSF).  The aperture

467: corrections are computed from bright stars within the FLS field and are

468: listed and discussed further in Lacy et al. (2005).  

469: The majority of galaxies with 3.6$\micron$ $>$ 15.0 mag are unresolved, or only slightly

470: resolved at the resolution of the 3.6$\micron$ bandpass and therefore the 3 pixel aperture corrected

471: magnitude provides the best total magnitude.  For

472: galaxies which are extended and resolved, this small aperture is an

473: underestimate of their total magnitude.  

474: For these galaxies, a ``best'' total magnitude is measured by

475: estimating an optimum photometric aperture

476: using the isophotal magnitudes.  The

477: geometric mean radius of the isophote ({\it r$_{m}$} =

478: (A/$\pi$)$^{0.5}$, where A is the isophotal area) is compared to the radius of

479: each of the 4 apertures used for the aperture magnitudes ({\it r$_{1}$},{\it r$_{2}$},{\it r$_{3}$},{\it

480:   r$_{4}$}).  If {\it r$_{m}$} $<$ 1.1 {\it r$_{ap}$}, then that

481: aperture magnitude is chosen as the best total magnitude.  For objects with {\it

482:   r$_{m}$} $>$ 1.1 {\it r$_{4}$} the isophotal magnitude is used as

483: the best total magnitude.  When measuring the R$_{c}$ - 3.6$\micron$ colors, we always use

484: the 3 pixel aperture-corrected magnitude, even for resolved galaxies

485: (see discussion in \S 2.3).    

486: \newline\indent

487: Object detection was performed separately in all 4 channels and these

488: catalogues were later merged using a 1.8$''$ search radius.  Tests of

489: this matching (Lacy et al. 2005) show that this radius provides

490: the most reliably matched catalogues. 

491: \subsection{Optical Data}

492: \indent

493: The ground-based Cousins R$_{c}$-band (hereafter ``R-band'') imaging

494: used in this study  was obtained as part of the FLS campaign and is also publically

495: available.  R-band imaging covering the entire FLS IRAC and MIPS

496: fields was observed on the Kitt Peak 4m Mayall telescope using the

497: MOSAIC-1 camera.  MOSAIC-1 consists of eight 4096 $\times$

498: 2048 CCDs, and has a field-of-view of 36 $\times$ 36 arcmin with a

499: pixel scale of 0.258 arcseconds per pixel.  Data reduction was performed

500: using the NOAO IRAF $mscred$ package and procedures, and galaxy photometry was performed using the

501: SExtractor (Bertin \& Arnouts 1996) package.  Typical seeing for the

502: images was $\sim$ 1.1 arcseconds and the 5$\sigma$ limiting magnitude

503: in an aperture of 3 arcseconds is 24.7 mag. The 50\% completeness

504: limit in the same aperture is $\sim$ 24.5 mag.  A complete discussion

505: of the data reduction, object finding, and photometry can 

506: be found in Fadda et al. (2004).  For this study we

507: performed additional photometry to that publically available in

508: order to measure fluxes in a slightly larger 3.66$''$ aperture which matches

509: with the smallest aperture of the IRAC data (D. Fadda, private communication).

510: \newline\indent

511: The mean absolute positional error in the astrometry for the R-band

512: data is 0.35$''$ (Fadda et al. 2004) and the mean positional error in

513: the astrometry

514: of bright (faint) sources in the IRAC catalogue is 0.25$''$ (1.0$''$) (Lacy et al. 2005).   Given

515: these uncertainties, as well as the large IRAC pixel scale,  the R-band catalogue was matched to the IRAC

516: catalogue by looking for the closest object within 1.5 IRAC pixels (1.8$''$) of

517: each IRAC detection.  Tests of  matching radii ranging between 0.3 and

518: 3.0 IRAC pixels (0.37$''$ - 3.66$''$) showed that

519: the number of matches increased rapidly using progressively larger

520: radii up to $\sim$ 1.5 IRAC pixels and thereafter the gain in the number of

521: matches with increasing radius was relatively modest, suggesting that

522: the majority of additional matches were likely to be chance associations.

523: Given that the IRAC

524: astrometry is calibrated using bright stars from the Two Micron All

525: Sky Survey (2MASS, Strutskie et al. 2006), whereas the R-band data was

526: astrometrically calibrated using the USNO-A2.0 catalogue (Monet et

527: al. 1998) an additional concern was the possibility of a systematic

528: linear offset between the two

529: astrometric systems.  We attempted to iteratively correct for any systematic offset by

530: shifting the IRAC astrometry by the median offset of all

531: matched sources and then rematching the catalogues; however, 

532: multiple iterations could not converge to a solution significantly better than

533: the initial 0.2$''$ offset seen between the two systems.  Given that

534: this offset is less than the quoted positional errors in the two systems, 

535: it suggests that any systematic offset between the 2MASS and USNO-A2.0 system in the FLS

536: field is less than the random positional error in the R-band and IRAC

537: data themselves.  The iterative refinements increased/decreased the

538: total number of matches by $\pm$ 0.05 - 0.3\% depending on which

539: iteration.  Given these small variations, and the lack of

540: further evidence for a systematic offset between the coordinate

541: systems, the final matched catalogue uses the original IRAC and R-band astrometry.

542: \newline\indent

543: In approximately 4\% of cases more 

544: than one R-band object was located within the search radius.  In these

545: cases, the object closest to the IRAC centroid was taken as the match.

546: The space density of R-band sources is approximately 5 times higher

547: than the number of IRAC sources at these respective depths.  This

548: suggests that at most, 20\% of R-band sources have an IRAC

549: counterpart at the respective depths.  

550: \newline\indent

551: When there are multiple R-band matches for an IRAC detection, the

552: majority of cases will be where only one of the R-band detections

553: is the counterpart of the IRAC detection, and our approach will

554: provide correct colors.  Nevertheless, 

555: a certain percentage of the multiple matches will be when two R-band objects,

556: both of which have IRAC counterparts, have these counterparts blended

557: together into a single IRAC detection due to the large IRAC PSF.  Because the IRAC

558: source is a blend of two objects, but we use only one R-band

559: counterpart, these objects 

560: will be cataloged as brighter and redder than they truly are.

561: However, because only 4\% of IRAC sources have multiple R-band matches, and the

562: probability that both of those R-band sources have an IRAC counterpart

563: is roughly, 20\%$^2$ = 4\%, this suggests that only 4\% x 4\% = 0.16\%

564: of all IRAC sources are blended sources where only one R-band galaxy

565: has been identified as the counterpart.  

566: \newline\indent

567: Although this estimated contamination is  small, clusters have

568: greater surface densities of galaxies than the field, and therefore it might be

569: expected that cluster

570: galaxies are blended more frequently than field galaxies.  We measured the frequency of multiple matches for galaxies in the fields

571: of the clusters (\S 4) and found that 

572: 6.5\% of IRAC sources had multiple R-band counterparts making blending

573: about 1.5 times more common in cluster fields.  Even

574: though the rate of blends is higher, it should not have a significant effect on the LFs.  Even in

575: the worst case that all 6.5\% of IRAC-detected galaxies with multiple R-band

576: matches are blended (not just coincidentally aligned with a faint

577: R-band galaxy in the foreground), and those blends are with a galaxy of

578: comparable luminosity, the values of M$^{*}$ measured from the LFs

579: would be only $\sim$ 0.05 mag brighter.  Given the Schechter function shape of the LF, it

580: is more probable that most galaxies are blended with a   fainter

581: galaxy and therefore 0.05 mag is likely to be the upper limit of how significantly

582: blending affects the LFs.  This effect is smaller than the statistical

583: errors in the measurement of M$^{*}$ for the LFs (\S 5) and therefore we make no attempt

584: to correct for it, but note that our M$^{*}$ values could be

585: systematically high by as much as 0.05 mag.

586: \newline\indent

587: The large IRAC PSF means that star-galaxy separation

588: using these data is difficult and therefore the classification of each matched

589: object is determined from the R-band data using the CLASS\_STAR parameter

590: from SExtractor.  This is done using the criteria suggested in Fadda et

591: al. (2004).  All objects with R $<$ 23.5 with CLASS\_STAR $<$ 0.9 are

592: considered galaxies.  For fainter objects with R $>$ 23.5,  

593: those with CLASS\_STAR $<$ 0.85 are considered galaxies.  Most stars

594: have R - 3.6$\micron$ colors of $\sim$ 0 in the Vega system.  The

595: R-band data is $\sim$ 5 mag deeper than the IRAC data and therefore most

596: stars detected by IRAC should be robustly removed using this classification.

597: \newline\indent

598: %ngal with any 1 channel IRAC detection: 269909

599: %ngal with R-band detection: 956135

600: %ngal IRAC matched to R-band: 163877

601: %ngal multi-match: 7405

602: 

603: \subsection{Galaxy Colors}

604: The most important ingredient in the cluster red sequence algorithm is

605: the measurement of accurate colors.  Excess noise in the colors causes

606: scatter in the cluster red sequence and reduces the probability that

607: a cluster will be detected.  For images with large differences in seeing,

608: PSF shape, and pixel size such as the R-band and 3.6$\micron$,

609: measuring accurate colors can be problematic.  To this end,

610: significant effort was invested in finding the most appropriate way to

611: measure colors with this filter combination.  

612: \newline\indent

613: Studies of the

614: cluster red sequence using telescopes/filters with equivalently large

615: angular resolution differences (e.g., HST + ground based, Holden et

616: al., 2004; Optical and low-resolution IR, Stanford et al., 1998) have

617: typically measured colors by degrading the highest

618: resolution images using the PSF of the lowest resolution images.  This

619: is the most accurate way to measure colors, and is feasible for a

620: survey of several

621: clusters; however, it is time consuming for a survey the size of

622: the FLS that has more than a million sources detected in the R-band.

623: More importantly, because there are so many more

624: galaxies detected in R-band 

625: than in 3.6$\micron$, degrading those images

626: causes numerous unnecessary blends of R-band galaxies resulting in

627: an increased number of catastrophic color errors.  Degrading the resolution also

628: inhibits the potential for detecting distant clusters

629: because the signal-to-noise ratio of the faintest R-band objects becomes

630: much worse when they are smeared with a large PSF.

631: \newline\indent

632: The compromise is to use a fixed

633: aperture that provides accurate colors, yet is as large as possible

634: for the IRAC data (to reduce the need for aperture corrections), and

635: yet is as small is possible to reduce the excess sky noise in

636: the R-band measurement.  It is important to use the same diameter apertures for

637: both 3.6$\micron$ and R-band 

638: so that the colors of bright resolved galaxies are measured

639: properly.  Galaxies which are small and

640: mostly unresolved require an aperture of only 2-3 times the seeing

641: disk to measure a correct color.  In principle, colors for such

642: galaxies can be measured correctly using a different sized apertures for both

643: 3.6$\micron$ and R-band (i.e., optimized apertures).  

644: However, because measuring the color correctly for large galaxies that

645: are resolved in both filters requires that the

646: aperture must be the same size in both filters, 

647: %Unfortunately, {\it a priori}, it is undetermined 

648: %whether a galaxy is extended and rather than use iterations

649: %of the photometry to determine a optimum color apertures

650: we use the same aperture for all

651: galaxies.  

652: \newline\indent

653: After experimenting with apertures ranging in diameter between

654: one to ten IRAC pixels (1.22$''$ to 12.2$''$) we determined

655: that the three IRAC pixel diameter aperture (3.66$''$) was the optimum

656: aperture because it requires a relatively small aperture correction at 3.6$\micron$

657: ($\sim$ 10\%) yet is only slightly larger than three R-band seeing

658: disks, resulting in only a marginal excess sky noise being added to the R-band

659: aperture magnitudes.  Using this large fixed aperture

660: means that the photometry of faintest R-band galaxies

661: is not optimized because much of the aperture contains sky. As a

662: result, some potential in discovering the

663: most distant clusters is sacrificed because the faintest red galaxies

664: (i.e., distant red sequence galaxies) may

665: have excessively large photometric errors.  However, most importantly, accurate

666: colors are determined for all galaxies, and overall the approach

667: provides much better photometry than degrading the

668: entire survey data.

669: \newline\indent

670: As an illustration of the quality of colors achievable with this approach we show the color-magnitude

671: diagram of FLS J171648+5838.6, the richest cluster in the survey, in

672: Figure 1.  The typical intrinsic scatter of early type galaxies on the red sequence at the

673: redshift of this cluster ($z_{spec} =$ 0.573) is $\sim$ 0.075 (

674: Stanford et al. 1998; Holden et al. 2004).  As a comparison we

675: measure the intrinsic scatter for FLS J171648+5838.6 by subtracting the mean

676: photometric error from the total scatter in quadrature.  This is

677: slightly less rigorous than the Monte-Carlo methods used by other

678: authors, but provides a reasonable estimate of the scatter. For galaxies with 3.6$\micron$ $<$ 17 mag (3.6$\micron$ $>$

679: 17 mag) the observed scatter

680: of the red sequence is 0.149(0.225) mag, and the mean photometric color error is 0.118(0.167)

681: mag, resulting in an intrinsic scatter of 0.091(0.151) mag.  We note that without knowing the

682: morphologies of the galaxies we are

683: unable to properly separate early type galaxies from bluer disk

684: galaxies, and therefore this measurement of the scatter is almost

685: certainly inflated by Sa or Sb galaxies bluer than the red sequence.  In

686: particular, these galaxies are generally more

687: prevalent at fainter magnitudes (e.g., Ellingson et al. 2001).

688: However, even

689: without morphological separation, the scatter in the color of

690: red sequence galaxies are in

691: fair agreement with scatter in the colors of typical red sequences  and

692: demonstrates that the 3.66$''$ aperture   works

693: well for measuring colors.  

694: 

695: %Figure XX shows the color-magnitude of FLSXXX, the richest cluster in our sample with several different combinations of aperture colors.  The overplotted line is the red sequence model that corresponds to the spectroscopic redshift of the cluster (see section XX).  Figure XX shows that the aperture that provides the best measure of the red sequence (i.e. minimal scatter) is the 3.66 arcsecond (3 IRAC pixels) aperture, with aperture corrections.  Colors measured in the 3 arcsecond aperture are systematically too red, and furthermore are more scattered.

696: %\newline\indent

697: %We also invested time in determining the best way to measure an IRAC1 total magnitude.  Typically the SExtractor MAG AUTO magnitude is used for this purpose, however, this measurement is quite poor in for significantly undersampled IRAC1 data.  Figure XX shows a comparison in the CMD of FLSXXX using 3.66 arcsecond aperture corrected magnitudes, IRAC1 ``best flux'', and inferring the IRAC1 total magnitude using the 3.66 arcsecond colors combined with the R-band MAG AUTO.  The IRAC1 ``best flux'' and the inferred colors both work well, however we prefer using the ``best flux'' magnitudes as the photometric errors are independent of the R-band aperture and MAG AUTO errors.  For the remainder of the paper we use 3.66'' aperture magnitudes for the colors of all objects and the IRAC1 ``best flux'' measurement for total magnitudes.  

698: \begin{figure}

699: \epsscale{1.1}

700: \plotone{f1.eps}

701: \caption{\footnotesize Color-Magnitude diagram within a 1 Mpc (2.5

702:    arcmin) diameter of FLS J171648+5838.6

703:   (cluster 44, $z_{spec}$ = 0.573), the richest cluster in the FLS.

704:    Several field

705:    galaxies with R - 3.6$\micron$ colors $>$ 5.5 have been removed for clarity.

706:    The solid line is the best red sequence model for the cluster (\S

707:   3.1).  The intrinsic scatter in the red sequence for this cluster 

708:   is 0.091 mag for galaxies with 3.6$\micron$ $<$ 17 mag, and 0.151

709:   mag for galaxies with 3.6$\micron$ $>$ 17 mag, and is comparable

710:   to the scatter in other clusters at this redshift. }

711: \end{figure}

712: %scatter in 44 for ch1 < 17 = 0.091, med scatter is 0.149, error is

713: %0.118

714: %scatter in 44 for ch1 > 17 = 0.151, med scatter is 0.225, error is

715: %0.167

716: 

717: \subsection{Keck, WIYN, \& SDSS Spectroscopic Data}

718: %1373 from Keck ;642 WIYN

719: A large number of spectroscopic redshifts are available for

720: galaxies in the FLS field from

721: several spectroscopic campaigns.    A sample of 642 redshifts were obtained using the

722: HYDRA spectrograph on the Wisconsin-Illinois-Yale-NOAO (WIYN) 3.6m

723: telescope as part of a program to followup radio sources in the FLS

724: (Marleau et al. 2007).  A set of 1373 redshifts

725: in the FLS field were obtained for galaxies selected by their red R -

726: K$_{s}$ colors using the DEIMOS spectrograph on the

727: 10m KECK II telescope by Choi et al. (2006).   Lastly,

728: 1296 redshifts were obtained using the Hectospec Fiber Spectrograph on

729: the 6.5m MMT by Papovich et al. (2006).  The

730: primary target of that survey were galaxies that are

731: detected in the FLS MIPS 24$\micron$ imaging and have R $<$ 21.5 mag. 

732: In addition to redshifts from these projects, 1192 redshifts in the

733: FLS field are also available from the Sloan Digital Sky

734: Survey (SDSS) DR5 database (Adelman-McCarthy et al. 2007).  In total there are 4503 redshifts at

735: various positions available in the FLS.  Of these, 26 are

736: likely to be cluster red sequence galaxies (see \S 3.7). %the a-mc

737: 				%ref is ApJS in-press 

738: \subsection{Palomar Spectroscopy}

739: In addition to the spectroscopic catalogues available, we also

740: obtained our own longslit spectroscopy for bright red sequence galaxies in three clusters with

741: 0.4 $< z_{phot} <$ 0.6 in the FLS using the Double-Spectrograph (Doublespec)

742: on the 200-inch Hale telescope at Palomar

743: Mountain (P200).   We also obtained multi-object spectroscopy using the

744: COSMIC Spectrograph on the P200 for an additional three clusters with

745: $z_{phot} <$ 0.3.  These six clusters were chosen for followup because they were amongst the richest clusters in

746: our preliminary cluster catalogues.

747: \subsubsection{Double-Spectrograph Data}

748: Spectroscopy of bright red sequence galaxies in clusters FLS J171241+5855.9,

749: FLS J172122+5922.7, and FLS J171648+5838.6 (clusters 16, 38, and 44

750: listed in Table 1) was performed on 17, 18, and 19 August 2004 with Doublespec

751: on the P200.  The

752: observations were made with the ``Red'' camera using the 316 l/mm

753: grating blazed at 7150$ $\AA $ $ and a 0.5$''$ wide slit,

754: giving a spectral resolution of 2.6$ $\AA$ $ ($\sim$ 150 km s$^{-1}$).  The Doublespec longslit is $\sim$ 1.5

755: arcmin long and the angle of the slit on the sky can be rotated.  In

756: all 3 clusters we centered the slit on the brightest cluster galaxy

757: (BCG) and then chose a rotation angle so that we could get at least 2

758: other bright objects (preferentially red sequence galaxies) on the

759: slit.  

760: \newline\indent

761: For FLS J172122+5922.7 and FLS J171648+5838.6 we obtained 

762: spectra of 3 objects in the field, and in FLS J171241+5855.9 we managed 4.  We

763: obtained three 20 minute exposures for  FLS J172122+5922.7 and FLS

764: J171648+5838.6, which have

765: photometric redshifts of 0.57 and 0.55, respectively, and one 20 minute

766: exposure for FLS J171241+5855.9, which has a photometric redshift of 0.39.  We

767: also observed a spectroscopic standard, calibration lamps, dome flats

768: and twilight flats at the beginning of each night.  Data reduction and

769: wavelength calibration were performed using the standard IRAF

770: techniques.  After 1-d spectra were extracted, 7 of the 10 objects had a

771: signal-to-noise ratio suitable for cross-correlation.  One of the spectra in

772: FLS J171241+5855.9 has a strong emission line at 7056\AA$ $ and no possible

773: identification that puts it near the photo-{\it z} of the cluster.  This

774: object was therefore considered a field interloper.  The remaining 6

775: spectra (two per cluster) showed significant absorption features typical of early type

776: galaxies and redshifts were obtained by cross correlating them with an

777: elliptical galaxy spectrum.  The redshifts of the galaxies within each cluster were

778: similar ($\Delta$$z$ $<$ 0.01) and are in excellent agreement with

779: the cluster photometric redshift. These spectroscopic redshifts are

780: listed in the cluster catalogue (Table 1). 

781: \subsubsection{COSMIC Data}

782: Multi-object spectroscopy of both red sequence galaxies and MIPS

783: 24$\micron$-detected galaxies in the fields of clusters FLS J171059+5934.2,

784: FLS J171639+5915.2, FLS J171505+5859.6, and FLS J172449+5921.3

785: (clusters 1, 2, 8, and 10

786: listed in Table 1) were performed on 26, 27, 28, 29 May 2006, and 15, 16,

787: 17 June 2007 using the

788: COSMIC Spectrograph on the 200$''$ Hale Telescope at Palomar Mountain.  These observations were made with the 300 l/mm grating blazed

789: at 5500$ $\AA$ $ with 1$''$ wide

790: slits giving a spectral resolution of 8$ $\AA$ $ ($\sim$ 450 km

791: s$^{-1}$).  These data are part of a

792: larger campaign to study cluster 24$\micron$ sources and full details of

793: the data reduction, calibration and cross-correlation will be

794: presented in a future paper (Muzzin et al. 2008, in preparation).  We

795: obtained 17, 16, 12 and 20 good-quality spectra in the fields of FLS J171059+5934.2,

796: FLS J171505+5859.6, and FLS J172449+5921.3 

797: respectively, and redshifts were determined using cross-correlation.

798: Including the data from the other spectroscopic campaigns, the field of FLS J171059+5934.2 has 10 galaxies with

799: $\overline z$ = 0.126, the field of FLS J171639+5915.2 has 7 galaxies with  $\overline z$ =  0.129,

800: the field of FLS J171505+5859.6 has 9 galaxies with  $\overline z$ =  0.252, and the field

801: of FLS J172449+5921.3 has 12 galaxies with $\overline z$ = 0.253.  These redshifts are

802: included in the cluster catalogue (Table 1).

803: \subsection{Keck/DEIMOS Spectroscopy of FLS J172126+5856.6}

804: Spectroscopy was obtained of the candidate cluster FLS J172126+5856.6

805: (cluster 93 in Table 1) with the Deep Imaging

806: Multi-Object Spectrograph (DEIMOS, Faber et al. 2003) on the 10~m Keck~II telescope.

807: On the night of 1 September 2005, we obtained three 1800s exposures on the same mask in

808: non-photometric conditions with $\sim$1.3$''$ seeing.   The 600ZD grating ($\lambda_{\rm blaze} = 7500$ \AA;

809: $\Delta \lambda_{\rm FWHM} = 3.7$ \AA) and a GG455 order-blocking filter

810: were used.  The DEIMOS data were processed using a slightly modified version

811: of the pipeline developed by the DEEP2 team at UC-Berkeley\footnote{\tt

812: http://astro.berkeley.edu/~cooper/deep/spec2d/}.  Relative flux calibration was achieved from

813: observations of standard stars from Massey \& Gronwall (1990).

814: \newline\indent

815: Slits were preferentially placed on candidate red sequence galaxies,

816: allowing a total of 10 slits on likely cluster members.

817: Of the 10 candidate red sequence galaxies, five had sufficient S/N for determining

818: redshifts, and four had redshifts $\Delta z$ $<$ 0.01 from each other,

819: with the $\overline z$ =  1.045.  These redshifts are included in the

820: cluster catalogue (Table 1).

821: \section{Cluster Finding Algorithm}

822: The cluster finding algorithm employed in this study is essentially

823: the CRS algorithm of Gladders \& Yee (2000,

824: 2005) with some minor modifications.  Here we outline only the major

825: steps, and refer to those papers

826: for a more detailed explanation of the procedures.  

827: \newline\indent

828: The CRS algorithm is motivated by the observation that early type

829: galaxies

830: dominate the bright end of the cluster LF and that 

831: these galaxies always follow a tight red sequence in the

832: color-magnitude plane.  At increasing redshift the observed

833: red sequence color becomes redder\footnote{The observed-frame color of the

834:   red sequence becomes redder with increasing redshift 

835:   because of band shifting.  The rest-frame color change due to passive

836:   evolution actually makes galaxies bluer at higher redshift,  but is

837:   a small effect for a single-burst population formed at

838:   high redshift.  Because the  change in observed-frame color

839:   is dominated by the k-correction from an old stellar population, it

840:   increases monotonically with redshift and provides a good estimate

841:   of the cluster redshift.}

842: and because this change in color follows closely the predictions from a

843: passively evolving stellar population, the color can be used as a robust

844: photometric redshift estimate for a cluster.  In order to apply the

845: CRS algorithm, slices are made in the color-magnitude plane of a

846: survey.  Galaxies are then assigned weights based on the probability

847: that they belong to a particular slice.  This probability is determined

848: by the color and the photometric error in the color.  Once color

849: weights for each galaxy in each slice have been assigned, each galaxy

850: is also assigned a magnitude weight.  Magnitude weighting is

851: done because bright red sequence galaxies are more likely to be

852: members of clusters than faint ones.  

853: \newline\indent

854: Once each galaxy is assigned a color and magnitude weight for each

855: slice, the positions of each galaxy are plotted for each slice with

856: their respective weights.  The resulting ``probability map'' for each

857: slice is then smoothed and peaks in these maps represent likely 

858: cluster candidates.  In the following subsections we discuss in more

859: detail the steps in our version of the algorithm.

860: %Mention why we use R-IRAC1 throughout in cluster

861: %finding.. perhaps best where the CRS is introduced using straddle

862: %4000A etc.

863: \subsection{Red Sequence Models}

864: The first step in finding clusters with the CRS is to model the color,

865: slope, and intercept of the

866: cluster red sequence as a function of redshift.  This was done by making

867: simulated single-burst galaxies using all available metallicities from the Bruzual

868: \& Charlot (2003) spectral synthesis code.   The models are constructed

869: with 50\% of the stars forming in a single-burst

870: at t = 0, and the remainder forming with an exponentially

871: declining star formation rate of $\tau$ = 0.l Gyr.  Using a range of

872: metallicities causes the color of 

873: each galaxy to be slightly different at $z$ = 0, with the most metal-rich

874: galaxies being the reddest.  The absolute magnitude of each

875: galaxy with a different metallicity is normalized using the U-V, V-I,

876: and J-K red sequences of Coma (Bower et al. 1992) assuming that

877: a metallicity gradient with magnitude is the primary source of the slope of

878: the red sequence.

879: Normalizing the absolute magnitude of each galaxy this way allows us

880: to reproduce models with the correct red sequence color and

881: slope with redshift.  

882: \newline\indent

883: There is increasing evidence that the slope of the red sequence is not only

884: caused by a metallicity sequence, but is also the product of an

885: age sequence, with the less

886: luminous galaxies being both more metal poor and younger (e.g.,

887: Nelan et al. 2005; Gallazzi et al. 2006).  Examination of

888: spectroscopically confirmed clusters in

889: the FLS shows that the pure metallicity sequence used in our models

890: reproduces the red sequence slope and color quite well,

891: and because we are only interested in a fiducial red sequence model

892: for detecting clusters and determining photometric redshifts,

893: no further tuning of the ages of galaxies along the

894: sequence is done.  

895: \newline\indent

896: Once the absolute magnitude of each model galaxy is normalized using

897: the Coma red sequences,

898: linear fits to the R - 3.6$\micron$ vs. 3.6$\micron$ color-magnitude

899: relations of the model galaxies between 0.1 $< z <$ 1.6 are made.   A

900: high density of redshift models are fit so that there is

901: significant overlap in color space (185 slices between 0.1 $< z <$ 1.6).  This assures that no clusters are missed

902: because they have colors between the finite number of models

903: and it also allows for increased precision in the photometric redshifts.

904: \newline\indent

905: We computed two sets of single-burst models, one with a formation

906: redshift ({\it z}$_{f}$) = 2.8, and

907: another with {\it z}$_{f}$ = 5.0.  These two sets of models produce nearly

908: identical observed red sequences at {\it z} $<$ 1.1, but begin to

909: diverge at higher redshifts.  There is evidence from

910: previous studies of the fundamental plane (e.g., van Dokkum et

911: al. 1998; van Dokkum \& Stanford 2003, and many others), evolution of

912: the color-magnitude diagram (Stanford et al. 1998; Holden et al. 2004), and K-band

913: luminosity function (De Propris et al. 1999; Lin et al. 2006; Muzzin et al. 2007a) that a

914: {\it z}$_{f}$ $\sim$ 3 model is appropriate for cluster early types;

915: however, the uncertainties in these studies are fairly large.  There is also

916: evidence that many of the most massive field early types formed the

917: majority of their stars at {\it z} $>$ 5

918: (McCarthy et al. 2004; Glazebrook et al. 2004), so the possibility remains that

919: a {\it z}$_{f}$ = 5.0 is more appropriate.  Regardless, the majority

920: of the systems we have discovered are at {\it z} $<$ 1.1, and therefore

921: the $z_{f}$ uncertainty does

922: not affect the photometric redshifts of these systems.  For

923: systems at {\it z} $>$ 1.1, the redshift can be considered an upper

924: limit.  For example, the photo-{\it z} for a cluster at {\it z} = 1.3

925: in the {\it z}$_{f}$ = 2.8 model would be {\it z} $\sim$ 1.2 in the

926: {\it z}$_{f}$ = 5.0 model.  

927: \newline\indent

928: To illustrate the depth of the survey, and the location of the

929: red sequence models, Figure 2 shows the R - 3.6$\micron$ vs. 3.6$\micron$

930: color-magnitude diagram for all galaxies in the FLS with some of the

931: {\it z}$_{f}$ = 2.8 red sequence models overlaid.   The density of

932: galaxies with M

933: $\sim$ M$^{*}$ begins to drop off significantly for the $z >$ 1.2

934: red sequence models

935: because of the depth of the R-band data (M$^{*}$(3.6$\micron$)

936: $\sim$ 17.0 mag at $z =$ 1.2) and therefore we consider $z

937: \sim$ 1.2 the upper limit at which we can reliably detect clusters.

938: Remarkably, the red sequence models are even well separated in

939: color space at $z <$ 0.5 where the R - 3.6$\micron$ filters do not

940: span the 4000\AA$ $ break.  This is caused by the large wavelength

941: separation between the bands, and the wide 3.6$\micron$ filter

942: which has a strongly redshift-dependent negative

943: k-correction.  Although the k-correction in R-band evolves slowly with

944: redshift out to $z \sim$ 0.5, the k-correction for 3.6$\micron$ is

945: significant and therefore the R - 3.6$\micron$ color is still a sensitive

946: redshift indicator.  

947: \begin{figure*}

948: \plotone{f2.ps}

949: \caption{\footnotesize Observed color-magnitude diagram for all galaxies in the

950: FLS.  The solid lines are fiducial red sequence models at different

951: redshifts generated using

952: the Bruzual \& Charot code.  The redshift of each model is labelled in

953: the figure.  The bulk of the shift in color  with redshift of the

954: models is due to

955: bandpass shifting or ``k-correction'', not because of evolution in the

956: rest-frame colors of the galaxies.}

957: \end{figure*}

958: \subsection{Color Weights}

959: Once red sequence models have been made, weights based on the

960: probability that a galaxy belongs within a color slice are computed.

961: The typical 1$\sigma$ scatter in the local cluster color-magnitude

962: relation is $\sim$ 0.075 mag (e.g., Lopez-Cruz et al. 2004; Bower et

963: al. 1992).  The scatter has been measured in clusters to z

964: $\sim$ 1 where it remains remarkable consistent (e.g., Stanford et

965: al. 1998; Gladders et al. 1998; Blakeslee et al. 2003).  Thereafter, it may become somewhat more

966: scattered (Holden et al. 2004).  Assuming that this relation holds to

967: $z \sim$ 1.3, color weights (with values ranging from 0 to 1) are assigned by computing the 

968: overlapping area of a galaxy's color with the red sequence assuming a

969: red sequence intrinsic dispersion of 0.075 mag and assuming the galaxy's color is

970: represented by a Gaussian centered on the measured color with a 1$\sigma$ dispersion equal to

971: the color error (see e.g. GY00, Figure 3 for an

972: example).  Using this method, the weight of a bright

973: galaxy lying directly on the red sequence with a color error significantly narrower than the width of the

974: red sequence is 1.0.  The same galaxy,

975: with a color error equal to the dispersion in the red sequence, has a 

976: weight of 0.67.  Color weights are computed for all galaxies in all 185

977: color slices. 

978: \subsection{Magnitude Weights}

979: In addition to the color weights, galaxies are also weighted based on

980: their magnitude relative to a fiducial M$^{*}$ value.  Cluster

981: early types are usually the brightest, reddest galaxies at a given

982: redshift and therefore, the brightest galaxies within a color slice

983: are more likely to be cluster galaxies and should be given

984: extra weight.  The distribution of magnitude weights was defined as

985: P(M) by GY00 (see their \S 4.3).  We compute the P(M)

986: using the data themselves, as suggested by those authors, and when doing

987: so we consider objects within the one-percentile highest density regime as

988: ``cluster'' galaxies.  This is a slightly more strict cut than the ten-percentile cut

989: used by GY00; however, the fact that 

990: IR-selected galaxies are more strongly clustered than

991: optically-selected galaxies justifies using a

992: more stringent cut.  

993: %Moreover, GY00 showed that using values

994: %between 2\% - 20\% have little effect on the P(M) values, and our own

995: %data 

996: \subsection{Probability Maps} 

997: Once the magnitude and color weights for all galaxies in each of the individual color slices

998: have been computed, a probablility map of each slice is created.  The map

999: is a spatial galaxy density map of the survey within each redshift slice.  The map is made

1000: using pixels which are 125 kpc in physical size at the redshift of each slice.  The

1001: probablility flux from each pixel is determined by placing each galaxy on the pixel

1002: that corresponds to its location in the survey, weighted by the

1003: product of its color

1004: and magnitude weights.  Once each slice is constructed this way, it is

1005: smoothed with the exponential kernel suggested in GY00 (their equation

1006: 3).  

1007: %As a visual example of

1008: %what this process looks like Figure xx shows the z = xxx and z = xxx,

1009: %and z = xxx probability maps.

1010: \subsection{Noise Maps}

1011: The noise properties of the probability maps of different color/redshifts slices

1012: are usually different.  In particular, the maps of the highest redshift slices

1013: tend to have large noise peaks because the survey is

1014: only as deep as $\sim$ M$^{*}$ in those slices.  

1015: %The peakiness is caused by the lack of

1016: %``background'' noise from sub-M$^{*}$ galaxies.  

1017: The lower redshift probability maps have a smoother background because there are

1018: numerous M $>$ M$^{*}$ galaxies which are more evenly distributed

1019: spatially and

1020: have a low probability of belonging to any slice because they have a

1021: large color error.  The higher redshift maps are shallower, thereby

1022: lacking the M $>$ M$^{*}$

1023: galaxies which provide this smooth background. 

1024: %This is primarily the product of a low-density of sources due to the

1025: %magnitude limit of the survey.  

1026: If peak finding is run on all probability 

1027: maps using similar detection parameters, it produces significantly

1028: different numbers of detections in different slices.  In particular, almost any noise in

1029: the highest redshift maps results in the detection of a ``cluster''.    

1030: \newline\indent

1031: To circumvent this problem the parameters of the peak finding for each map can

1032: be tuned

1033: individually in order to produce a reasonable number of detections in

1034: each slice;

1035: however, the resulting cluster catalogue is clearly biased by

1036: what is considered a ``real'' detection in a given map.

1037: It is preferrable to have a cluster catalogue which is as

1038: homogenously-selected as possible and based on a quantitative selection.  Therefore ``noise''

1039: maps are constructed and are added to each probability map to homogenize their noise

1040: properties.    

1041: \newline\indent

1042: The noise maps are constructed by adding fake red sequence galaxies to

1043: each pixel of the

1044: probability maps.  Adding a constant background of fake

1045: galaxies does not change the

1046: noise properties of a map because it is the variance in the number of background

1047: galaxies that determines the noise.  We experimented with a variety of variances to add,

1048: but settled that the variance from the photometric color errors of six M$^{*}$ red sequence galaxies per

1049: pixel provided the best results.  This level of noise removes the spurious detections

1050: in the highest redshift slices, but does not add so much noise as to

1051: wash-out the majority of the poorer clusters in the lower redshift slices.  

1052: \newline\indent

1053: The noise in each pixel is calculated by first

1054: determining the average color error of an M$^{*}$ red sequence

1055: galaxy using the survey data.  Once the average color error per slice

1056: is tabulated, the weights of six M$^{*}$ red sequence galaxies are 

1057: Monte Carlo simulated for each pixel of a noise map assuming that the colors are

1058: normally distributed around the red sequence with a dispersion equal

1059: to the mean color error.  These simulated weights are

1060: then assigned to each pixel of the noise map and each noise

1061: map is added to the appropriate cluster probability map.  This approach thereby

1062: implictly defines a ``cluster'' as an overdensity detectable above the

1063: Poisson noise from six M$^{*}$ background

1064: red sequence galaxies at any redshift.  The noise+clusters maps

1065: have  similar noise properties for every slice and peak finding can be run using

1066: identical parameters for all maps. 

1067: \newline\indent

1068: We note that in our simple empirical method for homogenizing the

1069: noise in the probability maps the added noise is Poissionian, not clustered like the underlying background galaxy

1070: distribution.  Despite this, the noise maps technique works extremely well, effectively smoothing out

1071: spurious noise spikes in the highest redshift probability maps.  In principle, a more sophisticated method which includes

1072: the clustering properties of background galaxies could be

1073: implemented; however, for our purposes such an approach is unecessary.  Only the detection probability of poorest clusters near the

1074: significance limit are affected by different choices in noise maps.

1075: Galaxies from the poorest clusters do not contribute significantly to

1076: the LFs, which are dominated by counts from more massive systems, and therefore we do not consider this issue further.

1077: \subsection{Cluster Detection}

1078: Once the combined noise-probability maps have been made, peaks are detected in

1079: each map using SExtractor.  The peak-finding is done differently

1080: from GY00 in that the individual 2d slices are searched instead

1081: of merging the slices into a 3d datacube and searching for

1082: 3d peaks.  It is unclear how

1083: these two methods compare; however, they are likely to be similar and 

1084: searching the slices individually permits easy visual inspection of

1085: the sources on each map which allows us to check any problems that

1086: have occured

1087: with peak finding or in the generation of the map.  Pixels 5$\sigma$ above the

1088: background are flagged  and 25 connected pixels are

1089: required to make a detection.  

1090: \newline\indent

1091: The slices are close in color space and therefore clusters

1092: (particularly rich ones) are detected in more than one color slice.

1093: The same cluster is identified in multiple color slices

1094: by merging the slice catalogues using a matching radius of 8

1095: pixels (1 Mpc).  Clusters found across as many as 20 color slices

1096: are connected as being the same object.  The color slices are not linear in

1097: redshift, but 20 slices correspond to $\Delta$$z \sim \pm$0.06.

1098: These combined spatial and

1099: color limits for connecting clusters imply that 

1100: clusters with separations $>$ 1 Mpc in transverse distance and

1101: $>$ 0.06 in redshift space can be resolved into distinct

1102: systems\footnote{The color slices are closer together at $z >$ 1 and

1103:    only systems with $\Delta z$ $>$ 0.12 can be resolved at this

1104:    redshift.  We note that although the overall level of projections

1105:    is likely to be low, because of the bunching up of the color

1106:    slices, the highest redshift clusters will be the most suseptible to

1107:    projection effects.}.  This level of sensitivity is similar to that found by

1108: Gladders \& Yee (2005) using R - z$^{\prime}$ colors to select

1109: clusters.  They also demonstrated that subclumps at redshift spacings much

1110: less than this are likely to be associated subclumps or infalling

1111: structures related to the main body of the cluster.

1112: \subsection{Photometric Redshifts}

1113: Each cluster is assigned the photometric redshift of the

1114: color slice in which it is most strongly detected.  The strength of the

1115: detection is determined by using

1116: SExtractor to perform aperture photometry of each cluster on each

1117: probability map.  This provides a ``probability flux'', and the cluster is

1118: assigned to the slice in which it has the largest

1119: probability flux.  

1120: \newline\indent

1121: The large number of spectroscopic redshifts available for the

1122: FLS can be used to verify the accuracy of the red sequence photometric

1123: redshifts.

1124: Examining the spectroscopic catalogue for galaxies within a 1 Mpc circle around each cluster

1125: shows that there are numerous galaxies with spectroscopic redshifts in the

1126: field of many of the clusters.  The spectroscopic targets were chosen

1127: with a variety of selection criteria (none of which preferentially

1128: select early type galaxies) and therefore the majority of galaxies with redshifts are

1129: foreground or background galaxies.  We use only 

1130: the spectroscopic redshifts for 

1131: galaxies which have a combined magnitude and color weight of $>$ 0.2

1132: in order to preferentially select likely cluster members.

1133: This cut in weight is used because it corresponds to the typical

1134: combined magnitude and color weight of

1135: M $<$ M$^{*}$ red sequence galaxies.  Once the cut is made there are 23 clusters which have at least one spectroscopic

1136: redshift for a likely cluster red sequence galaxy.  Remarkably, there

1137: are 26 galaxies which meet this criteria and 24 of these have a

1138: spectroscopic redshift $<$ 0.1 from the photometric redshift of the

1139: cluster.  This illustrates the effectiveness of the red sequence color at

1140: estimating photometric redshifts provided that the galaxy has a

1141: high-probability of being  a cluster early type.  

1142: \newline\indent

1143: In Figure 3 we plot spectroscopic vs. photometric redshift for these

1144: 23 clusters plus the additional 6 for which we obtained our own

1145: spectroscopic redshifts ($\S$ 2.5).  The straight line marks a one-to-one

1146: correlation.  Large points represent clusters with more than one

1147: galaxy with a redshift consistent with the being in the cluster.

1148: Small points represent clusters with a single spectroscopic redshift.

1149: Excluding the large single outlier with $z_{spec} \sim$ 0.9 (which is likely to be a

1150: bluer galaxy at high-redshift based on its spectrum and IRAC colors, see $\S$6.3) the rms scatter in the cluster spectroscopic

1151: vs. photometric redshift is $\Delta$$z$ = 0.04, demonstrating that the

1152: photometric redshifts from the red sequence algorithm work extremely

1153: well.  

1154: \newline\indent

1155: The accuracy of the photometric redshifts from the FLS sample is

1156: comparable to the accuracy of the RCS surveys (Yee et al. 2007; Gladders

1157: \& Yee 2005) which use R - z$^{\prime}$

1158: color selection, even though the R - 3.6$\micron$ colors

1159: have larger photometric errors than the R - z$^{\prime}$ colors.  It

1160: is likely this is because 

1161: the model red sequence colors change much

1162: more rapidly with redshift in R

1163: - 3.6$\micron$ than in R - z$^{\prime}$ (R - 3.6$\micron$ spans 2

1164: magnitudes between $z$ = 0.5 and $z$ = 1.0, whereas it spans only 1

1165: magnitude in R - z$^{\prime}$).  The larger change in the R -

1166: 3.6$\micron$  colors with

1167: redshift means that photometric measurement errors should correspond to smaller errors in photometric

1168: redshift.  

1169: %Therefore, despite the fact that the R - 3.6$\micron$ colors

1170: %have larger photometric errors than the R - z$^{\prime}$ colors at a

1171: %given redshift, they still provide a

1172: %better photometric redshift.  

1173: \begin{figure}

1174: \plotone{f3.eps}

1175: \caption{\footnotesize Photometric vs. spectroscopic

1176:   redshift for clusters in the FLS field.  The color of the circle

1177:   corresponds to the telescope/project where the spectroscopic redshifts were obtained (see

1178:   $\S$2).  Large circles denote clusters with more than one

1179:   spectroscopic redshift, small circles denote clusters with only one

1180:   spectroscopic redshift.  Excluding the one large outlier at $z_{spec} \sim$

1181:   0.9, the rms scatter is $\Delta$z = 0.04.}

1182: \end{figure}

1183: \subsection{B$_{gc}$ Richness Parameter}

1184: The final step in the selection of the cluster sample  is to cut

1185: low-richness detections from the catalogue.  The false postive rate is

1186: higher for low richness systems (i.e., galaxy groups) and

1187: we prefer restrict our analysis of the cluster LFs to a high confidence sample

1188: of massive clusters.  The cluster richnesses are measured quantitatively using

1189: the B$_{gc}$ richness parameter (Longair \& Seldner 1979; for a

1190: detailed look at the application of B$_{gc}$ to measuring cluster

1191: richnesses see Yee \& L\'{o}pez-Cruz

1192: 1999).  B$_{gc}$ is the

1193: amplitude of the 3-dimensional correlation function between cluster

1194: galaxies and the cluster center.  B$_{gc}$ is measured within a fixed

1195: aperture (typically 500 kpc radius) and is well-correlated with cluster physical parameters such

1196: as velocity disperion ($\sigma$), X-ray temperature (T$_{x}$), and

1197: the radius as which the mean density of the cluster exceeds the

1198: critical density by a factor of 200 (R$_{200})$ (e.g., Yee \&

1199: Lopez-Cruz 1999; Yee \&

1200: Ellingson 2003; Gilbank et al. 2004; Muzzin et al 2007b).  

1201: \newline\indent

1202: Gladders \& Yee (2005) introduced a new form of the B$_{gc}$

1203: parameter, counting the overdensity of red sequence galaxies within a

1204: fixed aperture, rather

1205: than all galaxies and defined this new parameter as B$_{gc,R}$.  This form of richness suffers less from cosmic

1206: variance in the background because red sequence galaxies provide

1207: better contrast with the field, and therefore it is a more

1208: robust estimate of the cluster richness.  We use B$_{gc,R}$ rather

1209: than B$_{gc}$ for determing the richnesses of the FLS

1210: clusters.  The net

1211: number  of 3.6$\micron$ red sequence galaxies  with M $<$ M$^{*}$ + 1.0 (where

1212: M$^{*}$ is determined from the data itself, see $\S$5.1) are counted within a fixed

1213: aperture of 500 kpc radius.  The

1214: model red sequences from $\S$3.1 are used and galaxies within $\pm$ 0.3

1215: in color are considered to belong to the red sequence.  

1216: \newline\indent

1217: Systems with B$_{gc,R}$ $<$ 200 are removed from the cluster catalogue.  The B$_{gc}$-M$_{200}$ 

1218: relation of Yee \& Ellingson (2003) implies that this corresponds to

1219: removing groups with

1220: M$_{200}$ $<$ 6.6 x 10$^{13}$ M$_{\odot}$, where M$_{200}$ is defined

1221: as the mass contained with R$_{200}$.  Groups with masses below

1222: this typically have only $\sim$ 5-10 bright galaxies (e.g., Balogh et

1223: al. 2007), making them difficult to  select robustly with the CRS

1224: algorithm.  

1225:  The systems that are removed by the richness cut are typically tight compact groups

1226: of 3-4 extremely bright galaxies that are the same color.  Although they

1227: are not rich, they have a

1228: strong probability of being detected by the CRS algorithm because of

1229: their luminosity and compactness.  It is likely that the majority of these systems are bona fide

1230: low-richness galaxy groups; however, we have no way of verifying the

1231: false-positive rate for these systems.

1232: \newline\indent

1233: Before these low-richness systems are cut from the catalogue there are 134

1234: cluster candidates between 0.1 $< z <$ 1.4 in the FLS field.  Removing

1235: systems with B$_{gc,R}$ $<$ 200 leaves a total of 99 candidate clusters in the

1236: sample.  

1237: \subsection{Cluster Centroids}

1238: \indent

1239: Defining a centroid for clusters can be a challenging task, yet is extremely

1240: important because properties determined within some aperture around

1241: the cluster (such as

1242: richness, or LF) can vary

1243: strongly with the choice of centroid.  In many

1244: cluster studies the location of the BCG is used as the center of the cluster.  This is

1245: a reasonble definition as frequently the BCG lies at the center of the

1246: dark matter halo and X-ray emission; however, there are also many

1247: examples where it does not.  Furthermore, not all clusters have an

1248: obvious BCG, particularly at higher redshift.

1249: \newline\indent

1250: Given these issues, two centroids are

1251: computed for the FLS

1252: clusters, one based on the location of the peak of the red sequence probability flux

1253: in the probability maps, and the other based on the location of the BCG within 500 kpc of this

1254: centroid.  In order to avoid bright foreground galaxies the brightest galaxy in the field

1255: with a red sequence weight $>$ 0.4 is designated as the BCG.  Eye examination of the

1256: clusters shows that this criteria is effective at choosing what

1257: appears visually to be the

1258: correct galaxy; however, because it chooses only a single galaxy this technique is still potentially

1259: suseptible to red low-redshift field interlopers.

1260: \newline\indent

1261: When computing the cluster LFs, only one of the centroids can be used.

1262: %Clearly the centroid of clusters with a obvious BCG is best-defined by

1263: %the BCG centroid, whereas for those without the red sequence centroid

1264: %would be best.  

1265: We define an ``optimum'' centroid for each cluster

1266: using the B$_{gc,R}$ parameter.  B$_{gc,R}$ is computed at both

1267: centroids and the optimum  centroid is the centroid which

1268: produces the maximum value of B$_{gc,R}$.  This approach is

1269: simplistic, but because B$_{gc}$ is the correlation amplitude between

1270: the cluster center and galaxies, the centroid which produces the

1271: largest value should be the best centroid of the galaxy population.

1272: %The optimum centroid for each cluster is listed in column 11 of Table 1.

1273: \section{Properties of the Cluster Catalogue}

1274: \indent

1275: The final cluster catalogue of 99 clusters and groups is presented in

1276: Table 1.  Where spectroscopic redshifts are available for

1277: high-probability cluster members they are listed

1278: in column 3, with the number of redshifts in parenthesis.  For each

1279: cluster we also compute an estimate of R$_{200}$ and M$_{200}$.  The M$_{200}$ values are estimated using the

1280: correlation between B$_{gc}$ and M$_{200}$ measured by Muzzin et

1281: al. (2007b) for 15 X-ray selected clusters at $z \sim$ 0.3 in the

1282: K-band.  The K-band and 3.6$\micron$ bandpasses sample similar parts

1283: of a galaxy's spectrum at 

1284: 0.1 $< z <$ 1.5 and therefore it is reasonable to assume that

1285: B$_{gc}$ values measured in both these bands will be comparable.  The

1286: best-fit relation between M$_{200}$ and B$_{gc}$ is

1287: \begin{equation}

1288: Log(M_{200}) = (1.62 \pm 0.24)Log(B_{gc}) + (9.86 \pm 0.77).

1289: \end{equation}

1290: Muzzin et al. (2007b) did not measure the correlation between B$_{gc}$

1291: and R$_{200}$ in the K-band, although Yee \& Ellingson (2003) showed a

1292: tight correlation for the same clusters using $r$-band selected

1293: B$_{gc}$.  Using the Muzzin et al. (2007b) K-band data we fit

1294: the correlation between these parameters for those clusters and find

1295: that the best fit relation is

1296: \begin{equation}

1297: Log(R_{200}) = (0.53 \pm 0.09)Log(B_{gc}) - (1.42 \pm 0.29).

1298: \end{equation}

1299: The rms scatter in the M$_{200}$ - B$_{gc}$ relation is 35\% and for

1300: the R$_{200}$ - B$_{gc}$ relation it is 12\%.  These scatters are

1301: similar to that measured between M$_{200}$ and K-band selected richness

1302: (parameterized by N$_{200}$) at $z \sim$ 0 by Lin et al. (2004).  The

1303: values of M$_{200}$ and R$_{200}$ derived from these equations are

1304: listed in columns 9 and 10 of Table 1, respectively.

1305: \newline\indent

1306: We caution that these equations have only been calibrated using rich

1307: clusters, and that extrapolating to  lower

1308: richness clusters such as those in the FLS may not be appropriate.  The lowest richness

1309: cluster in the Muzzin et al. (2007b) 

1310: sample has a richness of Log(B$_{gc}$) = 2.8, yet the majority of

1311: clusters in the FLS (70/99) have lower richnesses than this.

1312: There is evidence from both observations 

1313: (e.g., Lin et al. 2004) and numerical simulations (e.g., Kravtsov et

1314: al. 2004) that the same power-law correlation between 

1315: cluster galaxy counts (which are closely related to B$_{gc}$) and M$_{200}$

1316: extend to richnesses well lower than our B$_{gc,R}$ $>$ 200 cut, and

1317: therefore it probably not too unreasonable to extrapolate equations (1) and (2)

1318: to lower richnesses.

1319: \newline\indent

1320: Using an indirect method to estimate M$_{200}$ and R$_{200}$ means that

1321: reliable errors in R$_{200}$ and M$_{200}$ can not be computed for

1322: individual clusters; however,  

1323: the rms scatters in the correlations are at least indicative of the

1324: average uncertainty in the measurement of the parameters for the sample.

1325: Therefore, we suggest that the average error in the M$_{200}$ and R$_{200}$ values listed in Table 1

1326: are $\pm$ 35\% and 12\% respectively, but that the error in a

1327: particular cluster can be several times larger or smaller.  

1328: %This may

1329: %be most significant for the lowest richness clusters.

1330: \newline\indent

1331: In Figure 4 we plot a histogram of the number of clusters as a

1332: function of redshift in the FLS.  The solid histogram shows the

1333: distribution of all clusters and the dot-dashed histogram shows the

1334: distribution of clusters with M$_{200}$ $>$ 3 x 10$^{14}$ M$_{\odot}$

1335: (B$_{gc,R} >$ 700).  Similar to the predictions of

1336: numerical simulations (e.g., Haiman et al. 2003) the number of

1337: clusters peaks at $z \sim$ 0.6.  Qualitatively, the distribution of clusters is also

1338: similar to that found  by Gladders \& Yee (2005) in comparable size

1339: patches; however, the cosmic variance in the number of clusters in 

1340: $\sim$ 4 deg$^2$ patches is  too large to make a meaningful

1341: comparison between the selection of clusters in the R - $z^{\prime}$

1342: bandpasses versus the R - 3.6$\micron$ bandpasses.

1343: \newline\indent

1344: We plot the locations of the clusters superposed on the 3.6$\micron$

1345: image of the FLS field in Figure 5 as

1346: open circles.  Large and small circles represent 

1347: clusters with M$_{200}$ $>$ 3 x 10$^{14}$ M$_{\odot}$ and M$_{200}$ $<$ 3 x 10$^{14}$ M$_{\odot}$, respectively,

1348: and clusters with photometric redshifts 0.1 $< z <$ 0.4, 0.4 $< z <$ 0.8,

1349: z $>$ 0.8 are plotted as blue, green, and red circles,

1350: respectively.  The clusters themselves are clearly clustered;

1351: demonstrating the need for wide-field surveys when searching for

1352: representative samples of galaxy clusters.  

1353: \newline\indent

1354: We show a few examples of some of the richest cluster candidates in

1355: Figures 6 - 11.  The top left panel for each Figure is the R-band

1356: image; the top right is the 3.6$\micron$ image, and the bottom left

1357: panel is the 8.0$\micron$ image.  All images are 1 Mpc across at

1358: the cluster redshift.  The bottom right panel of each figure shows a

1359: histogram of the color distribution of galaxies with M $<$ M$^{*}$

1360: within  a 1 Mpc diameter aperture.

1361: The color of the red sequence for the photometric redshift is marked

1362: with an arrow.  The dashed histogram is the mean color background in

1363: that aperture measured from the entire survey.  The error bars on the

1364: dashed histogram are computed as the 1$\sigma$ variance in each bin from

1365: 200 randomly selected 1 Mpc apertures within the survey.  Galaxies are

1366: clustered, and therefore assuming the variance is Gaussian-distributed

1367: is probably an overestimate of the true variance (because there will

1368: be large wings in the distribution due to clustering); however, it provides a first-order demonstration

1369: of the overdensity of the cluster relative to the field.

1370: \newline\indent 

1371: Overall, the cluster catalogue is qualitatively similar in both redshift, and

1372: richness distributions to catalogues selected with the same technique

1373: in different bandpasses (e.g. Gladders \& Yee 2005, Gilbank et

1374: al. 2004), demonstrating that clusters can be reliably selected with the

1375: CRS method on IRAC data despite the limited spatial resolution of the instrument. 

1376: %\LongTables

1377: %\include{tab1}

1378: %\include{bryce_table}

1379: \begin{figure}

1380: \plotone{f4.eps}

1381: \caption{\footnotesize Redshift distribution of clusters in the FLS.

1382:   The solid histogram is for all clusters and the dot-dashed histogram

1383:   is for clusters with M$_{200}$ $>$ 3 x 10$^{14}$

1384:   M$_{\odot}$.}

1385: \end{figure}

1386: \begin{figure*}

1387: \plotone{f5.ps}

1388: \caption{\footnotesize The 3.6$\micron$ image of the FLS with the

1389:   positions of clusters superposed.  The blue, green, and red circles denote clusters with

1390:   0.1 $< z <$ 0.4, 0.4 $< z <$ 0.8, and $z >$ 0.8 respectively.  Large circles represent clusters

1391:   with M$_{200}$ $>$ 3 x 10$^{14}$ M$_{\odot}$ and small circles

1392:   represent clusters with M$_{200}$ $>$ 3 x 10$^{14}$

1393:   M$_{\odot}$.  The size of the circles is arbitrarily chosen for

1394:   clarity and is not related to the projected size of R$_{200}$ for the clusters.  }

1395: \end{figure*}

1396: \begin{figure}

1397: \plotone{f6.ps}

1398: \caption{\footnotesize Multi-wavelength images of FLS J172449+5921.3

1399:   at $z_{spec}$ = 0.252 (Cluster \#10 from Table 1).  The top

1400:   left, top right, and bottom left panels are the R-band, IRAC

1401:   3.6$\micron$, and IRAC 8.0$\micron$ respectively.  In each image

1402:   the field-of-view is 1 Mpc across at the redshift of the cluster.  The

1403:   solid histogram in the bottom

1404:   right panel shows the color distribution of galaxies with M $<$

1405:   M$^{*}$ in the same field.  The dashed histogram is the background distribution in

1406:   the same aperture and the error bars show the average variance in

1407:   the background.  The arrow marks the color of the red sequence from

1408:   the color-redshift models.  The cluster red sequence is clearly

1409:   detected at many sigma above the background.}

1410: \end{figure}

1411: \begin{figure}

1412: \plotone{f7.ps}

1413: \caption{\footnotesize Same as for Figure 6, but for FLS

1414:   J172122+5922.7 at $z_{phot}$ = 0.53 (Cluster \#38 from Table 1).}

1415: \end{figure}

1416: \begin{figure}

1417: \plotone{f8.ps}

1418: \caption{\footnotesize Same as for Figure 6, but for FLS J171648+5838.6 at $z_{phot}$ = 0.56 (Cluster \#44 from Table 1).}

1419: \end{figure}

1420: \begin{figure}

1421: \plotone{f9.ps}

1422: \caption{\footnotesize Same as for Figure 6, but for FLS J171420+6005.5 at $z_{phot}$ = 0.63 (Cluster \#50 from Table 1).}

1423: \end{figure}

1424: \begin{figure}

1425: \plotone{f10.ps}

1426: \caption{\footnotesize Same as for Figure 6, but for FLS J172013+5845.4 at $z_{phot}$ = 0.69 (Cluster \#56 from Table 1).}

1427: \end{figure}

1428: \begin{figure}

1429: \plotone{f11.ps}

1430: \caption{\footnotesize Same as for Figure 6, but for FLS J171508+5845.4 at $z_{phot}$ = 0.75 (Cluster \#68 from Table 1).}

1431: \end{figure}

1432: \section{Cluster Luminosity Functions}

1433: \indent

1434: In this section we measure the IRAC luminosity functions of the FLS

1435: cluster sample and use these to study the

1436: evolution of stellar mass assembly and dusty star formation/AGN activity in clusters.

1437: \subsection{The 3.6$\micron$ and 4.5$\micron$ Luminosity Functions}

1438: The luminosity of galaxies at 3.6$\micron$ and 4.5$\micron$ over

1439: the redshift range 0.1 $< z <$ 1.5 is dominated by emission from low mass stars and

1440: is fairly insensitive to ongoing star formation or dust.   Consequently, the

1441: 3.6$\micron$ and 4.5$\micron$ cluster LFs provide an  estimate of the

1442: stellar mass function of cluster galaxies, and their redshift evolution can constrain

1443: the mass assembly history of cluster galaxies.  One concern with using

1444: these LFs as a proxy for the stellar mass function

1445: is that at $z <$ 0.5 the 3.3$\micron$ PAH feature found in strongly star forming galaxies

1446: can contaminate the stellar emission observed at 3.6$\micron$ and 4.5$\micron$; however,

1447: it is likely that such contamination will be small for cluster galaxies in this

1448: redshift range.  In a study of Luminous Infrared Galaxies

1449: (LIRGs, L$_{IR}$ $>$ 10$^{11}$ L$_{\odot}$) with estimated star formation rates of $\sim$ 100

1450: M$_{\odot}$ yr$^{-1}$, Magnelli et al. (2008) found that the excess emission in the IRAC

1451: bands due to the 3.3$\micron$ PAH feature was only $\sim$ 30\%.  Given

1452: that such luminous LIRGs are fairly rare at $z <$ 0.5 (e.g.,

1453: P\'{e}rez-Gonz\'{a}lez et al. 2005), and the increase in flux is

1454: small, even for strongly star forming galaxies, contamination of the 3.6$\micron$

1455: and 4.5$\micron$ bandpasses by 3.3$\micron$ PAH emission should be negligible.  

1456: \newline\indent

1457: Another concern is that in the worse cases there can be variations in the stellar mass-to-light ratio

1458: (M$_{*}$/L) of galaxies in similar bandpasses

1459: as large as a factor of 5-7  (such as in the K-band, e.g., Brinchmann

1460: 1999; Bell \& de Jong, 2001; Bell et al. 2003).  These variations are

1461: smaller for evolved populations such as those found in clusters

1462: and in general the luminosity of a

1463: galaxy at 3.6$\micron$ and 4.5$\micron$ is still a 

1464: reasonable proxy for its stellar mass. 

1465: \newline\indent

1466: Exhaustive studies of both the K-band (e.g., De Propris et al. 1999, Lin et

1467: al. 2006, Muzzin et al. 2007a) and 3.6$\micron$ \& 4.5$\micron$ 

1468: (Andreon 2006, De Propris et al. 2007) LFs of cluster galaxies have shown that the evolution of

1469: M$^{*}$ in these bands is consistent with a passively evolving stellar

1470: population formed at high-redshift ($z_{f} >$ 1.5), suggesting that

1471: the majority of the stellar mass in bright cluster galaxies is already

1472: assembled

1473: into massive galaxies by at least $z \sim$ 1.  Here we compute the

1474: LFs in the 3.6$\micron$ and 4.5$\micron$ bands for the FLS clusters  to confirm that the FLS cluster sample provides

1475: similar results, and to demonstrate that these LFs can be used to estimate the

1476: stellar contribution to the MIR cluster LFs ($\S$5.2).

1477: \newline\indent

1478: The LFs are measured by stacking clusters in redshift bins of

1479: $\Delta$z = 0.1 starting from $z = 0.1$.  For each cluster, the number of galaxies within

1480: R$_{200}$ in 0.25 mag bins is tabulated and the expected number of background galaxies within

1481: R$_{200}$

1482: is subtracted from these counts.  The background counts are

1483: determined from the entire 3.8 deg$^2$ survey area and are well

1484: constrained.   Each background-subtracted cluster LF is then ``redshifted'' to the mean redshift of the

1485: bin using a differential distance modulus and a differential

1486: k-correction determined from the single-burst model

1487: ($\S$3.1).  At 3.6$\micron$ and 4.5$\micron$ the k-corrections

1488: for galaxies are almost independent of

1489: spectral-type (e.g., Huang et al. 2007a) and therefore using only the

1490: single-burst k-correction rather than a k-correction based on

1491: spectral-type  does not affect the 

1492: LFs.  Furthermore, the differential k-corrections and

1493: distance moduli are small (typically $<$ 0.1 mag) and do not affect the

1494: LFs in a significant way.  

1495: \newline\indent

1496: The final stacked LFs are constructed by summing the individual LFs

1497: within each bin.  The errors for each magnitude bin of the final LF

1498: are computed by adding the Poisson error of the total

1499: cluster counts to the Poisson error of the total background counts in

1500: quadrature.

1501: \newline\indent

1502: In Figure 12 and Figure 13 we plot the 3.6$\micron$ and

1503: 4.5$\micron$ cluster LFs respectively.  The 3.6$\micron$ LFs are

1504: fit to a Schechter (1976) function of the form

1505: \begin{equation}

1506: \phi(\mbox{M}) = (0.4 \mbox{ln} 10)\phi_{*}(10^{0.4(\mbox{\scriptsize

1507:     M$^{*}$-M})})^{1+\alpha}\mbox{exp}(-10^{0.4(\mbox{\scriptsize $M^{*}$-M})}),

1508: \end{equation}

1509: where $\alpha$ is the faint-end slope; $\phi_{*}$, the normalization;

1510: and M$^{*}$ is the ``characteristic'' magnitude, which indicates the

1511: transition between

1512: the power-law behavior of the faint-end and the

1513: exponential behavior of the bright end.

1514: The functions are fit using the Levenberg-Marquardt algorithm for

1515: least-squares (Press et al. 1992) and errors are estimated from the fitting

1516: covariance matrix.

1517: The data are not deep enough to provide good constraints on $\alpha$,

1518: $\phi^{*}$ and M$^{*}$ simultaneously, and therefore the faint-end slopes

1519: of the LFs are assumed to be fixed at $\alpha$ = -0.8.  This

1520: value is similar to the $\alpha$ = -0.84 $\pm$ 0.08 measured in the K-band for clusters at $z

1521: \sim$ 0.3 by Muzzin et al. (2007a) as

1522: well as the value measured in the K-band for local clusters ($\alpha$ = -0.84 $\pm$

1523: 0.02) by Lin et al. (2004).  Although assuming a fixed value of $\alpha$ precludes

1524: measuring any evolution of the faint-end slope of the LFs with

1525: redshift, it

1526: removes the strong correlation between M$^{*}$ and $\alpha$ in the

1527: fitting and, provided the evolution in $\alpha$ is

1528: modest, it is 

1529: the best way to measure the luminosity evolution of the

1530: cluster galaxies via the evolution of M$^{*}$.

1531: The fitted values of M$^{*}$ and the 1$\sigma$ errors are listed in the

1532: upper left of the panels in Figure 12.  

1533: \newline\indent

1534: We plot the evolution of M$^{*}$ at 3.6$\micron$ as a function of

1535: redshift in Figure 14 as filled circles.  Figure 14 also shows the predicted evolution

1536: of M$^{*}$ for single-burst models with $z_{f}$ = 1.0, 1.5,

1537: 2.0, 2.8, and 5.0.  These models are normalized to M$^{*}$ = -24.02

1538: at $z =$ 0 in the K-band, the result obtained by Lin et al. (2004) for 93 local

1539: clusters.  This corresponds to a normalization of M$^{*}$ = -24.32 at

1540: 3.6$\micron$, assuming a K-3.6$\micron$ color from the z$_{f}$ =

1541: 2.8 passive

1542: evolution model.  The FLS values of M$^{*}$ are consistent with most of

1543: these models, except the $z_{f}$ = 1.0 model, for which they are

1544: clearly too faint.  Therefore, similar to the majority of previous

1545: studies we can conclude that the bulk of the stellar mass in bright cluster

1546: galaxies is consistent with having been both formed and assembled at $z >$ 1.5 and has passively

1547: evolved since then.  As a comparison, the values measured at 

1548: 3.6$\micron$ by De Propris et al. (2007) and Andreon (2006) are

1549: overplotted as open squares and open diamonds respectively.  These

1550: values are from spectroscopically confirmed samples of $\sim$ 40 clusters

1551: (the majority of which are X-ray detected clusters) and both

1552: agree well with the FLS values demonstrating that passive

1553: evolution appears to be the ubiquitous conclusion regardless of

1554: cluster sample.

1555: \newline\indent

1556: Similar to the 3.6$\micron$ LFs, the 4.5$\micron$ LFs can be

1557: fit using a Schechter function; however, we do not perform fitting of the

1558: 4.5$\micron$ LFs.

1559: Instead, as a demonstration of the technique presented in $\S$5.2.3

1560: and $\S$5.2.4, we use the measured 3.6$\micron$ LFs to predict the

1561: 4.5$\micron$ LFs.  Unlike colors from the

1562: redder IRAC channels, the

1563: 3.6$\micron$-4.5$\micron$ colors of galaxies are nearly identical for

1564: most spectral-types over the redshift range 0.1 $< z <$ 1.5.

1565: As a consequence, the 4.5$\micron$  LFs can be predicted from the

1566: 3.6$\micron$ LFs

1567: using the 3.6$\micron$-4.5$\micron$

1568: colors from almost any stellar population model.  

1569: For simplicity, we use the passive

1570: evolution model to predict the 4.5$\micron$ LFs.  

1571: The inferred 4.5$\micron$ LFs are overplotted as solid lines in Figure

1572: 13.  The predicted 4.5$\micron$ LFs are consistent with the

1573: measured ones and this demonstrates that the 3.6$\micron$ LFs

1574: combined with

1575: simple models for the color evolution of galaxies can

1576: predict the LFs in other bandpasses.  Furthermore, the self-consistency

1577: between the 3.6$\micron$ and 4.5$\micron$ LFs at $z$ = 0.15, where the 3.3$\micron$ PAH would

1578: contaminate the 3.6$\micron$ band, and at $z$ = 0.33 where it would

1579: contaminate the 4.5$\micron$ band suggests that the primary source of

1580: the emission in these bandpasses at $z <$ 0.5 is stellar.

1581: %The 3.6$\micron$ -

1582: %4.5$\micron$ colors of both star forming and non-star forming

1583: %galaxies are nearly identical and as a consequence, the 3.6$\micron$ LFs combined with

1584: %a simple model for the 3.6$\micron$ -

1585: %4.5$\micron$ colors reproduces the  4.5$\micron$ LFs extremely well. 

1586: \begin{figure*}

1587: \plotone{f12.eps}

1588: \caption{\footnotesize The 3.6$\micron$ LFs of clusters in the FLS.

1589: The solid line shows the best-fit Schechter function assuming $\alpha$

1590: = -0.8.  The redshift, the value of

1591: M$^{*}$, and the number of clusters combined to make the LF are listed in

1592: the upper left corner of each panel.}

1593: \end{figure*}

1594: \begin{figure*}

1595: \plotone{f13.eps}

1596: \caption{\footnotesize The 4.5$\micron$ LFs of clusters in the FLS

1597:   in the same redshift bins as Figure 12.

1598: The solid line is the 4.5$\micron$ LF that is predicted from the

1599: 3.6$\micron$ LF assuming that galaxies have the

1600: 3.6$\micron$ - 4.5$\micron$ colors of a passively evolving population

1601: formed at high redshift.}

1602: \end{figure*}

1603: \begin{figure}

1604: \plotone{f14.eps}

1605: \caption{\footnotesize Evolution in M$^{*}$ from the 3.6$\micron$

1606:   LFs as a function of redshift.  The long dashed, dash-dotted,

1607:   dash-dot, solid, and dashed lines show

1608:   models where the stars form in a single burst at $z =$ 1.0, 1.5, 2.0, 2.8,

1609:   and 5.0 respectively.  The filled circles are the FLS clusters and

1610:   the open diamonds and open squares are the M$^{*}$ values from the Andreon (2006) and De

1611:   Propris et al. (2007) cluster samples.}

1612: \end{figure}

1613: \subsection{The 5.8$\micron$ and 8.0$\micron$ Luminosity

1614:   Functions}

1615: Unlike the 3.6$\micron$ and 4.5$\micron$ bandpasses where the

1616:  luminosity of galaxies is dominated by emission from low mass stars, the

1617: luminosity of galaxies at 5.8$\micron$ and 8.0$\micron$ comes from

1618: several sources.   It can have contributions

1619: from warm dust continuum, PAH emission, and low mass stars.  In particular,

1620: if warm dust (heated by intense star formation or an AGN) or

1621: PAH emission is

1622: present, it typically dominates the luminosity at these wavelengths.  Therefore, the 5.8$\micron$ and 8.0$\micron$ LFs 

1623: can be useful probes of the amount of dusty star formation and AGN

1624: activity in clusters if the contribution from stellar emission is

1625: properly accounted for.

1626: %\newline\indent

1627: %The primary goal of this paper is to understand if this population of dusty

1628: %galaxies can be explained by the ``regular'' cluster star forming population

1629: %or if it requires a luminous dusty starburst component, possibly excited by

1630: %the cluster environment, and possibly responsible for the large K+A

1631: %post-starburst population observed in clusters at $z \sim$ 0.4 by

1632: %Dressler et al (1999) \& Poggianti et al. (1999).  We explore these alternatives by

1633: %modeling the 8.0$\micron$ population using both ``regular''

1634: %star forming galaxies and dusty starburst galaxies and looking for a

1635: %unique solution.

1636: \newline\indent

1637: The main challenge in modeling the LFs at these wavelengths is that a massive, dust-free

1638: early type galaxy produces relatively the same flux at

1639: 5.8$\micron$ and 8.0$\micron$ from pure stellar emission as a much lower mass starburst

1640: galaxy or AGN produces from PAH emission or warm dust continuum.

1641: Determining the relative abundance of each of these populations

1642: in a LF is more challenging for a statistically defined sample such 

1643: as this cluster sample where individual galaxies are not identified as

1644: field/cluster or star forming/non-star forming.  Despite this challenge,

1645: we showed in $\S$5.1 that the 

1646: 3.6$\micron$ LFs can be used as a diagnostic of the average

1647: stellar emission from the cluster galaxies and that with a

1648:  model for galaxy colors they can predict the

1649: 4.5$\micron$ LFs extremely well.  The 3.6$\micron$-5.8$\micron$

1650: and 3.6$\micron$-8.0$\micron$ colors of different

1651: spectral-types vary significantly more than the

1652: 3.6$\micron$-4.5$\micron$ colors; however, if  

1653: these colors are modeled correctly  the same technique can

1654: be used to model the LFs in the 5.8$\micron$ and

1655: 8.0$\micron$ bandpasses and provide constraints on the number and

1656: type of star forming galaxies in clusters.

1657: \newline\indent

1658: Put another way, the 3.6$\micron$ LF provides

1659: effectively a ``stellar mass budget'' for predicting the 5.8$\micron$ and

1660: 8.0$\micron$ LFs.

1661: Subtracting this stellar mass budget at 5.8$\micron$ and

1662: 8.0$\micron$ leaves an excess which can be modeled with different

1663: populations of star forming galaxies or AGN.  Unfortunately,

1664: such models are unlikely to be completely unique in the sense that

1665: there will be a degeneracy

1666: between the {\it fraction} of star forming galaxies or AGN, and the

1667: {\it intensity} of the star formation or AGN activity within those galaxies;

1668: however, we will show that using only rough empircal

1669: constraints on the fraction of star forming/non-star forming

1670: galaxies in clusters places interesting

1671: constraints on the intensity of star formation in cluster galaxies, and

1672: the relative percentages of ``regular'' star forming galaxies and

1673: dusty starbursts.

1674: \subsubsection{Measuring the 5.8$\micron$ and 8.0$\micron$ LFs}

1675: %\newline\indent

1676: Before models of the cluster population are made we measure the 5.8$\micron$ and 8.0$\micron$ LFs

1677: using the same

1678: stacking and background subtraction methods as for the 3.6$\micron$

1679: and 4.5$\micron$ LFs.  The LFs 

1680: are plotted in Figures 15 and 16 in the same redshift bins as the 3.6$\micron$

1681: and 4.5$\micron$ LFs.  IRAC is

1682: significantly less sensitive at 5.8$\micron$ and 8.0$\micron$

1683: than at 3.6$\micron$ and 4.5$\micron$ and therefore these LFs

1684: are much shallower.  Only the bright end of the LF (roughly M $<$

1685: M$^{*}$, assuming a dust-free, pure stellar emission early type model) can be measured with

1686: these data; however, this shallow depth is still sufficient to be a good

1687: diagnostic of the presence of luminous dusty starbursts.  For example,

1688: at 0.1 $< z <$ 0.4, an M82-type starburst is

1689: roughly 3 magnitudes brighter at 8.0$\micron$ than an early type

1690: model (e.g., Huang et al. 2007a; Wilson et al. 2007, see also $\S$6.3) and

1691: therefore, even a galaxy with M $\sim$ M$^{*}$ + 3 from the

1692: 3.6$\micron$ LF would be detected at 8.0$\micron$ if undergoing

1693: an M82-like dusty starburst.

1694: \begin{figure*}

1695: \plotone{f15.eps}

1696: \caption{\footnotesize The 5.8$\micron$ LFs of clusters in the FLS.

1697: The solid red line shows the 5.8$\micron$ predicted

1698: from the 3.6$\micron$ LF assuming all galaxies have the colors of

1699: the passive evolution model.  The dashed green lines and dotted blue

1700: lines are the regular+quiescent and starburst+regular+quiescent models

1701: described in $\S$5.2.4 respectively; however, 5.8$\micron$ is not

1702: sensitive to PAH emission or warm dust at $z >$ 0.3 and therefore these models are not

1703: notably different from the passive evolution model.}

1704: \end{figure*}

1705: \begin{figure*}

1706: \plotone{f16.eps}

1707: \caption{\footnotesize The 8.0$\micron$ LFs of clusters in the FLS.

1708: The solid red line, dashed green line, and dotted blue line are the

1709: 8.0$\micron$ LFs predicted using the 3.6$\micron$ LF and the quiescent,

1710: regular+quiescent, and starburst+regular+quiescent models described in

1711: $\S$5.2.4.  At lower redshift ($z <$ 0.4) the LFs are most similar to

1712: the predictions from the regular+quiescent model whereas at higher

1713: redshift ($z >$ 0.4) the LFs are better described by the

1714: starburst+regular+quiescent model.}

1715: \end{figure*}

1716: \subsubsection{Contamination from AGN}

1717: \indent

1718: In order to draw conclusions from models of the MIR cluster LFs, it is

1719: important to have some constraints on the  fraction of cluster MIR sources

1720: that are AGN and the fraction that are star forming galaxies.    The

1721: fraction of galaxies in clusters at $z <$ 0.6 identified as AGN 

1722: based on their optical spectra in clusters is low ($<$ 2\%,

1723: e.g., Dressler et al. 1985, Dressler et al. 1999); whereas the fraction of 

1724: star forming galaxies can be quite large  (5 - 80\%, e.g., Butcher \&

1725: Oemler 1984; Dressler et al. 1999; Ellingson et al. 2001; Poggianti et

1726: al. 2006).  Therefore, it might be

1727: expected that star forming galaxies will dominate the overall

1728: number of cluster MIR sources.  It is possible

1729: that the AGN fraction in clusters may have been underestimated because some cluster AGN 

1730: are missed by  optical selection.  X-ray observations of moderate redshift clusters

1731: have found an additional population of cluster X-ray AGN that do not have

1732: AGN-like optical spectra (e.g., Martini et al. 2006; 2007, Eastman et

1733: al. 2007).  Martini et al. (2007) showed that this population is roughly as large the optical AGN

1734: population, making the overall AGN fraction  $\sim$ 5\%  for cluster

1735: galaxies at $z \sim$ 0.2 with moderate luminosity AGNs (broad-band X-ray luminosities L$_{X}$ $>$ 10$^{41}$ erg

1736: s$^{-1}$), but only $\sim$ 1\% for those with bright AGN (L$_{X}$ $>$ 10$^{42}$ erg

1737: s$^{-1}$).  If the analysis is

1738: restricted to galaxies with hard X-ray luminosities $>$ 10$^{42}$ erg

1739: s$^{-1}$, then the fraction is about an order of magnitude lower

1740: (0.1\%, Eastman et al. 2007).

1741: \newline\indent

1742: Although these studies suggest the  AGN fraction in clusters is low,

1743: particularly for bright AGN, 

1744: it is unclear how many of the optical and X-ray selected cluster AGN will

1745: have detectable MIR emission, and what fraction of the cluster MIR

1746: population they comprise.  Previous MIR studies of clusters have

1747: detected only a few AGN in spectroscopic samples of $\sim$ 30-80

1748: cluster MIR sources (e.g., Duc et al. 2002; Coia et

1749: al. 2005; Marcillac et al. 2007; Bai et al. 2007) suggesting that $>$90\%

1750: of cluster galaxies detected in the MIR are star forming galaxies.  

1751: One way to estimate the fraction of cluster MIR-bright AGN is to use the 

1752: IRAC and MIPS color-color diagrams suggested by Lacy et al. (2004) and

1753: Stern et al. (2005).  Although these simple color cuts fail to

1754: identify complete samples of AGN  because

1755: they only identify those that have red power-law slopes in the MIR (e.g.,

1756: Cardamone et al. 2008); these are precisely the type of AGN

1757: that will be included in the 5.8$\micron$

1758: and 8.0$\micron$ LFs and therefore the color cuts should provide a

1759: reasonable estimate of the contamination of those LFs from AGN.

1760: \newline\indent

1761: In the left panels of Figure 17 we plot the IRAC colors of all

1762: galaxies brighter than the 50\% completeness limits using

1763: the color spaces suggested by Stern et al. (2005) (top) and Lacy et

1764: al. (2004) (bottom).  The dashed lines in each panel represent the

1765: portion of color space used to select AGN in the MIR by these

1766: authors.  FLS galaxies which satisfy the color criteria are plotted as

1767: grey circles. The right panels of Figure 17 shows the same plot for all galaxies

1768: with R $<$ R$_{200}$ for clusters at $z <$ 0.7 in the FLS (59

1769: clusters). 

1770: \newline\indent

1771: The entire FLS (left panels) can be used to estimate the surface density of MIR

1772: selected AGN in these color spaces.  Subtracting this background from the cluster

1773: fields we find and excess of 26 $\pm$ 22 galaxies using the Stern et

1774: al. (2005) color cut and and excess of 30 $\pm$ 30 galaxies using the Lacy et

1775: al. (2004) color cut.  Summing the background subtracted 3.6$\micron$ LFs to the same limit

1776: implies that there are 2466 total cluster galaxies in these 59 clusters, and that the overall

1777: fraction of cluster galaxies that candidate MIR-bright AGN (to our 3.6$\micron$

1778: detection limit) is 1$^{+1}_{-1}$\%, where all error bars have been calculated using 

1779: Poisson statistics.  Integrating the 5.8$\micron$ and 8.0$\micron$ LFs

1780: shows there are 869 and 959 cluster galaxies detected in these bands

1781: and that the fraction of cluster sources detected in the MIR that are candidate AGN is

1782: $\sim$ 3$^{+3}_{-3}$\%.

1783: %The dashed line

1784: %In the top panel of Figure 17 we plot the 3.6$\micron$ - 4.5$\micron$

1785: %color vs. the 5.8$\micron$ - 8.0$\micron$ color for all galaxies in

1786: %the FLS brighter than the 50\% completeness limits in all bands.  The

1787: %dashed lines denote the region in this color space shown to select 

1788: % AGN by Stern et al. (2005), and galaxies

1789: %within that region are plotted as grey triangles.  In the FLS, this region contains 2425

1790: %galaxies implying a space density of $\sim$ 638 $\pm$ 13 deg$^{-2}$ to our flux

1791: %limits.  The bottom panel of Figure 17 shows the same plot for all galaxies

1792: %with R $<$ R$_{200}$ for clusters at $z <$ 0.7 in the FLS (59 clusters).  There are

1793: %393 galaxies within the color cut box in the fields of the clusters.

1794: %Based on the background calculated above this implies that 25$^{+27}_{-25}$ of the sources are cluster

1795: %galaxies.  The 3.6$\micron$ LFs imply that there are 2466

1796: %total cluster galaxies in these 59 clusters, and therefore the overall

1797: %fraction of cluster galaxies that are MIR-bright AGN is

1798: %1$^{+1}_{-1}$\%, where the error bar is calculated using 

1799: %Poisson statistics. 

1800: %number for text:Stern total 1503.  In box: 254, excess 26\pm22

1801: %Lacy: total 2884, 467, excess 30 \pm 30

1802: \newline\indent

1803: Although this crude estimate is almost certainly an incomplete census of the total fraction of

1804: AGN in clusters, it is remarkably similar to the AGN fractions

1805: measured with optical spectroscopy or by X-ray selection and is consistent with

1806: the fraction of spectroscopically confirmed MIR-bright AGN seen in previous cluster MIR studies.  Based on

1807: the low estimated AGN fraction, and for the sake of simplicity in interpretation, we do not model

1808: an AGN component in the 5.8$\micron$ and 8.0$\micron$ LFs in this analysis.

1809: We do note that the X-ray, spectroscopic and MIR selection do show

1810: clearly that the fraction of MIR cluster sources that are AGN is {\it not} zero, and

1811: therefore some of the sources in the 5.8$\micron$ and

1812: 8.0$\micron$ LFs will certainly be AGN.  

1813: %Martini et al. (2007) have shown that the AGN fraction in clusters at

1814: %$z \sim$ 0.2 is only 0.1\% for AGN with X-ray luminosities (L$_{X}$) $>$ 10$^{42}$ erg s$^{-1}$

1815: %and  $<$ 0.1\% for AGN with L$_{X}$ $>$ 10$^{43}$ erg s$^{-1}$.  Eastman et

1816: %al. (2007) showed a large increase in this fraction out to $z \sim$

1817: %0.6, but the overall fractions are still very low, only 3\% for AGN with L$_{X}$ $>$ 10$^{42}$ erg s$^{-1}$

1818: %and 2\% for AGN with L$_{X}$ $>$ 10$^{43}$ erg s$^{-1}$.  Although AGN

1819: %are more luminous at 5.8$\micron$ and 8.0$\micron$ than

1820: %star forming galaxies, in number they are so much less abundant

1821: %(cluster blue fractions at these redshifts 

1822: %typically range between 10-60\%) that they should not contribute

1823: %significantly to the 5.8$\micron$ and 8.0$\micron$ LFs.  

1824: %*dont forget to mention low fraction of sources found by Bai and

1825: %Marillac.. it is importnat!**

1826: \begin{figure*}

1827: \plotone{f17.eps}

1828: \caption{\footnotesize Top Left Panel: Color-color plot of all galaxies in

1829:   the FLS (small dots).  The

1830:   dashed lines denote the region used to select AGN by Stern et

1831:   al. (2005).  Bottom Left Panel: Same as top left, but for the

1832:   Lacy et al. (2004) color space.   Right Panels: Color-color plots for galaxies at R $<$

1833:   R$_{200}$ in the fields of clusters at $z <$ 0.7 (59 clusters).  The

1834:   majority of these sources are foreground or background galaxies.  

1835:   Background subtraction based on the surface density of sources in the left panels suggest that

1836:   1$^{+1}_{-1}$\% of cluster

1837:   galaxies detected at 3.6$\micron$ are  AGN and that $\sim$ 3$^{+3}_{-3}$\% of

1838:   cluster galaxies detected at 5.8$\micron$ and 8.0$\micron$ are AGN.}

1839: \end{figure*}

1840: %We note, however,

1841: %that some small percentage of the 5.8$\micron$ and 8.0$\micron$

1842: %LFs is almost certainly due to AGN and not solely star forming galaxies.

1843: \subsubsection{Modeling the 5.8$\micron$ Luminosity Function}

1844: \indent

1845: The simplest fiducial model

1846: that can be made for the MIR cluster galaxy population is to

1847: assume that 

1848: the bright end of the  LF is  dominated

1849: by passive, dust-free, early type galaxies (i.e., the emission at

1850: 5.8$\micron$ and 8.0$\micron$ is completely stellar).  Although such a

1851: model is unrealistic, it provides a baseline for predicting the

1852: amount of emission in the MIR from stellar emission, and any excess

1853: beyond this model is likely to be from dusty star formation in the cluster population.  Assuming

1854: such a model,  the 

1855: 5.8$\micron$ LFs can be inferred from the 3.6$\micron$ LFs using

1856: the 3.6$\micron$-5.8$\micron$ colors from the Bruzual \&

1857: Charlot passive evolution model.  These predicted 5.8$\micron$ LFs are

1858: overplotted on the LFs in Figure 15 as the solid red lines (Figure 15

1859: also has additional models overplotted which are introduced in $\S$5.2.4).  

1860: \newline\indent

1861: Qualitatively, the 

1862: 3.6$\micron$ LFs and the passive evolution model

1863: predict the 5.8$\micron$ LFs reasonably well at all redshifts.  This is perhaps not

1864: surprising because due to k-corrections, 5.8$\micron$ is only

1865: sensitive to emission from warm dust or PAHs

1866: in star forming galaxies at $z < 0.3$ (see $\S$6.3).

1867: For galaxies at higher redshift, 5.8$\micron$ probes

1868: rest-frame wavelengths which, similar to the 3.6$\micron$ LFs, are dominated by stellar emission.

1869: As a result, any dusty star forming cluster galaxies would only be visible

1870: as a notable excess in the predicted 5.8$\micron$ LFs at $z <$ 0.3.

1871: No such

1872: excess is seen; however, the fraction of blue

1873: star forming galaxies in clusters evolves rapidly (i.e., the

1874: Butcher-Oemler Effect) and clusters at $z <$ 0.3 typically have low

1875: blue fractions and relatively few

1876: star forming galaxies (e.g., Ellingson et al. 2001; Balogh et al. 1999;

1877: Margoniner et al. 2001).  This result confirms that

1878: the fraction of star forming galaxies in clusters at $z <$ 0.3 low,

1879: and, that furthermore there is no significant additional population of MIR

1880: luminous dusty

1881: star forming galaxies in clusters at these redshifts that are missing from optically-selected spectroscopic or photometric studies.

1882: %\newline\indent

1883: %Given the low blue fraction of clusters at $z <$ 0.3 and the fact that

1884: %5.8$\micron$ probes primarily stellar emission at $z >$ 0.3, it is not surprising that the 5.8$\micron$

1885: %LF is to first-order, consistent with the predictions from

1886: %the passive evolution model at all redshifts.  

1887: %Furthermore, it demonstrates that extremely 

1888: %luminous dusty starbursts do not constitute a significant

1889: %fraction of the cluster population at $z <$ 0.3.

1890: %Despite this, it is worthwhile to note that because the 5.8$\micron$ LF is well described by the passive evolution

1891: %model at $z <$ 0.3, with no requirement for other types of galaxies shows that there is no significant population of

1892: %MIR luminous dusty starbursts in clusters at $z <$ 0.3.  We discuss

1893: %this result in more detail as well as other possible interpretations of

1894: %the 5.8$\micron$ LF in $\S$xx.

1895: \subsubsection{Modeling the 8.0$\micron$ Luminosity Function}

1896: \indent

1897: Unlike the 5.8$\micron$ LFs, the cluster 8.0$\micron$ LFs are not

1898: consistent with the passive evolution model predictions from the

1899: 3.6$\micron$ LFs illustrated by the solid red lines plotted

1900: in Figure 16.  This model clearly underpredicts the number of galaxies in the 8.0$\micron$ LFs at all

1901: redshifts.  

1902: %We argue in this section that 

1903: %the excess of galaxies above the passive

1904: %evolution model is caused by star forming cluster galaxies which

1905: %are significantly more luminous than early type galaxies at 8.0$\micron$.  

1906: %\newline\indent

1907: In order to construct a more useful model for the 8.0$\micron$ LF that  includes

1908: the cluster star forming population, we use the

1909: 3.6$\micron$-8.0$\micron$ colors for different types of

1910: star forming galaxies from J. Huang et al. (2008, in preparation).  These authors have

1911: empirically extended the color/redshift models of Coleman et al. (1980) to

1912: 10$\micron$ using local galaxies with $ISO$ spectroscopy.  Some examples of

1913: the colors from these models are presented in Wilson et al. (2007).

1914: %{\bf Gillian: I am confused.  This is what he has given us, but not what

1915: %  is claimed in the 2007 paper.  He claims what is below. Is there a reference

1916: %for the models we use, or do we need Huang priv-comm?}

1917: %These authors have created empirical color models with wavelength coverage out to 8$\micron$ using local

1918: %galaxies with both 2MASS photometry and $ISO$ spectroscopy.  The

1919: %models are created by decomposing the data into bulge and disk

1920: %components and then combining these with different fractions typical

1921: %for various classes of star forming galaxies.  

1922: \newline\indent

1923: Given the large number of permutations possible in the types of

1924: star forming galaxies, we are interested in as simple a model as

1925: possible  which will allow for a straightforward interpretation of the

1926: data.  For this analysis we divide the cluster star forming population into

1927: two populations: ``regular'' star forming cluster spirals, and dusty starburst galaxies.

1928: Huang et al. (2008) have models for both Sbc and Scd galaxies; however,

1929: the 3.6$\micron$-8.0$\micron$ colors of these models are

1930: indistinguishable, and therefore we adopt their Sbc galaxy as the model for a

1931: ``regular'' star forming

1932: cluster spiral.  Huang et al. also have colors for several ``canonical''

1933: dusty starburst galaxies such as M82, Arp220,

1934: and NGC 1068.  M82 is a moderate-strength dusty starburst, has no AGN component, and is classified as a

1935: luminous infrared galaxy (LIRG).  By contrast, Arp220 and NGC 1068 are powerful

1936: dusty starbursts with AGN components.  The IR luminosity of Arp220 is dominated by star formation from

1937: a major merger, while the IR luminosity of NGC 1068 is dominated by a

1938: powerful AGN (although both galaxies have AGN and starburst components).  Both are classified as ultra-luminous infrared

1939: galaxies (ULIRGs).  Given that the majority of distant clusters studied thus far in the

1940: MIR have shown a significant population of LIRGs but no population

1941: of ULIRGs (e.g.,  Coia et al. 2005; Geach et

1942:   al. 2006; Marcillac et al. 2007), 

1943: we assume that any cluster dusty starbursts

1944: will have colors similar to M82, rather than Arp220 or NGC 1068.  In

1945: general, replacing M82 as the model for cluster dusty starbursts with

1946: either Arp220 or NGC 1068 requires a smaller

1947: fraction of dusty starbursts since they are more luminous.

1948: \newline\indent

1949: In order to ascertain the dominant mode of star formation present

1950: in the cluster population  we can construct simple models for

1951: the 8.0$\micron$ LFs from the 3.6$\micron$ LFs using various combinations of these

1952: populations.  The purpose of the models is not to perfectly

1953: reproduce the cluster 8.0$\micron$ LFs 

1954: (this requires a much more detailed

1955: knowledge of the populations in each cluster than can be obtained by

1956: statistical background subtraction), but to demonstrate how the

1957: 8.0$\micron$ LFs should appear given different proportions of these

1958: populations and thereby estimate the importance of each's contribution to

1959: the 8.0$\micron$ LFs.  Hereafter we refer to the Sbc model as ``regular'',

1960: the M82 model as ``dusty starburst'', and the Bruzual \&

1961: Charlot passive evolution model as ``quiescent''.

1962: \newline\indent

1963: Beyond assuming that all cluster galaxies are quiescent, which clearly

1964: underpredicts the 8.0$\micron$ LFs, the next most simple model

1965: that can be made is to assume some fraction of the cluster galaxies

1966: are ``regular'' star forming galaxies (hereafter we refer to this model as regular+quiescent).

1967: In order to make such a model we require an approximation of the relative proportions of star forming and

1968: quiescent galaxies in clusters as a function of redshift and

1969: luminosity.  The best spectroscopically-classified data at these redshifts comes

1970: from the MORPHS (Dressler et al. 1999; Poggianti et al. 1999) and

1971: CNOC1 (Balogh et al. 1999; Ellingson et al. 2001)

1972: projects.  Unfortunately, the number of cluster spectra per d$z$ is

1973: relatively small in these samples and they cover only a modest

1974: range in redshift (0.2 $< z <$ 0.5) and depth in terms of the cluster

1975: M$^{*}$.  

1976: \newline\indent

1977: Although spectroscopic

1978: classification would be the most reliable, the lack of data motivates the 

1979: use of cluster blue fractions (f$_{b}$) as a function of redshift as a model for the

1980: relative fractions of star forming/non-star forming galaxies.  Blue

1981: fractions for reasonably large samples of clusters at different

1982: redshifts have been calculated and it is fairly straightforward to

1983: measure them as a function of magnitude within these clusters.  In

1984: particular, using f$_{b}$ as an estimate of the star forming

1985: fraction should predict the number of blue

1986: star forming galaxies (i.e., those with colors similar to the Sbc model). If  a population of

1987: red, dust-obscured starburst galaxies exists in clusters they should

1988: be evident in the 8.0$\micron$ LFs as an excess of galaxies beyond

1989: the regular+quiescent model.

1990: \newline\indent

1991: For f$_{b}$ as a function of redshift we use the data

1992: of Ellingson et al. (2001) from the CNOC1 clusters which span the

1993: redshift range $z$ = 0.2 to $z

1994: =$ 0.4, and

1995: for clusters at $z >$ 0.4 we use the data on RCS-1 clusters from Loh

1996: et al. (2008).  Rough f$_{b}$ values for both these

1997: samples were recomputed using only galaxies with M $<$ M$^{*}$ (D. Gilbank private communication), because this matches

1998: the depth of the 5.8$\micron$ and 8.0$\micron$ LFs.  These f$_{b}$

1999: values as a function of redshift are listed in Table 2.  

2000: \newline\indent

2001: The scatter in cluster f$_{b}$ values at a given redshift is large, and therefore different

2002: studies find different mean values depending on sample.  The values we

2003: have adopted are consistent with the majority of work in the field

2004: (e.g., Butcher \& Oemler 1984; Smail et al. 1998;  Margoniner et

2005: al. 2001; Andreon et al. 2004), although we have measured them using a brighter

2006: luminosity cut.  Of course, the best way to infer the f$_{b}$ of the FLS

2007: clusters would be to measure it from the clusters themselves;

2008: however, we do not have the proper filter coverage at $z <$ 0.5 to

2009: make this measurement properly nor a large enough sample

2010: to make a measurement that would be statistically different from the

2011: adopted values.  

2012: \newline\indent

2013: The cluster f$_{b}$ is also a function of limiting magnitude (e.g., Ellingson

2014: et al. 2001), and

2015: without incorporating some variation in f$_{b}$ as a function of

2016: magnitude, all of the model LFs consistently overpredict the number of

2017: bright galaxies in the 8.0$\micron$ LFs, and underpredict the number

2018: of faint ones.  In order to estimate the variation of f$_{b}$ as a function of

2019: magnitude we use the spectrally-typed LFs of Muzzin et

2020: al. (2007a).  They measured the K-band

2021: LF for cluster galaxies defined spectroscopically as either star forming or quiescent.

2022: Comparing those LFs (their Figure 13) and assuming all star forming

2023: galaxies are blue, and all quiescent galaxies are red, results in 

2024: f$_{b}$ values of 0.19, 0.35, and 0.52 for galaxies with  M $<$ M$^{*}$, M$^{*}$ $<$ M $<$ M$^{*}$ + 1, and

2025: M$^{*}$ +1 $<$ M $<$ M$^{*}$ + 2 respectively in clusters at $z

2026: \sim$ 0.3.  Comparing these values shows that f$_{b}$ is 1.8 times larger at M$^{*}$ $<$ M

2027: $<$ M$^{*}$ + 1 than at M $<$ M$^{*}$, and is 2.7  times larger at

2028: M$^{*}$ +1 $<$ M $<$ M$^{*}$ + 2 than at M $<$ M$^{*}$.  We therefore adopt an f$_{b}$ that varies with

2029: magnitude with the following conditions:  For galaxies with M $<$

2030: M$^{*}$ in the 3.6$\micron$ LF we use the f$_{b}$ values from Table 2.  For

2031: galaxies with M$^{*}$ $<$ M $<$ M$^{*}$ + 1, we assume that f$_{b}$ is

2032: twice as large as the values in Table 2, and for galaxies with M$^{*}$

2033: + 1 $<$ M $<$ M$^{*}$ + 2 we assume that f$_{b}$ is

2034: three times as large as the values in Table 2.  In cases where this causes

2035: f$_{b}$ $>$ 1.0, it is set equal to 1.0.

2036: \newline\indent

2037: Combining the f$_{b}$ as a function of redshift and magnitude with the

2038: 3.6$\micron$ LFs assuming all ``blue'' galaxies have the color of

2039: the Huang et al. Sbc galaxies and all ``red'' galaxies have the color

2040: of the passive evolution model results in the models that are plotted as  

2041: green dashed lines in Figures 15 and 16.

2042: %are the predicted 8.0$\micron$

2043: %LFs from the 3.6$\micron$ LF assuming that star forming galaxies have

2044: %3.6$\micron$-8.0$\micron$ colors similar to the Huang et al. (xxx)

2045: %  Sbc galaxy, and that non-star forming galaxies have

2046: %3.6$\micron$-8.0$\micron$ colors similar to our single-burst

2047: %model.  

2048: %The vertical solid lines on the plot mark the location of M$^{*}$

2049: %(assuming a single-burst model) and the magnitude of an Ultra Luminous

2050: %Infrared Galaxy (ULIRG). 

2051: Comparing the data to these models shows that 

2052: this simple model using only regular+quiescent galaxies predicts the cluster 8.0$\micron$ LFs fairly

2053: well.  In particular, the z = 0.15, 0.25 and 0.33 LFs are well

2054: described by this model.  For the higher redshift LFs this model is clearly

2055: better than the purely quiescent model; however, it still does not

2056: account for the entire 8.0$\micron$ population.  

2057: \newline\indent

2058: Most importantly, the regular+quiescent 

2059: model shows that out to $z \sim$ 0.65, where 8.0$\micron$ still probes

2060: rest-frame dust emission, there is no significant population of

2061: bright (M $<$ M$^{*}$) galaxies in

2062: clusters that cannot reasonably be accounted for by ``regular''

2063: star forming cluster spirals.  This is significant because it suggests

2064: that whatever processes responsible for transforming the

2065: morphology and spectral-type of  bright cluster galaxies over the same redshift

2066: range do not involve an ultra-luminous dusty starburst phase such as

2067: those caused by major mergers of gas-rich galaxies (i.e., ``wet'' mergers).  We note that

2068: there appears to be an overdensity of very bright galaxies

2069: in the $z =$ 0.82 LF that cannot be accounted for by the

2070: regular+quiescent model and

2071: this suggests the possibility of an onset of luminous starbursts

2072: (possibly from mergers) or AGN activity in bright galaxies at  higher redshift.    

2073: \newline\indent

2074: %To first order, the conclusion from the 5.8$\micron$ and

2075: %8.0$\micron$ LFs is that the relative abundance of {\it bright} dusty star forming

2076: %galaxies can be explained by typical cluster blue fractions which

2077: %suggests that there is no evidence for a significant population of strongly optically-obscured

2078: %dusty star forming galaxies in clusters at $z <$ 0.7.  Furthermore,

2079: %there is also no significant population of ULIRG in clusters over the

2080: %same redshift range.  This suggests that there is no cluster-specific

2081: %environmental process responsible for triggering dusty starburst

2082: %events.

2083: %\newline\indent

2084: Although the regular+quiescent model predicts the bright end of the 8.0$\micron$

2085: LFs  well at all redshifts, and the entire 8$\micron$ LF at lower

2086: redshift, it fails to account for all of the LFs. In particular, this

2087: model seems to underpredict the number of fainter galaxies in the

2088: 8.0$\micron$ LFs for clusters at $z >$ 0.4.  This suggests

2089: a third component to the cluster 8.0$\micron$

2090: population, possibly a red, dusty starburst population which is not

2091: accounted for by the cluster f$_{b}$.  Such a population was suggested by

2092: Wolf et al. (2005) who found that the SEDs of roughly 30\% of the red sequence galaxies in

2093: the Abell 901/902 supercluster ($z$ = 0.17)

2094: were better described by dusty templates rather than a dust-free, old

2095: stellar population. In order to explore this possibility, we construct a new

2096: model with the

2097: same values of f$_{b}$ as a function of magnitude and redshift as for

2098: the regular+quiescent model, but this time we assume that some of the

2099: red quiescent galaxies are instead M82-like dusty starbursts.  M82

2100: has optical-IR colors that are similar to quiescent galaxies (see

2101: Huang et al. 2008 and

2102: $\S$6.3) so it is reasonable to assume that any M82-like dusty starbursts would be part of

2103: the population of red cluster galaxies rather than the blue cluster

2104: galaxies.  

2105: \newline\indent

2106: If we assume that the dusty

2107: starburst population is a constant fraction of the red cluster galaxies, this

2108: would result in a varying ratio of dusty starburst to regular star forming

2109: galaxies in clusters as a function of redshift.  In particular,

2110: clusters at low redshift will have the highest fraction of dusty

2111: starburst galaxies (because the f$_{b}$ is low and the red fraction is

2112: high).  The LFs above have already suggested that there is no need for

2113: a dusty starburst population at low redshift, so modeling the dusty

2114: starbursts as a fixed fraction of the red galaxies seems

2115: inappropriate.  Instead, a better way to model the population is to

2116: assume that the cluster f$_{b}$ is a tracer of the total star

2117: formation in the cluster and that ratio of dusty starburst to regular star forming

2118: galaxies  is a constant.  Given this assumption we can predict the fraction of dusty

2119: starbursts directly from the cluster f$_{b}$.  This fraction of dusty starbursts

2120: is then removed from the fraction of red quiescent galaxies and a

2121: model for the LFs can be made.  Hereafter we refer to this model as

2122: starburst+regular+quiescent.

2123: The fractions of the cluster galaxy populations in terms of f$_{b}$

2124: are defined using the equations,

2125: \begin{equation}

2126: f_{dsb} = f_{b} \times f_{dsb/reg},

2127: \end{equation}

2128: \begin{equation}

2129: f_{q} = 1 - f_{b} - f_{dsb},

2130: \end{equation}

2131: where f$_{dsb}$ is the fraction of dusty starburst galaxies, f$_{dsb/reg}$ is the assumed ratio of dusty starburst to regular

2132: star forming galaxies, and f$_{q}$ is the fraction of quiescent

2133: galaxies.  In cases where f$_{dsb}$ + f$_{b}$ $>$ 1 we set f$_{dsb}$ = 1

2134: - f$_{b}$ and f$_{q}$ = 0.

2135: \newline\indent

2136: As of yet there are no good observational constraints

2137: on the parameter f$_{dsb/reg}$. Therefore, as a first-order fiducial value we

2138: assume that f$_{dsb/reg}$ = 0.5.  In general, we find that

2139: allowing a range of values between 0.3 - 1.0 provides models that are

2140: fairly similar.  More importantly, the differences in models that use  f$_{sb/reg}$ between

2141: 0.3 - 1.0 are much smaller than the difference between any of those models and

2142: the regular+quiescent model. Therefore, the interpretation

2143: of the data using these models

2144: will not depend strongly on the assumed value of f$_{sb/reg}$.  

2145: %Given the Wolf et al. (2005) constraints,

2146: %and a lack of other data, we assume that

2147: %30\% of the red cluster galaxies are M82 starbursts as a fiducial

2148: %value.  

2149: The starburst+regular+quiescent model with f$_{sb/reg}$ = 0.5 is

2150: overplotted on Figures 15 and 16 as the dotted blue line.  

2151: \newline\indent

2152: This starburst+regular+quiescent model over-predicts the number of

2153: bright galaxies in the $z <$ 0.4 8.0$\micron$ LFs

2154: but it is better at describing the

2155: LFs at $z >$ 0.4 than the regular+quiescent or purely quiescent

2156: models.  This suggests that there is a population of dusty starbursts in

2157: clusters at $z >$ 0.4 that does not exist at $z <$ 0.4, and that

2158: these starbursts are consistent with being of an M82-type.  We discuss this in more

2159: detail in $\S$6.1.

2160: %The

2161: %simple f$_{b}$ model seems to underpredict both of the observed LFs.

2162: %It is possible that this is because the models fail at $z >$ 0.45, or

2163: %else there is a real change in the cluster population.  We discuss

2164: %this further in $\S$ xx.

2165: %\include{tab2}

2166: \section{Discussion}

2167: \subsection{Evidence for a Change in Star Formation Properties of

2168:   Cluster Galaxies?}

2169: \indent

2170: In order to better illustrate the differences in the model populations

2171: described above, we subtract the quiescent model from the

2172: 5.8$\micron$ and 8.0$\micron$ LFs between 0.15 $< z <$ 0.65 and

2173: plot the residuals in Figures 18 and 19.  The residuals

2174: from the quiescent+regular model and starburst+regular+quiescent models

2175: from $\S$5.2.4 are also plotted in Figures 18 and 19.  The solid vertical lines

2176: in the plots represent the magnitude of M$^{*}$ inferred from the

2177: 3.6$\micron$ LF assuming the passive evolution model, and give some

2178: indication of the depth of the LFs.

2179: %Points which follow the solid red line in these

2180: %Figures would be perfectly described by the purely quiescent model.

2181: If we compare the data to the models and take the

2182: results at face value, it suggests that the intensity of

2183: star formation  in clusters is evolving with redshift and that it can be classified into

2184: three types.  The

2185: first type of star formation is ``weak'' and best describes the lowest

2186: redshift clusters ($z <$ 0.15) which are consistent with the colors of an almost exclusively quiescent

2187: population in

2188: all IRAC bandpasses.  This result is consistent with numerous studies of nearby

2189: clusters using spectroscopy which show few star forming galaxies

2190: (e.g.,

2191: Dressler et al. 1985, Popesso et al. 2007; Christlein \& Zabludoff 2005; Rines et al. 2005).  

2192: %It is also consistent with

2193: %the local studies of Coma + Virgo with ISO and IRAS (need to look

2194: %these up and cite them).  

2195: \newline\indent

2196: Between 0.2 $< z <$ 0.5 the 8.0$\micron$ LFs

2197: are no longer well-described by the purely quiescent model and the

2198: regular+quiescent model is the best model.  This shows that the

2199: majority of star formation in clusters at this epoch is primarily

2200: relegated to galaxies that have MIR colors similar to local late-type

2201: star forming galaxies (i.e., the Sbc model).  This has direct implications for the SFRs of

2202: these galaxies because Wu et al. (2005) showed that the

2203: dust-obscured SFR of galaxies is proportional to their

2204: 8.0$\micron$ flux.  Although other authors have demonstrated that

2205: there are caveats when using the

2206: 8.0$\micron$ flux to infer SFRs (i.e., the scatter can be as high as

2207: a factor of 20-30, Dale et al. 2005), this still implies that the

2208: average SFR or the average SFR per unit stellar mass (the average specific

2209: star formation rate, SSFR) of star forming cluster galaxies at 0.2 $< z <$ 0.5 is similar to those in the

2210: local universe (because they have 3.6$\micron$-8.0$\micron$ colors

2211: similar to local Sbc galaxies).  This second mode of star formation in clusters is roughly what

2212: would be considered ``regular'' star formation for galaxies in the

2213: local universe.

2214: \newline\indent

2215: At $z >$ 0.5 the

2216: starburst+regular+quiescent model becomes the best description of the LFs.

2217: Again, assuming that 8.0$\micron$ flux is an indicator of SFR, the

2218: M82 starburst model is approximately a factor 2.5 brighter at 8.0$\micron$

2219: than the regular Sbc model for the same 3.6$\micron$ flux.

2220: Given that our model suggests that regular star forming galaxies make

2221: up $\sim$ 30-40\% of the cluster population at this redshift and M82 galaxies

2222: make up $\sim$ 15-20\%, this implies that not only is the

2223:   abundance of star forming galaxies in clusters higher at higher

2224: redshift (i.e., the Butcher-Oemler Effect), but also the average SSFR of cluster galaxies

2225: is approximately a factor of 1.5 higher at $z >$ 0.5 than it is at $z <$

2226: 0.5.  This increase in SSFR suggests a third mode of star formation in

2227: cluster galaxies that could be 

2228: considered a ``burst'' mode, at least relative to local star formation

2229: rates.  Interestingly, this increase in the SSFR of cluster galaxies at

2230: higher redshift is consistent with field studies of the

2231: universal star formation density ($\rho_{*}$) which show  an

2232: increase of roughly a factor of 2-5 between $z = 0.2$ and $z = 0.5$ (e.g.,

2233: Lilly et al. 1996; Madau et al. 1996; Wilson et al. 2002;

2234: Schiminovich et al. 2005; Le Floc'h et al. 2005). It suggests that the

2235: increasing fraction of dusty starbursts in the cluster population could be interpreted as the

2236: result of an increase in the universal SSFR of galaxies with redshift and the constant accretion

2237: of these galaxies into clusters and is not necessarily because

2238: starbursts are  triggered by the cluster environment.  Furthermore, these

2239: galaxies might only be considered ``starbursts'' relative to the mean

2240: SSFR locally, whereas at higher redshift their higher SSFR is simply

2241: typical of galaxies at that redshift.  We compare the cluster

2242: 5.8$\micron$ and 8.0$\micron$ LFs to the field LFs in $\S$6.2 and

2243: discuss this further in that section.

2244: %Assuming that the cluster f$_{b}$ values are a reasonable indicator of

2245: %the percentage of star forming galaxies in clusters this suggests a

2246: %significant change in the mode of star formation in clusters with an

2247: %increasing number of cluster galaxies moving from quiescent to normal to

2248: %bursting modes of star formation with increasing redshift.  Perhaps even more interesting than

2249: %this increase is the redshift ranges where the mode of star formation

2250: %appears to change.

2251: \newline\indent

2252: It is interesting that the cluster star forming population transitions from

2253: being best described  by

2254: regular star forming galaxies to regular and dusty starburst galaxies

2255: around a redshift of $z \sim $ 0.4.  This is notable because of the

2256: discrepant abundances of k+a and a+k post-starburst galaxies found in clusters

2257: by the MORPHS (Dressler et al. 1999) and CNOC1 (Balogh et al. 1999)

2258: projects.  Dressler et al. (1999) found that approximately 18\% of cluster galaxy

2259: spectra could be classified as k+a galaxies based on the equivalent

2260: width of the H$\delta$ line, whereas Balogh et al. (1999) found that

2261: only 2\% of the cluster population could be classified this way.

2262: These results obviously lead to very different interpretations of the

2263: role of starbursts in the evolution of cluster galaxies.  In

2264: particular, Dressler et al. found that the number of k+a galaxies was an

2265: order of magnitude higher in clusters than the coeval field, suggesting a

2266: cluster-related process to the creation of these galaxies, while Balogh et

2267: al. found roughly equal numbers, suggesting no environmental role.

2268: \newline\indent

2269: Although both Dressler et al. (2004) and Balogh et al. (1999) have pointed out that the different

2270: methods of data analysis may be partly responsible for such discrepant results,

2271: this study suggests that the slightly different redshift

2272: range of

2273: the MORPHS and CNOC1 sample may also play some role.

2274:   Excluding the two

2275: highest redshift clusters in the CNOC1 sample (MS 0451-03 and MS

2276: 0016+16, both at $z \sim$ 0.55) the mean redshift of the other 14/16 (88\%)

2277: clusters in the sample is $z = 0.28$.  By contrast, the mean

2278: redshift of the MORPHS sample is $z = 0.46$.  Our 8.0$\micron$

2279: cluster LFs seem to indicate that $z \sim $ 0.4 represents a

2280: transition redshift above which the dominant mode of star formation in clusters

2281: is better described as starburst, as opposed to regular.  Given that

2282: once star formation ceases, the

2283: typical lifetime of the A star component of a starburst galaxy's

2284: spectrum is $\sim$ 1.5 Gyr, and that the lookback time between $z =$

2285: 0.46 and $z =$ 0.28 is also 1.5 Gyr, it is possible that both dusty

2286: starbursts, and k+a galaxies that are

2287: in clusters at $z =$ 0.46 may have evolved to

2288: quiescent ``k''-type galaxies by $z \sim$

2289: 0.28, provided that the dusty star formation is immediately truncated.  This would be consistent with the change in the

2290: 8.0$\micron$ LFs around this redshift and may explain why the

2291: MORPHS and CNOC1 samples show different abundances of post-starburst 

2292: galaxies.  Furthermore, 1.5 Gyr prior to $z =$ 0.46 is $z \sim$

2293: 0.65.  Our $z =$ 0.65 cluster LF has the largest abundance of dusty starburst

2294: galaxies, and if a significant fraction of these had their star

2295: formation truncated, these would be logical progenitors to the large

2296: population of k+a galaxies seen at $z =$ 0.46 by Dressler et al. (1999).

2297: \newline\indent

2298: Our results, which show an increase in the strength of the dominant mode of star formation in

2299: cluster galaxies (from weak to normal to starburst), as well as

2300: an overall increase in the abundance of dusty star forming galaxies are 

2301: also consistent with MIR observations of other

2302: clusters at these redshift ranges.  In particular, Coia et al. (2005),

2303:  Geach et al. (2006), Marcillac et

2304: al. (2007), and Bai et al. (2007) have all shown that

2305: clusters at higher redshifts have significantly more MIR sources than clusters at

2306: lower-redshift, and that these sources are typically brighter than the

2307: sources in lower-redshift clusters.  Taken at face value, our results and their

2308: results show the equivalent of a Butcher-Oemler Effect in the MIR

2309: where both the fraction, and SSFR of star forming galaxies is

2310: increasing with increasing redshift.   Whether this increase is caused

2311: by the increase in the universal SFR with redshift, and the constant infall of

2312: such galaxies into the cluster environment, or by the triggering of

2313: starbursts by the high-redshift cluster environment is still uncertain.

2314: We investigate this point further in $\S$6.2 by comparing the cluster and

2315: field IRAC LFs.

2316: %\newline\indent

2317: %Assuming that this is the case, and that the mode of star formation in

2318: %clusters moves to higher specific star formation rates at higher

2319: %redshift, the next step is to understand why cluster galaxies are more

2320: %active at high redshift.

2321: \begin{figure*}

2322: \plotone{f18.eps}

2323: \caption{\footnotesize Residuals of the cluster 5.8$\micron$

2324:     LFs once the predictions from the 3.6$\micron$ LFs and the

2325:     passive evolution model have been subtracted.  The solid red line

2326:     shows the passive evolution model, the dashed green line shows the

2327:     regular+quiescent model and the dotted blue line shows the

2328:     starburst+regular+quiescent model.  The solid vertical line

2329:     represents the location of M$^{*}$ from the 3.6$\micron$ LFs

2330:     assuming the 3.6$\micron$ - 5.8$\micron$ color of the passive

2331:     evolution model.}

2332: \end{figure*}

2333: \begin{figure*}

2334: \plotone{f19.eps}

2335: \caption{\footnotesize Same as Figure 18 but for the 8.0$\micron$ LFs.}

2336: \end{figure*}

2337: \subsection{Is the Cluster Population Different From the Field

2338:   Population?}

2339: The most obvious way to understand if the cluster environment is

2340: responsible for triggering starburst events is to

2341: directly compare the field and cluster 5.8$\micron$ or 8.0$\micron$ LFs and look for an excess of

2342: galaxies in

2343: the cluster   LFs.  For 

2344: this comparison we use the field LFs

2345: measured by Babbedge et al. (2006, hereafter B06).  Their LFs are determined using photometric redshifts of

2346: $\sim$ 100 000 galaxies from a 6.5 deg$^2$ patch of the

2347: SWIRE survey.  The field LFs are measured in 5 redshift bins, and we

2348: compare the cluster LFs to the three bins which overlap the redshift range of

2349: the clusters (0.0 $<

2350: z <$ 0.25, 0.25 $< z <$ 0.50, and 0.5 $< z <$ 1.0).  The corresponding

2351: cluster LFs used for comparison are 

2352: the $z = 0.15$, $z =$ 0.33, and $z = $ 0.65 LFs 

2353: respectively.

2354: \newline\indent

2355: The B06 field LFs are determined using total luminosities, not

2356: apparent magnitudes like

2357: for the cluster LFs.  Converting the units of the cluster LFs to total

2358: luminosities requires distance moduli and full k-corrections.  In

2359: $\S$5.2.4 we showed that the cluster LFs can be well-described using 

2360: three basic populations of galaxies: quiescent, regular star forming,

2361: and dusty starburst.  We use the models of these three

2362: spectral types for the k-corrections.  The

2363: k-corrections for the quiescent galaxies are taken from the

2364: single-burst model and the k-corrections for the regular and

2365: dusty starburst galaxies are taken from the Huang et al. (2008) Sbc

2366: and M82 models respectively.  Each LF is statistically k-corrected

2367: using the relative proportions of the galaxies which best described the

2368: LFs in $\S$5.2.4.  The apparent LF for each redshift is divided into the

2369: three components by the fraction of galaxies of that type and are individually k-corrected and

2370: shifted by the distance modulus. 

2371: These LFs are then summed to provide the total cluster LF in terms of absolute

2372: luminosities in units of $\nu$L$_{\nu}$/L$_{\odot}$.

2373: \newline\indent

2374: The cluster LFs are normalized  by the number of galaxies per

2375: virial volume, whereas the field LFs are normalized by their actual number

2376: density per Mpc$^{3}$.  The cluster normalization can be put in the

2377: same units as the field LFs by dividing by the virial volume; however, this does not provide a fair comparison

2378: because clusters have much higher volume densities of galaxies than the field. 

2379: %and

2380: %therefore the

2381: %cluster LF will clearly have far more galaxies than the same volume of

2382: %the field.  

2383: The most useful way to compare the cluster and field LFs

2384: is on a per unit stellar mass basis.  We do not have 

2385: stellar mass functions for either the field or cluster; however, we

2386: can again assume

2387: that the 3.6$\micron$ luminosity is roughly a proxy for stellar mass

2388: and renormalize the LFs to a common normalization so that they

2389: reproduce the same $\phi^{*}$ in the Schechter function fits.  The

2390: renormalized 3.6$\micron$, 4.5$\micron$, 5.8$\micron$, and

2391: 8.0$\micron$ cluster LFs are plotted in Figures

2392: 20, 21, 22, and 23, respectively as the filled red circles.  The field

2393: LFs are overplotted as blue squares.

2394: \newline\indent

2395: Figures 20 and 21 show that the overall shape of the cluster and field

2396: 3.6$\micron$ and 4.5$\micron$ LFs are similar at all

2397: redshifts.  There is a slight, though not statistically

2398: significant, excess in the number of

2399: the brightest galaxies in the cluster LFs; however, these

2400: are likely to be giant elliptical galaxies which

2401: are common in clusters and typically do not follow the

2402: distribution of the Schechter function.  Other than the giant ellipticals,

2403: the shape of the 3.6$\micron$ and 4.5$\micron$ cluster and field LFs are

2404: similar which shows that the distribution of galaxies as a function of

2405: stellar mass is nearly identical in these environments.  This result

2406: is consistent with K-band studies which have shown only small

2407: differences in M$^{*}$ ($<$ 0.2 mag) between these environments (e.g.,

2408: Balogh et al. 2001; Lin et al. 2004; Rines et al. 2004; Muzzin et al. 2007a).

2409: \newline\indent

2410: Conversely, there are significant differences in the 5.8$\micron$ and

2411: 8.0$\micron$ LFs of the cluster and field.  Both the 5.8$\micron$ and

2412: 8.0$\micron$ LFs follow

2413: a sequence where the cluster LF is more abundant in MIR galaxies at

2414: $z =$ 0.65, particularly moderate-luminosity galaxies, and thereafter the

2415: abundance of MIR galaxies in clusters declines relative to the

2416: field with decreasing redshift.  At $z

2417: =$ 0.33, the cluster is slightly deficient in both 5.8$\micron$ and

2418: 8.0$\micron$ galaxies relative the field, reduced by a

2419: factor of $\sim$ 2 for galaxies with $\nu$L$_{\nu}$ = 5 x 10$^9$ -  5 x 10$^{10}$ L$_{\odot}$.  At $z =$ 0.15, the cluster LF is significantly depleted

2420: compared to the field, reduced by a factor of $\sim$ 5 for galaxies with $\nu$L$_{\nu}$ = 5 x 10$^8$ -  5 x 10$^{10}$ L$_{\odot}$.  

2421: %This differential evolution suggests that galaxies in high density regions such as clusters

2422: %are forming stars at higher rates than their field counterparts.  

2423: This trend not only indicates that the environment of 

2424: dusty star forming galaxies affects their evolution, but that the

2425: enironmental effects seem to evolve with redshift.  At $z =$ 0.15 dusty star forming galaxies

2426: are more frequently found in the lower density field environment,

2427: whereas at $z =$ 0.65 they are found more frequently in the

2428: higher density cluster environment.

2429: \newline\indent

2430: Our results are similar to those from recent studies by Elbaz et al. (2007) and Cooper et

2431: al. (2008) that have shown that the mean star formation rate of field galaxies in

2432: higher density environments increases faster than those in low density

2433: environments with increasing

2434: redshift.  This differential increase leads to a remarkable reversal in the slope of the $<$SFR$>$ of

2435: galaxies as a function of density at $z \sim$ 1 as compared to $z

2436: \sim$ 0.  Field galaxies in

2437: high density environments at $z \sim$ 1 actually have higher $<$SFR$>$ than those

2438: in low density environments.  Although those studies compare $<$SFR$>$

2439: of galaxies at a range of densities within the field and do not use

2440: clusters per se, our comparison between the 8$\micron$

2441: LFs of the cluster and field environments seem to at least

2442: qualitatively suggest a similar trend.

2443: \newline\indent

2444: It is not entirely obvious why

2445: starbursts should prefer the cluster environment over the field

2446: environment at high ($z >$

2447: 0.5) redshift and then reject it at lower redshift ($z <$ 0.5).  We suggest that

2448: starbursts could preferentially be triggered during the

2449: initial formation and collapse of the cluster, and be quenched

2450: thereafter by the high-density environment.  If this interpretation is

2451: correct, it is likely that the parameter most

2452: responsible for the change in star formation properties 

2453: relative to the field is the degree of virialization of the

2454: clusters.  

2455: \newline\indent

2456: Clusters that are unrelaxed, or in the process of collapsing, have two properties

2457: that would permit increased numbers of dusty starbursts.  Firstly,

2458: before virialization, the cluster gas has not yet been shock-heated to its maximum temperature.

2459: This hot intracluster gas has long been considered the primary cause for

2460: the quenching of

2461: star formation in cluster galaxies because it prevents the cooling of

2462: gas in the outer halo

2463: of a galaxy, thereby ``strangling'' star formation.

2464: Depending on the density/temperature threshold required for quenching,

2465: it is possible that starbursts that would normally be quenched in virialized

2466: clusters at lower redshifts may survive longer in

2467: unvirialized clusters at high redshift.  Secondly, the velocity

2468: dispersions in unrelaxed systems are lower and therefore mergers and

2469: harassments should be more common at higher redshift (e.g., Tran et

2470: al. 2005b).  It is

2471: plausible that this more dynamically ``active'' environment preferentially triggers

2472: star formation.  The combination of more triggered dusty starbursts

2473: through harassment and mergers as well as a weaker quenching process

2474: may be the reason for more dusty starbursts in clusters relative to

2475: the field at higher redshift.

2476: Once a cluster becomes virialized the interactions between galaxies

2477: should become less frequent and the quenching of star formation by the hot

2478: cluster gas will be more efficient.  In such a scenario the relative abundances of

2479: dusty starbursts in clusters should decrease relative to the field. 

2480: \newline\indent

2481: If our interpretation is correct we might expect different results

2482: from the 8.0$\micron$ LFs of X-ray selected samples of clusters (i.e., those which require a

2483: hot virialized cluster gas component) compared to red sequence

2484: selected samples, which, assuming the early type population is formed

2485: prior to cluster collapse, do not require that clusters are fully virialized.

2486: %We note that such a scenario could potentially reconcile the different abundances of

2487: %K+A galaxies in clusters found by Dressler et al (1999) and Balogh et

2488: %al. (1999).  If there is an enhanced dusty starburst phase in clusters

2489: %that ends at $z \sim$ 0.65 those galaxies could evolve into the large

2490: %population of K+A

2491: %galaxies seen by Dressler et al. (1999) by $z =$ 0.46 ($\sim$ 1.5 Gyr

2492: %later).  Assuming that $z =$ 0.5 is roughly the redshift where the cluster and

2493: %field 8.0$\micron$ LFs equalize (e.g., Figure 22), thereafter the post-starburst fraction in

2494: %clusters will be much lower, and similar to the field $\sim$ 1.5 Gyr

2495: %later (i.e., $z = 0.28$, the mean redshift of the Balogh et al. CNOC1

2496: %sample).  

2497: 

2498: %At no redshift does the cluster 5.8$\micron$ or 8.0$\micron$ LF

2499: %exceed the field LFs by greater than a few $\sigma$ (except a few points in the $z =$

2500: %0.65 5.8$\micron$ and 8.0$\micron$ LF).  This shows that in a per

2501: %unit stellar mass basis, the field

2502: %environment always has at least as many, and typically more, dusty star forming galaxies than the

2503: %cluster environment which suggests that {\it the cluster environment is not

2504: %responsible for triggering more dusty starburst events than are

2505: %already present in the coeval field}.

2506: %\newline\indent

2507: %This would lead to the conclusion that the greater abundance of K+A galaxies in clusters

2508: %over the field found by Dressler et al. (1999, 2004) is not because these galaxies result from luminous

2509: %dusty starbursts triggered by the cluster environment, but occur because

2510: %they are the result of the rapid strangulation of star formation in

2511: %infalling field galaxies which have large SSFRs at high redshift.

2512: %This interpretation is supported by Shioya et al. (2004) who have

2513: %shown that simply the truncation of ongoing star formation

2514: %in infalling star forming galaxies can explain the EW of H$_{\delta}$ for all but

2515: %the strongest systems.  They showed that only those rare

2516: %systems are more likely to be the product of galaxies that experience

2517: %another burst of star formation that is truncated.

2518: %They used galaxies

2519: %with typical SFRs of something??  Assuming that the the truncation

2520: %process takes roughly 1.5 Gyr before a star forming galaxy's spectra

2521: %looks like an K+A galaxy, it would be appropriate to study the depth

2522: %of the H$_{\delta}$ line that results from the truncation of the SSFR

2523: %typical for that epoch, rather than the coeval field.  This may even

2524: %explain the strongest H$_{\delta}$ systems.

2525: %\newline\indent

2526: %The difference in the cluster and field 5.8$\micron$ and

2527: %8.0$\micron$ LFs does not completely exclude a ``triggered'' dusty starburst phase in the evolution

2528: %of cluster galaxies.  It only excludes the possibility that such

2529: %events occur more frequently in clusters than in the field at a

2530: %given redshift.  As long as any dusty starburst phase is short-lived and occurs in

2531: %a small percentage of cluster galaxies at one time, it would not

2532: %be noticeable in the 5.8$\micron$ and 8.0$\micron$ LFs.  Better

2533: %constraints on such a phase could be made if the error bars in the

2534: %cluster LFs were smaller (i.e., more clusters were observed such that

2535: %rare events could be detected); however, the best way to exclude this possibility

2536: %would be to study the MIR properties of several clusters in detail

2537: %using spectroscopic redshifts and look for a triggered starburst component.

2538: %Still, the strong decline in 5.8$\micron$ and 8.0$\micron$

2539: %sources in clusters with redshift would be most naturally

2540: %explained by the truncation of star formation in infalling galaxies,

2541: %and likely does not require a triggered starburst phase.

2542: %\newline\indent

2543: %It is noteworthy that the cluster and field 8.0$\micron$ LFs are similar at $z <$

2544: %0.7 and that the cluster LF declines with decreasing redshift thereafter.  This

2545: %suggests two possibilities, 1) that many of the galaxies in clusters at $z >$ 0.7 are either

2546: %recent arrivals to the cluster environment and therefore the cluster

2547: %LF looks predominately like the field LF or 2) that the processes

2548: %that quench star formation in cluster galaxies (such as gas

2549: %strangulation) only become efficient at $z <$ 0.7, perhaps because

2550: %the hot intra-cluster gas reaches a critical temperature/density.  The details of this

2551: %cannot be asserted from these data; however, the LFs suggest that

2552: %environmental processes may only important in shaping the cluster

2553: %populations at $z <$ 0.7.  

2554: %The most obvious source of increased star formation could simply be a

2555: %change in the field population with redshift.  We already know that

2556: %the total star formation is higher at higher redshift (see references

2557: %in the Poggianti paper, perhaps also the Spitzer paper).  Perhaps that

2558: %the infalling field galaxies are the cause and cluster-triggered

2559: %processes are not important.

2560: \begin{figure}

2561: \plotone{f20.eps}

2562: \caption{\footnotesize Comparison between the cluster and field

2563:   3.6$\micron$ LFs at different redshifts.  The field LFs are

2564:   plotted as open blue squares and the cluster LFs are plotted as

2565:   filled red circles.  The cluster LFs are renormalized so that the

2566:   values of $\phi^{*}$ from the Schechter function fits ($\S$5.1)

2567:   match the $\phi^{*}$ values from the Schechter function fits in B06. }

2568: \end{figure}

2569: \begin{figure}

2570: \plotone{f21.eps}

2571: \caption{\footnotesize Same as Figure 19 but for the 4.5$\micron$ LFs.}

2572: \end{figure}

2573: \begin{figure}

2574: \plotone{f22.eps}

2575: \caption{\footnotesize Same as Figure 19 but for the 5.8$\micron$ LFs.}

2576: \end{figure}

2577: \begin{figure}

2578: \plotone{f23.eps}

2579: \caption{\footnotesize Same as Figure 19 but for the 8.0$\micron$ LFs.

2580: }

2581: \end{figure}

2582: \subsection{Are the Color Models Correct?}

2583: \indent

2584: The main conclusions from the cluster LFs presented in this paper

2585: depend on interpreting color models that have been primarily calibrated or determined

2586: using nearby galaxies.  If these models are not applicable at higher

2587: redshift then this could cause incorrect conclusions to be drawn from

2588: the LFs.   Using the spectroscopic redshifts

2589: we can examine the colors of confirmed cluster galaxies as a function

2590: of redshift to check if the models are reasonable.

2591: \newline\indent

2592: There are 55 spectroscopic redshifts available for

2593: cluster galaxies (see $\S$2.4 \& $\S$2.5).

2594: Using the spectra we can classify these galaxies into two basic types,

2595: star forming and non-star forming.  For the Hectospec, SDSS, and WIYN

2596: spectroscopy the best-fitting cross-correlation template is used for

2597: the classification.  For the remaining galaxies the classification is made by eye-examining the spectra for any

2598: evidence of the [OII], [OIII], or H$\alpha$ emission lines.  Galaxies

2599: with any of these emission lines are classified as star forming, and

2600: those without are classified as non-star forming.  Although this is a 

2601: crude approach to classifying galaxies, we are only interested in a

2602: rough classification and taking a more 

2603: quantitative  approach, such as measuring EWs, is unnecessary.  Furthermore, in

2604: all cases the cluster galaxies had spectra that were

2605: typical of either normal star forming (several emission lines

2606: including [OII] and H$\alpha$) or quiescent galaxies

2607: (strong H and K lines and a 4000\AA$ $ break), and classification was

2608: straightforward.  There were no hybrid

2609: objects associated with clusters except two AGN from the Hectospec

2610: data.  

2611: \newline\indent

2612: In Figure 24 we plot several of the colors of these galaxies as a function of

2613: redshift.  Star forming galaxies are plotted as purple points and

2614: non-star forming galaxies are plotted as red points.  The Bruzual \&

2615: Charlot single-burst model is overplotted as the solid line, and the

2616: Huang et al. (2008) Sbc and M82 models are overplotted as the dotted

2617: and dash dotted lines, respectively.  In general, the non-star forming galaxies follow the single-burst model 

2618: well at all redshifts.  There are a handful non-star forming galaxies which

2619: appear to have some excess 8.0$\micron$ emission, and this may

2620: be from either low-level  star formation or a low-luminosity

2621: AGN.  

2622: \newline\indent

2623: There are fewer star forming than non-star forming galaxies in

2624: the sample; however, their colors follow the Sbc and M82 models quite well.  At

2625: 8.0$\micron$, where the colors of the Sbc

2626: and M82 models are most

2627: different from the single-burst model, it is clear that galaxies with

2628: emission lines have colors similar to those models, whereas those

2629: without tend to follow the single-burst model.  Half of the star-forming

2630: galaxies in Figure 24 (8/16) come from our spectroscopy of FLS

2631: J172449+5921.3 (cluster \#10, $z =$ 0.252).  These galaxies were

2632: selected for spectroscopy because they were detected at 24$\micron$.  Interestingly,

2633: most of these galaxies (7/8) have a 3.6$\micron$ - 8.0$\micron$ color similar to

2634: the Sbc model, yet they show a wide range in R - 3.6$\micron$

2635: color.  A few have an R - 3.6$\micron$ color bluer than the

2636: red sequence, typical of Sbc galaxies, whereas others have an R -

2637: 3.6$\micron$ color redder than the red sequence.  This illustrates

2638: that there are both ``red'' and ``blue'' dusty star forming galaxies in

2639: clusters, and that our approach of modeling the 5.8$\micron$ and

2640: 8.0$\micron$ LFs with populations of both is reasonable.

2641: Furthermore, the fact that these are some of the brightest MIR

2642: sources in the cluster field, and that most have colors similar to the

2643: Sbc model, rather than the M82 model, is consistent with our conclusion 

2644: that the 8.0$\micron$ LF at this redshift is best modeled using

2645: the quiescent+regular model, with no need for a luminous dusty

2646: starburst component. We defer a more detailed discussion of the

2647: spectroscopy, including quantitative measurements of

2648: star formation from line widths to a future paper

2649: (Muzzin et al. 2008, in preparation).

2650: \newline\indent

2651: Overall, Figure 24 demonstrates that

2652: the galaxy templates used to model the cluster LFs agree well with the colors of

2653: spectroscopically confirmed cluster galaxies, and that they

2654: are reasonable descriptions of star forming and non-star forming

2655: galaxies between 0 $< z <$ 1.

2656: \begin{figure*}

2657: \plotone{f24.eps}

2658: \caption{\footnotesize Plot of optical - IRAC or IRAC - IRAC colors of

2659: galaxies as a function of redshift.  The red, purple, and green points are spectroscopic

2660: cluster members classified as non-star forming, star forming, and AGN

2661: respectively.  The solid, dotted, and dashed lines are the model colors from the passive evolution

2662: model, the Sbc model, and the M82 model respectively.}

2663: \end{figure*}

2664: \subsection{Systematic Uncertainties}

2665: The data presented in this paper support a self-consistent

2666: model of the evolution of stellar mass assembly and

2667: dusty star formation in clusters; however, there are several details of this

2668: analysis that have not been discussed and could potentially result in 

2669: inappropriate conclusions being drawn from the data.  Although it is

2670: difficult to quantify what effect, if any, these details will have on the

2671: interpretation of the data, we believe it is important to at least

2672: note these issues here.

2673: \newline\indent

2674: One worthwhile concern is the sample of clusters used in

2675: the analysis.  Although this sample is much larger than the mere handful of clusters that have

2676: been studied in the MIR thus far, it is still of modest size and

2677: subject to cosmic variance.  In particular, given that the clusters

2678: come from only 3.8 deg$^2$, it is

2679: unclear whether the higher redshift clusters in the sample are

2680: truly the progenitors of the lower redshift clusters.  

2681: Unfortunately, a cosmologically significant sample of 

2682: clusters covering of the order 100 degree$^2$ or more is likely needed

2683: to avoid biases that might result from cosmic variance in the sample.

2684: \newline\indent

2685: Another potential problem is that  there are many

2686: more low richness clusters in the sample than high richness clusters,

2687: simply because of the nature of the cluster mass function.

2688: Any effects that depend on cluster mass will clearly be missed by

2689: combining these samples.  This could be important because processes

2690: that could quench star formation (e.g., ram-pressure stripping, gas

2691: strangulation) or incite starbursts (tidal effects, harassment) will

2692: likely depend on cluster mass.  Using a much larger sample which can be

2693: separated by both mass and redshift would be invaluable for studying

2694: this issue further.

2695: \newline\indent

2696: Perhaps the most important concern is that there is a degeneracy between the intensity

2697: of star formation in clusters and the fraction of star forming

2698: galaxies.  We showed in $\S$6.3 that the color models used for the cluster

2699: galaxies reproduce the colors of cluster galaxies with spectroscopic

2700: redshifts very well; however, even though these colors are correct, the models of the

2701: 5.8$\micron$ and 8.0$\micron$ LFs still depend on the assumed

2702: f$_{b}$ as a function of magnitude and redshift for the clusters.  If

2703: the f$_{b}$ values are overestimated and need to be reduced, then a larger fraction of

2704: dusty starburst galaxies than we have assumed will be required to

2705: correctly model the cluster

2706: 5.8$\micron$ and 8.0$\micron$ LFs.  Likewise, if the f$_{b}$ is

2707: underestimated, fewer dusty starbursts will be required.  The assumed f$_{b}$ are

2708: consistent with most previous studies; however, optimally, if

2709: more data were available the f$_{b}$ should be calculated from the

2710: clusters themselves and this would avoid this degeneracy.

2711: \newline\indent

2712: Lastly, it is worth mentioning that much of the excess seen in

2713: the 8.0$\micron$ LFs is near the limiting magnitude of the survey.

2714: Problems with the background estimation could artificially inflate

2715: these values.  It is unlikely that this is the case because if the excess of galaxies near the faint limit of

2716: the survey were due to an undersubtraction of the background, it should

2717: also be seen in the lower redshift LFs, which it is not.  Furthermore, 

2718: undersubtraction of the background should be even more prevalent in the

2719: lower redshift LFs because clusters have much larger angular sizes and therefore more

2720: total area from which to undersubtract the background.  It is unlikely

2721: that this is a problem; however, deeper data would be useful in

2722: ensuring there are no errors due to completeness near the survey limit.

2723: \section{Conclusions}

2724: We have presented a catalogue of 99 candidate clusters and groups at 0.1 $< z_{phot} <$

2725: 1.3 discovered in

2726: the $Spitzer$ First Look Survey using the cluster red sequence

2727: technique.  Using spectroscopic redshifts from FLS followup campaigns

2728: and our own spectroscopic followup of clusters we have shown that the

2729: R - 3.6$\micron$ color of the

2730: cluster red sequence is an accurate photometric redshift estimator at

2731: the $\Delta$z = 0.04 level at $z <$ 1.0.  Furthermore, we demonstrated

2732: that the properties of the FLS cluster

2733: catalogue are similar to previous cluster surveys such as the RCS-1.  Using this cluster sample we studied the evolution of the cluster

2734: 3.6$\micron$, 4.5$\micron$, 5.8$\micron$, and 8.0$\micron$

2735: LFs.  The main results from these LFs can be summarized as follows:

2736: \begin{itemize}

2737: \item In agreement with previous work, the evolution of the 3.6$\micron$

2738:   and 4.5$\micron$ LFs between 0.1 $< z <$ 1.0 is

2739:   consistent with a passively evolving population of galaxies formed

2740:   in a single-burst at $z >$ 1.5.

2741:   Given that the 3.6$\micron$ and 4.5$\micron$ bandpasses are

2742:   reasonable proxies for stellar mass, this suggests that the majority

2743:   of stellar mass in clusters is already assembled into massive galaxies by

2744:   $z \sim$ 1.

2745: \item The MIR color cuts used to select AGN by Lacy et al. (2004) and

2746:   Stern et al. (2005) suggest that the fraction of cluster galaxies

2747:   that host MIR-bright AGN at $z <$ 0.7 is low.  We estimate that the AGN fraction of

2748:   cluster galaxies detected at 3.6$\micron$ is 1$^{+1}_{-1}$\%.  AGN

2749:   are a larger, but still modest component of the 5.8$\micron$ and 8.0$\micron$ cluster

2750:   population,  approximately

2751:   3$^{+3}_{-3}$\% of these galaxies.

2752: \item The cluster 5.8$\micron$ and 8.0$\micron$ LFs do not look

2753:   similar to the 3.6$\micron$ and 4.5$\micron$ LFs, and this is

2754:   due to the presence of  the cluster star forming galaxies. Star forming galaxies are much

2755:   brighter in these bandpasses than early type galaxies and their

2756:   varying fractions with redshift cause deviations from the shape of

2757:   the 3.6$\micron$ and 4.5$\micron$ LFs.  The

2758:   5.8$\micron$ and 8.0$\micron$ LFs are well-described using different

2759:   fractions of three basic types of galaxies: quiescent, regular

2760:   star forming, and dusty starburst by assuming that the fractions of

2761:   the latter two are proportional to the cluster f$_{b}$.

2762: \item The 8.0$\micron$ cluster LFs suggest that both the frequency and SSFR

2763:   of star forming cluster galaxies is increasing with increasing redshift.  In

2764:   particular it appears that when compared to star forming galaxies in

2765:   the local universe, the

2766:   intensity of star formation in clusters evolves from

2767:   ``weak'' to ``regular'' to ``starburst'' with increasing

2768:   redshift.  Qualitatively, this evolution mimics the evolution in the

2769:   universal star formation density with redshift suggesting that

2770:   this evolution is at least in part caused by the accretion of

2771:   star forming galaxies into the cluster environment.

2772: %s that the

2773: %  evolution in clusters is likely because clusters are accreting

2774: %  galaxies with higher specific star formation rates at higher

2775: %  redshifts, and not because the cluster environment preferentially

2776: %  causes more dusty starburst events at higher redshift.

2777: \item Comparing the 3.6$\micron$ and 4.5$\micron$ cluster and

2778:   field LFs with similar normalization shows that the LFs in these

2779:   environments are similar, with evidence for a small excess in the

2780:   brightest galaxies in clusters, likely caused by the cluster giant ellipticals.

2781:   In agreement with previous K-band studies this suggests that the distribution

2782:   of galaxies as a function of stellar mass in both environments is roughly equivalent.

2783: \item There is a significant differential evolution in the cluster and

2784:   field 5.8$\micron$ and 8.0$\micron$ LFs with redshift.  At $z =$

2785:   0.65 the cluster is more abundant in 8.0$\micron$ galaxies than

2786:   the field; however, thereafter the

2787:   relative number of 5.8$\micron$ and 8.0$\micron$ galaxies

2788:   declines in clusters with decreasing redshift and by $z =$ 0.15 the

2789:   cluster is underdense in these sources by roughly a factor of 5.

2790:   This differential evolution could be explained if starbursts are preferentially triggered during

2791:   the early formation stages of the cluster but then preferentially

2792:   quenched thereafter by the high density environment.

2793: %This means

2794: %  that it is unlikely that clusters are more efficient at inducing 

2795: %  dusty starbursts than the field environment unless that phase in a

2796: %  galaxy's evolution is very short-lived.  The differential evolution

2797: %  in the cluster and field 5.8$\micron$ and 8.0$\micron$ LFs is

2798: %  most simply explained by the continual quenching of star formation in

2799: %  infalling field galaxies.

2800: \end{itemize}

2801: \indent

2802: %The overall picture from these data is that the majority of

2803: %  the stellar mass in clusters is assembled into massive galaxies by at

2804: %  least $z \sim$ 1, and that the bulk of the stars in these

2805: %  galaxies have formed at

2806: %  even higher redshift ($z >$ 1.5).  At $z =$ 0.65 the amount of

2807: %  dusty star formation (as inferred by the 8.0$\micron$ LFs) is

2808: %  roughly similar in the field and cluster environment, which suggests

2809: %  that the cluster population is likely dominated by infalling field

2810: %  galaxies at high redshift or else that environmental processes which change the

2811: %  properties of cluster galaxies are not yet active.  The number

2812: %  of dusty star forming galaxies in clusters decreases rapidly with

2813: %  decreasing redshift, the equivalent of a MIR Butcher-Oemler

2814: %  Effect.  This evolution

2815: %  is likely caused by the truncation of star formation in the

2816: %  cluster environment.  If most of the star forming galaxies that are

2817: %  accreted at higher redshift have their star formation truncated

2818: %  quickly after entering the cluster environment then this would

2819: %  reconcile the idea that most of the stars in cluster galaxies are old,

2820: %  despite the fact that there are strongly star forming systems in

2821: %  clusters.  Put another way, the rapid truncation of star formation in

2822: %  the cluster environment  ensures that the evolution of the

2823: %  colors and luminosities of cluster galaxies follows that of an old

2824: %  population, because no new stars are formed once the galaxies are

2825: %  accreted.  

2826: A well-sampled spectroscopic study of several

2827:   high-redshift clusters with MIR data would be extremely valuable

2828:   for verifying our interpretation of the IRAC cluster LFs

2829:   because it is always difficult to draw incontrovertible

2830:   conclusions from LFs alone.  Still, the cluster LFs do show a strong increase in the

2831:   number of 5.8$\micron$ and 8.0$\micron$ sources in clusters with

2832:   increasing redshift which must almost certainly be attributed to

2833:   increased amounts of dusty star formation in higher redshift clusters.

2834: %that it is hard to support

2835: %  the idea that environmentally-induced dusty starbursts play an important role in the

2836: %  evolution of cluster galaxies given that the cluster always has less

2837: %  of these galaxies than the coeval field, and that most of the processes

2838: %  that could be responsible for inducing starbursts in the cluster

2839: %  environment such as harassment, or tidal forces, are more effective in massive clusters, yet 

2840: %  galaxies detected at 8.0$\micron$ are more abundant in higher-redshift clusters, which

2841: %  are less massive than their lower-redshift descendants.

2842: \newline\indent

2843: One of the strengths of this analysis is that it is based on a

2844: relatively large sample of galaxy clusters.  It has become

2845: clear from the handful of clusters studied thus far by $ISO$ and $Spitzer$

2846: that the MIR properties of cluster galaxies can be quite different from cluster to

2847: cluster.  They may depend  on dynamical state, mass, f$_{b}$,

2848: or other parameters (e.g., Coia et al. 2005; Geach et al. 2006).  The advantage of using many

2849: clusters is that it provides a metric of how the ``average''

2850: cluster is evolving as a function of redshift.  Detailed studies of individual

2851: clusters with significant ancillary data will pave the way to a better

2852: understanding of the physics behind the evolution of dusty star formation in

2853: cluster galaxies; however, large statistical studies such as this one will indicate

2854: whether the clusters studied in future work are representative of

2855: the cluster population as a whole, or are potentially rare, biased

2856: clusters with unusual properties caused by an ongoing merger or some other event.  

2857: \newline\indent

2858: It is worth noting that although the quality of the LFs

2859: provided by the 99 clusters in the FLS is good, these LFs

2860: would still

2861: benefit from a larger statistical sample.  In particular, a larger

2862: sample would allow for the separation of clusters by other

2863: properties such as mass or morphology, and to understand if these

2864: properties play a role in shaping the MIR cluster galaxy population.  We are currently

2865: working on a survey to detect clusters in the much larger SWIRE survey: the

2866: Spitzer Adaptation of the Red sequence Cluster Survey (SpARCS).  This

2867: project has 13 times more area than the FLS and is a factor of 2 deeper in

2868: integration time in the IRAC bands.  The analysis of that sample should provide a

2869: significant improvement in the quality of the cluster LFs.

2870: \acknowledgements

2871: We thank the anonymous referee whose comments improved this manuscript significantly.

2872: We would like to thank David Gilbank, Thomas Babbedge, Roberto De Propris, and

2873: Stefano Andreon for graciously making their data available to us.

2874: We thank David Gilbank for useful conversations which

2875: helped improve the clarity of this analysis.  We also thank Dario

2876: Fadda for recomputing the FLS R-band photometry using different apertures.

2877: A.M. acknowledges support from the $Spitzer$ Visiting Graduate Student

2878: Program during which much of this work was completed.  A.M. also

2879: acknowledges support from the National Sciences and Engineering

2880: Research Council (NSERC) in the form of PGS-A and PGSD2

2881: fellowships. 

2882: The work of H.K.C.Y. is supported by grants from the Canada Research

2883: Chair Program, NSERC, and the University of Toronto.    This work is based in part on observations made with the Spitzer Space

2884: Telescope, which is operated by the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California

2885: Institute of Technology under a contract with NASA.

2886: 

2887: %).  This is also potentially a biased

2888: %object.  So large statistical studies tells us again the average.

2889: %Although 4 sq deg is still subject to cosmic variance in terms of a

2890: %cluster catalogue, this project provides a {\it much} less biased look

2891: %at the average dusty properties of clusters galaxies than observing a

2892: %handful of clusters.  Those studies complement this work in that the

2893: %detailed ancillary data can be used to understand the processes

2894: %involved; however, without this study, it is unclear whether the few

2895: %clusters studies thus far are representative, or are somehow biased.

2896: %Given the wild variation in dusty star formation results, this suggests

2897: %the latter.  Mention SWIRE.

2898: %\section{Introduction1}

2899: %Clusters of galaxies are unique places in the universe.  They represent the largest collapsed structures in the universe and are also the sites of the most advanced stages of galaxy evolution.  The first cluster catalogues were generated by Zwicky (19XX) and Abell (19XX).  These catalogues were used extensively by early authors studying cluster galaxy evolution, and led to the discovery of some of the most fundamental properties of clusters.  Properties such as the color-magnitude relation (Bower et al., 1992), the morphology-density relation (Dressler, 1980) and the Butcher-Oemler effect (Butcher \& Oemler, 1984).   Subsequently, the advent of X-ray telescopes produced the first sample of massive clusters at redshifts greater then 0.3.  Surveys such as the Einstein Medium Sensitivity Survey (EMSS) and ROSAT Distant Cluster Survey (RDCS) found clusters as high as redshift xx.  Since then enormous effort has been devoted exploring whether the properties of low-{\it z} clusters extend to higher redshifts, and what the physical processes cause them are.  Dressler et al., (1997) showed that the morphology density relation holds at {\it z} $>$ 0.5, however the S0 population is significantly decreased compared to lower redshifts.  Ellis et al., (1997),  Stanford et al., (1998) and Holden (2004) showed that the color-magnitude relation exists in clusters at redshifts as high as 1.27, and that its evolution is consistent with a passively evolving set of galaxies formed at high ({\it z} $>$ 2.0) redshift.  De Propris et al., (1999) studied the evolution of the K band luminosity function of the Stanford et al., (1995) sample and also found that it is consistent with a passively evolving population of galaxies formed at high redshift.  Subsequent studies of the few clusters known at {\it z} > 1.0 have confirmed these findings (e.g. Toft et al., 2003, Ellis \& Jones 2003).  van Dokkum \& Stanford (1999) studied the fundamental plane for early types in high redshift cluster and confirmed the high-{\it z} formation scenario.  From these studies, a generic picture of cluster galaxy evolution has evolved.  Namely that the dominant early type population has existed in clusters since high redshift and that the evolution of cluster galaxies passive.  Authors such as Abraham et al., (1996); Treu et al.., (2004); Balogh et al., (1999); Ellingson et al., (2001) have argued that the evolution in cluster blue fraction has been due to the truncation of star formation in infalling blue galaxies and that their subsequent evolution is consistent with a passively evolving population.

2900: %\newline\indent

2901: %Since then new techniques for selecting clusters using optical imaging data have allowed us to significantly expand the sample of clusters known at high redshift, and have 

2902: 

2903: 

2904: %Most studies of high redshift cluster galaxy evolution have been based on systems discovered in these surveys.  From these systems we have managed  (e.g. Poggianti et al., 1999; Balogh et al., 1999; van Dokkum et al., 1999; Abraham et al., 1996; Treu et al., 2004).  

2905: 

2906: 

2907: \begin{thebibliography}{}

2908: \bibitem{ab58} Abell, G. O. 1958, ApJS, 3, 211

2909: \bibitem{ab96} Abraham, R. G., et al. 1996, AJ, 471, 694

2910: \bibitem{ad07} Adelman-McCarthy et al. 2007, AJ, in-prep

2911: \bibitem{and06} Andreon, S. 2006, A\&A, 448, 447

2912: \bibitem{and04} Andreon, S., Lobo, C., \& Iovino, A. 2004, MNRAS, 349, 889

2913: \bibitem{bab06} Babbedge, T. S. R., et al. 2006, MNRAS, 370, 1159

2914: \bibitem{bah03} Bahcall, N. A., et al. 2003, ApJSS, 148, 243

2915: \bibitem{bai07} Bai, L., et al. 2007, ApJ, 664, 181

2916: \bibitem{ba06} Balogh, M. L. et al. 2007, MNRAS, 374, 1169

2917: \bibitem{B01} Balogh, M. L., Christlein, D., Zabludoff, A. I.,

2918:   Zaritsky, D. 2001, ApJ, 557, 117

2919: \bibitem{b99} Balogh, M., Morris, S. L., Yee, H. K. C., Carlberg,

2920:   R. G., \& Ellingson, E. 1999, ApJ, 527, 54

2921: \bibitem{bar06} Barkhouse, W. A. et al. 2006, ApJ, 645, 955

2922: \bibitem{bek03} Bekki, K., \& Couch, W. J. 2003, ApJ, 596, L13

2923: \bibitem{bel03} Bell, E., McIntosh, D. H., Katz, N., \& Weinberg,

2924:   M. D. 2003, ApJSS, 149, 289

2925: \bibitem{bel01} Bell, E., \& de Jong, R. S., ApJ, 550, 212

2926: \bibitem{ber96} Bertin, E., \& Arnouts, S. 1996, A\&AS, 117, 393

2927: \bibitem{biv04} Biviano, A., et al. 2004, A\&A, 425, 33

2928: \bibitem{bla03} Blakeslee, J. P., et al. 2003, ApJ, 596, L143 

2929: \bibitem{bli04} Blindert, K., Yee, H. K. C., Gladders, M. D., \&

2930:   Ellingson, E. 2004, in IAU Coll. No. 195, Outskirts of Galaxy

2931:   Clusters: Intense Life in the Suburbs, ed. A. Diaferio, 215

2932: \bibitem{bow02} Bower, R. G., Lucey, J. R., \& Ellis, R. S., 1992, MNRAS,

2933:   254, 601

2934: \bibitem{bri99} Brinchmann, J. 1999, Ph.D. thesis, Cambridge Univ

2935: \bibitem{bro06} Brodwin, M., et al. 2006, ApJ, 651, 791

2936: \bibitem{Bru03} Bruzual, G., \& Charlot, S. 2003, MNRAS, 344, 1000

2937: \bibitem{but84} Butcher, H., \& Oemler, A. J. 1984, ApJ, 285, 426

2938: \bibitem{cal05} Calzetti, D. et al. 2005, ApJ, 633, 871

2939: \bibitem{cho06} Choi, P., et al. 2006, ApJ, 637, 227

2940: \bibitem{chr05} Christlein, D. \& Zabludoff, A. I. 2005, ApJ, 621, 201

2941: \bibitem{Coi05} Coia, D., et al. 2005, A\&A, 431, 433

2942: \bibitem{cop08} Cooper, M. et al. 2008, MNRAS, 383, 1058

2943: \bibitem{cor07} Cortese, L., et al. 2007, MNRAS, 376, 157

2944: \bibitem{dal05} Dale, D. A., et al. 2005, ApJ, 633, 857

2945: \bibitem{dep07} De Propris, R., Stanford, S. A., Eisenhardt, P. R.,

2946:   Holder, B. P., \& Rosati, P. 2007, AJ, 133, 2209

2947: \bibitem{dep99} De Propris, R., Stanford, S. A., Eisenhardt, P. R.,

2948:   Dickinson, M., \& Elston, R. 1999, AJ, 118, 719

2949: \bibitem{dre08} Dressler, A., Rigby, J., Oemler, A., Fritz, J.,

2950:   Poggianti, B., Rieke, G., \& Bai, L. 2008, arXiv:0806.2343

2951: \bibitem{dre04} Dressler, A., Oemler, A., Poggianti, B., Smail, I.,

2952:   Trager, S., Schectman, S., Couch, W., \& Ellis R. S. 2004, ApJ, 617, 867

2953: \bibitem{dre99} Dressler, A., Smail, I., Poggianti, B. M., Butcher, H.,

2954:   Couch, W. J., Ellis, R. S., \& Oemler, A. 1999, ApJSS, 122, 51

2955: \bibitem{dre97} Dressler, A., et al. 1997, Apj, 490, 577

2956: \bibitem{dre85} Dressler, A., Thompson, I. B., \& Shechtman,

2957:   S. A. 1985, ApJ, 288, 481

2958: \bibitem{duc02} Duc, P.-A., et al. 2002, A\&A, 382, 60

2959: \bibitem{eas07} Eastman, J., Martini, P., Sivakoff, G., Kelson, D. D.,

2960:   Mulchaey, J. S., \& Tran, K.-V. 2007, ApJ, in-press

2961: \bibitem{ein08} Eisenhardt, P. et al. 2008, arXiv:0804.4798

2962: \bibitem{ein04} Eisenhardt, P. et al. 2004, ApJSS, 154, 48

2963: \bibitem{elb07} Elbaz, D. et al. 2007, A\&A, 468, 33

2964: \bibitem{ell01} Ellingson, E., Lin, H., Yee, H. K. C., \& Carlberg,

2965:   R. G. 2001, ApJ, 547, 609

2966: \bibitem{ell97} Ellis, R. S., Smail, I., Dressler, A., Couch, W. J.,

2967:   Oemler, A., Butcher, H., \& Sharples, R. M. 1997, ApJ, 483, 582

2968: \bibitem{fab03} Faber, S., et al. 2003, Proc. of the SPIE,

2969: 4841, 1657, edited by Iye, Masanori, \& Moorwood, Alan F. M.

2970: \bibitem{fad07} Fadda, D., Biviano, A., Marleau, F. R.,

2971:   Storrie-Lombardi, L. J., \& Durret F. 2007, arXiv:0711.2561 

2972: \bibitem{fad04} Fadda, D., Jannuzi, B. T., Ford, A., \&

2973:   Storrie-Lombardi, L. J. 2004, AJ, 128, 1

2974: \bibitem{fad00} Fadda, D., Elbaz, D., Duc, P.-A., Flores, H.,

2975:   Franceschini, A., Cesarsky, C. J., \& Moorwood, A. F. M. 2000, A\&A,

2976:   361, 827

2977: \bibitem{gal06} Gallazzi, A., Charlot, S., Brinchmann, J., \& White,

2978:   S. D. M. 2006, MNRAS, 370, 1106

2979: \bibitem{Gea06} Geach, J. E., et al. 2006, ApJ, 649, 661

2980: \bibitem{Gil07} Gilbank, D. G., Yee, H. K. C., Ellingson, E.,

2981:   Gladders, M. D., Barrientos, L. F., \& Blindert, K. 2007, AJ, 134, 282

2982: \bibitem{gil04} Gilbank, D. G., Bower, R. G., Castander, F. J.,

2983:   \& Ziegler, B. L. 2004, MNRAS, 348, 551

2984: \bibitem{Gil73} Gillett, F. C., Forrest, W. J., \& Merrill,

2985:   K. M. 1973, 183, 87

2986: \bibitem{glad98} Gladders, M. D., Lopez-Cruz, O., Yee, H. K. C.,

2987:   \& Kodama, T., 1998, ApJ, 501, 571

2988: \bibitem{glad00} Gladders, M. D., \& Yee, H. K. C., 2000, AJ, 120, 2148

2989:   (GY00)

2990: \bibitem{glad05} Gladders, M. D., \& Yee, H. K. C. 2005, ApJSS 157, 1

2991: \bibitem{gla04} Glazebrook, K., et al. Nat, 430, 181

2992: \bibitem{hai03} Haiman, Z., Mohr, J. J., \& Holder, G. P. 2003, ApJ,

2993:   553, 545

2994: \bibitem{hold05} Holden, B. P., et al. 2005, ApJ, 620, L83

2995: \bibitem{Hol04} Holden, B. P., Stanford, S. A., Eisenhardt, P.,

2996:   \& Dickinson, M. 2004, AJ, 127, 2484

2997: \bibitem{hom06} Homeier, N. L., et al. 2006, ApJ, 647, 256

2998: \bibitem{hua07} Huang, J.-S. et al. 2007, ApJ, in-press

2999: \bibitem{Kod04} Kodama, T., Balogh, M. L., Smail, I., Bower, R. G., \&

3000:   Nakata, F. 2004, MNRAS, 354, 1103

3001: \bibitem{koe07} Koester, B. P., et al. 2007, ApJ, 660, 239

3002: \bibitem{lac05} Lacy, M. et al. 2005, ApJSS, 161, 41

3003: \bibitem{le05} Le Floc'h, E., et al. 2005, ApJ, 632, 169

3004: \bibitem{lil96} Lilly, S. J., Le F\'{e}vre, O., Hammer, F., \&

3005:   Crampton, D. 1996, ApJ, 460, L1

3006: \bibitem{Lin06} Lin, Y.-T., Mohr, J. J., Gonzalez, A. H., \& Stanford,

3007:   S. A. 2006, ApJ, 650, L99

3008: \bibitem{Lin04} Lin, Y.-T., Mohr, J. J., \& Stanford, S. A. 2004, ApJ,

3009:   610, 745

3010: \bibitem{lin03} Lin, Y.-T., Mohr, J. J., \& Stanford, S. A. 2003, ApJ,

3011:   591, 749

3012: \bibitem{loh07} Loh, Y.S., Ellingson, E., Yee, H.K.C., Gladders, M.D.,

3013:   Barrientos, L.F., \& Gilbank, D.G. 2008, ApJ, in press (arXiv0802.3726)

3014: \bibitem{lon79} Longair, M. S., \& Seldner, M. 1979, MNRAS, 189, 433

3015: \bibitem{lon03} Lonsdale, C. J., et al. 2003, PASP, 115, 897

3016: \bibitem{lop04} Lopez-Cruz, O., Barkhouse, W. A., \& Yee,

3017:   H. K. C. 2004, ApJ, 614, 679

3018: \bibitem{mar06} Marcillac, D., Rigby, J. R., Rieke, G. H., \& Kelly,

3019:   D. M. 2007, ApJ, 654, 825

3020: \bibitem{mar01} Margoniner, V. E., De Carvalho, R. R., Gal, R. R.,

3021:   \& Djorgovski, S. G., 2001, ApJ, 548, L143

3022: \bibitem{mar07} Marleau, F. R., Fadda, D., Appleton, P. N.,

3023:   Noriega-Crespo, A., Im, M., \& Clancy, D. 2007, ApJ, in-press

3024: \bibitem{mar07} Martini, P., Mulchaey, J. S., \& Kelson, D. D. 2007,

3025:   ApJ, in-press

3026: \bibitem{mas90} Massey, P., \& Gronwall, C. 1990, ApJ, 358, 344

3027: \bibitem{mcc04} McCarthy, P. J., et al. 2004, ApJ, 614, L9

3028: \bibitem{mei06} Mei, S., et al. 2006, ApJ, 644, 759

3029: \bibitem{met00} Metevier, A. J., Romer, A. K., \& Ulmer, M. P. 2000, AJ,

3030:   119, 1090

3031: \bibitem{mon98} Monet, D., et al. 1998, USNO-A2.0 (Flagstaff: US Nav. Obs.)

3032: \bibitem{mor06} Moran, S. M., Ellis, R. S., Treu, T., Salim, S., Rich,

3033:   R. M., Smith, G. P., Kneib, J.-P. 2006, ApJ, 641, L97

3034: \bibitem{mor05} Moran, S. M., Ellis, R. S., Treu, T., Smail, I.,

3035:   Dressler, A., Coil, A. L., \& Smith, G. P. 2005, ApJ, 634, 977

3036: \bibitem{mos00} Moss, C. \& Whittle, M. 2000, MNRAS, 317, 667

3037: \bibitem{Muz07a} Muzzin, A., Yee, H. K. C., Hall, P. B., Ellingson, E.,

3038:   \& Lin, H. 2007, ApJ, 659, 1106

3039: \bibitem{Muz07b} Muzzin, A., Yee, H. K. C., Hall, P. B.,

3040:   \& Lin, H. 2007, ApJ, 663, 150

3041: \bibitem{nel05} Nelan, J. E., Smith, R. J., Hudson, M. J., Wegner,

3042:   G. A., Lucey, J. R., Moore, S. A. W., Quinney, S. J., \& Suntzeff, N. B. 2005, ApJ, 632, 137

3043: \bibitem{ow00} Owen, F. N., Ledlow, M. J., Keel, W. C., Wang, Q. D.,

3044:   \& Morrison, G. E. 2005, AJ, 129, 31

3045: \bibitem{owe99} Owen, F. N., Ledlow, M. J., Keel, W. C., \& Morrison,

3046:   G. E. 1999, AJ, 118, 633

3047: \bibitem{pap06} Papovich, C., et al. 2006, AJ, 132, 231

3048: \bibitem{pog06} Poggianti, B. et al. 2006,  ApJ, 642, 188

3049: \bibitem{pg99} 	Poggianti, B. M., Smail, I., Dressler, A., Couch,

3050:   W. J., Barger, A. J., Butcher, H., Ellis, R. S., \& Oemler, A. 1999,

3051:   ApJ, 518, 576

3052: \bibitem{pos05} Postman, M., et al. 2005, ApJ, 623, 721

3053: \bibitem{pop07} Popesso, P., Biviano, A., Romaniello, M., \&

3054:   B\"{o}hringer, H. 2007, A\&A, 461, 411

3055: \bibitem{pre92} Press, W. H., Tuekolsky, S. A., \& Vetterling, W. T.,

3056:   Flannery, B. P. 1992, Numerical Recipes in Fortran 77, Vol 1; Second

3057:   Edition; Cambridge, Cambridge University Press

3058: \bibitem{rak95} Rakos, K. D., \& Schombert, J. M. 1995, ApJ, 439, 47

3059: \bibitem{rin05} Rines, K., Geller, M. J., Kurtz, M. J., \& Diaferio,

3060:   A. 2005, AJ, 130, 1482

3061: \bibitem{Rin04} Rines, K., Geller, M. J., Diaferio, A., Kurtz, M. J.,

3062:   \& Jarrett, T. H. 2004, AJ, 128, 1078

3063: \bibitem{san08} Saintonge, A., Tran, K.-V., \& Holden, B. P., 2008, arXiv:0806.2157

3064: \bibitem{Sch76} Schechter, P. 1976, ApJ, 203, 297

3065: \bibitem{sch05} Schiminovich, D., et al. 2005, ApJ, 619, L47

3066: \bibitem{shi04} Shioya, Y., Bekki, K., \& Couch, W. J. 2004, ApJ, 601,

3067:   654 

3068: \bibitem{Skr06} Skrutskie, M. F., et al. 2006, AJ, 131, 1163

3069: \bibitem{sma98} Smail, I., Edge, A., Ellis, R. S., \& Blandford,

3070:   R. D. 1998, MNRAS, 293, 124

3071: \bibitem{Smi05} Smith, G. P., Treu, T., Ellis, R. S., Moran, S. M.,

3072:   \& Dressler, A. 2005, ApJ, 620, 78

3073: \bibitem{Sta98} Stanford, S. A., Eisenhardt, P. R., \& Dickinson,

3074:   1998, ApJ, 491, 461

3075: \bibitem{str06} Strazzullo, V., et al. 2006, A\&A, 450, 909

3076: \bibitem{Tof04} Toft, S., Mainieri, V., Rosati, P., Lidman, C.,

3077:   Demarco, R., Nonino, M., \& Stanford, S. A. 2004, A\&A, 422, 29

3078: \bibitem{tra07} Tran, K.-V. H., Franx, M., Illingworth, G. D., van

3079:   Dokkum, P., Kelson, D. D., Blakeslee, J. P., \& Postman, M. 2007,

3080:   ApJ, in-press

3081: \bibitem{tra05} Tran, K.-V., van Dokkum, P., Illingworth, G. D.,

3082:   Kelson, D., Gonzalez, A., \& Franx, M. 2005a, ApJ, 619, 134

3083: \bibitem{Tra05} Tran, K.-V., van Dokkum, P., Franx, M., Illingworth,

3084:   G. D., Kelson, D. D., Schreiber, N. M. F. 2005b, ApJ, 627, L25

3085: \bibitem{Tre03} Treu, T., et al. 2003, ApJ, 591, 53

3086: \bibitem{van03} van Dokkum, P. G., \& Stanford, S. A. 2003, ApJ, 585, 78

3087: \bibitem{van98} van Dokkum, P. G., Franx, M., Kelson, D. D.,

3088:   \& Illingworth, G. 1998, ApJ, 504, L17

3089: \bibitem{wil77} Willner, S. P., Soifer, B. T., Russell, R. W., Joyce,

3090:   R. R. \& Gillett, F. C. 1977, ApJ, 217, L121

3091: \bibitem{wil06} Wilson, G., et al. 2007, ApJ, 660, L59

3092: \bibitem{wil02} Wilson, G., Cowie, L. L., Barger, A. J., \& Burke,

3093:   D. J. 2002, AJ, 124, 1258

3094: \bibitem{wol05} Wolf, C., Gray, M. E., \& Meisenheimer, K. 2005, A\&A

3095:   443, 435

3096: \bibitem{wu05} Wu, H., Cao, C., Hao, C.-N., Liu, F.-S., Wang, J.-L.,

3097:   Xia, X.-Y., Deng, Z.-G., \& Young, C. K.-S. 2005, ApJ, 632, L79

3098: \bibitem{yee07} Yee, H. K. C., Gladders, M. D., Gilbank, D. G.,

3099:   Majumdar, S., Hoekstra, H., \& Ellingson, E., 2007, astro-ph 0701839

3100: \bibitem{yee03} Yee, H. K. C., \& Ellingson, E. 2003, ApJ, 585, 215

3101: \bibitem{yee99} Yee, H. K. C., \& Lopez-Cruz, O., 1999, AJ, 117, 1985

3102: \bibitem{zw61} Zwicky, F., Herzog, E., \& Wild, P. 1961, Catalogue of

3103:   Galaxies and Clusters of Galaxies (Pasadena: California Institute of

3104:   Technology (CIT)) 

3105: \end{thebibliography}

3106: \include{tab1}

3107: \include{tab2}

3108: 

3109: \end{document}

3110: