1: %%
2: %% Beginning of file 'sample.tex'
3: %%
4: %% Modified 2004 January 9
5: %%
6: %% This is a sample manuscript marked up using the
7: %% AASTeX v5.x LaTeX 2e macros.
8:
9: %% The first piece of markup in an AASTeX v5.x document
10: %% is the \documentclass command. LaTeX will ignore
11: %% any data that comes before this command.
12:
13: %% The command below calls the preprint style
14: %% which will produce a one-column, single-spaced document.
15: %% Examples of commands for other substyles follow. Use
16: %% whichever is most appropriate for your purposes.
17: %%
18: %% \documentclass[12pt,preprint]{aastex}
19:
20: %% manuscript produces a one-column, double-spaced document:
21:
22: %% \documentclass[manuscript]{aastex}
23:
24: %% preprint2 produces a double-column, single-spaced document:
25:
26: %% \documentclass[twocolumn,apjl]{emulateapj}
27:
28: %% Sometimes a paper's abstract is too long to fit on the
29: %% title page in preprint2 mode. When that is the case,
30: %% use the longabstract style option.
31:
32: \documentclass[preprint2,longabstract]{aastex}
33:
34: %% If you want to create your own macros, you can do so
35: %% using \newcommand. Your macros should appear before
36: %% the \begin{document} command.
37: %%
38: %% If you are submitting to a journal that translates manuscripts
39: %% into SGML, you need to follow certain guidelines when preparing
40: %% your macros. See the AASTeX v5.x Author Guide
41: %% for information.
42:
43: \newcommand{\vdag}{(v)^\dagger}
44: \newcommand{\myemail}{mxseigar@ualr.edu}
45:
46: %% You can insert a short comment on the title page using the command below.
47:
48: %\slugcomment{To Appear in Astrophysical Journal}
49:
50: %% If you wish, you may supply running head information, although
51: %% this information may be modified by the editorial offices.
52: %% The left head contains a list of authors,
53: %% usually a maximum of three (otherwise use et al.). The right
54: %% head is a modified title of up to roughly 44 characters.
55: %% Running heads will not print in the manuscript style.
56:
57: \shorttitle{THE DARK MATTER HALO PROFILE OF MALIN 1}
58: \shortauthors{SEIGAR}
59:
60: %% This is the end of the preamble. Indicate the beginning of the
61: %% paper itself with \begin{document}.
62:
63: \begin{document}
64:
65: %% LaTeX will automatically break titles if they run longer than
66: %% one line. However, you may use \\ to force a line break if
67: %% you desire.
68:
69: %\title{Determination of the mass distribution in disk galaxies from spiral arm morphology. I. Constraints on galaxy formation models}
70: \title{A cosmologically motivated description of the dark matter halo profile for the Low Surface Brightness Galaxy, Malin 1}
71:
72: %% Use \author, \affil, and the \and command to format
73: %% author and affiliation information.
74: %% Note that \email has replaced the old \authoremail command
75: %% from AASTeX v4.0. You can use \email to mark an email address
76: %% anywhere in the paper, not just in the front matter.
77: %% As in the title, use \\ to force line breaks.
78:
79: \author{Marc S.\ Seigar}
80: \affil{Department of Physics \& Astronomy, University of Arkansas at Little Rock, 2801 S.\ University Avenue, Little Rock, AR 72204}
81: \affil{Arkansas Center for Space and Planetary Sciences, 202 Old Museum Building, University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, AR 72701}
82:
83: %% Notice that each of these authors has alternate affiliations, which
84: %% are identified by the \altaffilmark after each name. Specify alternate
85: %% affiliation information with \altaffiltext, with one command per each
86: %% affiliation.
87:
88:
89: %% Mark off your abstract in the ``abstract'' environment. In the manuscript
90: %% style, abstract will output a Received/Accepted line after the
91: %% title and affiliation information. No date will appear since the author
92: %% does not have this information. The dates will be filled in by the
93: %% editorial office after submission.
94:
95: \begin{abstract}
96: In this paper we derive a possible mass profile for the low surface brightness
97: galaxy, Malin 1, based upon previously published space-based and ground-based
98: photometric properties and kinematics. We use
99: properties of the bulge, normal disk, outer extended disk and \ion{H}{1} mass
100: as inputs into mass profile models. We find that the dark matter halo model
101: of Malin 1 is best described by a halo profile that has undergone
102: adiabatic contraction, inconsistent with the findings for most disk galaxies to
103: date, yet consistent with rotation curve studies of M31. More
104: importantly, we find that Malin 1 is baryon dominated in its central regions
105: out to a
106: radius of $\sim10$ kpc (in the bulge region).
107: Low-surface brightness galaxies are often
108: referred to as being dark matter dominated at all radii.
109: If this is the case, then Malin 1 would seem to
110: have characteristics similar to those of
111: normal barred disk galaxies, as suggested by other recent
112: work. We also find that Malin 1 also falls on the rotation curve shear versus
113: spiral arm pitch angle relation for normal galaxies, although more LSB galaxies
114: need to be studied to determine if this is typical.
115: \end{abstract}
116:
117: %% Keywords should appear after the \end{abstract} command. The uncommented
118: %% example has been keyed in ApJ style. See the instructions to authors
119: %% for the journal to which you are submitting your paper to determine
120: %% what keyword punctuation is appropriate.
121:
122: %% Authors who wish to have the most important objects in their paper
123: %% linked in the electronic edition to a data center may do so in the
124: %% subject header. Objects should be in the appropriate "individual"
125: %% headers (e.g. quasars: individual, stars: individual, etc.) with the
126: %% additional provision that the total number of headers, including each
127: %% individual object, not exceed six. The \objectname{} macro, and its
128: %% alias \object{}, is used to mark each object. The macro takes the object
129: %% name as its primary argument. This name will appear in the paper
130: %% and serve as the link's anchor in the electronic edition if the name
131: %% is recognized by the data centers. The macro also takes an optional
132: %% argument in parentheses in cases where the data center identification
133: %% differs from what is to be printed in the paper.
134:
135: \keywords{Galaxies}
136:
137: %% From the front matter, we move on to the body of the paper.
138: %% In the first two sections, notice the use of the natbib \citep
139: %% and \citet commands to identify citations. The citations are
140: %% tied to the reference list via symbolic KEYs. The KEY corresponds
141: %% to the KEY in the \bibitem in the reference list below. We have
142: %% chosen the first three characters of the first author's name plus
143: %% the last two numeral of the year of publication as our KEY for
144: %% each reference.
145:
146: \section{Introduction}
147:
148:
149:
150: \begin{deluxetable}{ll}
151: \tabletypesize{\scriptsize}
152: \tablecaption{Properties of the bulge, inner and outer disk and dark matter halo of Malin 1}
153: %\tablecolumns{2}
154: \tablewidth{0pt}
155: \label{tab1}
156: \tablehead{
157: \colhead{Property} & \colhead{Measurement}\\
158: }
159: \startdata
160: Bulge effective radius$^1$, $R_e$ & 0.6 kpc \\
161: Bulge effective surface brightness$^1$, $\mu_e$ & 16.8 mag arcsec$^{-2}$\\
162: Inner disk scalelength$^1$, $h_{\rm in}$ & 4.8 kpc \\
163: Inner disk central surface brightness$^1$, $I_{\rm in_0}$ & 20.1 mag arcsec$^{-2}$\\
164: Outer disk scalelength$^2$, $h_{\rm out}$ & 53 kpc\\
165: Outer disk central surface brightness$^2$, $I_{\rm out_0}$\hspace*{1.5cm} & 24.8 mag arcsec$^{-2}$\\
166: \ion{H}{1} mass$^3$, $M_{\rm HI}$ & $(6.8\pm0.7)\times10^{10} M_{\odot}$\\
167: Spiral arm pitch angle, $P$ & $25\fdg0\pm1\fdg0$\\
168: Halo concentration, $c_{\rm vir}$ & 8\\
169: Halo virial mass, $M_{\rm vir}$ & $2.6\times10^{12} M_{\odot}$\\
170: \enddata
171: \tablenotetext{1}{From Barth (2007) who used an HST/WFPC F814W ($I$-band) image of Malin 1 to perform a two-dimensional structural decomposition into bulge and disk components.}
172: \tablenotetext{2}{From Moore \& Parker (2007) who determine properties of the outer disk from a deep ground-based $R$-band image of Malin 1.}
173: \tablenotetext{3}{From Pickering et al.\ (1997).}
174: \end{deluxetable}
175:
176:
177:
178:
179:
180:
181:
182:
183:
184:
185:
186:
187:
188: Malin 1 is a highly unusual disk galaxy characterized by an enormous
189: \ion{H}{1} rich and extremely low surface brightness disk (Bothun et al.\ 1987;
190: Pickering et al.\ 1997). It has the largest radial extent of any known spiral
191: galaxy, with low surface brightness emission extending out to $\sim100$ kpc,
192: and its disk was found to have an extrapolated central surface brighness of
193: only $\mu_0\simeq25.5$ mag arcsec$^{-2}$ in the $V$-band (Bothun et al.\ 1987;
194: Impey \& Bothun 1989), with an exponential disk scalelength of $\sim50-70$ kpc
195: (e.g., Moore \& Parker 2007). Although it has a very low surface brightness,
196: its optical luminosity is $M_v\simeq-22.9$ mag (Pickering et al.\ 1997), due to
197: its large extent. It also has an extremely high gas mass, with an estimated
198: \ion{H}{1} mass of $\sim7\times10^{10}M_{\odot}$ (Pickering et al.\ 1997;
199: Matthews et al.\ 2001). As a result Malin 1 is often considered a Low Surface
200: Brightness (LSB) galaxy. However, recent studies of Malin 1 have started
201: to highlight features more typical of normal disk galaxies (e.g., Barth
202: 2007). The analysis of a {\em Hubble Space Telescope} (HST) WFPC2 F814W
203: ($I$-band) image
204: presented by Barth (2007) shows that Malin 1 possesses an inner
205: normal stellar disk, with characteristics similar to those in regular disk
206: galaxies. They calculate an exponential disk scalelength of $\sim 5$ kpc
207: and a disk central surface brightness of $\sim20$ mag arcsec$^{-2}$. These
208: data suggest that Malin 1 has characteristics similar to those of
209: normal disk galaxies, in particular
210: barred lenticular galaxies (SBOs), which typically
211: show an outer disk with a larger disk scalelength (Aguirre et al.\ 2005).
212: Moore \& Parker (2007) have also recently presented a deep ground-based
213: image of Malin 1, which shows spiral structure in its inner disk, another
214: hint that Malin 1 may be more closely related to normal disk galaxies than
215: originally thought. Indeed, Malin 1 may have much in common with the
216: recently discovered class of objects that host extended ultraviolet (XUV)
217: disks, such as M83 (Thilker et al.\ 2005) and NGC 4625 (Gil de Paz et al.\
218: 2005). All of these objects have apparently normal disks, but are surrounded
219: by very extended low surface brightness emission (sometimes missed entirely
220: in the optical) that shows up in the UV as a result of recent star formation.
221:
222: In this paper we make use of a recently published \ion{H}{1} rotation curve
223: (Sancisi \& Fraternali 2007) to determine a possible mass profile for Malin 1.
224: We use the bulge/disk decomposition from Barth (2007) and the properties
225: of the outer disk from Moore \& Parker (2007) in our model. We also take
226: into account the \ion{H}{1} mass from Pickering et al.\ (1997). The mass
227: models produced show that Malin 1 is baryon dominated out to a radius of
228: $\sim$15 kpc. As LSB galaxies are typically dark matter dominated down to
229: small radii (e.g., de Blok \& McGaugh 1997; Kuzio de Naray et al.\ 2008)
230: on the surface it would appear that LSB may not be typical of LSB galaxies.
231: However, it should be noted that the studies presented by de Blok \&
232: McGaugh (1997) and Kuzio de Naray et al.\ (2006, 2008) consisted of dwarf
233: LSB galaxies, which seem to be dark matter dominated beyond the inner
234: $\sim$1 kpc and may be baryon dominated within this radius.
235: By extrapolation to much large giant LSB galaxies, such as
236: Malin 1, it is not implausible that these objects would also be baryon
237: dominated out to 10$-$15 kpc.
238: We also find that the rotation curve shear and spiral
239: arm structure of Malin 1 show that it sits nicely on the spiral pitch angle
240: versus shear relation for normal disk galaxies reported by Seigar et al.\
241: (2005, 2006). However, we also note that more LSB galaxies need to be
242: studied to determine if they typically fall on the same relation.
243:
244:
245: \section{Data}
246:
247: Throughout this paper we use previously published data to determine
248: characteristics of both the stellar, gaseous and dark matter components.
249: We use the {\em HST} {\tt WFPC2} F814W image described by Barth (2007)
250: and the characteristics of the bulge and inner disk described therein.
251: We also use the deep ground-based $R$-band image from Moore \& Parker (2007)
252: to determine the spiral arm pitch angle of Malin 1 and we also use their
253: exponential scalelength of the outer disk of Malin 1 in our description of
254: the baryonic mass profile.
255:
256: %% In a manner similar to \objectname authors can provide links to dataset
257: %% hosted at participating data centers via the \dataset{} command. The
258: %% second curly bracket argument is printed in the text while the first
259: %% parentheses argument serves as the valid data set identifier. Large
260: %% lists of data set are best provided in a table (see Table 3 for an example).
261: %% Valid data set identifiers should be obtained from the data center that
262: %% is currently hosting the data.
263:
264: \section{Mass modeling of Malin 1}
265:
266: \subsection{The baryonic contribution}
267:
268:
269: \begin{figure*}[t]
270: \special{psfile=f1_new.eps
271: hscale=75 vscale=75 hoffset=10 voffset=-350 angle=0}
272: %\includegraphics[scale=0.8]{f1_new.eps}
273: %\plotone{f1_new.eps}
274: \vspace*{8cm}
275: \caption{\ion{H}{1} rotation curve data from Sancisi \& Fraternali (2007) with best fitting model rotation curve (solid line) overlaid. Also plotted are the contributions from the bulge (long dashed line), the inner stellar disk (dot-dashed line), the outer \ion{H}{1}+stellar disk (dotted line) and the dark matter halo (short-dashed line). {\em Left panel}: non-AC model; {\em Right panel}: AC model.}
276: \label{malin1rotn}
277: \end{figure*}
278:
279:
280:
281:
282:
283:
284:
285: Our goal is to determine a cosmologically motivated mass model for
286: Malin 1. In order to estimate the baryonic contribution to the rotation
287: curve, we use published bulge, inner (stellar)
288: disk and outer (gas) disk properties.
289: We then determine several possible mass models and determine the model
290: that best describes the observed \ion{H}{1} rotation curve, by minimizing
291: the reduced-$\chi^2$.
292:
293: The characterstics of the bulge and inner disk are taken from Barth (2007)
294: who performed a 2-dimensional bulge/disk decomposition of Malin 1, based
295: on an {\em HST} {\tt WFPC2} F814W ($I$-band) image. We then use the
296: characteristics of the outer disk as determined from a deep ground-based
297: $R$-band image presented by Moore \& Parker (2007). The characteristics
298: of these components are listed in Table 1.
299:
300:
301:
302: We then assign masses to the bulge, inner disk and outer disk of Malin 1.
303: In order to do this we have made use of the study of 7 giant LSBs from
304: Sprayberry et al.\ (1995). Using their data, we determine
305: typical colors for the bulge and disk components for giant LSB galaxies
306: and apply these same colors to the bulge and disk components of Malin 1
307: (assuming the inner and outer disk have similar colors). We find that a
308: typical bulge color for LSB galaxies is $B-R=1.5\pm0.4$ and a typical
309: disk color is $B-R=1.2\pm0.2$. Based upon these colors we determine
310: a range of calibrated stellar mass-to-light ($M/L$) ratios for the
311: $I$-band and $R$-band from Bell et al.\ (2003) for the bulge,
312: $(M/L_I)_{\rm bulge}$, the inner disk, $(M/L_I)_{\rm disk}$, and the
313: outer disk, $(M/L_R)_{\rm disk}$. In our models we allow
314: mass-to-light ratios in the ranges of $1.5<(M/L_I)_{\rm bulge}<3.8$
315: $1.2<(M/L_I)_{\rm disk}<2.1$
316: (measured in $I$-band solar
317: units) and $1.3<(M/L_R)_{\rm disk}<2.7$ (measured in $R$-band solar
318: units), and we allow the mass-to-light ratios to vary in these ranges in
319: steps of 0.1.
320: Large ranges in mass-to-light ratios are used in order to take into
321: account the large scatter in the relationships presented by Bell et al.\
322: (2003). We use the bulge, inner disk and outer disk light profiles to
323: determine the stellar mass contribution
324: $M_{*}=(M/L_I)L_{\rm bulge}+(M/L_I)L_{\rm in}+(M/L_R)L_{\rm out}$, where
325: $L_{\rm bulge}$ is the I-band luminosity of the bulge, $L_{\rm in}$ is the
326: I-band luminosity of the inner disk and $L_{\rm out}$ is the R-band
327: luminosity of the outer extended disk.
328: This outer extended disk was seen in the deep imaging of Moore \& Parker
329: (2007) to extend to at least a radius of 124 kpc. This disk is dominated by
330: \ion{H}{1} gas and is estimated to have a mass of
331: $(6.8\pm0.7)\times10^{10}M_{\odot}$ (Pickering et al.\ 1997). In this paper we
332: also take into account this gas mass of the outer \ion{H}{1} disk and assume
333: that it follows the same exponential disk scalelength of 53 kpc as the low
334: surface brightness $R$-band disk determined by Moore \& Parker (2007).
335: We also add in a stellar component (as described above) based upon the
336: $R$ band surface brightness measurements of Moore \& Parker (2007) and the
337: above $M/L$ values. It turns out that the stellar mass and the gas mass in
338: the outer disk are approximately equal.
339:
340: \subsection{Modeling the dark matter halo}
341:
342: We now explore a range of allowed dark matter halo masses
343: and density profiles, adopting two extreme models for disk galaxy
344: formation. In the first we assume that the dark matter halo
345: surrounding Malin 1 has not responded significantly to
346: the formation of a disk, i.e., adiabatic contraction (AC) does
347: not occur. We refer to this as our ``non-AC'' model. In this case,
348: the dark matter contribution to the rotation curve is described
349: by a density profiles that mirrors those found in dissipationless
350: dark matter simulations,
351: \begin{equation}
352: \rho(r)=\frac{\rho_{s}}{(r/r_s)(1+r/r_s)^2},
353: \label{NFW}
354: \end{equation}
355: where $r_s$ is a characteristic ``inner'' radius, and $\rho_s$ is a
356: corresponding inner density. Here we have adopted the profile shape
357: of Navarro et al.\ (1996; hereafter NFW). The NFW profile is a
358: two-parameter function and is completely specified by choosing
359: two independent parameters, e.g., the virial mass $M_{\rm vir}$ (or virial
360: radius $R_{\rm vir}$) and concentration $c_{\rm vir}=R_{\rm vir}/r_s$ define
361: the profile
362: completely (see Bullock et al.\ 2001b for a discussion). Similarly,
363: given a virial mass $M_{\rm vir}$ and the dark matter circular velocity at
364: any radius, the halo concentration $c_{\rm vir}$ is completely determined.
365:
366: In the second class of models we adopt the scenario of adiabatic
367: contraction (AC) discussed by Blumenthal et al.\ (1986; see
368: also Bullock et al.\ 2001a and Pizagno et al.\ 2005). Here we assume
369: that the baryons and dark matter initially follow an NFW
370: profile and that the baryons cool and settle into the halo center
371: slowly compared to a typical orbital time. This slow infall provokes
372: an adiabatic contraction in the halo density distribution
373: and gives rise to a more concentrated dark matter profile. The
374: idea of adiabatic contraction was originally discussed as to explain
375: the ``conspiracy'' between dark halos and disk sizes that
376: gives rise to a featureless rotation curve (Rubin et al.\ 1985) but
377: has since proven to be remarkably accurate in describing the formation
378: of disk galaxies in numerical simulations (e.g., Gnedin
379: et al.\ 2004, and references therein), although the degree to which
380: this process operates in the real universe is currently uncertain.
381: For example, Dutton et al.\ (2005) showed that adiabatic contraction
382: models are inconsistent with the rotation curves measured
383: and the expected NFW concentrations for a sample of six galaxies.
384: They suggest that mechanisms such as stellar feedback and
385: stellar bars may result in less concentrated halos than predicted
386: by adiabatic concentration.
387:
388: In our AC model we take the contraction into account following
389: the prescription of Blumenthal et al.\ (1986). Note that Gnedin
390: et al.\ (2004) advocate a slightly modified prescription, but the
391: differences between the two methods are small compared to the
392: differences between our AC model and our non-AC model. In principle,
393: any observational probe that can distinguish between AC and
394: non-AC-type scenarios provides an important constraint on
395: the nature of gas infall into galaxies (i.e., was it fast or was it slow?).
396:
397: We iterate over the central and $\pm1\sigma$ values
398: found in the bulge-disk decompositions for $h$ and $L_{\rm disk}$ and explore
399: the values of mass-to-light ratio discussed above,
400: for the bulge $1.5<(M/L_I)_{\rm bulge}<3.8$ for the inner
401: disk $1.2<(M/L_I)_{\rm disk}<2.1$ and for the outer disk
402: $1.3<(M/L_R)_{\rm disk}2.7$. In each case we assume average
403: values for
404: $(M/L_I)_{\rm bulge}$, $(M/L_I)_{\rm disk}$ and $(M/L_R)_{\rm disk}$.
405: For each choice of bulge-inner disk-outer disk
406: model parameters and mass-to-light ratios, we allow the (initial) halo
407: NFW concentration parameter to vary over the range of viable
408: values, $c_{\rm vir}= 3 - 31$ (Bullock et al.\ 2001b). We then determine
409: the halo virial mass $M_{\rm vir}$ necessary to reproduce the rotation velocity
410: at 2.2 inner disk scalelengths ($V_{2.2_{\rm in}}=10.56$ kpc) and the rotation
411: velocity at 2.2 outer disk scalelengths ($V_{2.2_{\rm out}}=116.6$ kpc)
412: for the galaxy and determine the implied fraction of the mass in
413: the system in the form of stars compared to that ``expected'' from
414: the Universal baryon fraction, $f_{*}=M_{*}/(f_{b}M_{\rm vir})$. We make the
415: (rather loose) demand that $f_{*}$ lies within the range of plausible
416: values $0.01f_{b}<f_{*}<f_{b}$.
417:
418: \begin{deluxetable}{lcc}
419: \tabletypesize{\scriptsize}
420: \tablecaption{Malin 1 best fitting models.}
421: \tablewidth{0pt}
422: \label{tab2}
423: \tablehead{
424: \colhead{Parameter} & \colhead{non-AC} & \colhead{AC}\\
425: }
426: \startdata
427: Shear & 0.50$\pm$0.01 & 0.47$\pm$0.01 \\
428: NFW concentration, $c_{\rm vir}$ & 15 & 8 \\
429: Virial mass, $M_{\rm vir}$ ($M_{\odot}$) & $1.8\times10^{12}$ & $2.6\times10^{12}$ \\
430: Bulge mass-to-light ratio, $(M/L_I)_{\rm bulge}$ & 2.2 & 2.2 \\
431: Inner disk mass-to-light ratio, $(M/L_I)_{\rm disk}$ & 1.2 & 1.2 \\
432: Outer disk mass-to-light ratio, $(M/L_R)_{\rm disk}$ & 1.3 & 1.3 \\
433: $\chi^2/\nu$ & 2.45 & 1.30 \\
434: \enddata
435: \tablecomments{``non-AC'' is the best-fit model to the rotation curve from Sancisi \& Fraternali (2007) without adiabatic contration. ``AC'' is the best-fit model to the same rotation curve data using the Adiabatic Contraction prescription from Blumenthal et al.\ (1986).}
436: \end{deluxetable}
437:
438: For each chosen value of $c_{\rm vir}$ and adopted disk formation scenario
439: (AC or non-AC), the chosen values of $V_{2.2_{\rm in}}$ and $V_{2.2_{\rm out}}$
440: constraints define the rotation
441: curve completely and thus provide an implied shear rate
442: at every radius. Figure 1 shows the \ion{H}{1} rotation velocity data from
443: Sancisi \& Fraternali (2007) overlaid with
444: best-fitting model rotation curves that
445: we derive for Malin 1 for both the non-AC ({\em left panel}) and AC ({\em right
446: panel}) models. The best fit overall rotation curve model is divided
447: into its bulge, inner disk, outer disk and halo components. We find that the
448: best fitting rotation curve model is more consistent with a halo that has
449: undergone adiabatic contraction, rather than a pure NFW model. Our
450: preference for the AC model
451: is inconsistent with the findings that an adiatically contracted
452: halo model rarely describes the observed rotation curves of disk galaxies
453: (e.g., Kassin et al.\ 2006a, b), yet consistent with the rotation curve of
454: M31, which also appears to require adiabatic contraction (Klypin et al.\ 2002;
455: Seigar et al.\ 2008a).
456: Given the accumulation of evidence that the rotation curves of
457: disk galaxies (especially late-type disk galaxies with little or no bulge)
458: tend to be inconsistent with the predictions of AC, it is surprising that
459: our AC model seems to work best for Malin 1. Considering that the rotation
460: curve of M31 (the nearest and best-studied of galaxies) is also consistent
461: with the expectations of AC (e.g., Seigar et al. 2008a), maybe this suggests
462: that Malin 1 has properties similar to those of normal surface brightness,
463: bulge-dominated galaxies, of which to-date only a handful have been studied in
464: this manner. From here on, we adopt
465: our AC model as the fiducial model.
466: The virial mass, $M_{\rm vir}$, and concentration, $c_{\rm vir}$,
467: for the best fitting halo model are listed in Table 1.
468: Table 2 lists parameters of both the non-AC and AC models for comparison.
469: Figure 2 shows
470: the enclosed mass as a funtion of radius for our best-fitting AC
471: model, separated into bulge, inner disk, outer disk and halo components.
472:
473:
474:
475: \begin{figure}[t]
476: %\special{psfile=f2.eps
477: % hscale=35 vscale=35 hoffset=0 voffset=-240 angle=0}
478: \plotone{f2.eps}
479: %\vspace*{6.4cm}
480: \caption{
481: Total enclosed mass (solid line) as a function of radius for Malin 1 for
482: the best-fitting AC model. The
483: enclosed mass is divided into its bulge (short-dashed line), inner disk
484: (long-dashed line), outer disk (dotted line) and dark matter halo
485: (dot-dashed line) components. The data points correspond to the \ion{H}{1}
486: rotation curve data from Sancisi \& Fraternali (2007) shown in the left
487: panel of Figure \ref{malin1rotn}.}
488: \label{malin1mass}
489: \end{figure}
490:
491:
492:
493: The most interesting aspect of the best-fitting rotation curve, is the
494: fact that it appears to be dominated by the bulge in the
495: inner regions of Malin 1, out to a radius of $\sim7$ kpc.
496: As LSB galaxies are often referred to as being dark matter dominated
497: at all radii, on the surface this result would suggest that Malin 1 may
498: not be a typical LSB galaxy. However, the studies of dwarf LSB galaxies
499: by de Blok \& McGaugh (1997) and Kuzio de Naray et al.\ (2006, 2008)
500: show that these galaxies may actually be baryon dominated in their
501: very central $\sim$1 kpc. By extrapolation to giant LSB galaxies it
502: may seem plausible that these larger counterparts may also be
503: baryon dominated out to $\sim5-10$ kpc. However, a common criterion
504: for classifying LSB galaxies is a disk central surface brightness
505: fainter than $\mu_B=23.0$ mag arcsec$^{-2}$ (Impey \& Bothun 1997).
506: A galaxy with a disk central surface brightness fainter than this
507: would present a $>4\sigma$ deviation from the distribution of
508: disk surface brightnesses found by Freeman (1970). As a result any
509: galaxy with a disk central surface brightness les than
510: $\mu_B=23.0$ mag arcsec$^{-2}$
511: is typically classified as an LSB. However, Barth (2007) determined
512: a $B$ band disk central surface brightness of $\mu_B(0)=22.3$ mag
513: arcsec$^{-2}$ for Malin 1. This would not classify Malin 1 as an LSB
514: galaxy, but as an intermediate surface brightness disk, if we were to
515: use the classification system of McGaugh (1996). Taken together with
516: our mass profile, which seems to suggest that Malin 1 is baryon
517: dominated out to large radii, this may be revealing that Malin 1 is
518: not as atypical as originally thought. It seems that Malin 1 has
519: characteristics that are similar to those of SBO type galaxies, but it
520: is also embedded in a very extended, optically faint, gas-rich outer
521: disk beyond its normal inner disk.
522:
523: Although the inner most point of the rotation curve is at 15 kpc, it would
524: be difficult to model Malin 1 with any cosmologically motivated dark matter
525: profile that would not be baryon dominated within $\sim5$ kpc. Even a
526: pseudo-isothermal profile (see e.g., Simon et al.\ 2005; Kuzio de Naray et al.\
527: 2006 for a description of the pseudo-isothermal profile) would be baryon
528: dominated out to a similarly large radius, as such a profile tends to provide
529: comparitively less dark matter at small radii.
530:
531: Given the lack of points
532: within 15 kpc, it is almost impossible to determine whether a NFW model
533: or a pseudo-isothermal model provides the best possible profile for the dark
534: matter halo of Malin 1. The difference between these two types of dark matter
535: halo profile are most sensitive in the very inner regions, where the NFW-type
536: profile provides a ``cuspy'' inner density profile and the pseudo-isothermal
537: profile provides a constant density core (see e.g., Simon et al.\ 2005).
538: To determine which of these best describes the halo of Malin 1, we would need
539: better sampled kinematics within the inner 15 kpc. Since more and more
540: evidence seems to suggest that pseudo-isothermal models work better for
541: describing the dark matter distribution in disk galaxies (e.g., Gentile et al.\
542: 2004, 2005; Shankar et al.\ 2006; Spano et al.\ 2008)
543: it seems important better sampled
544: spectrosocopy be observed for the inner regions of Malin 1 in any future
545: study.
546:
547: Of course, the use of optical data to model the stellar parts of Malin 1 is
548: limited. The expected stellar $M/L$
549: ratio in the optical has a very large scatter
550: (e.g., Bell \& de Jong 2001; Bell et al.\ 2003), and ideally we would prefer
551: to have near-infrared images of Malin 1, which would provide a more accurate
552: stellar $M/L$ ratio.
553:
554:
555: \section{Does Malin 1 lie on the Spiral Arm Pitch Angle versus Shear relation?}
556:
557: \subsection{Measurement of the pitch angle of Malin 1}
558:
559: \begin{figure}[t]
560: \plotone{f3.eps}
561: \caption{The Pitch angle versus Shear relation from Seigar et al.\ (2005, 2006)
562: with Malin 1 overlaid. The red points represent data from Block et al.\ (1999);
563: the blue points represent data from Seigar et al.\ (2005); the green points
564: represent data from Seigar et al.\ (2006) and the magenta point represents
565: Malin 1.}
566: \label{malin1shear}
567: \end{figure}
568:
569: Spiral arm pitch angles are measured using the same technique
570: employed by Seigar et al.\ (2004, 2005, 2006, 2008b). A two-dimensional fast-
571: Fourier transform technique (FFT) is used, which employs a
572: program described by Schr\"oder et al. (1994). Logarithmic spirals
573: are assumed in the decomposition.
574: The amplitude of each Fourier component is given by
575: \begin{equation}
576: A(m,p)=\frac{\Sigma_{i=1}^{I}\Sigma_{j=1}^{J}I_{ij}(\ln{r},\theta)\exp{[-i(m\theta+p\ln{r})]}}{\Sigma_{i=1}^{I}\Sigma_{j=1}^{J}I_{ij}(\ln{r},\theta)},
577: \label{pitch}
578: \end{equation}
579: where $r$ and $\theta$ are polar coordinates, $I(\ln{r},\theta)$ is the
580: intensity at position $(\ln{r},\theta)$, $m$ represents the number of arms or
581: modes, and $p$ is the variable associated with the pitch angle $P$, defined
582: by $\tan{P}=-(m/p)$. We measure the pitch angle $P$ of the $m=2$ component.
583: The resulting pitch angle measured using equation \ref{pitch} is in radians,
584: and this is later converted to degrees for ease of perception.
585:
586: The range of radii over which the FFT was applied
587: was selected to exclude the bulge (where there is no information
588: about the arms) and to extend out to the outer limits of
589: the arms in the deep R-band image of Malin 1 from Moore \& Parker (2007). The
590: radial extent of
591: the bar was measured manually (see, e.g., Grosbol et al.\ 2004),
592: and the inner radial limit applied to the FFT was chosen to be outside
593: this radius. The physical distance was calculated using a Hubble
594: constant $H_{0}=73$ km s$^{-1}$ Mpc$^{-1}$ (Spergel et al.\ 2007) and the
595: recessional velocity, $V_{rec}=24750\pm10$ km s$^{-1}$ (de Vaucouleurs et al.\
596: 1991; hereafter RC3).
597: The pitch angle was then determined from peaks in the Fourier spectrum,
598: as this is the most powerful method for finding periodicity in a distribution
599: (Consid\`ere \& Athanassoula 1988; Garcia-Gomez \& Athanassoula 1993). The
600: radial range over which the Fourier analysis was performed was chosen by eye
601: and is probably the dominant source of error in the calculation of the pitch
602: angle, as spiral arms are only approximately logarithmic and sometimes abrupt
603: changes can be seen in spiral arm pitch angles (e.g., Seigar \& James 1998).
604:
605: The image was first
606: deprojected to face-on. Mean uncertainties of position angle
607: and inclination as a function of inclination were discussed by Consid\`ere \&
608: Athanassoula (1988). For a galaxy with high inclination, there are clearly
609: greater uncertainties in assigning both a position angle and an accurate
610: inclination. These uncertainties are discussed by Block et al.\ (1999) and
611: Seigar et al.\ (2005), who take a galaxy with low inclination ($<30^{\circ}$)
612: and one with high inclination ($>60^{\circ}$) and varied the inclination angle
613: used in the correction to face-on. They found that for the galaxy with
614: low inclination, the measured pitch angle remained the same.
615: However, the measured pitch angle for the galaxy with high inclination
616: varied by 10\%. Since inclination corrections are likely to be largest for
617: galaxies with the highest inclinations, cases in which inclination is
618: $>60^{\circ}$ are taken as the worst case scenario. Since the inclination of
619: Malin 1, $i\simeq23^{\circ}$, the error in deprojecting to a face-on
620: orientation is likely to be very low.
621:
622: From the $R$ band image of Malin 1 presented in Moore \& Parker (2007), the
623: pitch angle of their overlaid spiral is measured as $P=25\fdg0\pm1\fdg0$.
624:
625: \subsection{Measurement of rotation curve shear}
626:
627: We use our best fit model rotation curve to the \ion{H}{1} rotation velocities
628: from Sancisi \& Fraternali (2007) to measure the shear for
629: Malin 1. The shear is measured using the same method used by other authors
630: (e.g., Block et al.\ 1999; Seigar et al.\ 2004, 2005, 2006; Seigar 2005).
631:
632: Rotation curve shear is defined as,
633: \begin{equation}
634: S=\frac{A}{\omega}=\frac{1}{2}\left(1-\frac{R}{V}\frac{dV}{dR}\right),
635: \label{shear}
636: \end{equation}
637: where $A$ is the first Oort constance, $\omega$ is the angular velocity, and
638: $V$ is the rotation velocity at a radius $R$. The shear depends on the shape
639: of the rotation curve. For a rotation curve that remains flat, $S=0.5$, for
640: a falling rotation curve, $S>0.5$, and for a continually rising rotation curve,
641: $S<0.5$.
642:
643: Using equation \ref{shear} and the model rotation curve,
644: we have calculated the shear for Malin 1 at a
645: radius of 10 kpc (the same radius at which Seigar et al.\ 2005, 2006
646: measured their values for rotation curve shear). The dominant source of error
647: on the measurement of shear is the rms error in the
648: rotation curve. This is typically $<10$\%. In order to calculate the
649: shear, the value of $dV/dR$, measured in km s$^{-1}$ arcsec$^{-1}$,
650: is calculated as a function of radius for the outer part
651: of the rotation curve (i.e., past the radius of turnover and the bulge
652: component).
653:
654: Using this technique we find a rotation curve shear of Malin 1,
655: $S=0.47\pm0.01$, indicating that the rotation curve for Malin 1 is declining
656: at this radius.
657:
658: \subsection{The shear versus pitch angle relation}
659:
660:
661: From the spiral arm detected by Moore \& Parker (2007), the pitch angle of
662: Malin 1 is $P=25\fdg0\pm1\fdg0$. We also find a shear of $S=0.47\pm0.01$
663: from the \ion{H}{1} rotation curve presented by Sancisi \& Fraternali (2007).
664: Figure 3 shows the result of plotting the pitch angle and shear of Malin 1
665: on the spiral arm pitch angle versus rotation curve shear relation from
666: Seigar et al.\ (2005, 2006). As can be seen Malin 1 fits nicely on this
667: relation, which was originally
668: determined for normal spiral galaxies. This is the
669: first LSB galaxy which has been plotted on the shear versus pitch angle
670: relation. It now seems appropriate that these measurements be made for
671: more LSB galaxies to see if their shear and pitch angle remain consistent
672: with the relation for normal brightness galaxies.
673:
674:
675:
676:
677:
678:
679:
680: \section{Conclusions}
681:
682: We conclude that Malin 1 is not as atypical as originally thought. We
683: highlight the fact that its $B$ band disk central surface brightness
684: of $\mu_B(0)=22.3$ mag arcsec$^{-2}$ as determined by Barth (2007)
685: seems to place it in the category of intermediate brightness galaxies
686: (McGaugh 1997). Taken together with our result here, that Malin 1
687: appears to be baryon dominated to $\sim$10 kpc, this may suggest that
688: Malin 1 has characteristics typical of normal galaxies. However, it still
689: remains a very unusual galaxy, as it
690: is also embedded in a very extended, gas-rich, outer disk. While
691: Barth (2007) compared Malin 1 to SBO galaxies, the discovery of spiral
692: structure in its disk (Moore \& Parker 2007) would suggest that
693: Malin 1 may very well be of later-type than this. The break in the
694: outer disk of Malin 1 to that of a disk with a larger scalelength is
695: not unusual for disk galaxies (e.g., Pohlen et al.\ 2002; Erwin et
696: al.\ 2005, 2007). Malin 1 may just exhibit an extreme case of this
697: phenomenon.
698:
699: The spiral
700: structure and rotation curve shear of Malin 1 are both consistent with
701: those of normal disk galaxies, and they both fall nicely on the rotation
702: curve shear versus spiral arm pitch angle relation reported by Seigar et al.\
703: (2005, 2006). It is possible that a comparison of shear values and pitch
704: angles for LSB galaxies reveal that they follow the same relation as normal
705: galaxies. For this reason, in the future, we intend to make these measurement
706: for a large sample of LSB galaxies.
707:
708:
709: \acknowledgments
710: This research has made use of the NASA/IPAC Extragalactic Database (NED)
711: which is operated by the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute
712: of Technology, under contract with the National Aeronautics and Space
713: Administration. The research presented in this paper has been made possible
714: by the Arkansas Space Grant Consortium. MSS also acknowledges the
715: anonymous referee, whose input greatly improved the content of this
716: article.
717:
718:
719:
720:
721: %% To help institutions obtain information on the effectiveness of their
722: %% telescopes, the AAS Journals has created a group of keywords for telescope
723: %% facilities. A common set of keywords will make these types of searches
724: %% significantly easier and more accurate. In addition, they will also be
725: %% useful in linking papers together which utilize the same telescopes
726: %% within the framework of the National Virtual Observatory.
727: %% See the AASTeX Web site at http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/AAS/AASTeX
728: %% for information on obtaining the facility keywords.
729:
730: %% After the acknowledgments section, use the following syntax and the
731: %% \facility{} macro to list the keywords of facilities used in the research
732: %% for the paper. Each keyword will be checked against the master list during
733: %% copy editing. Individual instruments can be provided in parentheses,
734: %% after the keyword, but they will not be verified.
735:
736:
737: %% Appendix material should be preceded with a single \appendix command.
738: %% There should be a \section command for each appendix. Mark appendix
739: %% subsections with the same markup you use in the main body of the paper.
740:
741: %% Each Appendix (indicated with \section) will be lettered A, B, C, etc.
742: %% The equation counter will reset when it encounters the \appendix
743: %% command and will number appendix equations (A1), (A2), etc.
744:
745:
746: %% The reference list follows the main body and any appendices.
747: %% Use LaTeX's thebibliography environment to mark up your reference list.
748: %% Note \begin{thebibliography} is followed by an empty set of
749: %% curly braces. If you forget this, LaTeX will generate the error
750: %% "Perhaps a missing \item?".
751: %%
752: %% thebibliography produces citations in the text using \bibitem-\cite
753: %% cross-referencing. Each reference is preceded by a
754: %% \bibitem command that defines in curly braces the KEY that corresponds
755: %% to the KEY in the \cite commands (see the first section above).
756: %% Make sure that you provide a unique KEY for every \bibitem or else the
757: %% paper will not LaTeX. The square brackets should contain
758: %% the citation text that LaTeX will insert in
759: %% place of the \cite commands.
760:
761: %% We have used macros to produce journal name abbreviations.
762: %% AASTeX provides a number of these for the more frequently-cited journals.
763: %% See the Author Guide for a list of them.
764:
765: %% Note that the style of the \bibitem labels (in []) is slightly
766: %% different from previous examples. The natbib system solves a host
767: %% of citation expression problems, but it is necessary to clearly
768: %% delimit the year from the author name used in the citation.
769: %% See the natbib documentation for more details and options.
770:
771: \begin{thebibliography}{}
772:
773: \bibitem[Aguirre et al.\ (2005)]{AECM05}
774: Aguirre, J.~A.~L., Elias-Rosa, N., Corsini, E.~M., \&
775: Mu\~noz-Tu\~n\'on, C.\ 2005, A\&A, 434, 109
776:
777: \bibitem[Barth (2007)]{B07}
778: Barth, A.~J.\ 2007, AJ, 133, 1085
779:
780: \bibitem[Bell \& de Jong (2001)]{BD01}
781: Bell, E.~F., \& de Jong, R.~S.\ 2001, \apj, 520, 212
782:
783: \bibitem[Bell et al.\ (2003)]{BMKW03}
784: Bell, E.~F., McIntosh, D.~H., Katz, N., Weinberg, M.~D.\ 2003,
785: \apj, 585, 117
786:
787: \bibitem[Block et al.\ (1999)]{BPFESF99}
788: Block, D.~L., Puerari, I., Frogel, J.~A., Eskridge, P.~B.,
789: Stockton, A., \& Fuchs, B.\ 1999, Ap\&SS, 269, 5
790:
791: \bibitem[Blumenthal et al.\ (1986)]{BFFP86}
792: Blumenthal, G.~R., Faber, S.~M., Flores, R., \& Primack, J.~R.\ 1986,
793: \apj, 301, 27
794:
795: \bibitem[Bothun et al.\ (1987)]{BIMM87}
796: Bothun, G.~D., Impey, C.~D., Malin, D.~F., \& Mould, J.~R.\ 1987,
797: \aj, 94, 23
798:
799: \bibitem[Bullock et al.\ (2001a)]{bullock01a}
800: Bullock, J.~S., Dekel, A., Kolatt, T.~S., Kravtsov, A.~V.,
801: Klypin, A.~A., Porciani, C., \& Primack, J.~R.\ 2001a, \apj, 555, 240
802:
803: \bibitem[Bullock et al.\ (2001b)]{bullock01b}
804: Bullock, J.~S., Kolatt, T.~S., Sigad, Y., Somerville, R.~S.,
805: Kravtsov, A.~V., Klypin, A.~A., Primack, J.~R., \& Dekel, A.\
806: 2001b, \mnras, 321, 559
807:
808: \bibitem[Consid\'ere \& Athanassoula (1988)]{CA88}
809: Consid\'ere, S., \& Athanassoula, E.\ 1988, A\&AS, 76, 365
810:
811: \bibitem[de Blok \& McGaugh (1997)]{DM97}
812: de Blok, W.~J.~G., \& McGaugh, S.~S.\ 1997, \mnras, 290, 533
813:
814: \bibitem[de Vaucouleurs et al.\ (1991)]{DDCBPF91}
815: de Vaucouleurs, G., de Vaucouleurs, A., Corwin, H.~G., Buta, R.~J.,
816: Paturel, G., \& Fouqu\'e, R.\ 1991, The Third Reference Catalog of
817: Bright Galaxies (New York: Springer) (RC3)
818:
819: \bibitem[Dutton et al.\ (2005)]{DCDC05}
820: Dutton, A.~A., Courteau, S., de Jong, R., \& Carignan, C.\ 2005,
821: \apj, 619, 218
822:
823: \bibitem[Erwin et al.\ (2005)]{EBP05}
824: Erwin, P., Beckman, J.~E., \& Pohlen, M.\ 2005, \apj, 626, L81
825:
826: \bibitem[Erwin et al.\ (2007)]{EPB07}
827: Erwin, P., Pohlen, M., \& Beckman, J.~E.\ 2007, \aj, in press
828: (astro-ph/0709.3505)
829:
830: \bibitem[Garcia-Gomez \& Athanassoula (1993)]{GA93}
831: Garcia-Gomez, C., \& Athanassoula, E.\ 1993, A\&AS, 100, 431
832:
833: \bibitem[Gentile et al.\ (2004)]{GSKVK04}
834: Gentile, G., Salucci, P., Klein, U., Vergani, D., \& Kalberla, P.\
835: 2004, \mnras, 351, 903
836:
837: \bibitem[Gentile et al.\ (2005)]{GBSKW05}
838: Gentile, G., Burkert, A., Salucci, P., Klein, U., \& Walter, F.\
839: 2005, \apj, 634, 145
840:
841: \bibitem[Gnedin et al.\ (2004)]{GKKN04}
842: Gnedin, O.~Y., Kravtsov, A.~V., Klypin, A.~A., \& Nagai, D.\ 2004
843: \apj, 616, 16
844:
845: \bibitem[Grosbol et al.\ (2004)]{GPP04}
846: Grosbol, P., Patsis, P.~A., \& Pompei, E.\ 2004, A\&A, 423, 849
847:
848: \bibitem[Impey \& Bothun (1989)]{IB89}
849: Impey, C., \& Bothun, G.\ 1989, \apj, 341, 89
850:
851: \bibitem[Impey \& Bothun (1997)]{IB97}
852: Impey, C., \& Bothun, G.\ 1997, ARA\&A, 35, 267
853:
854: \bibitem[Kassin et al.\ (2006a)]{KDP06a}
855: Kassin, S.~A., de Jong, R.~S., \& Pogge, R.~W.\ 2006a, \apjs, 162, 80
856:
857: \bibitem[Kassin et al.\ (2006b)]{KDW06b}
858: Kassin, S.~A., de Jong, R.~S., \& Weiner, R.~J.\ 2006b, \apj, 643, 804
859:
860: \bibitem[Klypin et al.\ (2002)]{KZS02}
861: Klypin, A., Zhao, H., \& Somerville, R.~S.\ 2002, \apj, 573, 597
862:
863: \bibitem[Kuzio de Naray et al.\ (2006)]{KMDB06}
864: Kuzio de Naray, R., McGaugh, S.~S., de Blok, W.~J.~G., \& Bosma, A.\
865: 2006, \apjs, 165, 461
866:
867: \bibitem[Kuzio de Naray et al.\ (2008)]{KMD08}
868: Kuzio de Naray, R., McGaugh, S.~S., \& de Blok, W.~J.~G.\ 2008, \apj
869: 676, 920
870:
871: \bibitem[Matthews et al.\ (2001)]{MVM01}
872: Matthews, L.~D., van Driel, W., \& Monnier-Ragaigne, D.\ 2001, A\&A,
873: 365, 1
874:
875: \bibitem[McGaugh (1996)]{M96}
876: McGaugh, S.~S.\ 1996, \mnras, 280, 337
877:
878: \bibitem[Moore \& Parker (2007)]{MP07}
879: Moore, L., \& Parker, Q.~A.\ 2007, PASA, 23, 165
880:
881: \bibitem[Navarro et al.\ (1996)]{NFW96}
882: Navarro, J.~F., Frenk, C.~S., \& White, S.~D.~M.\ 1996, \apj,
883: 462, 563 (NFW)
884:
885: \bibitem[Pickering et al.\ (1987)]{PIVB97}
886: Pickering, T.~E., Impey, C.~D., van Gorkom, J.~H., \& Bothun, G.~D.\
887: 1997, \aj, 114, 1858
888:
889: \bibitem[Pizagno et al.\ (2005)]{P05}
890: Pizagno, J., et al.\ 2005, \apj, 633, 844
891:
892: \bibitem[Pohlen et al.\ (2002)]{PDLA02}
893: Pohlen, M., Dettmar, R.-J., L\"utticke, R., \& Aronica, G.\
894: 2002, A\&A, 392, 807
895:
896: \bibitem[Rubin et al.\ (1985)]{RBFT85}
897: Rubin, V.~C., Burstein, D., Ford, W.~K., \& Thonnard, N.\ 1985,
898: \apj, 289, 81
899:
900: \bibitem[Sancisi \& Fraternali (2007)]{SF07}
901: Sancisi, R., \& Fraternali, F.\ 2007, in The Impact of HST on
902: European Astronomy, Proc.\ ESLAB Symp.\ 41, in press (astro-ph/0707.2377)
903:
904: \bibitem[Schr\"oder et al.\ (1994)]{SPKP94}
905: Schr\"oder, M.~F.~S., Pastoriza, M.~G., Kepler, S.~O., \& Puerari, I.\
906: 1994, A\&AS, 108, 41
907:
908: \bibitem[Seigar \& James (1998)]{SJ98}
909: Seigar, M.~S., \& James, P.~A.\ 1998, \mnras, 299, 285
910:
911: \bibitem[Seigar, Block \& Puerari (2004)]{SBP04}
912: Seigar, M.~S., Block, D.~L., \& Puerari, I.\ 2004, in Penetrating
913: Bars Through Masks of Cosmic Dust: The Hubble Tuning Fork Strikes a
914: New Note, ed.\ D.~L.\ Block, I.\ Puerari, K.~C.\ Freeman, R.\ Groess, \&
915: E.~K.\ Block (Dordrehct: Springer), 155
916:
917: \bibitem[Seigar (2005)]{S05}
918: Seigar, M.~S.\ 2005, MNRAS, 361, L20
919:
920: \bibitem[Seigar et al.\ (2005)]{SBPCJ05}
921: Seigar, M.~S., Block, D.~L., Puerari, I., Chorney, N.~E., \&
922: James, P.~A.\ 2005, \mnras, 359, 1065
923:
924: \bibitem[Seigar et al.\ (2006)]{SHBBH06}
925: Seigar, M.~S., Bullock, J.~S., Barth, A.~J., \& Ho, L.~C.\
926: 2006, \apj, 645, 1012
927:
928: \bibitem[Seigar et al.\ (2008a)]{SBB08a}
929: Seigar, M.~S., Barth, A.~J., \& Bullock, J.~S.\ 2008a, \mnras,
930: submitted (astro-ph/0612228)
931:
932: \bibitem[Seigar et al.\ (2008b)]{SKKL08b}
933: Seigar, M.~S., Kennefick, D., Kennefick, J., \& Lacy, C.~H.~S.\
934: 2008b, \apj, in press (astro-ph/0804.0773)
935:
936: \bibitem[Shankar et al.\ (2006)]{SLSDD06}
937: Shankar, F., Lapi, A., Salucci, P., de Zotti, G., \& Danese, L.\
938: 2006, \apj, 643, 14
939:
940: \bibitem[Simon et al.\ (2005)]{SBLBG05}
941: Simon, J.~D., Bolatto, A.~D., Leroy, A., Blitz, L., \& Gates, E.~L.\
942: 2005, \apj, 621, 757
943:
944: \bibitem[Spano et al.\ (2008)]{SMACEH08}
945: Spano, M., Marcelin, M., Amram, P., Carignan, C., Epinat, B., \&
946: Hernandez, O.\ 2008, \mnras, 383, 297
947:
948: \bibitem[Spergel et al.\ (2007)]{SBDNBDHJKPPVHHKLMOTWWW07}
949: Spergel, D.~N., et al.\ 2007, \apjs, 170, 377
950:
951: \bibitem[Sprayberry et al.\ (1995)]{SIBI95}
952: Sprayberry, D., Impey, C.~D., Bothun, G.~D., \& Irwin, M.~J.\
953: 1995, \aj, 109, 558
954:
955: \end{thebibliography}
956:
957: %\clearpage
958: %
959: %\begin{deluxetable}{ll}
960: %\tablecolumns{2}
961: %\tablewidth{0pc}
962: %\tablecaption{Properties of the bulge, inner and outer disk and dark matter halo of Malin 1}
963: %\label{tab1}
964: %\tablehead{
965: %\colhead{Property} & \colhead{Measurement}\\
966: %}
967: %\startdata
968: %Bulge effective radius$^1$, $R_e$ & 0.6 kpc \\
969: %Bulge effective surface brightness$^1$, $\mu_e$ & 16.8 mag arcsec$^{-2}$\\
970: %Inner disk scalelength$^1$, $h_{\rm in}$ & 4.8 kpc \\
971: %Inner disk central surface brightness$^1$, $I_{\rm in_0}$ & 20.1 mag arcsec$^{-2}$\\
972: %Outer disk scalelength$^2$, $h_{\rm out}$ & 53 kpc\\
973: %Outer disk central surface brightness$^2$, $I_{\rm out_0}$\hspace*{1.5cm} & 24.8 mag arcsec$^{-2}$\\
974: %\ion{H}{1} mass$^3$, $M_{\rm HI}$ & $(6.8\pm0.7)\times10^{10} M_{\odot}$\\
975: %Spiral arm pitch angle, $P$ & $25\fdg0\pm1\fdg0$\\
976: %Halo concentration, $c_{\rm vir}$ & 8\\
977: %Halo virial mass, $M_{\rm vir}$ & $2.6\times10^{12} M_{\odot}$\\
978: %\enddata
979: %\tablecomments{
980: %$^1$From Barth (2007) who used an HST/WFPC F814W ($I$-band) image of Malin 1 to perform a two-dimensional structural decomposition into bulge and disk components.\\
981: %$^2$From Moore \& Parker (2007) who determine properties of the outer disk from a deep ground-based $R$-band image of Malin 1.\\
982: %$^3$From Pickering et al.\ (1997).
983: %}
984: %\end{deluxetable}
985: %
986: %\clearpage
987: %
988: %\begin{deluxetable}{lcc}
989: %\tablecolumns{3}
990: %\tablewidth{0pc}
991: %\tablecaption{Malin 1 best fitting models.}
992: %\label{tab2}
993: %\tablehead{
994: %\colhead{Parameter} & \colhead{non-AC} & \colhead{AC}\\
995: %}
996: %\startdata
997: %Shear & 0.50$\pm$0.01 & 0.47$\pm$0.01 \\
998: %NFW concentration, $c_{\rm vir}$ & 15 & 8 \\
999: %Virial mass, $M_{\rm vir}$ ($M_{\odot}$) & $1.8\times10^{12}$ & $2.6\times10^{12}$ \\
1000: %Bulge mass-to-light ratio, $(M/L_I)_{\rm bulge}$ & 2.2 & 2.2 \\
1001: %Inner disk mass-to-light ratio, $(M/L_I)_{\rm disk}$ & 1.2 & 1.2 \\
1002: %Outer disk mass-to-light ratio, $(M/L_R)_{\rm disk}$ & 1.3 & 1.3 \\
1003: %$\chi^2/\nu$ & 2.45 & 1.30 \\
1004: %\enddata
1005: %\tablecomments{``non-AC'' is the best-fit model to the rotation curve from Sancisi \& Fraternali (2007) without adiabatic contration. ``AC'' is the best-fit model to the same rotation curve data using the Adiabatic Contraction prescription from Blumenthal et al.\ (1986).}
1006: %\end{deluxetable}
1007: %
1008: %\clearpage
1009: %
1010: %\begin{figure*}
1011: %\includegraphics[angle=0,scale=0.85]{f1_new.eps}
1012: %\caption{\ion{H}{1} rotation curve data from Sancisi \& Fraternali (2007) with best fitting model rotation curve (solid line) overlaid. Also plotted are the contributions from the bulge (long dashed line), the inner stellar disk (dot-dashed line), the outer \ion{H}{1}+stellar disk (dotted line) and the dark matter halo (short-dashed line). {\em Left panel}: non-AC model; {\em Right panel}: AC model.}
1013: %\label{malin1rotn}
1014: %\end{figure*}
1015: %
1016: %\clearpage
1017: %
1018: %\begin{figure*}
1019: %\includegraphics[angle=0,scale=0.8]{f2.eps}
1020: %\caption{
1021: %Total enclosed mass (solid line) as a function of radius for Malin 1 for
1022: %the best-fitting AC model. The
1023: %enclosed mass is divided into its bulge (short-dashed line), inner disk
1024: %(long-dashed line), outer disk (dotted line) and dark matter halo
1025: %(dot-dashed line) components. The data points correspond to the \ion{H}{1}
1026: %rotation curve data from Sancisi \& Fraternali (2007) shown in the left
1027: %panel of Figure \ref{malin1rotn}.}
1028: %\label{malin1mass}
1029: %\end{figure*}
1030: %
1031: %\clearpage
1032: %
1033: %\begin{figure*}
1034: %\includegraphics[angle=0,scale=0.8]{f3.eps}
1035: %\caption{The Pitch angle versus Shear relation from Seigar et al.\ (2005, 2006)
1036: %with Malin 1 overlaid. The red points represent data from Block et al.\ (1999);
1037: %the blue points represent data from Seigar et al.\ (2005); the green points
1038: %represent data from Seigar et al.\ (2006) and the magenta point represents
1039: %Malin 1.}
1040: %\label{malin1shear}
1041: %\end{figure*}
1042:
1043: \end{document}
1044: