1:
2:
3: %% AASTeX v5.x LaTeX 2e macros.
4:
5:
6: %% manuscript produces a one-column, double-spaced document:
7: %\documentclass[manuscript]{aastex}
8: \documentclass[12pt,preprint]{aastex}
9:
10: \usepackage{a4}
11: %\usepackage{deluxetable}
12:
13: \usepackage{graphicx}
14:
15: \textwidth=146mm
16:
17:
18: % text super and subscript
19: \newcommand{\super}[1]{\ensuremath{^\textrm{\scriptsize{#1}}}}
20: \newcommand{\sub}[1]{\ensuremath{_\textrm{\scriptsize{#1}}}}
21:
22:
23: % VGSR
24: \newcommand{\vgsr}{$V$\sub{GSR}}
25: % <VGSR>
26: \newcommand{\meanvgsr}{$\langle$$V$\sub{GSR}$\rangle$}
27: % km/s
28: \newcommand{\kms}{km s$^{-1}$}
29: % deg
30: \newcommand{\degree}{\super{o}}
31:
32: % <[Fe/H]>
33: \newcommand{\meanfeh}{$\langle$[Fe/H]$\rangle$}
34:
35:
36: \slugcomment{\emph{Accepted for Publication in ApJ}}
37:
38:
39: %% If you wish, you may supply running head information, although
40: \shorttitle{Extending the VSS with SEKBO}
41: \shortauthors{Prior et al.}
42:
43:
44: \begin{document}
45:
46: \title{Extending the Virgo Stellar Stream\\
47: with SEKBO Survey RR Lyrae Stars}
48:
49:
50: \author{Sayuri L. Prior, G. S. Da Costa, Stefan C. Keller and Simon J. Murphy}
51: \affil{Research School of Astronomy and Astrophysics, Australian National University, Cotter Road, Weston Creek, Canberra, ACT 2611, Australia}
52:
53:
54:
55: \begin{abstract}
56: %\input{abstract}
57: A subset of the RR Lyrae (RRL) candidates identified from the Southern
58: Edgeworth-Kuiper Belt Object (SEKBO) survey data has been followed up
59: photometrically ($n=106$) and spectroscopically ($n=51$). Period and light
60: curve fitting reveals a $24 \pm 7 \%$ contamination of SEKBO survey data by
61: non-RRLs. This paper focuses on the region of the Virgo Stellar Stream (VSS),
62: particularly on its extension to the south of the declination limits of the
63: SDSS and of the QUEST RRL survey. The distribution of radial velocities in
64: the Galactic standard of rest frame (\vgsr) for the 11 RRLs observed in the
65: VSS region has two apparent peaks. The larger peak coincides with the four
66: RRLs having \meanvgsr = $127 \pm 10$ \kms{} and dispersion $\sigma = 27$ \kms,
67: marginally larger than that expected from the errors alone. The two type $ab$
68: RRLs in this group have \meanfeh{} = $-1.95 \pm 0.1$. Both the radial
69: velocities and metal abundances are consistent with membership in the
70: VSS\@. The second velocity peak, which occurs at \meanvgsr = $-175 \pm 10$
71: \kms{} may indicate the presence of stars from the Sgr leading tidal tail,
72: which is expected to have large negative velocities in this region.
73: We explore the spatial extent of the VSS by constructing luminosity
74: functions from the SEKBO data and comparing them to data synthesized with
75: the Besan\c{c}on Galactic model. Analysis of the excess over the model
76: predictions reveals the VSS as a large ($\sim$760 deg$^2$) overdensity
77: centered at roughly (RA, Dec) $\sim$ (186\degree, $-4$\degree), spanning a
78: length of $\sim$15 kpc in projection, assuming a heliocentric distance of
79: 19 kpc. The data reveal for the first time the more southern regions of the
80: stream and trace it to Dec $\approx -15$\degree\ and Galactic latitudes
81: as low as $b \approx 45$\degree.
82: \end{abstract}
83:
84:
85: % ApJ style
86: \keywords{Galaxy: halo --- Galaxy: kinematics and dynamics --- Galaxy: structure --- stars: variables: other}
87:
88:
89:
90: %\input{intro}
91: \section{Introduction}
92:
93:
94: It is now widely accepted that galaxies are at least partly formed by
95: a prolonged, chaotic aggregation of independent, protogalactic
96: fragments, consistent with the proposal of \citet{SZ78}. This
97: conceptualization is in line with the currently favored $\Lambda$ cold
98: dark matter ($\Lambda$CDM) cosmologies which postulate that galaxy
99: formation is a consequence of the hierarchical assembly of subgalactic
100: dark halos and the subsequent accretion of cooled baryonic gas (see,
101: for example, \citealt{CB01} and references therein). The hierarchical
102: picture stands in contrast to the formerly held conceptualization that
103: a rapid, free-fall collapse of an isolated pre-galactic cloud was the
104: crucial galaxy-forming event \citep{ELS62}. Nevertheless, the
105: observed dual properties of the Galactic halo (e.g.\ in terms of
106: density, kinematics and age) now point to a possible combined scenario
107: wherein the inner and outer halo regions were formed by different
108: mechanisms (see, for example, \citealt{CBL07}).
109:
110:
111: Of all the Galactic components, the outer halo presents arguably the
112: best opportunity for probing its formation due to its remoteness and
113: relative quiescence. In order to gauge quantitatively the relative
114: importance of the accretion mechanism in halo formation, \citet{BZB08}
115: compare the level of substructure present in Sloan Digital Sky Survey
116: (SDSS) data to simulations, and find that the data are consistent with
117: a halo constructed entirely from disrupted satellite remnants. Direct
118: evidence of systems currently undergoing disruption have indeed been
119: found, with the prime example being the Sagittarius (Sgr) dwarf galaxy,
120: which is located a mere 16 kpc from the Galactic center. From the
121: time of its discovery, the elongated morphology of Sgr, pointing towards the
122: Galactic center, has been taken as evidence for strong, ongoing tidal
123: disruption \citep{IGI94}. A combination of observations have
124: subsequently found the debris from the interaction to wrap around the
125: sky \citep{MSW03,NYG03,BZE06}, making it the most significant known
126: contributor to the Galactic halo.
127:
128:
129: A number of other streams and groups have been identified in the halo.
130: Examples include the Monoceros Stream \citep{NYR02,YNG03} which
131: surrounds the Galaxy in a giant ring \citep{IIL03}, and the
132: Hercules-Aquila Cloud \citep{BEB07} which extends above and below the
133: Galactic plane and stretches $\sim$80\degree{} in longitude. Another
134: significant feature was discovered in Quasar Equatorial Survey Team
135: (QUEST) data as an overdensity of RR Lyrae stars
136: \citep{VZA01,VZA04,VZ06}, and in SDSS data as an excess of F-type main
137: sequence stars \citep{NYR02,NYC07}, in the direction of the Virgo
138: constellation. QUEST, dubbing the feature the ``12\super{h}.4
139: clump'', estimated its heliocentric distance as $\sim$19 kpc, centered
140: at RA $\sim 186$\degree{}. It was found to span RA $\sim
141: 175$\degree--$200$\degree{} and the Dec range of the QUEST survey
142: ($-2.3$\degree--$0.0$\degree). Subsequent radial velocity
143: measurements by \citet{DZV06} of a subset of the clump revealed a
144: common velocity in the Galactic standard of rest frame (\vgsr) of
145: $100$ \kms{} and a dispersion of $\sigma = 17$ \kms, slightly smaller
146: than the average error of the measurements. Using SDSS data, they
147: estimated the feature to cover at least $106$ deg\super{2} of sky and
148: suggested the name, ``Virgo Stellar Stream'' (VSS).
149:
150:
151: Using photometric parallaxes of SDSS stars, \citet{JIB08} identified
152: the ``Virgo Overdensity'' (VOD) as a large ($\sim$1000 deg\super{2}),
153: diffuse overdensity in the same direction as the VSS, but at distances
154: $\sim$6--20 kpc. In a recent paper, \citet{VJZ08} provided additional
155: information in this region of the sky for distances less than 13 kpc.
156: They found that the VSS extends to distances as short as 12 kpc, in
157: comparison to its previous detection at 19 kpc. In spite of the
158: differences in reported distances and velocities, \citet{NYC07}
159: suggested that all the observed overdensities in Virgo may be the same
160: feature. The possibility exists that the terms may not be
161: interchangeable, but for simplicity, the current paper hereafter
162: refers to the feature as the VSS. The association of the VSS with Sgr
163: debris was hypothesized by \citet{MPJ07} who showed that
164: \citeauthor{LJM05}'s \citeyearpar{LJM05} model of the Sgr leading
165: tidal tail passes through the region of the VSS\@. However, the model
166: predicts highly negative radial velocities for Sgr stars in this
167: region, contrary to the observations of \citet{DZV06} (see above) and
168: \citet{NYC07} who find the most significant peak at \vgsr = $130 \pm
169: 10$ \kms. The model also predicts a relatively low density of Sgr
170: debris in this region which is at odds with the significance of the
171: observed overdensity. \citeauthor{NYC07} also note that the VSS is not
172: spatially coincident with the main part of the Sgr leading tidal tail,
173: but that the features do significantly overlap.
174:
175:
176: The foregoing discussion is only a brief summary of the findings
177: relating to the overdensity in Virgo, but it highlights the
178: considerable uncertainty that remains regarding its spatial form and
179: origin. From the results of \citet{BZE06} and \citet{NYC07}, it is
180: highly probable that the center of the VSS in fact lies to the south
181: of the regions mapped by SDSS and QUEST\@. This region is covered by
182: the Southern Edgeworth-Kuiper Belt Object (SEKBO, \citealt{MSA03})
183: survey, which is discussed in more detail in \S\ref{targetselection}.
184: \citet{KMP08} produced a list of over 2000 RR Lyrae (RRL) variable
185: star candidates from this data set and analyzed their spatial
186: distribution. Among other overdensities, they identify two clumps in
187: the region of the VSS\@. Clump 1, at a heliocentric distance of 16 kpc,
188: is located $\sim$8\degree{} south-east of the VSS centre identified by
189: \citet{DZV06}, while Clump 2 is at a distance of 19 kpc and located
190: $\sim$16\degree{} further to the south-east. The current study
191: follows up a subset of these RRLs. After confirming their RRL
192: classification with photometric observations (\S\ref{obs}), radial
193: velocities from spectra enable us to determine whether they belong to
194: the VSS (\S\ref{rv}). Metal abundances are also calculated
195: (\S\ref{metal}). To obtain further information regarding the spatial
196: extent of the stream, a wider stellar population from the SEKBO survey
197: data set is examined for signs of an excess of stars in the region of
198: interest (\S\ref{lf}). The targets selected for follow-up also
199: include clumps of RRL candidates in regions overlapping Sgr debris,
200: though the results for these stars are deferred to a subsequent paper.
201: In addition, a few smaller apparent spatial groupings were also
202: targeted for spectroscopic follow-up to investigate whether they are
203: associated with other substructures in the halo.
204:
205: %\input{obs}
206:
207: \section{Observations and Data Reduction}
208: \label{obs}
209:
210: \subsection{Target Selection}
211: \label{targetselection}
212:
213: Targets were selected from a list of 2016 candidates produced by
214: \citet{KMP08} who searched the Southern Edgeworth-Kuiper Belt Object
215: survey data for RRLs. The SEKBO survey was conducted on the $50''$
216: telescope at Mount Stromlo Observatory between January 2000 and 2003
217: and covered a 10\degree{} wide band following the ecliptic (1675
218: deg$^2$ of imaging data). Two filters (`blue': 455--590 nm and `red':
219: 615--775 nm) were used simultaneously, with typically a set of three
220: 300 s observations obtained, separated by $\sim$4 hrs and $\sim$1--7
221: days. In order to select candidates, a score was constructed that
222: measured how well an object matched the expected properties of an RRL
223: (i.e.\ in terms of its color and variability). Analysis showed that
224: this procedure produced a candidate list with completeness for RR$ab$
225: $\sim$60\% for $V<18.5$, falling to 25\% by $V=19.5$. Further details
226: can be found in \citet{KMP08} (hereafter KMP08).
227:
228:
229: The heliocentric radial distribution of RRL candidates from the SEKBO
230: survey is displayed in Figure \ref{radial}. From this set of
231: candidates, several apparent clumps of stars were targeted for
232: follow-up. Firstly, as the SEKBO survey region overlaps that of the
233: QUEST survey in the vicinity of the VSS, the possibility existed to
234: not only recover previously identified VSS members, but also to gain
235: further information regarding the spatial extent of the stream. A
236: selection of 8 of the 13 RRLs from the candidate list falling within
237: the RA range $183$\degree--$192$\degree{} and $V_0$ range
238: $16.6$--$17.2$ was targeted for observation (`VOD Clump 1' in KMP08).
239: A second clump located at RA $\sim 206$\degree{} at a similar distance
240: was also targeted (`VOD Clump 2' in KMP08). In addition, apparent
241: spatial groupings of stars at (RA, $V$) of $\sim$ (14 h, 16 mag),
242: (16 h, 15 mag), (20 h, 17 mag), (21.5 h, 17 mag) and (0 h, 17 mag)
243: were targeted. Note that the spatial position of the 20 and 21.5 h
244: stars overlaps the expected position of the trailing arm of the Sgr
245: debris stream.
246:
247:
248:
249: %-------------------- radial --------------------------%
250: \begin{figure}[htb]
251: \centering
252: \epsscale{0.6}
253: % Online version in color :
254: %\plotone{f1_online.eps}
255: %%BoundingBox: 162 280 430 552
256: \plotone{f1_online.eps}
257: \caption[The heliocentric radial distribution of RRL
258: candidates from the SEKBO survey in ecliptic longitude (from
259: KMP08).]{The radial distribution of RRL candidates from the
260: SEKBO survey in ecliptic longitude, $\lambda$ (from KMP08).
261: The concentric circles are at $V_0$=15, 17 and 19. Shaded areas
262: represent regions of apparent overdensity which were followed
263: up in the current study. Red ($\lambda \sim 195$\degree{} and
264: $210$\degree): VSS region; Blue ($\lambda \sim 305$\degree{}
265: and $315$\degree): Sgr region; Green ($\lambda \sim
266: 210$\degree, $230$\degree{} and $5$\degree): 14h, 16 h, and 0
267: h regions.}
268:
269: \label{radial}
270: \end{figure}
271: %------------------------------------------------------%
272:
273:
274:
275: % contamination targets
276: In addition to the 51 RRLs from the clumps which were targeted for
277: spectroscopic follow-up, a selection of a further 55 candidates over a
278: wide range of RAs was targeted for photometric follow-up in order to
279: elucidate the nature of the contamination of the SEKBO RRL candidate
280: sample by non-RRLs. These targets varied in magnitude between $V$ =
281: 15 and 19.5. This set of targets included a selection of `red'
282: variable objects to investigate whether the adopted dereddened color
283: cutoff of $(V-R)_0 = 0.3$ for RRL candidates was appropriate. The
284: number of spectroscopy and photometry targets in each region is
285: summarized in Table \ref{targets}.
286:
287:
288:
289:
290:
291: \subsection{Photometry}
292:
293: % observations
294: Observations were made with the Australian National University (ANU)
295: $40''$ telescope at Siding Spring Observatory (SSO) over six six-night
296: runs between November 2006 and October 2007. The target was centered
297: on one of the Wide Field Imager's eight CCDs. The $V$ filter was
298: used, with exposure times ranging from 120 to 600 s depending on the
299: target magnitude. The total number of observations for each target
300: over the observing runs ranged from 5 to 19, with an average of 9
301: observations per target (see Figure \ref{nobs}).
302:
303:
304: %--------------------- nobs ----------------------%
305: \begin{figure}[htb]
306: \centering
307: \epsscale{0.5}
308: \plotone{f2.eps}
309: \caption[The distribution of number of observations for imaged
310: candidates.]{The distribution of number of observations for
311: imaged candidates.}
312: \label{nobs}
313: \end{figure}
314: %-------------------------------------------------%
315:
316:
317:
318: % data reduction
319: The data were overscan subtracted, trimmed, bias subtracted and
320: flatfielded with twilight sky flats using standard IRAF procedures.
321: Aperture photometry was then performed on each target as well as on an
322: ensemble of nearby comparison stars, yielding an average differential
323: magnitude for each target at each epoch. This series of differential
324: magnitudes for the target was subsequently entered into Andrew
325: Layden's period-fitting routine (\citealt{LS00} and references
326: therein) along with the mid-exposure heliocentric Julian dates of the
327: observations. Layden's routine identifies the most likely period by
328: fitting the photometry of the variable star with 10 templates
329: (including 7 RRL templates) and performing a $\chi^{2}$ minimization.
330: See \citet{PAJ02} for a more detailed description of the method. The
331: best obtained period was then entered into Layden's light
332: curve-fitting routine. Example candidate light curves are displayed
333: in Figure \ref{lightcurve}.
334:
335: %------------------- lightcurve --------------------%
336: \begin{figure}[htb]
337: \centering
338: \epsscale{1}
339: \plottwo{f3a.eps}{f3b.eps}
340: \caption[Phased $V$ mag differences between a candidate and
341: nearby comparison stars.]{Phased $V$ mag differences between a
342: candidate and nearby comparison stars. From the tight fit of
343: the data points to the template light curves \textit{(solid
344: line)}, we can be very confident that these two candidates are
345: indeed RR Lyrae stars. \textit{Left: } RR$ab$ with period =
346: 0.583 d. \textit{Right: } RR$c$ with period = 0.358 d.}
347: \label{lightcurve}
348: \end{figure}
349: %---------------------------------------------------%
350:
351:
352:
353: One important application of the analysis of this photometry was to
354: determine which candidates were indeed RRL stars and which were
355: spurious detections. Of the 73 stars observed at least 8 times, 11
356: had magnitudes which did not vary significantly over the observations,
357: 4 were classified as binary stars and 7 showed variability but did not
358: appear to have periods and light curves corresponding to either RRLs
359: or binary stars. Figure \ref{contam} shows the number of candidates
360: falling into each classification category as a function of $(V-R)_0$.
361:
362: Given that there are 51 RRLs and 16 non-RRLs within the color
363: selection, this indicates that the procedure KMP08 used to identify
364: RRLs from the SEKBO survey data has a contamination rate of 24 $\pm$
365: 7\%, where the uncertainty has been calculated using Poisson
366: statistics. Table \ref{photdata} summarizes the photometric data,
367: including the classification, period and fitted $V$ amplitudes (where
368: applicable) for all targets.
369:
370:
371: %-------------------- contam ----------------------%
372: \begin{figure}[htb]
373: \centering
374: \epsscale{0.7}
375: \plotone{f4.eps}
376: \caption[The classification of RRL candidates based on
377: follow-up photometry.]{The classification of RRL candidates
378: based on follow-up photometry. The dashed line indicates the
379: adopted color cutoff of $(V-R)_0<0.3$ for RRL candidates in
380: the SEKBO survey.}
381: \label{contam}
382: \end{figure}
383: %--------------------------------------------------%
384:
385:
386: \subsection{Spectroscopy}
387:
388: % observations
389: Observations were made with the ANU 2.3 m telescope at SSO in runs
390: that were concurrent with those on the $40''$ telescope. The blue arm
391: of the Double Beam Spectrograph was used with a $2''$ slit and the
392: 600B grating, giving a resolution of $\sim$2 \AA. The spectra were
393: centered on 4350 \AA{} so that the Ca II K line and Hydrogen lines such
394: as H$\delta$, H$\gamma$ and H$\beta$ could be observed. Exposure
395: times were chosen to give a signal-to-noise of $\sim$20 and varied
396: between 900 and 3000 s. Each target was observed between one and four
397: times, spread throughout a given observing run. Each observation was
398: accompanied by a comparison Cu Ar lamp exposure. Radial velocity
399: standards of similar spectral type were also observed for use as
400: cross-correlation templates (see \S \ref{rv}) as well as standards for
401: \citeauthor{Layden94}'s \citeyearpar{Layden94} pseudo-equivalent width
402: system (see \S \ref{metal}). A small number of bright RRLs from
403: \citet{Layden94} were also observed to serve as additional
404: cross-correlation templates.
405:
406: % data reduction
407: The data were overscan subtracted and trimmed using standard IRAF
408: procedures. Bias subtraction and flatfielding were not performed as
409: they only served to add noise to the data. Wavelength calibration was
410: performed over the range 3500--4965 \AA{} using 4th--8th order
411: legendre polynomials and 26--28 spectral lines, yielding dispersion
412: solutions with RMS $\sim$ 0.05 \AA. Example spectra (after continuum
413: fitting as described in \S \ref{metal}) are displayed in Figure
414: \ref{spectra} and demonstrate the range in quality obtained.
415:
416:
417:
418: %%BoundingBox: 125 411 434 707
419: %-------------------- spectra ----------------------%
420: \begin{figure}[htb]
421: \centering
422: \epsscale{0.7}
423: \plotone{f5.eps}
424: \caption{Examples of poor quality \textit{(top)} and good
425: quality \textit{(bottom)} normalized spectra.}
426: \label{spectra}
427: \end{figure}
428: %--------------------------------------------------%
429:
430: %\input{rv}
431:
432: \section{Radial Velocities}
433: \label{rv}
434:
435: % fxcor
436: Radial velocities were determined using the IRAF task \textsc{fxcor}
437: which performs Fourier cross-correlations between spectra of the
438: target star and chosen template stars. For each observing run, we
439: chose 5--6 stars to use as templates from amongst the radial velocity
440: standards and the bright RRLs from \citet{Layden94}. The selection
441: process was guided by the fact that relative velocities between
442: template and target stars were most precise when the two stars were of
443: similar spectral type. Subsequently, heliocentric corrections were
444: made to remove the component of the observed velocity due to the
445: Earth's motion around the Sun.
446:
447: % RRab: X Ari
448: Observed radial velocities of an RR$ab$ star can vary up to $\pm$50
449: \kms{} from its systemic velocity as a function of phase. In order to
450: correct the observed velocities to systemic velocities we first
451: determined the phase of each observation using the ephemerides based
452: on the best period obtained from our photometric data.
453: \citeauthor{Layden94}'s \citeyearpar{Layden94} parametrization of the
454: velocity curve for the RRL star X Ari (measured by \citet{Oke66} from
455: the H$\gamma$ line) was then used to determine the systemic
456: velocity. Figure \ref{vphase} shows example fits of the curve to our
457: observed data. Based on X Ari, the systemic velocity is taken to
458: occur at phase 0.5. Note that because the form of the discontinuity
459: in the light curve near maximum light varies amongst RRLs, only phases
460: between 0.1 and 0.85 were used in the fit. The average RMS of the
461: fits was 18 \kms{}, which we use as an estimate of the uncertainty in
462: the conversion from observed velocities to systemic velocities. We
463: then combine this with the average uncertainty in the radial velocity
464: zeropoints across the observing runs ($\pm 7$ \kms) and the
465: uncertainty in the cross-correlations ($\pm 4$ \kms). The latter was
466: quantified by calculating, for each observation, the standard
467: deviation of the velocities obtained using the different templates,
468: then averaging over all observations. The combination of these errors
469: then yields an overall uncertainty in the systemic radial velocities
470: of $\pm 20$ \kms. For the one RRL in common with \citet{DZV06}, the
471: velocities agree within the combined errors.
472:
473:
474: %-------------------- vphase --------------------------%
475: \begin{figure}[htbp]
476: \centering
477: \epsscale{0.8}
478: \plotone{f6.eps}
479: \caption[Fits of the radial velocity template of X Ari to
480: three type $ab$ RRLs in our sample.]{Fits of the radial
481: velocity template of X Ari \textit{(solid line)} to three type
482: $ab$ RRLs in our sample, each observed at three phases. The
483: upper two plots are examples of excellent fits, while the
484: lowest plot is an example of a poor fit. Note that data
485: points with phase $<$ 0.1 or phase $>$ 0.85 are excluded in
486: the fit. The systemic velocity corresponds to phase 0.5.}
487: \label{vphase}
488: \end{figure}
489: %------------------------------------------------------%
490:
491:
492:
493: % RRc
494: Of the 51 spectroscopic targets, 13 were type $c$ RRLs. For these
495: stars, velocity data for DH Peg and T Sex \citep{LJ89,JCL88} were used
496: to create a template velocity curve. However, given that the template
497: yielded uncertainties in systemic velocities of up to 30 \kms{} when
498: fitted to our data, we opted to instead use the average radial
499: velocity as our estimate of the systemic velocity. Taking into
500: consideration the precision of our measurements and the fact that
501: observed radial velocities of an RR$c$ star at different phases only
502: vary by up to $\pm$30 \kms{} from its systemic velocity, one would not
503: expect a fit to a template curve to provide an improved constraint on
504: the systemic velocity. This was indeed evidenced by the large scatter
505: in the residuals of the template fit to the data as a function of
506: phase. The average radial velocity was also used as an estimate of
507: the systemic velocity for the four type $ab$ RRLs having all
508: observations at phases less than 0.1 or greater than 0.85. This
509: non-optimal method likely produced inflated radial velocity
510: uncertainties for these stars.
511:
512: % Vgsr
513: When investigating Galactic substructures, it is useful to consider
514: radial velocities in a frame of reference which is at rest with
515: respect to the Galactic center. The heliocentric radial velocities
516: ($V$\sub{helio}) calculated as described above were thus transformed
517: to Galactic standard of rest frame velocities (\vgsr{}), thereby
518: removing the effects of the Sun's peculiar motion (assumed to be
519: $(u,v,w) = (-9,11,6)$ \kms{} with respect to the local standard of
520: rest which has a rotation of 220 \kms{}). The determined radial
521: velocities, $V$\sub{helio} and \vgsr, for RRLs in the VSS region and
522: the 14 h, 16 h and 0 h regions are given in Table \ref{spectro}.
523:
524:
525:
526:
527: \subsection{Virgo Stellar Stream region}
528:
529: The spatial distribution and \vgsr{} of observed RRLs in VSS Clumps 1
530: and 2 are displayed in Figure \ref{12hrtno}. Distances are based on
531: the assumption of $M_V$ = 0.56 and have an uncertainty of $\sim$7\%,
532: as described in KMP08. This corresponds to an uncertainty of
533: approximately $\pm$1 kpc at a distance of 20 kpc. RRLs observed
534: spectroscopically by \citet{DZV06} (hereafter DZV06) and classified as
535: VSS members are also included on the Figure to show the region where
536: the VSS was detected. The four magenta points have $40$ \kms{} $<$
537: \vgsr{} $< 160$ \kms, the range within which DZV06 classified RRLs as
538: members of the VSS. One star has previously been associated with the
539: VSS by DZV06 while the remaining three proposed members are new
540: discoveries. They would suggest that the stream spans a much larger
541: declination range than previously estimated. The four members have
542: \meanvgsr{} = $127 \pm 10$ \kms{} and dispersion $\sigma = 27$ \kms{{}
543: which is only slightly larger than the measurement error of $\pm20$
544: \kms. Our value of \meanvgsr{} is somewhat higher than DZV06's
545: value of $100\pm8$ \kms\ and is in better agreement with
546: \citeauthor{NYC07}'s \citeyearpar{NYC07} value of $130\pm10$ \kms.
547:
548:
549: %-------------------- 12hrtno --------------------------%
550: \begin{figure}[htbp]
551: \centering
552: \epsscale{0.8}
553: \plotone{f7_cmyk.eps}
554: \caption[The spatial and \vgsr{} distribution of RRL
555: candidates from the SEKBO survey and QUEST RRLs found by
556: \citet{DZV06} to be VSS members.]{The spatial distribution of
557: RRL candidates from the SEKBO survey \textit{(circles)} and
558: QUEST RRLs found to be VSS members \textit{(triangles)}.
559: Symbol size represents distance, ranging from 16 kpc
560: \textit{(largest)} to 22 kpc \textit{(smallest)}. Filled
561: circles were observed spectroscopically and are color-coded
562: according to \vgsr. \textit{Blue:} less than $-160$ \kms{};
563: \textit{Cyan:} $-160$ to $-40$ \kms{}; \textit{Green:} $-40$
564: to 40 \kms{}; \textit{Magenta:} 40 to 160 \kms{} and
565: \textit{Red:} greater than 160 \kms. The dotted line is the
566: ecliptic and the small dots represent the coverage of the
567: SEKBO survey fields in this part of the sky. The dashed box
568: is the region where \citet{DZV06} identified the VSS as an
569: excess of main-sequence stars of appropriate apparent
570: magnitude. The approximate southern limit of SDSS data in
571: this region is shown by the solid line at Dec = $-4$\degree.}
572: \label{12hrtno}
573: \end{figure}
574: %------------------------------------------------------%
575:
576:
577:
578:
579: Figure \ref{genhistovss} is a generalized histogram of \vgsr{} in
580: which each observed value is represented by a normal distribution with
581: mean equal to the observed value and standard deviation comparable to
582: the uncertainty in the measurement. Summing probability density
583: distributions over all observations then yields an estimate of the
584: true distribution of \vgsr{} which, unlike in standard histograms,
585: does not vary according to binning choice. A random selection of halo
586: stars is expected to have a normal distribution of radial velocities
587: (e.g. \citealt{HMO01}) with a mean of $\sim$0 \kms{} and a standard
588: deviation of $\sim$100 \kms (e.g.\ \citealt{SGK04,BGK05}) (dotted line
589: on Figure \ref{genhistovss}). Our data does not fit the expected
590: distribution well, though the difference did not reach statistical
591: significance in a Kolmogorov-Smirnov test due to the small sample
592: size.
593:
594: On visual inspection, however, there is a suggestion of a peak at
595: $\sim$130 \kms{} (VSS members) and a second at large negative velocities.
596: The three stars contributing to this latter peak, for which
597: \meanvgsr{} = $-175 \pm 10$ \kms{}, are similar in velocity (and general
598: spatial location) to the excess of stars
599: identified by \citet{NYC07} at \vgsr{} $= -168 \pm 10$ \kms{}
600: and (RA, Dec) $\approx$ (191\degree, $-8$\degree{}). \citet{NYC07} did not suggest an
601: association for this peak, but it has the appropriate \vgsr{} to be
602: associated with the Sgr leading tidal tail, which is expected to have a highly
603: negative radial velocity at this RA (e.g.\ see modeling by
604: \citealt{LJM05}). However, debate currently surrounds the question of
605: whether Sgr debris, coming from the north Galactic pole to the solar
606: neighborhood, is in fact densely located in this region
607: \citep{MPJ07,NYC07}. \citeauthor{NYC07} do concede, however, that the
608: VSS and Sgr streams overlap, so while it is not expected
609: to be dense enough in this region to account for the entire
610: overdensity in Virgo, it seems plausible that a portion could be
611: attributed to Sgr leading debris.
612:
613: %--------------------------- genhistovss --------------------------%
614: % epsffit -r 22 16 596 784 genhisto_bw.eps | epsffit -r 22 16 596 784 |
615: % epsffit -r 22 16 596 784 > genhisto_rot_bw.eps
616: % BB 22 44 500 320
617: \begin{figure}[htbp]
618: \centering
619: \epsscale{1}
620: \plotone{f8.eps}
621: \caption[Generalized histogram of \vgsr{} for the eleven
622: observed RRLs in the VSS region.]{Generalized histogram of
623: \vgsr{} (with kernel of 20 \kms{}) for the eleven observed
624: RRLs in the VSS region \textit{(left)} and for the fourteen
625: RRLs in the 14 h, 16 h, and 0 h regions \textit{(right)}.
626: Overplotted \textit{(dotted line)} is the expected
627: distribution of \vgsr{} given a halo population in which
628: velocities are normally distributed with \meanvgsr{} = 0
629: \kms{} and $\sigma$ = 100 \kms{}. The VSS can be seen in the
630: left panel as the excess of stars at \vgsr{} $\sim 130$ \kms,
631: while the excess at \vgsr{} $\sim -170$ \kms{} could
632: potentially be related to leading Sgr debris.}
633: \label{genhistovss}
634: \end{figure}
635: %------------------------------------------------------%
636:
637:
638: \subsection{Regions at RA 14 h, 16 h, and 0 h}
639:
640: %% other clumps
641: No groupings of velocities were noted in the apparent spatial clumps
642: at 14 h, 16 h, and 0 h, though it should be noted that the small sample
643: sizes might have made any moving groups difficult to detect. We note,
644: however, that the \vgsr{} distribution of RRLs in these regions (see
645: the right panel of Figure \ref{genhistovss}) more closely resembles
646: the expected normal distribution of halo stars than does the
647: distribution of RRLs in the VSS region. As mentioned above, the
648: 20 and 21.5~h regions overlap with the Sgr trailing debris stream and the
649: results will be discussed in a separate paper.
650: %The remainder of this paper
651: %focuses on the VSS region, particularly its extension to the
652: %south of the declination limits of the SDSS and the QUEST survey.
653:
654: %\input{metal}
655:
656: \section{Metal Abundances}
657: \label{metal}
658:
659:
660: Metallicities ([Fe/H]) were calculated using the \citet{FR75} method
661: which is an analogue of \citeauthor{Preston59}'s
662: \citeyearpar{Preston59} classic $\Delta$S technique. In the
663: \citeauthor{FR75} method, metal abundance is determined by plotting
664: the pseudo-equivalent width (EW) of the Ca II K line, $W$(K), against
665: the mean EW of the Balmer lines, $W$(H). As the RRL varies in phase,
666: it traces out a path on this plot which is strongly dependent on its
667: metallicity. Thus, by using a calibration based on RRLs of known
668: metallicity, we can determine [Fe/H] for our sample from low
669: resolution spectra. Note that observations taken during rising light
670: (phase $\sim$ 0.8--1) should not be used since changes in the RRL's
671: effective gravity and Balmer line profiles during this stage alter the
672: relationship between $W$(K) and $W$(H). We have also omitted type $c$
673: RRLs from the metallicity analysis since they are hotter and have
674: weaker Ca II K lines than type $ab$ RRLs. Lower signal-to-noise
675: spectra and uncertainties in the contamination from interstellar Ca II
676: K would thus result in larger uncertainties in the metallicities of
677: type $c$ RRLs compared to type $ab$.
678:
679:
680: The first step was to normalize our wavelength-calibrated spectra to
681: unit intensity using IRAF's \textsc{continuum} task, which divides
682: each spectrum by an appropriate polynomial. Subsequent steps closely
683: followed the method described in \citet{Layden94}. Eight of
684: \citeauthor{Layden94}'s EW standard RRLs had been observed multiple
685: times over the course of our observing runs. $W$(K) (corrected for
686: interstellar contamination using the \citealt{Beers90} model) and the
687: EWs of the Balmer lines H$\delta$, H$\gamma$ and H$\beta$ were
688: measured using numerical integration, with feature bands and continuum
689: bands equal to \citeauthor{Layden94}'s wherever possible (see Table
690: \ref{ewbands}). Unlike \citeauthor{Layden94}, however, the $W$(K)
691: continuum bands were fixed for all reductions and our red continuum
692: band for H$\beta$ was truncated due to our smaller wavelength
693: coverage. Also note that all bands were offset by an
694: appropriate wavelength shift according to the observed geocentric
695: radial velocity of each spectrum (described in \S\ref{rv}).
696:
697:
698:
699:
700:
701:
702: The measured equivalent widths for the standard RRLs are shown in
703: Table \ref{ewstds} and offsets from \citeauthor{Layden94}'s values
704: are displayed in Figure \ref{resids}. It can be seen that our
705: values agree well with \citeauthor{Layden94}'s for $W$(K),
706: $W$(H$\delta$) and $W$(H$\gamma$) but that our values for
707: $W$(H$\beta$) are systematically smaller than
708: \citeauthor{Layden94}'s. This was likely due to the use of a
709: different red continuum band as mentioned above. A linear
710: regression was performed to calculate the appropriate correction to
711: bring our $W$(H$\beta$) measurements in line with
712: \citeauthor{Layden94}'s. The best fit is overplotted on Figure
713: \ref{resids}.
714:
715:
716:
717:
718: %---------------------- resids --------------------------%
719: \begin{figure}[htbp]
720: \centering
721: \epsscale{1.0}
722: \plotone{f9.eps}
723: \caption[Differences between pseudo-equivalent widths in the
724: present study and those of \citet{Layden94} for eight EW
725: standard stars.]{Differences between pseudo-equivalent widths
726: (\textit{top to bottom:} $W$(K), $W$(H$\gamma$),
727: $W$(H$\delta$), $W$(H$\beta$)) in the current study and those
728: of \citet{Layden94} for eight EW standard stars. Negative
729: $\Delta W$ values indicate that our EWs are smaller than those
730: of Layden. Error bars are the standard deviations of our
731: repeated measures of the EWs (see Table \ref{ewstds} for
732: details). No appreciable difference was noted for $W$(K),
733: $W$(H$\gamma$) or $W$(H$\delta$) (horizontal line drawn at
734: $\Delta W$ = 0 for reference) but a negative linear
735: relationship was noted for $W$(H$\beta$), as shown by the
736: solid line in the lowest plot.}
737: \label{resids}
738: \end{figure}
739: %------------------------------------------------------%
740:
741:
742:
743:
744:
745: %---------------------- h3k --------------------------%
746: \begin{figure}[htbp]
747: \centering
748: \epsscale{0.8}
749: \plotone{f10.eps}
750: \caption[The pseudo-equivalent width of the Ca II K line,
751: corrected for interstellar absorption, against the average
752: width of H$\delta$, H$\gamma$ and H$\beta$ for the 16 type
753: $ab$ RRLs in the 14 h, 16 h, 0 h, and VSS regions.]{The
754: pseudo-equivalent width of the Ca II K line, corrected for
755: interstellar absorption, against the average width of
756: H$\delta$, H$\gamma$ and H$\beta$ for the 16 type $ab$ RRLs in
757: the 14 h, 16 h, 0 h and VSS regions. Solid lines connect
758: values for the same RRL observed at different phases. The
759: dashed lines are the loci of stars having the indicated [Fe/H]
760: value according to \citeauthor{Layden94}'s
761: \citeyearpar{Layden94} calibration. The two hypothesized VSS
762: members are plotted as open squares.}
763: \label{h3k}
764: \end{figure}
765: %------------------------------------------------------%
766:
767:
768:
769:
770: With the offsets to \citeauthor{Layden94}'s system in hand, the process
771: of normalization and measurement of EWs was repeated for the target
772: RRLs. In Figure \ref{h3k}, $W$(K), corrected for interstellar Ca II
773: K, is plotted against $W$(H3), the average of the EWs of H$\delta$,
774: H$\gamma$ and H$\beta$ (offset to \citeauthor{Layden94}'s system).
775: The dashed lines are given by
776:
777: \begin{displaymath}
778: \textrm{$W$(K) = $a$ + $bW$(H) + $c$[Fe/H] + $dW$(H)[Fe/H],}
779: \end{displaymath}
780:
781: \noindent using coefficients determined by \citet{Layden94} that yield
782: an external precision for [Fe/H] of $0.15$--$0.20$ dex. The values of
783: [Fe/H] determined from this equation for the 16 type $ab$ RRLs are listed
784: in Table \ref{spectro} and
785: their distribution is shown in Figure \ref{fehhisto}.
786: Where more than one observation exists, the tabulated values were calculated
787: by averaging the [Fe/H] values from the different phases (cf.\ Figure \ref{h3k}).
788: Based on the stars with multiple observations, the
789: internal precision of a single [Fe/H] determination is 0.20 dex. For this sample
790: \meanfeh $= -1.86 \pm 0.1$ with a dispersion $\sigma$ = 0.45
791: dex (see Figure \ref{fehhisto}). This value is somewhat more metal
792: poor than that, \meanfeh $= -1.61 \pm 0.06$,
793: $\sigma$ = 0.4 dex, tabulated by \citet{KCC00} for RRLs in the halo. The two
794: proposed VSS members (the other two members are type $c$ RRLs for
795: which metallicities could not be calculated) have \meanfeh $ = -1.95
796: \pm 0.1$ on our [Fe/H] system and an abundance range of $0.4 \pm 0.2$
797: dex. These values agree with \meanfeh\sub{VSS} $= -1.86 \pm 0.08$,
798: $\sigma$ = 0.40 dex found by DZV06, supporting our claim that
799: these stars are part of the stream. The two type $ab$ RRLs
800: in the negative \vgsr\ peak in Figure \ref{genhistovss}, which may be associated
801: with Sgr debris, have \meanfeh $= -1.57 \pm
802: 0.1$ and an abundance range of $0.2 \pm 0.1$ dex.
803:
804:
805:
806: %---------------------- fehhisto --------------------------%
807: \begin{figure}[htbp]
808: \centering
809: \epsscale{0.5}
810: \plotone{f11.eps}
811: \caption{Generalized histogram of [Fe/H] (with kernel of 0.1
812: dex) for the 16 type $ab$ RRLs in the 14 h, 16 h, 0 h, and VSS
813: regions.}
814: \label{fehhisto}
815: \end{figure}
816: %------------------------------------------------------%
817:
818:
819: %\input{lf}
820:
821: \section{Luminosity Functions}
822: \label{lf}
823:
824:
825: Having discovered three RRLs with radial velocities and metal
826: abundances consistent with the VSS yet falling outside the VSS region
827: identified by DZV06, it was of interest to further explore the spatial
828: extent of the stream by now examining a broader stellar population.
829: We selected 49 2\degree$\times$2\degree{} regions spread over RA
830: 125--220\degree{} with the aim of sampling the area roughly evenly,
831: given the constraints of the actual SEKBO field locations (see Figure
832: \ref{12hr4panel}). Color-magnitude diagrams (CMDs) and luminosity
833: functions (LFs) were constructed from the SEKBO data (examples are
834: shown in Figure \ref{cmdlf}) and examined for signs of an upturn near
835: the magnitude where the subgiant branch and the main sequence merge.
836: For an old population, this occurs at $M_V \approx 3.5$ which corresponds
837: to $V \approx 19.9$ at a distance of 19 kpc (the average distance of the
838: four identified VSS members, consistent with the findings of
839: \citealt{NYR02} and DZV06). This technique was also used by DZV06,
840: where the target region was compared to a control region of equal
841: area. Given the difficulty in identifying a suitable control region
842: when the spatial extent of the VSS is unclear, we opted instead to
843: compare the observational data to synthetic data produced by the
844: Besan\c{c}on model of Galactic stellar populations \citep{RRD03}.
845: This model comprises four components: thin disk, thick disk, halo and
846: bulge. It is a smooth, dynamically self-consistent model where
847: parameters are forced to follow physical laws, taking into account
848: physical links between density, velocity and metallicity distribution.
849:
850:
851: The simulations covered a distance interval of 0--120 kpc and assumed
852: an average interstellar extinction coefficient of $A_V$ = 0.75 mag
853: kpc\super{-1}. This value was chosen so that the average integrated
854: line-of-sight extinction was in agreement with those derived using the
855: dust maps of \citet{SFD98} and it is close to the value suggested by
856: \citet{RRD03} for intermediate to high galactic latitudes (the region
857: studied here covers $30\degree \lesssim b \lesssim 60\degree$).
858: Initial cuts in magnitude ($13 < V < 22$) and color ($-0.5 < V-R <
859: 1.5$) were made. In order to omit local red dwarfs and focus more
860: clearly on the population of interest, only stars with $(V-R)_0 < 0.7$
861: were included in the luminosity functions. Since the simulated color
862: interval greatly exceeded the observational color errors, the
863: simulations were not convolved with photometric errors. Similarly,
864: completeness of the observations was not incorporated into the
865: simulated data since our analyses would focus on stars brighter than
866: the observational incompleteness limit.
867:
868: %-------------------- 12hr4panel --------------------------%
869: % BB 30 320 560 700
870: \begin{figure}[htbp]
871: \centering
872: \epsscale{1.0}
873: \plotone{f12_cmyk.eps}
874: \caption[The spatial distribution of regions where data was
875: compared to the model, with color representing the
876: significance of the excess of data stars over synthetic
877: stars.]{The spatial distribution of regions in which data was
878: compared to the Galactic stellar distribution model. The
879: significance of the excess of data stars over synthetic stars
880: is represented by the coloring of the region according to the
881: scale shown, with darker shades indicating a more significant
882: excess. The range of magnitudes included in the excess
883: calculation was $V_0$ = 16.25 to \textit{(left panel, top to
884: bottom)} 18.25, 18.75, 19.25 or \textit{(right panel)} 19.75.
885: Also shown are the four stars from our sample with \vgsr{}
886: consistent with the VSS \textit{(cyan asterisks)} and those
887: found by DZV06 in QUEST data \textit{(red crosses)}. The
888: example regions in Figure \ref{cmdlf} are circled in yellow.
889: As in Figure \ref{12hrtno}, the red dashed box is DZV06's
890: identification of the VSS region. The dashed line represents
891: the ecliptic and the solid lines outline the broad limits of
892: the SEKBO survey, with small dots showing the centers of the
893: fields surveyed.}
894: \label{12hr4panel}
895: \end{figure}
896: %------------------------------------------------------%
897:
898:
899: Equatorial coordinates of the regions simulated were identical to
900: those of the chosen observed regions (with a step size of 1\degree{}
901: in both RA and Dec), however, areas were not equal due to the
902: non-uniform sampling of the SEKBO survey (see the small dots in the
903: righthand panel of Figure \ref{12hr4panel}). In order to compare the
904: LFs, we thus normalized the synthetic data to the observed data based
905: on counts in the range $14.7< V_0 < 16$. As an example, Figure
906: \ref{cmdlf} shows CMDs and LFs for three regions. In the upper panel,
907: a clear excess of observed stars over synthetic stars can be seen for
908: $V_0 > 16.5$, peaking at $V_0 \sim 19.5$. It should be noted that
909: incompleteness becomes a significant factor by $V = 19$ and thus the
910: excess may well continue to grow to fainter magnitudes. In this
911: particular region, two excesses are apparent in the CMD for stars
912: fainter than $V \sim 19$. One has $(V-R)_0 \sim 0.35$ while the other
913: is redder, with $(V-R)_0 \sim 0.6$. These excesses possibly
914: correspond to the top of the main sequence and the lower giant branch,
915: respectively. We verified that the excess in the luminosity function
916: is still present using a bluer cutoff, $(V-R)_0 < 0.5$, and thus the
917: excess is not driven solely by the redder stars. In the middle panel,
918: the overall excess is smaller, becoming noticeable only at $V_0 \sim
919: 17.5$ and apparently peaking at $V_0 \sim 19$ before incompleteness
920: sets in. There is thus some evidence for the VSS in the region
921: represented in the middle panel and evidence for a strong signal in
922: the region represented in the top panel. The data in the bottom panel
923: follows the synthetic data closely, until dropping off at the faint
924: end when incompleteness sets in. Such regions show no evidence of the
925: presence of the VSS.
926:
927:
928: As confirmation of these results, for those regions north of the declination limit of
929: the SDSS we carried out a similar comparison using SDSS data rather
930: than that from the SEKBO survey.
931: The SDSS data have the advantage of deeper limiting magnitude and complete area
932: coverage. In Figure \ref{sdsslfcomp} we show comparisons similar to those
933: of Figure \ref{cmdlf}, but with the predictions of the Besan\c{c}on model now
934: compared to SDSS data, again for 2\degree$\times$2\degree{} regions.
935: As for the SEKBO data, the color-magnitude diagrams and luminosity functions
936: in Figure \ref{sdsslfcomp} exclude local red dwarfs by considering only stars with
937: $(g-r)_{0} < 1.0$, equivalent to $(V-R)_{0} \approx 0.7$. The
938: upper panels of Figure \ref{sdsslfcomp} are in fact for the same region as the
939: upper panels of Figure \ref{cmdlf}, and, comfortingly, the results are very similar.
940: There is an increasing excess of stars above the model predictions with decreasing
941: magnitude that continues beyond the completeness limit of the SEKBO data,
942: confirming that the VSS is strongly present in this region. The other two panels
943: show different regions to those in Figure \ref{cmdlf}, though they were selected in a similar
944: way: the middle panel is for the region centered on (RA, Dec) = (170\degree,
945: +2\degree) where the
946: SEKBO data predicts the VSS is present (cf.\ Figure \ref{12hr4panel}) and the lower panel
947: is for the region (135\degree, +8\degree) where no significant excess is predicted. In both instances the
948: comparison with the SDSS data confirms the interpretation of the SEKBO data.
949:
950:
951: % strong VSS (top) -> field31
952: % weak VSS (middle) -> field42
953: % absent (bottom) -> field11
954:
955: %-------------------- cmdlf --------------------------%
956: % BB 18 144 592 718
957: \begin{figure}[htbp]
958: \centering
959: \epsscale{0.7}
960: \plotone{f13.eps}
961: \caption[CMDs and LFs for three observed and synthetic
962: fields.]{\textit{Left panels:} Example CMDs from observed data
963: for 2\degree$\times$2\degree{} (non-uniformly sampled) regions
964: (see yellow circles on Figure \ref{12hr4panel} for spatial
965: locations). \textit{Middle panels:} Corresponding CMDs from
966: synthetic data using the Bescan\c{c}on model \citep{RRD03},
967: not convolved with completeness or photometric errors. Note
968: that the areas have not been normalized in constructing the
969: CMDs. \textit{Right panels:} Luminosity functions for
970: observed \textit{(solid line)} and synthetic data (normalized
971: over $14.7<V_0<16$; \textit{dashed line}) in each region for
972: stars with $(V-R)_0 < 0.7$. Poisson error bars are shown.
973: The field in the top panel (RA $\sim 178$\degree) shows a
974: large excess of stars in the data compared to the model,
975: providing strong evidence for the presence of the VSS. The
976: field in the middle panel (RA $\sim 192$\degree) shows a
977: weaker excess, while the field in the bottom panel (RA $\sim
978: 218$\degree) shows no excess.}
979: \label{cmdlf}
980: \end{figure}
981: %------------------------------------------------------%
982:
983: %-------------------------sdsslfcomp---------------%
984: \begin{figure}[htbp]
985: \centering
986: \epsscale{0.8}
987: \plotone{f14.eps}
988: \caption[As for fig 13 but with SDSS data]{Color-magnitude diagram and luminosity
989: function comparisons as for Figure \ref{cmdlf} but now with SDSS observational data
990: rather than SEKBO data. The field for the upper panels is the same as in
991: Figure \ref{cmdlf}. \textit{Left panels:} CMDs
992: for 2\degree$\times$2\degree{} regions from the SDSS.
993: \textit{Right panels:} Luminosity functions for
994: observed \textit{(solid line)} and synthetic data (normalized
995: over $14.9<g_0<16.2$; \textit{dashed line}) in each region for
996: stars with $(g-r)_0 < 1.0$. Poisson error bars are shown.
997: As in Figure \ref{cmdlf} the top panel shows a
998: large excess of stars compared to the model,
999: providing strong evidence for the presence of the VSS. The
1000: field in the middle panel (170\degree, +2\degree) also shows an
1001: excess, while the field in the bottom panel (135\degree, +8\degree) shows
1002: reasonable agreement between the model and the observations. These
1003: are consistent with the SEKBO data for these fields (cf.\ Figure \ref{12hr4panel}).}
1004: \label{sdsslfcomp}
1005: \end{figure}
1006: %-------------------------------------------------%
1007:
1008:
1009: With this confirmation of the utility of the SEKBO data, we now examine the
1010: excess quantitatively, by computing for each
1011: region the average difference between the observed data counts and the
1012: normalized model counts between $V_0 = 16.25$ and $V_0 = $18.25,
1013: 18.75, 19.25 or 19.75. Differences were calculated in 0.5 mag bins
1014: and divided by the error in the difference, taken as the combined
1015: Poisson error in the data and normalized model counts. The average
1016: error-weighted difference over the magnitude bins was then taken as a
1017: measure of the significance of the excess in each region. Figure
1018: \ref{12hr4panel} displays the significance of the excess, represented
1019: by the grayscale shading, as a function of spatial position. The
1020: regions colored black have a 4.5$\sigma$ excess of data stars over
1021: model stars, providing strong evidence for the presence of the VSS in
1022: those regions. Since the excess appears to peak at $V_0\sim 19.5$ or
1023: fainter, it is not surprising that using 19.75 as the faint limit of
1024: the excess calculation (right panel) provides the highest sensitivity
1025: to detection of the VSS. The VSS signal is, however, present at
1026: brighter magnitudes, albeit more weakly (left panels). Taking into
1027: account the scarcity of sampled fields to the west of RA $\sim
1028: 180\degree$, the overall pattern of excess significance is not
1029: inconsistent with the location of overdensities (Clumps 1 and 2) of
1030: the SEKBO survey RRL candidates at this distance.
1031:
1032:
1033:
1034:
1035: While the foregoing analysis provided a significance map of the VSS,
1036: it is also desirable to construct a density map so that the absolute
1037: magnitude of the entire stream can be estimated. To do this, we
1038: scaled both observed and synthetic counts by the actual area covered.
1039: After normalizing the synthetic data to the observed data based on
1040: counts between $14.7 < V_0 < 16.0$ and subtracting synthetic data from
1041: observed data, we then had a measure of the excess number of stars per
1042: square degree in each 0.5 mag bin between $V_0 = 16.25$ and 19.75.
1043: This excess number, summed over magnitude, is represented by the
1044: grayscale shading in Figure \ref{12hrarea}, with black indicating a
1045: 500 star excess per square degree. The overall pattern of excess is
1046: similar to the significance map in the righthand panel of Figure
1047: \ref{12hr4panel}, with perhaps the southern regions showing a stronger
1048: signal in the density map than in the significance map. This could be
1049: understood in terms of the relative significance of the feature
1050: decreasing towards the Galactic plane due to the increase in
1051: background Milky Way stars, while the number density of stars in the
1052: feature in fact remains constant.
1053:
1054:
1055: %-------------------- 12hrarea --------------------------%
1056: % BB 22 16 596 784 (rotate sm figure 3 times using epsffit)
1057: \begin{figure}[htbp]
1058: \centering
1059: \epsscale{1.0}
1060: \plotone{f15_cmyk.eps}
1061: \caption[The spatial distribution of regions where data was
1062: compared to the model, with color representing the number of
1063: excess data stars over synthetic stars.]{The spatial
1064: distribution of regions in which data was compared to the
1065: Galactic stellar distribution model. The number of excess
1066: data stars over synthetic stars is represented by the
1067: coloring of the region according to the scale shown, with
1068: darker shades indicating a larger excess. The range of
1069: magnitudes included in the excess calculation was $16.25 < V_0
1070: < 19.75$. Also shown are the four stars from our sample with
1071: \vgsr{} consistent with the VSS \textit{(cyan asterisks)} and
1072: those found by DZV06 \textit{(red crosses)}. The ellipse
1073: outlines the estimated area of the VSS based on the current
1074: analysis. As in Figure \ref{12hrtno}, the red dashed box is
1075: DZV06's identification of the VSS region. The dashed line
1076: represents the ecliptic and the small dots show the centres of
1077: the fields surveyed. The approximate southern limit of the
1078: SDSS coverage in this region is shown by the solid line at Dec =
1079: $-4$\degree.}
1080: \label{12hrarea}
1081: \end{figure}
1082: %------------------------------------------------------%
1083:
1084:
1085:
1086:
1087:
1088:
1089: In order to make a rough estimation of the sky coverage of the VSS, an
1090: ellipse has been overplotted on Figure \ref{12hrarea}. The chosen
1091: shape is somewhat arbitrary, with the positioning and size selected so
1092: as to include the regions in which the excess appears visually to be
1093: significant. The ellipse encompasses areas not sampled by the SEKBO
1094: survey on the basis that the VSS could plausibly extend to those areas
1095: given the distribution of high excess regions in the sampled areas and
1096: assuming a certain degree of uniformity. This assumption could lead
1097: to an overestimate in the area, but conversely, the VSS may well
1098: extend beyond the survey region (particularly to the south where no
1099: data has been gathered by previous surveys) leading to an area
1100: underestimate. Entire coverage will be possible with SkyMapper
1101: \citep{KSB07}, but in the meantime we note that the current area
1102: estimate is likely to be uncertain by at least a factor of two.
1103:
1104: Assuming a heliocentric distance of 19 kpc, the stream's projection on
1105: the sky extends $\sim$15 kpc in length along the largest dimension and
1106: covers an area of $\sim$760 deg\super{2}, centered at (RA, Dec) $\sim
1107: (186\degree, -4\degree)$. This estimate of the area, with its large
1108: uncertainty, is in rough agreement with \citeauthor{JIB08}'s
1109: \citeyearpar{JIB08} estimate of 1000 deg\super{2} for the VSS based on
1110: SDSS data. Not only is there evidence that the feature is much larger
1111: than DZV06's estimate of 106 deg\super{2} (dashed box on Figure
1112: \ref{12hr4panel}), but given the non-overlapping regions of the SDSS
1113: and SEKBO survey data, the true size of the stream may well be greater
1114: than 1000 deg\super{2}. Our analysis shows the VSS to extend to the
1115: west and to the south of DZV06's detection. We indeed found three
1116: RRLs in the southern direction with radial velocities consistent with
1117: the VSS. Note that neither QUEST nor SDSS covered Galactic latitudes
1118: lower than $\sim$60\degree{} in this region, hence our findings
1119: provide the first tracing of this section of the stream, extending the
1120: location of the VSS well south of the declination limits of these two surveys.
1121: \citet{JIB08} found that the number density of stars belonging to the
1122: feature increases towards the Galactic plane and indeed we find that
1123: the VSS extends to at least $b\sim45\degree$ (Dec $\sim -15$\degree).
1124:
1125:
1126:
1127: Having estimated the area of the VSS, it is now possible to calculate
1128: an estimate of the absolute magnitude, $M_V$, of the stream. The
1129: fluxes for the excess stars in each magnitude bin ($16.25<V_0<19.75$)
1130: were averaged over all the regions contained within the ellipse,
1131: summed over the magnitude bins and finally, multiplied by the area of
1132: the ellipse. Assuming a distance of 19 kpc and an area of 760
1133: deg\super{2} and using $V$ band values of $M_{\odot} = 4.83$ and
1134: $L_{\odot} = 4.64\times10^{25}$ W \citep{BM98}, we calculate $M_V =
1135: -11.9$ mag. This value is considerably brighter than $M_R = -8.0$ mag
1136: estimated by \citet{JIB08}. We note, however, that their value
1137: assumed a distance of 10 kpc, an area of 1000 deg\super{2} and
1138: magnitude limits of $18 < R < 21.5$. Using values as close to these
1139: as possible given the constraints of our data, our estimate becomes
1140: $M_V = -10.1$ mag.
1141:
1142: A final point to note is that \citet{JIB08} find the VSS to span
1143: $\sim$10 kpc along the line-of-sight, at distances closer than where
1144: it was detected by the SEKBO survey, and that their survey data did
1145: not go beyond a scale height of $Z = 20$ kpc. It thus seems a likely
1146: scenario that the VSS spans many kpc along the line-of-sight (indeed
1147: DZV06 found possible members at distances ranging between 16 and 24
1148: kpc and new results of \citealt{VJZ08} find possible members as close
1149: as 12 kpc) but is more diffuse at distances $\lesssim$15 kpc, with the
1150: highest concentration at $d \sim 19$ kpc. Considering that
1151: \citet{JIB08} do not include the portion at $d \sim 19$ kpc in their
1152: $M_R$ calculation, it is not surprising that their value should be
1153: considerably fainter than ours. It is also important to note that all
1154: our values are lower limits only, since stars brighter than $V_0 =
1155: 16.25$ and fainter than $V_0 = 19.75$ were not included. In addition,
1156: incompleteness was not taken into account. The estimate is also
1157: sensitive to the area covered, distribution of VSS density within that
1158: area and to the distance of the stream, each of which are somewhat
1159: uncertain based on the sampling of the data currently available and
1160: the likely extended nature of the stream along the line-of-sight.
1161:
1162: Nevertheless, the VSS is clearly a significant local structure. Its
1163: origin remains unclear, though the large abundance range observed
1164: ($\sim$0.4 dex)
1165: is consistent with DZV06's suggestion that the VSS is the disrupted
1166: remnants of a dwarf Spheroidal galaxy. It is certainly a large,
1167: diffuse structure and is likely to have a substantial total
1168: luminosity. Future kinematic observations are needed to further
1169: constrain the properties of the system and to provide additional clues
1170: to its origin.
1171:
1172:
1173:
1174:
1175: %\input{conc}
1176:
1177: \section{Conclusions}
1178: \label{conc}
1179:
1180:
1181: Analysis of follow-up spectroscopy of eleven photometrically confirmed
1182: RRLs from a candidate list based on SEKBO survey data has revealed
1183: three new RRLs with velocities consistent with membership in the Virgo
1184: Stellar Stream, in addition to one previously identified member
1185: (\meanvgsr = $127 \pm 10$ \kms{}, $\sigma = 27$ \kms). The two type
1186: $ab$ members have \meanfeh{} = $-1.95 \pm 0.1$ and an abundance range
1187: of $\sim$0.4 dex, consistent with values found by DZV06 for the VSS\@.
1188: The newly discovered VSS members occupy a region of space covered by
1189: neither QUEST nor SDSS data, to the south-east of the apparent center
1190: of the stream at (RA, Dec) $\sim$ ($186\degree,-4\degree$).
1191: Comparison of luminosity functions for observed data compared to data
1192: synthesized with the Besan\c{c}on Galactic model \citep{RRD03}
1193: revealed the VSS to be a large, diffuse feature, covering at least 760
1194: deg$^2$ of sky. The core of the VSS appears to have an angular size of
1195: $\sim$45\degree{} along the longest dimension, corresponding to a
1196: spatial scale of $\sim$15 kpc in projection, assuming a heliocentric
1197: distance of $\sim$19 kpc. We have traced the stream as far south as
1198: Dec $\sim -14$\degree{} and to Galactic latitudes as low as $b \sim
1199: 45$\degree.
1200:
1201:
1202:
1203:
1204:
1205: \acknowledgments
1206:
1207: We are grateful to Mike Bessell for generously taking time out of his
1208: own 2.3m run to take spectroscopic observations of two suspected VSS
1209: members which would otherwise have been lost due to poor weather.
1210: This research has been supported in part by the Australian Research
1211: Council through Discovery Project Grants DP0343962 and DP0878137.
1212:
1213: %\url{http://www.aas.org/publications/aastex}.
1214: %\email{aastex-help@aas.org}.
1215:
1216:
1217: %% See the AASTeX Web site at http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/AAS/AASTeX
1218: %% for information on obtaining the facility keywords.
1219: %{\it Facilities:} \facility{Nickel}, \facility{HST (STIS)}, \facility{CXO (ASIS)}.
1220:
1221: {\it Facilities:} \facility{SSO:1m (WFI)}, \facility{SSO:2.3m (DBS-B)}
1222:
1223: %---------------------- targets --------------------------%
1224: \begin{deluxetable}{lc}
1225: \tablewidth{0pt}
1226: \tabletypesize{\small}
1227: \tablecaption{Target Summary\label{targets}}
1228: \tablehead{
1229: \colhead{} & \colhead{Number of Targets}}
1230: \tablecolumns{2}
1231: \startdata
1232: \multicolumn{2}{c}{\textsc{Photometry and Spectroscopy}} \\
1233: \textbf{VSS:} & \\
1234: \phm{abcdefg}Clump 1 (12.4 h) & 8 \\
1235: \phm{abcdefg}Clump 2 (14 h) & 3 \\
1236: \textbf{Sgr:} & \\
1237: \phm{abcdefg}Clump 1 (20 h) & 5 \\
1238: \phm{abcdefg}Clump 2 (21.5 h) & 21 \\
1239: \textbf{Other clumps:} & \\
1240: \phm{abcdefg}14 h & 3 \\
1241: \phm{abcdefg}16 h & 6 \\
1242: \phm{abcdefg}0 h & 5 \\
1243: \textit{Spectroscopy Total} & \textit{51}\\
1244: \\
1245: \multicolumn{2}{c}{\textsc{Photometry Only}} \\
1246: \textbf{Contamination check:} & \\
1247: \phm{abcdefg}0 -- 21.5 h & 55 \\
1248: \textit{Photometry Total} & \textit{106}\\
1249: \enddata
1250: \end{deluxetable}
1251: %---------------------------------------------------------%
1252:
1253: %---------------------- ewbands --------------------------%
1254: \begin{deluxetable}{lccccccc}
1255: \tablewidth{0pt}
1256: \tabletypesize{\small}
1257: \tablecaption{Feature and continuum band wavelengths (in \AA)\label{ewbands}}
1258: \tablehead{
1259: \colhead{Feature}&\colhead{$\lambda$\sub{feature}}
1260: &\multicolumn{2}{c}{Feature Band}
1261: &\multicolumn{2}{c}{Blue Contin. Band}
1262: &\multicolumn{2}{c}{Red Contin. Band}
1263: \\
1264: \multicolumn{2}{l}{}
1265: &\colhead{$\lambda$\sub{blue}} &\colhead{$\lambda$\sub{red}}
1266: &\colhead{$\lambda$\sub{blue}} &\colhead{$\lambda$\sub{red}}
1267: &\colhead{$\lambda$\sub{blue}} &\colhead{$\lambda$\sub{red}}
1268: }
1269: \tablecolumns{8}
1270: \startdata
1271: Ca II K-narrow & 3933.666& 3927.& 3941.& 3908.& 3923.& 4019.& 4031.\\
1272: Ca II K-wide & 3933.666& 3924.& 3944.& 3908.& 3923.& 4019.& 4031.\\
1273: H$\delta$ & 4101.735& 4092.& 4112.& 4008.& 4060.& 4140.& 4215.\\
1274: H$\gamma$ & 4340.465& 4330.& 4350.& 4206.& 4269.& 4403.& 4476.\\
1275: H$\beta$ & 4861.327& 4851.& 4871.& 4719.& 4799.& 4925.& 4950.\\
1276: \enddata
1277: \end{deluxetable}
1278: %---------------------------------------------------------%
1279:
1280: %---------------------- ewstds --------------------------%
1281: \begin{deluxetable}{lccccccccc}
1282: \tablewidth{0pt}
1283: \tabletypesize{\small}
1284: \tablecaption{Standard equivalent widths (in \AA)\label{ewstds}}
1285: \tablehead{
1286: \colhead{Star}&\colhead{N\sub{obs}}
1287: &\multicolumn{2}{c}{$W$(K)}
1288: &\multicolumn{2}{c}{$W$(H$\delta$)}
1289: &\multicolumn{2}{c}{$W$(H$\gamma$)}
1290: &\multicolumn{2}{c}{$W$(H$\beta$)}
1291: \\
1292: \multicolumn{2}{l}{}
1293: &\colhead{mean} &\colhead{sd}
1294: &\colhead{mean} &\colhead{sd}
1295: &\colhead{mean} &\colhead{sd}
1296: &\colhead{mean} &\colhead{sd}
1297: }
1298: \tablecolumns{10}
1299: \startdata
1300: BD-17 484 & 8& 5.05\super{w}& 0.09& 3.70& 0.05& 3.51& 0.07& 3.41& 0.07\\
1301: HD 22413 & 10& 3.69\super{n}& 0.05& 6.75& 0.05& 6.43& 0.05& 5.86& 0.06\\
1302: HD 65925 & 2& 6.66\super{w}& 0.04& 5.33& 0.06& 5.08& 0.07& 5.04& 0.01\\
1303: HD 74000 & 4& 3.31\super{n}& 0.10& 3.89& 0.02& 3.66& 0.06& 3.43& 0.17\\
1304: HD 74438 & 2& 3.39\super{n}& 0.00& 8.88& 0.01& 8.59& 0.08& 7.82& 0.01\\
1305: HD 76483 & 7& 2.55\super{n}& 0.11& 9.85& 0.13& 9.55& 0.17& 8.68& 0.22\\
1306: HD 78791 & 2& 9.69\super{w}& 0.03& 2.47& 0.07& 2.48& 0.06& 3.79& 0.07\\
1307: HD 180482 & 4& 2.57\super{n}& 0.02& 10.02& 0.07& 9.64& 0.07& 8.82& 0.10\\
1308: \tableline
1309: \multicolumn{2}{l}{mean standard deviation}& & 0.06& & 0.06& & 0.08& & 0.09\\
1310: \enddata
1311: \tablecomments{When $W$(K\protect{\sub{wide}}) $< 4.0$ \AA, the narrow
1312: (n) feature band was used; when $W$(K\protect{\sub{wide}})
1313: \protect{$\geqslant$} 4.0 \AA, the wide (w) feature band was used.}
1314: \end{deluxetable}
1315: %---------------------------------------------------------%
1316:
1317:
1318: %\appendix
1319:
1320: %\input{photdatashort}
1321:
1322: \begin{deluxetable}{lcrccccccc}
1323: \rotate
1324: \tabletypesize{\small}
1325: \tablewidth{0pt}
1326: \tablecaption{Photometric data summary\label{photdata}}
1327: \tablehead{
1328:
1329:
1330: \colhead{ID} & \colhead{$\alpha$ (J2000.0)} & \colhead{$\delta$ (J2000.0)} & \colhead{$\langle$$V$$\rangle$} & \colhead{$\langle$$R$$\rangle$} & \colhead{$\langle$$V-R$$\rangle$$_0$} & \colhead{n\sub{obs}} & \colhead{Classification} & \colhead{Period (days)} & \colhead{$V$ Amplitude}}
1331:
1332: \startdata
1333:
1334: 96102-170 & 12 24 15.67 & $-$01 49 14.52 & 17.02 & 16.83 & 0.174 & 15 & RR$ab$ & 0.525 & 0.286 \\
1335: 96637-458 & 08 48 02.53 & 17 02 45.92 & 17.19 & 16.68 & 0.499 & 6 & non-variable & - & - \\
1336: 97883-402 & 13 51 34.58 & $-$11 46 40.63 & 17.30 & 17.06 & 0.199 & 5 & RR$ab$ & 0.542 & 0.718 \\
1337: 97890-199 & 13 43 04.44 & $-$11 34 05.74 & 16.34 & 16.18 & 0.130 & 6 & RR$c$ & 0.350 & 0.374 \\
1338: 97890-1542 & 13 45 14.61 & $-$11 12 09.57 & 17.24 & 17.09 & 0.105 & 7 & unclassified variable & - & - \\
1339: 99747-73 & 21 14 09.39 & $-$17 36 32.90 & 17.09 & 16.91 & 0.135 & 8 & RR$ab$ & 0.517 & 0.724 \\
1340: 99752-96 & 21 33 35.19 & $-$16 07 05.52 & 17.08 & 16.93 & 0.098 & 15 & RR$c$ & 0.324 & 0.466 \\
1341:
1342:
1343: \enddata
1344:
1345: \tablecomments{Table \ref{photdata} is published in its entirety in the electronic version of the Journal. A portion is shown here for guidance regarding its form and content. Units of right ascension are hours, minutes, and seconds, and units of declination are degrees, arcminutes, and arcseconds.}
1346:
1347:
1348: \end{deluxetable}
1349:
1350:
1351:
1352:
1353: %\input{spectro}
1354:
1355:
1356:
1357: \begin{deluxetable}{lcccrrcc}
1358: \tablewidth{0pt}
1359: \tabletypesize{\small}
1360: \tablecaption{Spectroscopic data summary\label{spectro}}
1361: \tablehead{
1362: \colhead{ID} &\colhead{RRL} &\colhead{systemic vel.}
1363: &\colhead{n\sub{vel}} &\colhead{$V$\sub{helio}} &\colhead{\vgsr}
1364: &\colhead{n\sub{Fe/H}} &\colhead{[Fe/H]}
1365: \\
1366: &\colhead{type} &\colhead{calculation}
1367: &\colhead{} &\colhead{(\kms)} &\colhead{(\kms)}
1368: &\colhead{} &\colhead{}
1369: }
1370:
1371:
1372: \startdata
1373:
1374: \multicolumn{8}{l}{\textit{VSS region}}\\
1375: 96102-170* & $ab$ & fit & 2 & $230$ & $128$ & 3 & $-2.15$ \\
1376: 105648-222 & $ab$ & fit & 1 & $-91$ & $-162$ & 1 & $-1.45$ \\
1377: 107552-323 & $ab$ & fit & 3 & $302$ & $193$ & 3 & $-1.34$ \\
1378: 108227-529 & $c$ & average & 1 & $-8$ & $-119$ & - & - \\
1379: 109247-528 & $c$ & average & 2 & $113$ & $28$ & - & - \\
1380: 119827-670 & $ab$ & fit & 2 & $-84$ & $-192$ & 2 & $-1.68$ \\
1381: 120185-77 & $ab$ & fit & 2 & $94$ & $ 1$ & 2 & $-2.38$ \\
1382: 120679-336* & $ab$ & fit & 3 & $204$ & $91$ & 2 & $-1.74$ \\
1383: 120698-392* & $c$ & average & 1 & $227$ & $134$ & - & - \\
1384: 121242-188* & $c$ & average & 3 & $276$ & $155$ & - & - \\
1385: 121194-205 & $c$ & average & 1 & $-39$ & $-152$ & - & - \\
1386: \\
1387: \multicolumn{8}{l}{\textit{14 h, 16 h, and 0 h regions}}\\
1388: 97890-199 & $c$ & average & 2 & $367$ & $285$ & - & -\\
1389: 106586-211 & $ab$ & fit & 2 & $-5$ & $-33$ & 2 & $-1.52$\\
1390: 114421-242 & $ab$ & fit & 1 & $-51$ & $40$ & 1 & $-2.30$\\
1391: 120857-475 & $ab$ & fit & 1 & $191$ & $100$ & 1 & $-2.24$\\
1392: 121817-2385 & $ab$ & fit & 2 & $3$ & $-33$ & 1 & $-1.87$\\
1393: 121906-2336 & $c$ & average & 2 & $40$ & $-2$ & - & -\\
1394: 122112-595 & $ab$ & fit & 1 & $-134$ & $-168$ & 1 & $-1.42$\\
1395: 122156-1114 & $c$ & average & 2 & $-42$ & $-81$ & - & -\\
1396: 122214-1315 & $ab$ & fit & 1 & $24$ & $-14$ & 2 & $-1.96$\\
1397: 122240-33 & $ab$ & average & 2 & $121$ & $21$ & 1 & $-2.01$\\
1398: 127008-210 & $ab$ & fit & 2 & $-3$ & $78$ & 2 & $-0.96$\\
1399: 127806-85 & $ab$ & fit & 1 & $-187$ & $-102$ & 1 & $-2.63$\\
1400: 127806-438 & $c$ & average & 3 & $-165$ & $-80$ & - & - \\
1401: 128416-544 & $ab$ & fit & 2 & $-309$ & $-192$ & 2 & $-2.19$\\
1402:
1403: \enddata
1404:
1405: \tablecomments{Proposed VSS members are marked by *}
1406:
1407: \end{deluxetable}
1408:
1409:
1410:
1411:
1412:
1413: %% \bibliographystyle{apj}
1414: %% \bibliography{apj-jour,ms}
1415:
1416:
1417: \begin{thebibliography}{41}
1418: \expandafter\ifx\csname natexlab\endcsname\relax\def\natexlab#1{#1}\fi
1419:
1420: \bibitem[{{Beers}(1990)}]{Beers90}
1421: {Beers}, T.~C. 1990, \aj, 99, 323
1422:
1423: \bibitem[{{Bell} {et~al.}(2008){Bell}, {Zucker}, {Belokurov}, {Sharma},
1424: {Johnston}, {Bullock}, {Hogg}, {Jahnke}, {de Jong}, {Beers}, {Evans},
1425: {Grebel}, {Ivezi{\'c}}, {Koposov}, {Rix}, {Schneider}, {Steinmetz}, \&
1426: {Zolotov}}]{BZB08}
1427: {Bell}, E.~F., {Zucker}, D.~B., {Belokurov}, V., {Sharma}, S., {Johnston},
1428: K.~V., {Bullock}, J.~S., {Hogg}, D.~W., {Jahnke}, K., {de Jong}, J.~T.~A.,
1429: {Beers}, T.~C., {Evans}, N.~W., {Grebel}, E.~K., {Ivezi{\'c}}, {\v Z}.,
1430: {Koposov}, S.~E., {Rix}, H.-W., {Schneider}, D.~P., {Steinmetz}, M., \&
1431: {Zolotov}, A. 2008, \apj, 680, 295
1432:
1433: \bibitem[{{Belokurov} {et~al.}(2007){Belokurov}, {Evans}, {Bell}, {Irwin},
1434: {Hewett}, {Koposov}, {Rockosi}, {Gilmore}, {Zucker}, {Fellhauer},
1435: {Wilkinson}, {Bramich}, {Vidrih}, {Rix}, {Beers}, {Schneider}, {Barentine},
1436: {Brewington}, {Brinkmann}, {Harvanek}, {Krzesinski}, {Long}, {Pan},
1437: {Snedden}, {Malanushenko}, \& {Malanushenko}}]{BEB07}
1438: {Belokurov}, V., {Evans}, N.~W., {Bell}, E.~F., {Irwin}, M.~J., {Hewett},
1439: P.~C., {Koposov}, S., {Rockosi}, C.~M., {Gilmore}, G., {Zucker}, D.~B.,
1440: {Fellhauer}, M., {Wilkinson}, M.~I., {Bramich}, D.~M., {Vidrih}, S., {Rix},
1441: H.-W., {Beers}, T.~C., {Schneider}, D.~P., {Barentine}, J.~C., {Brewington},
1442: H., {Brinkmann}, J., {Harvanek}, M., {Krzesinski}, J., {Long}, D., {Pan}, K.,
1443: {Snedden}, S.~A., {Malanushenko}, O., \& {Malanushenko}, V. 2007, \apjl, 657,
1444: L89
1445:
1446: \bibitem[{{Belokurov} {et~al.}(2006){Belokurov}, {Zucker}, {Evans}, {Gilmore},
1447: {Vidrih}, {Bramich}, {Newberg}, {Wyse}, {Irwin}, {Fellhauer}, {Hewett},
1448: {Walton}, {Wilkinson}, {Cole}, {Yanny}, {Rockosi}, {Beers}, {Bell},
1449: {Brinkmann}, {Ivezi{\'c}}, \& {Lupton}}]{BZE06}
1450: {Belokurov}, V., {Zucker}, D.~B., {Evans}, N.~W., {Gilmore}, G., {Vidrih}, S.,
1451: {Bramich}, D.~M., {Newberg}, H.~J., {Wyse}, R.~F.~G., {Irwin}, M.~J.,
1452: {Fellhauer}, M., {Hewett}, P.~C., {Walton}, N.~A., {Wilkinson}, M.~I.,
1453: {Cole}, N., {Yanny}, B., {Rockosi}, C.~M., {Beers}, T.~C., {Bell}, E.~F.,
1454: {Brinkmann}, J., {Ivezi{\'c}}, {\v Z}., \& {Lupton}, R. 2006, \apjl, 642,
1455: L137
1456:
1457: \bibitem[{Binney \& Merrifield(1998)}]{BM98}
1458: Binney, J. \& Merrifield, M. 1998, Galactic Astronomy (Princeton: Princeton
1459: Univ. Press)
1460:
1461: \bibitem[{{Brown} {et~al.}(2005){Brown}, {Geller}, {Kenyon}, {Kurtz}, {Allende
1462: Prieto}, {Beers}, \& {Wilhelm}}]{BGK05}
1463: {Brown}, W.~R., {Geller}, M.~J., {Kenyon}, S.~J., {Kurtz}, M.~J., {Allende
1464: Prieto}, C., {Beers}, T.~C., \& {Wilhelm}, R. 2005, \aj, 130, 1097
1465:
1466: \bibitem[{{Carollo} {et~al.}(2007){Carollo}, {Beers}, {Lee}, {Chiba}, {Norris},
1467: {Wilhelm}, {Sivarani}, {Marsteller}, {Munn}, {Bailer-Jones}, {Fiorentin}, \&
1468: {York}}]{CBL07}
1469: {Carollo}, D., {Beers}, T.~C., {Lee}, Y.~S., {Chiba}, M., {Norris}, J.~E.,
1470: {Wilhelm}, R., {Sivarani}, T., {Marsteller}, B., {Munn}, J.~A.,
1471: {Bailer-Jones}, C.~A.~L., {Fiorentin}, P.~R., \& {York}, D.~G. 2007, \nat,
1472: 450, 1020
1473:
1474: \bibitem[{{Chiba} \& {Beers}(2001)}]{CB01}
1475: {Chiba}, M. \& {Beers}, T.~C. 2001, ApJ, 549, 325
1476:
1477: \bibitem[{{Duffau} {et~al.}(2006){Duffau}, {Zinn}, {Vivas}, {Carraro},
1478: {M{\'e}ndez}, {Winnick}, \& {Gallart}}]{DZV06}
1479: {Duffau}, S., {Zinn}, R., {Vivas}, A.~K., {Carraro}, G., {M{\'e}ndez}, R.~A.,
1480: {Winnick}, R., \& {Gallart}, C. 2006, \apjl, 636, L97
1481:
1482: \bibitem[{{Eggen} {et~al.}(1962){Eggen}, {Lynden-Bell}, \& {Sandage}}]{ELS62}
1483: {Eggen}, O.~J., {Lynden-Bell}, D., \& {Sandage}, A.~R. 1962, ApJ, 136, 748
1484:
1485: \bibitem[{{Freeman} \& {Rodgers}(1975)}]{FR75}
1486: {Freeman}, K.~C. \& {Rodgers}, A.~W. 1975, \apjl, 201, L71+
1487:
1488: \bibitem[{{Harding} {et~al.}(2001){Harding}, {Morrison}, {Olszewski},
1489: {Arabadjis}, {Mateo}, {Dohm-Palmer}, {Freeman}, \& {Norris}}]{HMO01}
1490: {Harding}, P., {Morrison}, H.~L., {Olszewski}, E.~W., {Arabadjis}, J., {Mateo},
1491: M., {Dohm-Palmer}, R.~C., {Freeman}, K.~C., \& {Norris}, J.~E. 2001, \aj,
1492: 122, 1397
1493:
1494: \bibitem[{{Ibata} {et~al.}(1994){Ibata}, {Gilmore}, \& {Irwin}}]{IGI94}
1495: {Ibata}, R.~A., {Gilmore}, G., \& {Irwin}, M.~J. 1994, \nat, 370, 194
1496:
1497: \bibitem[{{Ibata} {et~al.}(2003){Ibata}, {Irwin}, {Lewis}, {Ferguson}, \&
1498: {Tanvir}}]{IIL03}
1499: {Ibata}, R.~A., {Irwin}, M.~J., {Lewis}, G.~F., {Ferguson}, A.~M.~N., \&
1500: {Tanvir}, N. 2003, \mnras, 340, L21
1501:
1502: \bibitem[{{Jones} {et~al.}(1988){Jones}, {Carney}, \& {Latham}}]{JCL88}
1503: {Jones}, R.~V., {Carney}, B.~W., \& {Latham}, D.~W. 1988, \apj, 326, 312
1504:
1505: \bibitem[{{Juri{\'c}} {et~al.}(2008){Juri{\'c}}, {Ivezi{\'c}}, {Brooks},
1506: {Lupton}, {Schlegel}, {Finkbeiner}, {Padmanabhan}, {Bond}, {Sesar},
1507: {Rockosi}, {Knapp}, {Gunn}, {Sumi}, {Schneider}, {Barentine}, {Brewington},
1508: {Brinkmann}, {Fukugita}, {Harvanek}, {Kleinman}, {Krzesinski}, {Long},
1509: {Neilsen}, {Nitta}, {Snedden}, \& {York}}]{JIB08}
1510: {Juri{\'c}}, M., {Ivezi{\'c}}, {\v Z}., {Brooks}, A., {Lupton}, R.~H.,
1511: {Schlegel}, D., {Finkbeiner}, D., {Padmanabhan}, N., {Bond}, N., {Sesar}, B.,
1512: {Rockosi}, C.~M., {Knapp}, G.~R., {Gunn}, J.~E., {Sumi}, T., {Schneider},
1513: D.~P., {Barentine}, J.~C., {Brewington}, H.~J., {Brinkmann}, J., {Fukugita},
1514: M., {Harvanek}, M., {Kleinman}, S.~J., {Krzesinski}, J., {Long}, D.,
1515: {Neilsen}, Jr., E.~H., {Nitta}, A., {Snedden}, S.~A., \& {York}, D.~G. 2008,
1516: \apj, 673, 864
1517:
1518: \bibitem[{{Keller} {et~al.}(2008){Keller}, {Murphy}, {Prior}, {DaCosta}, \&
1519: {Schmidt}}]{KMP08}
1520: {Keller}, S.~C., {Murphy}, S., {Prior}, S., {DaCosta}, G., \& {Schmidt}, B.
1521: 2008, \apj, 678, 851
1522:
1523: \bibitem[{{Keller} {et~al.}(2007){Keller}, {Schmidt}, {Bessell}, {Conroy},
1524: {Francis}, {Granlund}, {Kowald}, {Oates}, {Martin-Jones}, {Preston},
1525: {Tisserand}, {Vaccarella}, \& {Waterson}}]{KSB07}
1526: {Keller}, S.~C., {Schmidt}, B.~P., {Bessell}, M.~S., {Conroy}, P.~G.,
1527: {Francis}, P., {Granlund}, A., {Kowald}, E., {Oates}, A.~P., {Martin-Jones},
1528: T., {Preston}, T., {Tisserand}, P., {Vaccarella}, A., \& {Waterson}, M.~F.
1529: 2007, Publications of the Astronomical Society of Australia, 24, 1
1530:
1531: \bibitem[{{Kinman} {et~al.}(2000){Kinman}, {Castelli}, {Cacciari}, {Bragaglia},
1532: {Harmer}, \& {Valdes}}]{KCC00}
1533: {Kinman}, T., {Castelli}, F., {Cacciari}, C., {Bragaglia}, A., {Harmer}, D., \&
1534: {Valdes}, F. 2000, \aap, 364, 102
1535:
1536: \bibitem[{{Law} {et~al.}(2005){Law}, {Johnston}, \& {Majewski}}]{LJM05}
1537: {Law}, D.~R., {Johnston}, K.~V., \& {Majewski}, S.~R. 2005, \apj, 619, 807
1538:
1539: \bibitem[{{Layden}(1994)}]{Layden94}
1540: {Layden}, A.~C. 1994, \aj, 108, 1016
1541:
1542: \bibitem[{{Layden} \& {Sarajedini}(2000)}]{LS00}
1543: {Layden}, A.~C. \& {Sarajedini}, A. 2000, \aj, 119, 1760
1544:
1545: \bibitem[{{Liu} \& {Janes}(1989)}]{LJ89}
1546: {Liu}, T. \& {Janes}, K.~A. 1989, \apjs, 69, 593
1547:
1548: \bibitem[{{Majewski} {et~al.}(2003){Majewski}, {Skrutskie}, {Weinberg}, \&
1549: {Ostheimer}}]{MSW03}
1550: {Majewski}, S.~R., {Skrutskie}, M.~F., {Weinberg}, M.~D., \& {Ostheimer}, J.~C.
1551: 2003, \apj, 599, 1082
1552:
1553: \bibitem[{{Mart{\'{\i}}nez-Delgado} {et~al.}(2007){Mart{\'{\i}}nez-Delgado},
1554: {Pe{\~n}arrubia}, {Juri{\'c}}, {Alfaro}, \& {Ivezi{\'c}}}]{MPJ07}
1555: {Mart{\'{\i}}nez-Delgado}, D., {Pe{\~n}arrubia}, J., {Juri{\'c}}, M., {Alfaro},
1556: E.~J., \& {Ivezi{\'c}}, Z. 2007, \apj, 660, 1264
1557:
1558: \bibitem[{{Moody} {et~al.}(2003){Moody}, {Schmidt}, {Alcock}, {Goldader},
1559: {Axelrod}, {Cook}, \& {Marshall}}]{MSA03}
1560: {Moody}, R., {Schmidt}, B., {Alcock}, C., {Goldader}, J., {Axelrod}, T.,
1561: {Cook}, K.~H., \& {Marshall}, S. 2003, Earth Moon and Planets, 92, 125
1562:
1563: \bibitem[{{Newberg} {et~al.}(2007){Newberg}, {Yanny}, {Cole}, {Beers}, {Re
1564: Fiorentin}, {Schneider}, \& {Wilhelm}}]{NYC07}
1565: {Newberg}, H.~J., {Yanny}, B., {Cole}, N., {Beers}, T.~C., {Re Fiorentin}, P.,
1566: {Schneider}, D.~P., \& {Wilhelm}, R. 2007, \apj, 668, 221
1567:
1568: \bibitem[{{Newberg} {et~al.}(2003){Newberg}, {Yanny}, {Grebel}, {Hennessy},
1569: {Ivezi{\'c}}, {Martinez-Delgado}, {Odenkirchen}, {Rix}, {Brinkmann}, {Lamb},
1570: {Schneider}, \& {York}}]{NYG03}
1571: {Newberg}, H.~J., {Yanny}, B., {Grebel}, E.~K., {Hennessy}, G., {Ivezi{\'c}},
1572: {\v Z}., {Martinez-Delgado}, D., {Odenkirchen}, M., {Rix}, H.-W.,
1573: {Brinkmann}, J., {Lamb}, D.~Q., {Schneider}, D.~P., \& {York}, D.~G. 2003,
1574: \apjl, 596, L191
1575:
1576: \bibitem[{{Newberg} {et~al.}(2002){Newberg}, {Yanny}, {Rockosi}, {Grebel},
1577: {Rix}, {Brinkmann}, {Csabai}, {Hennessy}, {Hindsley}, {Ibata}, {Ivezi{\'c}},
1578: {Lamb}, {Nash}, {Odenkirchen}, {Rave}, {Schneider}, {Smith}, {Stolte}, \&
1579: {York}}]{NYR02}
1580: {Newberg}, H.~J., {Yanny}, B., {Rockosi}, C., {Grebel}, E.~K., {Rix}, H.-W.,
1581: {Brinkmann}, J., {Csabai}, I., {Hennessy}, G., {Hindsley}, R.~B., {Ibata},
1582: R., {Ivezi{\'c}}, Z., {Lamb}, D., {Nash}, E.~T., {Odenkirchen}, M., {Rave},
1583: H.~A., {Schneider}, D.~P., {Smith}, J.~A., {Stolte}, A., \& {York}, D.~G.
1584: 2002, \apj, 569, 245
1585:
1586: \bibitem[{{Oke}(1966)}]{Oke66}
1587: {Oke}, J.~B. 1966, \apj, 145, 468
1588:
1589: \bibitem[{{Preston}(1959)}]{Preston59}
1590: {Preston}, G.~W. 1959, \apj, 130, 507
1591:
1592: \bibitem[{{Pritzl} {et~al.}(2002){Pritzl}, {Armandroff}, {Jacoby}, \& {Da
1593: Costa}}]{PAJ02}
1594: {Pritzl}, B.~J., {Armandroff}, T.~E., {Jacoby}, G.~H., \& {Da Costa}, G.~S.
1595: 2002, AJ, 124, 1464
1596:
1597: \bibitem[{{Robin} {et~al.}(2003){Robin}, {Reyl{\'e}}, {Derri{\`e}re}, \&
1598: {Picaud}}]{RRD03}
1599: {Robin}, A.~C., {Reyl{\'e}}, C., {Derri{\`e}re}, S., \& {Picaud}, S. 2003,
1600: \aap, 409, 523
1601:
1602: \bibitem[{{Schlegel} {et~al.}(1998){Schlegel}, {Finkbeiner}, \&
1603: {Davis}}]{SFD98}
1604: {Schlegel}, D.~J., {Finkbeiner}, D.~P., \& {Davis}, M. 1998, \apj, 500, 525
1605:
1606: \bibitem[{{Searle} \& {Zinn}(1978)}]{SZ78}
1607: {Searle}, L. \& {Zinn}, R. 1978, ApJ, 225, 357
1608:
1609: \bibitem[{{Sirko} {et~al.}(2004){Sirko}, {Goodman}, {Knapp}, {Brinkmann},
1610: {Ivezi{\'c}}, {Knerr}, {Schlegel}, {Schneider}, \& {York}}]{SGK04}
1611: {Sirko}, E., {Goodman}, J., {Knapp}, G.~R., {Brinkmann}, J., {Ivezi{\'c}}, {\v
1612: Z}., {Knerr}, E.~J., {Schlegel}, D., {Schneider}, D.~P., \& {York}, D.~G.
1613: 2004, \aj, 127, 899
1614:
1615: \bibitem[{{Vivas} {et~al.}(2008){Vivas}, {Jaffe}, {Zinn}, {Winnick}, {Duffau},
1616: \& {Mateu}}]{VJZ08}
1617: {Vivas}, A.~K., {Jaffe}, Y., {Zinn}, R., {Winnick}, R., {Duffau}, S., \&
1618: {Mateu}, C. 2008, \aj, in press (arXiv:0807.1735)
1619:
1620: \bibitem[{{Vivas} \& {Zinn}(2006)}]{VZ06}
1621: {Vivas}, A.~K. \& {Zinn}, R. 2006, \aj, 132, 714
1622:
1623: \bibitem[{{Vivas} {et~al.}(2004){Vivas}, {Zinn}, {Abad}, {Andrews}, {Bailyn},
1624: {Baltay}, {Bongiovanni}, {Brice{\~ n}o}, {Bruzual}, {Coppi}, {Della Prugna},
1625: {Ellman}, {Ferr{\'{\i}}n}, {Gebhard}, {Girard}, {Hernandez}, {Herrera},
1626: {Honeycutt}, {Magris}, {Mufson}, {Musser}, {Naranjo}, {Rabinowitz},
1627: {Rengstorf}, {Rosenzweig}, {S{\' a}nchez}, {S{\' a}nchez}, {Schaefer},
1628: {Schenner}, {Snyder}, {Sofia}, {Stock}, {van Altena}, {Vicente}, \&
1629: {Vieira}}]{VZA04}
1630: {Vivas}, A.~K., {Zinn}, R., {Abad}, C., {Andrews}, P., {Bailyn}, C., {Baltay},
1631: C., {Bongiovanni}, A., {Brice{\~ n}o}, C., {Bruzual}, G., {Coppi}, P., {Della
1632: Prugna}, F., {Ellman}, N., {Ferr{\'{\i}}n}, I., {Gebhard}, M., {Girard}, T.,
1633: {Hernandez}, J., {Herrera}, D., {Honeycutt}, R., {Magris}, G., {Mufson}, S.,
1634: {Musser}, J., {Naranjo}, O., {Rabinowitz}, D., {Rengstorf}, A., {Rosenzweig},
1635: P., {S{\' a}nchez}, G., {S{\' a}nchez}, G., {Schaefer}, B., {Schenner}, H.,
1636: {Snyder}, J.~A., {Sofia}, S., {Stock}, J., {van Altena}, W., {Vicente}, B.,
1637: \& {Vieira}, K. 2004, AJ, 127, 1158
1638:
1639: \bibitem[{{Vivas} {et~al.}(2001){Vivas}, {Zinn}, {Andrews}, {Bailyn}, {Baltay},
1640: {Coppi}, {Ellman}, {Girard}, {Rabinowitz}, {Schaefer}, {Shin}, {Snyder},
1641: {Sofia}, {van Altena}, {Abad}, {Bongiovanni}, {Brice{\~n}o}, {Bruzual},
1642: {Della Prugna}, {Herrera}, {Magris}, {Mateu}, {Pacheco}, {S{\'a}nchez},
1643: {S{\'a}nchez}, {Schenner}, {Stock}, {Vicente}, {Vieira}, {Ferr{\'{\i}}n},
1644: {Hernandez}, {Gebhard}, {Honeycutt}, {Mufson}, {Musser}, \&
1645: {Rengstorf}}]{VZA01}
1646: {Vivas}, A.~K., {Zinn}, R., {Andrews}, P., {Bailyn}, C., {Baltay}, C., {Coppi},
1647: P., {Ellman}, N., {Girard}, T., {Rabinowitz}, D., {Schaefer}, B., {Shin}, J.,
1648: {Snyder}, J., {Sofia}, S., {van Altena}, W., {Abad}, C., {Bongiovanni}, A.,
1649: {Brice{\~n}o}, C., {Bruzual}, G., {Della Prugna}, F., {Herrera}, D.,
1650: {Magris}, G., {Mateu}, J., {Pacheco}, R., {S{\'a}nchez}, G., {S{\'a}nchez},
1651: G., {Schenner}, H., {Stock}, J., {Vicente}, B., {Vieira}, K.,
1652: {Ferr{\'{\i}}n}, I., {Hernandez}, J., {Gebhard}, M., {Honeycutt}, R.,
1653: {Mufson}, S., {Musser}, J., \& {Rengstorf}, A. 2001, \apjl, 554, L33
1654:
1655: \bibitem[{{Yanny} {et~al.}(2003){Yanny}, {Newberg}, {Grebel}, {Kent},
1656: {Odenkirchen}, {Rockosi}, {Schlegel}, {Subbarao}, {Brinkmann}, {Fukugita},
1657: {Ivezic}, {Lamb}, {Schneider}, \& {York}}]{YNG03}
1658: {Yanny}, B., {Newberg}, H.~J., {Grebel}, E.~K., {Kent}, S., {Odenkirchen}, M.,
1659: {Rockosi}, C.~M., {Schlegel}, D., {Subbarao}, M., {Brinkmann}, J.,
1660: {Fukugita}, M., {Ivezic}, {\v Z}., {Lamb}, D.~Q., {Schneider}, D.~P., \&
1661: {York}, D.~G. 2003, \apj, 588, 824
1662:
1663: \end{thebibliography}
1664:
1665:
1666:
1667:
1668:
1669:
1670:
1671:
1672: \end{document}
1673:
1674:
1675: %% End of file `ms.tex'.
1676: