1: %
2: % LaTeX sample file for
3: % Publications of the Astronomical Society of Australia.
4: % Version 4.0 - November 2003
5: %
6: %
7: % Other information on PASA can be found at:
8: % http://www.publish.csiro.au/journals/pasa/
9: %
10: % General instruction for PASA authors can be found at:
11: % http://www.publish.csiro.au/nid/141/aid/442.htm
12: %
13: % \label and \ref cross-referencing is encouraged for referencing
14: % figures and sections.
15: %
16: % Natbib may be used for citations.
17: %
18: \documentclass[useAMS,usenatbib,usegraphicx]{pasa}
19:
20: \title[The Canis Major Dwarf Galaxy]{
21: The Canis Major Dwarf Galaxy}
22:
23: \author[Lewis et al.]{
24: Geraint F. Lewis$^{1,5}$,
25: Rodrigo A. Ibata$^2$,
26: Michael J. Irwin$^3$, \\
27: Nicolas F. Martin$^2$,
28: Michele Bellazzini$^4$ \&
29: Blair Conn$^1$
30: \affil{
31: $^1$Institute of Astronomy, School of Physics, A29,
32: University of Sydney, NSW 2006, Australia \\
33: $^2$Observatoire de Strasbourg, 11 Rue de l'Universite,
34: F-6700 Strasbourg, France\\
35: $^3$Institute of Astronomy, Madingley Road, Cambridge, CB3 0HA, U.K.\\
36: $^4$INAF - Osservatorio Astronomico di Bologna, Via Ranzani 1, 40127, Bologna, Italy\\
37: $^5$Email: {\tt gfl@physics.usyd.edu.au}
38: }}
39: \begin{document}
40:
41: \maketitle
42:
43: \label{firstpage}
44:
45: \begin{abstract}
46: Recent observational evidence suggests that the Sagittarius dwarf
47: galaxy represents the only major ongoing accretion event in the
48: Galactic halo, accounting for the majority of stellar debris
49: identified there. This paper summarizes the recent discovery of
50: another potential Milky Way accretion event, the Canis Major dwarf
51: galaxy. This dwarf satellite galaxy is found to lie just below the
52: Galactic plane and appears to be on an equatorial orbit. Unlike
53: Sagittarius, which is contributing to the Galactic halo, the location
54: and eventual demise of Canis Major suggests that it represents a
55: building block of the thick disk.
56: \end{abstract}
57:
58: \begin{keywords}
59: Galaxy: structure -- Galaxy: evolution -- galaxies: dwarf
60: \end{keywords}
61:
62: \section{Introduction}\label{introduction}
63: ${\rm \Lambda}$CDM represents the current paradigm for the formation
64: and evolution of structure in the Universe. While successul on large
65: scales, focus has recently turned to its inability to correctly
66: predict the number of satellite systems in galactic halos
67: \citep{1999ApJ...522...82K}. This {\it missing satellite problem} is
68: apparent with the Milky Way, with recent observations indicating that
69: the Milky Way has undergone a single large accretion, the Sagittarius
70: Dwarf galaxy, in the last
71: $\sim7$Gyrs~\citep{2002MNRAS.332..921I,2003ApJ...599.1082M}, although
72: some older accretions are apparent in
73: phase-space~\citep{1999Natur.402...53H,2003ApJ...585L.125B}.
74:
75: \begin{figure*}
76: \includegraphics[height=4.4in]{CanisMajorfig05.ps}
77: \caption{\label{fig1} Binned M-giant counts about the Galactic plane.
78: The three panels denote different magnitude (and hence distance)
79: ranges, with the galactocentric distance modulus labeled upon each
80: panel. Also in each panel, the counts represent the asymmetry between
81: the north and south (ie - southern data subtracted from the north and
82: vice-versa). The main body of Canis Major and prominent structures in
83: the M-giant distribution are noted (Figure 5 from
84: \citet{2004MNRAS.348...12M}).}
85: \end{figure*}
86:
87: To compare with predictions from ${\rm \Lambda}$CDM models, the
88: accretion history of the Milky Way needs to be mapped out. As with
89: many studies of the Universe, however, our view of the Galactic halo,
90: and any accreting systems, is obscured by the disk of the Milky Way.
91: Recent large scale surveys of this region, however, have uncovered a
92: curious overdensity of stars that has been interpreted as being part
93: of a current accretion event that is taking place within the plane of
94: the Milky Way. This paper reviews the discovery of this object and our
95: current understanding of its properties.
96:
97: \section{The ring around the Galaxy}\label{ring}
98: The first indication of an additional halo population of stars was
99: found by ~\citet{2002ApJ...569..245N} while examining halo stars drawn
100: from the Sloan Digital Sky Survey. Taken in a narrow band of
101: $\sim2.5^o$ about the celestial equator, and selected to have the
102: colours of F-stars, these data revealed a prominent overdensity of
103: halo stars which has been interpreted as the survey slicing through
104: the stream of tidal debris from the Sagittarius Dwarf Galaxy. One
105: additional prominent overdensity of stars was identified within the
106: halo, towards the Galactic anti-centre, in the direction of Monoceros,
107: at a galactocentric distance of $\sim18$kpc and width $<6$kpc. While
108: a Galactic origin could not be conclusively ruled out,
109: \citet{2002ApJ...569..245N} suggested that this too represented a
110: tidal stream, but of a yet unknown disrupting companion galaxy,
111:
112: Spurred by this discovery, \citet{2003MNRAS.340L..21I} searched for
113: the signature of the Monoceros stream of stars in the Isaac Newton
114: Telescope Wide Field Survey data archive. Analysis of
115: colour-magnitude diagrams, \citet{2003MNRAS.340L..21I} confirmed the
116: identification of the distinct stellar population in the vicinity of
117: Monoceros. This study also identified the Monoceros stream population
118: in a number of additional fields, revealing this population to extend
119: $\sim100^o$ over the sky, within $\sim30^o$ of the Galactic equator,
120: and \citet{2003MNRAS.340L..21I} suggest that the Monoceros stream
121: actually rings the Galaxy. Fitting the main sequence of this stellar
122: population in each field, this study estimates that the distance to
123: the stream ranges from $\sim15$ to $\sim20$kpc, with an apparent
124: scale-height of $\sim0.75$kpc. While they consider the possibility
125: that this stellar population was an accreting dwarf, they also pointed
126: out that their data is consistent with other hypotheses including an
127: outer spiral arm or unknown flare/warp generated via a resonance in
128: the Galactic disk.
129:
130: At the same time as the \citet{2003MNRAS.340L..21I} results,
131: \citet{2003ApJ...588..824Y} presented a kinematic analysis of a
132: Galactic halo stars drawn from the SDSS. Focusing upon F-star
133: candidates, this study obtained spectra in several regions, allowing
134: the determination of their kinemtatic properties. Accounting for the
135: Galactic contribution, the Monoceros population was found to have a
136: velocity dispersion of $\sim25-30$km/s. While of similar order to the
137: tidal debris torn from the Sagittarius dwarf, this velocity dispersion
138: is quite distinct from the spheroid, thick disk or any known warp or
139: flare. From these velocities, \citet{2003ApJ...588..824Y} deduce that
140: the orbital velocity of the stream of stars is prograde and (assuming
141: circular orbits) is $215\pm25$km/s, [An erratum to the original result
142: of $110\pm25$kms/s was presented in \citet{2004ApJ...605..575Y}], and
143: that the stars appear to be relatively metal-poor
144: $([\frac{Fe}{H}]=-1.6)$. \citet{2003ApJ...588..824Y} conclude by
145: proposing a simple model for the Monoceros stream as a disrupting
146: dwarf, orbiting the Milky Way at a distance of $\sim18$kpc; the dwarf
147: galaxy's stars are undulating above and below the plane of the Milky
148: Way by $\sim6$kpc.
149:
150: Several additional programs have focused upon the Monoceros
151: stream~\footnote{The stream of stars has acquired several names since
152: its discovery. For the sake of consistency, in this paper it is
153: referred to solely as the Monoceros Stream.}. Using M giant star
154: candidates drawn from 2MASS, \citet{2003ApJ...594L.115R} further
155: confirmed the existence of the Monoceros Stream as a distinct stellar
156: population beyond the edge of the disk of the Milky Way. With a
157: galactocentric distance of $18\pm2$kpc, they find the arc of material
158: possesses an angular extent of at $\sim170^o$, with the presence of M
159: giants indicating the stellar population of the Monoceros stars
160: possesses a higher metallicity than previously estimated
161: $([\frac{Fe}{H}]\sim0.4\pm0.3)$. \citet{2003ApJ...594L.119C} extended
162: this work, obtaining velocities of 2MASS selected stars over
163: $\sim100^o$ of the Monoceros stream. While confirming a velocity
164: dispersion of $\sim20$km/s, these data also indicate the stars in the
165: Monoceros stream orbit the Galaxy in a prograde fashion, with little
166: eccentricity. While this is somewhat worrisome for the tidally
167: disrupting dwarf galaxy hypothesis, \citet{2003ApJ...594L.119C} point
168: out that such features are apparent in numerical simulations of
169: in-plane dwarf accretion\citep{2003ApJ...592L..25H}. Furthermore,
170: this study identifies four globular clusters that are spatially and
171: kinematically aligned with the putative stellar stream; such an
172: alignment argues against a Galactic origin for the stream, such as a
173: spiral arm. Finally, \citet{2004ApJ...602L..21F} noted that five
174: globular clusters aligned with the Monoceros stream, as well as
175: $\sim15$ outer, old stellar clusters that may also be part of the same
176: population; these clusters lie in a plane which is significantly
177: tilted $(\sim17^o)$ to that of the Milky Way. The population of
178: globular clusters is reminiscent of the Sagittarius Dwarf galaxy which
179: has appears to have deposited a similar number of globular clusters
180: into the halo of the Milky Way, bolstering the argument that the
181: Monoceros stream represets a similarly disrupting dwarf galaxy.
182:
183: The extensive nature of the material strongly suggested that its
184: origin lay in a disrupting system, in an event similar to that of
185: Sagittarius, but occurring in the plane of the Galaxy. This, however,
186: was not the only explanation for its origin as it may represent a
187: previously unidentified aspect of Galactic structure. If the
188: disrupting system hypothesis is correct, and its destruction is not
189: yet complete, we should expect to identify some remnant of the
190: original dwarf galaxy. However, the expected location, observed
191: against the plane of the Galaxy, makes the detection of such a remnant
192: difficult.
193:
194: \section{The Canis Major Dwarf}\label{cmdwarf}
195: As with \citet{2003ApJ...594L.115R}, \citet{2004MNRAS.348...12M}
196: employed 2MASS to search for a signature of Monoceros stream of stars.
197: Pushing the search to $|b|\sim5^o$, \citet{2004MNRAS.348...12M} mapped
198: the density of M-giant stars around the Galactic equator. This reveals
199: a strong asymmetry about the Galactic plane which is interpreted as
200: being the Monoceros ring of stars snaking around the outskirts of the
201: Milky Way. Several prominent features are noted, including a strong
202: Northern arc and weaker Southern arc, both of which extend for more
203: than $\sim100^o$ on the sky (see Figure~\ref{fig1}).
204:
205: Intriguingly, \citet{2004MNRAS.348...12M} also identified a strong,
206: elliptical overdensity of M-stars at $(l,b)=(240^o,-8^o)$, aligned
207: somewhat with the Galactic disk. The (heliocentric) distance to this
208: stellar overdensity is $D_\odot = 7.1\pm0.1$kpc, with a major axis is
209: $\sim4.2$kpc. With $\sim2300$ M-giant stars within $10^o$ of its
210: centre, this overdensity contains a similar number of M-giants to the
211: Sagittarius Dwarf galaxy, a system which we know is currently being
212: cannibalised by the Milky Way. Given that this implies that the mass
213: of the Canis Major overdensity is $\sim10^8-10^9{\rm M_\odot}$,
214: \citet{2004MNRAS.348...12M} concluded that it too represents a dwarf
215: galaxy also undergoing tidal disruption, and possibly representing the
216: progenitor of the Monoceros stream of stars.
217:
218: Unlike Sagittarius, which passes over the poles of the Milky Way, the
219: identification of the Canis Major dwarf galaxy (as this overdensity
220: will now be referred to) represents the first detection of an
221: accretion occurring within the plane of the Galaxy.
222:
223: \citet{2004MNRAS.348...12M} also noted that possibly five globular
224: clusters were associated in phase-space with the Canis Major dwarf
225: galaxy. This is a similar number to the globular cluster population
226: currently associated with the Sagittarius dwarf galaxy, providing
227: further evidence for the origin of Canis Major. Furthermore,
228: \citet{2004MNRAS.348...12M} noted the phase-space grouping of a number
229: of four open galactic clusters directly associated with the main body
230: of Canis Major\footnote{Several of these clusters were also noted by
231: \citet{2004ApJ...602L..21F} as being part of the Monoceros stream.}.
232:
233: In an attempt to understand the observed distribution of M-stars,
234: \citet{2004MNRAS.348...12M} also undertook a series of numerical
235: simulations. Utilizing detailed models for the mass distribution of
236: the Milky Way \citep{1998MNRAS.294..429D}, these simulations involved
237: following the dynamical dissociation of dwarf galaxies (modeled as
238: King profiles) as they orbited the Galaxy. The results of this
239: procedure favoured a dwarf galaxy with an initial mass of
240: $\sim5\times10^8{\rm M_\odot}$, with a orbital period of
241: $\sim0.4$Gyrs. While such simulations can reasonably account for the
242: observed distribution of M-stars not only in the body of Canis Major,
243: but also along the extensive arcs above and below the Galactic plane,
244: the current data does not allow a definitive differentiation between
245: prograde and retrograde orbits. \citet{2004MNRAS.348...12M}, however,
246: point out that the resultant orbits of the debris in such an encounter
247: closely mimic those of stars in the thick disk. Given that the
248: estimated mass of this single dwarf is roughly $\sim10\%$ of the
249: entire thick disk, then the thick disk could be formed via only a few
250: such accretion events.
251:
252: Further observational evidence for the nature of the Canis Major dwarf
253: came from the study of \citet{aa} who identified the main-sequence and
254: red giant branch populations of Canis Major in the background to the
255: Galactic open clusters NGC2477, Tombaugh 1 and Berkeley 33. Analysis
256: of this population suggested it is somewhat metal-rich
257: $(-0.7<[\frac{Fe}{H}]<0.0)$, with an age of $\sim2-7$Gyrs, although an
258: apparent blue plume of stars is taken as evidence of a more recent
259: episode of star formation. This study also finds a photometric
260: parallax for the main body of Canis Major of $\sim8.3\pm1.2$kpc,
261: larger than the M-giant study of \citep{2004MNRAS.348...12M}, whose
262: smaller distance determination they put down to poorer systematics in
263: the M-giant photometric parallax. Finally, \citet{aa} also suggest
264: that as well as the identified globular cluster population, two old
265: open clusters, AM-2 and Tombaugh 2, are possibly associated with the
266: Canis Major dwarf.
267:
268: Utilizing the Second U.S. Naval Observatory CCD Astrograph Catalog
269: (UCAC2), \citet{bb} examined the proper motions of stars in the
270: vicinity of the Canis Major dwarf galaxy. Cross-identifying M-giant
271: stars drawn from the 2MASS catalog, the Galactic-longitudinal motion
272: of Canis Major was found to be $\mu_l=-4.0\pm0.4$mas/yr, with no
273: measurable motion in Galactic latitude. At a distance of $D=8.3$kpc,
274: this corresponds to transverse velocity of $\sim238\pm28$km/s, with
275: Canis Major on a prograde orbit about the Milky Way. Since this value
276: is higher than that predicted by \citet{2004MNRAS.348...12M}, drawn
277: from their numerical simulation, it is clear the full
278: three-dimensional velocity of Canis Major will be required for the
279: detailed numerical modeling of this accretion event.
280:
281: Recently, \citet{cc} further examined the globular cluster population
282: associated with the Canis Major dwarf galaxy, finding that the
283: age-metallicity relationship for these is distinct from the main
284: globular cluster population of the Milky Way. Furthermore, these
285: globular clusters are somewhat smaller than expected if they were
286: drawn from the Galactic population. Both these lines of evidence add
287: further weight to the possibility that the globular clusters, and
288: Canis Major itself, were formed elsewhere, were drawn in presumably as
289: the initial orbit decayed by dynamical friction, and represent an
290: on-going accretion event onto the Milky Way galaxy.
291:
292: \section{Further Observations}\label{further}
293: While the tidally disrupting dwarf galaxy is the favoured explanation
294: for the observed overdensity of star in Canis Major, current
295: observations are not yet completely conclusive, and the possibility
296: that the Monoceros Ring and Canis major dwarf galaxy actually
297: represent some unknown aspect of Galactic structure has not been ruled
298: out. Hence, several observational programs are underway to address
299: this issue.
300:
301: The first is an extension of the earlier study
302: by~\citet{2003MNRAS.340L..21I}, systematically mapping above and below
303: the Galactic plane with wide-field camera observations. This has been
304: completed in the north, using the Wide-Field Camera on the Isaac
305: Newton Telescope; these data are being analyzed and will be published
306: shortly (Conn et al. {\it in preparation}). The southern survey, with
307: the Wide-Field Imager at the Anglo-Australian Telescope, is currently
308: underway and will be completed by mid-2004. These will provide
309: important probes of the extent of the stellar material, as well as
310: constraining its distance (via main sequence fitting).
311:
312: \begin{figure}
313: \includegraphics[height=4.7in]{CanisMajorfig14.ps}
314: \caption{\label{fig2} A numerical simulation of the demise of the
315: Canis Major dwarf galaxy. The top panel presents the view from above
316: the Milky Way [with the Sun located at $(x,y,z)=-8,0,0\ $kpc]. The
317: lower panel presents the side-on view of the debris. The colour coding
318: in both denoted the heliocentric velocity of the stars (as given in the
319: lower key), while the symbols represent data from the INT survey and
320: 2MASS [Figure 14 from \citet{2004MNRAS.348...12M}].}
321: \end{figure}
322:
323: To augment these studies, 2dF observations of the main body of Canis
324: Major and the extensive stream of stars are being conducted to obtain
325: stellar kinematics, via the calcium triplet, over $\sim100^o$ of the
326: sky. Coupled with the spatial data obtained with the wide-field
327: camera surveys, these data should test the hypotheses that Canis Major
328: represents a truly disrupting dwarf galaxy, or (equally interesting)
329: is a currently unknown aspect of Galactic structure. Furthermore, if
330: the dwarf galaxy is confirmed, then these data will provide important
331: constraints to numerical simulations of its orbit and eventual demise.
332:
333: \section*{Acknowlegements}
334: GFL thanks Joss Bland-Hawthorn for inviting him to the Little Bay
335: Meeting. The anonymous referee is thanked for their constructive
336: comments.
337:
338: \begin{thebibliography}{}
339: %
340: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Bellazzini et al.}{2004}]{aa}
341: Bellazzini M., Ibata R., Monaco L., Martin N., Irwin M.~J., Lewis
342: G.~F., 2004, MNRAS in press, {\it astro-ph/0311119}
343: %
344: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Brook et
345: al.}{2003}]{2003ApJ...585L.125B} Brook C.~B., Kawata D., Gibson B.~K.,
346: Flynn C., 2003, ApJ, 585, L125
347: %
348: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Crane et al.}{2003}]{2003ApJ...594L.119C}
349: Crane J.~D., Majewski S.~R., Rocha-Pinto H.~J., Frinchaboy P.~M., Skrutskie
350: M.~F., Law D.~R., 2003, ApJ, 594, L119
351: %
352: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Dehnen \&
353: Binney}{1998}]{1998MNRAS.294..429D} Dehnen W., Binney J., 1998, MNRAS, 294,
354: 429
355: %
356: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Forbes et al.}{2004}]{cc}
357: Forbes, D.~A., Strader, J., Brodie, J.P., 2004, {\it astro-ph/0403136}
358: %
359: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Frinchaboy et
360: al.}{2004}]{2004ApJ...602L..21F} Frinchaboy P.~M., Majewski S.~R., Crane
361: J.~D., Reid I.~N., Rocha-Pinto H.~J., Phelps R.~L., Patterson R.~J., Mu{\~
362: n}oz R.~R., 2004, ApJ, 602, L21
363: %
364: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Helmi et al.}{2003}]{2003ApJ...592L..25H}
365: Helmi A., Navarro J.~F., Meza A., Steinmetz M., Eke V.~R., 2003, ApJ, 592,
366: L25
367: %
368: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Helmi et al.}{1999}]{1999Natur.402...53H}
369: Helmi A., White S.~D.~M., de Zeeuw P.~T., Zhao H., 1999, Natur, 402, 53
370: %
371: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Ibata et al.}{2003}]{2003MNRAS.340L..21I}
372: Ibata R.~A., Irwin M.~J., Lewis G.~F., Ferguson A.~M.~N., Tanvir N., 2003,
373: MNRAS, 340, L21
374: %
375: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Ibata et al.}{2004}]{bb}
376: Ibata R., Bellazzini, M., Irwin M., Lewis G.~F., Martin, N.~F.,
377: 2004, MNRAS (Submitted)
378: %
379: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Ibata et al.}{2002}]{2002MNRAS.332..921I}
380: Ibata R.~A., Lewis G.~F., Irwin M.~J., Cambr{\' e}sy L., 2002, MNRAS, 332,
381: 921
382: %
383: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Ibata et al.}{2001}]{2001ApJ...551..294I}
384: Ibata R., Lewis G.~F., Irwin M., Totten E., Quinn T., 2001, ApJ, 551, 294
385: %
386: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Klypin et al.}{1999}]{1999ApJ...522...82K}
387: Klypin A., Kravtsov A.~V., Valenzuela O., Prada F., 1999, ApJ, 522, 82
388: %
389: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Majewski et
390: al.}{2003}]{2003ApJ...599.1082M} Majewski S.~R., Skrutskie M.~F., Weinberg
391: M.~D., Ostheimer J.~C., 2003, ApJ, 599, 1082
392: %
393: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Martin et al.}{2004}]{2004MNRAS.348...12M}
394: Martin N.~F., Ibata R.~A., Bellazzini M., Irwin M.~J., Lewis G.~F., Dehnen
395: W., 2004, MNRAS, 348, 12
396: %
397: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Newberg et al.}{2002}]{2002ApJ...569..245N}
398: Newberg H.~J.~et al., 2002, ApJ, 569, 245
399: %
400: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Rocha-Pinto et
401: al.}{2003}]{2003ApJ...594L.115R} Rocha-Pinto H.~J., Majewski S.~R.,
402: Skrutskie M.~F., Crane J.~D., 2003, ApJ, 594, L115
403: %
404: \bibitem[\protect\citeauthoryear{Yanny et al.}{2003}]{2003ApJ...588..824Y}
405: Yanny B.~et al., 2003, ApJ, 588, 824
406: %
407: \bibitem[Yanny et al.(2004)]{2004ApJ...605..575Y} Yanny, B., et al.\ 2004,
408: ApJ, 605, 575
409: %
410: \end{thebibliography}
411:
412:
413:
414: \label{lastpage}
415:
416: \end{document}
417: