1: \documentclass[12pt,preprint]{aastex}
2:
3: \slugcomment{Submitted to AJ, 2006 October 09}
4:
5: \shorttitle{GRB 050813}
6:
7: \shortauthors{Ferrero et al.}
8:
9: \received{}
10:
11: \begin{document}
12:
13: \title{Constraints on an optical afterglow and on supernova light \\
14: following the short burst
15: GRB 050813\thanks{Based on observations collected at the
16: European Southern Observatory, La Silla and Paranal, Chile (ESO
17: Programme 075.D-0415) and on observations taken at the German-Spanish Calar
18: Alto Observatory and at IAA's Observatorio de Sierra Nevada in Spain.}}
19:
20: \author{
21: P.~Ferrero\altaffilmark{1},
22: S.~F.~Sanchez\altaffilmark{2},
23: D.~A.~Kann\altaffilmark{1},
24: S.~Klose\altaffilmark{1},
25: J.~Greiner\altaffilmark{3},
26: J.~Gorosabel\altaffilmark{4},
27: D.~H.~Hartmann\altaffilmark{5},
28: A.~A.~Henden\altaffilmark{6},
29: P.~M\o ller\altaffilmark{7},
30: E.~Palazzi\altaffilmark{8},
31: A.~Rau\altaffilmark{9},
32: B.~Stecklum\altaffilmark{1},
33: A.~J.~Castro-Tirado\altaffilmark{4},
34: J.~P.~U.~Fynbo\altaffilmark{10},
35: J.~Hjorth\altaffilmark{10},
36: P.~Jakobsson\altaffilmark{11},
37: C.~Kouveliotou\altaffilmark{12},
38: N.~Masetti\altaffilmark{8},
39: E.~Pian\altaffilmark{13},
40: N.~R.~Tanvir\altaffilmark{14},
41: R.~A.~M.~J.~Wijers\altaffilmark{15}
42: }
43:
44:
45: %-------------------------------------------------------------------------
46:
47: \altaffiltext{1}{Th\"uringer Landessternwarte Tautenburg, Sternwarte 5,
48: D--07778 Tautenburg, Germany}
49:
50: \altaffiltext{2}{Centro Astron\'{o}mico Hispano Alem\'{a}n de Calar Alto,
51: Calle Jesus Durban Remon 2-2, E--04004 Almer\'{\i}a, Spain}
52:
53: \altaffiltext{3}{Max-Planck-Institut f\"ur Extraterrestische Physik,
54: Giessenbachstra\ss{}e, D--85741 Garching, Germany}
55:
56: \altaffiltext{4}{Instituto de Astrof\'{\i}sica de Andaluc\'{\i}a (IAA-CSIC),
57: Apartado de Correos, 3.004, E--18.080 Granada, Spain}
58:
59: \altaffiltext{5}{Clemson University, Department of Physics and Astronomy,
60: Clemson, SC 29634-0978, USA}
61:
62: \altaffiltext{6}{U. S. Naval Observatory/Universities Space Research Association,
63: Flagstaff Station, Flagstaff, AZ 86001, USA}
64:
65: \altaffiltext{7}{European Southern Observatory, Karl Schwarzschild-Strasse 2,
66: D--85748 Garching bei M\"{u}nchen, Germany}
67:
68: \altaffiltext{8}{INAF -- Istituto di Astrofisica Spaziale e Fisica Cosmica di Bologna,
69: via Gobetti 101, I-40129 Bologna, Italy}
70:
71: \altaffiltext{9}{Division of Physics, Mathematics and Astronomy, 105-24,
72: California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, CA 91125}
73:
74: \altaffiltext{10}{Dark Cosmology Centre, Niels Bohr Insitute, University of
75: Copenhagen, Juliane Maries Vej 30, 2100 Copenhagen, Denmark}
76:
77: \altaffiltext{11}{Centre for Astrophysics Research, University of Hertfordshire, College Lane,
78: Hatfield, Herts, AL10 9AB, UK}
79:
80: \altaffiltext{12}{NSSTC, SD-50, 320 Sparkman Drive, Huntsville, AL 35805, USA}
81:
82: \altaffiltext{13}{INAF -- Osservatorio Astronomico di Trieste, Via Tiepolo 11,
83: I-34143 Trieste, Italy}
84:
85: \altaffiltext{14}{Department of Physical and Astronomy, University of Leicester,
86: Leicester, LE1 7RH, UK}
87:
88: \altaffiltext{15}{University of Amsterdam, Kruislaan 403, 1098 SJ Amsterdam, The Netherlands}
89:
90: %-------------------------------------------------------------------------
91: \begin{abstract}
92:
93: We report early follow-up observations of the error box of the short burst
94: 050813 using the telescopes at Calar Alto and at Observatorio Sierra Nevada
95: (OSN), followed by deep VLT/FORS2 $I$-band observations obtained under very
96: good seeing conditions 5.7 and 11.7 days after the event. Neither a fading
97: afterglow, nor a rising SN component was found, so the potential GRB
98: host galaxy has not been identified based on a comparison of the two VLT images
99: taken at different epoches. We discuss if any of the galaxies
100: present in the original 10 arcsec XRT
101: error circle could be the host. In any case, the optical afterglow of GRB
102: 050813 was of very low luminosity. We conclude that all these
103: properties are consistent with the binary compact merger hypothesis for the
104: progenitor of GRB 050813.
105:
106: \end{abstract}
107:
108: \keywords{Gamma rays: bursts: individual: GRB 050813 --- Supernovae: general}
109:
110: %-------------------------------------------------------------------------
111: \section{Introduction}
112:
113: \subsection{Short Bursts}
114:
115: Much progress is currently being made toward understanding the nature of the
116: progenitors responsible for the class of short-duration, hard gamma-ray bursts
117: \citep[][ see also Appendix B]{Kouveliotou1993}. While the physical link
118: between long-duration, soft gamma-ray bursts and the core collapse of massive
119: stars \citep[e.g.,][]{Paczynski1998} has been conclusively confirmed by the
120: spectroscopic detection of supernova (SN) light following some bursts \citep[
121: for a review]{Stanek2003,Hjorth2003,Pian2006,Woosley2006}, the nature of the
122: sources responsible for short bursts remains to be revealed in full. Although
123: there is a developing consensus in the community that at least some short
124: bursts are due to merging compact stellar objects
125: \citep[cf.][]{FWH1999,Aloy2005,Rosswog2005,Oechslin2006,Faber2006}, an
126: unambiguous observational verification of this model is not an easy task and
127: has not yet been accomplished. Furthermore, the origin of a certain fraction
128: of short bursts as giant flares of magnetars in nearby galaxies seems to be
129: possible as well \citep[cf.][]{Tanvir2005}. Indeed, the short-hard burst
130: 051103 detected by the Interplanetary Network \citep{Golenetskii2005} might be
131: the first well-localized member of this class \citep{Frederiks2006, Ofek2006}.
132:
133: Within the context of the merger model, the stellar populations underlying
134: short bursts could be associated either with an old stellar population or even
135: with a young one \citep{Belczynski2006}. Short bursts might therefore occur in
136: quiescent ellipticals or star-forming galaxies. Indeed, the first short burst
137: well-localized by \emph{Swift}, GRB 050509B \citep{Gehrels2005}, was
138: associated with a giant elliptical galaxy located in a cluster of galaxies at
139: $z=0.225$ \citep{Bloom2006a, Pedersen2005}, while the \emph{HETE-2} short
140: burst GRB 050709 \citep{Hjorth2005b} occurred in an isolated, star-forming
141: dwarf galaxy. Shortly thereafter GRB 050724 was found in association with a
142: lone early-type galaxy
143: \citep{Bloom2005,Prochaska2005,Berger2005a,Gorosabel2006}. Assuming as a
144: working definition that a short burst should have $T_{90}<2$ s, then since GRB
145: 050813 six further short bursts have been accurately localized by
146: \emph{HETE-2} or \emph{Swift} via their X-ray afterglows by the end of
147: September 2006 \citep[see also table 8 in][]{Donaghy2006}. Among them GRB 051210
148: \citep{LaParola2006}, GRB 060502B \citep{Bloom2006b} and GRB 060801
149: \citep{Racusin2006} had only X-ray afterglows, while GRB 051221A
150: \citep{Soderberg2006}, GRB 060121 \citep{Malesani2006,Levan2006,dUP2006} and
151: GRB 060313 \citep[ Hjorth et al. 2007, in preparation]{Roming2006} have
152: detected optical afterglows as well. A broad range of morphological types of
153: host galaxies was derived for this set. For example, \citet{Bloom2006b}
154: postulated an association between GRB 060502B and a bright elliptical galaxy
155: at a large offset at $z=0.287$, while GRB 051221A is associated with an
156: isolated star-forming dwarf galaxy \citep{Soderberg2006}, and the host of GRB
157: 060121 might be a dusty edge-on irregular or spiral galaxy
158: \citep{Levan2006}. This ``mixed-bag'' of host types is consistent with the
159: idea that merging compact binaries will sample all types of galaxies, even
160: those in which star formation turned off a long time ago. The short burst GRB
161: 050813 belongs to the small set of short bursts for which up to date it has
162: not been possible to define precisely the host galaxy.
163:
164: %-------------------------------------------------------------------------
165: \subsection{GRB 050813}
166:
167: According to its observed duration ($T_{90}$, see below), GRB 050813 can be
168: associated with the class of short bursts with very high (99.9\%) probability
169: \citep{Donaghy2006}. In addition, its measured spectral lag is consistent
170: with zero, another important property of short bursts \citep{NB2006,
171: Donaghy2006}. Furthermore, the small original \emph{Swift} XRT error circle
172: encompasses parts of an anonymous cluster of galaxies with ellipticals inside
173: and close to the error circle
174: \citep{Gladders2005,Gorosabel2005,Prochaska2006}. Taken together, these
175: observations suggest that GRB 050813 should be considered as a typical short
176: burst.
177:
178: GRB 050813 was detected by the \emph{Swift} satellite on 2005 August 13,
179: 6:45:09.76 UT \citep{Retter2005}. Its duration in the 15-350 keV band was
180: $0.6\pm0.1$ seconds \citep{Sato2005}, making it after GRB 050509B and 050724
181: the third short burst that \emph{Swift} localized quickly and precisely. It
182: is reminiscent of GRB 050509B, which had a very faint X-ray afterglow
183: \citep{Gehrels2005}. Ground analysis of the X-ray data revealed a faint,
184: uncatalogued source at coordinates RA, DEC (J2000) = 16$^{\rm h}$ 07$^{\rm m}$
185: 57$\fs$0, +11$^{\circ}$ 14$'$ 52$''$ with an uncertainty of 10 arcsec radius
186: \citep{Morris2005}. This position was later refined by \cite{Moretti2006} to
187: RA, DEC (J2000) = 16$^{\rm h}$ 07$^{\rm m}$ 57$\fs$07, +11$^{\circ}$ 14$'$
188: 54$\farcs$2 with an uncertainty of 6.5 arcsec radius; an even smaller error
189: region was reported by \cite{Prochaska2006}. No optical or near-infrared
190: afterglow candidate was found. \cite{Li2005} reported an unfiltered upper
191: limit of magnitude 18.6 at 49.2 seconds after the burst. UVOT observations
192: started 102 seconds after the trigger and a 3-sigma upper limit of $V=19.1$
193: was derived from a 188 seconds exposure \citep{Blustin2005}.
194: \cite{Sharapov2005} found a limiting $I$-band magnitude
195: of $\sim$21 at 10.52 hours after the burst, while \citet{Bikmaev2005} reported
196: an $R$-band upper limit of $\sim$23 at 12.75 hours after the event.
197:
198: Spectroscopy of galaxies close to and inside the XRT error circle revealed a
199: mean redshift of $z=0.72$ \citep{Berger2005b,Foley2005,Prochaska2006},
200: indicating the possibility that this may also be the redshift of the GRB. This
201: was later refuted by \cite{Berger2006}, who argued that the host is a
202: background galaxy at a (photometric) redshift of about 1.8, possibly
203: related to a background cluster of galaxies. This would make GRB 050813 the
204: second most distant \citep[after GRB 060121,][]{dUP2006,Levan2006}
205: short burst for which a redshift could be estimated.
206:
207: Here we report on a deep follow-up observing campaign of GRB 050813 with
208: telescopes at Paranal, Chile, as well as at Calar Alto and at the
209: Observatorio Sierra Nevada (OSN), Spain. The constraints we can set on any SN
210: component following this burst as well as the faintness of its optical
211: afterglow match well into what is known so far about the properties of short
212: bursts. Throughout this paper we adopt a world model with $H_0=71$ km
213: s$^{-1}$ Mpc$^{-1}$, $\Omega_{\rm M}=0.27$, $\Omega_\Lambda=0.73$
214: \citep{Spergel2003}, which for $z$=0.72 yields a distance modulus of 43.22
215: mag. The luminosity distance is $1.36\,\times\,10^{28}$ cm and 1 arcsec
216: corresponds to 7.23 kpc. If $z$=1.8, the corresponding numbers are 45.7 mag,
217: $4.26\,\times\,10^{28}$ cm, and 8.55 kpc.
218:
219: %-------------------------------------------------------------------------
220: \section{Observations and data reduction}
221:
222: A first imaging of the GRB error box was performed with the 1.5-m OSN
223: telescope at Observatorio Sierra Nevada and the Calar Alto 2.2-m telescope
224: equipped with CAFOS starting already 0.5 days after the burst
225: \citep{Gorosabel2005}. Unfortunately, these observations resulted only in
226: upper limits for the magnitude of any optical transient (Table~\ref{log}). In
227: order to set constraints on a rising SN component, we have then carried out
228: deep follow-up observations using VLT/FORS2 in standard resolution (SR)
229: imaging mode with a scale of 0.25 arcsec per pixel (field of view
230: 6$\farcm$8 $\times$ 6$\farcm$8). Observations were performed in the
231: Bessel $I$ band in order to minimize the potential influence of host
232: extinction on the discovery of a fading (afterglow) or a rising (supernova)
233: source. A first run was performed on August 19.061 to 19.088 UT, 5.8 days
234: after the burst. Ten frames were obtained, 200 seconds exposure time
235: each. Seeing conditions were very good, $\sim$ 0.5 arcsec. A second run using
236: the same instrumental setup was performed on August 24.990 to 25.017 UT, 11.7
237: days after the burst. Atmospheric seeing conditions were even better than
238: during the first observing run, approaching
239: 0.35 arcsec. Both nights were photometric.
240:
241: The FORS2 images were bias-subtracted and flat-fielded with standard reduction
242: procedures provided within IRAF.\footnote{http://iraf.noao.edu} Frames
243: obtained on the same night and in the same band were summed together in order
244: to increase the signal-to-noise ratio. Photometry was performed with standard
245: Point Spread Function (PSF) fitting using the DAOPHOT II image data analysis
246: package "PSF-fitting\footnote{The PSF-fitting photometry is accomplished by
247: modeling a two-dimensional Gaussian profile with two free parameters (the half
248: width at half maxima along $x$ and $y$ coordinates of each frame) on at least
249: five unsaturated bright stars in each image.} algorithm" \citep{Stetson1987}
250: within the MIDAS
251: platform.\footnote{http://www.eso.org/projects/esomidas} In addition, we
252: performed aperture photometry using the IRAF Aperture Photometry Package
253: Apphot.
254:
255: Additional spectroscopic observations covering the entire original $r$=10
256: arcsec XRT error circle \citep{Morris2005} were performed with the Integral
257: Field Unit VIMOS/IFU at the ESO-VLT starting 20 hours after the burst.
258: Unfortunately, these observations could not be implemented into this study
259: due to technical problems with the data.
260:
261: Figure~\ref{field} shows the \emph{Swift} XRT 90\% containment radius reported
262: by \cite{Morris2005} (large circle), the refined error circle by
263: \cite{Moretti2006} (small circle) and, as a small ellipse, the re-analyzed
264: X-ray error box (68$\%$ containment radius) given by \cite{Prochaska2006}. In
265: the original $r$=10 arcsec XRT error circle we identify 11 sources, designated
266: by the letters C, D, E, F and the numbers from 1 to 7. Note that B = X, C = B,
267: 4 = B* and E = C in the nomenclature of \cite{Prochaska2006}. The X-ray error
268: box published by \cite{Prochaska2006} contains only two sources, of which
269: \#6 is the one identified by \cite{Berger2006} as the possible host galaxy
270: possibly related to a cluster of galaxies\footnote{E. Berger, talk given at
271: ``Swift and GRBs: Unveiling the Relativistic Universe'', San Servolo, Venice
272: (Italy), 2006 June 5-9} at $z$=1.8. Nothing can be said at this stage about
273: the redshift of source \#7, however. Here, we assume that it is a member of
274: the cluster of galaxies at $z$=0.72
275: \citep{Berger2005b,Foley2005,Prochaska2006}.
276:
277: %-------------------------------------------------------------------------
278: \section{Results}
279:
280: Our two FORS2 observing runs were arranged such that they would allow us to
281: search for a fading (afterglow) as well as for a rising (supernova) component
282: following GRB 050813, supposing $z$=0.72. Initially we searched for a
283: transient isolated point source in the original 10 arcsec XRT error circle,
284: but we did not find one. The fact that the sources \#2, \#5 and \#6
285: (Fig.~\ref{field}; Table~\ref{tab2}) are not detected in the combined image of
286: the first VLT/FORS2 observing run might be due to the presence of the Moon,
287: causing an enhanced sky background level. During the second FORS2 run the sky
288: background was much lower and the seeing even better than during the first
289: observing run. We conclude that any well-isolated afterglow or supernova in
290: this field was fainter than the magnitude limits at the time of the two FORS2
291: observing runs, $I$=25.1 and 25.5, respectively.
292:
293: %-------------------------------------------------------------------------
294: \subsection{Search for a fading afterglow component}
295:
296: Based on our deep FORS2 observing runs, we searched for a potential fading
297: afterglow superimposed on the brightest extended sources (galaxies) in the
298: field (Table~\ref{tab1}). No evidence for variability due to an underlying
299: transient source was found. \cite{Prochaska2006} identified object C and E as
300: elliptical galaxies (Fig.~\ref{field}), with C being the most likely host
301: candidate based on its location relative to their revised elliptical error
302: circle. In our images source E appears to have an irregular halo which does
303: not support its classification as an elliptical. Image subtraction did not
304: reveal any transient source superimposed on this galaxy.
305:
306: In order to obtain an upper limit on a possible detection of an afterglow
307: (or a SN) in the first (second) epoch FORS2 image superimposed source E, we
308: artificially added point sources of different magnitudes to E and then
309: performed an aperture photometry.
310: These point sources were selected from the second epoch image.
311: All pixels of the second epoch image were then set to zero except
312: the pixels of the selected point source of known magnitude
313: and the resulting image was
314: then
315: shifted and added to the first epoch image.
316: This analysis showed that we would have
317: been able to detect (at 3 $\sigma$) a fading afterglow superimposed on
318: this galaxy if its $I$-band magnitude had been 23.5 at the time of the
319: first FORS2 observation.
320:
321: %-------------------------------------------------------------------------
322: \subsection{Upper limits on a rising supernova component}
323:
324: One of the main observational characteristics of a short burst should be the
325: absence of a SN component in the late-time afterglow \citep{Hjorth2005a}, as
326: the merger is not expected to result in the kind of radioactivity-powered
327: optical display typical for thermonuclear (Type Ia) and core-collapse (Types
328: II and Ib/c) supernovae. However, mergers may have sub-relativistic explosions
329: with low amount of ejected mass \citep{Li1998,Kulkarni2005}, but they should have
330: a small luminosity. In agreement with these expectations, strong upper limits could be
331: set so far on any potential SN component accompanying short bursts
332: \citep[cf.][]{Hjorth2005a, Fox2005}.
333:
334: The constraints we can place on a rising SN component for GRB~050813 are less
335: severe, given the potentially relatively high redshift of this burst. For the
336: cosmological parameters employed here, SN 1998bw \citep{Galama1998} redshifted
337: to $z$=0.72 would have magnitudes of $I$=24.7 and $I$=23.9 during our first
338: and second VLT/FORS observing run, respectively, after taking into account a
339: Galactic reddening of $E(B-V)$=0.056 mag \citep{SFD1998} in the direction of
340: GRB 050813. At that brightness level we would have detected the SN if not
341: superimposed on a much brighter host or strongly extinguished by dust. More
342: precisely, we conclude that at the time of our second FORS2 observation any
343: supernova following GRB 050813 was at least about 1.5 mag less luminous than
344: SN 1998bw. While constraints placed on any SN component underlying the
345: afterglow of e.g. GRB 050509B \citep{Hjorth2005a} and GRB 050709
346: \citep{Fox2005,Covino2006} are much stronger, this makes a potential SN
347: component following GRB 050813 already fainter than any of the 11 GRB-SNe of
348: long bursts known to date \citep[ their Figure 6]{Ferrero2006}.
349:
350: On the other hand, we would have been able to detect (at 3 $\sigma$) a rising
351: SN component superimposed on the bright galaxy E (Fig.~\ref{field}) only if
352: its $I$-band magnitude had been 23.5 at the time of the second FORS2
353: observation. In other words, a SN 1998bw-like component would be missed in
354: this case. The same holds for a typical type Ia supernova
355: \citep{Krisciunas2003}, which would have had $I$=26.9 and $I$=25.4 at the
356: time of our first and second FORS2 observing run, respectively.
357:
358: %-------------------------------------------------------------------------
359: \section{Discussion}
360:
361: Short bursts, by phenomenological classification introduced by
362: \cite{Kouveliotou1993}, are bursts whose $T_{90}$ duration measured with
363: \emph{BATSE} was less than 2 sec. Even though it has already been known in the
364: 1990s that $T_{90}$ is a function of energy (and of detector properties),
365: this definition, because of its simplicity, has been widely used even in the
366: \emph{HETE-2} and in the \emph{Swift} era. In principle, having now much
367: more observational data at hand for individual bursts than in the \emph{BATSE}
368: era, this phenomenological definition/classification scheme calls for a more
369: accurate, namely physical classification scheme.
370:
371: It is clear that the classification of individual bursts with respect to the
372: nature of their progenitor is difficult. Recent investigations tackle this
373: problem and have led to the suggestion of much more then just one criterium in
374: order to classify a GRB \citep{Donaghy2006,NB2006}. As long as no consensus
375: has been reached in the literature what the ultimate criteria are for a burst
376: to be classified as being due to a merger event, in several cases only
377: arguments can be provided that favor one scenario for the other (merger
378: vs. collapse). The detection or non-detection of a SN signal plays a key role
379: in this approach but has come into question recently
380: \citep[see][]{Gehrels2006,Fynbo2006,DellaValle2006,Gal-Yam2006,Zhang2006}.
381: This leaves the nature of the host galaxy as the strongest argument to detect
382: a GRB due to a merger event, namely if the host is an elliptical galaxy. But
383: the potentially broad range in merger times and hence distances of the merger
384: events from their host galaxies \citep[cf.][]{Belczynski2006} might also call
385: into question the application of this criterium. GRB 050813 belongs to those
386: bursts that demonstrate all these problems in detail.
387:
388: One of the main goals of our observing runs was the localization of the
389: afterglow and hence the identification of the GRB host galaxy. Basically, the
390: host cannot be identified with certainty and we have to consider other
391: arguments that favor or disfavor any galaxy visible on the deep FORS2 $I$-band
392: images of the XRT error circle as the potential host. GRB 050813 then joins
393: the increasing list of short bursts with no detected optical afterglow,
394: starting with GRB 050509B \citep{Bloom2006a,CT2005, Gehrels2005,Hjorth2005a}.
395: Using the upper limits on the afterglow of GRB 050813 (Table 1) we can follow
396: \cite{Kann2006} and place the properties of this afterglow in the context of
397: other known GRB afterglows (Fig.~\ref{IcLKs}). The long burst afterglows
398: shown in Fig.~\ref{IcLKs} by solid lines are those from the ``Golden Sample'' of
399: \cite{Kann2006}, i.e., those that have sufficient $I$-band data. In addition,
400: we analyzed the available afterglow data on the short bursts GRB 050709
401: \citep{Hjorth2005b, Fox2005, Covino2006}, GRB 050724 \citep{Berger2005a,
402: Malesani050724}, GRB
403: 051221A \citep{Soderberg2006} and GRB 060121 \citep{Levan2006,dUP2006} in an
404: analogous way and also included them in Fig.~\ref{IcLKs} (see the Appendix B
405: for details). As can be seen, short burst optical afterglows are
406: intrinsically very faint, with the afterglows of GRB 050724 and GRB 051221A
407: being about 3 magnitudes fainter than any long burst afterglow in the sample,
408: and GRB 050709 being 4 magnitudes fainter at one day after the burst and
409: assuming $z=0.72$ \citep[in agreement with the predictions for short burst
410: afterglows;][]{Panaitescu2001}. They are also significantly fainter than
411: intrinsically faint afterglows of some long GRBs, such as GRB 021211. Only
412: the afterglow of GRB 060121 is comparable with the typical afterglows of long
413: GRBs. The upper limits on the optical afterglow of GRB 050813 show that its
414: luminosity was also far below typical luminosities of (extinction-corrected)
415: afterglows of long bursts. On the other hand, it matches the luminosity region
416: occupied so far by afterglows of the short bursts (with GRB 060121 being the
417: only exception).
418:
419: Figure~\ref{field} shows that there are only two sources in the XRT error
420: ellipse \citep{Prochaska2006}, while there are at least three additional
421: sources in the refined error circle \citep{Moretti2006}. The former might
422: favor a burst related to the very faint sources \#6 and \#7 (source \#6
423: appears point-like in our images) but it does not even exclude an event in
424: the outer halo of source C, an elliptical galaxy at a redshift of 0.719
425: \citep{Prochaska2006}. The minimum distance between the border of the error
426: ellipse and the center of this galaxy is 3.2 arcsec, corresponding to a
427: projected distance of 23 kpc. This is less than the projected distance of the
428: error circle of GRB 050509B from the center of its suspected host, an
429: elliptical galaxy at a redshift of $z$=0.225 \citep{Gehrels2005}. In
430: addition, the minimum angular distance between source E and the border of the
431: error ellipse is 7.1 arcsec, corresponding to a projected distance of 51
432: kpc. Even this is within the range predicted by recent models of merging
433: compact objects \citep[see][]{BBK02,PB02}. The error circle determined by
434: \cite{Moretti2006} is much larger, and thus allows not only source C but also
435: galaxy E at $z=0.73\pm0.01$ \citep{Prochaska2006} to be the potential host of
436: GRB 050813. This galaxy was classified by \cite{Prochaska2006} as an elliptical
437: galaxy, while our images show morphology that point either to a spiral or to
438: an irregular galaxy. The nature of the fifth, point-like source in the refined
439: error circle, \#4, remains undetermined.
440:
441: While this paper was submitted, a new revised XRT error circle was reported by
442: \cite{Butler2006}. This revised error circle is 3.8 arcsec in radius and
443: centered close to a faint edge-on galaxy. This galaxy (source \#7, see
444: Fig.~\ref{field}) was only marginally detected during the first FORS
445: observations. A comparison with the second FORS observations six days later
446: does not provide convincing evidence for a photometric variability due to an
447: underlying point source.
448:
449: To summarize, our optical data do not reveal either an afterglow nor a SN
450: component. If GRB 050813 was occurring in a cluster of galaxies at a redshift
451: of $z$=0.72, as it might be indicated by the surrounding galaxy population,
452: then its projected distance from its potential host galaxy could have been of
453: the order of less than 4 to some dozen kpc, depending on the chosen potential
454: host galaxy. The non-detection of the afterglow is well in accord with the
455: faintness of optical afterglows following short bursts (Fig.~\ref{IcLKs}). On
456: the other hand, if the burster would had been at $z$=1.8 \citep{Berger2006},
457: no SN~1998bw-like component would have been detectable in our images and any
458: afterglow component would have been correspondingly fainter than in the former
459: case (Fig.~\ref{IcLKs2}). But even in this case the upper limits we can set
460: on any optical afterglow are consistent with the hypothesis that GRB 050813
461: was a typical member of the short bursts.
462:
463: %-------------------------------------------------------------------------
464: \section{Acknowledgements}
465:
466: We thank the staff at ESO/Paranal, in particular C. Dumas, P. D. Lynam,
467: P. Gandhi, N. Hu\'elamo, and E. Jehin, for performing the observations and
468: additional efforts related to that. We thank CAHA and OSN staff for excellent
469: support during some of the observations presented here. P.F., D.A.K., and
470: S.K. acknowledge financial support by DFG grant Kl 766/13-2 and by the German
471: Academic Exchange Service (DAAD) under grant No. D/05/54048. The research
472: activity of J.Gorosabel is supported by the Spanish Ministry of Science
473: through projects AYA2004-01515 and ESP2005-07714-C03-03. We thank the second
474: referee for a rapid reply and a constructive report.
475:
476: %-------------------------------------------------------------------------
477: \appendix
478:
479: \section{The light curves of the short burst afterglows}
480:
481:
482: In Fig. \ref{IcLKs} we included those four GRBs that have both an optical
483: afterglow and a redshift derived either from host galaxy spectroscopy or
484: photometry \citep[GRB 060121;][]{dUP2006} up to October 2006.
485:
486: We take data from the following works: GRB 050709: \cite{Hjorth2005b,
487: Fox2005, Covino2006}. GRB 050724: \cite{Berger2005a, Malesani050724}.
488: GRB 051221A: \cite{Soderberg2006}. GRB 060121: \cite{Levan2006, dUP2006}.
489:
490: For GRB 050709, we derive a decay slope of $\alpha=1.68\pm0.15$ from the
491: $R_C$-band light curve. \cite{Fox2005} noted that the late \emph{Hubble Space
492: Telescope (HST)} data indicate a steepening of the light curve decay, possibly
493: due to a jet break. Using the $R_C$-band decay index, we find a rebrightening
494: (significant at the 5 $\sigma$ level) in the HST data, but only marginal
495: evidence that the afterglow is fainter than expected from the early decay in
496: the last HST detection. This result is in accordance with \cite{Watson2006}.
497: The light curve shown in Fig.~\ref{IcLKs} is composed of the $R_C$ data
498: shifted to the HST F814W zero point, plus the HST data. From the
499: $V,R_C,F8,K^\prime$ spectral energy distribution (SED), we derive a steep
500: uncorrected spectral slope $\beta_0=1.71\pm0.17$. This is indicative of
501: additional source frame extinction. As the host is a blue dwarf galaxy
502: \citep{Fox2005}, we assumed SMC-type dust \citep{Pei1992}. A free fit implies
503: $\beta=0.26\pm1.16$ and a host extinction of $A_V$(host)$=1.46\pm1.07$ mag, a
504: very high value indeed. As the single $K^\prime$-data point has a very large
505: error (0.7 mag), this value may not be trustworthy. For a progenitor that has
506: traveled far from its birthplace, an unstratified surrounding medium is
507: expected (density $\rho \propto r^0$). We fixed $\beta$ to the value derived
508: from the pre-break decay slope $\alpha_1$, and find $\beta=1.12$ and
509: $A_V$(host)$=0.67\pm0.19$ mag. We used these parameters to correct and shift
510: the light curve.
511:
512:
513: For GRB 050724, the Galactic extinction is high and not well determined.
514: We follow \cite{Malesani050724}, who argue, based on the X-ray to optical SED,
515: for $E_{B-V}=0.49$. After correcting for this extinction, we find $\beta=0.76
516: \pm0.07$ and no evidence for source frame extinction, in accordance with
517: \cite{Malesani050724}. The light curve is mostly $I_C$ data anyway, we
518: add $V$, $R_C$ and $K$ data shifted to the $I_C$ zero point.
519:
520: In the case of GRB 051221A, we find that the light curve decays as a single
521: power-law with a slope $\alpha=0.94\pm0.03$, in accordance with
522: \cite{Soderberg2006}. We derive a flat spectral slope ($\beta=-0.16\pm0.84$)
523: from the $r^\prime i^\prime z^\prime$ spectral energy distribution, but
524: caution that the errors of the $i^\prime$ and $z^\prime$ data are very
525: large. Assuming an unstratified surrounding medium and a cooling frequency
526: blueward of the optical bands, we derive $\beta=0.62$ \citep[coupled with a
527: typical power-law index of the electron distribution function of $p=2.25$;
528: cf.][]{Kann2006}. We used this spectral slope and assume no additional
529: extinction to shift the light curve.
530:
531: Combining the data from \cite{Levan2006} and \cite{dUP2006} of GRB 060121, we
532: find that the zero points of the two data sets differ. We shifted the data
533: from \cite{dUP2006} to the fainter zero point of \cite{Levan2006}. The light
534: curve has a complex shape and seems to include several rebrightenings
535: (Fig. \ref{IcLKs}). It is composed of $I_C$ data and $R_C$ data shifted to the
536: $I_C$ zero point. We used the redshift and host galaxy extinction derived by
537: \cite{dUP2006}, assuming the more probable redshift of $z=4.6$, and a
538: spectral slope in the optical of $\beta=0.6$, as derived by the authors cited
539: above.
540:
541: In all cases, except for GRB 060121, the afterglow data do not contain any
542: host contribution. For GRB 060121, we used a host galaxy magnitude derived
543: from the HST measurements \citep{Levan2006}. To correct for
544: Galactic extinction, we used the value derived from the maps of \cite{SFD1998}
545: for GRB 050709, 051221A and 060121, and $E_{B-V}=0.49$ mag for GRB 050724
546: \citep[as suggested by][]{Malesani050724}.
547:
548: %-------------------------------------------------------------------------
549:
550: \begin{thebibliography}{}
551:
552: \bibitem[Aloy, Janka \& M\"uller(2005)]{Aloy2005}Aloy, M. A., Janka, H.-T., \& M\"uller, E. 2005, \aap, 436, 273
553: \bibitem[Bal\'azs, M\'esz\'aros \& Horv\'ath(1998)]{BMH1998}Bal\'azs, L. G., M\'esz\'aros, A., \& Horv\'ath, I. 1998, \aap, 339, 1
554: \bibitem[Belczynski, Bulik \& Kalogera(2002)]{BBK02}Belczynski, K., Bulik, T., \& Kalogera, V. 2002, \apjl, 571, L147
555: \bibitem[Belczynski et al.(2006)]{Belczynski2006}Belczynski, K., et al. 2006, \apj, 648, 1110
556: \bibitem[Berger et al.(2005a)]{Berger2005a}Berger, E., et al. 2005, \nat, 438, 988
557: \bibitem[Berger (2005b)]{Berger2005b}Berger, E. 2005, GCN 3801
558: \bibitem[Berger (2006)]{Berger2006}Berger, E. 2006, in: Proc. Gamma-Ray Bursts in the
559: Swift era, eds. S. S. Holt, N. Gehrels, J. A. Nousek, AIP Conf. Proc. 836, 33
560: \bibitem[Bikmaev et al.(2005)]{Bikmaev2005}Bikmaev, I., et al. 2005, GCN 3797
561: \bibitem[Bloom et al.(2007)]{Bloom2006b}Bloom, J. S., et al. 2007, \apj, 654, 878
562: \bibitem[Bloom et al.(2006)]{Bloom2006a}Bloom, J. S., et al. 2006, \apj, 638, 354
563: \bibitem[Bloom et al.(2005)]{Bloom2005}Bloom, J. S., Dupree, A., Chen, H-W., \& Prochaska, J. X.
564: 2005, GCN 3672
565: \bibitem[Blustin et al.(2005)]{Blustin2005}Blustin, A. J., et al. 2005, GCN 3791
566: \bibitem[Butler(2007)]{Butler2006}Butler, N. R. 2007, \aj, 133, 1027
567: \bibitem[Castro-Tirado et al.(2005)]{CT2005}Castro-Tirado, A. J., et al. 2005, \aap, 439, L15
568: \bibitem[Covino et al.(2006)]{Covino2006}Covino, S., et al. 2006, \aap, 447, L5
569: \bibitem[Della Valle et al.(2006)]{DellaValle2006}Della Valle, M., et al. 2006, \nat, 444, 1050
570: \bibitem[de Ugarte Postigo et al.(2006)]{dUP2006}de Ugarte Postigo, A., et al. 2006, \apjl, 648, L83
571: \bibitem[Donaghy et al.(2006)]{Donaghy2006}Donaghy, T. Q., et al. 2006, \apj, submitted (astro-ph/0605570)
572: \bibitem[Faber et al.(2006)]{Faber2006}Faber, J. A., Baumgarte, T. W., Shapiro, S. L., \& Taniguchi, K. 2006, \apj, 641, L93
573: \bibitem[Ferrero et al.(2006)]{Ferrero2006}Ferrero, P., et al. 2006, \aap, 457, 857
574: \bibitem[Foley, Bloom \& Chen(2005)]{Foley2005}Foley, R. J., Bloom, J. S., \& Chen, H.-W. 2005, GCN 3808
575: \bibitem[Fox et al.(2005)]{Fox2005}Fox, D. B., et al. 2005, \nat, 437, 845
576: \bibitem[Frederiks et al.(2007)]{Frederiks2006}Frederiks, D. D., et al. 2006, Astronomy Letters, 33, 19
577: \bibitem[Fryer, Woosley \& Hartmann(1999)]{FWH1999}Fryer, C. L., Woosley, S. E., \& Hartmann, D. H. 1999, \apj, 526, 152
578: \bibitem[Fynbo et al.(2006)]{Fynbo2006}Fynbo, J. P. U., et al. 2006, \nat, 444, 1047
579: \bibitem[Galama et al.(1998)]{Galama1998}Galama, T. J., et al. 1998, \nat, 395, 670
580: \bibitem[Gal-Yam et al.(2006)]{Gal-Yam2006}Gal-Yam, A., et al. 2006, \nat, 444, 1053
581: \bibitem[Gehrels et al.(2005)]{Gehrels2005}Gehrels, N., et al. 2005, \nat, 437, 851
582: \bibitem[Gehrels et al.(2006)]{Gehrels2006}Gehrels, N., et al. 2006, \nat, 444, 1044
583: \bibitem[Gladders et al.(2005)]{Gladders2005}Gladders, M., Berger, E., Morell, N., \& Roth, M. 2005, GCN 3798
584: \bibitem[Golenetskii et al.(2005)]{Golenetskii2005}Golenetskii, S. et al. 2005, GCN 4197
585: \bibitem[Gorosabel et al.(2005)]{Gorosabel2005}Gorosabel, J., et al. 2005, GCN 3796
586: \bibitem[Gorosabel et al.(2006)]{Gorosabel2006}Gorosabel, J., et al. 2006, \aap, 450, 87
587: \bibitem[Hjorth et al.(2003)]{Hjorth2003}Hjorth, J., et al. 2003, \nat, 423, 847
588: \bibitem[Hjorth et al.(2005a)]{Hjorth2005a}Hjorth, J., et al. 2005a, \apjl, 630, L117
589: \bibitem[Hjorth et al.(2005b)]{Hjorth2005b}Hjorth, J., et al. 2005b, \nat, 437, 859
590: \bibitem[Kann, Klose \& Zeh(2006)]{Kann2006}Kann, D. A., Klose, S., \& Zeh, A. 2006, \apj, 641, 993
591: \bibitem[Kouveliotou et al.(1993)]{Kouveliotou1993}Kouveliotou, C., et al. 1993, \apjl, 413, L101
592: \bibitem[Krisciunas et al.(2003)]{Krisciunas2003}Krisciunas, K., et al. 2003, \aj, 125, 166
593: \bibitem[Kulkarni(2005)]{Kulkarni2005}Kulkarni, S. R. 2005, astro-ph/0510256
594: \bibitem[La Parola et al.(2006)]{LaParola2006}La Parola, V., et al. 2006, \aap, 454, 753
595: \bibitem[Lee, Ramirez-Ruiz \& Granot(2005)]{Lee2005}Lee, W. H., Ramirez-Ruiz, E., \& Granot, J. 2005, \apjl, 630, L165
596: \bibitem[Levan et al.(2006)]{Levan2006}Levan, A. J., et al. 2006, \apjl, 648, L9
597: \bibitem[Li \& Paczy\'nski(1998)]{Li1998}Li, L. X., \& Paczy\'nski, B. 1998, \apjl, 507, L59
598: \bibitem[Li(2005)]{Li2005}Li, W. 2005, GCN 3794
599: \bibitem[Malesani et al.(2006)]{Malesani2006}Malesani, D., et al. 2006, GCN 4561
600: \bibitem[Malesani et al.(2007)]{Malesani050724}Malesani, D., et al. 2007, \aap, in press (arXiv:0706.1273)
601: \bibitem[Moretti et al.(2006)]{Moretti2006}Moretti, A., et al. 2006, \aap, 448, L9
602: \bibitem[Morris et al.(2005)]{Morris2005}Morris, D. C., et al. 2005, GCN 3790
603: \bibitem[Norris \& Bonnell(2006)]{NB2006}Norris, J. P., \& Bonnell, J. T. 2006, \apj, 643, 266
604: \bibitem[Oechslin \& Janka(2006)]{Oechslin2006}Oechslin, R., \& Janka, H.-Th. 2006, \mnras, 368, 1489
605: \bibitem[Ofek et al.(2006)]{Ofek2006}Ofek, E. O., et al. 2006, \apj, 652, 507
606: \bibitem[Panaitescu, Kumar \& Narayan(2001)]{Panaitescu2001}Panaitescu, A., Kumar, P., \& Narayan, R. 2001, \apjl, 561, L171
607: \bibitem[Paczy\'nski(1998)]{Paczynski1998}Paczy\'nski, B. 1998, \apjl, 494, L45
608: \bibitem[Pedersen et al.(2005)]{Pedersen2005}Pedersen, K., et al. 2005, \apjl, 634, L17
609: \bibitem[Pei(1992)]{Pei1992}Pei, Y. C. 1992, \apj, 395, 130
610: \bibitem[Perna \& Belczynski(2002)]{PB02}Perna, R. \& Belczynski, K. 2002, \apj, 570, 252
611: \bibitem[Pian et al.(2006)]{Pian2006}Pian, E., et al. 2006, \nat, 442, 1011
612: \bibitem[Prochaska et al.(2006)]{Prochaska2006}Prochaska, J. X., et al. 2006, \apj, 642, 989
613: \bibitem[Prochaska et al.(2005)]{Prochaska2005}Prochaska, J. X., Chen, H-W., Bloom, J. S., \&
614: Stephens, A. 2005, GCN 3679
615: \bibitem[Racusin et al.(2006)]{Racusin2006}Racusin, J. L., et al. 2006, GCN 5378
616: \bibitem[Retter et al.(2005)]{Retter2005}Retter, A., et al. 2005, GCN 3788
617: \bibitem[Roming et al.(2006)]{Roming2006}Roming, P. W. A., et al. 2006, \apj, 651, 985
618: \bibitem[Rosswog(2005)]{Rosswog2005}Rosswog, S. 2005, \apj, 634, 1202
619: \bibitem[Ruffert \& Janka(2001)]{Ruffert2001}Ruffert, M. \& Janka, H.-Th. 2001, \aap, 380, 544
620: \bibitem[Sari, Piran \& Narayan(1998)]{Sari1998}Sari, R., Piran, T. \& Narayan, R. 1998, \apjl, 497, L17
621: \bibitem[Sato et al.(2005)]{Sato2005}Sato, G., et al. 2005, GCN 3793
622: \bibitem[Schlegel, Finkbeiner \& Davis(1998)]{SFD1998}Schlegel, D. J., Finkbeiner, D. P., \& Davis, M. 1998, \apj, 500, 525
623: \bibitem[Sharapov et al.(2005)]{Sharapov2005}Sharapov, D., Ibrahimov, M., Pozanenko, A., \& Rumyantsev, V. 2005, GCN 3857
624: \bibitem[Soderberg \& Berger(2005)]{SoderbergBerger2005}Soderberg, A. M., \& Berger, E. 2005, GCN 4375
625: \bibitem[Soderberg et al.(2006)]{Soderberg2006}Soderberg, A. M., et al. 2006, \apj, 650, 261
626: \bibitem[Spergel et al.(2003)]{Spergel2003} Spergel, D. N., et al. 2003, \apjs, 148, 175
627: \bibitem[Stanek et al.(2003)]{Stanek2003}Stanek, K. Z., et al. 2003, \apjl, 591, L17
628: \bibitem[Stetson(1987)]{Stetson1987}Stetson, P. B. 1987, \pasp, 99, 191
629: \bibitem[Tanvir et al.(2005)]{Tanvir2005} Tanvir, N. R., Chapman, R., Levan, A. J., \& Priddey, R. S. 2005, \nat, 438, 991
630: \bibitem[Watson et al.(2006)]{Watson2006}Watson, D., et al. 2006, \aap, 454, L123
631: \bibitem[Woosley \& Bloom(2006)]{Woosley2006}Woosley, S. E., \& Bloom, J. S. 2006, Ann. Rev. Astron. Astroph., 44, 507
632: \bibitem[Zhang(2006)]{Zhang2006}Zhang, B. 2006, Nature 444, 1010
633:
634: \end{thebibliography}
635:
636: %-------------------------------------------------------------------------
637:
638: \begin{figure}
639: \includegraphics[width=16.5cm,angle=0,clip=true]{f1.eps}
640: \caption{VLT $I$-band image of the GRB field obtained 11 days after the
641: burst, showing the original 10 arcsec (radius) XRT error circle of GRB 050813
642: \citep{Morris2005} (large circle), the refined error circle by
643: \cite{Moretti2006} (small circle, center around source \#4), the revised error
644: ellipse \citep{Prochaska2006}, the refined error circle by \cite{Butler2006}
645: (small circle, center around source \#7) and the objects listed in
646: Tables~\ref{tab1} and \ref{tab2}.}
647: \label{field}
648: \end{figure}
649:
650: \begin{figure}
651: \includegraphics[width=16.5cm,angle=0,clip=true]{f2.eps}
652: \caption{The $I$-band light curves of all afterglows from the ``Golden Sample''
653: of \cite{Kann2006} after correction for Galactic and for host extinction and
654: after shifting them to a common redshift of $z$=0.72, the potential redshift
655: of GRB 050813. Two long GRB supernova rebrightenings are indicated. Also shown
656: are the $I$-band afterglows of the short bursts GRB 050709, 050724, 051221A
657: and 060121 shifted in a similar way, and our upper limits on any afterglow or
658: supernova from GRB 050813 (upside-down triangles). For GRB 060121 a redshift
659: of $z=4.6$ \citep{dUP2006} is assumed here.}
660: \label{IcLKs}
661: \end{figure}
662:
663: \begin{figure}
664: \includegraphics[width=16.5cm,angle=0,clip=true]{f3.eps}
665: \caption{The same as Fig.\ref{IcLKs}, but for a redshift of 1.8}
666: \label{IcLKs2}
667: \end{figure}
668: %-------------------------------------------------------------------------
669: \clearpage
670:
671: \begin{deluxetable}{lccccc}
672: \tablecolumns{6}
673: \tabletypesize{\scriptsize}
674: \tablecaption{Observing log of the GRB 050813 field}
675: \tablehead{
676: \colhead{Date [days]} &
677: \colhead{$t-t_0$\tablenotemark{a} [days]} &
678: \colhead{Mag\tablenotemark{b}} &
679: \colhead{Exposure [s]} &
680: \colhead{Filter} &
681: \colhead{Telescope}}
682: \startdata
683: 13.8333 & 0.5519 & 22.8 &10$\times$600 &I & 1.5m OSN \\
684: 13.8708 & 0.5894 & 23.3 &23$\times$180 &R & 2.2m, CAFOS\\
685: 14.8475 & 1.5661 & 23.1 &24$\times$300 &R & 2.2m, CAFOS\\
686: 19.0606 & 5.7792 & 25.1 &10$\times$200 &I & 8.2m, FORS2\\
687: 24.9901 &11.7087 & 25.5 &10$\times$200 &I & 8.2m, FORS2\\ \hline
688: \enddata
689: \tablenotetext{a}{$t_0$ = 2005 August 13.2814, the time of the burst.
690: All dates refer to August 2005 and give the time of
691: the start of the first exposure.}
692: \tablenotetext{b}{The limiting magnitude of the combined image.}
693: \label{log}
694: \end{deluxetable}
695:
696: % -------------------------------------------------------------------------
697:
698: \newpage\clearpage
699:
700: \begin{deluxetable}{cccc}
701: \tablecolumns{4}
702: \tabletypesize{\scriptsize}
703: \tablecaption{The objects used for the calibration of the photometry
704: (A,B,F,G,H,I) and the brightest galaxies in the XRT error circle (C,D,E).}
705: \tablehead{
706: \colhead{\#\tablenotemark{a}} &
707: \colhead{RA\tablenotemark{b}} &
708: \colhead{DEC\tablenotemark{b}} &
709: \colhead{$I$}}
710: \startdata
711: A & 16:07:57.72 & +11:15:02.24 & $24.68\pm0.35$ \\
712: B & 16:07:57.50 & +11:15:02.13 & $21.83\pm0.09$ \\
713: C & 16:07:57.19 & +11:14:53.15 & $22.43\pm0.12$ \\
714: D & 16:07:57.16 & +11:14:46.86 & $23.38\pm0.22$ \\
715: E & 16:07:57.01 & +11:14:47.61 & $22.74\pm0.28$ \\
716: F & 16:07:56.85 & +11:15:01.80 & $20.88\pm0.03$ \\
717: G & 16:07:56.66 & +11:15:02.87 & $23.61\pm0.19$ \\
718: H & 16:07:56.53 & +11:15:01.11 & $22.85\pm0.14$ \\
719: I & 16:07:56.10 & +11:14:47.34 & $23.50\pm0.17$ \\
720: \enddata
721: \tablenotetext{a}{The numbering follows Fig.~\ref{field}.}
722: \tablenotetext{b}{Epoch J2000}
723: \label{tab1}
724: \end{deluxetable}
725:
726: % -------------------------------------------------------------------------
727: \newpage\clearpage
728:
729: \begin{deluxetable}{ccccc}
730: \tablecolumns{4}
731: \tabletypesize{\scriptsize}
732: \tablecaption{The photometry of the fainter sources in the XRT error circle.}
733: \tablehead{
734: \colhead{\#\tablenotemark{a}} &
735: \colhead{RA\tablenotemark{b}} &
736: \colhead{DEC\tablenotemark{b}} &
737: \colhead{$I$ run 1\tablenotemark{c}} &
738: \colhead{$I$ run 2\tablenotemark{c}}}
739: \startdata
740: 1 & 16:07:57.00 & +11:14:43.83 & $24.7<I<24.9$ & $24.4<I<25.4$ \\
741: 2 & 16:07:56.85 & +11:14:42.91 & $>25.1$ & $24.4<I<25.5$ \\
742: 3 & 16:07:56.66 & +11:14:43.58 & $24.69\pm0.24$ & $24.44\pm0.10$ \\
743: 4 & 16:07:57.07 & +11:14:53.65 & $24.63\pm0.30$ & $24.67\pm0.13$ \\
744: 5 & 16:07:56.40 & +11:14:48.35 & $>25.1$ & $25.47\pm0.25$ \\
745: 6 & 16:07:56.91 & +11:14:55.91 & $>25.1$ & $25.64\pm0.28$ \\
746: 7 & 16:07:57.07 & +11.14.57.43 & $24.7<I<25.1$ & $25.41\pm0.25$ \\
747: \enddata
748: \tablenotetext{a}{The numbering follows Fig.~\ref{field}.}
749: \tablenotetext{b}{Epoch J2000}
750: \tablenotetext{c}{Run 1 and run 2 refer to the first
751: and second VLT/FORS observations, respectively.}
752: \label{tab2}
753: \end{deluxetable}
754:
755: \end{document}
756: