Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-t5tsf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-11T01:23:55.365Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Close pairs of galaxies with different activity levels

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  25 July 2014

T. A. Nazaryan ,
A. R. Petrosian ,
A. A. Hakobyan ,
B. J. McLean  and
D. Kunth
T. A. Nazaryan
Affiliation:
Byurakan Astrophysical Observatory, 0213 Byurakan, Aragatsotn Province, Armenia email: nazaryan@bao.sci.am
A. R. Petrosian
Affiliation:
Byurakan Astrophysical Observatory, 0213 Byurakan, Aragatsotn Province, Armenia email: nazaryan@bao.sci.am
A. A. Hakobyan
Affiliation:
Byurakan Astrophysical Observatory, 0213 Byurakan, Aragatsotn Province, Armenia email: nazaryan@bao.sci.am
B. J. McLean
Affiliation:
Space Telescope Science Institute, 3700 San Martin Drive, Baltimore, MD 21218, USA
D. Kunth
Affiliation:
Institut d'Astrophysique de Paris, 98 bis Bd Arago, 75014 Paris, France
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

We selected and studied 180 pairs with d V < 800 km s−1 and Dp < 60 kpc containing Markarian (MRK) galaxies to investigate the dependence of galaxies integral parameters, star-formation (SF) and active galactic nuclei (AGN) properties on kinematics of pairs, their structure and large-scale environments. Projected radial separation Dp and perturbation level P are better measures of interaction strength than dV. The latter correlates with the density of large-scale environment and with the morphologies of galaxies. Both galaxies in a pair are of the same nature, the only difference is that MRK galaxies are usually brighter than their neighbors. Specific star formation rates (SSFR) of galaxies in pairs with smaller Dp or d V is in average 0.5 dex higher than that of galaxies in pairs with larger Dp or d V. Closeness of a neighbor with the same and later morphological type increases the SSFR, while earlier-type neighbors do not increase SSFR. Major interactions/mergers trigger SF and AGN more effectively than minor ones. The fraction of AGNs is higher in more perturbed pairs and pairs with smaller Dp. AGNs typically are in stronger interacting systems than star-forming and passive galaxies. There are correlations of both SSFRs and spectral properties of nuclei between pair members.

Keywords

galaxies: generalinteractionsstarburstactivepeculiar
Type
Contributed Papers
Information
Proceedings of the International Astronomical Union , Volume 9 , Symposium S304: Multiwavelength AGN Surveys and Studies , October 2013 , pp. 327 - 330
Copyright
Copyright © International Astronomical Union 2014 

References

Cox, T. J., Jonsson, P., Somerville, R. S., et al. 2008, MNRAS, 384, 386Google Scholar
Di Matteo, P., Bournaud, F., Martig, M., et al. 2008, A&A, 492, 31Google Scholar
Ellison, S. L., Patton, D. R., Simard, L. & McConnachie, A. W. 2008, AJ, 135, 1877Google Scholar
Ellison, S. L., Patton, D. R., Simard, L., et al. 2010, MNRAS, 407, 1514CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ellison, S. L., Patton, D. R., Mendel, J. T., & Scudder, J. M. 2011, MNRAS, 418, 2043CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ellison, S. L., Mendel, J. T., Scudder, J. M., et al. 2013, MNRAS, 430, 3128CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hopkins, P. F. 2012, MNRAS, 420, L8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hopkins, P. F., Cox, T. J., Hernquist, L., et al. 2013, MNRAS, 430, 1901Google Scholar
Hwang, H. S., Elbaz, D., Lee, J. C., et al. 2010, A&A, 522, A33Google Scholar
Lambas, D. G., Tissera, P. B., Alonso, M. S., & Coldwell, G. 2003, MNRAS, 346, 1189Google Scholar
Lambas, D. G., Alonso, S., Mesa, V. & O'Mill, A. L. 2012, A&A, 539, A45Google Scholar
Larson, R. B., & Tinsley, B. M. 1978, ApJ, 219, 46Google Scholar
Li, C., Kauffmann, G., Heckman, T. M., et al. 2008, MNRAS, 385, 1903Google Scholar
Liu, X., Shen, Y., & Strauss, M. A. 2012, ApJ, 745, 94CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Markarian, B. E., Lipovetsky, V. A., Stepanian, J. A., et al. 1989, Comm. SAO, 62, 5Google Scholar
Mihos, J. C., Hernquist, L. 1996, ApJ, 464, 641Google Scholar
Nazaryan, T. A., Petrosian, A. R. & McLean, B. J. 2012, Astrophys., 55, 448Google Scholar
Nazaryan, T. A., Petrosian, A. R., Hakobyan, A. A., et al. 2014, Astrophys., 57, 14CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nazaryan, T. A. 2014, Astrophys., 57, 50CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Petrosian, A., McLean, B., Allen, R. J. & MacKenty, J. W. 2007, ApJS, 170, 33Google Scholar
Scudder, J. M., Ellison, S. L., & Mendel, J. T. 2012, MNRAS, 423, 2690Google Scholar
Sol Alonso, M., Lambas, D. G., Tissera, P., & Coldwell, G. 2006, MNRAS, 367, 1029Google Scholar
Wild, V., Heckman, T., & Charlot, S. 2010, MNRAS, 405, 933Google Scholar