All Figures

$\begin{figure} {\epsfig{figure=2615.f1.ps,width=4.9cm,angle=-90} } \end{figure}$ Figure 1: $M_{\rm gas}$ in 10 $^8~M_{\odot}$ deduced from CO observations, versus the galaxy redshift. Filled stars are detections, filled square hints of detection and arrows are upper limits. The dashed line represents the molecular mass limit than can be deduced from CO observations with the IRAM 30 m telescope, in 2 h integration time.
Open with DEXTER

In the text

$\begin{figure} \par {\epsfig{figure=2615.f2.ps,width=4.9cm,angle=-90} } \end{figure}$ Figure 2: CO(2-1) versus CO(1-0) corrected from the effect of different beam sizes. The straight line corresponds to line emission equality.
Open with DEXTER

In the text

$\begin{figure} \par\epsfig{figure=2615.f3.ps,width=5.1cm,angle=-90}\end{figure}$ Figure 3: $M_{\rm gas}$ from CO observations with respect to $\dot{M}$ the mass deposition rates deduced from Einstein X-ray data by White et al. (1997). Straight lines from right to left are for $M_{\rm gas}=1\%\times\dot{M}\times1$ Gyr, $M_{\rm gas}=10\%\times\dot{M}\times1$ Gyr and $M_{\rm gas}=\dot{M}\times1$ Gyr.
Open with DEXTER

In the text

$\begin{figure} \par\epsfig{figure=2615.f4.ps,width=5.1cm,angle=-90}\end{figure}$ Figure 4: $M_{\rm gas}$ from CO observations with respect to $\dot{M}$ the mass deposition rates deduced from ROSAT X-ray data by Peres et al. (1998).
Open with DEXTER

In the text

$\begin{figure} \par {\epsfig{figure=2615.f5.ps,width=5.1cm,angle=-90} } \end{figure}$ Figure 5: $M_{\rm gas}$ versus radio power at 1.4 GHz. There is no clear correlation between molecular gas masses and radio flux.
Open with DEXTER

In the text

$\begin{figure} \par {\epsfig{figure=2615.f6.ps,width=4.9cm,angle=-90} } \end{figure}$ Figure 6: $M_{\rm gas}$ deduced from our CO observations versus H $_{\alpha }$ . The straight line here is a fit to the detection and hint of detection points. Data from Edge (2001) are plotted. Diamond shaped are the detections and triangles are the upper limits. Upper limits were not taken into account in the fit. There is a clear correlation between H $_{\alpha }$ luminosity and cold gas masses, in agreement with previous detections.
Open with DEXTER

In the text

$\begin{figure} \par {\epsfig{figure=2615.f7.ps,width=5.1cm,angle=-90} } \par {\epsfig{figure=2615.f8.ps,width=5.1cm,angle=-90} } \end{figure}$ Figure 7: $M_{\rm gas}$ molecular hydrogen mass given by CO measurements as a function of $M_{\rm dust}$ obtained from IRAS data. The dust mass highly depends on the dust temperature which is unknown: the dust temperature is estimated to 35 K on the upper figure and to 40 K on the figure below. The straight lines represent gas to dust ratio of 200 (dashed), 500 (full) and 1500 (dotted). The temperature uncertainties exclude any clear conclusion about the cold gas origin.
Open with DEXTER

In the text

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=16cm,clip]{2615.f9.eps}\end{figure}$ Figure 8: CO(1-0) and CO(2-1) emission lines observed with the IRAM 30 m telescope. On the Y-axis, main beam temperature (in mK) versus velocity (in km s^-1) on the X-axis.
Open with DEXTER

In the text

$\begin{figure} {\epsfig{figure=2615.f1.ps,width=4.9cm,angle=-90} } \end{figure}$	Figure 1: $M_{\rm gas}$ in 10 $^8~M_{\odot}$ deduced from CO observations, versus the galaxy redshift. Filled stars are detections, filled square hints of detection and arrows are upper limits. The dashed line represents the molecular mass limit than can be deduced from CO observations with the IRAM 30 m telescope, in 2 h integration time.
Open with DEXTER

$\begin{figure} \par {\epsfig{figure=2615.f2.ps,width=4.9cm,angle=-90} } \end{figure}$	Figure 2: CO(2-1) versus CO(1-0) corrected from the effect of different beam sizes. The straight line corresponds to line emission equality.
Open with DEXTER

$\begin{figure} \par\epsfig{figure=2615.f3.ps,width=5.1cm,angle=-90}\end{figure}$	Figure 3: $M_{\rm gas}$ from CO observations with respect to $\dot{M}$ the mass deposition rates deduced from Einstein X-ray data by White et al. (1997). Straight lines from right to left are for $M_{\rm gas}=1\%\times\dot{M}\times1$ Gyr, $M_{\rm gas}=10\%\times\dot{M}\times1$ Gyr and $M_{\rm gas}=\dot{M}\times1$ Gyr.
Open with DEXTER

$\begin{figure} \par\epsfig{figure=2615.f4.ps,width=5.1cm,angle=-90}\end{figure}$	Figure 4: $M_{\rm gas}$ from CO observations with respect to $\dot{M}$ the mass deposition rates deduced from ROSAT X-ray data by Peres et al. (1998).
Open with DEXTER

$\begin{figure} \par {\epsfig{figure=2615.f5.ps,width=5.1cm,angle=-90} } \end{figure}$	Figure 5: $M_{\rm gas}$ versus radio power at 1.4 GHz. There is no clear correlation between molecular gas masses and radio flux.
Open with DEXTER

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=16cm,clip]{2615.f9.eps}\end{figure}$	Figure 8: CO(1-0) and CO(2-1) emission lines observed with the IRAM 30 m telescope. On the Y-axis, main beam temperature (in mK) versus velocity (in km s^-1) on the X-axis.
Open with DEXTER