All Figures

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=8.2cm,clip]{0540fig1.eps}\end{figure}$ Figure 1: Star formation rate ( upper panel), $t_{\rm cool},~t_{\rm ff}$ ( lower panel) versus time for model La1 (see text and Table 1 for details).
Open with DEXTER

In the text

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=8.3cm,clip]{0540fig2.eps}\end{figure}$ Figure 2: Predicted mass-metallicity relation for the central zones of our models. The curves are obtained by correcting the average properties of the whole galaxy with the theoretical metallicity gradients by PM04 (see text for details). Results for $\alpha$ -enhanced calibration (solid line) and not $\alpha$ -enhanced calibration (dashed line) are shown versus a collection of data from Kuntschner (2000) and Kuntschner et al. (2001).
Open with DEXTER

In the text

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=8.4cm,clip]{0540fig3.eps}\end{figure}$ Figure 3: Predicted CMRs for our models and different redshift of formation compared with the fit to the Bower et al. (2002b) data (solid line). A measure of the observational scatter is given by dashed lines.
Open with DEXTER

In the text

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=8.4cm,clip]{0540fig4.eps}\end{figure}$ Figure 4: Temporal behaviour of the ISM iron abundance, temperature, gas density and cooling term predicted for models H0 (solid lines), Ha1 (dotted) and Ha10 (dashed).
Open with DEXTER

In the text

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=8.3cm,clip]{0540fig5.ps} % \end{figure}$ Figure 5: Predicted X-ray spectrum for model Ha1. For the adoptedprocedure see Sect. 2.7.
Open with DEXTER

In the text

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=8.5cm,clip]{0540fig6.eps}\end{figure}$ Figure 6: Prediction for the $L_B-L_{\rm X}$ relation for our model galaxies compared to the best fit of O'Sullivan et al.'s (2001a, solid line) data, excluding bright cluster and group ellipticals as well as galaxies hosting an AGN. The dotted lines give a measure of the scatter. Filled triangles: La1, Ha1. Open triangles: La1, Ha1 in which we fix [Fe/H] = 0. Stars: Models L and H with $M_{\rm acc}=0.007~M_{\rm lum}$ . Filled squares: Models L and H with $M_{\rm acc}=0.005~M_{\rm lum}$ . Open squares: H0 and L0. Hexagon: Ha1 with $R=8~R_{\rm eff}$ .
Open with DEXTER

In the text

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=8.2cm,clip]{0540fig7.eps}\end{figure}$ Figure 7: Prediction for $L_{\rm X}-T_{\rm X}$ relation for our model galaxies La1 and Ha1 (filled triangles) compared to the data of Matsushita et al. (2000, squares with error bars). For comparison we show the models La1 and Ha1 in which we fix [Fe/H] = 0 (open triangles).
Open with DEXTER

In the text

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=8.3cm,clip]{0540fig8.eps}\end{figure}$ Figure 8: Prediction for $L_{\rm X}-{\rm [Fe/H]}_{\rm X}$ relation for our model galaxies La1 and Ha1 compared to the data of Matsushita et al. (2000). The symbols are the same as in Fig. 7. Empty triangles refer to models Ha1 and La1 with the same $L_{\rm X}$ , but with $\rm [Fe/H]\sim 0$ .
Open with DEXTER

In the text

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=7.9cm,clip]{0540fig9.eps}\end{figure}$ Figure 9: Mass and energy flow rate versus time during the galactic wind for a La1 model galaxy.
Open with DEXTER

In the text

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=8.2cm,clip]{0540fig1.eps}\end{figure}$	Figure 1: Star formation rate ( upper panel), $t_{\rm cool},~t_{\rm ff}$ ( lower panel) versus time for model La1 (see text and Table 1 for details).
Open with DEXTER

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=8.4cm,clip]{0540fig3.eps}\end{figure}$	Figure 3: Predicted CMRs for our models and different redshift of formation compared with the fit to the Bower et al. (2002b) data (solid line). A measure of the observational scatter is given by dashed lines.
Open with DEXTER

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=8.4cm,clip]{0540fig4.eps}\end{figure}$	Figure 4: Temporal behaviour of the ISM iron abundance, temperature, gas density and cooling term predicted for models H0 (solid lines), Ha1 (dotted) and Ha10 (dashed).
Open with DEXTER

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=8.3cm,clip]{0540fig5.ps} % \end{figure}$	Figure 5: Predicted X-ray spectrum for model Ha1. For the adoptedprocedure see Sect. 2.7.
Open with DEXTER

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=8.2cm,clip]{0540fig7.eps}\end{figure}$	Figure 7: Prediction for $L_{\rm X}-T_{\rm X}$ relation for our model galaxies La1 and Ha1 (filled triangles) compared to the data of Matsushita et al. (2000, squares with error bars). For comparison we show the models La1 and Ha1 in which we fix [Fe/H] = 0 (open triangles).
Open with DEXTER

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=8.3cm,clip]{0540fig8.eps}\end{figure}$	Figure 8: Prediction for $L_{\rm X}-{\rm [Fe/H]}_{\rm X}$ relation for our model galaxies La1 and Ha1 compared to the data of Matsushita et al. (2000). The symbols are the same as in Fig. 7. Empty triangles refer to models Ha1 and La1 with the same $L_{\rm X}$ , but with $\rm [Fe/H]\sim 0$ .
Open with DEXTER

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=7.9cm,clip]{0540fig9.eps}\end{figure}$	Figure 9: Mass and energy flow rate versus time during the galactic wind for a La1 model galaxy.
Open with DEXTER