All Figures

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=8.4cm,clip]{7481fig1.eps}\end{figure}$ Figure 1: Comparisons of the tidal strength within a radius of 0.5 Mpc, Q_0.5, to the tidal strength in the whole available field, Q.
Open with DEXTER

In the text

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=8.6cm,clip]{7481fig2.eps}\end{figure}$ Figure 2: Distribution of the local number density ( $\eta _k$ ) estimation, for the four samples of galaxies.
Open with DEXTER

In the text

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=8.6cm,clip]{7481fig3.eps}\end{figure}$ Figure 3: Distribution of the tidal strength (Q) estimation including all neighbours, for the four samples of galaxies.
Open with DEXTER

In the text

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=8.6cm,clip]{7481fig4.eps}\end{figure}$ Figure 4: Distribution of the tidal strength ( $Q_{\rm Kar}$ ) estimation including similar size neighbours, for the four samples of galaxies.
Open with DEXTER

In the text

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=8.2cm,clip]{7481fig5.eps}\end{figure}$ Figure 5: Local number density vs. tidal strength ( $Q_{0.5, {\rm Kar}}$ ) estimations for similar size neighbours within 0.5 Mpc from the CIG galaxy. Galaxies failing are depicted by pluses and galaxies in agreement with the Karachentseva's criterion are displayed with circles.
Open with DEXTER

In the text

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=8.2cm,clip]{7481fig6.eps}\end{figure}$ Figure 6: Comparison between the local number density and tidal strength ( $Q_{\rm Kar}$ ) parameters for the CIG and the comparison samples. The CIG galaxies are represented by grey pluses. The KTG are depicted by green triangles, the HCG by magenta squares and the ACO by red dots. The mean values of each sample are shown by horizontal and vertical lines, following the same colour code.
Open with DEXTER

In the text

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=8.2cm,clip]{7481fig7.eps}\end{figure}$ Figure 7: The tidal strength (Q_0.5) is calculated including all the neighbours within 0.5 Mpc. The CIG galaxies, which were not flagged as interacting galaxies, are represented by green pluses. The red triangles indicate a morphologically distorted system and/or almost certain interacting system while the blue circles indicate evidence for interaction/asymmetry with/without certain detection of a neighbour (Sulentic et al. 2006).
Open with DEXTER

In the text

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=8.2cm,clip]{7481fig8.eps}\end{figure}$ Figure 8: The tidal strength ( $Q_{0.5, {\rm Kar}}$ ) is calculated including only the similar size neighbours within 0.5 Mpc. The CIG galaxies, which were not flagged as interacting galaxies, are represented by green pluses. The red triangles indicate a morphologically distorted system and/or almost certain interacting system while the blue circles indicate evidence for interaction/asymmetry with/without certain detection of a neighbour (Sulentic et al. 2006).
Open with DEXTER

In the text

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=8.2cm,clip]{7481fig9.eps}\end{figure}$ Figure 9: Local number density vs. tidal strength (Q_0.5). The final bisector fit is shown by the plain red line. The dotted red lines represent the final 2 $\sigma$ dispersion: the CIG galaxies within these limits are depicted by pluses, the CIG rejected during the successive iterations are shown by points.
Open with DEXTER

In the text

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=8.6cm,clip]{7481fig10.eps}\end{figure}$ Figure 10: The fraction of interacting galaxies is shown as a function of the distance to the fitted bisector (calculated with Q_0.5). As the environment of the galaxies gets denser and denser (large values for the distance, departure from the normal environments of the CIG galaxies), the galaxies have a higher probability to be disturbed due to interactions with their environment.
Open with DEXTER

In the text

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=8.2cm,clip]{7481fig11.eps}\end{figure}$ Figure 11: Local number density vs. tidal strength ( $Q_{0.5, {\rm Kar}}$ ). The final bisector fit is shown by the plain red line. The dotted red lines represent the final 2 $\sigma$ dispersion: the CIG galaxies within these limits are depicted by pluses, the CIG rejected during the successive iterations are shown by points.
Open with DEXTER

In the text

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=8.6cm,clip]{7481fig12.eps}\end{figure}$ Figure 12: The fraction of interacting galaxies is shown as a function of the distance to the fitted bisector (calculated only including the similar size neighbours within 0.5 Mpc of each CIG galaxy).
Open with DEXTER

In the text

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=8.4cm,clip]{7481fig1.eps}\end{figure}$	Figure 1: Comparisons of the tidal strength within a radius of 0.5 Mpc, Q_0.5, to the tidal strength in the whole available field, Q.
Open with DEXTER

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=8.6cm,clip]{7481fig2.eps}\end{figure}$	Figure 2: Distribution of the local number density ( $\eta _k$ ) estimation, for the four samples of galaxies.
Open with DEXTER

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=8.6cm,clip]{7481fig3.eps}\end{figure}$	Figure 3: Distribution of the tidal strength (Q) estimation including all neighbours, for the four samples of galaxies.
Open with DEXTER

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=8.6cm,clip]{7481fig4.eps}\end{figure}$	Figure 4: Distribution of the tidal strength ( $Q_{\rm Kar}$ ) estimation including similar size neighbours, for the four samples of galaxies.
Open with DEXTER

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=8.2cm,clip]{7481fig5.eps}\end{figure}$	Figure 5: Local number density vs. tidal strength ( $Q_{0.5, {\rm Kar}}$ ) estimations for similar size neighbours within 0.5 Mpc from the CIG galaxy. Galaxies failing are depicted by pluses and galaxies in agreement with the Karachentseva's criterion are displayed with circles.
Open with DEXTER

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=8.2cm,clip]{7481fig6.eps}\end{figure}$	Figure 6: Comparison between the local number density and tidal strength ( $Q_{\rm Kar}$ ) parameters for the CIG and the comparison samples. The CIG galaxies are represented by grey pluses. The KTG are depicted by green triangles, the HCG by magenta squares and the ACO by red dots. The mean values of each sample are shown by horizontal and vertical lines, following the same colour code.
Open with DEXTER

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=8.2cm,clip]{7481fig9.eps}\end{figure}$	Figure 9: Local number density vs. tidal strength (Q_0.5). The final bisector fit is shown by the plain red line. The dotted red lines represent the final 2 $\sigma$ dispersion: the CIG galaxies within these limits are depicted by pluses, the CIG rejected during the successive iterations are shown by points.
Open with DEXTER

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=8.6cm,clip]{7481fig10.eps}\end{figure}$	Figure 10: The fraction of interacting galaxies is shown as a function of the distance to the fitted bisector (calculated with Q_0.5). As the environment of the galaxies gets denser and denser (large values for the distance, departure from the normal environments of the CIG galaxies), the galaxies have a higher probability to be disturbed due to interactions with their environment.
Open with DEXTER

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=8.2cm,clip]{7481fig11.eps}\end{figure}$	Figure 11: Local number density vs. tidal strength ( $Q_{0.5, {\rm Kar}}$ ). The final bisector fit is shown by the plain red line. The dotted red lines represent the final 2 $\sigma$ dispersion: the CIG galaxies within these limits are depicted by pluses, the CIG rejected during the successive iterations are shown by points.
Open with DEXTER

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=8.6cm,clip]{7481fig12.eps}\end{figure}$	Figure 12: The fraction of interacting galaxies is shown as a function of the distance to the fitted bisector (calculated only including the similar size neighbours within 0.5 Mpc of each CIG galaxy).
Open with DEXTER