EDP Sciences
Free Access
Issue
A&A
Volume 547, November 2012
Article Number A51
Number of page(s) 18
Section Extragalactic astronomy
DOI https://doi.org/10.1051/0004-6361/201219669
Published online 25 October 2012

Online material

Appendix A: z  ~  7 galaxy candidates in the GDS, P12HUDF, EGS and UDS fields

The z ~ 7 candidate galaxies in the ERS and HUDF fields have been already presented in Grazian et al. (2011). Here we provide the lists of the z-band drop-out candidates for the GDS (Table A.1), P12HUDF (Table A.2), and I814-band dropout from the UDS (Table A.3) and EGS (Table A.4) fields. In Table A.3 (A.4) we mark the 27 (13) candidates selected by McLure et al. (in prep.) with a robust photometric redshift consistent with z ≥ 7 in the UDS and EGS fields, respectively.

Table A.1

z ~ 7 galaxy candidates in the GDS field.

Table A.2

z ~ 7 galaxy candidates in the P12HUDF field.

Table A.3

z ~ 7 galaxy candidates in the UDS field.

Table A.4

z ~ 7 galaxy candidates in the EGS field.

Appendix B: Output of completeness simulations in the EGS, ERS, GDS, P12HUDF, and HUDF fields

Figure B.1 shows the results of the simulations carried out in the UDS field. A Sersic profile of index n = 4 has been adopted as input morphology for our simulations. This plot shows the comparison between the half-light radius (in arcsec) as measured by SExtractor as a function of the input one, for the magnitude range 21 < J < 24 (top) and 24 < J < 25 (bottom). Figure B.2 provides the same information for simulated galaxies in the HUDF field, in the range 25.5 < J < 26.5 (top) and 26.5 < J < 27.5 (bottom). The measured size of the objects cannot be smaller than the instrumental PSF (which is about 0.18′′ of FWHM in the J band, corresponding to an half light radius of 0.11′′). Because of the convolution with the PSF, all objects intrinsically smaller than  ≃ 0.2″ are biased high by the SExtractor estimate.

thumbnail Fig. B.1

Results of our simulations for z ~ 7 galaxies with Sersic profiles of index n = 4 in the UDS field. The plot shows the comparison between the half-light radius (in arcsec) as measured by SExtractor as a function of the input one. The upper and lower panel refer to different total magnitudes, as reported in the legend. The red line shows the identity relation. The blue points and errorbar shows the average value and the relevant rms of the output half-light radius. At small sizes the output half light radius is typically larger than the input one due to the convolution with the instrumental PSF carried out during the simulations.

Open with DEXTER

thumbnail Fig. B.2

Results of our simulations for z ~ 7 galaxies with Sersic profiles of index n = 4 in the HUDF field. The plot shows the comparison between the half-light radius (in arcsec) as measured by SExtractor as a function of the input one. The upper and lower panel refer to different total magnitudes, as reported in the legend. The red line shows the identity relation. The blue points and errorbar shows the average value and the relevant rms of the output half-light radius. At small sizes the output half light radius is typically larger than the input one due to the convolution with the instrumental PSF carried out during the simulations.

Open with DEXTER

Figure B.3 shows the observed J-band magnitudes versus the measured sizes for simulated (small dots) and observed galaxies (red triangles) at z ~ 7 for the EGS, ERS, GDS, P12HUDF and HUDF fields. The solid blue line shows the 50% completeness level for an input simulated profile of disk galaxy. Detailed explanations on the procedure adopted in these simulations can be found in Sect. 4.1.

thumbnail Fig. B.3

Observed J magnitude vs. size of simulated (small dots) and observed galaxies (red triangles) at z ~ 7 for the EGS, ERS, GDS, P12HUDF and HUDF fields.

Open with DEXTER

Appendix C: Best fit

thumbnail Fig. C.1

Composite likelihood distribution for the intermediate (26.6 ≤ J ≤ 27.6, left) and faint (27.6 ≤ J ≤ 28.6, right) magnitude bins. The best fit is indicated by the magenta point while the green, blue, and red regions define the uncertainties at 68%, 95%, and 99.7% (1,2, and 3 sigma) confidence level, respectively.

Open with DEXTER

The confidence levels for the maximum likelihood analysis of the size distribution on the combined ERS and GDS fields (intermediate sample), and the combined P12HUDF and HUDF fields

 

(faint sample). The best fit is indicated by the magenta point while the green, blue, and red regions define the uncertainties at 68%, 95%, and 99.7% (1, 2, and 3 sigma) confidence level, respectively.


© ESO, 2012

Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.

Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.

Initial download of the metrics may take a while.