Surveys of galaxies at and beyond a redshift z
6 represent
the current observational frontier. We are motivated to search to
conduct a census of the earliest galaxies seen 1 Gyr after the Big Bang
as well as to evaluate the contribution of early star formation to
cosmic reionization. Although impressive future facilities such as
the next generation of extremely large telescope
6 and the
James Webb Space Telescope
(Gardner et al 2006)
are destined to address these issues in considerable detail, any
information we can glean on the abundance, luminosity and
characteristics of distant sources will assist in planning their
effective use.
In this lecture and the next, we will review the current optical and near-infrared techniques for surveying this largely uncharted region. They include
For the Lyman dropouts discussed here, as introduced in the last lecture, there is an increasingly important role played by the Spitzer Space Telescope in estimating stellar masses and earlier star formation histories.
The key questions we will address in this lecture focus on the (somewhat controversial) conclusions drawn from the analyses of Lyman dropouts thus far, namely:
6.2. Contamination in z
6 Dropout Samples
The traditional dropout technique exploited very effectively
at z 3 (Lecture
3) is poorly suited for z
6
samples because the use of a simple i - z > 1.5 color cut
still permits significant contamination by passive galaxies at z
2 and Galactic stars.
The addition of an optical-infrared color allows some
measure of discrimination
(Stanway et al 2005)
since a passive z
2 galaxy will be red over a wide range in wavelength,
whereas a star-forming z
6 galaxy should be
relatively blue in the optical-infrared color corresponding to its
rest-frame ultraviolet (Figure 41). Application
of this two color technique suggests contamination by foreground
galaxies is
10%
at the bright end (zAB < 25.6) but negligible
at the UDF limit (zAB < 28.5)
![]() |
Figure 41. The combination of a i -
z and z - J color cut
permits the distinction of z
|
Unfortunately, the spectral properties of cool Galactic L dwarfs
are dominated by prominent molecular bands rather than simply
by their effective temperature. This means that they cannot be
separated from z
6 galaxies in a similar color-color diagram.
Indeed, annoyingly, these dwarfs occupy precisely the location
of the wanted z
6 galaxies (Figure 42)!
The only practical way to discriminate L dwarfs is either via
spectroscopy or their unresolved nature in ACS images.
![]() |
Figure 42. (Left) Keck spectroscopic
verification of two contaminating
L dwarfs lying within the GOODS i - z dropout sample but pinpointed
as likely to be stellar from ACS imaging data. The smoothed
spectra represent high signal to noise brighter examples for comparison
purposes. Strong molecular bands clearly mimic the Lyman dropout
signature. (Right) Optical-infrared color diagram with the dropout
color selector, iAB - zAB > 1.5,
shown as the vertical dotted line.
Bright L dwarfs (lozenges) frustratingly occupy a similar region of color
space as the z |
Stanway et al (2004)
conducted the first comprehensive spectroscopic and ACS
imaging survey of a GOODS i-drop sample limited at
zAB < 25.6, finding that stellar contamination at
the bright end of the luminosity function of a traditional
(iAB - zAB > 1.5)
color cut could be as high as 30-40%. Unfortunately, even with
substantial 6-8 hour integrations on the Keck telescope, redshift
verification of the distant population was only possible in those dropout
candidates with Ly
emission.
Stanway et al (2005)
subsequently analyzed the ACS imaging properties of a fainter subset
arguing that stellar contamination decreases with increasing apparent
magnitude.
Further progress has been possible via the use of the ACS grism on board HST (Malhotra et al 2005). As the OH background is eliminated in space, despite its low resolution, it is possible even in the fairly low signal/noise data achievable with the modest 2.5m aperture of HST to separate a Lyman break from a stellar molecular band. It is claimed that of 29 zAB < 27.5 candidates with (i - z) > 0.9, only 6 are likely to be low redshift interlopers.
Regrettably, as a result of these difficulties, it has become routine to
rely entirely on photometric and angular size information without
questioning further the degree of contamination. This is likely one
reason why there remain significant
discrepancies between independent assessments of the abundance
of z 6 galaxies
(Giavalisco et al 2004,
Bouwens et al 2004,
Bunker et al 2004).
Although there are indications from the tests of
Stanway et al (2004,
2005)
and Malhotra et al (2005)
that contamination is significant only at the bright end, the lack of
a comprehensive understanding of stellar and foreground contamination
remains a major uncertainty.
The deepest data that has been searched for i-band dropouts includes
the two GOODS fields
(Dickinson et al 2004)
and the Hubble Ultra Deep Field (UDF,
Beckwith et al 2006).
As these represent publicly-available fields
they have been analyzed by many groups to various flux limits. The
Bunker/Stanway team probed the GOODS fields to zAB =
25.6 (spectroscopically) and 27.0 (photometrically, and the UDF to
zAB = 28.5.
At these limits, it is instructive to consider the comoving cosmic volumes
available in each field within the redshift range selected by the typical
dropout criteria. For both GOODS-N/S fields, the total volume is
5 × 105
Mpc3, whereas for the UDF it is only 2.6 ×
104 Mpc3. These contrast with 106
Mpc3 for a single deep pointing taken with the SuPrime Camera
on the Subaru 8m telescope.
Somerville et al (2004)
present a formalism for estimating, for any
population, the fractional uncertainty in the inferred number density from
a survey of finite volume and angular extent. When the clustering signal
is measurable, the cosmic variance can readily be calculated analytically.
However, for frontier studies such as the i-dropouts, this is not the case.
Here Somerville et al propose to estimate cosmic variance
by appealing to the likely halo abundance for the given observed
density using this to predict the clustering according to CDM models.
In this way, the uncertainties in the inferred abundance of i-dropouts
in the combined GOODS fields could be
20-25% whereas that
in the UDF could be as high as 40-50%.
It seems these estimates of cosmic variance can only be strict lower limits to the actual fluctuations since Somerville et al make the assumption that halos containing star forming sources are visible at all times. If, for example, there is intermittent activity with some duty cycle whose "on/off" fraction is f, the cosmic variance will be underestimated by that factor f (Stark et al, in prep).
6.4. Evolution in the UV Luminosity Density 3 < z < 10?
The complementary survey depths means that combined studies of GOODS and
UDF have been very effective in probing the shape of the UV luminosity
function (LF) at z
6
7. Even so,
there has been a surprising variation in the derived faint end slope
.
Bunker et al (2004)
claim their data (54 i-dropouts) is consistent with the modestly-steep
= -1.6 found
in the z
3 Lyman
break samples
(Steidel et 2003),
whereas
Yan & Windhorst (2004)
extend the UDF counts to zAB = 30.0 and,
based on 108 candidates, find
= -1.9, a value close
to a divergent function! Issues of sample completeness are central to
understanding whether the LF is this steep.
In a comprehensive analysis based on all the extant deep data, Bouwens et al (2006) have attempted to summarize the decline in rest-frame UV luminosity density over 3 < z < 10 as a function of luminosity (Figure 43). They attribute the earlier discrepancies noted between Giavalisco et al (2004), Bunker et al (2004) and Bouwens et al (2004) to a mixture of cosmic variance and differences in contamination and photometric selection. Interestingly, they claim a luminosity-dependent trend in the sense that the bulk of the decline occurs in the abundance of luminous dropouts, which they attribute to hierarchical growth.
![]() |
Figure 43. Evolution in the rest-frame UV (1350 Å) luminosity density (right ordinate) and inferred star formation rate density ignoring extinction (left ordinate) for drop-out samples in two luminosity ranges from the compilation by Bouwens et al (2006). A marked decline is seen over 3 < z < 6 in the contribution of luminous sources. |
A similar trend is seen in ground-based data obtained with Subaru. Although
HST offers superior photometry and resolution which is effective in
eliminating stellar contamination, the prime focus imager on Subaru
has a much larger field of view so that each deep exposure covers
a field twice as large as both GOODS N+S. As they do not have access
to ACS data over such wide fields, the Japanese astronomers have
approached the question of stellar contamination in an imaginative way.
Shioya et al (2005)
used two intermediate band filters at 709nm and
826nm to estimate stellar contamination in both z
5 and z
6
broad-band dropout samples. By considering the slope of the
continuum inbetween these two intermediate bands, in addition to a
standard i - z criterion, they claim an ability to separate L and
T dwards. In a similar, but independent, study,
Shimasaku et al (2005)
split the z band into two intermediate filters
thereby measuring the rest-frame UV slope just redward of the Lyman
discontinuity. These studies confirm both the redshift decline and, to a
lesser extent, the luminosity-dependent trends seen in the HST data.
Although it seems there is a 5× abundance decline in luminous
UV emitting galaxies from z
3 to 6, it's worth
noting again that the relevant counts refer to sources uncorrected for
extinction. This is appropriate
in evaluating the contribution of UV sources to the reionization process
but not equivalent, necessarily, to a decline in the star formation rate
density. Moreover, although the luminosity dependence seems similar
in both ground and HST-based samples, it remains controversial (e.g.
Beckwith et al 2006).
6.5. The Abundance of Star Forming Sources Necessary for Reionization
Have enough UV-emitting sources been found at
z 6-10 to account
for cosmic reionization? Notwithstanding the observational uncertainties
evident in Figure 43, this has not prevented
many teams from addressing this important question. The main difficulty
lies in understanding the physical
properties of the sources in question. The plain fact is that we cannot
predict, sufficiently accurately, the UV luminosity density that is
sufficient for reionization!
Some years ago,
Madau, Haardt & Rees
(1999)
estimated the star
formation rate density based on simple parameterized assumptions
concerning the stellar IMF and/or metallicity Z essential for
converting a 1350 Å luminosity into the integrated UV output, the
fraction fesc of escaping UV photons, the clumpiness
of the surrounding intergalactic hydrogen, C =
<HI2> /
<
HI>2, and the temperature of the
intergalactic medium TIGM. In general terms,
for reionization peaking at a redshift zreion, the
necessary density of sources goes as:
![]() |
For likely ranges in each of these parameters,
Stiavelli et al (2004)
tabulate the required source surface density which, generally speaking,
lie above those observed at z
6 (e.g.
Bunker et al 2004).
It is certainly possible to reconcile the end of the reionization at
z 6
with this low density of sources (Figure 43)
by appealing to cosmic variance, a low metallicity and/or top-heavy IMF
(Stiavelli et al 2005)
or a steep faint end slope of the luminosity function
(Yan & Windhorst 2004)
but none of these arguments is convincing without further proof.
As we will see, the most logical way to proceed is to explore
both the extent of earlier star formation from the mass assembled
at z
5-6
(Lecture 5) and to directly measure, if possible,
the abundance of low luminosity sources at higher redshift.
6.6. The Spitzer Space Telescope Revolution: Stellar
Masses at z
6
One of the most remarkable aspects of our search for the most
distant and early landmarks in cosmic history is that a modest cooled
85cm telescope, the Spitzer Space Telescope, can not only assist
but provide crucial diagnostic data! The key instrument is the InfraRed
Array Camera (IRAC) which offers four channels at 3.6, 4.5, 5.8
and 8 µm corresponding to the rest-frame optical 0.5-1
µm at redshifts z
6-7. In the space of
only a year, the subject has progressed from the determination of
stellar masses for a few z
5-7 sources to mass
densities and direct constraints
on the amount of early activity, as discussed in Lecture 5.
An early demonstration of the promise of IRAC in this area was provided by
Eyles et al (2005)
who detected two spectroscopically-confirmed
z 5.8
i-band dropouts at 3.6 µm, demonstrating
the presence of a strong Balmer break in their spectral energy
distributions (Figure 44). In these sources,
the optical detection of
Ly
emission provides an
estimate of the current ongoing star formation rate, whereas the flux
longward of the Balmer break provides a measure of the past averaged
activity. The combination gives a measure of the luminosity
weighted age of the stellar population. In general terms,
a Balmer break appears in stars whose age cannot, even
in short burst of activity, be younger than 100 Myr. Eyles
et al showed such systems could well be much older (250-650 Myr)
depending on the assumed form of the past activity. As the
Universe is only 1 Gyr old at z
6, the IRAC detections
gave the first indirect glimpse of significant earlier star formation -
a glimpse that was elusive with direct searches at the time.
![]() |
![]() |
Figure 44. (Left) Detection of a
spectroscopically-confirmed
i-drop at z = 5.83 from the analysis of
Eyles et al (2005).
(Right) Spectral energy distribution of the same source. Data points
refer to IRAC at 3.6 and 4.5 µm, VLT (K) and HST
NICMOS (J,H) overplotted on a synthesised spectrum; note
the prominent Balmer break. Synthesis models indicate
the Balmer break takes 100 Myr to establish. However, the
luminosity-weighted age could be significantly older depending
on the assumed past star formation rate. In the example shown,
a dominant 450 Myr component (zF ~ 10) is
rejuvenated with a more recent secondary burst whose ongoing
star formation rate is consistent with the
Ly |
Independent confirmation of both the high stellar masses
and prominent Balmer breaks was provided by the analysis of
Yan et al (2005)
who studied 3 z
5.9 sources. Moreover,
Yan et al also showed several objects had (z - J) colors
bluer than the predictions of the Bruzual-Charlot models for
all reasonable model choices - a point first noted by
Stanway et al (2004).
Eyles et al and Yan et al proposed the presence
of established stellar populations in z
6 i-drops and
also to highlight the high stellar masses (M
1 - 4 ×
1010
M
)
they derived. At first sight, the presence of z
6 sources as massive as
the Milky Way seems a surprising result. Yan et al discuss the question in
some detail and conclude the abundance of such massive objects
is not inconsistent with hierarchical theory. In actuality it is hard to
be sure because cosmic variance permits a huge range in the
derived volume density and theory predicts the halo abundance (e.g.
Barkana & Loeb 2000)
rather than the stellar mass density.
To convert one into the other requires a knowledge of the star
formation efficiency and its associated duty-cycle.
One early UDF source detected by IRAC has been a particular
source of puzzlement.
Mobasher et al (2005)
found a J-dropout candidate
with a prominent detection in all 4 IRAC bandpasses. Its photometric
redshift was claimed to be z
6.5 on the basis of
both a Balmer
and a Lyman break. However, despite exhaustive efforts, its redshift
has not been confirmed spectroscopically. The inferred stellar mass is
2-7 × 1011
M
,
almost an order of magnitude larger than
the spectroscopically-confirmed sources studied by Eyles et al and
Yan et al. If this source is truly at z
6.5, finding such a
massive galaxy whose star formation likely peaked before z
9 is very surprising in
the context of contemporary hierarchical models. Such sources should be
extremely rare so finding one in the tiny area of the UDF is
all the more puzzling.
Dunlop et al (2006)
have proposed the source must be foreground both on account of an
ambiguity in the photometric redshift determination and the absence of
similarly massive sources in a panoramic survey being conducted at UKIRT
(McClure et al 2006).
This year, the first estimates of the stellar mass density
at z 5-6 have
been derived
(Yan et al 2006,
Stark et al 2006a,
Eyles et al 2006).
Although the independenty-derived results are
consistent, both with one another and with lower redshift estimates
(Figure 45)
the uncertainties are considerable as discussed briefly in the previous
lecture. There are four major challenges to undertaking a census
of the star formation at early times.
![]() |
Figure 45. Evolution in the comoving
stellar mass density from the compilation derived by
Eyles et al (2006).
The recent z |
Foremost, the bulk of the faint sources only have photometric redshifts. Even a small amount of contamination from foreground sources would skew the derived stellar mass density upward. Increasing the spectroscopic coverage would be a big step forward in improving the estimates.
Secondly, IRAC suffers from image confusion given its lower angular resolution than HST (4 arcsec c.f. 0.1 arcsec). Accordingly, the IRAC fluxes cannot be reliably estimates for blended sources. Stark et al address this by measuring the masses only for those uncontaminated, isolated sources, scaling up their total by the fraction omitted. This assumes confused sources are no more or less likely to be a high redshift.
Thirdly, as only star forming sources are selected using the
v- and i- dropout technique, if star formation is episodic,
it is very likely that quiescent sources are present and thus
the present mass densities represent lower limits. The missing
fraction is anyone's guess. As we saw at z
2, the
factor could be as high as ×2.
Finally, as with all stellar mass determinations, many assumptions
are made about the nature of the stellar populations involved
and their star formation histories. Until individual z
5-6 sources
can be studied in more detail, perhaps via the location of one or two
strongly lensed examples, or via future more powerful facilities, this will
regrettably remain the situation. At present, such density estimates
are unlikely to be accurate to better than a factor of 2. Even so,
they provide good evidence for significant earlier star formation
(Stark et al 2006a,
Lecture 5).
In this lecture we have discussed the great progress made in using
v, i, z and J band Lyman dropouts to probe
the abundance of star forming galaxies over 3 < z < 10. At
redshifts z
6 alone,
Bouwens et al (2006)
discuss the properties of a catalog
of 506 sources to zAB = 29.5.
In practice, the good statistics are tempered by uncertain contamination
from foreground cool stars and dusty or passively-evolving red
z 2 galaxies and
the vagaries of cosmic variance in the
small fields studied. It may be that we will not overcome these
difficulties until we have larger ground-based telescopes.
Nonetheless, from the evidence at hand, it seems that
the comoving UV luminosity density declines from z
3
to 10, and that only by appealing to special circumstances can the
low abundance of star forming galaxies at z > 6 be reconciled
with that necessary to reionize the Universe.
One obvious caveat is our poor knowledge of the contribution from lower luminosity systems. Some authors (Yan & Windhorst 2004, Bouwens et al 2006) have suggested a steepening of the luminosity function at higher redshift. Testing this assumption with lensed searches is the subject of our next lecture.
Finally, we have seen the successful emergence of the Spitzer
Space Telescope as an important tool in confirming the
need for star formation at z > 6. Large numbers of z
5-6
galaxies have now been detected by IRAC. The prominent
Balmer breaks and high stellar masses argue for much
earlier activity. Reconciling the present of mature galaxies
at z
6 with the
absence of significant star formation beyond, is one of the most
interesting challenges at the present time.
6 e.g. The US-Canadian Thirty Meter Telescope - http://www.tmt.org. Back.
7 In this section we will only refer to the observed (extincted) LFs and luminosity density. Back.