2017
DOI: 10.1093/mnras/stx821
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Photometric and kinematic DISKFIT models of four nearby spiral galaxies

Abstract: We present optical BVRI photometry, Hα IFU velocity fields, and Hα long-slit rotation curves for a sample of four nearby spiral galaxies having a range of morphologies and inclinations. We show that the DiskFit code can be used to model the photometric and kinematic data of these four galaxies and explore how well the photometric data can be decomposed into structures like bars and bulges and to look for non-circular motions in the kinematic data. In general, we find good agreement between our photometric and … Show more

Help me understand this report
View preprint versions

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
6
0

Year Published

2018
2018
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
5
1

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 8 publications
(6 citation statements)
references
References 49 publications
0
6
0
Order By: Relevance
“…To study the molecular gas kinematics we use two different softwares, namely the 3D-Based Analysis of Rotating Object via Line Observations (3D BAROLO 1 ; Di Teodoro & Fraternali 2015) and DiskFit (Peters & Kuzio de Naray 2017). This paper is structured as follows.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…To study the molecular gas kinematics we use two different softwares, namely the 3D-Based Analysis of Rotating Object via Line Observations (3D BAROLO 1 ; Di Teodoro & Fraternali 2015) and DiskFit (Peters & Kuzio de Naray 2017). This paper is structured as follows.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The failure of DiskFit to recover bulges in simulated S 4 G-like images highlights the importance of validating decomposition algorithms, especially before applying them to large samples of real systems (e.g. Schombert & Bothun 1987;Byun & Freeman 1995;Wadadekar et al 1999;MacArthur et al 2003;Gadotti 2008;Peters & Kuzio de Naray 2017). It is possible that the non-parametric nature of DiskFit makes bulge recovery more difficult than for parametric algorithms such as galfit, though Gadotti (2008) finds that bulges with r ef f comparable to the seeing radius are difficult to recover even when both the bulge and the disk are parametrized.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Bar parameters are thus often presented without uncertainties (Weinzirl et al 2008;Salo et al 2015;de Swardt et al 2015). Although modelling large galaxy samples is an effective means of minimizing the statistical uncertainties on measured values (Blanton et al 2005), detailed survey-and algorithm-specific tests are required to determine whether or not systematic biases are important (Schombert & Bothun 1987;Byun & Freeman 1995;Wadadekar et al 1999;MacArthur et al 2003;Gadotti 2008;Peters & Kuzio de Naray 2017).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…There are no signs of a classical bulge in the galaxy (Barentine & Kormendy 2012), but the nuclear disc is embedded within a boxy bulge with a peanut shape extending out to ∼ 35 arcsec along the major axis of the galaxy (Kuijken & Merrifield 1995;Bureau & Freeman 1999). This structure actually corresponds to a bar seen at an intermediate angle, close to end-on (Peters & Kuzio de Naray 2017). Signatures of the bar are also seen in the kinematics of gas (Kuijken & Merrifield 1995) and stars, with in particular a correlation between 𝑉 and ℎ 3 which is expected from a barred disc seen in projection (Chung & Bureau 2004;Molaeinezhad et al 2016).…”
Section: Ngc 5746mentioning
confidence: 97%