2005
DOI: 10.1086/498109
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Specific Star Formation Rates to Redshift 5 from the FORS Deep Field and the GOODS-S Field

Abstract: We explore the buildup of stellar mass in galaxies over the wide redshift range by studying the 0.4 ! z ! 5.0 evolution of the specific star formation rate (SSFR), defined as the star formation rate per unit stellar mass, as a function of stellar mass and age. Our work is based on a combined sample of ∼9000 galaxies from the FORS Deep Field and the GOODS-S field, providing high statistical accuracy and relative insensitivity against cosmic variance. As at lower redshifts, we find that lower mass galaxies show … 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

27
151
4
1

Year Published

2008
2008
2015
2015

Publication Types

Select...
7
2
1

Relationship

1
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 149 publications
(183 citation statements)
references
References 38 publications
(73 reference statements)
27
151
4
1
Order By: Relevance
“…The downsizing is consistent with several results obtained at low and high redshifts, such as the mass-dependent star formation histories of early-type galaxies (Thomas et al 2005), the evolution of the fundamental plane (e.g., Treu et al 2005;van der Wel et al 2005;di Serego Alighieri et al 2005), the evolution of the optical luminosity function of early-type galaxies to z ∼ 1 (Cimatti et al 2006;Scarlata et al 2007), the evolution of the cosmic star formation density and specific star formation (Gabasch et al 2006;Feulner et al 2005;Juneau et al 2005), and the evolution of the colour-magnitude relation (Tanaka et al 2004). However, the results of studies aimed at constraining the star formation rates (SFRs) and dust content of z ∼ 2 galaxies show that dust attenuation is a strong function of galaxy stellar mass with more massive galaxies being more obscured than lower mass objects, and therefore that specific star formation rates (SSFRs) are constant over about 1 dex in stellar mass up to the highest stellar masses probed (∼10 11 M , Pannella et al 2009).…”
Section: Introductionsupporting
confidence: 90%
“…The downsizing is consistent with several results obtained at low and high redshifts, such as the mass-dependent star formation histories of early-type galaxies (Thomas et al 2005), the evolution of the fundamental plane (e.g., Treu et al 2005;van der Wel et al 2005;di Serego Alighieri et al 2005), the evolution of the optical luminosity function of early-type galaxies to z ∼ 1 (Cimatti et al 2006;Scarlata et al 2007), the evolution of the cosmic star formation density and specific star formation (Gabasch et al 2006;Feulner et al 2005;Juneau et al 2005), and the evolution of the colour-magnitude relation (Tanaka et al 2004). However, the results of studies aimed at constraining the star formation rates (SFRs) and dust content of z ∼ 2 galaxies show that dust attenuation is a strong function of galaxy stellar mass with more massive galaxies being more obscured than lower mass objects, and therefore that specific star formation rates (SSFRs) are constant over about 1 dex in stellar mass up to the highest stellar masses probed (∼10 11 M , Pannella et al 2009).…”
Section: Introductionsupporting
confidence: 90%
“…Erb et al 2006) and that at a fixed stellar mass, the SSFR declines with increasing redshift (e.g. Reddy et al 2006;Feulner et al 2005). In Fig.…”
Section: Star Formation Rates From Ultraviolet Continuum and Sed-fittingmentioning
confidence: 78%
“…Elbaz et al 2007;Salmi et al 2012), which implies that their sSFR does not depend strongly on stellar mass. Specific star formation rates increase out to z ≈ 2 (Elbaz et al 2007(Elbaz et al , 2011Daddi et al 2007Daddi et al , 2009Noeske et al 2007;Dunne et al 2009;Stark et al 2009;Oliver et al 2010;Rodighiero et al 2010) and are constant, or perhaps slowly increasing, from z = 2 out to z = 6, though with a large scatter, sSFR ≈ 2−10 Gyr −1 (Feulner et al 2005;Dunne et al 2009;Magdis et al 2010;Stark et al 2013).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%