2018
DOI: 10.1093/mnrasl/sly058
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Recovering the systemic redshift of galaxies from their Lyman alpha line profile

Abstract: The Lyman alpha (Lyα) line of Hydrogen is a prominent feature in the spectra of star-forming galaxies, usually redshifted by a few hundreds of km s −1 compared to the systemic redshift. This large offset hampers follow-up surveys, galaxy pair statistics and correlations with quasar absorption lines when only Lyα is available. We propose diagnostics that can be used to recover the systemic redshift directly from the properties of the Lyα line profile. We use spectroscopic observations of Lyman-Alpha Emitters (L… Show more

Help me understand this report
View preprint versions

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

24
153
1

Year Published

2019
2019
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

1
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 128 publications
(178 citation statements)
references
References 48 publications
24
153
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Our BELLS GALLERY LAEs show Lyα escape fraction ranging between 0.11 and 0.37 (see Table 2), with a mean value and scatter f esc (Lyα)= 0.21 ± 0.11, in between the range of values found for z = 2 − 4 UV-selected galaxies ( f esc (Lyα) ≈ 0.05; e.g., Kornei et al 2010;Cassata et al 2015) and other strong Lyα emitters ( f esc (Lyα) ≈ 0.30; e.g., Nakajima et al 2012;Hashimoto et al 2013;Wardlow et al 2014;Trainor et al 2015;Matthee et al 2016). We recover previous findings that large Lyα escape fraction is associated with small ∆v (Lyα) Verhamme et al 2015;Yang et al 2017;Verhamme et al 2018) and strong EW 0 's (Lyα) (e.g., Trainor et al 2015;Matthee et al 2016;Sobral et al 2017;Yang et al 2017;Izotov et al 2019;McKinney et al 2019), in line with the empirical relation derived by Sobral & Matthee (2019).…”
Section: Other Nebular Linessupporting
confidence: 87%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Our BELLS GALLERY LAEs show Lyα escape fraction ranging between 0.11 and 0.37 (see Table 2), with a mean value and scatter f esc (Lyα)= 0.21 ± 0.11, in between the range of values found for z = 2 − 4 UV-selected galaxies ( f esc (Lyα) ≈ 0.05; e.g., Kornei et al 2010;Cassata et al 2015) and other strong Lyα emitters ( f esc (Lyα) ≈ 0.30; e.g., Nakajima et al 2012;Hashimoto et al 2013;Wardlow et al 2014;Trainor et al 2015;Matthee et al 2016). We recover previous findings that large Lyα escape fraction is associated with small ∆v (Lyα) Verhamme et al 2015;Yang et al 2017;Verhamme et al 2018) and strong EW 0 's (Lyα) (e.g., Trainor et al 2015;Matthee et al 2016;Sobral et al 2017;Yang et al 2017;Izotov et al 2019;McKinney et al 2019), in line with the empirical relation derived by Sobral & Matthee (2019).…”
Section: Other Nebular Linessupporting
confidence: 87%
“…For three LAEs (BG0742+3341, BG0755+3445, and BG1429+1202), however, the Lyα line has its maximum intensity very close to, or even consistent with the systemic velocity (see Section 5.1). These are the ones that show narrower Lyα profiles (230-330 km s −1 FWHM) suggestive of less scatter from low H i column densities and/or that Lyα photons freely escape through a clumpy ISM (e.g., Zheng & Wallace 2014;Verhamme et al 2015Verhamme et al , 2018Claeyssens et al 2019). On the other hand, in addition to the prominent Lyα emission line, BG0201+3228 shows also an underlying broad Lyα absorption (see Figure 2).…”
Section: Lyα Linementioning
confidence: 99%
“…We note that the MACS0940 regions are located below the empirical relation but very close to the 1 σ error so are marginally consistent. We find for both objects a linear slope (Table 1) close to the Verhamme et al (2018) relation (a = 0.9). The linear fit of the two datapoints series was also performed with the emcee package accounting for measurement errors along both directions.…”
Section: Summary and Discussionsupporting
confidence: 72%
“…In Fig. 3 we overplot the empirical relation defined in Verhamme et al (2018) between Lyman-α peak shift and FWHM (not corrected for the line spread function) obtained with large samples on an object-by-object basis. Due to the uncertainties in the systemic redshift, the values of peak shift could be biased by ±13 km s −1 and ±33 km s −1 for SMACS2031 and MACS0940, respectively; but this does not affect our results on variations within the halo and the slope of the correlation.. We can see that the correlation between peak shift and FWHM within each object follows the same empirical relation (in particular the same slope) as the one established on an object-by-object basis.…”
Section: Summary and Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation