Detection of a Thick Disk in the edge-on Low Surface Brightness Galaxy ESO 342-G017: I. VLT Photometry in V and R Bands

18 Pages·0.99 MB·English

by  Mark J. Neeser

Astronomy & Astrophysics manuscript no. February 1, 2008
(DOI: will be inserted by hand later)
Detection of a Thick Disk in the edge-on Low Surface
⋆
Brightness Galaxy ESO 342–G017
I. VLT Photometry in V and R Bands
Mark J. Neeser1,2, Penny D. Sackett1, Guido De Marchi3, and Francesco Paresce4
2
0 1 Kapteyn Astronomical Institute,Postbus 800, 9700 AV Groningen, The Netherlands
0 2 Universit¨ats–Sternwarte Mu¨nchen, Scheinerstr.1, D–81679 Mu¨nchen, Germany
2 3 European Space Agency, Research and Science Support Department, 3700 San Martin Drive, Baltimore, MD

n 21218, USA
a 4 European Southern Observatory,Karl-Schwarzschild-Str.2, D–85748 Garching bei Mu¨nchen, Germany
J

9 Received: 30 September2001; Accepted: 11 December 2001

1
Abstract. We report the detection of a thick disk in the edge-on, low surface brightness (LSB), late-type spiral
v
ESO 342–G017, based on ultra-deep images in the V and R bands obtained with the VLT Test Camera during
1
Science Verification on UT1. All steps in the reduction procedure are fully described, which, together with an
4
1 extensiveanalysis of systematic and statistic uncertainties, has resulted in surface brightness photometry that is
1 reliable for the detection of faint extended structure to a level of V = 27.5 and R = 28.5 mag/sq arcsec. The
0 faintlightapparentinthesedeepimagesiswell-modeledbyathickexponentialdiskwithanintrinsicscaleheight
2 about 2.5 times that of the thin disk, and a comparable or somewhat larger scale length. Deprojection including
0 theeffectsofinclinationandconvolutionwiththePSFallowustoestimatethatthethickdiskcontributes20-40%
/ ofthetotal(old)stellar diskluminosityofESO342–G017. Toourknowledge,thisisthefirstdetectionofathick
h
p diskinanLSBgalaxy,whicharegenerallythoughttoberatherunevolvedcomparedtohighersurfacebrightness
- galaxies.
o
r
t Key words.galaxies: spiral, stellar content,structure
s
a
:
v
1. Introduction kinematical, morphological and chemical characteristics,
i
X but too few systems have been sufficiently well studied to
Outside our own Galaxy, most of what we know about
r constrain the models. Due to the difficulty in detecting
a the structure, evolution and dynamics of stellar popula-
low surface brightness features reliably in external galax-
tions, and their connection to dark matter, is deduced
ies, the important complementary information they con-
from high surface brightness features: bars, bulges, and
tain has only begun to be tapped.
thin disks. Fainter surface brightness components such
as stellar halos, thick disks, and globular clusters probe
In the Milky Way, faint disk and halo compo-
galactic potentials differently, in both time andspace ow-
nents can be separated on the basis of their kinemat-
ing to their larger age and extent. The formation mech-
ics and morphology, and – to a certain extent – metal-
anisms of these faint tracers are still a matter of some
licity, because individual stars can be resolved. The
controversy; suggestions range from early protogalactic
Galactic stellar halo of field stars and the globular clus-
collapse, secular processes such as heating from molec-
ter systems have volume densities that decrease with
ular clouds, black holes and spiral structure, through to galactocentric radius r roughly as ρ(r) r−3.0 or
later stochastic processes suchas accretion(see recent re- r−3.5 (Harris & Racine 1979;Saha 1985;Zinn∝1985),sim-
views by Buser 2000; Bland-Hawthorn & Freeman 2000;
ilar to results for halo populations in large spirals like
and references therein). These scenarios predict different
M31 (Racine 1991; Reitzel et al. 1998) and NGC 4565
(Fleming et al. 1995).Giantellipticalsandsuperluminous
Send offprint requests to: M.J. Neeser ([email protected]
CD galaxies, on the other hand, which are thought to
muenchen.de)
⋆Based on observations collected at the European Southern be the product of many mergers, have halo luminosi-
Observatory, Paranal, Chile (VLT-UT1 Science Verification ties and globular cluster systems that fall less steeply,
Program) roughly as ρ(r) r−2.3 (Harris 1986; Bridges et al. 1991;
∝
2 Neeser et al.: Thick Disk in LSB Spiral ESO 342–G017
Harris et al. 1995; Graham et al. 1996). The total mass, extended light is redder than the thin stellar disk. If
the bulkofwhichis believedtobe containedindarkmat- the faint light is due to a thick disk, it is unlike any
ter halos,is inferredfromkinematicalstudies to havevol- other, with a scale length that is at least twice that
ume densities that decline as ρ(r) r−2 beyond a few of its thin disk (Morrison 1999). The stellar population
∼
disk scale lengths (see Sackett 1996 for a review). responsible for this faint light remains highly contro-
Our Galaxy also has a faint thick disk whose versial, ranging from normal or metal-rich populations
density falls exponentially with increasing height (z) with steep IMFs (Lequeux et al. 1996; Rudy et al. 1997;
above the plane as e−z/htzhick. Its scale height htzhick ≃ Jtiaomnsesw&ithCnasoarlmia1l99IM8),Fo(lLde,qmueeutxale-rticahl. 1a9cc9r8e)t,eodrpexopceuelda--
1 0.3 kpc (Reid & Majewski 1993; Ojha et al. 1996;
± ingly metal-poor or giant-poor populations with few re-
Buser et al. 1999) is about three times larger than that
solvable stars at the tip of the RGB (Zepf et al. 2000).
of the much brighter thin disk.
The controversy remains because the full spectral energy
Thescalelengthofthethickdiskishthick 3 1.5kpc
R ≃ ± distribution is apparentlyinconsistentwith any single ex-
(Buser et al. 1999), similar to that of the Galactic thin
planation (e.g. Zepf et al. 2000; Yost et al. 2000). 1
disk. Despite this, the thick disk contibutes only 2-9% of
ThepuzzlingnatureoftheextendedlightinNGC5907
the total local stellar disk light (Reid & Majewski 1993;
has motivated new studies to test a possible connec-
Ojha et al. 1996; Buser et al. 1999), and perhaps 13%
∼ tion between faint optical and IR light and dark mat-
of the total disk luminosity of the Milky Way
ter in this and other spirals (Gilmore & Unavane 1998;
(Morrison et al. 1994).
Rauscher et al. 1998;Uemizu et al. 1998;Abe et al. 1999;
Forexternalgalaxies,morphologydeterminedthrough
Beichman et al. 1999; Yost et al. 2000; Zepf et al. 2000).
integrated surface brightness photometry is the only cur-
Theopticalresultsaremixed,butinfraredsurfacebright-
rent method to detect and characterize faint galactic
ness photometry indicates that whatever produces the
components. Detections of extended light that are
faintopticallightdetectedtodatedoesnotappeartoemit
perhaps indicative of a thick disk component with
stronglyatIRwavelengthsfarfromtheplaneofthegalac-
hthick 1 2 kpc have been reported in a few external
z ≃ − tic disks. Thus, if associated with known stellar popula-
edge-on galaxies. Early detections of extra-planar light
tions,thesourcesofthe faintlightareunlikelyto account
in excess of that associated with a thin exponential disk
for the dark mass of spiral galaxies.
were limited to SO (Burstein 1979) and early-typespirals
In this paper, we report on the collection, reduction
with significant bulges (van der Kruit & Searle 1981a;
and analysis of ultra-deep surface photometry of the iso-
van der Kruit & Searle 1981b;
lated,edge-on,lowsurfacebrightness,SdgalaxyESO342–
Wakamatsu & Hamabe 1984; Bahcall & Kylafis 1985;
G017, using some of the first science observations taken
Shaw & Gilmore 1989; de Grijs & van der Kruit 1996),
with the VLT. The simple optics, good seeing, and ex-
Morrison et al. 1997). leading to the suppo-
tremely well-sampled PSF of our observations ensured a
sition that thick disks were found in older
low andwell-understoodlevelofscatteredlightand accu-
stellar systems with significant central con-
rate identification of contaminating sources. Concurrent
centrations (van der Kruit & Searle 1981a;
deep observations of unrelated blank fields with the VLT
Hamabe & Wakamatsu 1989, de Grijs & Peletier 1997).
were used to create dark sky flat fields at the appropri-
This hypothesis is consistent with the lack of a thick
ate wavelengths. Considering all sources of uncertainty,
luminous component around the small, Scd spiral
including those from light scattered through the wings of
NGC 4244 in deep R-band observations reaching to
the PSF, we conclude that the resulting surface photom-
R = 27.5mag/sq arcsec (Fry et al. 1999), and in the
etry is reliable to a level of R = 28.5mag/sq arcsec and
bulgeless Sd edge-on NGC 7321 (Matthews et al. 1999).
V = 27.5mag/sq arcsec. Analysis of these data reveals a
On the other hand, observations indicate that there
are individual exceptions. Multiband photometry of the
1 The discovery of a faint, long, very narrow arc of light
later-type Sc spiral NGC 6504 (van Dokkum et al. 1994)
apparently associated with NGC 5907 (Shanget al. 1998) led
revealed extended light interpreted as a weak thick disk
Zheng et al. (1999) to suggest that the extended light in the
with hthick 2 kpc.
R ≃ galaxy might beanartifact duetoconfusion from thearcand
Faint light high above the plane of the well-studied, foreground objects. The arc clearly contributes some light to
late-type, edge-on spiral NGC 5907 has further compli- some positions near the galaxy, but is too narrow and asym-
catedthepictureofextra-planarlightinsmall-orno-bulge metric to be the cause of the symmetric extended light de-
tected by Morrison et al. (1994). Zheng et al. (1999) report
spirals. First detected at heights of 3 to 6 kpc above the
that their photometry suffers from systematics at light levels
planeindeepR-bandobservations(Morrison et al. 1994),
fainter than R=27mag/sq arcsec. (Due to a large pixel size,
this extended emission is intriguing because it is unlike
the PSF was often undersampled, despite the seeing of 3.4 to
anyknownthickdiskorstellarcomponent,havinginstead ′′
5.4 thatwastypicaloftheirobservations).Sincealldetections
a morphology similar to that inferred for the dark mat-
of faint extended light in NGC 5907 have been reported for
ter halo distribution of NGC 5907 (Sackett et al. 1994). R 27mag/sq arcsec, and all optical photometry (including
Other workers have confirmed the presence of the faint tha≥t of Zhenget al. 1999) agrees abovethislevel, themystery
light in other bands (BVRIJK), and showed that the of thisfaint halo light remains.
Neeser et al.: Thick Disk in LSB Spiral ESO 342–G017 3
Table 1. Basic Properties of ESO 342–G017
Parameter Value Reference
α,δ (J2000.0) 21 12 10.8, 37 37 38 Karachentsev et al. 1999
−
type Sc+6 Mathewson & Ford 1996
redshift 7680 10kms−1 Mathewson & Ford 1996
± ◦
inclination 88 this paper
PA 120◦.4 0◦.5 this paper
∗ ±′′
major-axis D 86 this paper
mB 16.67 0.09 Lauberts & Valentijn 1989
±
mV 16.40 0.03 this paper
±
mR 15.92 0.04 this paper
±
mI 15.47 0.06 Mathewson & Ford 1996
±
MR 19.1 0.3 this paper
− ±
MV 18.7 0.3 this paper
− ±
∗
major-axis diameter measured from theR=27.0 mag/sq arcsec contour.
Magnitudes are not corrected for extinction.
faint component that we interpret as a thick disk, to our
knowledgethefirstthickdiskdiscoveredinanLSBgalaxy.
In Sect. 2 we describe the VLT observations and ob-
serving strategy. In Sect. 3 the data reduction process,
including the production of dark sky flats and the proce-
dures for masking, mosaicing, calibrating, and determin-
ing the sky flux are outlined. The procedure to extract
profiles from the deep images is given in Sect. 4, along
with a briefdescriptionofthe erroranalysis,whichis dis-
cussed in depth in the appendix. The resulting V and
R surface photometry of ESO 342–G017 are presented in
Sect. 5, along with a description of the fitting procedure
for the thin and thick disk parameters. A thorough anal-
ysis of scattered light due to the tightly-constrained PSF
is discussed in Sect. 5, and ruled out as the cause of the
faintextendedlightwedetectinESO342–G017.Thethin
and thick disks, including their inferred intrinsic proper-
ties are described in Sect. 6. We summarize and conclude
in Sect. 7. Throughout this paper we assume a distance
of 102Mpc to ESO 342–G017 (based on a Hubble con-
stant of H◦=75km/s/Mpc), which yields an image scale Fig.1. Contour plot of ESO 342–G017 showing levels
of 0.495kpc per arcsecond.
from 20.0 to 27.0 R mag/sq arcsec in 0.5 mag/sq arc-
sec steps. The image is a central subsection of our total
ESO342–G017mosaic.Theinabilitytotracesmoothcon-
2. Observations
toursatthe lowestlightlevelsandthe noisierbackground
on the western end of the source is due to fewer frames
2.1. The Target Galaxy
making up the mosaic on this side of ESO 342–G017.
The target, ESO 342–G017, is a nearby, edge-on galaxy,
selectedonthebasisofitsrightascensionanddeclination,
very high disk inclination, absence of a prominent bulge,
low extinction correction, and optimal angular size. The 2.2. Observing Strategy and Resulting Data
latter is importantin orderto adequately resolvethe disk
Bessel V and R observations of ESO 342–G017 were
scale height while maintaining sensitivity to faint surface
made on the nights of 18, 22 and 25 August 1998 as
brightness in the halo. Our deep R-band image obtained
part of the ESO VLT–UT1 Science Verification (SV)
withtheVLT–UT1testcameraisshowninFig.1andthe
program. A complete description of the VLT SV pro-
basic properties of the source are given in Table 1.
gram telescope and instrument set-up can be found in
Leibundgut et al.1998 and Giacconi et al.1999. We give
4 Neeser et al.: Thick Disk in LSB Spiral ESO 342–G017
Table 2. Summary of Observations
Field Filter Dates Total Integration Median Seeing
August 1998 (seconds) (arcsec)
ESO 342–G017 Bessel-V 22 3300 1′.′1
′′
Bessel-R 18, 22, 25 10320 0.9
Flat-field frames:
HDF–Sa Bessel-V 18, 22, 23, 26, 27 16200 0′.′9
′′
Bessel-R 18, 22, 23, 25, 26 15300 1.0
′′
EIS0046-2930 Bessel-V 17 2700 0.8
′′
Bessel-R 17 2700 0.8
′′
EIS0046-2951 Bessel-V 22 2700 0.9
only a summary of the issues important for our observa- Thebiasframesshowedafixedstructurewithanover-
tions of ESO 342–G017. all level that varied up to 20 counts during the course of
TheVLTTestCamera,anengineeringgradeTektronix each night. We corrected for this by using the overscan
20482 CCD, was rebinned 2 2 to improve its surface regionofthedetector,whichmirroredthe samevariation.
×
brightness sensitivity, resulting in a binned scale of 0.091 For each night, a median-filtered master bias was made
arcsec pixel−1 and a field of view of 93 arcsec on a side. from at least 20 individual bias images. An average bias
The camera was rotated approximately 60 degrees in or- level was determined for each image from its overscanre-
der to position the galaxy major axis along the x-axis of gion. The associated master bias was then scaled to each
the detector. For economy of prose throughout the pa- overscanmean and subtracted from each image, with the
per, we will refer to the northeast and southwest sides of 0.5countdifferencebetweentheoverscanandthebiasav-
ESO 342–G017 as the “northern” and “southern” sides, erage taken into account. No significant dark current was
respectively. measured in the VLT test camera.
Achallengetoourdatareductionwasthefactthatthe
Test Camera CCD is not a science-grade device. As such,
3.2. Creating the Super Sky Flats
it displays more than the customary number of cosmetic
flaws, most noticeably, a large region ( 120 130 pixels)
Thegreatestpotentialsourceoferrorinourfinalimagesis
∼ ×
near the center of the chip with a lower sensitivity than
uncertaintyinthe flat-field.Asmanyskycountsperpixel
itssurroundings.Althoughthis“stain”hasastrongcolour
as possible are required to reduce the statistical error in
dependence(itismoreprominentintheblue),wefoundit
the flat-field which, to avoid large systematic uncertain-
tobetemporallystableandthereforeeasilycorrectedwith
ties,shouldbeobtainedusinglightwiththesamespectral
our science frame flat-fields (see Sect. 3.2). Furthermore,
energy distribution as the primary observation. This was
ESO342–G017wasalwayspositionedwellawayfromthis
donebycreatingasuperflat-fieldmadefromcarefulcom-
feature.
binations of the deep EISand the HDF-S fields that were
Fortuitously, long total integrations were made of the interleavedtemporallywithourobservationsofESO342–
HDF-south and two EIS cluster candidate fields on the G017.Theadvantageofthismethodliesinthelargetotal
nights of 17, 18, 22, 23, 25, and 26 August, in the same exposure of these deep fields, which are devoid of bright
filters as our observations. Using these images to create starsandwerewell-ditheredbetweenindividualexposures.
our deep sky flat-fields obviated the time-intensive strat- TheHDF-SandEISfieldsarelocated26◦.3and53◦.8away
egyofobservingoff-sourcefieldsforESO342–G017.Each from ESO 342–G017,respectively.
of the images used to make our superflats, as well as the
Each candidate sky flat image was inspected visually;
observationsofESO342–G017itself,wereditheredonav-
only those free of defects and temporally close to our ob-
′′
erageby more than 10 in both α and δ. This allowedfor
servations of ESO 342–G017 were chosen. Observations
the removal of cosmic rays from our galaxy field, and the
of the HDF-S made on 28, 29, and 31 August 1998 were
removal of stars in the super sky flat (see Sect. 3.2).
not used in our flat-field due to increasing sky levels from
a waxing moon. The remaining 26 R-band and 31 V-
bandflatframescontainedatotalof73560and39550sky
3. Data Reduction
electronsper pixel,respectively.ConsideringonlyPoisson
statistics of sky electrons,the flat-field formed from these
3.1. Bias and Dark Current
frames should contribute a pixel-to-pixel error of 0.37%
The basic image reduction was done using MIDAS. (R-band) and 0.50% (V-band). Of course, variations in
Neeser et al.: Thick Disk in LSB Spiral ESO 342–G017 5
the sky brightness across the image and remnant halos
frominadequatelyremovedbrightstars,createlarge-scale
errorsabovethatexpectedfromsimplePoissonvariations.
We empirically determine the size of this dominant flat-
field error below.
The super flat-field was created for each filter sepa-
rately as follows. Each individual flat-field sky frame was
normalised to its modal value as determined in the cen-
tral3/5ofthe image.Theaveragevalueofpixel(i,j)was
thendeterminedfromthestackofskyframesforthefilter,
acceptingapixel(i,j,k)fromthekthframeinthecompu-
tation of the average only if it passed two tests. First, its
deviation from the mean pixel value in the stack at (i,j)
must not exceed a given threshold measured in units of
the noiseatthatpixelposition(aκ-σ clip).This criterion
effectively removed cosmic-ray events and, since each im-
Fig.2.HistogramofthenumberofobjectsinourR-band
′′
agewasditheredbyatleast10 (110pixels)inbothαand
imagedetectedbytheSeXtractorprogram,asafunction
δ between successive exposures, the bright cores of stars
of the object’s classification. The dividing line between a
and galaxies as well. Second, a median-filtered frame was
stellar and an extended detection is approximately 0.8;
created over a 3 3 pixel window from the average frame
× the VLT field surrounding ESO 342–G017is clearlydom-
resulting from the first step. A κ-σ clip was againapplied
inated by background galaxies.
to each pixel (i,j,k) based on the value of its local me-
dian.The secondtestwasappliedto removeanyremnant
faint extended wings of stars and galaxies, which would
each individual image to compute their positional offsets
otherwise contaminate the resulting flat-field frame.Only
within the mosaic. In order to remove cosmic ray events,
pixels satisfying both these “filters” entered the average
imagesweredividedintogroupsoffourcloselyoverlapping
for the flat-field frames. A normalization level was calcu-
frames. Using the computed offsets, each group was com-
lated from the median value in the central 3/5 of each
binedintoatemporarymedian-filteredimage.Eachinput
flat-field frame, and each image was then flattened and
images was compared to its group median and all pixels
renormalized.
deviating by more than 3.5σ were replaced by the me-
In order to test the quality of the flat-fields, and to
dian value. Since cosmic ray events are often surrounded
compute an empirical large scale flat-field error, we re-
by lower brightness halos or tails, a second iteration was
peated the above procedure using only one-half of the
doneateachpositionatwhichacosmicraywasdetected.
availableHDF-S andEISimages.Inthis way,flatR1was
Inthissecondpass,alowerpixelcorrectioncriteriaof2.0σ
made from HDF-S and EIS images from nights 17, 18,
was applied.
22, and 23 August, while flatR2 was made from HDF-S
The 14 (R-band) and 11 (V-band) frames with the
and EIS images from nights 23 and 26 August. The two
bestseeingwerethencombined,usingintegerpixelshifts,
subflatsR1andR2haveapproximatelythesamefluxlev-
into R- and V-band mosaic frames. Given the small pixel
els. Two V-band subflats were created in the same way.
sizeandlargeover-sampling,this didnotlimittheresolu-
The flat-field frames flatR1 and flatV1 were then flat-
tion of our resulting image. Since different regions of the
tened using flatR2 and flatV2, respectively. Each was
mosaic are constructed from different numbers of images,
then examined visually for any remnant features, and
it is necessary to renormalize. To do this an identical set
then rebinned to a number of relevant scales and the
of frames was created having the same sizes and offsets,
rms variation across the frames measured. The cosmetic
butcontainingonlythemodalvalueofthesource-freesky
flaws inherent in the Test Camera CCD, particularly the
background.These were also combined into a mosaic and
“stain” mentioned in Sect. 2.2, were removed effectively
used to renormalize the R- and V-band mosaic frames. A
by our flat-field procedure. The results are summarized
subsectionofthe R-bandimageresultingfromthis proce-
in Table 3, in which the measured rms is compared to
dure is shown in Fig. 1.
that expected fromphotonstatistics alone.The empirical
In order to be able detect faint light associated with
values are used in our computation of flat-fielding errors.
ESO 342–G017 in our deep mosaic, foreground stars and
backgroundgalaxiesmustbemaskedout.SinceESO342–
3.3. Mosaicing and Masking the Galaxy Frames G017 was explicitly chosen for its paucity of foreground
stars, most of the objects contaminating its background
A region of sky 2.′8 2.′2 (R) and 2.′2 2.′0 (V) around are galaxies (see Fig. 2), and simple profile fitting cannot
× ×
ESO342–G017wastiledwithVLTtestcameraexposures be used to model and subtract contaminants.
andthencombinedintoafinalmosaic.Centroidsofanum- Instead, we used the SeXtractor detection algorithm
berofstarsandgalaxies(usually6to10)weremeasuredin (Bertin & Arnouts 1996) to find sources not associated
6 Neeser et al.: Thick Disk in LSB Spiral ESO 342–G017
Table 3. RMS Flatness of Flat-fields
Flat Correcting Flat Filter RebinnedSize (′′) Relevant Scale Measured rms Pixel−to−Pixelrms
√N
pixel
′′
flatR1/flatR2 R 0.091 1 pixel 0.57% –
flatV1/flatV2 V 0′.′091 1 pixel 0.78% –
′′
flatR1/flatR2 R 0.806 400pc ( hdisk) 0.11% 0.064%
flatV1/flatV2 V 0′.′806 400pc (∼hdisk) 0.14% 0.088%
′′ ∼
flatR1/flatR2 R 0.9 450pc(PSF FWHMin R) 0.16% 0.058%
′′
flatV1/flatV2 V 1.1 550pc (PSFFWHM in V) 0.12% 0.065%
′′
flatR1/flatR2 R 6.04 3kpc( hhalo) 0.08% 0.0086%
′′ ∼
flatV1/flatV2 V 6.04 3kpc( hhalo) 0.11% 0.012%
∼
yondtheoutermostcontoursofESO342–G017.Theinitial
outputmasksstillretainedafainthaloofemissionaround
brightersources.Forthisreason,themasksweregrownin
size iteratively until a histogram of the unmasked back-
groundpixelsnolongerchangedshape,indicatingthatthe
local background level had been reached.
A crucial step in the data reduction process is the de-
termination of an accurate value for the background sky
level. A large central section of both masked mosaics was
extracted so that its area contained the largest possible
number of overlapping individual images ( 11 for the R-
≥
band and 8 for the V-band). In order to prevent any
≥
emissionfromESO342–G017contributing to the sky sig-
′′
nal, the galaxy was liberally masked out to 20.1 (10kpc)
above and below the central plane of its disk, and along
its major axis to the outermost edges of the images. The
mask sizes of the brightest field stars were also liberally
increased for this procedure.
3.4. Determination of Sky Level
Thedistributionofskyvaluesareshowninthehistograms
ofFig.4,whichwereusedtocomputethetruebackground
value of the unmasked pixels in each image, and the as-
sociated error in its mean. These sky values are =
R
16651.5 0.4 e− pix−1 and = 2950.2 0.2 e−Spix−1
V
± S ±
in the R and V bands, respectively. Using the calibra-
tion described in the next section, these values corre-
spond to m (R) = 20.98mag/sq arcsec and m (V) =
sky sky
21.60mag/sq arcsec,with a systematic uncertainty domi-
natedbycalibrationerrorsof 5%.Thesystematicdevia-
Fig.3. Final R-band (top) and V-band masked images ∼
of ESO 342–G017. Objects detected with SeXtractor in tionfromgaussianbehaviourseenatextremepixelvalues
in Fig. 4 is slight andvery much smaller,in its integrated
either band have been masked in both frames. Levels
effect on the averagesky value, than the uncertainties δ
3.5σsky to 10σsky around the frame median are shown, S
− based on gaussian statistics reported above.
where σ is the background rms/pixel of the frame.
sky
3.5. Calibration to Standard System
withESO342–G017.Asourcewasdefinedtoconsistofat
least five connected pixels at a level of 1.5σ above the lo- Ourphotometriccalibrationwasbasedonresultssupplied
cal background, which was computed over a 32 32 pixel bytheSVteamtogetherwiththedistributionofourdata.
mesh. The so-called OBJECTS output of SeXtra×ctor, es- Aphotometricsolutionwasavailableonlyfortheobserva-
sentially a frame of all detected objects separated by null tionsofESO342–G017on22and15August,asthesewere
pixels, proved valuable in creating a mask for objects be- thetwophotometricnights.Typically,fourstandardfields
Neeser et al.: Thick Disk in LSB Spiral ESO 342–G017 7
1 5 8 2 6
3 3 3 4 4
- - - - -
16-21 22-27 28 32 36 39 43 47-52 53-58
1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33 35 37 39 41 43 45 47 49 51 53 55 57 59 61 63 65 67 69 71
2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 44 46 48 50 52 54 56 58 60 62 64 66 68 70
Fig.5. The positions of the profile extractions shown on the mosaiced, masked, R-band image. The V-band image
was extracted at the identical positions, but since it is smaller (see Fig. 3), the V profiles only reach number 52. The
vertical profiles averagedtogether to create Figs. 7 and 8 are labelled at the top.
were observed several times during each of these nights, 3. In the vertical direction (z-axis), each profile was av-
with anaverageofabout 10 Landoltstandardstars being eragedoverthe size ofthe seeingFWHM ( 10pixels)
∼
usedtocomputethephotometricsolutions.Thestandards for all points above the plane of the galaxy.
chosen spanned a significant range of colours in order to 4. Finally, a number of profiles were averaged together.
adequately measure the colour term. Anaverageofthethreeinnermostprofiles(extractions
36to38)wasmadetocreateonecentralprofile,groups
4. Extracting Vertical Profiles of four profiles (28–31 and 32–35 to the east and 39–
42 and 43–46 to the west) were averaged on each side
Achieving acceptable signal-to-noiseat surface brightness of the center, groups of six (16–21 and 22–27 to the
levels 6 to 8 mag/sq arcsec below sky requires averaging east and 47–52 and 53–58 to the west) were averaged
over a large number of pixels. We begin by extracting a on the outermost ends of the galaxy. The extractions
number of vertical rectangular regions,each of dimension averaged together are shown at the top of Fig. 5. In
21 530 pixels (0.9 24kpc), perpendicular to the disk the case of the V-band image, the averaging process
× ×
of ESO 342–G017.These extracted areas are centered on ends with extraction number 52.
the major axis of the galaxy, avoid the most prominent
The resulting masks made from the R and V images
HII regions,and extend well beyond the visible disk. The
separately,werethenmultiplied togethertocreatea mas-
positions of the extractions were identical for both the R
termaskframethatwasappliedtoeachmosaic.Thispro-
and V-band images; 71 regions were extracted from the
cedure masked 10.3% and 11.0% of the total image areas
R-band image and 52 from the smaller V-band image.
in the final R and V mosaics respectively. The masked
Fig. 5 shows these areas atop on our masked mosaic R-
images are shown in Fig. 3.
band image.
Foreachoftheverticalextractionscoveringthevisible
From these initial extractions four levels of averaging
disk of ESO 342–G017 (profiles 16 to 58 in R and 16 to
were performed in order to increase the signal-to-noise:
52 in V), a least-squares fit to the thin disk component
1. Thesumofthefluxacrossthe21pixelwidex-direction wasmade.Asimultaneoustwo-component(thinandthick
was determined for each extraction, and normalized disk)fitwasmadetoeachextraction,usinganexponential
by the numberofnon-maskedpixels containedineach parametrization given by
row.
f(z)=fthinexp( z /hthin)+fthickexp( z /hthick) (1)
2. Due to the extremely symmetrical cross-section of ◦ −| | z ◦ −| | z
ESO 342–G017 (see Fig. 6) we were able to average for both components, where f◦ is the surface flux at
the profiles above and below the disk. the position the extraction crosses the major axis of the
8 Neeser et al.: Thick Disk in LSB Spiral ESO 342–G017
Table 4. Typical Errors for ESO 342–G017Vertical Profiles
Uncertainty R-band V-band
[electrons] Galaxy Center (%) 4kpc (%) Galaxy Center (%) 4kpc(%)
± ±
Averaged fluxper pixel 30640 16703 5498 2958
Sky fluxper pixel 16651.5 16651.5 2950.2 2950.2
Net fluxper pixel 13988.5 51.5 2547.8 7.8
Read Noise (σRN) 0.04 (0.0003) 0.04 (0.08) 0.05 (0.002) 0.05 (0.6)
Flat-Fielding (σFF) 7.4 (0.05) 4.0 (7.8) 1.8 (0.07) 1.0 (12.5)
Photon Noise (σPN) 1.0 (0.007) 0.8 (1.5) 0.5 (0.02) 0.4 (5.4)
Mosaicing Error (σM) 1.7 (0.01) 0.9 (1.8) 2.6 (0.1) 1.4 (17.9)
Surface Brightness Fluctuations (σL) 0.2 (0.001) 0.01 (0.02) 0.06 (0.002) 0.003 (0.04)
Total Statistical Error (σSTAT) 7.6 (0.05) 4.2 (8.1) 3.2 (0.1) 1.7 (22.3)
∗
Sky Subtraction (σSS) 0.4 (0.003) 0.4 (0.8) 0.2 (0.008) 0.2 (2.6)
Total m ∆m [mag/sq arcsec] 21.17 0.04 27.3 +0.13 21.76 0.03 28.0 +0.30
± ± −0.12 ± −0.25
The numbersin parenthesesare theerrors as a percentage of the sky-subtractedflux.
∗ Note:the sky subtraction error is a systematic error and,therefore, does not enterinto σSTAT.
10000
1000
100
10
1
16200 16400 16600 16800 17000 17200
Fig.6. The symmetry of the vertical surface brightness
profiles of ESO 342–G017. The north (dashed lines) and
10000 south(dottedlines)profilesextractedatvariouspositions
alongthedisk.Theobject-maskedimageshavebeenused.
1000
eters are fthin, hthin, fthick, and hthick. Regions strongly
◦ z ◦ z
affectedbydustorclumpyHIIregionswereexcludedfrom
100
the fit.For comparison,a single-component(thin disk)fit
was also performed for those data that lie between 1 and
10 3mag/sq arcsec below the central galaxy surface bright-
ness. Results are presented in Sect. 5.
1
2800 2900 3000 3100
4.1. Error Analysis
Fig.4. Histogram of sky pixels from the completely
We present here a brief summary of the sources of pho-
masked R-band (top panel) and V-band (bottom panel).
tometric uncertainty and their magnitudes; the reader is
A gaussian fit to the histograms (exp( (x x )2/2σ2)
0 referred to the Appendix for a more detailed discussion.
with x (R)=16651.5 e−1 pix−1, σ(R)=−120.2−e−1 pix−1
0 For illustration, Table 4 shows the average flux lev-
and x (V)=2950.2 e−1 pix−1, σ(V)=39.7 e−1 pix−1) is
0 els and uncertainties at two positions along the central
shown as a dotted line.
vertical profile (the average of extractions 36 to 38) of
ESO 342–G017, one at the galaxy center and another at
the much fainter light levels 4kpc above the galaxy disk.
galaxy, z is the projected distance from the major axis, For each of the two flux extremes in each of R and V-
and h is the exponential scale height. The fitted param- bands, we give the uncertainties associated with the av-
z
Neeser et al.: Thick Disk in LSB Spiral ESO 342–G017 9
erage flux per pixel (averaged over the unmasked area of likeobjectsmeasuredbyanastronomicaldetectortohave
3 21 10pixels) in units of electronsand as a percentage a roughly gaussian shape, but many effects, including
× ×
of the sky-subtracted flux (given in parentheses). scattering in the telescope optics, can lead to broader
The systematic uncertaintiesinthe skylevelofδS = wings.AlthoughthesimpleopticsoftheVLTtestcamera
R
0.4 e− pix−1 and δS = 0.2 e− pix−1 correspond to (Giacconi et al.1999) should minimize such a scattering,
V
errors of only 0.0024% and 0.0068% per pixel in the R faint wings in the PSF are still present. To quantify the
andV bands,respectively.Thesesystematicuncertainties effect of these wings on our faint surface brightness pho-
are present in the sky-subtracted profiles we present in tometry, we measured the PSFs of isolated fainter stars
the next section, but because they correspond to light in the field of ESO 342–G017 and bright standard stars
levels ∆R = 11.5 and ∆V = 10.4 magnitudes below observed on the same nights as our science frames.
the sky (m (R) = 20.98mag/sq arcsec and m (V) = In order to be meaningful, such PSFs must be con-
sky sky
21.60mag/sq arcsec), they are of no importance (<10%) structedwithhighsignal-to-noisedata.Aconservativees-
overthe range of surface brightness we consider.The sys- timate ofthe precisionrequiredcanbe madebyassuming
tematic uncertainty in overall calibration to a standard thatallofthelightofESO342–G017isconfinedtoapoint
systemofabout5%isrelevant,butsimplycorrespondsto at a distance equalto the angularseparationbetween the
a possible overall shift in the surface brightness scale by center ofthe galaxyandthe mostdistantpoint abovethe
that amount. Note that at bright flux levels, the error in plane we consider. Such an estimate shows that ,at 6 kpc
the magnitudes is dominated by the error in the photo- abovetheplane,theamountofR-bandlightbrighterthan
metricconversionterm,notbyσ .Atfaintfluxlevels, 30 mag/sq arcsec scattered from ESO 342–G017 can be
STAT
the situation is reversed. quantified easily if the PSF is known to a precision of
2.5 10−6 at that distance.
∼ ×
Only three relatively isolated stars near the center of
5. Results
the ESO 342–G017 mosaic are available; the R- and V-
5.1. Analysis of the Surface Brightness Profiles bandimagesoftheseweremasked,added,andazimuthally
averaged.TheresultisshowninFig.9.Notethatalthough
In Figs. 7 and 8, we show the vertical extractions, av- theextendedemissionaroundESO342–G017isseenmore
eraged above and below the plane of ESO 342–G017, de- clearlyintheR-band,medianseeinginRisbetterthanin
rivedfromourdeepVLTimaginganddiscussedinSect.4. V.At faint lightlevels,both the R andV faint-starPSFs
Individual extractions consist of the horizontalaverageof have broader wings than a pure gaussian. Unfortunately,
21 pixel wide rectangles, with foreground stars and back- the statisticalnoiseinthesefaint-starPSFs,andthe rela-
groundgalaxiesmasked.Extractionsaboveandbelowthe tive size of the systematic photometric uncertainties over
galaxy disk were averaged about their axis of symmetry the relevantradii, precludes measurementin the wings to
and averaged in groups to produce the profiles shown in the accuracy we require. In principle, saturated stars on
the figures. In order to display meaningfully our data at the mosaic could be used to study the wings of the PSF,
the faintest levels, insets in Figs. 7 and 8 show fluxes on but our small field contained only two; one has a near
a linear scale for distances greater than 6kpc from the brightneighborandtheotherdoesnotfallontheV-band
major axis of ESO 342–G017. The scatter in each inset mosaic.
about zero indicates clearly that the sky flux has been WethereforestudythePSFwingsusingmuchbrighter
well-subtracted in our final mosaic within our calculated standardstarsimagedduringthesameobservingrun.We
uncertainties. build a model PSF directly from the data, using the iso-
The deviation from pure exponential behaviour in latedthreestarsonthemosaicofESO342–G017toderive
nearly all of the profiles indicates that presence of ex- the PSF out to 2.5′′, and a bright reference star observed
tended light beyond that expected for a purely exponen- withsimilarseeingtoderivethePSFfrom2.5to16′′ (i.e.,
tial stellar disk. This motivated our choice of one- (thin outto8kpcabovethegalaxyplane).Sincetheseeingwas
disk only) and two-component (thin+thick disks) least- slightlybetterduringtheimagingofthereferencestar,the
squaresfitstotheprofiles,whichareoverplottedinFigs.7 standard star profile was horizontally displaced to create
and 8 on the data.Both components were modeled as ex- a smooth match to the inner PSF derived from the mo-
ponential disks (see equation 1) with the scale height hz saic. The result is shown as the thin solid line in Fig. 9.
and central surface brightness f0 as free parameters. The The R-band PSF of the standard star is consistent with
scale heights and central surface brightnesses (expressed zero at the level of 2.5 10−6 from 7 to 12 arcsec ( 3.5
in mag/sqarcsec)derivedfromthesimultaneousthinplus to 6kpc), satisfyingthe×conservativerequirementth∼atwe
thick disk fits are summarized in Table 5. derived above. We conclude, therefore, that the PSF is
well enough understood to determine its effect on the ob-
served shape of the vertical surface brightness profiles of
5.2. Could the Faint Extended Emission be Scattered
ESO 342–G017.
Light?
In order to examine whether the extended light ap-
The first-order effect of turbulence in the atmosphere parent in Figs. 7 and 8 might be due to thin disk light
causes the radial point spread functions (PSFs) of point- scattered through the broad wings of the PSF to other
10 Neeser et al.: Thick Disk in LSB Spiral ESO 342–G017
20 20 20
20 20 20
22 22 22
0 0 0
24 24 24
-20 -20 -20
26 6 8 10 12 26 6 8 10 12 26 6 8 10 12
28 28 28
30 30 30
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 0 2 4 6 8 10 12
20 20 20
20 20 20
22 22 22
0 0 0
24 24 24
-20 -20 -20
26 6 8 10 12 26 6 8 10 12 26 6 8 10 12
28 28 28
30 30 30
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 0 2 4 6 8 10 12
20 20 20
20 20 20
22 22 22
0 0 0
24 24 24
-20 -20 -20
26 6 8 10 12 26 6 8 10 12 26 6 8 10 12
28 28 28
30 30 30
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 0 2 4 6 8 10 12
Fig.7.TheR-bandaveragedprofilesthroughthediskofESO342–G017,perpendiculartothemajoraxis.Theaverage
positionfromthe galaxycenterisgivenatthe topofeachpanel(eastofcenteris indicatedbyR>0;westofcenterby
R<0).The insets show,ona linearscale,the background-subtractedflux levels ofeachprofileatdistances morethan
6kpc from the galaxy disk. The simultaneous thin and thick disk fit and the range of data used for the fit is shown
by a solid line; the dotted line is the extrapolation of the fit. The dashed line is intended as a guide, and indicates
a single-component fit to data dominated by the thin disk. This fit was restricted to data between 1 and 3 mag/sqr
arcsec fainter than the peak flux.
positionsonthe detector,we convolvedamodelexponen- diskfittedparameterswereretrieved.Thedegreetowhich
tialdiskwithintrinsicstructuralcharacteristicssimilarto the thin disk fits are reproduced is illustrated in Fig. 10.
thoseofESO342–G017withourmodelR-bandPSF.The Due to its high inclination, ESO 342–G017has an ob-
intrinsic thin disk model parameters reported in Sect. 6 served surface brightness along its length that is much
were determined by requiring that, after inclination and larger than the intrinsic (input) face-on value. Except for
convolution with the observed PSF, the projected thin- the central regions, which suffer a net loss of light from