The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
THE GROWTH OF MASSIVE GALAXIES SINCE z= 2
Open accessAbstract
We study the growth of massive galaxies from z = 2 to the present using data from the NOAO/Yale NEWFIRM Medium Band Survey. The sample is selected at a constant number density of n = 2 × 10 −4 Mpc −3 , so that galaxies at different epochs can be compared in a meaningful way. We show that the stellar mass of galaxies at this number density has increased by a factor of ≈2 since z = 2, following the relation log M n ( z ) = 11.45 − 0.15 z . In order to determine at what physical radii this mass growth occurred, we construct very deep stacked rest-frame R -band images of galaxies with masses near M n ( z ), at redshifts 〈 z 〉 = 0.6, 1.1, 1.6, and 2.0. These image stacks of typically 70–80 galaxies enable us to characterize the stellar distribution to surface brightness limits of ∼28.5 mag arcsec −2 . We find that massive galaxies gradually built up their outer regions over the past 10 Gyr. The mass within a radius of r = 5 kpc is nearly constant with redshift, whereas the mass at 5 kpc < r < 75 kpc has increased by a factor of ∼4 since z = 2. Parameterizing the surface brightness profiles, we find that the effective radius and Sersic n parameter evolve as r e ∝ (1 + z ) −1.3 and n ∝ (1 + z ) −1.0 , respectively. The data demonstrate that massive galaxies have grown mostly inside-out, assembling their extended stellar halos around compact, dense cores with possibly exponential radial density distributions. Comparing the observed mass evolution to the average star formation rates of the galaxies we find that the growth is likely dominated by mergers, as in situ star formation can only account for ∼20% of the mass buildup from z = 2 to z = 0. A direct consequence of these results is that massive galaxies do not evolve in a self-similar way: their structural profiles change as a function of redshift, complicating analyses which (often implicitly) assume self-similarity. The main uncertainties in this study are possible redshift-dependent systematic errors in the total stellar masses and the conversion from light-weighted to mass-weighted radial profiles.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Schlegel, D. J., Finkbeiner, D. P., & Davis, M. (1998) · The Astrophysical Journal · doi:10.1086/305772 · Cited by 15,126
An iterative technique for the rectification of observed distributions
Lucy, L. B. (1974) · The Astronomical Journal · doi:10.1086/111605 · Cited by 3,866 · cited 1×
“The deconvolution was done with a combination of the Lucy-Richardson algorithm (Lucy 1974) andσ-CLEAN (Högbom 1974; Keel 1991), ensuring flux conservation.”
MethodMaraston, C. (2005) · Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society · doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2005.09270.x · Cited by 1,907 · cited 1×
“Stellar masses and other stellar population parameters were determined with FAST (Kriek et al. 2009a), using the models of Maraston (2005), the Calzetti et al. (2000) reddening law, and exponentially declining star formation histories.”
MethodDunkley, J., Komatsu, E., Nolta, M. R., Spergel, D. N., Larson, D., Hinshaw, G., Page, L., Bennett, C. L., Gold, B., Jarosik, N., et al. (2009) · The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series · doi:10.1088/0067-0049/180/2/306 · Cited by 1,787
Cited by
UV LUMINOSITY FUNCTIONS AT REDSHIFTS z∼ 4 TO z∼ 10: 10,000 GALAXIES FROM HST LEGACY FIELDS
Bouwens, R. J., Illingworth, G. D., Oesch, P. A., Trenti, M., Labbé, I., Bradley, L., Carollo, M., van Dokkum, P. G., Gonzalez, V., Holwerda, B., et al. (2015) · The Astrophysical Journal · doi:10.1088/0004-637x/803/1/34 · Cited by 1,298
Self-citationMuzzin, A., Marchesini, D., Stefanon, M., Franx, M., McCracken, H. J., Milvang-Jensen, B., Dunlop, J. S., Fynbo, J. P. U., Brammer, G., Labbé, I., et al. (2013) · The Astrophysical Journal · doi:10.1088/0004-637x/777/1/18 · Cited by 982
Self-citationFinkelstein, S. L., Ryan, R. E., Papovich, C., Dickinson, M., Song, M., Somerville, R. S., Ferguson, H. C., Salmon, B., Giavalisco, M., Koekemoer, A. M., et al. (2015) · The Astrophysical Journal · doi:10.1088/0004-637x/810/1/71 · Cited by 729
Theoretical Challenges in Galaxy Formation
Naab, T., & Ostriker, J. P. (2017) · Annual Review of Astronomy and Astrophysics · doi:10.1146/annurev-astro-081913-040019 · Cited by 722
De re metallica: the cosmic chemical evolution of galaxies
Maiolino, R., & Mannucci, F. (2019) · The Astronomy and Astrophysics Review · doi:10.1007/s00159-018-0112-2 · Cited by 697
Metadata
- Authors
- van Dokkum, P. G., Whitaker, K. E., Brammer, G., Franx, M., Kriek, M., Labbé, I., Marchesini, D., Quadri, R., Bezanson, R., Illingworth, G. D., Muzzin, A., Rudnick, G., Tal, T., & Wake, D.
- Venue
- The Astrophysical Journal
- Publisher
- American Astronomical Society
- Published
- 2010-01-11
- Volume
- 709
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 1018-1041
- ISSN
- 0004-637X (ISSN-L)
- 1538-4357
- OpenAlex
- W2162399571
- Cited by
- 807
- References
- 4
- FWCI
- 36.65
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: THE GROWTH OF MASSIVE GALAXIES SINCE z= 2. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1088/0004-637x/709/2/1018
- The paper
- van Dokkum, P. G., Whitaker, K. E., Brammer, G., Franx, M., Kriek, M., Labbé, I., Marchesini, D., Quadri, R., Bezanson, R., Illingworth, G. D., Muzzin, A., Rudnick, G., Tal, T., & Wake, D. (2010). THE GROWTH OF MASSIVE GALAXIES SINCE z= 2. The Astrophysical Journal. https://doi.org/10.1088/0004-637x/709/2/1018
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.