Observational constraints on the merger history of galaxies since z≈6: Probabilistic galaxy pair counts in the CANDELS fields

Abstract

Galaxy mergers are expected to have a significant role in the mass assembly of galaxies in the early Universe, but there are very few observational constraints on the merger history of galaxies at z>2. We present the first study of galaxy major mergers (mass ratios > 1:4) in mass-selected samples out to z≈6. Using all five fields of the HST/CANDELS survey and a probabilistic pair count methodology that incorporates the full photometric redshift posteriors and corrections for stellar mass completeness, we measure galaxy pair-counts for projected separations between 5 and 30 kpc in stellar mass selected samples at 9.7 < 10(M*/M) < 10.3 and 10(M*/M) > 10.3. We find that the major merger pair fraction rises with redshift to z≈6 proportional to (1+z)m, with m = 0.80.2 (m = 1.80.2) for 10(M* / M) > 10.3 (9.7 < 10(M*/M) < 10.3). Investigating the pair fraction as a function of mass ratio between 1:20 and 1:1, we find no evidence for a strong evolution in the relative numbers of minor to major mergers out to z<3. Using evolving merger timescales we find that the merger rate per galaxy (R) rises rapidly from 0.07 0.01 Gyr-1 at z < 1 to 7.6 2.7 Gyr-1 at z = 6 for galaxies at 10(M*/M) > 10.3. The corresponding co-moving major merger rate density remains roughly constant during this time, with rates of ≈ 10-4 Gyr-1 Mpc-3. Based on the observed merger rates per galaxy, we infer specific mass accretion rates from major mergers that are comparable to the specific star-formation rates for the same mass galaxies at z>3 - observational evidence that mergers are as important a mechanism for building up mass at high redshift as in-situ star-formation.

0

Turn this paper into a lesson

ArcXiv compiles a structured reading guide from this paper's metadata: plain-English importance, contributions, prerequisite concepts, which sections to read first, flashcards, and a quiz. Grounded in the abstract, never invented.

Discussion (0)

Sign in to join the discussion.

Loading comments…