The dust-to-gas mass ratio of luminous galaxies as a function of their metallicity at cosmic noon

Abstract

We aim to quantify the relation between the dust-to-gas mass ratio (DTG) and gas-phase metallicity of z=2.1-2.5 luminous galaxies and contrast this high-redshift relation against analogous constraints at z=0. We present a sample of ten star-forming main-sequence galaxies in the redshift range 2.1<z<2.5 with rest-optical emission-line information available from the MOSDEF survey and with ALMA 1.2 millimetre and CO J=3-2 follow-up observations. The galaxies have stellar masses ranging from 1010.3 to 1010.6\,M and cover a range in star-formation rate from 35 to 145 M\,yr-1. We calculated the gas-phase oxygen abundance of these galaxies from rest-optical nebular emission lines (8.4 < 12 + (O/H) < 8.8, corresponding to 0.5 - 1.25 Z). We estimated the dust and H2 masses of the galaxies (using a metallicity-dependent CO-to-H2 conversion factor) from the 1.2~mm and CO J=3-2 observations, respectively, from which we estimated a DTG. We find that the galaxies in this sample follow the trends already observed between CO line luminosity and dust-continuum luminosity from z=0 to z=3, extending such trends to fainter galaxies at 2.1<z<2.5 than observed to date. We find no second-order metallicity dependence in the CO - dust-continuum luminosity relation for the galaxies presented in this work. The DTGs of main-sequence galaxies at 2.1<z<2.5 are consistent with an increase in the DTG with gas-phase metallicity. The metallicity dependence of the DTG is driven by the metallicity dependence of the CO-to-H2 conversion factor. Galaxies at z=2.1-2.5 are furthermore consistent with the DTG-metallicity relation found at z=0 (i.e. with no significant evolution), providing relevant constraints for galaxy formation models.

0

Turn this paper into a full lesson

ArcXiv compiles a staged curriculum from this paper: 8-12 lessons across beginner → advanced, synthesised section guides, visuals, flashcards, a quiz, exercises, and on-demand deep dives per section. Grounded in the abstract, never invented.

Discussion (0)

Sign in to join the discussion.

Loading comments…