Duilia de Mello (CUA-GSFC) Amy Soto (CUA), Nick Bond (GSFC), Jon P. Gardner (GSFC), Swara Ravindranath (STScI), Claudia Scarlata (UMN), Elysse Voyer (LAM), Harry Teplitz (IRSA)

Elmegreen et al. 05 UDF i image (lines=0.5) 884 gals with d > chain 178 clump cluster 126 double 97 tadpole 269 spiral 100 elliptical Clump cluster properties z phot = x10 8 M sun D = 1.8 kpc 5 – 10 clumps per galaxy

Simulations: high-z clumps could both dissipate to form disks and coalesce to form bulges (e.g., Bournaud et al 2011; Ceverino et al. 2010, Krumholz et al. 2010; Agertz et al. 2009; Elmegreen 2008) – potential building block of local spirals Simulation Ceverino et al. 10 Bournaud et al. 11 (Faucher-Giguere's Perret's simulations)

When UV Clumps become disks? z < 1.5 – restframe UV Instruments: WFPC2 F300W U band (de Mello et al. 2006, Voyer et al. 2009) ACS SBC F150LP (Voyer et al. 2011) BUT more recently WFC3 UVIS (de Mello, Soto, Bond, Teplitz)

Voyer et al. (2011, 2013) 230 FUV selected galaxies (0.1<z<1.2) ACS/SBC F150LP GOODS-N and S L sun < L FUV < 10 8 L sun Optical morphologies (GALFIT) compared to spectral types (SED fitting) Majority of unobscured star formation occurs in: Spectral type typical of quiescent disks almost evenly in Sersic (n) typical of disks and clumpy merger/tidal morphologies ~50% of Starburst STs have disky morphologies

disky n<0.8 mergers 0.8<n<2.5 disks n>2.5 Early-type Ravindranath+ Lotz+

uvudf.ipac.caltec.edu

Teplitz et al arXiv Charge Transfer Efficiency CTE arrows = readout direction CTE degradation Effect is worse for objects far from CCD readout (Solar activity) Epoch 3 – post-flash (unbinned)

ACS WFC3F275W WFPC2 F300W phot-z objects

ACS WFC3F275W WFPC2 F300W phot-z objects

Templates: early- to late-type Coleman et al. Starbursts Kinney et al. ESbc Scd Im Starburst

2 spheroids 3 chains 4 clump clusters 5 irregulars 6 spirals 7 clumpy disks

rest-frame 3000 A 1500 A color ( ) 7000A Bond et al. 2013

rest-frame 3000 A 1500 A color ( ) 7000A

ID5: (4x4) Redshift:0.57 WFPC2 F300W – Voyer et al. (2013) WFC3 F275W ID5 with contour levels 6 – 11σ Redshift:0

ID5-Clump Area Comparison Clump 2 Clump 3 Clump 4 Clump 6 Contours are 6 σ Clump 5 is 4σ Sizes: 0.8 to 1.6 kpc

ID17: (2.5x2.5) ID17: (2.5x2.5) with contour level 5σ Redshift:1.18 WFC3 F275WWFPC2 F300W

zoomed in clumps Redshift:1.18 Sizes 1.6 kpc 1.3 kpc 0.7 kpc 0.8 kpc

F275W z ~ 0.8 = rest frame 1500 AA

Starburst – 2500A Why UV?

Giant HII regions/Super OB associations Powered by massive young clusters with 100 to 1000 O/WR stars, instead of a few as in regular HII regions (Zinnecker & Yorke ARAA 2007). The Carina Nebula in the Milky Way – 150 pc 30 Doradus in the LMC – 100 pc (radius) NGC 604 in M33 – 200 pc (radius)

200 pc radius

Giant Spiral: NGC6872 D=65 Mpc size > 100 Kpc Eufrasio et al. (2013)

NGC 3079 Petty et al GALEX UV images redshifted to z ~ 1.5 and z ~4 resembles LBGs (Gini, M20, Sersic)

Careful when using UV to study overall properties of galaxies There are UV clumps without clear signatures of disks Most of UV clumps seem to be in disks at z ~ 1 UV clumps are much larger than HII regions, SSCs, etc Found no signatures of size evolution in UV clumps at z~1 in comparison with higher-z