1. Ringberg Castle, 7th July 2005 Panoramic View of Cluster Evolution Taddy Kodama (NAOJ / ESO), Masayuki Tanaka (Univ. of Tokyo), PISCES team Cygnus Vega Altair ♂ ♀

2. Overview Panoramic Views of Cluster Scale Assemblies Panoramic Views of Cluster Scale Assemblies Environmental Dependence of Galaxy Evolution Environmental Dependence of Galaxy Evolution Down-Sizing in Galaxy Formation and Evolution Down-Sizing in Galaxy Formation and Evolution Based on Subaru Panoramic Imaging

3. Cluster Assembly and Galaxy Evolution Morphology-Density RelationN-body simulation (Dark matter) SCDM; Moore et al. (1998) Dressler et al. (1980; 1997) E Sp S0 “a priori” or “a posteriori” ? z=5010 31 0.5z=0

4. Panoramic Imaging and Spectroscopy of Cluster Evolution with Subaru Panoramic Imaging and Spectroscopy of Cluster Evolution with Subaru Panoramic imaging of ~15 Clusters at 0.4 0.5) Panoramic imaging of ~15 Clusters at 0.4 0.5) Spectroscopic follow-up with FOCAS (optical, 6’) and FMOS/MOIRCS (NIR, 30’/4’×7’) Spectroscopic follow-up with FOCAS (optical, 6’) and FMOS/MOIRCS (NIR, 30’/4’×7’)  Mapping Large Scale Structures in and around Clusters Cluster Scale Assembly Cluster Scale Assembly  Environmental Variation of Galaxy Properties Origin of Morphology-SFR-Density Relation Origin of Morphology-SFR-Density Relation Kodama et al. (2005)

5. Panoramic Optical Imaging with Suprime-Cam on Subaru Suprime-Cam (34’ x 27’)  10 － 15 Mpc @ 0.4<z<1.3

6. Panoramic NIR Imaging with WFCAM on UKIRT WFCAM (52’ x 52’ by 4 pointings)

7. Panoramic Optical Spectroscopy with FOCAS on Subaru FOCAS (~30 multi-slits, 6’φ) selected regions along large scale structures

8. Panoramic NIR Spectroscopy with FMOS / MOIRCS on Subaru FMOS (~400 fibers, 30’φ) MOIRCS (~30 multi-slits, 4’×7’)

9. Members Members PI ： T. Kodama (NAOJ) PI ： T. Kodama (NAOJ) Co-I’s Co-I’s N. Arimoto, T. Yamada, N. Kashikawa, M. Iye, F. Nakata, M. Kajisawa (NAOJ), S. Okamura, Y. Suto, K. Shimasaku, M. Tanaka, H. Yahagi (Univ of Tokyo), K. Ohta, M. Nagashima (Kyoto Univ), T. Futamase, I. Tanaka, Y. Karasawa (Tohoku Univ), H. Matsuhara, T. Tamura (ISAS), T. Hoshi (Meisei Univ), T. Kitayama (Toho Univ), T. Ohashi (Tokyo Metro Univ), N. Tamura, T. Okamoto, R. Bower, I. Smail (Durham, UK) K. Umetsu, W. Kawasaki (Taipei), M. Balogh (Waterloo, Canada)

10. Total Sample & Current Status Imaging ： Suprime-Cam-BB CL0024, CL0939, CL0016, RX1716, RXJ0153, CL1604, CL1252, RXJ0849, CL0451, MS2054, MS1054, RD0910 (8 clusters completed, 4 clusters half-done, 3 not yet) Suprime-Cam-NB (Hα) CL0024 (z=0.39), CL0939 (z=0.41) WFCAM (NIR) CL1604 (z=0.9), CL1252 (z=1.23) Spectroscopy ： FOCAS CL0939 (z=0.41), CL0016 (z=0.55), RXJ0153 (z=0.83) 15 X-ray detected clusters at 0.4<z<1.3 ACS(3.5’) XMM 1.14 Spitzer

11. RX J0152.7-1357 (z=0.83) Suprime-Cam V : 120 min R : 116 min i’ : 75 min z’ : 79 min central 3’ x 3’ (1% out of 34’x27’) Courtesy: Ichi Tanaka “A Chain Cluster” Seeing ~ 0.5-0.6”

12. Optical (Galaxies) vs. X-ray (Hot gas) RX J0152.7-1357 (z=0.83), 7 arcmin = 3.2 Mpc Jones et al. (2003) Kodama et al. (2004) XMM-Newton phot-z selected galaxies (Δz = － 0.05~+0.03)

13. Panoramic Map of RXJ0153 (z=0.83) Marked qualitative agreement with N-body simulations! Central core dominated by red galaxies, and filaments coming out to various directions connecting groups of galaxies out to 10Mpc. Moore et al. (1999)

14. Spectroscopic confirmation of LSS F1 F2 F3 F4 F5 F7 F8 F6 We selected 8 groups in RXJ0153 for multi-slit spectroscopy with FOCAS/Subaru.

15. Spectroscopic confirmation of LSS 0.835 0.842 0.837 0.835 0.843 0.782 0.745 0.845 6 out of 8 groups are confirmed to locate at cluster redshifts! (~10 members per group) Tanaka, Kodama, et al. (2005b) ⊿ Vr < 1000km/s

16. Spectroscopic confirmation of LSS They all show a distinct isolated peak in spec-z! Tanaka, Kodama, et al. (2005b) F1 F5 F4F3 F2 F6 F1 F5 F2 F3 F6 F4 σv = 200-400km/s

17. Panoramic Views of Cluster Assembly CL 0016+16CL 0939+47RX J0153 － 14 z=0.41 (4.3 Gyr ago) z=0.55 (5.4 Gyr ago) z=0.83 (7.0 Gyr ago) 30 arcmin = 10, 12, and 14 Mpc (physical), respectively contours: 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 5 sigma Distribution of phot-z sliced galaxies (Δz = － 0.05~+0.03) Kodama, et al. (2005)

18. Truncation of SF in CL0939 Cluster (z=0.41) Suprime-Cam / BVRI critical density Galaxies start to be truncated at relatively low density (groups) far from core, suggesting a non-cluster-specific mechanism for truncation. Kodama et al. (2001) 75 % 50 25

19. Colour-Density Relations RXJ0153 (z=0.83) CL0016 (z=0.55) SDSS (z~0) Colours change sharply at break densities, especially for faint galaxies (>M*+1). Tanaka, Kodama, et al. (2005) bright faint 50% 25% 50% 25%

20. “ Break Densities ” Tanaka, Kodama, et al. (2005) slope of colour change

21. Star Formation vs. Morphology E+S0 S+I Kodama, Balogh, et al. (2004) Treu et al. (2003) Morphologies seem to react later (or at inner region) than SF. 0.5Mpc1.7Mpc0.5Mpc1.7Mpc 39 WFPC2 pointings across 25 arcmin! CL0024 Cluster (z=0.4) Suprime-Cam/Subaru

22. Galaxy evolution as a function of mass SDSS (z=0) Kauffmann et al. (2003) Massive galaxies are old, while less massive galaxies are younger or have more extended star formation:  “Down-sizing”! Kodama et al. (2004) see also De Lucia et al. (2004) critical mass SXDS (z=1), 1.2 deg^2 red+bright blue+faint red+bright blue+faint 11 10 9 8 log Mstar U-V = z’ (magnitude) R-z’ (colour)

23. Down-sizing seen in the FP to z~1 Treu et al. (2005) van der Wel et al. (2005) GOODS (141 field early-types)CDFS/1252 (27 field early-types) Less massive galaxies tend to have larger deviation in M/L ratio compared to local FP, suggesting their younger ages.

24. Down-sizing seen in Mg/Fe ratio Thomas (2001) Ap&SS, 277, 209 Lower Mg/Fe ratio towards smaller ellipticals suggesting longer timescale of star formation. Obs Model

25. “ Morphological Down-sizing ” ＊ Early-types at massive-end and late-types at faint-end. ＊ Fraction of early-types at small mass increases with decreasing redshift. Bundy, Ellis, Conselice (2005) astro-ph/0502204 on GOODS fields (300 sq. arcmin) All E P E P E P S S S

26. Classification of galaxy environments field cluster group field group cluster control field control field control field Σ 2Mpc Field, Group, and Cluster Tanaka, Kodama, et al. (2005)

27. Colour-Magnitude Diagrams as a function of environment Tanaka, Kodama et al. (2005, astro-ph/0506713)

28. Luminosity Functions as a function of environment RXJ0153 (z=0.83)CL0016 (z=0.55)SDSS (z~0) Tanaka, Kodama et al. (2005) red blue red

29. Environmental Dependence of Down-Sizing Deficit of Red+Faint Galaxies is Stronger in Lower Density Regions.  Environment = Evolutionary Stage Tanaka, Kodama, et al. (2005) R(Giant/Dwarf) for red galaxies (><4 ｘ 10 Mo) Degree of the Deficit of Red Faint Galaxies ＝ 10

30. Build-up of the colour-magnitude relation z=1 z=0.5 z=0 Coma fading vector

31. From Distant Clusters to Nearby Clusters z=0.43 0.33 0.23 0.0 Assembly Evolution fading vector Kodama & Bower (2001) Once the SF is truncated, difference in lum. weighted age as a function of luminosity will be diminished quickly. Luminosity weighted age at z=0 Flow of galaxies on the CMDs Δ (U-V) MVMV

32. Formation of massive galaxies: late assembly? Baugh et al. (2002) z=310 Stellar mass function is expected to dramatically change with time in the hierarchical galaxy formation models Mstars semi-analytic model Bekki & Chiba (2001) 2

33. Assembly of massive galaxies in the Field Pozzetti et al. (2003) Saracco et al. (2004) K20 (52 arcmin^2) GDDS (120 arcmin^2) No evolution out to z~1.5 10 M ◎ 11 No evol. to z~1.7 Glazebrook et al. (2004) No evol. to z~1.6 L>2L* L>3L* MUNICS (160 arcmin^2) Also in the field environment, mass assembly is largely completed by z~1.5.

34. Distant Red Galaxies (DRG) at 2<z<3 by the FIRES (near-infrared survey) Franx + (2003), van Dokkum + (2003; 2004), Forster Schreiber + (2004) DRGs significantly contribute to stellar mass density at 2<z<3: 2×LBG ！ DRG LBG 10 Mo 11

35. Summary Assembly of clusters of galaxies Assembly of clusters of galaxies * Large scale filamentary structures (>10Mpc) are seen in all clusters, providing good evidence for cluster scale assembly. * Large scale filamentary structures (>10Mpc) are seen in all clusters, providing good evidence for cluster scale assembly. Origins of morph-density/sfr-density relations Origins of morph-density/sfr-density relations * Truncation of SF is sharply seen in groups far out from cluster cores. * Truncation of SF is sharply seen in groups far out from cluster cores. * Truncation of SF and transformation of morphologies are driven by different physical processes (at least partly). * Truncation of SF and transformation of morphologies are driven by different physical processes (at least partly). Down-sizing in galaxy formation/evolution. Down-sizing in galaxy formation/evolution. * Massive galaxies form early while less massive galaxies (in final) form later or have more extended star formation. * Massive galaxies form early while less massive galaxies (in final) form later or have more extended star formation. * Down-sizing is a function of environment (=evolutionary stage). * Down-sizing is a function of environment (=evolutionary stage). high-density/high-mass  low-density/low-mass high-density/high-mass  low-density/low-mass

36. Key Questions What’s happening in groups to stop star formation? What’s happening in groups to stop star formation? Is it intrinsic or external effect? Is it intrinsic or external effect? Search for interaction and/or E+A in groups. Search for interaction and/or E+A in groups. What’s the connection between “down-sizing” and the hierarchical galaxy formation (“bottom-up”)? What’s the connection between “down-sizing” and the hierarchical galaxy formation (“bottom-up”)? --- strong galaxy formation bias --- --- strong galaxy formation bias --- Very efficient SF and assembly for massive galaxies? Very efficient SF and assembly for massive galaxies? Suppression of early SF in dwarfs (UVB, gas fallback)? Suppression of early SF in dwarfs (UVB, gas fallback)?

37. Thank you, Alvio! Prost ! 18/06/05