1. Morphology of galaxies at z>1.4 Marseille June 10 th, 2009 zCOSMOS deep v1.1 z>1.4 & flag=2,3,4,9 317 galaxies

2. Ellipticals Spirals high-z low-z Marseille Lidia Tasca June 10 th, 2009 20 Ellipticals 174 Spirals 104 Irregulars Need new classification scheme 5 classes: class 1= compact class 2= dominant single extended component, symmetrical class 3= Irregular class 4= Tadpole class 5= diffuse, low SB & count number of distant components in 1 arcsec

3. Class 1 Class 2 Class 3 Class 5 Class 4

4. Marseille Lidia Tasca June 10 th, 2009 Class 3 -> dominant Number of clumps increases with class Link between CAS classification and visually defined classes Class 1 Class 3 Class 4 Class 5 Class 2 “Typical” galaxy has a morphology comprising 1 or more distinct clumps, with some degree of diffuse nebulosity

5. Marseille Lidia Tasca June 10 th, 2009 I vs K morphology K-band morphology at z>1.4  not trivial (ground-based seeing-limited) ~50% of star-forming galaxies at z>1.4 are not detected in K Interesting: blue compact galaxies at z>1.4

6. Class 1 Class 2 Class 3 Class 4 Class 5 HST-ACS F814W IRCAM Ks High-z galaxies have irregular morphologies not only in the rest-UV but at rest-optical as well  both regimes are dominated by emission from young starbursting components.  Maybe fundamental differences between high and low z galaxies

7. Spectral vs. morphological properties Marseille Lidia Tasca June 10 th, 2009 Literature: galaxies at z~2-3 have irregular morphologies Is there a connection between rest-UV morphology and the content in star, dust, gas at these epochs? Can we connect these galaxies with lower z population? When did early and late type differentiate? Do we see more mergers?

8. Spectral properties vs. visual class Marseille Lidia Tasca June 10 th, 2009Class EW - Ly  1-19.4 26.3 3-18.7 4-19.1 5-13.0

9. Conclusions & Perspectives Marseille Lidia Tasca June 10 th, 2009 Visual classification complementary from CAS classification Ly  properties weakly linked to morphology classification UV morphology decoupled from physical observables, or physical processes too complex for a simple link ? Complete spectral classification based on Ly  and UV continuum Continue exploration of parameter space, use morphological and spectral features to classify (ie. gini and Ly  linear trend of increasing emission strength with increasing nucleation)