![]() | ![]() |
Astron. Astrophys. 359, 1059-1067 (2000) 4. Metallicity effects on Cepheid distances and
|
![]() | Fig. 3. The difference between KP empirical distances and predicted metallicity-corrected values, plotted against the HII metallicity of the host galaxy. The filled circles depict the eight galaxies which give Cepheid-calibrated SNIa luminosities. |
As a first straightforward test to the actual occurrence of a
metallicity effect, we consider the KP distance to galaxies members of
groups or clusters. The lower panel of Fig. 4 shows the residuals
and
[O/H] of each galaxy from the
distance modulus and O/H metallicity as averaged over the galaxies of
the same group or cluster. A correlation between the metallicity and
distance deviations from the mean values can be detected, best-fitted
by the relation (dotted line)
![[EQUATION]](img83.gif)
in the sense that galaxies whose O/H metallicity is larger than the average appear to have a larger distance. We believe that depth-effects within a given group or cluster cannot be invoked since there is no reason for which the metal-richest galaxies are also the most distant ones.
![]() | Fig. 4a and b. a Residuals of each galaxy from the average true distance modulus and O/H metallicity of the host cluster or group. Symbols as follows: Fornax cluster: filled circles, NGC 3184 group: triangles, Leo I group: squares, M87 sub-cluster: open circles, NGC 4472 sub-cluster: asterisks. The dotted line is the best fit to the points [Eq. (4)]. b As below, but with the Kennicutt et al. (1998) metallicity correction to the absolute distance moduli [Eq. (5)]. |
This unexpected result, which appears surprisingly in agreement with our predicted correction [Eq. (3)], disagrees with earlier observational clues. It is known that studies of different fields in M31 (Freedman & Madore 1990) and M101 (Kennicutt et al. 1998) suggested an opposite metallicity correction on distance (see also Kochanek 1997; Sasselov et al. 1997). Following Kennicutt et al. (1998), the correction (in magnitude) to the true distance modulus is given by
![[EQUATION]](img86.gif)
We show in the upper panel of the same Fig. 4 that adopting such an empirical correction would imply an even stronger correlation between distance and metallicity, with a slope of +0.53 (dotted line) hard to accept.
Applying the predicted metallicity correction to the absolute
distance moduli [Eq. (3)], obviously results in a correction to the
-values based on LMC-calibrated
distances. Assuming
, one has
[O/H]
+0.124 dex-1, i.e. an increase of
6% in the LMC-based
value of any SNIa calibrator whose
metallicity is 0.5 dex larger than that of the LMC. This is a not
dramatic variation, nevertheless it seems interesting to settle
whether it works to decrease or increase the present dispersion of
values. Within this context, it is
worth noticing that the well known disagreement between the "high" and
"low"
values claimed by KP and SNP
studies, respectively, are not due entirely to the already mentioned
different distances to SNIa calibrating galaxies. As discussed by
Gibson et al. (2000), the methodology adopted by the SNP group with KP
distances leads to
63 km s-1 Mpc-1 dex-1, which is 9%
higher than the SNP average value (
58 km s-1 Mpc-1 dex-1). Moreover, the
calibration of SNIa luminosities presents a variety of different
approaches and the same KP distances, coupled with the Suntzeff et al.
(1999) procedure, would give
67 km s-1 Mpc-1 dex-1. However, the
absolute value of the Hubble constant is out the purpose of this
paper. We aim only at determining the metallicity-correction to
LMC-based
values, with the hope of
providing new elements for reducing the present uncertainty of
10% to a 5% level.
Taking at the face value the
estimates given by Gibson et al. (2000, see their Table 6) we
show in the lower panel of Fig. 5 that they agree to each other to
within 10% (dashed lines), but with a mild tendency to increase as the
oxygen abundance of the host galaxy decreases. The linear regression
to the points (dotted line) is
![[EQUATION]](img103.gif)
suggesting a metallicity correction as
[O/H]
+0.069 dex-1 which is
roughly half the amount predicted on the basis of Eq. (3), but it runs
towards the same direction. On the contrary, applying the Kennicutt et
al. (1998) correction to the true distance moduli [Eq. (5)], results
in a correction as
/
[O/H]
0.111 dex-1
to the LMC-based
values. The upper
panel of Fig. 5 shows that this would produce a more evident
correlation between
and [O/H], with
two estimates overcoming the discrepancy of 10% from the average value
(dashed lines). On the other hand, the lower panel of Fig. 6 shows
that our predicted metallicity correction
/
[O/H]
0.124 dex-1
would yield
values which agree to
within 10%, but slightly increasing as the [O/H] abundance increases.
Eventually, in order to remove any dependence of
on the galaxy metallicity (see upper
panel in Fig. 6), we suggest that at least the empirical
evidence in Fig. 5a should be taken into consideration, i.e.,
/
[O/H]
0.069 dex-1,
leading to a slight upward revision of the KP unweighted mean of
=67.0
4.3 km s-1
Mpc-1 to
=68.6
3.9 km s-1
Mpc-1.
![]() |
Fig. 5. a The KP values from LMC-based Cepheid distance to the eight SNIa calibrating galaxies. The average value is labelled. The dashed lines depict the uncertainty of 10%. The dotted line depicts Eq. (6) in the text; b As below, but with the Kennicutt et al. (1998) metallicity correction to the absolute distance moduli. The resulting correction to is / [O/H] 0.111 dex-1 (see text).
|
![]() |
Fig. 6. a As in Fig. 5b, but with the predicted metallicity correction / [O/H] +0.124 dex-1; b As below, but with the metallicity correction / [O/H] +0.069 dex-1, as suggested by the dotted line in Fig. 5a.
|
As said before, the determination of
deals with several factors apart from
the distance to the SNIa calibrating galaxies. Thus, we are not giving
the predicted value of the Hubble constant, but only the result of the
predicted metallicity-correction to the KP
estimates, still holding their
adopted approach in the treatment of SNIa data and distance to
LMC.
© European Southern Observatory (ESO) 2000
Online publication: July 13, 2000
helpdesk.link@springer.de
