![]() | ![]() |
Astron. Astrophys. 352, 371-382 (1999) 4. Comparison with the luminosity functions and densities in the local universe4.1. The ratio of the luminosity densitiesThe luminosity functions and luminosity densities of the local
universe are available at both wavelengths (0.2 and
60 µm). Therefore we can compare some of their properties
to the characteristics of individual galaxies. The 60 µm
local luminosity function and density at z=0 have been calculated by
Saunders et al. (1990). The 0.2 µm luminosity function
and density have been derived by Treyer et al. (1998) at a mean
z=0.15. From these studies we can calculate the ratio of the local
luminosity densities
Our sample is FIR selected since we have searched for FIR galaxies detected in UV, therefore a bias toward large FIR to UV flux ratio is expected and this bias increases as we select brighter galaxies (Fig. 2). For comparison, we can also re-consider the sample used by Buat & Xu (1996): the galaxies were primarily selected to have a UV measurement and then searched in the IRAS database. Only galaxies detected both in UV and FIR are considered. Whereas the selection biases of this sample are very complicated since the primary selection is on the UV the bias toward the FIR is certainly less strong than for the IRAS/FOCA sample. In Fig. 4 the histograms of
The mean property of the local Universe in terms FIR to UV luminosity density ratio is not well represented by the samples of galaxies considered here. Therefore much caution must be taken to estimate global correction for extinction to be applied to the luminosity function. 4.2. The local luminosity functionsAn explanation for the discrepancy between the
We have evaluated the contribution to the luminosity function and
the luminosity density at 0.2 µm (resp.
60 µm) of the galaxies as a function of their intrinsic
luminosity (per decade of luminosity). These values are reported in
Table 3 (resp 4) together with the number of galaxies of our
IRAS/FOCA sample in each bin of luminosity (in log unit). The
luminosity functions are truncated at
Table 3. Contribution of the galaxies to the UV luminosity function and to the UV luminosity density in the local Universe per decade of luminosity. The luminosity function is truncated at Table 4. Same as Table 3 at 60 µm As expected for a magnitude limited sample, our individual galaxies do not truly sample the luminosity functions. This effect is dramatic in UV: the steepness of the faint end slope of the UV luminosity function (Treyer et al. 1998) implies a large number of faint galaxies. These objects largely contribute to the UV luminosity density. The relative numbers of galaxies in each bin of UV luminosity are similar to those used by Treyer et al. to calculate the UV luminosity function. Conversely, the FIR luminosity function is better sampled in the
sense that the deficiency of low luminosity galaxies has less
implications than in UV. Indeed, the FIR luminosity function is
extremely flat at low luminosities (Saunders et al. 1990) and the
contribution of the faint FIR galaxies to the local luminosity density
is very low. As a consequence the number of galaxies in each bin of
luminosity is more representative of its contribution to the FIR
luminosity density than in UV. The bright end of both luminosity
functions is not represented in the IRAS/FOCA sample because of the
scarcity of these objects and the small statistics. In terms of global
(cumulated) luminosity of our sample of individual galaxies we are
entirely dominated by the galaxies between
Hence our sample IRAS/FOCA sample of individual galaxies is more representative of the FIR properties of the universe. If the faint UV galaxies are dwarf galaxies they probably have a low extinction and therefore a low FIR to UV ratio. Our sample being FIR selected, it is probably biased against these objects. A consequence of these effects is that when a correction for extinction is calculated from individual galaxies using such a correction to correct the entire luminosity function can lead to some mistakes as we will discuss in the next subsection. 4.3. Consequences on the estimate of the UV extinction for large samples of galaxies and statistical studiesMost of the time neither the FIR flux nor the UV continuum
( The problem of the correction for extinction arises when one has to derive an intrinsic UV luminosity distribution (Treyer et al. 1998, Steidel et al. 1999). At low redshift the UV slope is not available for the moment on a large sample of galaxies and cannot be used to correct the UV luminosity function for dust extinction. The extinction has been found to vary as a function of the absolute bolometric magnitude of the galaxies (e.g. Wang 1991, Heckman et al. 1998, Buat & Burgarella 1998). Unfortunately, the UV luminosity is not a good tracer of the bolometric luminosity of a galaxy since it is expected to be very influenced by the current star formation activity. Moreover the extinction (larger for brighter galaxies) adds an anti correlation between the observed UV luminosity and the bolometric one. Therefore, relating the extinction to the UV luminosity is not possible. Indeed no correlation exists between the UV luminosity and the FIR/UV ratio in the IRAS/FOCA sample or that previously used by Buat & Xu (1996). In the same way Heckman et al. (1998) have used the sum of the FIR and UV luminosities as a tracer of the bolometric luminosity. The use of the absolute B magnitude
We have also compared the extinction deduced from the FIR/UV flux
ratio (
A correlation is found between these two quantities (R=0.70).
Indeed, a clear correlation has already been found between the FIR/UV
flux ratio and the UV-B color (Deharveng et al. 1994) which has been
interpreted to be due at least in part to the influence of the dust
extinction (Buat et al. 1997). The UV-B color is also sensitive to the
star formation history on timescales of the order of some
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() © European Southern Observatory (ESO) 1999 Online publication: December 2, 1999 ![]() |