J-PLUS: 2-D analysis of the stellar population in NGC 5473 and NGC 5485
I. San Roman, P. Sánchez-Blázquez, A. J. Cenarro, L. A. Díaz-García, C. López-Sanjuan, J. Varela, G. Vilella-Rojo, S. Akras, S. Bonoli, A. L. Chies Santos, P. Coelho, A. Cortesi, A. Ederoclite, Y. Jiménez-Teja, R. Logroño-García, R. Lopes de Oliveira, J. P. Nogueira-Cavalcante, A. Orsi, H. Vázquez Ramió, K. Viironen, D. Cristóbal-Hornillos, R. Dupke, A. Marín-Franch, C. Mendes de Oliveira, M. Moles, L. Sodré
AAstronomy & Astrophysics manuscript no. Sanroman_JPLUS c (cid:13)
ESO 2018April 12, 2018
J-PLUS: 2-D analysis of the stellar population in NGC 5473 andNGC 5485
I. San Roman (cid:63) , P. Sánchez-Blázquez , A. J. Cenarro , L. A. Díaz-García , C. López-Sanjuan , J. Varela , G.Vilella-Rojo , S. Akras , S. Bonoli , A. L. Chies Santos , P. Coelho , A. Cortesi , A. Ederoclite , Y. Jiménez-Teja , R.Logroño-García , R. Lopes de Oliveira , , , , J. P. Nogueira-Cavalcante , A. Orsi , H. Vázquez Ramió , K. Viironen ,D. Cristóbal-Hornillos , R. Dupke , A. Marín-Franch , C. Mendes de Oliveira , M. Moles and L. Sodré Centro de Estudios de Física del Cosmos de Aragón (CEFCA), Unidad Asociada al CSIC, Plaza San Juan 1, E-44001 Teruel, Spain Departamento de Física Teórica, Universidad Autonoma de Madrid (UAM-CSIC), 28049 Cantoblanco, Madrid, Spain Observatório Nacional / MCTI, Rua Gal. José Cristino, 77, São Cristóvão 20921-400 Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil Departamento de Astronomia, Instituto de Física, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul (UFRGS), Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil Instituto de Astronomia, Geofísica e Ciências Atmosféricas (IAG), Universidade de São Paulo (USP), R. do Matão 1226, 05508-090, Sâo Paulo, Brazil Departamento de Física, Universidade Federal de Sergipe, Av. Marechal Rondon, S / N, 49000-000 São Cristóvão, SE, Brazil X-ray Astrophysics Laboratory, NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, MD 20771, USA Department of Physics, University of Maryland, Baltimore County, 1000 Hilltop Circle, Baltimore, MD 21250, USAApril 12, 2018
ABSTRACT
Context.
The spatial variations of stellar population properties within a galaxy are intimately related to their formation process.Therefore, spatially resolved studies of galaxies are essential to uncover their formation and assembly. Although the arrival of integralfield unit (IFU) surveys has brought a significant breakthrough in the field, recent techniques that combine photometric multi-filtersurveys with spectral fitting diagnostics have opened a new way to disentangle the stellar population of spatially-resolved galaxieswith a relatively low-cost compared to IFU surveys.
Aims.
The Javalambre Photometric Local Universe Survey (J-PLUS) is a dedicated multi-filter designed to observed ∼ ofthe Northern sky using twelve narrow-, intermediate- and broad-band filters in the optical range. In this study, we test the potential ofthe multi-filter observation carried out with J-PLUS to investigate the properties of spatially-resolved nearby galaxies. Methods.
We present detailed 2D maps of stellar population properties (age, metallicity, extinction, and stellar mass surface density)for two early-type galaxies observed in both, J-PLUS and CALIFA surveys: NGC 5473 and NGC 5485. Radial structures are alsocompared and luminosity- and mass-weighted profiles are derived. We use MUFFIT to process the J-PLUS photometric multi-filterobservations, and two di ff erent techniques (STARLIGHT and STECKMAP) to analyze IFU CALIFA data. Results.
We demonstrate that this novel technique delivers radial stellar population gradients in good agreement with the IFU tech-nique CALIFA / STECKMAP although comparison of the absolute values reveals the existence of intrinsic systematic di ff erences.Radial stellar population gradients di ff er when CALIFA / STARLIGHT methodology is used. Age and metallicity radial profiles de-rived from J-PLUS / MUFFIT are very similar when luminosity- or mass-weighted properties are used, suggesting that the contributionof a younger component is small and the star formation history of these early-type galaxies are well represented by mainly an old SSPcomponent.
Conclusions.
We present the potential of J-PLUS to explore the unresolved stellar populations of spatially-extended local galaxies.Comparison between the three methodologies reveals some discrepancies suggesting that the specific characteristics of each methodcauses important di ff erences. We conclude that the ages, metallicities and extinction derived for individual galaxies not only dependon the chosen models but also depend on the method used. Future work is required to evaluate in detail the origin of these di ff erencesand to quantify the impact that di ff erent fitting routines have on the derived stellar population properties. Key words. galaxies: evolution - galaxies: formation - galaxies: photometry - galaxies: elliptical
1. Introduction
The study of the stellar content of galaxies is crucial to unveiltheir formation and assembly. In the last fifteen years, the fieldhas witnessed the outbreak of integral field spectroscopy (IFS)surveys (SAURON, de Zeeuw et al. 2002; VENGA, Blanc et al.2010; PINGS, Rosales-Ortega et al. 2010; DiskMass, Bershadyet al. 2010; ATLAS D , Cappellari et al. 2011; CALIFA, Sánchezet al. 2012). While large surveys of galaxies such as the SloanDigital Sky Survey (SDSS; York et al. 2000), the Galaxy and (cid:63) e-mail: [email protected] Mass Assembly project (GAMA; Driver et al. 2011), or the 2dFGalaxy Redshift Survey (2dFGRS; Colless et al. 2001) obtainone spectrum per galaxy, IFS surveys spectrally map galaxiespixel by pixel. These IFS surveys allow detailed spatial analysesthrough multiple spectra of each galaxy by creating a 2D map ofthe object. While these surveys are very powerful, they are stilllimited in number of galaxies and in redshift range (e.g., CAL-IFA observes ∼
650 galaxies with redshifts limited to z < Article number, page 1 of 19 a r X i v : . [ a s t r o - ph . GA ] A p r & A proofs: manuscript no. Sanroman_JPLUS though this technique has allowed to increase significantly thenumber of galaxies, there are still limitations in terms of the red-shift range probed and the galactocentric distance analyzed (i.e.,few e ff ective radii, R e ff ) . For example, MaNGA aims to obtainspatially resolved spectroscopy of 10,000 galaxies but it will belimited to resolve galaxies spatially out to R = e ff (with asubsample reaching R = e ff ) and with a median redshift of z ∼ z < e ff (2 R e ff for40% of the sample).Recent hydrodynamical simulations find that the informationcontent of the accretion history is retained in the stellar popula-tion profiles only at very large radii (R > e ff ) from the galacticcenter (Cook et al. 2016). The limitations of current IFU surveysat these low signal-to-noise (S / N) regimes suggest that deep pho-tometric studies in galactic stellar halos are essential to unveil theformation and assembly of local galaxies.On the other hand, the number of alternative techniques suchas multi-filter surveys is significantly increasing (e.g., COMBO-17, Wolf et al. 2003; ALHAMBRA, Moles et al. 2008; PAU,Castander et al. 2012; SHARDS, Pérez-González et al. 2013:J-PAS, Benitez et al. 2014; J-PLUS, Cenarro et al. 2018, here-after Paper I). These photometric surveys aim at a diversityof scientific goals but with a common characteristic: a wellsampled spectral energy distribution (SED) of galaxies usingbroad-, intermediate- and / or narrow-band filters in the opti-cal range. Half-way between classical photometry and standardspectroscopy, these retrieved SEDs are, e ff ectively, spectra witha low-spectral resolution depending on the filter system (e.g., R ∼
20 for ALHAMBRA; R ∼
50 for J-PAS). Although multi-filterobserving techniques su ff er from the lack of high spectral reso-lution, their advantages over standard spectroscopy are multiple:1) IFU-like character, allowing a pixel-by-pixel investigation ofextended galaxies; 2) a uniform and non-biased spatial samplingthat allows environmental studies; 3) larger galaxy samples thanmulti-object spectroscopic surveys; 4) no sample selection cri-teria other than the photometric depth in the detection band;and 5) analysis of lower brightness surface areas than in spec-troscopy, allowing the studies of the outermost regions of thegalaxies and of galaxies at higher redshifts (i. e., multi-filter sur-veys are generally deeper than traditional spectroscopic studiessince direct imaging is more e ffi cient than spectroscopy). It alsoallows studies of very nearby galaxies ( z < (cid:63) > . M (cid:12) ) early-type galaxies at z < e ff . We found, on average, flatluminosity-weighted age gradients ( ∇ log Age L = ± / R e ff ) and negative luminosity-weighted gradients in metal-licity ( ∇ [Fe / H] L = – 0.09 ± / R e ff ). Although these resultsare in agreement with previous long-slit analyses (e.g. Mehlertet al. 2003; Sánchez-Blázquez et al. 2006, 2007; Reda et al.2007; Spolaor et al. 2010) and also with the most recent IFUstudies (e.g. Rawle et al. 2008; Rawle, Smith & Lucey 2010;Kuntschner et al. 2010; Wilkinson et al. 2015; Goddard et al.2017), they are discrepant when compared with some recentresults. Most studies in the literature have found either flat or slightly positive age gradients in early-type galaxies, however re-cent IFU works present disparate results (see Table 3 in San Ro-man et al. 2018, for a comprehensive review). In particular, theresults of González Delgado et al. (2015) found, using a sampleof 41 early-type galaxies from the CALIFA survey, very nega-tive inner ( < R e ff ) luminosity-weighted age gradients ( ∼ – 0.25dex / R e ff ) that become flatter ( ∼ – 0.05 dex / R e ff ) at larger galac-tocentric distances (up to 2 R e ff ). Most recently, Boardman et al.(2017) observed twelve H I-detected early-type galaxies andfound median age gradients of – 0.047 dex / dex (in log-space),reaching approximately 3 half-light radii. IFU MaNGA studiesreveal contradictory results; while Goddard et al. (2017) foundflat age gradient inside R < R e ff , Zheng et al. (2017) found aslightly negative gradient (–0.05 ± / R e ff ). Both MaNGAstudies analyze similar galaxy sample but using di ff erent spectralfitting techniques and stellar population models. To shed lightinto this problem, in this paper we propose the analysis of com-mon objects observed with the photometric multi-filter J-PLUSand IFU CALIFA but analyzed with di ff erent techniques.The Javalambre Photometric Local Universe Survey (J-PLUS, Paper I) is a photometric multi-filter survey defined toobserve ∼ of the Northern sky. Combination of J-PLUS observations with spectral fitting diagnostics will disen-tangle the stellar population of spatially extended galaxies. Onthe other side, the Calar Alto Legacy Integral Field Area (CAL-IFA) survey is a pioneer in the integral field spectroscopy legacyprojects. Recent studies using data from CALIFA provided themost comprehensive results so far regarding the radial variationsof the stellar population parameters and star formation historiesof nearby galaxies (e.g., Pérez et al. 2013; Sánchez et al. 2014;Sánchez-Blázquez et al. 2014).The specific goals of this paper are: 1) to illustrate the poten-tial of J-PLUS to analyze unresolved stellar populations of spa-tially extended local galaxies, and 2) to compare our methodol-ogy (MUFFIT, Díaz-García et al. 2015) applied to J-PLUS datawith two di ff erent ones applied to CALIFA data: STARLIGHT(Cid Fernandes et al. 2013) and STECKMAP (Ocvirk et al.2006a,b).This paper is organized as follows. Section 2 provides a briefoverview of the J-PLUS Science Verification Data (SVD) andthe CALIFA survey as well as the photometric properties ofour sample. In Sect. 3, we describe the technical aspects of themethodologies used to analyze the di ff erent data sets. Section 4presents the J-PLUS and CALIFA 2D maps of age, [Fe / H], A v ,and stellar mass density and Sect. 5 presents the radial profilesand gradients. The stellar mass-to-light ratio analysis and the in-tegrated properties of the sample are presented in Sect. 6 andSect. 7, respectively. We discuss the results in Sect. 8. Through-out this paper we assume a Λ CDM cosmology with H =
70 kms − , Ω M = .
30, and Ω Λ = .
2. Observations and Data Reduction
J-PLUS is a multi-filter survey carried out with the JavalambreAuxiliary Survey Telescope (JAST / T80), a 0.83m telescope in-stalled at the Observatorio Astrofísico de Javalambre (OAJ) inTeruel, Spain. The survey uses the panoramic camera T80Camthat provides a large field of view of 2 deg with a pixel scaleof 0.55" pixel − . J-PLUS was primarily conceived to performthe calibration tasks for the main J-PAS survey that will ob- The Javalambre Physics of the Accelerating Universe Astrophys-ical Survey (J-PAS) is a very wide-field cosmological survey to beArticle number, page 2 of 19an Roman et al.: 2D study of J-PLUS galaxies serve a contiguous area of 8500 deg . The specially designedfilter system will cover the optical range with twelve broad-, intermediate-, and narrow-band filters. The photometric filterset is composed of 4 broad ( g , r , i , and z ), 2 intermediate ( u and J J J J J J J and are part of J-PLUS earlydata release (EDR). In addition to the present paper, the J-PLUSEDR and SVD have so far been used to refine the membership innearby galaxy clusters (Molino et al. 2018), analyze the globularcluster M15 (Bonatto et al. 2018), study the H α emission of sev-eral local galaxies (Logroño-García et al. 2018), and compute thestellar and galaxy number counts up to r =
21 (López-Sanjuanet al. 2018).Data processing and calibration is carried out using an au-tomatized pipeline developed and implemented at the Centro deEstudios del Cosmos de Aragón (CEFCA) . The data process-ing includes standard steps such as overscan subtraction, flat-field correction, and rejections of bad pixels and cosmic rays.If needed, fringe corrections are applied to the images. Thepipeline makes use of the packages Scamp (Bertin 2006) and
Swarp (Bertin et al. 2002) to perform the astrometric calibrationand image coadding. The photometric calibration is performedthrough a series of calibration procedures (e.g., based on SDSSobservations and spectrophotometric standard stars) rather thanrelying on a single calibration technique. More technical detailsinvolved in the data processing and calibration procedure can befound in Paper I. Table 1 summarizes the journal of observa-tions and provides basic information on the filters used. We notethat due to the science verification nature of the observations, theexposure times are di ff erent from the general observation condi-tions of J-PLUS. In spite of these peculiarities, SVD is represen-tative of the whole J-PLUS survey and analysis presented in thispaper are directly applicable to future 2D J-PLUS studies (seedetails in Paper I).The target sample of this paper was selected exclusively tostudy common objects observed with both J-PLUS and CALIFAsurveys. For the purposes of this early paper, we focus on theanalysis of spheroidal, large and bright galaxies. This selectioncriteria restrict this work to the study of the only two early-typegalaxies, NGC 5473 and NGC 5485. We note that there are noobjects in common between J-PLUS and any other IFU survey atthe moment (e.g., MaNGA DR14, SAMI DR1, Sauron) exceptfor CALIFA and ATLAS D . The ATLAS D survey also presentsIFU data for the two objects analyzed in this paper. Althoughno direct comparison is made with these observations due to thelimited covered area ( < e ff ) and the small wavelength range(480 – 538 nm) of ATLAS D , a qualitative comparison is madein Sect. 5. Table 2 summarizes the basic properties of the twoobjects analyzed in this study. Figure 2 shows the J-PLUS color conducted from the OAJ with the 2.5m Javalambre Survey Telescope,JST / T250, and the panoramic camera JPCam (4.7 deg field of view). Itwill cover 8500 deg with an unprecedented filter set of 54 contiguous,narrow band optical filters (145 Å width each, placed ∼
100 Å apart)plus two broad filters at the blue and red sides of the optical range, and3 SDSS-like filters. http: // j-plus.es / datareleases http: // / Fig. 1.
Transmission curves of the J-PLUS filter system. The curves arecomputed after accounting for the e ff ects of both the e ffi ciency of theCCD and the atmospheric extinction. images of these objects. Visual inspection of Fig. 2 shows thatwhile NGC 5473 looks like a classical early-type galaxy, NGC5485 is a more complex galaxy with a prominent minor-axis dustlane. CALIFA (Sánchez et al. 2012) is a pioneer wide-field IFS surveyof 667 galaxies in the local universe. The observations were car-ried out with the Potsdam Multi-Aperture Spectrometer (PMAS,Roth et al. 2005) in the PPaK mode (Verheijen et al. 2004) at the3.5m telescope of Calar Alto observatory. PPaK contains 382fibers of 2.7" diameter each and a 74" x 64" field of view. Threedi ff erent spectral setups are available: i) a low-resolution V500setup covering the wavelength range 3745 – 7500 Å with a spec-tral resolution of 6.0 Å (FWHM); ii) a medium-resolution V1200setup covering the wavelength range 3650 – 4840 Å with a spec-tral resolution of 2.3 Å (FWHM); and iii) the combination of thecubes from both, i) and ii), setups (called COMBO) with a spec-tral resolution of 6.0 Å and a wavelength range between 3700– 7500 Å. The target sample has been selected from the photo-metric catalog of Sloan Digital Sky Survey (SDSS, York et al.2000) as a sample limited in the apparent isophotal diameter,45" < isoA r < < z < and belong to the CALIFA DR3.
3. Method
Three di ff erent methodologies are used throughout this work:one single method to process the photometric multi-filter ob- http: // califa.caha.es / Article number, page 3 of 19 & A proofs: manuscript no. Sanroman_JPLUS
Fig. 2.
J-PLUS colored composite images of the objects analyzed in this paper. The red solid line in each panel delimits a ellipse with thesemi-major axis R = e ff . Table 1.
J-PLUS SVD Observation SummaryFilter λ e ff ∆ λ e ff Exp. Time FWHM mean (nm) (nm) (s) (arcsec) u J J J J g J r J i J z ff ective pass band; Col. 4: Exposuretime; Col. 5: Mean Full width at half maximum. servations (J-PLUS / MUFFIT), and two di ff erent techniques toanalyze IFU CALIFA data (CALIFA / STARLIGHT and CAL-IFA / STECKMAP).Single stellar population (SSP) models are a key ingredientto disentangle physical properties of galaxies stellar populations.They are the basis to transform observed quantities to physicalproperties and involve choices among di ff erent IMFs, stellar li-braries, and isochrones. Although several studies show a gen-eral good agreement when using di ff erent model sets, some ev-idence indicates systematic di ff erences associated with the dif-ferent SSP models used (e.g., Coelho, Mendes de Oliveira &Cid Fernandes 2009; Dias et al. 2010; Cid Fernandes et al.2014; Díaz-García et al. 2015; San Roman et al. 2018). To min-imize the di ff erences due to the methodologies, we will per-form the comparison between the three methods described aboveusing the same stellar population models (Bruzual & Charlot2003, BC03 hereafter) except for CALIFA / STARLIGHT thatuses BC03 updated version Charlot & Bruzual (2007, private communication) . These SSPs are an update of BC03 mod-els, where STELIB (Le Borgne et al. 2003) is replaced by theMILES (Sánchez-Blázquez et al. 2006) and GRANADA (Mar-tins et al. 2005; González Delgado et al. 2005) stellar libraries.In addition, the updated version incorporates an improved TP-AGB treatment (Marigo & Girardi 2007). Maraston et al. (2006)have shown that the treatment of the TP-AGB phase of the stel-lar evolution is a source of discrepancy in the determination ofthe spectroscopic age and mass of high-z (1.4 < z < ff erent prescriptionsshow significant di ff erences in the infrared, major discrepanciesare not expected in the optical regime (e.g., Bruzual 2007; Röcket al. 2016). We selected the Padova 1994 tracks (Bressan et al.1993; Fagotto et al. 1994a,b; Girardi et al. 1996) that cover arange of ages from 0.001 to 14 Gyr and metallicities [Fe / H] = –2.3, –1.7, –0.7, –0.4, 0.0, + The method used in this analysis has been extensively describedand tested in San Roman et al. (2018). It can be summarized inthree main steps: the homogenization of the point-spread func-tions (PSF), the spatial binning of the images through a cen-troidal Voronoi tessellation (CVT, Cappellari & Copin 2003),and the SED fitting of each bin. For the SED fitting, we used thecode MUFFIT (MUlti-Filter FITting for stellar population diag-nostics; Díaz-García et al. 2015). MUFFIT is a generic codeoptimized to retrieve the main stellar population parameters ofgalaxies in photometric multi-filter surveys.To perform good-quality multicolor photometry of such widefield of view, PSF homogenization processes are required. PSFvariations cause that the light inside a given aperture is redis-tributed di ff erently across the field of view and from filter-to-filter. These e ff ects may produce artificial structures that couldbias our results (Bertin 2011). To avoid this problem, we per-formed a PSF homogenization in the twelve bands. SExtractor The Charlot & Bruzual (2007) models are available athttp: // / ∼ gbruzual / cb07)Article number, page 4 of 19an Roman et al.: 2D study of J-PLUS galaxies Table 2.
Objects General PropertiesObject CALIFA ID R.A. (J2000.0) Dec. (J2000.0) Hubble Type Environment M B a Redshift b log M JAM c (M (cid:12) )NGC 5473 703 14:04:43.22 + + a B-band absolute magnitude. b Spectroscopic redshift from SDSS. c Dynamical mass inferred from ATLAS D survey (Cappellari et al. 2013). (Bertin & Arnouts 1996) and PSFEx (Bertin 2013) were used inevery image to generate an homogenization kernel, where theworst (widest) PSF value of the image set was chosen as a tar-get PSF. A 2D Mo ff at model is used as a homogenization kernel.The images were convolved with their corresponding kernels us-ing a fast Fourier transform, bringing the images of all the bandsto the same circular PSF. Finally, we need to take into accountthat the homogenization process has consequences in the imagenoise, producing pixel-by-pixel correlations. To correct for this,we recalculate the noise model of the images using the proce-dure described in Labbé et al. (2003) and Molino et al. (2014).This recalculated noise model is then used for computing thephotometric errors.To ensure a reliable determination of the stellar populationparameters we perform a CVT imposing a minimum S / N of 10in the J / N. We note that this choiceis a conservative limit and that slightly lower S / N could extendedthe analysis to larger galactocentric radii (e.g., sacrificing theS / N of 1 out of 12 filters). As mentioned in the introduction,multi-filter techniques allow the analysis of galaxy profiles atlarger galactocentric radii and at higher redshift than spectro-scopic surveys. Although overall this idea is true and IFU-likephotometric techniques can map fainter surface brightness lev-els, for this specific study we have been conservative and onlythe pixels inside the Kron radius of the blue filter J0378, R
Kron ,were included in the analysis. R
Kron is defined by SExtractor as aflexible elliptical aperture that confines most of the flux from anobject and has been empirically tested to enclose >
90% of theobject light. A comprehensive study of MUFFIT performanceon J-PLUS and the dependency with the S / N of each filter isout of the scope of this paper and will be presented in a futurework. The tessellation was then applied to the images in all thefilters, and finally, the photometry of every region in all the fil-ters was determined. For details about the tessellation methodsee San Roman et al. (2018). J-PLUS images are already back-ground subtracted. This subtraction is done globally over the en-tire image. To assure a good background subtraction, we furtherperformed a local sky subtraction considering an area of 100 x100 pixels (55" x 55") around each target galaxy.After performing the CVT and the photometry of every re-gion in every filter is determined, we run MUFFIT to obtain 2Dmaps of di ff erent stellar population properties. The code com-pares the multi-filter fluxes of galaxies with the synthetic pho-tometry of mixtures of two SSPs for a range of redshifts and ex-tinctions through an error-weighted χ approach. Several studieshave shown that the mixture of two SSPs is a suitable and re-liable approach to describe the stellar populations of early-typegalaxies (Rogers et al. 2010; Ferreras & Silk 2000; Kaviraj et al.2007; Lonoce et al. 2014). More recently, Lopez-Corredoiraet al. (2017) fit a set of 20 red galaxies with models of a single-burst SSP, a combination of two SSPs, and an extended star for- mation history. They concluded that exponentially decaying ex-tended star formation models ( τ -models) improve slightly thefits (they have lower average reduced χ ) with respect to single-burst models, but they are considerably worse than the two SSPsbased fits ( χ >
20% larger). They conclude that the models with2 SSPs represent better red galaxies. Based on these studies, weconsider a 2-SSP model fitting approach the best method for ourspecific work.Throughout this work the Fitzpatrick reddening law has beenused (Fitzpatrick 1999) with extinctions values A V in the rangeof 0 to 3.1. This extinction law is suitable for dereddening anyphotospectroscopic data, such as J-PLUS (further details in Fitz-patrick 1999). To minimize the number of free fitting parame-ters we provide MUFFIT with a fixed redshift value. We haveused the spectroscopic redshifts determined by SDSS (Table 2).We note that, in the future, J-PLUS will provide accurate photo-redshifts values for local galaxies (see details in Paper I). The first method for extracting stellar population informationfrom the CALIFA data cubes is based on a full spectral synthe-sis approach using the STARLIGHT code (Cid Fernandes et al.2005). Previous to the spectral fitting, all spaxels containing lightfrom spurious sources (e.g., foreground stars and backgroundgalaxies) are masked. The spaxels with S / N < / N isset to 20, which leaves most of the spaxels inside one half lightradius unbinned.STARLIGHT fits an observed spectrum in terms of a modelbuilt by a linear combination of SSPs from a base spanning dif-ferent ages and metallicities. Dust e ff ects are modeled as a fore-ground screen with a Cardelli, Clayton & Mathis (1989) redden-ing law with R v = γ , H β , [OIII], HeI, [OI], H α , [NII],[SII]). Because of its interstellar absorption component, the NaIdoublet was also masked. A more detailed explanation aboutCALIFA / STARLIGHT process can be found in Cid Fernandeset al. (2013, 2014). The spectra were then processed through PY-CASSO (the Python CALIFA Starlight Synthesis Organizer; deAmorim et al. 2017) producing the results discussed in the nextsections.The star formation histories are derived using two di ff er-ent stellar population models, the Granada (Martins et al. 2005;González Delgado et al. 2005) and the Charlot & Bruzual (2007,private communication). We chose to compare the results withthe latter as these models are very similar to those used in J-PLUS / MUFFIT and CALIFA / STECKMAP. http: // picasso.ufsc.br / Article number, page 5 of 19 & A proofs: manuscript no. Sanroman_JPLUS F i g . . M a ss - w e i gh t e d s t e ll a r popu l a ti onp r op e r ti e s m a p s f o r NG C e t e r m i n e dby J - P L U S / M U FF I T ( fi r s t r o w ) , C A L I F A / S T A R L I GH T ( s ec ond r o w ) a nd C A L I F A / S TE C K M A P ( t h i r d r o w ) . E ac h c o l u m n c o rr e s pond s t o2 D m a p s f o r a g e ( l og A g e ) , m e t a lli c it y ([ F e / H ]) , e x ti n c ti onp a r a m e t e r( A v ) a nd s t e ll a r m a sss u rf ace d e n s it y ( l og µ (cid:63) ) . T h ec o l o rr a ng e i s t h e s a m e f o r t h e d i ff e r e n t m e t hod s . T h ece n t e r o f t h e g a l a xy i s m a r k e d w it h a w h it ec r o ss i n eac hp a n e l . Article number, page 6 of 19an Roman et al.: 2D study of J-PLUS galaxies F i g . . S a m ea s i n F i g . , bu t f o r NG C . Article number, page 7 of 19 & A proofs: manuscript no. Sanroman_JPLUS
The second method for extracting stellar population informa-tion from the CALIFA data cubes is based on a spectralfeature synthesis approach using STECKMAP code (STEl-lar Content and Kinematics via Maximum A Posteriori like-lihood; Ocvirk et al. 2006a,b). Previous to the spectral fit-ting, pre-processing steps include spatial masking of fore-ground / background sources, very low S / N spaxels, and badpixels. Although CALIFA / STECKMAP spatially bins the datacubes using also the centroidal Voronoi tessellation routine de-scribe in Cappellari & Copin (2003), the minimum S / N requiredis more restrictive (40 per Å at 5800Å) than for the CAL-IFA / STARLIGHT method. This conservative restriction pro-duces a di ff erent Voronoi segmentation than the one used inCALIFA / STARLIGHT but ensures a reliable determination ofthe stellar population properties. STECKMAP is run on theemission lines cleaned spectra, where the emission line clean-ing has been performed with the code GANDALF (Sarzi et al.2006).STECKMAP is a Bayesian method that simultaneously re-covers the kinematic and stellar population properties via a max-imum a posteriori algorithm. STECKMAP projects the observedspectrum onto a temporal sequence of models of SSPs to de-termine the linear combination that better fits the observed spec-trum. The stellar content of the object is indicated by the weightsof the various components of this linear combination, thus themethod does not assume the shape of the star formation his-tory. STECKMAP uses a penalized χ that imposes high pe-nalization values for solutions with strong oscillations (i.e., arapid variation of the metallicity with age or a noisy broaden-ing function) and small penalization values for smoothly vary-ing solutions. This initial condition avoids extreme oscillatingsolutions that are not robust and most likely unphysical. We notethat this method does not use the continuum in the derivation ofthe stellar population parameters. The model is multiplied by asmooth non parametric transmission curve. This curve extendsuniformly along the wavelength range. By using this curve toremove the continuum, no extinction correction needs to be ap-plied as dust extinction does not change the equivalent width ofthe absorption lines. Therefore, an extinction law is not assumed.This technique avoids spurious results due to possible flux cali-bration errors or extinction. For details about the analysis methodsee Sánchez-Blázquez et al. (2011, 2014), while the performanceof STECKMAP is described in Ocvirk et al. (2006a,b). The typ-ical STECKMAP outputs give the proportion of stars at each agethat are contributing to the observed flux and to the stellar massand the evolution of the metallicity with time.
4. 2D Maps
As explained in the previous section, J-PLUS / MUFFIT andCALIFA / STARLIGHT provide luminosity- and mass-weightedlog Age, [Fe / H] and A v maps while from the CAL-IFA / STECKMAP outputs we can obtain luminosity- and mass-weighted log Age and [Fe / H] maps. Mass-weighted propertiesare more representative of the whole evolutionary history of thegalaxy since they give insight into its mass assembly history. Onthe other hand, luminosity-weighted properties are better con-strained and more sensitive to the fingerprints of the most re-cent periods of star formation in the galaxy. Throughout thisstudy, we analyze both mass- and luminosity-weighted prop-erties. We present in this section the mass-weighted properties
Fig. 5.
Covariance error ellipses of the stellar population parametersfor NGC 5473 (top panel) and NGC 5485 (bottom panel) using J-PLUS / MUFFIT. maps. For completeness, Appendix A includes the luminosity-weighted maps. v and stellar mass surface density Figures 3 and 4 show the 2D maps of the stellar populations forNGC 5473 and NGC 5485 derived with the di ff erent methods.The maps were shifted to center the galaxies and facilitate thecomparison. The center of each galaxies (white crosses in each2D maps) has been derived using the IRAF task ELLIPSE tofit elliptical isophotes to the stellar mass surface density maps.Isophotes were fitted between 0.1 arcsec and the largest mea-surable semi-major axis. The overall center position was deter-mined as the average of ELLIPSE output between 0.5 and 1.5arcsec along the semi-major axis where the measurements aremore reliable.Figure 3 shows some di ff erences between the values de-rived by each method. NGC 5473 shows in the J-PLUS / MUFFITmaps a smooth behavior in log Age M , [Fe / H] M , and A v Article number, page 8 of 19an Roman et al.: 2D study of J-PLUS galaxies
Fig. 6.
Maps with data and fit quality indicators for NGC 5473 determined by J-PLUS / MUFFIT (top panels), CALIFA / STARLIGHT (middlepanels) and CALIFA / STECKMAP (bottom panels) . The center of the galaxy is marked with a white cross in each panel. suggesting flat age and metallicity gradients. These resultsare in agreement with the relatively flat age and metallic-ity maps derived by CALIFA / STECKMAP. In contrast, CAL-IFA / STARLIGHT map suggests a mild negative age gradient.In addition, the upper part of the galaxy seems to be moremetal-rich than the lower part in the CALIFA / STARLIGHTmetallicity map. Significant di ff erences in the extinction pa-rameter, A v , are found between J-PLUS / MUFFIT and CAL-IFA / STARLIGHT. While J-PLUS / MUFFIT obtained a signif-icant dust component, smoothly distributed within the galaxy,the CALIFA / STARLIGHT analysis finds A v = ∆ X, ∆ Y = –20", 15") visible in theCALIFA / STECKMAP corresponds to a background galaxy notmasked during the pre-processing steps.NGC 5485 (Fig. 4) also presents a relative smooth logAge M and [Fe / H] M maps in J-PLUS / MUFFIT, but a higher ex-tinction area (A v ∼ v map. This high extinction seems to be asso-ciated with the prominent minor-axis dust lane visible in thecolored images (Fig. 2). We note that the [Fe / H] map shows a slightly more metal-rich population in that specific area thatcould be produce by a potential metallicity-extinction degen-eracy. CALIFA / STARLIGHT is also able to detect the promi-nent dust lane although A v values are significantly lower thanthe values obtained by J-PLUS / MUFFIT. CALIFA / STECKMAPshows smooth log Age M and [Fe / H] M maps, although obtainsan older population. The log Age M map determined by CAL-IFA / STARLIGHT exhibits an older component in the cen-ter of the galaxy not present in J-PLUS / MUFFIT or CAL-IFA / STECKMAP maps. This old component seems to have thesame position, size and orientation than the dust line cross-ing the galaxy. We checked that the general results do notsignificantly vary for luminosity-weighted parameters (see theluminosity-weighted maps in Appendix A). In a recent study,Martin-Navarro et al. (2018) present a spatially-resolved stellarpopulations analysis of a sample of 45 elliptical galaxies usingthe CALIFA survey. They measure the stellar population prop-erties (age, metallicity, and [Mg / Fe]) via standard line-strengthanalysis of the indices H β o , Fe4383, Fe5015, Fe5270, and Mgb(Worthey et al. 1994; Burstein et al. 1984). Overall, they find flatage gradients and negative metallicity gradients. We note that Article number, page 9 of 19 & A proofs: manuscript no. Sanroman_JPLUS
Fig. 7.
Same as in Fig. 6, but for NGC 5485. their galaxy sample includes NGC 5485. Visual inspection ofthe NGC 5485 age map does not show any evidence for the oldstellar component present in the CALIFA / STARLIGHT map.Although some degeneracies are unavoidable, analysis oftheir extension and potential e ff ects are crucial in order to avoidany misinterpretation. To address the degeneracy problem, weuse the stellar population values recovered by MUFFIT duringthe Monte Carlo approach for both objects in every bin of the tes-sellation. This approach assumes an independent Gaussian dis-tribution in each filter, centered on the band flux or magnitude,with a standard deviation equal to its photometric error. Figure5 presents the 2D confidence intervals. The ellipses are obtainedfrom the covariance matrix of each distribution and followingthe method used in Díaz-García et al. (2015). A value of the el-lipticity close to zero implies no degeneracy between the twoparameters. Furthermore, when the position angle lies on any ofthe two axes (position angle multiple of π / v and the other two parameters. This means that a stellar popu-lation reddened by extinction can mimic a metal-rich populationor an old one. J-PLUS / MUFFIT provides typical uncertainties of ∆ log Age M = ∆ [Fe / H] M = ∆ A v = / STARLIGHT doesnot provide direct error estimates in its output. Based on sim-ulations by Cid Fernandes et al. (2014) and de Amorim et al.(2017), estimated uncertainties of physical quantities obtainedby STARLIGHT are ∆ Age M = ∆ [Fe / H] M = ∆ A v = Despite the general high quality data of CALIFA and J-PLUS,variations in data quality across the image of a given galaxyor from galaxy-to-galaxy can produce biased results. In addi-tion, a poor fit can be produced even from good quality data
Article number, page 10 of 19an Roman et al.: 2D study of J-PLUS galaxies
Fig. 8.
Distribution of the residuals of the best fitting for each J-PLUSfilter (enclosed colored regions). The color scheme correspond to Fig.1. The black symbols and bars correspond to the medians and the in-terquartile range for each distribution. (e.g., an unmasked emission line). Therefore, it is importantto perform a quality control check of the data and the fit.Figs. 6 and 7 show the di ff erent data and fit quality maps re-ported by J-PLUS / MUFFIT, CALIFA / STARLIGHT, and CAL-IFA / STECKMAP for NGC 5473 and NGC 5485, respectively.J-PLUS / MUFFIT shows as quality indicators the bin-by-binS / N in the filter J J χ map of the SED fitting (first row of Figs. 6and 7). The reference filter J / N in the J / N >
20 in the J χ map of ev-ery object is inspected as a goodness-of-fit quality check (Figs.6b and 7b). A detailed definition of the error-weighted χ mini-mization process can be found in Sec. 3.2.1 of Díaz-García et al.(2015). Although generally speaking, a value of χ ∼ χ should be considered only as anindicator because strongly depends on the photometric errors es-timate. χ maps show small values in both cases. Visual inspec-tion of the error maps (Figs. 6c and 7c) does not show evidenceof significantly higher photometric errors that could suggest anyartificial feature. Finally the distribution of the residuals of thebest fitting are also examined. Figure 8 shows the distributionof the residuals for each filter. We note that while the red filtersare always well fitted producing a small median residual and asmall interquartile range (black symbols), the blue filters showa larger residual distribution. In particular, median residuals forfilters J0395 and J0410 are ∼ ff ect could be a con-sequence of the calibration technique performed since the zeropoint uncertainties of those filters are larger than in the rest of thefilters. J-PLUS calibration applies a series of calibration proce-dures rather than relying on a single calibration technique. Whilethe photometric calibration in some filters is performed based onSDSS spectroscopic observations, photometric SDSS observa-tions are used to calibrate the bands uncovered by SDSS spectra.The spectrophotometric standard star technique is critical in thecalibration of the J0378 filter, since neither SDSS photometrynor SDSS spectroscopy cover this bandpass. Although this pro-cedure has the advantage of providing an independent calibra-tion for each filter, by combining the information from di ff erentbands, it is also possible to apply methods that enable to anchorthe calibration across the spectral range. One particular promis-ing approach is the use of the stellar locus method (e.g. Highet al. 2009). The stellar locus approach for the calibration ofJ-PLUS is currently under development but preliminary resultssuggest consistent zero point calibrations over the full J-PLUSspectral range with σ zp (cid:46) / STARLIGHT method. The spaxels with ar-tifacts, foreground objects, and very low S / N ( <
3) are maskedand appear as white regions in the maps. The spaxels with S / Nlower than 20 in the 5635 ±
45 Å band are binned into Voronoizones (e.g., two or more spaxels are contained in a given zone).As shown by Figs. 6d and 7d, only the very outer parts of eachgalaxy are a ff ected by low S / N spaxels. After the Voronoi bin-ning, all the spectra have S / N >
20 at 5635 Å. Figs 6e and 7epresent the reduced χ for the CALIFA / STARLIGHT analysis.As discussed previously, χ is closely tied to the uncertaintyof the spectra, meaning that inspection of Figs 6e and 7e maylead to the wrong conclusion that the fits are worse in the cen-tral regions than in the outskirts. Based on this argument, CAL-IFA / STARLIGHT provides also the mean absolute model devi-ation, ∆ maps (Figs. 6f and 7f). ∆ does not depend explicitlyon the uncertainties so it is a more appropriate measure of thefit quality. A detailed definition of χ and ∆ can be found in CidFernandes et al. (2013). As noted by Cid Fernandes et al. (2013),the inspection of the highest ∆ spectra often reveals non-maskedemission lines or artifacts. The median ∆ value for the ∼ CALIFA analyzed spectra was 4% (corresponding to an equiva-lent S / N of 25), and in less than 2% of the cases ∆ exceeds 10%.As explained in Sec. 3, the Voronoi tessellation is di ff erentfor each method. Although ideally the same binning segmenta-tion should be used for a fair comparison (i.e., same areas / spectraof the object are compared), in practice this is not convenient.Di ff erent observing conditions between J-PLUS and CALIFAwould require degrading J-PLUS quality data to match CALIFApoint-spread function and spatial resolution (e.g., strong homog-enization of the data). Even when considering the same observ- Article number, page 11 of 19 & A proofs: manuscript no. Sanroman_JPLUS ing data (CALIFA / STARLIGHT and CALIFA / STECKMAP),the peculiarities of each method require a di ff erent treatmentto ensure a reliable determination of the output parameters(e.g., di ff erent minimum S / N required). For these reasons, eachmethod has been applied under the best possible conditions andproduce di ff erent S / N and binning maps (Figs. 6 and 7) from sur-vey to survey (J-PLUS versus CALIFA) and also from techniqueto technique (STARLIGHT versus STECKMAP).
5. Radial profiles
To quantify radial variations of the galaxies properties,we present in Figs. 9 and 10 the mass- and luminosity-weighted radial profiles of the stellar population parameters. J-PLUS / MUFFIT profiles were obtained following the techniquedescribed in San Roman et al. (2018). They plot the stellar prop-erties values of each bin in each galaxy as a function of the cir-cularized galactocentric distance, R (cid:48) (see their eq. 3). The finalprofiles were obtained by averaging the stellar population prop-erties of the sample in constant bins of 0.2 R e ff for 0 ≤ R ≤ e ff . The errors correspond to the standard deviation of the meanin each bin. CALIFA / STARLIGHT and CALIFA / STECKMAPprofiles were derived by binning the output values into ellipticalannuli that are scaled in along the major axis such that the binsare constant in e ff ective radius. Elliptical apertures of 0.1 R e ff areused to extract the radial profiles. These azimuthally averaged ra-dial profiles assume a priori symmetry in the stellar population ofthe galaxies by directly collapsing the information to a 1D plot.Same position angles, ellipticities and R e ff are used to obtain J-PLUS / MUFFIT and CALIFA / STECKMAP profiles. Along thesemi-major axis R (cid:48) = R, so the profiles derived by the di ff erenttechniques are directly comparable. Enclosed shadowed regionscorrespond to the uncertainties of each profile.Figures 9 and 10 show an o ff set between the di ff erentmethodologies with di ff erences up to ∆ log Age = ∆ [Fe / H] = ff er-ences between the three methods seems to be the most plausi-ble reason for the di ff erent absolute values of the derived stellarparameters. The discrepancies between the analysis of spectralfeatures versus colors, together with the assumptions of di ff er-ent star formation histories may be responsible for the quanti-tative discrepancies. For each individual method, the age andmetallicity radial profiles are very similar (i.e., same gradient)when luminosity- and mass-weighted properties are used. Thisresult agrees with previous studies (San Roman et al. 2018;González Delgado et al. 2014), and confirms that the contribu-tion of the second SSP (the younger component) is small and thestar formation history of early-type galaxies is well representedby mainly an old SSP component.The radial profiles shapes, however, show clear di ff erencesbetween the three methodologies. NGC 5473 (Fig. 9) shows flator slightly negative age profiles in J-PLUS / MUFFIT and CAL-IFA / STECKMAP analysis while the CALIFA / STARLIGHT ageprofile is significantly steeper. The metallicity profiles are neg-ative in all the cases although the J-PLUS / MUFFIT metallic-ity gradient seems flatter than in the other two methods. Onthe other side, NGC 5485 profiles present significant di ff erencesfrom method to method, more clearly evident in the age pro-files. While J-PLUS / MUFFIT and CALIFA / STECKMAP showsimilar flat age gradients, CALIFA / STARLIGHT presents a u-shaped log Age M profile with a strong negative age gradi-ent inside 1.5 R e ff that becomes positive at larger radii. Theluminosity-weighted age profile, log Age L , of STARLIGHT alsopresents significant di ff erences with the other methods showing Table 3.
Ages and metallicities values determined within di ff erentcircular aperture using Lick index measurements (SSP) and mass-weighted parameters from spectral fitting (SFH) by the ATLAS D sur-vey. NGC 5473 NGC 5485R circ Age
SSP [Fe / H] SSP
Age
SSP [Fe / H] SSP (Gyrs) (Gyrs)R e ff / ± ± ± ± e ff / ± ± ± ± e ff ± ± ± ± SFH [Fe / H] SFH
Age
SHF [Fe / H] SHF (Gyrs) (Gyrs)R e ff ± ± ± ± a strong negative inner ( < e ff ) gradient that flattens at largerradii. The slightly negative [Fe / H] profiles seem to be compati-ble between the di ff erent methods. Results of J-PLUS / MUFFITof the stellar extinction behavior are consistent with a flat orslightly negative A v profile with a constant A v ∼ / STARLIGHT results show a dust-free content (A v =
0) atR > e ff with inner regions showing A v < µ (cid:63) ,also show di ff erences in the structures where J-PLUS / MUFFITpresents a more linear decline in the profiles. These di ff erencesin the stellar mass surface density may be a consequence of thelarge di ff erences in the extinction parameter.Overall, Figs. 9 and 10 show that the profiles obtained byJ-PLUS / MUFFIT and CALIFA / STECKMAP present a linearbehavior with the galactocentric distance (i.e., flat age gradi-ent and negative metallicity gradient). On the contrary, CAL-IFA / STARLIGHT presents non-linear profiles (i.e., negative gra-dients in the inner part of the galaxies ( < R e ff ) that flatten atlarger galactocentric distances) producing di ff erent inner andouter gradients.As mentioned previously, ATLAS D survey observed ourtwo target objects using SAURON spectrograph. These IFU ob-servations are limited by a small wavelength range (480 – 538nm) and focused on the very center of the galaxies. They de-termined the stellar population content applying two methods:one based on measuring line-strength indices and applying SSPmodels to derive SSP-equivalent values; and another one basedon spectral fitting to derive non-parametric star formation histo-ries, mass-weighted average values of age, metallicity and half-mass formation timescales. Using spectra integrated within threeapertures covering up to one e ff ective radius (R e ff /
8, R e ff / e ff ), McDermid et al. (2015) obtain average values of ageand metallicity based on measuring the Lick indices H β , Fe5015,Mgb, and Fe5270 (Worthey et al. 1994) and using SSP models.Age values inferred at di ff erent apertures show that the youngstars are more centrally concentrated implying positive age gra-dients. The derived metallicity becomes lower at larger aper-tures, due to the inclusion of the metal-poor outer regions. To ob-tain the mass-weighted parameters from spectral fitting, they usethe penalized pixel fitting code pPXF (Cappellari & Emsellem2004) to fit a linear combination of SSP model spectra from theMIUSCAT model library (Vazdekis et al. 2012). They fit theintegrated spectra within one e ff ective radius. We note that theages and metallicities obtained by McDermid et al. (2015) are Article number, page 12 of 19an Roman et al.: 2D study of J-PLUS galaxies
Fig. 9.
Mass-weighted (solid lines) and luminosity-weighted (dashed lines) radial profiles for NGC 5473 of log Age, [Fe / H], A v and log µ (cid:63) for thethree di ff erent methods. Enclosed shadowed regions correspond to the uncertainties of each profile. integrated aperture measurements so are not directly compara-ble with the radial profiles presented in Figs. 9 and 10. The agesand values are presented in Table 3. The results of ATLAS D for NGC 5485 would agree with the flat or slightly positive agegradient found by J-PLUS / MUFFIT and CALIFA / STECKMAPup to one e ff ective radius, however they would contrast with thestrong negative age gradient observed in CALIFA / STARLIGHTprofile for the same area.
6. Stellar mass-to-light ratio
Stellar masses play a crucial role in the study of galaxy proper-ties and the evolution of the galaxy population. Even though itis generally accepted that the analysis of galaxies by their esti-mated stellar masses rather than observed luminosities providesa more physical insight, it is also recognized that we are lim-ited by a number of statistical and systematic uncertainties whentranslating observational quantities into physical parameters. Be-sides the accuracy of the population synthesis models used to in-terpret observations (e.g., di ff erent stellar libraries or particularstellar evolutionary phases), dust attenuation is a key uncertaintyin stellar mass, M (cid:63) , and mass-to-light ratio, M (cid:63) / L, values. Al-though dust can a ff ect also absorption features like the 4000Å-break (MacArthur 2005), this uncertainty is especially relevantwhen using color information in the analysis (e.g., Zibetti, Char-lot & Rix 2009; Sorba & Sawicki 2015). If the attenuation ispatchy, such as the case of NGC 5485, using spatially resolvedM (cid:63) and M (cid:63) / L and then integrating the results galaxy-wide, re- duces this systematic uncertainty (e.g., Zibetti, Charlot & Rix2009; Sorba & Sawicki 2015).Figure 11 shows the M (cid:63) / L maps derived with J-PLUS / MUFFIT for NGC 5473 and NGC 5485. M (cid:63) / L ratios arederived considering the J J (cid:63) / L is almost constant across both galaxies, althoughNGC 5485 presents a significant increase in M (cid:63) / L clearly as-sociated with the minor-axis dust lane. Table 4 presents the logM (cid:63) resolved and (M (cid:63) / L) resolved , obtained integrating the spatiallyresolved maps.
7. Integrated properties
In addition to the spatially resolved stellar properties of eachgalaxy, we also determined the global stellar properties ofthe two galaxies. Table 4 summarizes the global propertiesof the two galaxies determined using the integrated photome-try for J-PLUS / MUFFIT, and the integrated spectra for CAL-IFA / STARLIGHT and CALIFA / STECKMAP.Table 4 shows some discrepancies between the global prop-erties of the galaxies analyzed by J-PLUS / MUFFIT, CAL-IFA / STARLIGHT, and CALIFA / STECKMAP. Di ff erences canreach up to ∆ log Age = ∆ Age ∼ ∆ Fe / H = Article number, page 13 of 19 & A proofs: manuscript no. Sanroman_JPLUS
Fig. 10.
Same as in Fig. 9, but for NGC 5485.
MUFFIT and ALHAMBRA reveal good qualitative agreementbut a systematic di ff erence of ∼ ff set, they conclude that the existence of intrinsic system-atic di ff erences between the two methods seems to be the mostplausible reason for the di ff erence in the absolute values of thederived ages. More significant are the di ff erences between theextinction parameters obtained by the di ff erent methods.To closely inspect any potential systematic e ff ect between J-PLUS and CALIFA data, we compare directly the photo-spectraanalyzed by J-PLUS and the integrated spectra of CALIFA. Fig-ure 12 shows the comparison between the integrated spectra in a3" diameter fiber of SDSS, CALIFA and the photo-spectrum ofJ-PLUS for NGC 5485. The spectra are normalized to the r band.We note that SDSS does not provide the NGC 5473 spectrum sothe analogous comparison for this object can not be shown. Wealso note that the apertures used are not exactly equivalent. TheCALIFA extraction is made in a 3" x 3" area centered in thecontinuum peak of the V500 spectral setup while the integratedJ-PLUS photo-spectrum is obtained using a circular aperture of3" diameter. In addition, the precise position of the SDSS fiber isunknown producing potential di ff erences in the aperture center-ing. In spite of these di ff erences both observations closely followthe SDSS spectrum. This is not surprising since the calibrationof J-PLUS and CALIFA observations are anchored to SDSS. Inorder to ultimately compare the three methodologies, we haveperformed the analysis on this spectra / pseudospectra where thespectra and the photometry concur. Table 5 shows the resultsof J-PLUS / MUFFIT on the 3" integrated photometry, and theresults of CALIFA / STARLIGHT and CALIFA / STECKMAP on the same 3"x 3" integrated spectra. Overall, di ff erences reachup to ∆ log Age = ∆ Age ∼ ∆ Fe / H = ff erences between the ex-tinction parameters obtained by J-PLUS / MUFFIT and CAL-IFA / STARLIGHT are very large. The assumption of di ff erentstar formation histories or the di ff erent spectral range coveredby CALIFA and J-PLUS may be responsible for the quantita-tive discrepancies. More remarkable are the di ff erences betweenCALIFA / STARLIGHT and CALIFA / STECKMAP. Even whenthe same spectra and very similar stellar population models areused (see Sect. 3) discrepancies are significant reaching ∆ logAge M = ∆ Age M = ∆ Fe / H M = ff erences and to clearly quantifythem.
8. Discussion
Early-type galaxies were once considered uniform stellar sys-tems with little gas, dust and nuclear activity. We now know thatearly-type galaxies commonly contain large amount of dust ineither organized or complex structures (e.g., Sadler & Gerhard1985; van Dokkum & Franx 1995; Tran et al. 2001). In a frac-tion of the early-type galaxy population, the dust is organizedin prominent and large-scale dust lanes. These so-called dust-lane early-type galaxies are considered to be the remnants of re-cent gas-rich minor mergers with a low star-formation e ffi ciency(Hawarden et al. 1981; Kaviraj et al. 2012; Shabala et al. 2012;Davis et al. 2015). If we assume that dust and gas settle in the Article number, page 14 of 19an Roman et al.: 2D study of J-PLUS galaxies
Table 4.
Global stellar population properties of the galaxies using the integrated photometry / spectraNGC 5473 log Age L log Age M [Fe / H] L [Fe / H] M A v log M (cid:63) (dex) (dex) (dex) (dex) (mag) (M (cid:12) )J-PLUS / MUFFIT 9.92 ± ± ± ± ± / STARLIGHT 9.89 9.97 0.08 0.16 0.0 10.62CALIFA / STECKMAP 9.83 ± ± ± ± L log Age M [Fe / H] L [Fe / H] M A v log M (cid:63) (dex) (dex) (dex) (dex) (mag) (M (cid:12) )J-PLUS / MUFFIT 9.93 ± ± ± ± ± / STARLIGHT 9.85 9.92 0.05 0.12 0.0 10.49CALIFA / STECKMAP 9.88 ± ± ± ± Table 5.
Global stellar population properties of the galaxies using the integrated photometry / spectra in a 3" aperture.NGC 5485 log Age L log Age M [Fe / H] L [Fe / H] M A v (Gyrs) (Gyrs) (dex) (dex) (mag)J-PLUS / MUFFIT 9.76 ± ± ± ± ± / STARLIGHT 9.96 10.09 0.40 0.30 0.0CALIFA / STECKMAP 9.87 ± ± ± ± principal planes of a galaxy, the existence of a minor axis dustlane in NGC 5485 is a visual evidence for its triaxiality. Thistriaxiality is also supported by its rather exceptional kinematicalstructure, which shows strong minor-axis rotation – prolate ro-tation – (Wagner, Bender & Moellenho ff ff erent formation scenario. Theyfind that a prolate early-type galaxy, such as NGC 5485, mayhave been formed by gas-poor, polar major merger that happened10 Gyr ago. The galaxy was imaged in H α by Finkelman et al.(2010) who detected an ionized gas disk that closely follow thedust structure. They find that the H α emission and color of NGC5485 is consistent with the presence of an old stellar population( ∼ ∼ ff ects maycontribute to the excitation of the warm ionized medium (e.g.,Dopita & Sutherland 1995; Stasi´nska et al. 2008; Papaderos et al.2013).As shown in Fig. 4, the age maps of NGC 5485 presentsignificant di ff erences between the 3 methodologies. If the oldstellar component, aligned with the dust lane, present in theCALIFA / STARLIGHT maps is a real feature, the stellar com-ponent could be associated with the NGC 5485 kinematic struc-ture and would favor the polar major merger scenario at 10 Gyrs.This interpretation would not however explain the absence of the aligned old stellar component in the CALIFA / STECKMAP andJ-PLUS / MUFFIT maps. It would also contrast the centrally con-centrated young stars found by ATLAS D . On the other hand,if the position, size and orientation of the old component in theCALIFA / STARLIGHT is an artificial feature, this will suggestthat a potential age-extinction degeneracy could be a ff ecting theresults. This means that a stellar population reddened by the oldcontent can mimic the behavior of a population that has beenreddened by extinction. Overall, MaNGA early-type galaxies ex-hibit relatively flat radial profiles with reddening values betweenE(B–V) ∼ to A v ∼ = v = (i.e., absence of a dustystructure) reveals that the main source of discrepancies are due tothe actual methodologies and not the singularities of the objects.IFU MaNGA studies also show discrepant conclusions whenanalyzing the same galaxy sample but using di ff erent spectral fit-ting techniques. Goddard et al. (2017), using the full spectral fit-ting code FIREFLY (Wilkinson et al. 2015, 2017) and the spec-tral population models of Maraston & Strömbäck (2011), foundflat luminosity-weighted age gradients inside R < R e ff . Contrary,styding the same data set but using the full spectral fitting codeSTARLIGHT and BC03 models, Zheng et al. (2017) found aslightly negative gradient (– 0.05 dex / R e ff ) at the same galac-tocentric distances. Goddard et al. (2017) perform a compari-son between fitting codes and stellar population models. Theyconclude that overall, the luminosity-weighted ages are a ff ected Considering R v = A v / E(B–V) and assuming a value of R v = We note that although visual inspection reveals no photometric pecu-liarities suggesting that NGC 5473 is an elliptical galaxy, the morpho-kinematic study of Mendez-Abreu et al. (2017) suggests that NGC 5473is a S0 galaxy. Article number, page 15 of 19 & A proofs: manuscript no. Sanroman_JPLUS
Fig. 11.
Stellar mass-to-light ratio maps determined by J-PLUS / MUFFIT for NGC 5473 (top panel) and NGC 5485 (bottompanel). The center of the galaxy is marked with a white cross in eachpanel. by systematic o ff sets between the various codes and underly-ing stellar population models of the order of –0.13 dex with alarge scatter of 0.37 dex. The comparison for the luminosity-weighted metallicity is even more complex showing an overalldi ff erence of – 0.24 dex with a large scatter of 0.34 dex. Whenthe dependence of the stellar population models is isolated (i.e.,same stellar population models are used), the choice of fittingtechnique also yield significant e ff ects producing age o ff sets of–0.04 ± ff sets of –0.11 ± ff erence between both techniques is the treat-ment of dust: while STARLIGHT assumes a dust reddening law,FIREFLY is parameter free, because it does not fit the continuumshape to constrain the stellar population properties. Di ff erencesin the extinction treatment method of our study are also present(Sect. 3).The age and metallicity measurements are considerably af-fected by systematic di ff erences, not only because of the stellarpopulation models used, but also based on the fitting techniquechosen. As a consequence, measurements of quantities such as Fig. 12.
Comparison between the integrated spectra in a 3" diameterfiber of SDSS, CALIFA and the photo-spectrum of J-PLUS for NGC5485. The color scheme correspond to Fig. 1. Error bars correspond tothe photometric errors. age gradients are a ff ected by uncertainties of similar magnitudeas the signal itself. This problem clearly requires more inves-tigation to include other spectral fitting codes. Future work isrequired to evaluate in detail the origin of these di ff erences andexplore possible paths to mitigate them.
9. Summary and conclusions
We illustrate the scientific potential of J-PLUS data to explorethe spatially resolved stellar populations of local galaxies us-ing a method that combines a centroidal Voronoi tessellationand MUFFIT multi-filter SED fitting method. This techniqueallows us to analyze unresolved stellar populations of spatiallyresolved galaxies based on multi-filter photometry. We presentdetailed 2D maps of stellar population properties (age, metallic-ity, extinction, and stellar mass surface density) for two early-type galaxies: NGC 5473 and NGC 5485. Radial structureswere also obtained and luminosity- and mass-weighted pro-files were derived out to R = e ff . J-PLUS / MUFFIT resultswere compared with analysis from IFU CALIFA data for thesame galaxies. Two di ff erent techniques to analyze IFU CAL-IFA were used: STARLIGHT and STECKMAP. We demon-strate that our alternative technique derives radial stellar popu-lation gradients in good agreement with IFU technique such asCALIFA / STECKMAP but di ff ers when CALIFA / STARLIGHTmethodology is used.Comparison of the absolute values reveals the existenceof intrinsic systematic di ff erences between the three meth-ods. Di ff erences are also found in the 2D maps. While NGC5473 shows flat age and slightly negative metallicity profiles,NGC 5485 age and extinction profiles are more challenging.CALIFA / STARLIGHT shows an older component in the cen-ter of the galaxy not present in the J-PLUS / MUFFIT andCALIFA / STECKMAP analysis. This older component has thesame position, size and orientation that the prominent dust linevisible along the minor-axis of the galaxy. Although CAL-IFA / STARLIGHT detects the dust feature in the A v map,values are significantly lower than the ones obtained by J- Article number, page 16 of 19an Roman et al.: 2D study of J-PLUS galaxies
PLUS / MUFFIT. Radial profile shape of NGC 5485 also presentsa di ff erent behavior between di ff erent methodologies. CAL-IFA / STARLIGHT presents a u-shaped age profile with strongnegative age gradient inside 1.5 R e ff that become positive atlarger radii while a flat age gradient is present in the J-PLUS / MUFFIT and CALIFA / STECKMAP analysis.For each methodology, the age and metallicity radial profilesare very similar when luminosity- or mass-weighted propertiesare used, suggesting that the mass assembly of the early-typegalaxies NGC 5473 and NGC 5485 are followed by their lumi-nosity components.Although discrepancies between the analysis of spectral fea-tures and colors together with di ff erent star formation historiesassumptions and the di ff erent spectral range may be responsi-ble for the discrepancies between J-PLUS / MUFFIT and CAL-IFA / STECKMAP, significant o ff sets are also present when sim-ilar analysis conditions are present (e.g., CALIFA / STARLIGHTversus CALIFA / STECKMAP). This result suggests that the spe-cific characteristics of each methodology such as the extinctiontreatment used may cause important di ff erences. We concludethat the ages, metallicities and extinction derived for individualgalaxies not only depend on the chosen models but also dependon the methodology used. This problem clearly requires moreinvestigation to evaluate in detail the origin of these di ff erences.Finally, we remark that although detailed investigations willrequire larger data sets, it is clear that photometric surveys suchas the current J-PLUS (Paper I) and the upcoming J-PAS (Ben-itez et al. 2014) will extend 2D multi-filter studies such as theone presented here to scientific cases not available to current IFUtechniques (e.g., larger galactocentric distances, e ff ect of the en-vironments on the 2D structures, ...) Acknowledgements.
We thank Rosa M. González Delgado for the fruitful dis-cussions and the helpful comments. Based on observations made with theJAST / T80 telescope at the Observatorio Astrofísico de Javalambre (OAJ), inTeruel, owned, managed and operated by the Centro de Estudios de Física delCosmos de Aragón. We acknowledge the OAJ Data Processing and Archiv-ing Unit (UPAD) for reducing and calibrating the OAJ data used in this work.Funding for the J-PLUS Project has been provided by the Governments ofSpain and Aragón through the Fondo de Inversiones de Teruel, the Aragón Gov-ernment through the Reseach Groups E96 and E103, the Spanish Ministry ofEconomy and Competitiveness (MINECO; under grants AYA2015-66211-C2-1-P, AYA2015-66211-C2-2, AYA2012-30789 and ICTS-2009-14), and EuropeanFEDER funding (FCDD10-4E-867, FCDD13-4E-2685). The Brazilian agenciesFAPESP and the National Observatory of Brazil have also contributed to thisproject. R.L.O. was partially supported by the Brazilian agency CNPq (Univer-sal Grants 459553 / / / References
Astropy Collaboration et al., 2013, A&A, 558, A33Baes M. et al., 2014, MNRAS, 444, L90Benitez N. et al., 2014, [arXiv:1403.5237]Bershady M. A., Verheijen M. A. W., Swaters R. A., Andersen D. R., WestfallK. B., Martinsson T., 2010, ApJ, 716, 198Bertin E., 2006, in Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series, Vol.351, Astronomical Data Analysis Software and Systems XV, Gabriel C.,Arviset C., Ponz D., Enrique S., eds., p. 112Bertin E., 2011, in Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series, Vol.442, Astronomical Data Analysis Software and Systems XX, Evans I. N.,Accomazzi A., Mink D. J., Rots A. H., eds., p. 435Bertin E., 2013, PSFEx: Point Spread Function Extractor. Astrophysics SourceCode LibraryBertin E., Arnouts S., 1996, A&AS, 117, 393 Bertin E., Mellier Y., Radovich M., Missonnier G., Didelon P., Morin B., 2002,in Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series, Vol. 281, Astro-nomical Data Analysis Software and Systems XI, Bohlender D. A., DurandD., Handley T. H., eds., p. 228Blanc G. A. et al., 2010, in Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Se-ries, Vol. 432, New Horizons in Astronomy: Frank N. Bash Symposium 2009,Stanford L. M., Green J. D., Hao L., Mao Y., eds., p. 180Boardman N. F. et al., 2017, MNRAS, 471, 4005Bonatto C., Chies-Santos A. L., Coelho P. R. T., J-PLUS collaboration, 2018,A&A, submittedBressan A., Fagotto F., Bertelli G., Chiosi C., 1993, A&AS, 100, 647Bruzual A. G., 2007, in IAU Symposium, Vol. 241, Stellar Populations as Build-ing Blocks of Galaxies, Vazdekis A., Peletier R., eds., pp. 125–132Bruzual G., Charlot S., 2003, MNRAS, 344, 1000Bundy K. et al., 2015, ApJ, 798, 7Burstein D., Faber S. M., Gaskell C. M., Krumm N., 1984, ApJ, 287, 586Cappellari M., Copin Y., 2003, MNRAS, 342, 345Cappellari M., Emsellem E., 2004, PASP, 116, 138Cappellari M. et al., 2011, MNRAS, 413, 813Cappellari M. et al., 2013, MNRAS, 432, 1709Cardelli J. A., Clayton G. C., Mathis J. S., 1989, ApJ, 345, 245Castander F. J. et al., 2012, in Proc. SPIE, Vol. 8446, Ground-based and AirborneInstrumentation for Astronomy IV, p. 84466DCenarro A. J., Cristóbal-Hornillos D., Marín-Franch A., J-PLUS collaboration,2018, A&A, submittedChabrier G., 2003, PASP, 115, 763Cid Fernandes R. et al., 2014, A&A, 561, A130Cid Fernandes R., Mateus A., Sodré L., Stasi´nska G., Gomes J. M., 2005, MN-RAS, 358, 363Cid Fernandes R. et al., 2013, A&A, 557, A86Coelho P., Mendes de Oliveira C., Cid Fernandes R., 2009, MNRAS, 396, 624Colless M. et al., 2001, MNRAS, 328, 1039Cook B. A., Conroy C., Pillepich A., Rodriguez-Gomez V., Hernquist L., 2016,ApJ, 833, 158Covey K. R. et al., 2007, AJ, 134, 2398Croom S. M. et al., 2012, MNRAS, 421, 872Davis T. A. et al., 2015, MNRAS, 449, 3503de Amorim A. L. et al., 2017, ArXiv e-printsde Zeeuw P. T. et al., 2002, MNRAS, 329, 513Dias B., Coelho P., Barbuy B., Kerber L., Idiart T., 2010, A&A, 520, A85Díaz-García L. A. et al., 2015, A&A, 582, A14Dopita M. A., Sutherland R. S., 1995, ApJ, 455, 468Driver S. P. et al., 2011, MNRAS, 413, 971Emsellem E. et al., 2011, MNRAS, 414, 888Fagotto F., Bressan A., Bertelli G., Chiosi C., 1994a, A&AS, 104Fagotto F., Bressan A., Bertelli G., Chiosi C., 1994b, A&AS, 105Ferreras I., Silk J., 2000, ApJ, 541, L37Finkelman I., Brosch N., Funes J. G., Kniazev A. Y., Väisänen P., 2010, MNRAS,407, 2475Fitzpatrick E. L., 1999, PASP, 111, 63Gallazzi A., Charlot S., Brinchmann J., White S. D. M., Tremonti C. A., 2005,MNRAS, 362, 41Girardi L., Bressan A., Chiosi C., Bertelli G., Nasi E., 1996, A&AS, 117, 113Goddard D. et al., 2017, MNRAS, 466, 4731González Delgado R. M., Cerviño M., Martins L. P., Leitherer C., HauschildtP. H., 2005, MNRAS, 357, 945González Delgado R. M. et al., 2016, A&A, 590, A44González Delgado R. M. et al., 2015, A&A, 581, A103González Delgado R. M. et al., 2014, A&A, 562, A47Hawarden T. G., Longmore A. J., Tritton S. B., Elson R. A. W., Corwin, Jr. H. G.,1981, MNRAS, 196, 747High F. W., Stubbs C. W., Rest A., Stalder B., Challis P., 2009, AJ, 138, 110Hunter J. D., 2007, Computing In Science & Engineering, 9, 90Husemann B. et al., 2013, A&A, 549, A87Jones E., Oliphant T., Peterson P., et al., 2001, SciPy: Open source scientific toolsfor PythonKaviraj S. et al., 2007, ApJS, 173, 619Kaviraj S. et al., 2012, MNRAS, 423, 49Krajnovi´c D. et al., 2011, MNRAS, 414, 2923Kroupa P., 2001, MNRAS, 322, 231Kuntschner H. et al., 2010, MNRAS, 408, 97Labbé I. et al., 2003, AJ, 125, 1107Le Borgne J.-F. et al., 2003, A&A, 402, 433Logroño-García R., Vilella-Rojo G., López-Sanjuan C., J-PLUS collaboration,2018, A&A, submittedLonoce I., Longhetti M., Saracco P., Gargiulo A., Tamburri S., 2014, MNRAS,444, 2048Lopez-Corredoira M., Vazdekis A., Gutierrez C. M., Castro-Rodriguez N., 2017,ArXiv e-prints
Article number, page 17 of 19 & A proofs: manuscript no. Sanroman_JPLUS
López-Sanjuan C., Vázquez Ramió H., Varela J., J-PLUS collaboration, 2018,A&A, submittedMacArthur L. A., 2005, ApJ, 623, 795Maraston C., Daddi E., Renzini A., Cimatti A., Dickinson M., Papovich C.,Pasquali A., Pirzkal N., 2006, ApJ, 652, 85Maraston C., Strömbäck G., 2011, MNRAS, 418, 2785Marigo P., Girardi L., 2007, A&A, 469, 239Martin-Navarro I., Vazdekis A., Falcon-Barroso J., La Barbera F., Yildirim A.,van de Ven G., 2018, ArXiv e-printsMartins L. P., González Delgado R. M., Leitherer C., Cerviño M., Hauschildt P.,2005, MNRAS, 358, 49McDermid R. M. et al., 2015, MNRAS, 448, 3484Mehlert D., Thomas D., Saglia R. P., Bender R., Wegner G., 2003, A&A, 407,423Mendez-Abreu J. et al., 2017, ArXiv e-printsMoles M. et al., 2008, AJ, 136, 1325Molino A. et al., 2014, MNRAS, 441, 2891Molino A., Costa-Duarte M. V., Mendes de Oliveira C., J-PLUS collaboration,2018, A&A, submittedOcvirk P., Pichon C., Lançon A., Thiébaut E., 2006a, MNRAS, 365, 74Ocvirk P., Pichon C., Lançon A., Thiébaut E., 2006b, MNRAS, 365, 46Papaderos P. et al., 2013, A&A, 555, L1Pérez E. et al., 2013, ApJ, 764, L1Pérez F., Granger B. E., 2007, Computing in Science and Engineering, 9, 21Pérez-González P. G. et al., 2013, ApJ, 762, 46Rawle T. D., Smith R. J., Lucey J. R., 2010, MNRAS, 401, 852Rawle T. D., Smith R. J., Lucey J. R., Swinbank A. M., 2008, MNRAS, 389,1891Reda F. M., Proctor R. N., Forbes D. A., Hau G. K. T., Larsen S. S., 2007,MNRAS, 377, 1772Röck B., Vazdekis A., Ricciardelli E., Peletier R. F., Knapen J. H., Falcón-Barroso J., 2016, A&A, 589, A73Rogers B., Ferreras I., Peletier R., Silk J., 2010, MNRAS, 402, 447Rosales-Ortega F. F., Kennicutt R. C., Sánchez S. F., Díaz A. I., Pasquali A.,Johnson B. D., Hao C. N., 2010, MNRAS, 405, 735Roth M. M. et al., 2005, PASP, 117, 620Sadler E. M., Gerhard O. E., 1985, MNRAS, 214, 177San Roman I. et al., 2018, A&A, 609, A20Sánchez S. F. et al., 2016, A&A, 594, A36Sánchez S. F. et al., 2012, A&A, 538, A8Sánchez S. F. et al., 2014, A&A, 563, A49Sánchez-Blázquez P., Forbes D. A., Strader J., Brodie J., Proctor R., 2007, MN-RAS, 377, 759Sánchez-Blázquez P., Gorgas J., Cardiel N., 2006, A&A, 457, 823Sánchez-Blázquez P., Ocvirk P., Gibson B. K., Pérez I., Peletier R. F., 2011,MNRAS, 415, 709Sánchez-Blázquez P. et al., 2006, MNRAS, 371, 703Sánchez-Blázquez P. et al., 2014, A&A, 570, A6Sarzi M. et al., 2006, MNRAS, 366, 1151Shabala S. S. et al., 2012, MNRAS, 423, 59Sorba R., Sawicki M., 2015, MNRAS, 452, 235Spolaor M., Forbes D. A., Proctor R. N., Hau G. K. T., Brough S., 2008, MN-RAS, 385, 675Spolaor M., Kobayashi C., Forbes D. A., Couch W. J., Hau G. K. T., 2010, MN-RAS, 408, 272Stasi´nska G. et al., 2008, MNRAS, 391, L29Tran H. D., Tsvetanov Z., Ford H. C., Davies J., Ja ff e W., van den Bosch F. C.,Rest A., 2001, AJ, 121, 2928Tsatsi A., Lyubenova M., van de Ven G., Chang J., Aguerri J. A. L., Falcón-Barroso J., Macciò A. V., 2017, A&A, 606, A62van der Walt S., Colbert S. C., Varoquaux G., 2011, Computing in Science andEngineering, 13, 22van Dokkum P. G., Franx M., 1995, AJ, 110, 2027Vazdekis A., Ricciardelli E., Cenarro A. J., Rivero-González J. G., Díaz-GarcíaL. A., Falcón-Barroso J., 2012, MNRAS, 424, 157Verheijen M. A. W., Bershady M. A., Andersen D. R., Swaters R. A., WestfallK., Kelz A., Roth M. M., 2004, Astronomische Nachrichten, 325, 151Wagner S. J., Bender R., Moellenho ff C., 1988, A&A, 195, L5Wilkinson D. M., Maraston C., Goddard D., Thomas D., Parikh T., 2017, MN-RAS, 472, 4297Wilkinson D. M. et al., 2015, MNRAS, 449, 328Wolf C., Meisenheimer K., Rix H.-W., Borch A., Dye S., Kleinheinrich M., 2003,A&A, 401, 73Worthey G., Faber S. M., Gonzalez J. J., Burstein D., 1994, ApJS, 94, 687York D. G. et al., 2000, AJ, 120, 1579Zheng Z. et al., 2017, MNRAS, 465, 4572Zibetti S., Charlot S., Rix H.-W., 2009, MNRAS, 400, 1181
Appendix A: Luminosity-weighted Maps
Article number, page 18 of 19an Roman et al.: 2D study of J-PLUS galaxies F i g . A . . L u m i no s it y - w e i gh t e d s t e ll a r popu l a ti onp r op e r ti e s m a p s f o r NG C ( fi r s tt w o c o l u m n s ) a nd NG C ( l a s tt w o c o l u m n s ) d e t e r m i n e dby J - P L U S / M U FF I T ( fi r s t r o w ) , C A L -I F A / S T A R L I GH T ( s ec ond r o w ) a nd C A L I F A / S TE C K M A P ( t h i r d r o w ) . T h ec o l o rr a ng e i s t h e s a m e f o r t h e d i ff e r e n t m e t hod s . T h ece n t e r o f t h e g a l a xy i s m a r k e d w it h a w h it ec r o ss i n eac hp a n e l ..