Clustering of Submillimeter-Selected Galaxies
Extracted source text ยท arXiv astro-ph/0405035
%%
%% Beginning of file 'sample.tex'
%%
%% Modified 03 Jan 01
%%
%% This is a sample manuscript marked up using the
%% AASTeX v5.x LaTeX 2e macros.
%% The first piece of markup in an AASTeX v5.x document
%% is the \documentclass command. LaTeX will ignore
%% any data that comes before this command.
%% The command below calls the preprint style
%% which will produce a one-column, single-spaced document.
%% Examples of commands for other substyles follow. Use
%% whichever is most appropriate for your purposes.
%%\documentclass[12pt,preprint]{aastex}
\documentclass[12pt,preprint]{emulateapj}
\usepackage{psfig}
\usepackage{graphicx}
%% manuscript produces a one-column, double-spaced document:
% \documentclass[manuscript]{aastex}
%% preprint2 produces a double-column, single-spaced document:
% \documentclass[preprint2]{aastex}
%% If you want to create your own macros, you can do so
%% using \newcommand. Your macros should appear before
%% the \begin{document} command.
%%
%% If you are submitting to a journal that translates manuscripts
%% into SGML, you need to follow certain guidelines when preparing
%% your macros. See the AASTeX v5.x Author Guide
%% for information.
\newcommand{\vdag}{(v)^\dagger}
\newcommand{\myemail}{awb@astro.caltech.edu}
%% You can insert a short comment on the title page using the command below.
\slugcomment{Submitted to ApJ}
%% If you wish, you may supply running head information, although
%% this information may be modified by the editorial offices.
%% The left head contains a list of authors,
%% usually a maximum of three (otherwise use et al.). The right
%% head is a modified title of up to roughly 44 characters. Running heads
%% will not print in the manuscript style.
\shorttitle{Submm clustering}
\shortauthors{Blain et al.}
%% This is the end of the preamble. Indicate the beginning of the
%% paper itself with \begin{document}.
\begin{document}
%% LaTeX will automatically break titles if they run longer than
%% one line. However, you may use \\ to force a line break if
%% you desire.
\title{Clustering of Submillimeter-Selected Galaxies}
%% Use \author, \affil, and the \and command to format
%% author and affiliation information.
%% Note that \email has replaced the old \authoremail command
%% from AASTeX v4.0. You can use \email to mark an email address
%% anywhere in the paper, not just in the front matter.
%% As in the title, you can use \\ to force line breaks.
\author{A.\,W. Blain and S.\,C. Chapman}
\affil{Caltech,
Pasadena, CA 91125}
\author{Ian Smail}
\affil{Institute for Computational Cosmology, University of Durham, Durham, UK}
\and
\author{Rob Ivison\altaffilmark{1}}
\affil{UK-ATC, Royal Observatory, Blackford Hill, Edinburgh, UK}
\altaffiltext{1}{Institute for Astronomy, University of Edinburgh, Blackford Hill,
Edinburgh, UK}
%% Notice that each of these authors has alternate affiliations, which
%% are identified by the \altaffilmark after each name. Specify alternate
%% affiliation information with \altaffiltext, with one command per each
%% affiliation.
%% Mark off your abstract in the ``abstract'' environment. In the manuscript
%% style, abstract will output a Received/Accepted line after the
%% title and affiliation information. No date will appear since the author
%% does not have this information. The dates will be filled in by the
%% editorial office after submission.
\begin{abstract}
Using accurate positions from very deep radio observations to guide
multi-object Keck spectroscopy, we have
determined a
substantially complete redshift distribution for very luminous,
distant submillimeter-selected galaxies (SMGs). A sample of 73
redshifts for SMGs in seven fields contains a surprisingly large number of
`associations': systems of SMGs with Mpc-scale separations, and
redshifts within
1200\,km\,s$^{-1}$. This sample provides tentative evidence of
strong clustering of SMGs at $z \simeq 2-3$ with a
correlation length
$\sim (6.9 \pm 2.1)h^{-1}$\,Mpc, using a simple pair-counting
approach that is appropriate to the small, sparse SMG samples. This is
somewhat greater than the well-determined
correlation lengths for both $z \simeq 3$
optical--UV color-selected
Lyman break galaxies (LBGs) and $z \simeq 2$ QSOs. This
could indicate that SMGs
trace the densest large-scale structures in the
high-redshift universe, and that they may either be
evolutionarily distinct from
LBGs and QSOs,
or subject to a more
complex astrophysical bias.
\end{abstract}
%% Keywords should appear after the \end{abstract} command. The uncommented
%% example has been keyed in ApJ style. See the instructions to authors
%% for the journal to which you are submitting your paper to determine
%% what keyword punctuation is appropriate.
\keywords{galaxies: clusters: general -- galaxies: evolution --
galaxies: formation
-- galaxies: starburst --
large-scale structure of universe --
cosmology: observations
}
%% From the front matter, we move on to the body of the paper.
%% In the first two sections, notice the use of the natbib \citep
%% and \citet commands to identify citations. The citations are
%% tied to the reference list via symbolic KEYs. The KEY corresponds
%% to the KEY in the \bibitem in the reference list below. We have
%% chosen the first three characters of the first author's name plus
%% the last two numeral of the year of publication as our KEY for
%% each reference.
\section{Introduction}
Since 1997 several hundred galaxies have been discovered using imaging
arrays at millimeter and submillimeter wavelengths (Blain et al. 2002;
Smail et al. 2002; Scott et al. 2002; Borys et al.\ 2003; Webb et al.\ 2003;
Greve et al. 2004a). The difficulties of identifying these galaxies at
other wavelengths, and moreover determining their redshifts, are
significant, owing both
to the coarse positional accuracy ($\simeq 8"$) of the discovery
images and to the faint optical magnitudes of their proposed counterparts.
By exploiting the high-redshift analog of the far-infrared--radio correlation
between hot dust and radio synchrotron emission, which are
powered by young,
hot stars and their associated supernovae respectively,
sub-arcsecond radio positions can be found for a substantial
fraction of submillimeter-selected galaxies (SMGs). This
enables efficient multi-object optical
spectroscopy to search for
redshifts, given that the surface
density of radio-detected
SMGs on the sky is $\sim 300$\,deg$^{-2}$ (Chapman et al. 2003a),
and thus is well matched to the field of view and multiplex gain of current
spectrographs. This
technique was first tried using the Keck LRIS-B spectrograph, which
counterintuitively detected identifiable restframe ultraviolet spectral
lines and features in many of these galaxies.
The redshift distribution of a large sample of 73 of these galaxies in
seven independent fields listed in Table\,1 is presented by
Chapman et al.\ (2004a). The spectroscopic completeness for
redshift determinations is
$\sim 50$\% for SMGs selected purely on the grounds of submillimeter
flux density greater than 5\,mJy at a wavelength of 850\,$\mu$m,
and $\sim 70$\% of for SMGs with the same submillimeter flux density and radio
detections at 1.4\,GHz brighter than 30\,$\mu$Jy.
The remaining $\sim 30$\% of radio-detected SMGs
without redshifts are likely split
between those at higher redshifts and any with cooler
dust temperatures and lower luminosities, neither of which yield
radio detections, and galaxies in the
redshift range $1.2 < z < 1.8$, whose optical continua are generally too
faint for the
detection of rest-frame UV absorption lines, and for which
any restframe UV emission lines are not redshifted into the wide spectral
range of LRIS
(Chapman et al. 2004a).
This reasonably complete redshift distribution confirms absolutely that the
SMGs are an important high-redshift galaxy population, and
that galaxies within a factor of 5 in submillimeter flux density of the 5-mJy
850-$\mu$m detection limit of this sample
dominate the luminosity density from galaxies at redshifts $z \simeq 2$.
The redshift distribution can be represented adequately by a Gaussian with
$\bar z = 2.4$
and $\sigma = 0.65$, with almost all SMGs found over the redshift range
$1.5 < z < 3$. SMGs are
found in relatively small fields on the sky,
less than 10' across, but are
spread very widely in redshift from at least 0.8 to 3.4.
This means that the SMG survey volumes have a uniquely long
thin pencil geometry, which extends
in depth by 2--3\,Gpc, but
across the sky only as far as 5\,Mpc.
The spatial distribution of SMGs
is important, as the detection of any clustering signal can provide
information about
the distribution of galaxies as a function of
dark matter density. In principle, in a dark
matter-dominated universe the strength of clustering should correlate with the
mass of halos (Bardeen et al.\ 1986), and thus its measurement
provides an insight into the masses
of the dark halos that host luminous galaxies
(e.g. Overzier et al.\ 2003 and references therein).
The clustering strength of many types of high- and low-redshift
galaxies has been probed
by a wide variety of methods.
At redshifts less than those of SMGs, $z<1.3$, the
large-scale structure of galaxies is being mapped in great detail by
the DEEP2 survey (Coil et al.\ 2003). At higher mean
redshifts, the clustering of many hundreds of restframe
UV/optically-selected, spectroscopically-confirmed
Lyman-break galaxies (LBGs)
can be measured (Adelberger et al. 1998). Recent values of correlation
lengths\footnote{The
two-point
correlation function of galaxies that describes the excess probability
of finding a pair of galaxies separated by $r$ over an unclustered
distribution is observed to be a decreasing power-law with distance
$\xi(r) = (r/r_0)^{\simeq-1.8}$ (Coil et al. 2003).} are
$r_0 = 4h^{-1}$\,Mpc (Porciani \& Giavalisco 2002) and $r_0 =
2.7h^{-1}$\,Mpc (Ouchi et al. 2001). The published samples of
LBGs lie at higher redshifts than
most SMGs,
which could on its own explain the lack of observed
correlation between the positions of LBGs and SMGs (Peacock et al.\
2000; Chapman et al.\ 2000; Webb et al.\ 2003),
even if they are drawn from a common underlying population of
galaxies described by the same form of evolution.
Lower-redshift counterparts to LBGs can be isolated
by varying the color selection conditions (see
Steidel et al. 2004). Spectroscopically-confirmed samples of
these galaxies can be compiled in parallel to surveys for
SMG redshifts using the same multi-object slitmasks,
and should ultimately provide an excellent
opportunity to determine the relative three-dimensional distribution of
LBGs and SMGs.
The clustering of much rarer QSOs and relatively faint
($\simeq 10$\,mJy) radio galaxies at redshifts that overlap with the
SMGs has been probed by Croom et al. (2002) and Overzier et al. (2003),
who report correlation lengths
$r_0 = 5$ and 6$\,h^{-1}$\,Mpc respectively.
However, these surveys are more sparsely sampled, and cover larger areas of
sky (of order thousands of square degrees), so the
typical source separation is much greater than the correlation
length.
Without redshifts to trace three-dimensional structure, only limits to
the projected clustering strength of SMGs
in two dimensions have been obtained (Carilli et al. 2000; Scott et al.
2002; Borys et al. 2003; Webb et al. 2003; see Fig.\,1). This is unsurprising
given the narrow, deep geometry of SMG surveys:
multiple structures along the line of sight overlap
and dilute the clustering signal.
Note that even the best possible photometric redshifts derived from
deep multicolor optical and near-IR imaging with $\Delta z \simeq 0.1$
are not sufficiently accurate to provide useful three-dimensional clustering
information in the
deep, narrow pencil-beam geometries of SMG surveys, which include very
significant projection effects (see Fig.\,2).
The availability of a large number of spectroscopic redshifts
means that we can now remove these projection effects and investigate the
clustering of the SMG population directly.
Throughout this paper we assume a post-{\it Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy
Probe}
cosmology with $\Omega_0=0.27$, $\Omega_\Lambda=0.73$, and
$H_0=100h$\,km\,s$^{-1}$\,Mpc$^{-1}$ with $h=0.71$.
%\begin{figure}[t]
\vspace{12cm}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=.3\textwidth,angle=-90]{f1.eps}
\end{center}
%\caption{\baselineskip = 1pt
{\footnotesize{{\sc Fig. 1. ---}
ACF observed for
47 SMGs in the extended HDF field shown in Fig.\,1 (Borys et al.\
2003; Chapman et al.\ 2003a, 2004a). Other results
for two-dimensional clustering of SMGs have been discussed by
Carilli
et al. (2000), Scott et al.
(2002), Borys et al. (2003) and Webb et al. (2003).
The errors on existing ACF data are much too great
to measure the clustering signal without much larger SMG samples:
redshifts
are essential to discern the clustering of SMGs.
The observed correlation functions
of $z \simeq 1$ EROs (Daddi et al. 2001; $r_0 \simeq 12h^{-1}$\,Mpc),
$z \simeq 3$ LBGs (Adelberger et al.\ 1998; Porciani
\& Giavalisco 2002; $r_0 \simeq 4h^{-1}$\,Mpc)
and $z \simeq 2.5$
SMGs assuming the correlation length $r_0 \simeq 7h^{-1}$\,Mpc
determined in Section\,3 (Table\,1)
are also shown.
After projection, the SMGs and LBGs have similar ACFs, which are
much weaker than the ACF for the lower-redshift
EROs.}}
\label{fig1}
%\end{figure}
\section{Signs of clustering in SMG surveys}
There have been serendipitous detections of SMGs clustered
in close proximity to
other classes of high-redshift galaxies. For example there are
detections of optically-selected galaxies at redshifts matching those
of known SMGs and with separations
of only $\sim 100$\,kpc in
the backgrounds of two gravitational lensing clusters
of galaxies:
at $z=2.80$ in A370 (Ivison et al.\ 1998;
Santos et al.\ 2004), and at $z=2.55$ in
A2218
(Kneib et al.\ 2004). SMGs were identified by Chapman et al. (2001)
in the most overdense structure of LBGs at $z \simeq 3.1$ (Steidel
et al.\ 2000).
Overdensities of bright SMGs found near the targeted
positions of
some of the most extreme high-redshift radio galaxies at redshifts
as great as $z=3.8$ (Ivison et al. 2000; Stevens et al. 2003) also
provide evidence for some strong overdensities in the
spatial distribution of SMGs, some confirmed by spectroscopy
(Smail et al.\ 2003a, b).
Can we find direct spectroscopic evidence of clustering in the general
population
of SMGs?
In order to demonstrate the crucial importance of obtaining
redshifts for the SMGs before attempting to measure their clustering
properties,
in Fig.\,1 we determine the projected two-dimensional angular
correlation function (ACF)
of 47 SMGs in the
biggest available survey field (Borys et al.\ 2003; Chapman et al.\ 2004a).
To measure a significant ACF for the SMGs the large
fractional errors on the results shown in Fig.\,1
indicate that a {\emph{much}} larger sample of several hundred SMGs would be
required, a challenge for the next generation of sensitive wide-field
submillimeter telescopes.
We indeed find spectroscopic evidence for clustering of SMGs.
In six of the seven fields containing SMGs with redshifts,
"associations" of galaxies are found, with redshifts separated by less than
1200\,km\,s$^{-1}$ in radial velocity (Table\,1). This velocity is an
approximate upper limit to the velocity dispersion of the richest clusters of
galaxies at the present epoch, and so should be larger than the velocity
dispersion of any less evolved large-scale structures at high redshifts.
Furthermore, it is greater than the random
offset velocity expected from
emission generated in randomly oriented outflowing
galactic winds at high-redshifts
(Erb et al. 2003).
Most of the associations are pairs, but
there is a group of three SMGs
at $z=3.1$ in the highest overdensity in the survey
of LBGs in the SA22 field (Steidel et al. 2000),
and a group of five SMGs at $z=2$ in the Hubble Deep Field (HDF; Fig.\,2).
SMGs are often found to have
disturbed and probably interacting morphologies (e.g. Ivison et al. 1998;
Chapman et al. 2003b). Note that the associations
are not close interacting pairs of SMGs (such as, e.g.,
SMM\,J09431+4700; Neri et al.\ 2003; see also Swinbank et al.\ 2004),
but are
separated on much larger scales up to several Mpc. Their spatial separation
is comparable both to the extent of the
survey fields (Fig.\,2) and to the scale of the local
galaxy correlation length. It is possible
that the successors of the SMGs may finally reside in
the densest clusters, but at the observed epoch the SMGs with
associated redshifts are much more
widely spread, presumably lying throughout infalling, pre-virialized
filaments and walls in the large-scale structures of galaxies.
In parallel to measuring the SMG redshifts, Chapman et al.\ (2004b) have found
redshifts for a comparable number of optically-faint radio galaxies (OFRGs)
that are not detected at submillimeter wavelengths. Their optical spectra
are similar to the SMGs, and it is very plausible that these submillimeter-faint
OFRGs are
comparably luminous to the SMGs, but have dust temperatures too high to
be detected at submillimeter wavelengths (Blain et al. 2004).
The submillimeter-faint OFRGs display a similar
abundance of systems with associated redshifts to the SMGs, both
within the submillimeter-faint OFRG
population itself (in
the 03 hr, Lockman, SA13 and SA22 fields), and
when cross-correlated with the SMG population
(in the five-member HDF association
and in the very overdense $z=3.1$ structure in the SA22 field).
Once {\it Spitzer Space Telescope} observations
reveal whether these galaxies are truly as luminous as the SMGs, they
offer to approximately double the density of the
sampling of large-scale structure
provided by very luminous dusty galaxies.
\setcounter{figure}{1}
\begin{figure*}[t]
\begin{center}
%\includegraphics[width=.3\textwidth]{figure.eps}
\includegraphics[width=.37\textwidth,angle=-90]{f2a.eps}
\hspace{10pt}
\includegraphics[width=.37\textwidth,angle=-90]{f2b.eps}
\hspace{10pt}
\includegraphics[width=.37\textwidth,angle=-90]{f2c.eps}
\end{center}
\caption{
%{\footnotesize{{\sc Fig. 2. ---}
Positions of radio-pinpointed SMGs in the
richest three field in our redshift survey: from left to right these are;
the HDF (the boundaries
of the HDF-N and GOODS fields are also shown), Lockman Hole, and SA13 fields.
SMGs in our catalog
with spectroscopic redshifts are represented by open circles. Those
in the redshift `associations'
present are shown by different filled symbols. These
figures demonstrate the typical wide separation of the
associations, which span the whole field.
}
\label{fig2}
\end{figure*}
\section{The correlation length of SMG clustering}
To interpret our sparse data, we cannot use regular methods to
determine clustering strength (Adelberger et al.\ 1998; Wilson et al.\
2001) but
must make use of the limited information as best we can.
We compare the
number of pairs of galaxies found in each field with velocity
separations less than 1200\,km\,s$^{-1}$ (Table\,1) with
the number of pairs
expected assuming a comoving correlation length that is fixed
throughout the
redshift range of the SMG sample. We further assume that the
redshift distribution of the population is known accurately,
and determine the
space density of SMGs in each field that is required
to match the observed number. This allows us to estimate the number
of pairs expected in each field in the absence of clustering, as
listed in Table\,1 ($N_{\rm pair}'$).
To evaluate the number of pairs expected with a particular
correlation function $\xi$, which is assumed to be constant in redshift,
we carry out a double integral over volume
for the product of the space density of SMGs $N$ at two positions
separated by a three-dimensional distance $r$, and the
two-point correlation function $\xi$:
\begin{eqnarray}
N_{\rm pair} &=& {1\over2} \int_{\theta, \phi} \int_{\theta', \phi'}
\int_{z_{\rm min}}^{z_{\rm max}}
\int_{-\Delta v}^{\Delta v} N(z,\theta,\phi) \times \\
& & \>\>\>\>\>\>\>\>\>\>\>\>\>\>\>\>\>\> N(z',\theta',\phi') \times
\left[ 1 + \xi(r) \right] {\rm d}V {\rm d}V'.
\end{eqnarray}
The factor of a half corrects for double counting.
One radial variable is limited by the redshift range of the SMGs
(values of $z_{\rm min} = 1.8$ and $z_{\rm max}=4.0$ were used, but
note that the effects of changing $z_{\rm min}$ to zero are less than 1\%:
the peaked distribution of $N$ sets the size of $N_{\rm pair}$),
and the other the distance corresponding to
relative velocity in the Hubble flow, with a limit $\Delta v$
set to the limiting velocity that defines a pair. This is usually
1200\,km\,s$^{-1}$.
Note that we integrate over the velocity
range as we cannot be sure of the relative spatial distribution of
galaxies along the line of sight because of peculiar velocities, and so
all galaxies that lie within $\Delta v$ of each other are counted.
The solid angle of the survey in each rectangular field sets the
limits on $\theta$ and $\phi$.
$N$ is assumed the
have the Gaussian redshift distribution discussed above, normalized to
match the number of detections $N_{\rm gal}$ in each field (Table\,1).
We then change the correlation length $r_0$ included in $\xi(r)$,
keeping $\gamma = -1.8$, until
the numbers of pairs predicted by equation 1 matches the
observed numbers of pairs $N_{\rm pair}$ (Table\,1), either
field by field or in a combination
of fields, as listed in Table\,1. The uncertainties on the
derived values
of $r_0$ are determined by the range of $r_0$ values that match the
Poisson errors on $N_{\rm gal}$ and $N_{\rm pair}$ in each field.
$N_{\rm pair}'$ in Table\,1 is derived for $r_0 = 0$\,Mpc.
Note that the overall result is presented with and without the
SA22 field included, as the overdensity in that field was known
prior to substantial submillimeter observations, although the radio-pinpointed
submillimeter observations
were carried out before any redshifts were determined.
We now illustrate the robustness of this pair-counting procedure in an
LBG survey field with a more richly sampled redshift
distribution.
The largest and best populated LBG survey field -- the
850"$\times$850" Westphal
field\footnote{
ftp://ftp.astro.caltech.edu/pub/ccs/lbgsurvey} --
contains
192 galaxies with redshifts, and 912 galaxy pairs using our definition.
As the LBG redshift distribution is approximately a Gaussian
with $\bar z = 3.0$ and $\sigma_z = 0.28$, 594 pairs would be expected with
no clustering. This corresponds to an excess of pairs over random
by a factor of
1.55, which requires a correlation length of
$r_0=(5.8 \pm 0.3)h^{-1}$\,Mpc using our
method of integrating over the two-point correlation function.
By comparison, we obtain a correlation length $r_0=(6 \pm 0.3)h^{-1}$\,Mpc
in this field if we
evaluate the two-point ACF
against a mock catalog
of random galaxy positions with the same redshift distribution
(Landy \& Szalay 1993), and then compare the results with the
ACF obtained from an assumed three-dimensional
correlation function using Limber's equation
e.g. Wilson 2003). Although this is a single relatively small
field, and fluctuations
in the correlation amplitude are certainly expected, the result
from the pair-counting method used to analyze our small SMG sample
is in accordance
with that expected from more established methods. Note that the
strength of clustering in this field appears to be greater than
for the LBG sample as a whole.
Over all seven fields we find a correlation length
$r_0 = (6.9 \pm 2.1)h^{-1}$\,Mpc for the SMG sample.
Only in the best-sampled HDF field is a significant result
obtained in an individual field -- $r_0 = (9.5 \pm 3.3)\,h^{-1}$\,Mpc
-- the other
fields all include too few galaxies and pairs.
Note that varying the choice of field area or $\Delta v$
makes relatively little difference to the result.
If the size of the HDF
field is doubled, then the calculated correlation length is
reduced to
$r_0 = (7.5 \pm 3.2)h^{-1}$\,Mpc, consistent with the value above.
If $\Delta v$ is reduced to 600\,km\,s$^{-1}$, then only two pairs
of galaxies are lost from the 18 in the sample. The calculated
correlation length is then increased by 24\%. If the
value of $\Delta v$ is increased to 1800\,km\,s$^{-1}$, then
an additional
three pairs are counted, and the correlation length is reduced by
8\%. Hence, within the uncertainties the results are robust to changes in
the assumptions made.
The correlation length for SA22 is greater, but note that SA22 includes
a known strong overdensity at the redshift of the association of SMGs
(Steidel et al. 2000), and so it is possible that
the value for
SA22 does not give a fair representation of the clustering of SMGs in a
typical field.
Using the larger spectroscopic catalogs of LBGs,
we also conducted several additional tests of the results. We again
verified that the predicted and measured counts of pairs are
not very sensitive to reasonable changes in the chosen
velocity range $\Delta v$ away from 1200\,km\,s$^{-1}$. The results
depend more strongly on
the shape and size of the field, with smaller fields yielding a
larger boost in the expected number of pairs for a certain correlation
length, as the correlation function $\xi$ is larger when
sampled on smaller scales. We also
randomized the redshifts of the LBG catalog and, as expected,
found that the measured excess of pairs vanished. The
pair-counting method is thus sensitive to real three-dimensional
structure in the galaxy
distribution. We also examined
the effects of randomly dropping a redshift-independent
fraction of the LBGs from the
catalog, to simulate
the effects of incompleteness in sampling a galaxy population
with an well-known and independent correlation length
measurement. The
results do not change significantly, even if the sample becomes 50\%
incomplete. As we know that the catalogs of redshifts for
radio-selected SMGs are
probably complete at the 70\% level (Chapman et al.\ 2004a),
and that no redshifts in the range
$1.8 < z < 4$ are preferentially excluded from our redshift sample,
we can be confident in the
accuracy of our results.
A correlation length of $\sim 7\,h^{-1}$\,Mpc for the SMGs is close to
that predicted by
Shu, Mao \& Mo (2001), assuming that star-formation activity in
massive halos follows a Schmidt Law with gas surface density;
this is a very
uncertain assumption given the apparent large masses, and complex
dynamical structure in these galaxies (Frayer et al.\ 1998, 1999;
Neri et al.\ 2003; T. R. Greve et al.\
2004b, in preparation).
We can also compare and
contrast the correlation length result for the SMGs with the
results for rarer,
more sparsely sampled populations of galaxies. The sample of QSOs with a
surface density of $\sim 30$\,deg$^{-2}$ and
$z \simeq 1.6 \pm 0.65$ from the Two-Degree Field (2dF) survey
overlaps in redshift with the lower end of the SMG redshift
distribution. The correlation function of the 2dF QSOs is smaller than
that for the SMGs,
$\sim 5\,h^{-1}$ Mpc (Croom et al.\ 2002). The 2dF correlation function is
evaluated over a very much larger
area ($\sim 730$\,deg$^{2}$), and so is not
prone to field-to-field variations. The correlation length for
other samples of high-redshift
galaxies, including very
deep near-IR selected populations (Daddi et al.\ 2003)
and bright radio-galaxies (R\"ottgering et al. 2003) have also been evaluated
at similar redshifts to our SMG samples. For the former, the survey areas are
small in extent, and have relatively
incomplete redshift distributions, while for the latter, the survey volumes
are sparsely sampled. It is hence
difficult to compare the correlation functions
of these samples directly with SMGs at present.
We are targeting a statistically reliable
subset of our SMGs with known redshifts to detect
CO emission lines using
mm-wave interferometry and rest-frame optical nebular line
emission using near-infrared spectrographs.
The CO linewidth can be used to
provide a dynamically-determined estimate of the mass within about 10\,kpc
(Frayer et al.\ 1998; Neri et al.\ 2003; Genzel et al.\ 2003;
T. R. Greve et al.\ 2004b, in preparation); a more accurate
mass can be obtained if the emission can be resolved spatially. Initial
indications are that SMGs have velocity dispersions that are greater by a
factor of 2, and thus have dynamical masses greater by a factor of $\sim 4$,
as compared with the dynamical masses of
LBGs at $z \simeq 2$ ($4 \times 10^{10}\,M_\odot$;
Erb et al.\
2003). The half-light radii of SMGs appear to be larger than those of
SMGs (Chapman et al.\, 2003b), which would lead to a further increase in
the relative mass of SMGs as compared with LBGs by a factor of 2.
At $z \simeq 2$ near-IR observations of resolved nebular line
emission are easier, although published samples of $z \simeq 3$
LBGs are larger.
LBGs appear to be typically twice as
massive at $z=2$ as at $z \simeq 3$. None of
these direct dynamical measures indicate, however, that SMGs are
as massive as the
several $10^{13}\,M_\odot$ halos their clustering
properties would suggest (Fig.\,2). Their
central dynamical masses derived on 10\,kpc length scales
are likely to be a
factor of only 3--4 times less than the mass of the dark-matter halo,
extended to of order 200\,kpc, given the steep $r^{-3}$ decline in the
expected profile of dark matter halos outside of the visible
galaxy (Navarro, Frenk \& White 1997).
Recent near-IR and CO observations of
SMGs (Genzel et al.\ 2003; Tecza et al.\ 2004; T. R. Greve et al.\
2004b, in preparation; Swinbank et al.\ 2004) tend to support the
greater masses of SMGs as compared with LBGs.
It is interesting to note that the masses
of the dark-matter halos surrounding
the large, well-studied sample of
LBGs at $z \simeq 3$ inferred from their clustering properties
($\sim 8 \times 10^{11}\,M_\odot$; Adelberger et al.\ 1998; Fig.\,1)
also exceed the central dynamical masses
inferred from spatially
structured asymmetric line profiles and velocity dispersions, but by
a smaller factor than for the SMGs. If in fact SMGs can only form in the most
massive halos, then in a hierarchical picture of galaxy formation, this
could account for their apparent typical moderate redshifts
(Chapman et al.\ 2003a, 2004).
Differences between
the inferred dynamical and dark matter masses of high-redshift galaxies
provides a direct hint that more
complex astrophysics in SMGs could break a simple
link between clustering amplitude and
mass (see Shu et al.\ 2001). For example, the time-dependence of
merging has been claimed to
both boost (from infall; Scannapieco \& Thacker 2003), and leave unaffected
(Percival et al. 2003) the
clustering properties of galaxies. Intuitively,
very luminous SMGs that are only briefly visible
in overdense regions might be expected to have a weaker
clustering signal, as compared with a quiescent population that has
the same spatial distribution;
however, the strength of clustering could
be increased if the luminous SMG phase is
triggered preferentially in overdense
regions. Further observations to investigate the
relationship between the luminous SMGs
and their underlying dark matter distribution are necessary to
account for the effects of time evolution. Note that there is
also certain to be strong field-to-field variation in the density
of structures of associated redshifts for SMGs (Fig.\,2).
We stress that accurate spectroscopic redshifts are essential
in order to reveal clustering properties of the SMGs. The same
information cannot be derived from two-dimensional data.
The expected ACFs for $z \simeq 1$ extremely red objects (EROs),
$z \sim 3$ LBG, and SMGs assuming the correlation lengths discussed above
are shown in Fig.\,1.
The relatively narrow redshift range for the
EROs leads to a large expected signal, while the LBGs and SMGs
have a much weaker ACF due in part to the greater distance to
both samples, and mainly to their
broader redshift distributions, especially for the SMGs.
The inferred correlation length for the SMGs is similar to the projected
extent of the SMG survey fields,
and so the relative
spatial positions of the members of each association reveal
little information on the maximum extent and strength of the
clustering present. We await much larger square degree-scale fields in
order to sample the clustering properties of SMGs in a representative
region of the high-redshift universe.
%\begin{figure}[t]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=.55\textwidth,angle=-90]{f3.eps}
\end{center}
%\caption{{\sc Fig. 3. --- } The
{\footnotesize{{\sc Fig. 3. --- }
Comoving correlation
length of the SMGs inferred from our survey in
contrast to other populations of low and high-redshift galaxies (see
the summary in Overzier et al.\ 2003). The horizontal error bar on the
SMG point spans the
range of redshifts over which SMG associations are found (Table\,1).
The solid line shows
a representative model for
the evolution of a certain overdensity. The dashed
lines show the expected correlation length of dark
matter halos as a function of mass and redshift. }}
\label{fig3}
%\end{figure}
\section{Consequences of strong SMG clustering}
There are two immediate consequences of the presence of a strong clustering
signal in the SMG survey. These concern both the nature of the SMG themselves,
and the galaxies that result when the SMG activity is completed.
First, since the correlation length of SMGs
appears to be somewhat larger than for
both LBG and QSO surveys at comparable redshifts, it seems
unlikely that the SMGs form a simple evolutionary sequence with
either population. It is
attractive to link together these different samples of high-redshift galaxies,
but they are likely to be substantially
distinct populations. If they are distinct then the large luminosities of
the SMGs would not represent a shorter-lived, more luminous
phase during the active lifetime
of more typical, less deeply dust-enshrouded star forming
galaxies, and few powerful active galactic nuclei (AGNs) would
burn out of the dust cocoons of SMGs to appear as optically visible QSOs.
Second, if there are no complex biases at work, then the correlation
length inferred for the
SMGs is consistent with a form of evolution that
subsequently matches the large comoving
correlation length typical of evolved EROs
at $z \simeq 1$ and of
clusters of galaxies at the present epoch (Fig.\,3).
If this picture
is correct, then the
descendants
of SMGs would be
rare in the field, and found predominantly in rich cluster environments.
However, this appears to be inconsistent with their space densities, since a
progenitor of a rich cluster of galaxies is not
expected to
intersect every 100-arcmin$^2$ field sampled out to redshift
$z \simeq 3$. The condition for this to occur is
a comoving density of proto-clusters on the order of $10^{-6}$\,Mpc$^{-3}$,
in contrast to the observed
comoving density of clusters with masses
$M > 8 \times 10^{14}\,M_\odot$ at $z=0$, which is
$\sim 10^{-7}$\,Mpc$^{-3}$ (Bahcall et al.\ 2003). However, it is
possible that SMGs in more extended unvirialized wall and filament
large-scale structures with masses of several times 10$^{13}\,M_\odot$
at $z \simeq 2.5$
(Fig.\,3) that subsequently drain, merge and collapse into more
massive clusters
could provide a greater effective covering factor, to reconcile these
values.
More likely, either the halo masses are less extreme than inferred from a
picture of simple one-to-one halo biasing at a given mass,
or some other astrophysical biasing effect must be at work. By considering the
correlations between dark matter sub-halos, and a
"halo occupancy distribution",
it is possible to enhance clustering on a
given halo mass scale
(Berlind et al.\ 2003). Building a better observational view of
the density of the environments of SMGs based on deep multiwaveband imaging
and densely-sampled
spectroscopy should allow these ideas
to be tested.
The suggestion of an evolutionary link between
SMGs and passive EROs from their clustering strength
may provide useful constraints on the lifetime
of the SMG phase.
The comoving space density of bright radio-detected
SMGs at $z \simeq 2.5$
is $\sim 2.7 \times 10^{-5}$\,Mpc$^{-3}$. The
corresponding density of EROs at
$0.7<z<1.5$ is $(2.2 \pm 0.6) \times 10^{-4}$\,Mpc$^{-3}$ in a sample
with spectroscopic completeness of $\sim 70$\% (Cimatti et al.\ 2002).
The density of EROs matches closely
the comoving abundance of $L^*$ elliptical galaxies at the present epoch,
which is
$\sim 2 \times 10^{-4}$\,Mpc$^{-3}$.
Hence,
because the comoving abundance of SMGs is much less, even neglecting merging,
the SMGs and EROs
can only be part of a direct evolutionary
sequence with the same density in space
if the duty cycle
of SMGs is short, less than 700\,Myr, to generate
enough evolved, long-lived EROs in the 6\,Gyr prior to
$z \simeq 1$. The resulting EROs could
then evolve naturally into $L^*$
elliptical galaxies at the present epoch with a very modest amount of
merging. The unknown time profile of the luminosity of SMGs would
certainly also have an effect on the results.
Direct accurate
determinations of the masses of SMGs
are critically important to investigate these links.
The first hints from systematic
CO observations are that SMGs
are massive enough to generate the stellar populations of
$L^*$ elliptical galaxies directly
(Neri et al.\ 2003; T. R. Greve et al.\ 2004b,
in preparation).
The correlation function of SMGs appears to be consistent with their
being associated with massive dark-matter halos at high redshifts, halos more
massive than those hosting LBGs and QSOs at comparable redshifts.
The successors of SMGs could thus be associated with clusters of galaxies at
the present epoch. A key test of the nature of the SMGs requires
a larger sample of
dynamical mass estimates for the population, and a direct comparison
of their spatial
distribution as compared with populations of more common
optical/UV-selected
galaxies in the same fields.
\section{Summary}
The discovery of associated systems of high-redshift
luminous SMGs, enabled by the measurement of
a substantially complete redshift distribution
($z \simeq 2$--3),
hint that they represent a strongly clustered population. We derive
a correlation length of $(6.9 \pm 2.1) h^{-1}$\,Mpc in our best sampled
field. Representative samples of
high-redshift SMGs
may thus be found in high-density environments that could evolve into rich
clusters of galaxies at the present epoch. The large correlation length
casts doubt on a simple evolutionary link with populations of
high-redshift optical/UV-selected galaxies and QSOs, while offering the
potential to use associations of SMG redshifts to signpost the densest
regions of
the high-redshift Universe with only a modest requirement on spectroscopic
observing time.
A key goal is now to investigate and compare the masses of SMGs inferred
from clustering measurements, and the dynamical masses inferred from
near-IR and mm-wave CO spectroscopy. This could help to determine the
nature of the power source and lifetime of the SMGs themselves, and reveal the
galaxies at the present epoch that evolve from the SMGs.
\acknowledgments
%% Appendix material should be preceded with a single \appendix command.
%% There should be a \section command for each appendix. Mark appendix
%% subsections with the same markup you use in the main body of the paper.
%% Each Appendix (indicated with \section) will be lettered A, B, C, etc.
%% The equation counter will reset when it encounters the \appendix
%% command and will number appendix equations (A1), (A2), etc.
A. W. B. acknowledges support from NSF grant AST-0205937 and
the Alfred P. Sloan foundation. I. R. S. acknowledges support from
the Royal Society. We thank the anonymous referee for
their helpful comments on the manuscript, and to Kurt Adelberger for
pointing out a typo in equation 1.
\begin{thebibliography}{}
\bibitem[Adelberger et al.(1998)]{1998ApJ...505...18A} Adelberger, K.~L.,
Steidel, C.~C., Giavalisco, M., Dickinson, M., Pettini, M., \& Kellogg, M.\
1998, \apj, 505, 18
\bibitem[Bahcall et al.(2003)]{2003ApJ...585..182B} Bahcall, N.~A.~et al.\
2003, \apj, 585, 182
\bibitem[Bardeen, Bond, Kaiser, \& Szalay(1986)]{1986ApJ...304...15B}
Bardeen, J.~M., Bond, J.~R., Kaiser, N., \& Szalay, A.~S.\ 1986, \apj, 304,
15
\bibitem[Berlind et al.(2003)]{2003ApJ...593....1B} Berlind, A.~A.~et al.\
2003, \apj, 593, 1
%\bibitem{Bert} Bertoldi F. et al. 2004, ApJ, in prep
\bibitem{Blain1} Blain, A.~W., Chapman, S.~C., Smail, I., \& Ivison, R.~J.,
2004, ApJ, in press (astro-ph/0404438)
\bibitem{Blain} Blain, A.~W., Smail, I., Ivison, R.~J., Kneib, J.-P., \&
Frayer, D.\,T., 2002, Physics Reports, 369, 111
\bibitem{Borys} Borys, C., Chapman, S., Halpern, M., \& Scott, D.,
2003, MNRAS, 344, 385
\bibitem{Carilli} Carilli, C.\,L., Bertoldi, F., Bertarini, A., Menten, K.\,M.,
Kreysa, E., Zylka, R., Owen, F., \& Yun, M., 2000, conference proceeding
(astro-ph/0009298)
\bibitem{Ch04} Chapman, S.\,C., Blain, A.\,W., Smail, I., \& Ivison, R.\,J.,
2004a, ApJ, submitted
\bibitem{Ch04b} Chapman, S.\,C., Smail, I., Blain, A.\,W., \& Ivison, R.\,J.,
2004b, ApJ, submitted
\bibitem{Ch03} Chapman, S.\,C., Blain, A.\,W., Smail, I., \& Ivison, R.\,J.,
2003a, Nat, 422, 695
\bibitem[Chapman et al.(2003b)]{2003ApJ...599...92C} Chapman, S.~C.,
Windhorst, R., Odewahn, S., Yan, H., \& Conselice, C.\ 2003b, \apj, 599, 92
\bibitem[Chapman et al.(2000)]{2000MNRAS.319..318C} Chapman, S.~C., et al.\
2000, \mnras, 319, 318
\bibitem[Chapman et al.(2001)]{2001ApJ...548L..17C} Chapman, S.~C., Lewis,
G.~F., Scott, D., Richards, E., Borys, C., Steidel, C.~C., Adelberger,
K.~L., \& Shapley, A.~E.\ 2001, \apjl, 548, L17
\bibitem{Cim} Cimatti, A., et al. 2002, A\&A, 381, L68
\bibitem{Coil} Coil, A.\,L., et al. 2003, ApJ, in press (astro-ph/0305586)
\bibitem[Croom et al.(2002)]{2002MNRAS.335..459C} Croom, S.~M., Boyle,
B.~J., Loaring, N.~S., Miller, L., Outram, P.~J., Shanks, T., \& Smith,
R.~J.\ 2002, \mnras, 335, 459
\bibitem[Daddi et al.(2003)]{2003ApJ...588...50D} Daddi, E., et al.\ 2003,
\apj, 588, 50
\bibitem[Daddi et al.(2001)]{2001A&A...376..825D} Daddi, E., Broadhurst,
T., Zamorani, G., Cimatti, A., R{\" o}ttgering, H., \& Renzini, A.\ 2001,
\aap, 376, 825
\bibitem[Erb et al.(2003)]{2003ApJ...591..101E} Erb, D.~K., Shapley, A.~E.,
Steidel, C.~C., Pettini, M., Adelberger, K.~L., Hunt, M.~P., Moorwood,
A.~F.~M., \& Cuby, J.\ 2003, \apj, 591, 101
\bibitem[Frayer et al.(1999)]{1999ApJ...514L..13F} Frayer, D.~T.~et al.\
1999, \apjl, 514, L13
\bibitem[Frayer et al.(1998)]{1998ApJ...506L...7F} Frayer, D.~T., Ivison,
R.~J., Scoville, N.~Z., Yun, M., Evans, A.~S., Smail, I., Blain, A.~W., \&
Kneib, J.-P.\ 1998, \apjl, 506, L7
\bibitem[Genzel et al.(2003)]{2003ApJ...584..633G} Genzel, R., Baker,
A.~J., Tacconi, L.~J., Lutz, D., Cox, P., Guilloteau, S., \& Omont, A.\
2003, \apj, 584, 633
\bibitem{Grevea} Greve, T. R., Ivison, R. J., Bertoldi, F., Stevens, J. A.,
Dunlop, J. S., Lutz, D., \& Carilli, C. L., 2004a, MNRAS, submitted
(astro-ph/0405361)
\bibitem{Greve} Greve, T. R. et al. 2004b, ApJ, in prep
\bibitem[Ivison et al.(2000)]{2000ApJ...542...27I} Ivison, R.~J., Dunlop,
J.~S., Smail, I., Dey, A., Liu, M.~C., \& Graham, J.~R.\ 2000, \apj, 542,
27
\bibitem[Ivison et al.(1998)]{1998MNRAS.298..583I} Ivison, R.~J., Smail,
I., Le Borgne, J.-F., Blain, A.~W., Kneib, J.-P., Bezecourt, J., Kerr,
T.~H., \& Davies, J.~K.\ 1998, \mnras, 298, 583
\bibitem[Kneib et al.(2004)]{2004MNRAS.349.1211K} Kneib, J., van der Werf,
P.~P., Kraiberg Knudsen, K., Smail, I., Blain, A., Frayer, D., Barnard, V.,
\& Ivison, R.\ 2004, \mnras, 349, 1211
\bibitem{LS} Landy, S., \& Szalay, A. 1993, \apj, 412, 63
\bibitem[Navarro, Frenk, \& White(1997)]{1997ApJ...490..493N} Navarro,
J.~F., Frenk, C.~S., \& White, S.~D.~M.\ 1997, \apj, 490, 493
\bibitem[Neri et al.(2003)]{2003ApJ...597L.113N} Neri, R.~et al.\ 2003,
\apjl, 597, L113
\bibitem[Ouchi et al.(2001)]{2001ApJ...558L..83O} Ouchi, M.~et al.\ 2001,
\apjl, 558, L83
\bibitem[Overzier, R{\" o}ttgering, Rengelink, \&
Wilman(2003)]{2003A&A...405...53O} Overzier, R.~A., R{\" o}ttgering,
H.~J.~A., Rengelink, R.~B., \& Wilman, R.~J.\ 2003, \aap, 405, 53
\bibitem[Peacock et al.(2000)]{2000MNRAS.318..535P} Peacock, J.~A., et al.\
2000, \mnras, 318, 535
\bibitem{Percival} Percival, W.\,J., Scott, D., Peacock, J. A., \&
Dunlop, J. S., 2002, MNRAS, 338, L31
\bibitem[Porciani \& Giavalisco(2002)]{2002ApJ...565...24P} Porciani, C.~\&
Giavalisco, M.\ 2002, \apj, 565, 24
\bibitem[R{\" o}ttgering, Daddi, Overzier, \&
Wilman(2003)]{2003NewAR..47..309R} R{\" o}ttgering, H., Daddi, E.,
Overzier, R., \& Wilman, R.\ 2003, New Astronomy Review, 47, 309
\bibitem{Santos} Santos, M., Ellis, R.\,S., Kneib, J.-P., Richard, J., \&
Kuijken, K., 2004, ApJ, in press (astro-ph/0310478)
\bibitem{ST} Scannapieco, E., Thacker R.J. 2003, \apjl, 590, L69
\bibitem{Scott} Scott, S.\,E. et al. 2002, MNRAS, 331, 839
\bibitem[Shu, Mao, \& Mo(2001)]{2001MNRAS.327..895S} Shu, C., Mao, S., \&
Mo, H.~J.\ 2001, \mnras, 327, 895
\bibitem[Smail(2003b)]{2003b}
Smail, I., Scharf, C.A., Ivison, R.J., Stevens, J.A., Bower, R.G., \& Dunlop,
J.S., 2003b, ApJ, 599, 86
\bibitem[Smail(2003b)]{2003a}
Smail, I., Ivison, R.J., Gilbank, D.G., Dunlop, J.S., Keel, W.C.,
Motohara, K., \& Stevens, J.A., 2003a, ApJ, 583, 551
\bibitem{Smail} Smail, I., Ivison, R.\,J., Blain, A.\,W., \& Kneib, J.-P.,
2002, MNRAS, 331, 495
\bibitem[Steidel et al.(2000)]{2000ApJ...532..170S} Steidel, C.~C.,
Adelberger, K.~L., Shapley, A.~E., Pettini, M., Dickinson, M., \&
Giavalisco, M.\ 2000, \apj, 532, 170
\bibitem[Steidel et al.(2004)]{2004ApJ...604..534S} Steidel, C.~C.,
Shapley, A.~E., Pettini, M., Adelberger, K.~L., Erb, D.~K., Reddy, N.~A.,
\& Hunt, M.~P.\ 2004, \apj, 604, 534
\bibitem{Stevens} Stevens, J.A., et al. 2003, \nat, 425, 264
\bibitem{Swinbank} Swinbank, M.A., et al. 2004, ApJ, submitted
\bibitem[Tecza et al.(2004)]{2004ApJ...605L.109T} Tecza, M., et al.\ 2004,
\apjl, 605, L109
\bibitem{Webb} Webb, T.\,M., et al. 2003, ApJ, 582, 6
\bibitem{Wilson} Wilson, G. 2003, ApJ, 585, 191
\end{thebibliography}
%% Use the figure environment and \plotone or \plottwo to include
%% figures and captions in your electronic submission.
%% If you are not including electronic art with your submission, you may
%% mark up your captions using the \figcaption command. See the
%% User Guide for details.
%%
%% No more than seven \figcaption commands are allowed per page,
%% so if you have more than seven captions, insert a \clearpage
%% after every seventh one.
%% Tables should be submitted one per page, so put a \clearpage before
%% each one.
%% Two options are available to the author for producing tables: the
%% deluxetable environment provided by the AASTeX package or the LaTeX
%% table environment. Use of deluxetable is preferred.
%%
%% Three table samples follow, two marked up in the deluxetable environment,
%% one marked up as a LaTeX table.
%% In this first example, note that the \tabletypesize{}
%% command has been used to reduce the font size of the table.
%% Note also that the \label command needs to be placed
%% inside the \tablecaption.
\begin{deluxetable}{lllclllll}
%\tabletypesize{\scriptsize}
\tablecaption{
Correlation Lengths $r_0$ for Radio-pinpointed SMGs.
\label{tbl-1}
}
\tablewidth{0pt}
\tablehead{
\colhead{Field} & \colhead{R.A.} & \colhead{Decl.} &
\colhead{Size} & \colhead{$N_{\rm gal}$} &
\colhead{$N_{\rm pair}$} & \colhead{$z_{\rm as}$} & \colhead{$N'_{\rm pair}$}
& \colhead{$r_0$} \\
& & & \colhead{(arcsec)} & & & & & \colhead{($h^{-1}$\,Mpc)}
}
\startdata
All fields& ... & ... & ... & ... & ... & ... & ... & $6.9 \pm 2.1$ \\
All but SA22& ... & ... & ... & ... & ... & ... & ... & $5.5 \pm 1.8$ \\
03hr & 03 02 & 00 06 & $240 \times 280$ & 5 & 0 & ... & 0.20 & ... \\
Lockman & 10 52 & 57 20 & $360 \times 450$ & 12 & 2 & 2.1, 2.7 & 1.2 & $4.3 \pm 3$\\
HDF & 12 36 & 66 10 & $720 \times 900$ & 21 & 9 & 1.9, 2.0\tablenotemark{a} & 3.65 &
$9.5\pm3.3$ \\
%& & & & & & 2.4 & & \\
SA13 & 13 12 & 42 40 & $470 \times 540$ & 11 & 2 & 1.5, 2.6 & 0.99 & $6.1 \pm 4$\\
14hr & 14 18 & 52 29 & $320 \times 210$ & 7 & 1 & 2.1 & 0.40 & $5.3 \pm 5.3$ \\
N2 & 16 37 & 40 55 & $480 \times 750$ & 8 & 1 & 2.4 & 0.53 & $6.4 \pm 6.4$\\
SA22 & 22 18 & 00 12 & $820 \times 650$ & 9 & 3 & 3.1$\tablenotemark{b}$ &
1.0 & $15 \pm 9$ \\
\enddata
\tablecomments{
The total number
of spectroscopic redshifts $N_{\rm gal}$ and the numbers of
pairs of galaxies
$N_{\rm pair}$ within
1200\,km\,s$^{-1}$ in radial velocity at redshift $z_{\rm as}$ in each field
are listed, along with
the pair abundance predicted
in the absence of clustering $N'_{\rm pair}$. Units of right
ascension are hours and minutes, and units of declination are
degrees and arcminutes.
}
\bigskip
%% Text for table notes should follow after the \enddata but before
%% the \end{deluxetable}. Make sure there is at least one \tablenotemark
%% in the table for each \tablenotetext.
\tablenotetext{a}{This is a 5-galaxy association}
\tablenotetext{b}{
These three SMGs lie in the richest
spectroscopically confirmed high-redshift large-scale
structure (Steidel et al.\ 2000), which contains 29 of the 76 LBGs
in this field. If the width of the LBG redshift distribution
matched that of the SMG surveys, then only 15\% of
the LBGs
would lie in this structure, not the
3/9 found in the SMG survey. The comoving density of LBGs in the
best-sampled Westphal--14\,hr field is $4.6 \times 10^{-4}$\,Mpc$^{-3}$,
while the comoving density of SMGs in all the survey fields is
$(2.7 \pm 0.4) \times 10^{-5}$\,Mpc$^{-3}$, and in the HDF it is
$2.5 \times 10^{-5}$\,Mpc$^{-3}$.
}
%\tablecomments{Occasionally, authors wish to append a short
%paragraph of explanatory notes that pertain to the entire table, but
%which are different than the caption. Such notes should be placed in
%a {\tt tablecomments} command like this.}
\end{deluxetable}
%% If you use the table environment, please indicate horizontal rules using
%% \tableline, not \hline.
%% Do not put multiple tabular environments within a single table.
%% The optional \label should appear inside the \caption command.
\end{document}
%%
% End of file `sample.tex'.