Letter | Published:

Strangulation as the primary mechanism for shutting down star formation in galaxies

Nature volume 521, pages 192195 (14 May 2015) | Download Citation

Abstract

Local galaxies are broadly divided into two main classes, star-forming (gas-rich) and quiescent (passive and gas-poor). The primary mechanism responsible for quenching star formation in galaxies and transforming them into quiescent and passive systems is still unclear. Sudden removal of gas through outflows1,2,3,4,5,6 or stripping7,8,9 is one of the mechanisms often proposed. An alternative mechanism is so-called “strangulation”10,11,12,13,14, in which the supply of cold gas to the galaxy is halted. Here we report an analysis of the stellar metallicity (the fraction of elements heavier than helium in stellar atmospheres) in local galaxies, from 26,000 spectra, that clearly reveals that strangulation is the primary mechanism responsible for quenching star formation, with a typical timescale of four billion years, at least for local galaxies with a stellar mass less than 1011 solar masses. This result is further supported independently by the stellar age difference between quiescent and star-forming galaxies, which indicates that quiescent galaxies of less than 1011 solar masses are on average observed four billion years after quenching due to strangulation.

Access optionsAccess options

Rent or Buy article

Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.

from$8.99

All prices are NET prices.

References

  1. 1.

    , & Energy input from quasars regulates the growth and activity of black holes and their host galaxies. Nature 433, 604–607 (2005)

  2. 2.

    et al. Unified, merger-driven model of the origin of starbursts, quasars, the cosmic X-ray background, supermassive black holes, and galaxy spheroids. Astrophys. J. Suppl. Ser. 163, 1–49 (2006)

  3. 3.

    et al. Evidence of strong quasar feedback in the early Universe. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 425, L66–L70 (2012)

  4. 4.

    et al. High-velocity outflows without AGN feedback: Eddington-limited star formation in compact massive galaxies. Astrophys. J. 755, L26 (2012)

  5. 5.

    et al. The Sins/zC-Sinf survey of z 2 galaxy kinematics: evidence for powerful active galactic nucleus-driven nuclear outflows in massive star-forming galaxies. Astrophys. J. 787, 38 (2014)

  6. 6.

    et al. Massive molecular outflows and evidence for AGN feedback from CO observations. Astron. Astrophys. 562, A21 (2014)

  7. 7.

    & On the infall of matter into clusters of galaxies and some effects on their evolution. Astrophys. J. 176, 1–19 (1972)

  8. 8.

    , & Ram pressure stripping of spiral galaxies in clusters. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 308, 947–954 (1999)

  9. 9.

    , & Gone with the wind: the origin of S0 galaxies in clusters. Science 288, 1617–1620 (2000)

  10. 10.

    , & The evolution of disk galaxies and the origin of S0 galaxies. Astrophys. J. 237, 692–707 (1980)

  11. 11.

    & α photometry of Abell 2390. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 318, 703–714 (2000)

  12. 12.

    , & The origin of star formation gradients in rich galaxy clusters. Astrophys. J. 540, 113–121 (2000)

  13. 13.

    , , & How do galaxies get their gas? Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 363, 2–28 (2005)

  14. 14.

    & Galaxy bimodality due to cold flows and shock heating. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 368, 2–20 (2006)

  15. 15.

    et al. Mass and environment as drivers of galaxy evolution in SDSS and zCOSMOS and the origin of the Schechter function. Astrophys. J. 721, 193–221 (2010)

  16. 16.

    , & Chemical enrichment of the intracluster and intergalactic medium in a hierarchical galaxy formation model. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 349, 1101–1116 (2004)

  17. 17.

    et al. Feedback and recycled wind accretion: assembling the z = 0 galaxy mass function. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 406, 2325–2338 (2010)

  18. 18.

    , & On the galaxy stellar mass function, the mass-metallicity relation and the implied baryonic mass function. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 388, 945–959 (2008)

  19. 19.

    & Constraints on star formation driven galaxy winds from the mass-metallicity relation at z = 0. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 417, 2962–2981 (2011)

  20. 20.

    et al. Cold gas properties of the Herschel Reference Survey. II. Molecular and total gas scaling relations. Astron. Astrophys. 564, A66 (2014)

  21. 21.

    et al. The evolution of the dust and gas content in galaxies. Astron. Astrophys. 562, A30 (2014)

  22. 22.

    , , & Galaxy evolution in groups and clusters: satellite star formation histories and quenching time-scales in a hierarchical Universe. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 432, 336–358 (2013)

  23. 23.

    et al. The influence of the environmental history on quenching star formation in a Λ cold dark matter universe. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 444, 2938–2959 (2014)

  24. 24.

    et al. The green valley is a red herring: Galaxy Zoo reveals two evolutionary pathways towards quenching of star formation in early- and late-type galaxies. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 440, 889–907 (2014)

  25. 25.

    , , & Two conditions for galaxy quenching: compact centres and massive haloes. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 448, 237–251 (2015)

  26. 26.

    , & Galaxy evolution in cosmological simulations with outflows—II. Metallicities and gas fractions. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 416, 1354–1376 (2011)

  27. 27.

    , & Stellar feedback in galaxies and the origin of galaxy-scale winds. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 421, 3522–3537 (2012)

  28. 28.

    et al. Massive molecular outflows and evidence for AGN feedback from CO observations. Astron. Astrophys. 562, A21 (2014)

  29. 29.

    , & An analytic model for the evolution of the stellar, gas and metal content of galaxies. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 421, 98–107 (2012)

  30. 30.

    Carollo, C. M. et al. ZENS IV. Similar morphological changes associated with mass- and environment-quenching, and the relative importance of bulge growth versus the fading of disks. Astrophys. J. (submitted)

  31. 31.

    , , & Mass and environment as drivers of galaxy evolution. II. The quenching of satellite galaxies as the origin of environmental effects. Astrophys. J. 757, 4 (2012)

  32. 32.

    & K-corrections and filter transformations in the ultraviolet, optical, and near-infrared. Astron. J. 133, 734–754 (2007)

  33. 33.

    & Stellar population synthesis at the resolution of 2003. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 344, 1000–1028 (2003)

  34. 34.

    et al. The physical properties of star-forming galaxies in the low-redshift Universe. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 351, 1151–1179 (2004)

  35. 35.

    , , , & The ages and metallicities of galaxies in the local universe. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 362, 41–58 (2005)

  36. 36.

    , , , & Gas regulation of galaxies: the evolution of the cosmic specific star formation rate, the metallicity-mass-star-formation rate relation, and the stellar content of halos. Astrophys. J. 772, 119 (2013)

  37. 37.

    & From haloes to galaxies—I. The dynamics of the gas regulator model and the implied cosmic sSFR history. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 443, 3643–3664 (2014)

  38. 38.

    et al. The star formation law in nearby galaxies on sub-kpc scales. Astrophys. J. 136, 2846–2871 (2008)

  39. 39.

    et al. The Gemini Deep Deep Survey. VII. The redshift evolution of the mass-metallicity relation. Astrophys. J. 635, 260–279 (2005)

  40. 40.

    et al. AMAZE. I. The evolution of the mass-metallicity relation at z > 3. Astron. Astrophys. 488, 463–479 (2008)

  41. 41.

    Surface brightness and evolution of galaxies. Astrophys. J. 209, L1–L5 (1976)

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank A. Gallazzi and her collaborators for making their SDSS DR4 version of the stellar ages and metallicities catalogues publicly available. We thank S. Lilly, A. Renzini, H.-W. Rix and M. Haehnelt for useful discussions. We acknowledge NASA’s IDL Astronomy Users Library, the IDL code base maintained by D. Schlegel, and the kcorrect software package of M. Blanton.

Author information

Affiliations

  1. Cavendish Laboratory, University of Cambridge, 19 J. J. Thomson Avenue, Cambridge CB3 0HE, UK

    • Y. Peng
    • , R. Maiolino
    •  & R. Cochrane
  2. Kavli Institute for Cosmology, University of Cambridge, Madingley Road, Cambridge CB3 0HA, UK

    • Y. Peng
    •  & R. Maiolino
  3. Institute for Astronomy, Royal Observatory Edinburgh, Blackford Hill, Edinburgh EH9 3HJ, UK

    • R. Cochrane

Authors

  1. Search for Y. Peng in:

  2. Search for R. Maiolino in:

  3. Search for R. Cochrane in:

Contributions

Y.P. and R.M. co-developed the idea; both contributed to the interpretation and manuscript writing. Y.P. and R.C. contributed to the measurements and analysis.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing financial interests.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Y. Peng.

Extended data

About this article

Publication history

Received

Accepted

Published

DOI

https://doi.org/10.1038/nature14439

Further reading

Comments

By submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms and Community Guidelines. If you find something abusive or that does not comply with our terms or guidelines please flag it as inappropriate.