Intracluster light (ICL) is diffuse light from stars that are gravitationally bound not to individual member galaxies, but to the halo of galaxy clusters. Leading theories1,2 predict that the ICL fraction, defined by the ratio of the ICL to the total light, rapidly decreases with increasing redshift, to the level of a few per cent at z > 1. However, observational studies have remained inconclusive about the fraction beyond redshift unity because, to date, only two clusters in this redshift regime have been investigated. One shows a much lower fraction than the mean value at low redshift3, whereas the other possesses a fraction similar to the low-redshift value4. Here we report an ICL study of ten galaxy clusters at 1 ≲ z ≲ 2 based on deep infrared imaging data. Contrary to the leading theories, our study finds that ICL is already abundant at z ≳ 1, with a mean ICL fraction of approximately 17%. Moreover, no significant correlation between cluster mass and ICL fraction or between ICL colour and cluster-centric radius is observed. Our findings suggest that gradual stripping can no longer be the dominant mechanism of ICL formation. Instead, our study supports the scenario wherein the dominant ICL production occurs in tandem with the formation and growth of the brightest cluster galaxies and/or through the accretion of preprocessed stray stars.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution
Subscribe to Nature+
Get immediate online access to Nature and 55 other Nature journal
Subscribe to Journal
Get full journal access for 1 year
only $3.90 per issue
All prices are NET prices.
VAT will be added later in the checkout.
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.
Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.
All prices are NET prices.
An exhaustive repository of code for our custom data processing and analyses reported in this manuscript are available on the github repository at https://github.com/Hyungjin-Joo/High_z_ICL.
Rudick, C. S., Mihos, J. C. & McBride, C. K. The quantity of intracluster light: comparing theoretical and observational measurement techniques using simulated clusters. Astrophys. J. 732, 48–64 (2011).
Contini, E., De Lucia, G., Villalobos, Á. & Bogani, S. On the formation and physical properties of the intracluster light in hierarchical galaxy formation models. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 437, 3787–3802 (2014).
Burke, C., Collins, C. A., Stott, J. P. & Hilton, M. Measurement of the intracluster at z ~ 1. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 425, 2058–2068 (2012).
Ko, J. & Jee, M. J. Evidence for the existence of abundant intracluster light at z = 1.24. Astrophys. J. 862, 95–103 (2018).
Montes, M. & Trujillo, I. Intracluster light at the Frontier - II. The Frontier Fields Clusters. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 474, 917–932 (2018).
DeMaio, T. et al. The growth of brightest cluster galaxies and intracluster light over the past 10 billion years. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 491, 3751–3759 (2020).
Gonzalez, A. H. et al. Galaxy cluster baryon fractions revisited. Astrophys. J. 778, 14–29 (2013).
Presotto, V. et al. Intracluster light properties in the CLASH-VLT cluster MACS J1206.2-0847. Astron. Astrophys. 565, A126 (2014).
Contini, E., Yi, S. K. & Kang, X. Theoretical predictions of colors and metallicity of the intracluster light. Astrophys. J. 871, 24–33 (2019).
Burke, C., Hilton, M. & Collins, C. Coevolution of brightest cluster galaxies and intracluster light using CLASH. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 449, 2353–2367 (2015).
Morishita, T. et al. Characterizing intracluster light in the Hubble Frontier Fields. Astrophys. J. 846, 139–151 (2017).
Almao-Martinez, K. A. & Blakeslee, J. P. Specific frequencies and luminosity profiles of cluster galaxies and intracluster light in Abell 1689. Astrophys. J. 849, 6–24 (2017).
Ellien, A. et al. The complex case of MACS J0717.5+6745 and its extended filament: intra-cluster light, galaxy luminosity function, and galaxy orientations. Astron. Astrophys. 628, A34 (2019).
Feldmeier, J. J. et al. Intracluster planetary nebulae in the Virgo Cluster. III. Luminosity of the intracluster light and tests of the spatial distribution. Astrophys. J. 615, 196–208 (2004).
Griffiths, A. et al. MUSE spectroscopy and deep observations of a unique compact JWST target, lensing cluster CLIO. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 475, 2853–2869 (2018).
Jee, M. J. Tracing the peculiar dark matter structure in the galaxy cluster Cl 0024+17 with intracluster stars and gas. Astrophys. J. 717, 420–434 (2010).
Jimenez-Teja, Y. et al. Unveiling the dynamical state of massive clusters through the ICL fraction. Astrophys. J. 857, 79–96 (2018).
Jimenez-Teja, Y. et al. J-PLUS: analysis of the intracluster light in the Coma cluster. Astrophys. J. 522, A183 (2019).
Krick, J. E. & Berstein, R. A. Diffuse optical light in galaxy clusters. II. Correlations with cluster properties. Astrophys. J. 134, 466–493 (2007).
Mihos, J. C. Intragroup and intracluster light. in Proc. IAU Symp.: The General Assembly of Galaxy Halos: Structure, Origin and Evolution vol. 317 (eds Bragaglia, A., Arnaboldi, M., Rejkuba, M. & Romano, D.) 27–34 (Int. Astron. Union, 2015).
Yoo, J. et al. Intracluster light properties in a fossil cluster at z = 0.47. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 508, 2634–2649 (2021).
Montes, M. The faint light in groups and clusters of galaxies. Nature. Astro. 6, 308–316 (2022).
Navarro, J. F., Frenck, C. S. & White, S. D. M. The structure of cold dark matter halos. Astrophys. J. 462, 563–575 (1996).
Asensio, I. A. et al. The intracluster light as a tracer of the total matter density distribution: a view from simulations. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 494, 1859–1864 (2020).
Pillepich, A. et al. First results from the IllustrisTNG simulations: the stellar mass content of groups and clusters of galaxies. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 475, 648–675 (2018).
Murante, G. et al. The diffuse light in simulations of galaxy clusters. Astrophys. J. Lett. 607, 83–86 (2004).
Purcell, C. W., Bullock, J. S. & Zentner, A. R. Shredded galaxies as the source of diffuse intrahalo light on varying scales. Astrophys. J. 666, 20–33 (2007).
Furnell, K. E. et al. The growth of intracluster light in XCS-HSC galaxy clusters from 0.1 < z < 0.5. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 502, 2419–2437 (2021).
Guennou, L. et al. Intracluster light in clusters of galaxies at redshifts 0.4 < z < 0.8. Astron. Astrophys. 537, A64 (2012).
Contini, E. On the origin and evolution of the intra-cluster light: a brief review of the most recent developments. MDPI. 9, 60 (2021).
Murante, G. et al. The importance of mergers for the origin of intracluster stars in cosmological simulations of galaxy clusters. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 377, 2–16 (2007).
Contini, E., Yi, S. K. & Kang, E. The different growth pathways of brightest cluster galaxies and intracluster light. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 479, 932–944 (2018).
Tang, L. et al. An investigation of intracluster light evolution using cosmological hydrodynamical simulations. Astrophys. J. 859, 85–97 (2018).
DeMaio, T. et al. On the origin of the intracluster light in massive galaxy clusters. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 448, 1162–1177 (2015).
DeMaio, T. et al. Lost but not forgotten: intracluster light in galaxy groups and clusters. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 474, 3009–3031 (2018).
Sahu, K. WFC3 Data Handbook v.5.5 (STScI, 2021).
Hoffmann, S. L. et al. The DrizzlePac Handbook v. 2.0 (STScI, 2021).
Bertin, E. & Arnouts, S. SExtractor: software for source extraction. Astron. Astrophys. 117, 393–404 (1996).
Stone, C. J. et al. AutoProf - I. An automated non-parametric light profile pipeline for modern galaxy surveys. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 508, 1870–1887 (2021).
Sérsic, J. L. Influence of the atmospheric and instrumental dispersion on the brightness distribution in a galaxy. Boletin de la Asociacion Argentina de Astronomia La Plata Argentina 6, 41–43 (1963).
Krist, J. Tiny Tim: an HST PSF simulator. Astronomical Data Analysis Software and Systems II. 52, 536 (1993).
Oser, L. et al. The two phases of galaxy formation. Astrophys. J. 725, 2312–2323 (2010).
Huang, S. et al. The Carnegie-Irvine Galaxy Survey. III. The three-component structure of nearby elliptical galaxies. Astrophys. J. 766, 47 (2013).
Huang, S. et al. The Carnegie-Irvine Galaxy Survey. IV. A method to determine the average mass ratio of mergers that built massive elliptical galaxies. Astrophys. J. 821, 114–133 (2016).
Gill, J. Bayesian Methods: A Social Behavioral Science Approch 2nd edn (CRC, 2008).
Balogh, M. L. et al. The GOGREEN and GCLASS surveys: first data release. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 500, 358–387 (2021).
Santos, J. S. et al. Multiwavelength observations of a rich galaxy cluster at z ~ 1. The HST/ACS colour-magnitude diagram. Astron. Astrophys. 501, 49–60 (2009).
Gongalez, A. H. et al. The massive and distant clusters of WISE Survey: MOO J1142+1527, a 1015 M⊙ galaxy cluster at z = 1.19. Astrophys. J. L. 812, L40 (2015).
Demarco, R. et al. VLT and ACS observations of RDCS J1252.9-2927: dynamical structure and galaxy populations in a massive cluster at z = 1.237. Astrophys. J. 663, 164–182 (2007).
Decker, B. et al. The massive and distant clusters of WISE Survey. VI. Stellar mass fractions of a sample of high-redshift infrared-selected clusters. Astrophys. J. 878, 72–84 (2019).
Santos, J. S. et al. Dust-obscured star formation in the outskirts of XMMU J2235.3-2557, a massive galaxy cluster at z = 1.4. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 433, 1287–1299 (2013).
Webb, T. M. A. et al. The star formation history of BCGs to z = 1.8 from the SpARCS/SWIRE Survey: evidence for significant in situ star formation at high redshift. Astrophys. J. 814, 96–107 (2015).
Stanford, S. A. et al. IDCS J1426.5+3508: discovery of a massive, infrared-selected galaxy cluster at z = 1.75. Astrophys. J. 753, 164–171 (2012).
Newman, A. B. et al. Spectroscopic confirmation of the rich z = 1.80 galaxy cluster JKCS 041 using the WFC3 grism: environmental trends in the ages and structure of quiescent galaxies. Astrophys. J. 788, 51–76 (2014).
This study is based on observations created with NASA/ESA Hubble Space Telescope and downloaded from the Mikulski Archive for Space Telescope at the Space Telescope Science Institute. The current research is supported by the National Research Foundation of Korea under programme 2022R1A2C1003130 and the Yonsei Future-Leading Research Initiative programme.
The authors declare no competing interests.
Peer review information
Nature thanks Emanuele Contini and the other, anonymous, reviewer(s) for their contribution to the peer review of this work.
Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Extended data figures and tables
(A) Exposure map for the single-frame image. (B) Same as (C) except that it is for the mosaic image. (C) Science image for single frame. (D) Same as (C) except that it is for the mosaic image. The pink circular region in (A) is the region that is observed in common by all contributing frames. (B) shows how this common region is positioned in one of the input frames. As the central region of this circle is likely to be heavily influenced by the ICL, we excluded the central region and instead defined the annulus shown in (C) and (D) to estimate the background level.
(A), (B) and (C) illustrate our scheme for masking size growth from the original to the ce = 2 and ce = 6 cases. Note that we exhaust pixels for ICL measurement at ce = 6. In (D), we show how the background level (green) changes as we vary the masking size using the expansion coefficient for a single exposure. We observe that at ce ≳ 6 the measurement converges (red). The black solid line indicates the result when instead we use a 3σ clipping algorithm without considering the diffuse wings of the astronomical objects. The yellow line shows the surface brightness level measured at each ce. (E) is the same as the left except that the measurement is from the final deep stack. Solid lines indicate the median value and shaded regions show the 68% uncertainty. As the image is deeper, the number of pixels discarded (masked out) at the same ce value is much greater.
Dark grey rectangles show the steps where external packages are used, while light grey rectangles illustrate our custom procedures. Parallelograms represent the input/output data.
Here we display the case for SPT2106. (A) Colour–magnitude diagram. Black dots are all sources detected by SExtractor. The red dots represent the spectroscopic members, whereas the orange dots are our red sequence candidates. The BCG is indicated with a red star. The red dashed line shows the final, best-fit red sequence. The dot-dashed lines bracket the 68% distribution. (B) Distribution of the F105W < 26 object distances from the best-fit red sequence. The green line shows the best-fit double Gaussian models. The yellow line illustrates a single Gaussian component, which represents the distribution of the red sequence candidates.
The mass comes from weak lensing studies. No significant correlation between ICL fraction and mass is found.
About this article
Cite this article
Joo, H., Jee, M.J. Intracluster light is already abundant at redshift beyond unity. Nature 613, 37–41 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-022-05396-4