Physical properties of galaxies and their evolution in the VIMOS VLT Deep Survey. I. The evolution of the mass-metallicity relation up to z~0.9

TL;DR

This study investigates how the relationship between galaxy mass and metallicity evolves up to redshift 0.9, revealing a flattening trend that supports the open-closed galaxy evolution model.

Contribution

It provides the first detailed analysis of the mass-metallicity relation evolution up to z~0.9 using VIMOS VLT Deep Survey data, including new empirical calibrations.

Findings

Mass-metallicity relation flattens at higher redshift.

Stronger metallicity evolution observed in the wide sample.

Supports the open-closed galaxy evolution model.

Abstract

We derive the mass-metallicity relation of star-forming galaxies up to $z\sim0.9$, using data from the VIMOS VLT Deep Survey. Automatic measurement of emission-line fluxes and equivalent widths have been performed on the full spectroscopic sample. This sample is divided into two sub-samples depending on the apparent magnitude selection: wide ($I_{\mathrm{AB}}<22.5$) and deep $I_{\mathrm{AB}}<24$). These two samples span two different ranges of stellar masses. Emission-line galaxies have been separated into star-forming galaxies and active galactic nuclei using emission line ratios. For the star-forming galaxies the emission line ratios have also been used to estimate gas-phase oxygen abundance, using empirical calibrations renormalized in order to give consistent results at low and high redshifts. The stellar masses have been estimated by fitting the whole spectral energy distributions with a set of stellar population synthesis models. We assume at first order that the shape of the mass-metallicity relation remains constant with redshift. Then we find a stronger metallicity evolution in the wide sample as compared to the deep sample. We thus conclude that the mass-metallicity relation is flatter at higher redshift. The observed flattening of the mass-metallicity relation at high redshift is analyzed as an evidence in favor of the open-closed model.