# MIPS 24-160 $\mu$m photometry for the Herschel-SPIRE Local Galaxies
Guaranteed Time Programs

G. J. Bendo1,2, F. Galliano3, S. C. Madden3
1 UK ALMA Regional Centre Node, Jodrell Bank Centre for Astrophysics, School
of Physics and Astronomy, University of Manchester, Oxford Road,
Manchester M13 9PL, United Kingdom
2 Astrophysics Group, Imperial College, Blackett Laboratory, Prince Consort
Road, London SW7 2AZ, United Kingdom
3 Laboratoire AIM, CEA, Université Paris Diderot, IRFU/Service
d’Astrophysique, Bat. 709, 91191 Gif-sur-Yvette, France

###### Abstract

We provide an overview of ancillary 24, 70, and 160 $\mu$m data from the
Multiband Imaging Photometer for Spitzer (MIPS) that are intended to
complement the 70-500 $\mu$m Herschel Space Observatory photometry data for
nearby galaxies obtained by the Herschel-SPIRE Local Galaxies Guaranteed Time
Programs and the Herschel Virgo Cluster Survey. The MIPS data can be used to
extend the photometry to wave bands that are not observed in these Herschel
surveys and to check the photometry in cases where Herschel performs
observations at the same wavelengths. Additionally, we measured globally-
integrated 24-160 $\mu$m flux densities for the galaxies in the sample that
can be used for the construction of spectral energy distributions. Using MIPS
photometry published by other references, we have confirmed that we are
obtaining accurate photometry for these galaxies.

###### keywords:

infrared: galaxies, galaxies: photometry, catalogues

††pagerange: MIPS 24-160 $\mu$m photometry for the Herschel-SPIRE Local
Galaxies Guaranteed Time Programs–References

##  1 Introduction

The Herschel-SPIRE Local Galaxies Guaranteed Time Programs (SAG2) comprise
several Herschel Space Observatory (Pilbratt et al., 2010) programs that used
primarily the Photodetector Array Camera and Spectrometer (PACS; Poglitsch et
al., 2010) and Spectral and Photometric Imaging Receiver (SPIRE; Griffin et
al., 2010) to perform far-infrared and submillimetre observations of galaxies
in the nearby universe. Three of the programs include photometric surveys of
galaxies. The Very Nearby Galaxies Survey (VNGS; PI: C. D. Wilson) has
performed 70-500 $\mu$m photometric and spectroscopic observations of 13
archetypal nearby galaxies that includes Arp 220, M51, and M81. The Dwarf
Galaxy Survey (DGS; PI: S. C. Madden) is a 70-500 $\mu$m photometric and
spectroscopic survey of 48 dwarf galaxies selected to span a range of
metallicities (with 12+log(O/H) values ranging from 7.2 to 8.5). The Herschel
Reference Survey (HRS; Boselli et al., 2010) is a 250-500 $\mu$m photometric
survey of a volume-limited sample of 323 nearby galaxies designed to include
both field and Virgo Cluster galaxies. The HRS also significantly overlaps
with the Herschel Virgo Cluster Survey (HeViCS Davies et al., 2010a), a
100-500 $\mu$m survey that will image 60 square degrees of the Virgo Cluster,
and both collaborations will be sharing their data.

The far-infrared and submillimetre photometric data from these surveys can be
used to construct spectral energy distributions (SEDs) of the dust emission
and to map the distribution of cold dust within these galaxies. However, the
surveys benefit greatly from the inclusion of 24, 70, and 160 $\mu$m data from
the Multiband Imaging Photometer for Spitzer (MIPS; Rieke et al., 2004), the
far-infrared photometric imager on board the Spitzer Space Telescope (Werner
et al., 2004). The 24 $\mu$m MIPS data are particularly important either when
attempting to model the complete dust emission from individual galaxies, as it
provides constraints on the hot dust emission, or when attempting to measure
accurate star formation rates, as 24 $\mu$m emission has been shown to be
correlated with other star formation tracers (Calzetti et al., 2005, 2007;
Prescott et al., 2007; Kennicutt et al., 2007, 2009; Zhu et al., 2008). The 70
$\mu$m MIPS data are less critical for the VNGS and DGS galaxies, which have
been mapped with PACS at 70 $\mu$m, but the data are more important for the
HRS galaxies, most of which will not be mapped with PACS at 70 $\mu$m. None
the less, the MIPS 70 $\mu$m data can be used to check the PACS photometry,
and the data may be useful as a substitute for PACS photometry in situations
where the MIPS data are able to detect emission at higher signal-to-noise
levels but where the higher resolution of PACS is not needed. For galaxies
without 70 $\mu$m PACS observations, the MIPS data will provide an important
additional data point that is useful for constraining the part of the far-
infrared SED that represents the transition between the $\sim 20$ K dust
emission from the diffuse interstellar medium and the hot dust emission from
large grains in star forming regions and very small grains. The 160 $\mu$m
MIPS data are less important, as 160 $\mu$m PACS observations with equivalent
sensitivities and smaller PSFs have been performed on the VNGS and DGS samples
as well as the fraction of the HRS sample that falls within the HeViCS fields.
For these galaxies, the MIPS 160 $\mu$m data can primarily be used to check
PACS 160 $\mu$m photometry. An additional follow-up program (Completing the
PACS coverage of the Herschel Reference Survey, P.I.: L. Cortese) has been
submitted to perform PACS 160 $\mu$m observations on the HRS galaxies outside
the HeViCS field. However, those observations have not yet been performed at
the time of this writing, so the MIPS 160 $\mu$m data can serve as a
substitute for the missing PACS data.

The pipeline processing from the MIPS archive is not optimized for
observations of individual galaxies. The final 24 $\mu$m images may include
gradients from zodiacal light emission, incomplete flatfielding, and
foreground asteroids, while the 70 and 160 $\mu$m images may include short-
term variations in the background signal (“drift”). Moreover, many galaxies
are often observed multiple times in multiple Astronomical Observation
Requests (AORs), and optimal images can often be produced by combining the
data from these multiple AORs, which is something that the MIPS pipeline is
not designed to do. Hence, to get the best MIPS images for analysis, it is
necessary to reprocess the archival data.

Work on reprocessing the archival MIPS data for the SAG2 and HeViCS programs
has been ongoing since before the launch of Herschel. Either these reprocessed
MIPS data or earlier versions of the data have already been used in multiple
papers from the SAG2 collaboration (Cortese et al., 2010a; Eales et al., 2010;
Galametz et al., 2010; Gomez et al., 2010; O’Halloran et al., 2010; Pohlen et
al., 2010; Sauvage et al., 2010; Auld et al., 2011; Bendo et al., 2012; Smith
et al., 2011; Foyle et al., 2012) and the HeViCS collaboration (de Looze et
al., 2010; Smith et al., 2010; Davies et al., 2012), and the data have also
been used in other publications outside of these collaboration (Young et al.,
2009; Wilson et al., 2009; Whaley et al., 2009; Galametz et al., 2010; Cortese
et al., 2010b; Bendo et al., 2010; de Looze et al., 2011). The data processing
has been described with some details in some of these papers but not in
others. Global photometry measurements (printed numerical values, not just
data points shown in figures) have only been published for 11 galaxies, and
some of the measurements are based either on older versions of the data
processing or on images created before all of the MIPS data for the targets
were available.

The goal of this paper is to describe the MIPS data processing for SAG2 in
detail and to present photometry for all of the SAG2 galaxies as well as the
500 $\mu$m flux-limited sample of HeViCS galaxies published by Davies et al.
(2012). While the MIPS data is incomplete for the DGS, HRS, and HeViCS samples
and hence cannot be used to create statistically complete datasets, the data
are still useful for constructing SEDs for individual galaxies and subsets of
galaxies in the SAG2 and HeViCS samples. The paper is divided into two primary
sections. Section 2 describes the data processing in detail. Section 3
describes the globally-integrated photometry for these galaxies, which can be
used as a reference for other papers, and also discusses how the photometry
compares to the MIPS photometry from other surveys.

##  2 Data processing

###  2.1 Overview of MIPS

This section gives a brief overview of the MIPS instrument and the type of
data produced by the instrument. Additional information on the instrument and
the arrays can be found in the MIPS Instrument Handbook (MIPS Instrument and
MIPS Instrument Support Teams, 2011)181818The MIPS Instrument Handbooks is
available at http://irsa.ipac.caltech.edu/data/SPITZER/docs/mips/
mipsinstrumenthandbook/MIPS_Instrument_Handbook.pdf ..

MIPS has four basic observing modes, but most observations were performed in
one of the two imaging modes. The photometry map mode produced maps of
multiple dithered frames that were usually $\sim 5$ arcmin in size. The
observing mode could also be used to produce raster maps or could be used in
cluster mode to produce maps of multiple objects that are close to each other.
Although intended to be used for observing sources smaller than 5 arcmin, the
mode was sometimes used to image larger objects. Because the 24, 70, and 160
$\mu$m arrays are offset from each other in the imaging plane, observations in
each wave band need to be performed in separate pointings. The scan map
observing mode was designed to be used primarily for observing objects larger
than 5 arcmin. The telescope scans in a zig-zag pattern where each of the
arrays in the instrument pass over the target region in each scan leg. In
typical observations, the telescope scans a region that is 1 degree in length,
although longer scan maps were also produced with the instrument. In both
observing modes, a series of individual data frames are taken in a cycle with
the telescope pointing at different offsets from the target. These cycles
include stimflash observations, which are frames in which the arrays are
illuminated with an internal calibration source. Between 6 and 32 frames may
be taken during a photometry map observation. In scan map observations, the
number of frames per cycle may vary, but the data are always bracketed by
stimflash frames. In typical 1 degree long scan map legs taken with the medium
scan rate, each scan leg contains 4 cycles of data, and each cycle contains 25
frames.

The other two observing modes were a 65-97 $\mu$m low resolution spectroscopy
mode using the 70 $\mu$m array and a total power mode that could be used to
measure the total emission from the sky. However, since our interest is in
working with photometric images of individual galaxies, we did not use the
data from either of these observing modes.

Details on the three arrays are given in Table 1. The 70 $\mu$m array is
actually a $32\times 32$ array, but half of the array was effectively
unusable, so the array effectively functions as a $32\times 16$ array. Details
on the effective viewing area are given in the table. Also, the 70 $\mu$m
array can be used in wide field-of-view and super-resolution modes for
producing photometry maps, but virtually no super-resolution data was taken
for our target galaxies, so we only list data for the wide field-of-view mode.

Table 1: Data on the three MIPS arraysa

Wave Band | Pixel Size | Array Size | PSF FWHMb | Flux Conversion Factors | Calibration
---|---|---|---|---|---
($\mu$m) | (arcsec) | (pixels) | (arcmin) | (arcsec) | (MJy/sr) [MIPS unit]-1 | Uncertainty
24 | $2.5\times 2.6$ | $128\times 128$ | $5.4\times 5.4$ | 6c |  $4.54\times 10^{-2}$c | 4%c
70 | $9.9\times 10.1$ | $32\times 16$ | $5.2\times 2.6$ | 18d | $702^{d}$ | 10%d
160 | $16\times 18$ | $2\times 20$ | $2.1\times 5.3$ | 38e | $41.7^{e}$ | 12%e

a Except where noted, these data come from the MIPS Instrument Handbook (MIPS
Instrument and MIPS Instrument Support Teams, 2011).

b This is the full-width and half-maximum (FWHM) of the point spread function
(PSF).

c Data are from Engelbracht et al. (2007).

d Data are from Gordon et al. (2007).

e Data are from Stansberry et al. (2007).

###  2.2 Overview of data

####  2.2.1 Archival data

Spitzer observations of multiple galaxies within the SAG2 samples were
performed in other survey programs before SAG2 began working on the MIPS
analysis and data reduction. The only Spitzer observing program devoted to
SAG2 photometry that was awarded observing time was a program that included
MIPS 24 $\mu$m observations for 10 of the DGS galaxies, which is described in
the next subsection. All other MIPS data originate from an assortment of
programs. Some galaxies were observed as specific targets in surveys of nearby
galaxies. Others were observed in surveys of wide fields, such as the wide
field surveys of the Virgo Cluster. Still others were serendipitously observed
in observations with other targets, such as scan map observations of zodiacal
light. Both photometry maps and scan map data are available for these
galaxies. Consequently, the observed areas vary significantly among the
galaxies. The coverage (the number of data frames covering each pixel in the
final mosaics) and on-source integration times also vary among the galaxies.

Given the inhomogeneity of the data as well as the incomplete coverage of the
galaxies in the sample, we opted to use all data available for every galaxy to
produce the best images for each galaxy. This means that the data set will not
be uniform and that the noise levels in the data will vary among the galaxies
in the sample, but the resulting images will be the best on hand for analysis.
While we generally attempted to use all available, we made some judgments on
selecting data for final images. When both scan map and photometry map data
were available for individual galaxies, we used only the scan map data to
create final images if the optical discs of the galaxies were larger than the
areas covered in the photometry maps or if the background area in the
photometry map was too small to allow us to apply data processing steps that
rely on measurements from the background in on-target frames. We also did not
use observations that covered less than half of the optical discs of
individual objects. When multiple objects were covered in regions covered in
multiple overlapping or adjacent AORs, we made larger mosaics using all of the
data whenever technically feasible. Also, for photometry map data, we often
used the serendipitous data taken when individual arrays were in off-target
positions if those fields covered galaxies in our samples, and when multiple
fields were observed using the cluster option in the photometry map data (see
the MIPS Instrument handbook by the MIPS Instrument and MIPS Instrument
Support Teams, 2011), we combined the data from all pointings that covered
SAG2 or HeViCS galaxies.

####  2.2.2 SAG2 observations of dwarf galaxies

Ten of the dwarf galaxies were observed by DGS with MIPS in cycle 5 as part of
the program Dust Evolution in Low-Metallicity Environments: Bridging the Gap
Between Local Universe and Primordial Galaxies (PI: F. Galliano; ID: 50550).
Since these were objects smaller than 5 arcmin in diameter and since SAG2
intended to rely upon Herschel for 70 and 160 $\mu$m photometry, these
galaxies were mapped only at 24 $\mu$m using the photometry map mode. One AOR
was performed per object. Each observation uses a dither pattern to cover a
$\sim 6$ arcmin square region around the targets, and the integration times
were set to 3 s per frame, giving a total time of 328 s per AOR.

###  2.3 Data processing for individual data frames

The raw data from the Spitzer archive were reprocessed using the MIPS Data
Analysis Tools (Gordon et al., 2005) along with additional processing steps,
some of which are performed by software from the MIPS Instrument Team and some
of which were developed independently. The scan map data processing is a
variant of the data processing pipeline used in the fourth data delivery of
MIPS data from the Spitzer Infrared Nearby Galaxies Survey (SINGS; Kennicutt
et al., 2003), although changes have been made to the background subtraction,
and an asteroid removal step has been added to the 24 $\mu$m data processing.
Although other data processing software for MIPS is available from the Spitzer
Science Center, we have continued to use the MIPS DAT because of our
familiarity with the software and because we have developed an extensive range
of tools to work with the intermediate and final data products produced by the
MIPS DAT.

Separate sections are used to describe the processing steps applied to the 24
$\mu$m data frames and the steps applied to the 70 and 160 $\mu$m data frames,
as the data from the 24 $\mu$m silicon-based detectors differs somewhat from
the data from the 70 and 160 $\mu$m germanium-gallium detectors. The tools for
processing photometry map data frames differ slightly from the tools for the
scan map data frames. However, the differences are small enough that it is
possible to describe the data processing for both observing modes in the same
sections. The mosaicking and post-processing steps applied to all data are
very similar, and so these steps are described in the last subsection.

####  2.3.1 MIPS 24 $\mu$m data frame processing

The raw 24 $\mu$m data consist of slopes to the ramps measured by the
detectors (the counts accumulated in each pixel during non-destructive
readouts). The following data processing steps were applied to MIPS 24 $\mu$m
data frames:

  * $1$.

The MIPS DAT program mips_sloper was applied to the frames. This applies a
droop correction, which removes an excess signal in each detector that is
proportional to the signal in the entire array, a dark current subtraction,
and an electronic nonlinearity correction.

  * $2$.

The MIPS DAT program mips_caler was applied to the data frames. This corrects
the detector responsivity using a mirror-position dependent flatfield that
removes spots from the images caused by material on the scan mirror. This data
processing step also included a correction for variations in the readout
offsets between different columns in the data frames.

  * $3$.

To remove latent images from bright sources, pixels with signals above 2500
MIPS units in individual frames were masked out in the following three frames.
In a few cases, this threshold was lowered to remove additional latent image
effects.

  * $4$.

When some 24 $\mu$m data frames were made, the array was hit by strong cosmic
rays that also caused severe “jailbar” effects or background offsets in the
data. When we have identified data frames with these problems or other severe
artefacts, we masked out those data frames manually at this stage in the data
processing.

  * $5$.

A mirror-position independent flatfield was created from on-target frames
falling outside “exclusion” regions that included the optical disc of target
galaxies and bright foreground or background sources. These flatfields correct
for responsivity variations in the array that are specific to each
observation. This flatfield was then applied to the data frames. In the case
of some photometry map data, not enough background area was available for
properly making flatfields. In these cases, data from the off-target pointings
were used to build the mirror-position independent flatfields that were then
applied to the data.

  * $6$.

Gradients in the background signal, primarily from zodiacal light, were then
subtracted from the data frames. This step differs between the photometry and
scan map modes. For photometry map data, the background signal outside the
exclusion regions in each frame was fit with a plane, and then this plane was
subtracted from the data (although this step was skipped if not enough area
was available in the data frames to measure the background). In the scan map
data, two different approaches were used. Before applying either of these
methods, we typically discarded the first five frames of data from each scan
leg because the background signal was often ramping up to a stable background
level; these frames usually did not cover any targets. In the standard
approach, the background was subtracted in two steps. First, the median signal
for data outside the exclusion regions in each data frame were fit with a
second-order polynomial that was a function of time, and then this function
was subtracted from the data. Second, we measured the mean residual background
signal as a function of the frame position within a stimflash cycle and
subtracted these background variations from the data. The alternate background
subtraction approach relies upon using data from multiple scan legs; it was
generally applied when the standard approach did not properly subtract the
background. It was also sometimes used in place of the standard approach on
data that did not scan 1 degree with the medium scan rate (6.5 arcsec s-1), as
the code was simply more flexible to use. For all forward scan leg data or all
reverse scan leg data, we measured the median background level as a position
of location within the scan leg. This gives the background signal as a
function of position in a scan leg and scan direction that is then applied to
each scan leg. Note that these steps will also remove large scale structure
outside of the exclusion regions from the data but do not significantly affect
signal from compact and unresolved sources.

  * $7$.

In cases where we had data from multiple AORs that overlapped similar regions,
we compared the data from pairs of AORs to perform asteroids removal in a
three step process that involved. In the first step, we used the mips_enhancer
in the MIPS DAT to make preliminary mosaics of the data from each AOR. In the
second step, we subtracted the data from each AOR to produce difference maps
in which asteroids and other transient sources will appear as either bright or
dark sources but where stationary objects will appear as noise. To identify
locations that contained signal from asteroids, we looked for data where
signal in either of the AORs was above a set S/N threshold, where the signal
in the difference maps was above a set S/N threshold, and where the coverage
was above a set threshold; these thresholds needed to be manually adjusted for
each comparison. When performing this step, we visually confirmed that the
software was identifying transient sources and not stationary sources or
background noise. In the final step, we went through the data frames from each
AOR and masked out data within 5 pixels ($\sim 12.5$ arcsec) of pixels
identified as containing signal from asteroids. In cases with bright
asteroids, we may identify multiple pixels containing signal from asteroids,
and so we often masked out regions signficantly larger than 11 pixels.

####  2.3.2 MIPS 70-160 $\mu$m data frame processing

The raw 70 and 160 $\mu$m data consist of the counts accumulated in each pixel
during non-destructive readouts, which are referred to as ramps. We applied
the following processing steps to the 70 and 160 $\mu$m data frames:

  * $1$.

The MIPS DAT program mips_sloper was applied to the individual data frames to
convert the ramps into slopes. This step also removes cosmic rays and readout
jumps, and it includes a nonlinearity corrections.

  * $2$.

The MIPS DAT program mips_caler was applied to adjust the detector
responsivity relative to the stim flashes observed during the observations and
to apply illumination corrections. This step also includes electronic
nonlinearity and dark current corrections.

  * $3$.

Short term drift in the signal was removed from the data on a pixel-by-pixel
basis. The background signal was measured in data falling outside the optical
disc of the galaxy and other sources that we identified in exclusion regions
similar to those described in the 24 $\mu$m data processing. In the 70 $\mu$m
photometry map data, the background was measured as a function of time and
then subtracted from the data. The 160 $\mu$m photometry map observations
often did not include enough background data to perform this step properly,
and the background variations in the 160 $\mu$m data was not problematic.
However, when the 160 $\mu$m photometry map data were to be combined with scan
map data, we did measure median background signals in the areas outside the
exclusion regions on a frame-by-frame basis and subtract these backgrounds
from the data. In the case of the scan map data, the median background signal
was measured for each pixel during each stim flash cycle, a spline procedure
was used to describe the background signal as a function of time during the
entire AOR, and then this background was subtracted from the data. This
procedure also removes gradients and large-scale structure from regions
outside the exclusion regions but will generally not affect compact and
unresolved sources.

  * $4$.

In scan map data, residual variations in the background signal as a function
of time since the last stim flash were measured in data outside the exclusion
regions and then subtracted from the data.

  * $5$.

Any problematic data that we have identified, such as individual 160 $\mu$m
detector pixels with very poor drift correction over a subset of the data
frames or cosmic ray hits on 160 $\mu$m detectors that were not filtered out
in the previous data processing steps, were masked out manually.

###  2.4 Mosaicking data and post-processing

Final images for the galaxies were created using all suitable AORs using the
mips_enhancer in a two step process. In the first step, the mips_enhancer is
used to identify pixels from individual frames that are statistical outliers
compared to co-spatial pixels from other frames. These pixels are then masked
out in enhanced versions of the data frames. In the second step, the
mips_enhancer is used to create the final maps. In these images, north is up,
east is left, and the pixel scales are set to 1.5, 4.5, and 9.0 arcsec
pixel-1. The pixel scales are based on a convention originally adopted by
SINGS, as it allows for fine sampling of PSF substructure and as the pixel
scales are integer multiples of each other, which allows for easier
comparisons among the images.

The CRPIX keywords in the final FITS images correspond to the centres of the
optical discs of the individual target galaxies as given by the NASA/IPAC
Extragalactic Database. In cases where two or more galaxies fell in contiguous
areas, we sometimes produced separate final mosaics for each galaxy in which
the final maps were constructed using different CRPIX values. We also
attempted to do this for a large amount of contiguous data for the Virgo
Cluster covering a $\sim 5^{\circ}$ region centered on a point near NGC 4486
and an overlapping $\sim 2.5^{\circ}$ region approximately centered on
RA=12:28:10 Dec=+80:31:35. While we succeeded at doing this with the 70 and
160 $\mu$m data, mips_enhancer failed to execute properly when we attempted
this with the 24 $\mu$m data, probably because of the relatively large angular
area compared to the pixel size. We therefore produced final 24 $\mu$m mosaics
of each galaxy in this region based on subsets of the contiguous data. In
doing this, we ensured that, when producing a 24 $\mu$m image of an individual
galaxy, we mosaicked all AORs that covered each galaxy that was being mapped.
NGC 4380 is an exception, as it lies near the ends of a $\sim 5^{\circ}$ scan
to the north and a $\sim 2.5^{\circ}$ scan to the south. We therefore measured
the 24 $\mu$m flux density for this galaxy in the map produced for NGC 4390,
which is nearby and which falls in almost all of the scan maps centered on or
to the north of NGC 4380. We also had problems with producing 24 $\mu$m maps
of NGC 4522 with the CRPIX values set to the central coordinates of the
galaxy, so we measured the flux density in the map centered on NGC 4519. In
the cases of NGC 3226/NGC 3227 and NGC 4567/NGC4568, where the galaxies appear
close enough that their optical discs overlap, we only made one map with the
central position set to the centre of the galaxy that is brighter at optical
wavelengths.

We performed a few post-processing steps to the final mosaics. We applied the
flux calibration factors given in Table 1 to produce maps in units of MJy
sr-1. Next, we applied a non-linearity correction to 70 $\mu$m pixels that
exceeded 66 MJy sr-1. This correction, given by Dale et al. (2007) as

$f_{70\mu m}(\mbox{true})=0.581(f_{70\mu m}(\mbox{measured}))^{1.13}$ (1)

is based on data from Gordon et al. (2007). When applying this correction, we
adjusted the calculations to include the median background signal measured in
the individual data frames before the drift removal steps. We then measured
and subtracted residual background surface brightnesses outside the optical
discs of the galaxies in regions that did not contain any nearby, resolved
galaxies (regardless of whether they were detected in the MIPS bands) or
point-like sources. In the case of the 24 $\mu$m data, we used multiple small
circular regions around the centres of targets. For the 70 and 160 $\mu$m
images, we used whenever possible two or more regions that were as large as or
larger than the optical discs of the target galaxies and that straddled the
optical disc of the galaxy. In some of the smaller photometry maps, however,
we could not often do this, so we made our best effort to measure the
background levels within whatever background regions were observed. In cases
where multiple galaxies fall within the final mosaics, we only performed this
background subtraction for the central galaxy, although when performing
photometry on the other galaxies in these fields, we measured the backgrounds
in the same way around the individual targets.

The final images have a few features and artefacts that need to be taken into
consideration when using the data. First of all, the large scale structure
outside of the target galaxies in the images has been mostly removed. Although
the images, particularly the 160 $\mu$m images, may contain some cirrus
structure, most of the large scale features in the cirrus have been removed.
Second, all scan map data may contain some residual striping. Additionally,
the 70 $\mu$m images for bright sources are frequently affected by latent
image effects that manifest themselves as positive or negative streaks aligned
with the scan direction. Finally, many objects falling within the Virgo
Cluster as well as a few objects in other fields were observed in fields
covered only with MIPS scan map data taken using the fast scan rate. The
resulting 160 $\mu$m data contain large gaps in the coverage, and the data
appear more noisy than most other 160 $\mu$m data because of the poor
sampling.

##  3 Photometry

###  3.1 Description of measurements

For most galaxies, we performed aperture photometry within elliptical
apertures with major and minor axes that were the greater of either 1.5 times
the axis sizes of the D25 isophotes given by (de Vaucouleurs et al., 1991) or
3 arcmin. The same apertures were used in all three bands for consistency. The
lower limit of 3 arcmin on the measurement aperture dimensions ensures that we
can measure the total flux densities of 160 $\mu$m sources without needing to
apply aperture corrections. We performed tests with measuring some unresolved
sources in the DGS with different aperture sizes and found that the fraction
of the total flux not included within a 3 arcmin aperture for these sources is
below the 12% calibration uncertainty of the 160 $\mu$m band. In galaxies much
larger than 3 arcmin, we found that apertures that were 1.5 times the D25
isophote contained all of the measurable signal from the target galaxies. The
measured flux densities in apertures larger than this did not change
significantly, but the measured flux densities decreased if we used smaller
apertures.

For the elliptical galaxies NGC 3640, NGC 4125, NGC 4365, NGC 4374, NGC 4406,
NGC 4472, NGC 4486, NGC 4552, NGC 4649, NGC 4660, and NGC 5128, however, we
used measurement apertures that were the same size as the D25 isophotes.
Additionally, for the nearby dwarf elliptical galaxy NGC 205, we used a
measurement aperture that was 0.5 times the size of the D25 isophote. These
were all cases where the 70 and 160 $\mu$m emission across most of the optical
disc is within $5\sigma$ of the background noise, and in many cases, the
emission from the galaxies is not detected. Using smaller apertures in these
specific cases allows us to avoid including background sources and artefacts
from the data processing, thus allowing us to place better constraints on the
flux densities. We also treated NGC 4636 as a special case in which, at 160
$\mu$m, we only measured the flux density for the central source because of
issues with possible background sources falling within the optical disc of the
galaxy (although the background sources are not as problematic at 24 $\mu$m,
and so the 24 $\mu$m measurement is still for the entire optical disc).
Additional details on NGC 4636 are given in Section 3.1.1.

A few galaxies in the various samples are so close to each other or so close
to other galaxies at equivalent distances that attempting to separate the
infrared emission from the different sources would be very difficult. Objects
where this is the case are Mrk 1089 (within NGC 1741), NGC 3395/3396, NGC
4038/4039, NGC 4567/4568, NGC 5194/5195, and UM 311 (within NGC 450). In these
cases, we used measurement apertures that were large enough to encompass the
emission from the target galaxy and all other nearby sources. Details on the
other apertures are given in Table 2.

Table 2: Special measurement apertures

Galaxy | R.A. | Dec. | Axis sizes | Position
---|---|---|---|---
| (J2000) | (J2000) | (arcmin) | Anglea
Mrk 1089 | 05:01:37.8 | -04:15:28 | $3.0\times 3.0$ | $0^{\circ}$
NGC 891 | 02:22:33.4 | +42:20:57 | $20.3\times 10.0$ | $22^{\circ}$
NGC 3395/3396 | 10:49:50.1 | +32:58:58 | $6.0\times 6.0$ | $0^{\circ}$
NGC 4038/4039 | 12:01:53.0 | -18:52:10 | $10.4\times 10.4$ | $0^{\circ}$
NGC 4567/4568 | 12:36:34.3 | +11:14:20 | $8.5\times 8.5$ | $0^{\circ}$
NGC 5194/5195 | 13:29:52.7 | +47:11:43 | $19.6\times 19.6$ | $0^{\circ}$
NGC 6822 | 19:44:56.6 | -14:47:21 | $30.0\times 30.0$ | $0^{\circ}$
UM 311 | 01:15:30.4 | -00:51:39 | $4.7\times 3.5$ | $72^{\circ}$

a Position angle is defined as degrees from north through east.

Many of the galaxies in the DGS do not have optical discs defined by de
Vaucouleurs et al. (1991), and some do not have optical discs defined anywhere
in the literature. These are generally galaxies smaller than the minimum 3
arcmin diameter aperture that we normally use, so we used measurement
apertures of that size in many cases. However, for sources fainter than 100
mJy in the 24 $\mu$m data, we found that background noise could become an
issue when measuring 24 $\mu$m flux densities over such large apertures;
although the galaxy would clearly be detected at a level much higher than
$5\sigma$ in the centre of the aperture, the integral of the aperture would
make the detection appear weaker. Hence, for 24 $\mu$m DGS sources that were
fainter than 10 mJy and did not appear extended in the 24 $\mu$m data, we used
apertures with 1 arcmin diameters and divided the data by 0.93, which is an
aperture correction that we derived empirically from bright point-like sources
in the DGS.

NGC 891 and NGC 6822 were treated as special cases for selecting the
measurement apertures. Details are given in the photometry notes below, and
the parameters describing the measurement apertures are given in Table 2.

Before performing the photometry on individual galaxies, we identified and
masked out emission that appeared to be unrelated to the target galaxies. We
visually identified and masked out artefacts from the data processing in the
final mosaics, such as bright or dark pixels near the edges of mapped field
and streaking in the 70 $\mu$m images related to latent image effects. We also
statistically checked for pixels that were $5\sigma$ below the background,
which are almost certainly associated with artefacts except when this becomes
statistically probable in apertures containing large numbers of pixels. In
cases where we determined that the $<-5\sigma$ pixels were data processing
artefacts or excessively noisy pixels, we masked them out. When other galaxies
appeared close to individual galaxies in which we were measauring flux
densities but when the optical discs did not overlap significantly, we masked
out the adjacent galaxies. We also masked out emission from unresolved
sources, particularly unresolved 24 $\mu$m sources, that did not appear to be
associated with the target galaxies and that appeared signficantly brighter
than the emission in the regions where we measured the background. Most of
these sources appeared between the D25 isophote and the measurement aperture.
In cases where the galaxies contained very compact 24 $\mu$m emission (as is
the case for many elliptical and S0 galaxies), we also masked out unresolved
sources within but near the D25 isophote. A few unresolved sources within the
D25 isophote appeared as bright, unresolved sources in Digitized Sky Survey or
2MASS data, indicating that they were foreground stars, and we masked them out
as well. In many 24 $\mu$m images, the measured flux densities changed by less
than 4% (the calibration uncertainty) when the unresolved sources were
removed.

As stated above, in cases where the MIPS 160 $\mu$m data for individual
galaxies consists of only scan map data taken at the fast scan rate, our final
160 $\mu$m maps include gaps in the coverage. To make 160 $\mu$m measurements,
we have interpolated the signal across these gaps using nearest neighbor
sampling techniques. We also applied this interpolation technique to 160
$\mu$m data for the regions in the optical discs (but not in the whole
measurement aperture, which may fall outside the scan region) of IC 1048, NGC
4192, NGC 4535, and NGC 5692. In many other cases, the observed regions did
not completely cover the optical discs of the target galaxies. We normally
measured the flux densities for the regions covered in the observed regions.
Cases where the observed regions did not cover $~{}\hbox
to0.0pt{$>$\hss}{\lower 4.30554pt\hbox{$\sim$}}90$% of the optical discs are
noted in the photometry tables. Although we believe that these data are
reliable (especially since the observations appear to cover most of the
emission that is seen in the other bands), people using these data should
still be aware of the limitations of these data.

As a quality check on the photometry, we examined the 24/70, 24/160, and
70/160 $\mu$m flux density ratios to identify any galaxies that may have
discrepant colours (for example, abnormally high 24/70 and low 70/160 $\mu$m
colours, which would be indicative of problems with unmasked negative pixels
in the final images). In such discrepant cases, we examined the images for
unmasked artefacts, masked out the artefacts when identified, and repeated the
photometry.

The globally-integrated flux densities for the galaxies in the four different
samples are listed in Tables 3-6. No colour corrections have been applied to
these data. We include three sources of uncertainty. The first source is the
calibration uncertainty. The second source is the uncertainty based on the
error map. Each pixel in the error map is based on the standard deviation of
the overlapping pixels from the individual data frames; the uncertainties will
include both instrumental background noise and shot noise from the
astronomical sources. To calculate the total uncertainty traced by the data in
the error map, we used the square root of the sum of the square of the error
map pixels in the measurement region. The third source of uncertainty is from
background noise (which includes both instrumental and astronomical sources of
noise) measured in the background regions. The total uncertainties are
calculated by adding these three sources of uncertainty in quadrature. Sources
that are less than $5\sigma$ detections within the measurement apertures
compared to the combination of the error map and background noise are reported
as $5\sigma$ upper limits. Sources in which the surface brightness within the
measurement aperture is not detected at the $5\sigma$ level for regions
unaffected by foreground/background sources or artefacts are reported as upper
limits; in these cases, the integrated flux densities within the apertures are
used as upper limits. This second case occurs when the target aperture
includes emission from diffuse, extended emission (as described for NGC 4552
below) or large scale artefacts that are impossible to mask out for the
photometry.

Table 3: Photometry for the Very Nearby Galaxies Survey

Galaxy | Optical Disc | Wavelength | Flux Density |  Flux Density Uncertainty (Jy)d
---|---|---|---|---
| R. A. | Declination | Axes | Position |  ($\mu$m) | Measurement | Calibration | Error | Background | Total
|  (J2000)a |  (J2000)a |  (arcmin)b |  Anglebc |  | (Jy) |  | Map |  |
NGC 205 | 00:40:22.0 | +41:41:07 | $21.9\times 11.0$ | $170^{\circ}$ | 24 | 0.1089 | 0.0044 | 0.0005 | 0.0008 | 0.0044
|  |  |  |  | 70 | 1.302 | 0.130 | 0.019 | 0.023 | 0.134
|  |  |  |  | 160 | 8.98 | 1.08 | 0.03 | 0.05 | 1.08
NGC 891e | 02:22:33.4 | +42:20:57 | $13.5\times 2.5$ | $22^{\circ}$ | 24 | 6.4531 | 0.2581 | 0.0005 | 0.0007 | 0.2581
|  |  |  |  | 70 | 97.122 | 9.712 | 0.045 | 0.018 | 9.712
|  |  |  |  | 160 | 287.27 | 34.47 | 8.72 | 0.04 | 35.56
NGC 1068 | 02:42:40.7 | -00:00:48 | $7.1\times 6.0$ | $70^{\circ}$ | 24 |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  | 70 | 189.407 | 18.941 | 0.491 | 0.058 | 18.947
|  |  |  |  | 160 | 237.39 | 28.49 | 5.53 | 0.06 | 29.02
NGC 2403 | 07:36:51.4 | +65:36:09 | $21.9\times 12.3$ | $127^{\circ}$ | 24 | 6.0161 | 0.2406 | 0.0022 | 0.0019 | 0.2407
|  |  |  |  | 70 | 81.710 | 8.171 | 0.057 | 0.052 | 8.171
|  |  |  |  | 160 | 221.04 | 26.53 | 0.24 | 0.11 | 26.53
NGC 3031 | 09:55:33.1 | +69:03:55 | $26.9\times 14.1$ | $157^{\circ}$ | 24 | 5.2748 | 0.2110 | 0.0017 | 0.0024 | 0.2110
|  |  |  |  | 70 | 81.049 | 8.105 | 0.063 | 0.080 | 8.106
|  |  |  |  | 160 | 316.30 | 37.96 | 0.97 | 0.40 | 37.97
NGC 4038f |  |  |  |  | 24 | 5.8226 | 0.2329 | 0.0073 | 0.0012 | 0.2330
|  |  |  |  | 70 | 45.949 | 4.595 | 0.148 | 0.035 | 4.597
|  |  |  |  | 160 | 80.28 | 9.63 | 3.62 | 0.06 | 10.29
NGC 4125 | 12:08:06.0 | +65:10:27 | $5.8\times 3.2$ | $95^{\circ}$ | 24 | 0.0790 | 0.0032 | 0.0002 | 0.0003 | 0.0032
|  |  |  |  | 70 | 1.014 | 0.101 | 0.008 | 0.008 | 0.102
|  |  |  |  | 160 | 1.37 | 0.16 | 0.01 | 0.01 | 0.17
NGC 4151 | 12:10:32.5 | +39:24:21 | $6.3\times 4.5$ | $50^{\circ}$ | 24 | 4.5925 | 0.1837 | 0.0104 | 0.0005 | 0.1840
|  |  |  |  | 70 | 5.415 | 0.541 | 0.027 | 0.013 | 0.542
|  |  |  |  | 160 | 9.38 | 1.13 | 0.02 | 0.02 | 1.13
NGC 5128 | 13:25:27.6 | -43:01:09 | $25.7\times 20.0$ | $35^{\circ}$ | 24 | 24.0374 | 0.9615 | 0.0135 | 0.0028 | 0.9616
|  |  |  |  | 70 | 263.165 | 26.316 | 0.226 | 0.068 | 26.318
|  |  |  |  | 160 | 582.51 | 69.90 | 22.50 | 0.14 | 73.43
NGC 5194f |  |  |  |  | 24 | 14.2309 | 0.5692 | 0.0037 | 0.0015 | 0.5693
|  |  |  |  | 70 | 151.000 | 15.100 | 0.123 | 0.045 | 15.101
|  |  |  |  | 160 | 458.44 | 55.01 | 7.80 | 0.11 | 55.56
NGC 5236 | 13:37:00.9 | -29:51:57 | 12.9 |  | 24 | 40.4266 | 1.6171 | 0.0263 | 0.0017 | 1.6173
|  |  |  |  | 70 | 312.808 | 31.281 | 0.290 | 0.051 | 31.282
|  |  |  |  | 160 | 798.23 | 95.78 | 9.95 | 0.13 | 96.30
Arp 220 | 15:34:57.1 | +23:30:11 | 1.5 |  | 24 |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  | 70 | 74.976 | 7.498 | 0.309 | 0.023 | 7.504
|  |  |  |  | 160 | 54.88 | 6.59 | 1.38 | 0.02 | 6.73

a Data are from NED.

b Data are from de Vaucouleurs et al. (1991) unless otherwise specified. If de
Vaucouleurs et al. (1991) specify both the minor/major axis ratio and the
position angle, then both axes and the position angle are listed. If de
Vaucouleurs et al. (1991) did not specify either of these data, then we
performed photometry on circular regions, and so only the major axis is
specified.

c The position angle is defined as degrees from north through east.

d Details on the sources of these uncertainties are given in Section 3.1.

e A special measurement aperture was used for NGC 891. See Table 2.

f These objects consist of two galaxies with optical discs that overlap. See
Table 2 for the dimensions of the measurement apertures for these objects.

Table 4: Photometry for the Dwarf Galaxies Survey Galaxy | Optical Disc | Wavelength | Flux Density |  Flux Density Uncertainty (Jy)d
---|---|---|---|---
| R. A. | Declination | Axes | Position |  ($\mu$m) | Measurement | Calibration | Error | Background | Total
|  (J2000)a |  (J2000)a |  (arcmin)b |  Angle${}^{b}c$ |  | (Jy) |  | Map |  |
IC 10 | 00:20:17.3 | +59:18:14 | 6.3 |  | 24 | 9.8188 | 0.3928 | 0.0136 | 0.0013 | 0.3930
|  |  |  |  | 70 |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  | 160 |  |  |  |  |
HS 0017+1055 | 00:20:21.4 | +11:12:21 |  |  | 24 | 0.0237 | 0.0009 | 0.0005 | 0.0009 | 0.0014
|  |  |  |  | 70 |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  | 160 |  |  |  |  |
Haro 11 | 00:36:52.4 | -33:33:19 |  |  | 24 | 2.3046 | 0.0922 | 0.0123 | 0.0005 | 0.0930
|  |  |  |  | 70 | 4.912 | 0.491 | 0.038 | 0.007 | 0.493
|  |  |  |  | 160 | 2.01 | 0.24 | 0.01 | 0.02 | 0.24
HS 0052+2536 | 00:54:56.3 | +25:53:08 |  |  | 24 | 0.0207 | 0.0008 | 0.0004 | 0.0008 | 0.0012
|  |  |  |  | 70 |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  | 160 |  |  |  |  |
UM 311e |  |  |  |  | 24 | 0.3289 | 0.0132 | 0.0008 | 0.0009 | 0.0132
|  |  |  |  | 70 | 3.075 | 0.308 | 0.008 | 0.008 | 0.308
|  |  |  |  | 160 | 6.62 | 0.79 | 0.02 | 0.01 | 0.79
NGC 625 | 01:35:04.6 | -41:26:10 | $5.8\times 1.9$ | $92^{\circ}$ | 24 | 0.8631 | 0.0345 | 0.0016 | 0.0003 | 0.0346
|  |  |  |  | 70 | 6.252 | 0.625 | 0.036 | 0.012 | 0.626
|  |  |  |  | 160 | 7.87 | 0.94 | 0.03 | 0.02 | 0.95
UGCA 20 | 01:43:14.7 | +19:58:32 | $3.1\times 0.8$ | $153^{\circ}$ | 24 | $<0.0085$ |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  | 70 |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  | 160 |  |  |  |  |
UM 133 | 01:44:41.2 | +40:53:26 |  |  | 24 | 0.0094 | 0.0004 | 0.0002 | 0.0003 | 0.0005
|  |  |  |  | 70 |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  | 160 |  |  |  |  |
UM 382 | 01:58:09.3 | -00:06:38 |  |  | 24 |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  | 70 | $<0.070$ |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  | 160 |  |  |  |  |
NGC 1140 | 02:54:33.5 | -10:01:40 | $1.7\times 0.9$ | $10^{\circ}$ | 24 | 0.3764 | 0.0151 | 0.0009 | 0.0006 | 0.0151
|  |  |  |  | 70 | 3.507 | 0.351 | 0.020 | 0.008 | 0.351
|  |  |  |  | 160 | 3.67 | 0.44 | 0.01 | 0.01 | 0.44
SBS 0335-052 | 03:37:44.0 | -05:02:40 |  |  | 24 | 0.0768 | 0.0031 | 0.0005 | 0.0005 | 0.0032
|  |  |  |  | 70 | 0.051 | 0.005 | 0.005 | 0.006 | 0.009
|  |  |  |  | 160 | $<0.07$ |  |  |  |
NGC 1569 | 04:30:49.0 | -64:50:53 | $3.6\times 1.8$ | $120^{\circ}$ | 24 | 7.7189 | 0.3088 | 0.0091 | 0.0010 | 0.3089
|  |  |  |  | 70 | 46.120 | 4.612 | 0.068 | 0.029 | 4.613
|  |  |  |  | 160 | 33.49 | 4.02 | 0.11 | 0.02 | 4.02
NGC 1705 | 04:54:13.5 | -53:21:40 | $1.9\times 1.4$ | $50^{\circ}$ | 24 | 0.0532 | 0.0021 | 0.0000 | 0.0001 | 0.0021
|  |  |  |  | 70 | 1.315 | 0.132 | 0.002 | 0.004 | 0.132
|  |  |  |  | 160 | 1.29 | 0.16 | 0.01 | 0.01 | 0.16
Mrk 1089e |  |  |  |  | 24 | 0.5252 | 0.0210 | 0.0008 | 0.0003 | 0.0210
|  |  |  |  | 70 | 1.123 | 0.112 | 0.004 | 0.004 | 0.112
|  |  |  |  | 160 |  |  |  |  |
II Zw 40 | 05:55:42.6 | +03:23:32 |  |  | 24 | 1.6545 | 0.0662 | 0.0063 | 0.0006 | 0.0665
|  |  |  |  | 70 | 5.438 | 0.544 | 0.031 | 0.011 | 0.545
|  |  |  |  | 160 |  |  |  |  |
Tol 0618-402 | 06:20:02.5 | -40:18:09 |  |  | 24 | $<0.0015$ |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  | 70 | $<0.037$ |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  | 160 | $<0.42$ |  |  |  |
NGC 2366 | 07:28:54.6 | +69:12:57 | $8.1\times 3.3$ | $25^{\circ}$ | 24 | 0.6919 | 0.0277 | 0.0013 | 0.0007 | 0.0277
|  |  |  |  | 70 | 5.230 | 0.523 | 0.021 | 0.019 | 0.524
|  |  |  |  | 160 | 5.50 | 0.66 | 0.21 | 0.03 | 0.69
HS 0822+3542 | 08:25:55.5 | +35:32:32 |  |  | 24 | 0.0032 | 0.0001 | 0.0001 | 0.0002 | 0.0003
|  |  |  |  | 70 | 0.043 | 0.004 | 0.004 | 0.006 | 0.008
|  |  |  |  | 160 | $<0.04$ |  |  |  |
He 2-10 | 08:36:15.1 | -26:24:34 |  |  | 24 | 5.7368 | 0.2295 | 0.0262 | 0.0007 | 0.2310
|  |  |  |  | 70 | 17.969 | 1.797 | 0.102 | 0.009 | 1.800
|  |  |  |  | 160 | 13.41 | 1.61 | 0.05 | 0.01 | 1.61
UGC 04483 | 08:37:03.0 | +69:46:31 |  |  | 24 | 0.0101 | 0.0004 | 0.0001 | 0.0003 | 0.0005
|  |  |  |  | 70 | 0.142 | 0.014 | 0.003 | 0.006 | 0.016
|  |  |  |  | 160 | 0.27 | 0.03 | 0.01 | 0.00 | 0.03
Table 4: Photometry for the Dwarf Galaxies Survey (continued) Galaxy | Optical Disc | Wavelength | Flux Density | Flux Density Uncertainty (Jy)d
---|---|---|---|---
| R. A. | Declination | Axes | Position | ($\mu$m) | Measurement | Calibration | Error | Background | Total
| (J2000)a | (J2000)a | (arcmin)b | Angle${}^{b}c$ |  | (Jy) |  | Map |  |
I Zw 18 | 09:34:02.0 | +55:14:28 |  |  | 24 | 0.0061 | 0.0002 | 0.0001 | 0.0002 | 0.0003
|  |  |  |  | 70 | 0.042 | 0.004 | 0.002 | 0.004 | 0.006
|  |  |  |  | 160 | $<0.12$ |  |  |  |
Haro 2 | 10:32:31.9 | +54:24:03 |  |  | 24 | 0.8621 | 0.0345 | 0.0015 | 0.0001 | 0.0345
|  |  |  |  | 70 | 3.988 | 0.399 | 0.019 | 0.005 | 0.399
|  |  |  |  | 160 | 3.09 | 0.37 | 0.01 | 0.01 | 0.37
Haro 3 | 10:45:22.4 | +55:57:37 |  |  | 24 | 0.8514 | 0.0341 | 0.0027 | 0.0004 | 0.0342
|  |  |  |  | 70 | 4.898 | 0.490 | 0.018 | 0.007 | 0.490
|  |  |  |  | 160 | 3.93 | 0.47 | 0.01 | 0.01 | 0.47
Mrk 153 | 10:49:05.0 | +52:20:08 |  |  | 24 | 0.0358 | 0.0014 | 0.0003 | 0.0005 | 0.0015
|  |  |  |  | 70 | 0.260 | 0.026 | 0.004 | 0.007 | 0.027
|  |  |  |  | 160 |  |  |  |  |
VII Zw 403 | 11:27:59.8 | +78:59:39 |  |  | 24 | 0.0329 | 0.0013 | 0.0002 | 0.0005 | 0.0014
|  |  |  |  | 70 | 0.425 | 0.043 | 0.005 | 0.007 | 0.043
|  |  |  |  | 160 | 0.31 | 0.04 | 0.00 | 0.01 | 0.04
Mrk 1450 | 11:38:35.6 | +57:52:27 |  |  | 24 | 0.0570 | 0.0023 | 0.0003 | 0.0004 | 0.0023
|  |  |  |  | 70 | 0.264 | 0.026 | 0.004 | 0.005 | 0.027
|  |  |  |  | 160 | 0.15 | 0.02 | 0.00 | 0.01 | 0.02
UM 448 | 11:42:12.4 | +00:20:03 |  |  | 24 | 0.6425 | 0.0257 | 0.0018 | 0.0007 | 0.0258
|  |  |  |  | 70 | 3.703 | 0.370 | 0.021 | 0.015 | 0.371
|  |  |  |  | 160 | 2.67 | 0.32 | 0.01 | 0.01 | 0.32
UM 461 | 11:51:33.3 | -02:22:22 |  |  | 24 | 0.0344 | 0.0014 | 0.0002 | 0.0029 | 0.0032
|  |  |  |  | 70 | 0.090 | 0.009 | 0.003 | 0.011 | 0.014
|  |  |  |  | 160 | 0.10 | 0.01 | 0.00 | 0.01 | 0.01
SBS 1159+545 | 12:02:02.3 | +54:15:50 |  |  | 24 | 0.0062 | 0.0002 | 0.0001 | 0.0002 | 0.0004
|  |  |  |  | 70 |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  | 160 |  |  |  |  |
SBS 1211+540 | 12:14:02.4 | +53:45:17 |  |  | 24 | 0.0033 | 0.0001 | 0.0001 | 0.0002 | 0.0003
|  |  |  |  | 70 |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  | 160 |  |  |  |  |
NGC 4214 | 12:15:39.1 | +36:19:37 | 8.5 |  | 24 | 2.1044 | 0.0842 | 0.0015 | 0.0012 | 0.0842
|  |  |  |  | 70 | 24.049 | 2.405 | 0.043 | 0.032 | 2.406
|  |  |  |  | 160 | 38.18 | 4.58 | 0.34 | 0.05 | 4.59
Tol 1214-277 | 12:17:17.0 | -28:02:33 |  |  | 24 | 0.0068 | 0.0003 | 0.0001 | 0.0002 | 0.0003
|  |  |  |  | 70 | 0.073 | 0.007 | 0.004 | 0.005 | 0.010
|  |  |  |  | 160 |  |  |  |  |
HS 1222+3741 | 12:24:36.7 | +37:24:37 |  |  | 24 |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  | 70 | 0.062 | 0.006 | 0.004 | 0.007 | 0.010
|  |  |  |  | 160 |  |  |  |  |
Mrk 209 | 12:26:16.0 | +48:29:37 |  |  | 24 | 0.0587 | 0.0023 | 0.0003 | 0.0005 | 0.0024
|  |  |  |  | 70 | 0.466 | 0.047 | 0.004 | 0.004 | 0.047
|  |  |  |  | 160 | 0.18 | 0.02 | 0.00 | 0.01 | 0.02
NGC 4449 | 12:28:11.8 | +44:05:40 | $6.2\times 4.4$ | $45^{\circ}$ | 24 | 3.2863 | 0.1315 | 0.0010 | 0.0008 | 0.1315
|  |  |  |  | 70 | 43.802 | 4.380 | 0.053 | 0.019 | 4.381
|  |  |  |  | 160 | 78.09 | 9.37 | 0.70 | 0.03 | 9.40
SBS 1249+493 | 12:51:52.4 | +49:03:28 |  |  | 24 | 0.0043 | 0.0002 | 0.0001 | 0.0002 | 0.0003
|  |  |  |  | 70 |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  | 160 |  |  |  |  |
NGC 4861 | 12:59:02.3 | +34:51:34 | $4.0\times 1.5$ | $15^{\circ}$ | 24 | 0.3657 | 0.0146 | 0.0012 | 0.0008 | 0.0147
|  |  |  |  | 70 | 1.971 | 0.197 | 0.012 | 0.010 | 0.198
|  |  |  |  | 160 | 2.00 | 0.24 | 0.01 | 0.02 | 0.24
HS 1304+3529 | 13:06:24.1 | +35:13:43 |  |  | 24 | 0.0122 | 0.0005 | 0.0004 | 0.0007 | 0.0009
|  |  |  |  | 70 |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  | 160 |  |  |  |  |
Pox 186 | 13:25:48.6 | -11:36:38 |  |  | 24 | 0.0108 | 0.0004 | 0.0005 | 0.0009 | 0.0011
|  |  |  |  | 70 |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  | 160 |  |  |  |  |
NGC 5253 | 13:39:55.9 | -31:38:24 | $5.0\times 1.9$ | $45^{\circ}$ | 24 |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  | 70 | 23.626 | 2.363 | 0.074 | 0.015 | 2.364
|  |  |  |  | 160 | 17.35 | 2.08 | 0.05 | 0.03 | 2.08
Table 4: Photometry for the Dwarf Galaxies Survey (continued)

Galaxy | Optical Disc | Wavelength | Flux Density | Flux Density Uncertainty (Jy)d
---|---|---|---|---
| R. A. | Declination | Axes | Position | ($\mu$m) | Measurement | Calibration | Error | Background | Total
| (J2000)a | (J2000)a | (arcmin)b | Angle${}^{b}c$ |  | (Jy) |  | Map |  |
SBS 1415+437 | 14:17:01.3 | +43:30:05 |  |  | 24 | 0.0187 | 0.0007 | 0.0003 | 0.0005 | 0.0009
|  |  |  |  | 70 | 0.177 | 0.018 | 0.004 | 0.006 | 0.019
|  |  |  |  | 160 | $<0.06$ |  |  |  |
HS 1424+3836 | 14:26:28.1 | +38:22:59 |  |  | 24 |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  | 70 | $<0.024$ |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  | 160 |  |  |  |  |
HS 1442+4250 | 14:44:12.8 | +42:37:44 |  |  | 24 | 0.0066 | 0.0003 | 0.0001 | 0.0001 | 0.0003
|  |  |  |  | 70 | 0.079 | 0.008 | 0.004 | 0.006 | 0.010
|  |  |  |  | 160 | $<0.10$ |  |  |  |
SBS 1533+574 | 15:34:13.8 | +57:17:06 |  |  | 24 |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  | 70 | 0.270 | 0.027 | 0.004 | 0.005 | 0.028
|  |  |  |  | 160 |  |  |  |  |
NGC 6822f | 19:44:56.6 | -14:47:21 | 15.5 |  | 24 | 4.5230 | 0.1809 | 0.0027 | 0.0032 | 0.1810
|  |  |  |  | 70 | 52.413 | 5.241 | 0.082 | 0.096 | 5.243
|  |  |  |  | 160 | 109.44 | 13.13 | 0.61 | 0.20 | 13.15
Mrk 930 | 23:31:58.2 | +28:56:50 |  |  | 24 | 0.1985 | 0.0079 | 0.0005 | 0.0006 | 0.0080
|  |  |  |  | 70 | 1.159 | 0.116 | 0.007 | 0.006 | 0.116
|  |  |  |  | 160 | 0.96 | 0.12 | 0.01 | 0.02 | 0.12
HS 2352+2733 | 23:54:56.7 | +27:49:59 |  |  | 24 | 0.0026 | 0.0001 | 0.0001 | 0.0003 | 0.0003
|  |  |  |  | 70 |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  | 160 |  |  |  |  |

a Data are from NED.

b Data are from de Vaucouleurs et al. (1991) unless otherwise specified. If de
Vaucouleurs et al. (1991) specify both the minor/major axis ratio and the
position angle, then both axes and the position angle are listed. If de
Vaucouleurs et al. (1991) did not specify either of these data, then we
performed photometry on circular regions, and so only the major axis is
specified. If no optical dimensions are specified, then we performed
photometry on a 3 arcmin diameter circular region centered on the source

c The position angle is defined as degrees from north through east.

d Details on the sources of these uncertainties are given in Section 3.1.

e Special measurement apertures were used for these targets because of the
presence of nearby associated sources. See Table 2.

f A special measurement aperture was used for NGC 6822. See Table 2.

Table 5: Photometry for the Herscher Reference Survey Galaxy | HRS | Optical Disc | Wave- | Flux Density |  Flux Density Uncertainty (Jy)e
---|---|---|---|---|---
|  Numbera | R. A. | Declination | Axes | Position | length | Measurement | Calibration | Error | Back- | Total
|  |  (J2000)b |  (J2000)b |  (arcmin)c |  Anglecd |  ($\mu$m) | (Jy) |  | Map | ground |
NGC 3226 | 3 | 10:23:27.4 | +19:53:55 | $3.2\times 2.8$ | $15^{\circ}$ | 24 | 0.0250 | 0.0010 | 0.0003 | 0.0006 | 0.0012
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 | 0.459 | 0.046 | 0.009 | 0.011 | 0.048
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 |  |  |  |  |
NGC 3227 | 4 | 10:23:30.5 | +19:51:54 | $5.4\times 3.6$ | $155^{\circ}$ | 24 | 1.7173 | 0.0687 | 0.0067 | 0.0010 | 0.0690
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 | 9.033 | 0.903 | 0.044 | 0.018 | 0.905
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 |  18.19f | 2.18 | 0.05 | 0.02 | 2.18
NGC 3254 | 8 | 10:29:19.9 | +29:29:31 | $5.0\times 1.6$ | $46^{\circ}$ | 24 | 0.0927 | 0.0037 | 0.0005 | 0.0007 | 0.0038
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 |  |  |  |  |
NGC 3338 | 15 | 10:42:07.5 | +13:44:49 | $5.9\times 3.6$ | $100^{\circ}$ | 24 | 0.4578 | 0.0183 | 0.0003 | 0.0005 | 0.0183
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 |  |  |  |  |
NGC 3370 | 17 | 10:47:04.0 | +17:16:25 | $3.2\times 1.8$ | $148^{\circ}$ | 24 | 0.3836 | 0.0153 | 0.0005 | 0.0009 | 0.0154
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 | 5.194 | 0.519 | 0.018 | 0.012 | 0.520
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 | 10.30 | 1.24 | 0.02 | 0.02 | 1.24
NGC 3395 | 20 |  |  |  |  | 24 | 1.1400 | 0.0456 | 0.0013 | 0.0010 | 0.0456
/3396h | /(N/A) |  |  |  |  | 70 | 11.927 | 1.193 | 0.025 | 0.027 | 1.193
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 | 17.26 | 2.07 | 0.03 | 0.04 | 2.07
NGC 3414 | 22 | 10:51:16.2 | +27:58:30 | 3.5 |  | 24 | 0.0430 | 0.0017 | 0.0004 | 0.0007 | 0.0019
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 | 0.428 | 0.043 | 0.011 | 0.016 | 0.047
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 |  |  |  |  |
NGC 3424 | 23 | 10:51:46.3 | +32:54:03 | $2.8\times 0.8$ | $112^{\circ}$ | 24 | 0.7181 | 0.0287 | 0.0012 | 0.0005 | 0.0288
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 | 9.398 | 0.940 | 0.035 | 0.012 | 0.941
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 | 15.93 | 1.91 | 0.04 | 0.03 | 1.91
NGC 3430 | 24 | 10:52:11.4 | +32:57:02 | $4.0\times 2.2$ | $30^{\circ}$ | 24 | 0.4101 | 0.0164 | 0.0004 | 0.0006 | 0.0164
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 | 5.683 | 0.568 | 0.015 | 0.021 | 0.569
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 | 14.36 | 1.72 | 0.03 | 0.02 | 1.72
NGC 3448 | 31 | 10:54:39.2 | +54:18:19 | $5.6\times 1.8$ | $65^{\circ}$ | 24 | 0.5782 | 0.0231 | 0.0009 | 0.0005 | 0.0232
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 | 6.730 | 0.673 | 0.024 | 0.012 | 0.673
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 |  9.43f | 1.13 | 0.20 | 0.47 | 1.24
NGC 3485 | 33 | 11:00:02.3 | +14:50:30 | 2.3 |  | 24 | 0.1853 | 0.0074 | 0.0002 | 0.0003 | 0.0074
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 | 2.279 | 0.228 | 0.008 | 0.012 | 0.228
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 |  |  |  |  |
NGC 3499 | 35 | 11:03:11.0 | +56:13:18 | 0.8 |  | 24 | 0.0124 | 0.0005 | 0.0001 | 0.0002 | 0.0005
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 |  |  |  |  |
NGC 3504 | 36 | 11:03:11.2 | +27:58:21 | 2.7 |  | 24 | 3.0895 | 0.1236 | 0.0131 | 0.0003 | 0.1243
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 | 19.268 | 1.927 | 0.089 | 0.017 | 1.929
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 | 21.44 | 2.57 | 0.04 | 0.04 | 2.57
NGC 3512 | 37 | 11:04:02.9 | +28:02:13 | 1.6 |  | 24 | 0.1365 | 0.0055 | 0.0001 | 0.0001 | 0.0055
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 | 1.982 | 0.198 | 0.007 | 0.010 | 0.199
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 |  |  |  |  |
NGC 3608 | 43 | 11:16:58.9 | +18:08:55 | $3.2\times 2.6$ | $75^{\circ}$ | 24 | 0.0223 | 0.0009 | 0.0002 | 0.0004 | 0.0010
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 | $<0.110$ |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 | $<0.48$ |  |  |  |
NGC 3640 | 49 | 11:21:06.8 | +03:14:05 | $4.0\times 3.2$ | $100^{\circ}$ | 24 | 0.0236 | 0.0009 | 0.0003 | 0.0006 | 0.0011
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 | $<0.137$ |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 | $<0.72$ |  |  |  |
NGC 3655 | 50 | 11:22:54.6 | +16:35:25 | $1.5\times 1.0$ | $30^{\circ}$ | 24 | 0.7768 | 0.0311 | 0.0002 | 0.0001 | 0.0311
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 |  |  |  |  |
NGC 3659 | 51 | 11:23:45.5 | +17:49:07 | $2.1\times 1.1$ | $60^{\circ}$ | 24 | 0.1419 | 0.0057 | 0.0002 | 0.0003 | 0.0057
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 |  |  |  |  |
NGC 3666 | 53 | 11:24:26.0 | +11:20:32 | $4.4\times 1.2$ | $100^{\circ}$ | 24 | 0.2577 | 0.0103 | 0.0003 | 0.0004 | 0.0103
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 |  |  |  |  |
NGC 3681 | 54 | 11:26:29.8 | +16:51:47 | 2.5 |  | 24 | 0.0772 | 0.0031 | 0.0002 | 0.0003 | 0.0031
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 | 1.374 | 0.137 | 0.008 | 0.012 | 0.138
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 |  |  |  |  |
Table 5: Photometry for the Herscher Reference Survey (continued) Galaxy | HRS | Optical Disc | Wave- | Flux Density |  Flux Density Uncertainty (Jy)e
---|---|---|---|---|---
|  Numbera | R. A. | Declination | Axes | Position | length | Measurement | Calibration | Error | Back- | Total
|  |  (J2000)b |  (J2000)b |  (arcmin)c |  Anglecd |  ($\mu$m) | (Jy) |  | Map | ground |
NGC 3683 | 56 | 11:27:31.8 | +56:52:37 | $1.9\times 0.7$ | $128^{\circ}$ | 24 | 1.1755 | 0.0470 | 0.0003 | 0.0001 | 0.0470
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 |  |  |  |  |
NGC 3686 | 57 | 11:27:43.9 | +17:13:27 | $3.2\times 2.5$ | $15^{\circ}$ | 24 | 0.5463 | 0.0219 | 0.0004 | 0.0004 | 0.0219
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 |  |  |  |  |
NGC 3729 | 60 | 11:33:49.3 | +53:07:32 | $2.8\times 1.9$ | $15^{\circ}$ | 24 | 0.4591 | 0.0184 | 0.0012 | 0.0002 | 0.0184
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 |  |  |  |  |
NGC 3945 | 71 | 11:53:13.7 | +60:40:32 | $5.2\times 3.5$ | $165^{\circ}$ | 24 | 0.0914 | 0.0037 | 0.0003 | 0.0005 | 0.0037
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 | 0.456 | 0.046 | 0.012 | 0.020 | 0.051
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 |  3.30f | 0.40 | 0.01 | 0.01 | 0.40
NGC 3953 | 73 | 11:53:48.9 | +52:19:36 | $6.9\times 3.5$ | $13^{\circ}$ | 24 | 1.0606 | 0.0424 | 0.0006 | 0.0009 | 0.0424
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 | 12.034 | 1.203 | 0.025 | 0.036 | 1.204
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 | 47.64 | 5.72 | 0.05 | 0.06 | 5.72
NGC 3982 | 74 | 11:56:28.1 | +55:07:31 | 2.3 |  | 24 | 0.7506 | 0.0300 | 0.0008 | 0.0006 | 0.0300
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 | 9.222 | 0.922 | 0.024 | 0.012 | 0.923
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 | 14.39 | 1.73 | 0.03 | 0.02 | 1.73
NGC 4030 | 77 | 12:00:23.6 | -01:06:00 | $4.2\times 3.0$ | $27^{\circ}$ | 24 | 1.9186 | 0.0767 | 0.0005 | 0.0004 | 0.0767
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 | 18.994 | 1.899 | 0.046 | 0.011 | 1.900
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 | 57.33 | 6.88 | 1.19 | 0.03 | 6.98
KUG 1201 | 82 | 12:03:35.9 | +16:03:20 | $1.0\times 1.0$ | $0^{\circ}$ | 24 | 0.0596 | 0.0024 | 0.0002 | 0.0003 | 0.0024
+163 |  |  |  |  |  | 70 |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 |  |  |  |  |
NGC 4116 | 86 | 12:07:37.1 | +02:41:26 | $3.8\times 2.2$ | $155^{\circ}$ | 24 | 0.2172 | 0.0087 | 0.0003 | 0.0004 | 0.0087
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 |  |  |  |  |
NGC 4178 | 89 | 12:12:46.4 | +10:51:57 | $5.1\times 1.8$ | $30^{\circ}$ | 24 | 0.3898 | 0.0156 | 0.0003 | 0.0004 | 0.0156
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 | 5.138 | 0.514 | 0.011 | 0.011 | 0.514
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 | 14.16 | 1.70 | 0.03 | 0.02 | 1.70
NGC 4192 | 91 | 12:13:48.2 | +14:54:01 | $9.8\times 2.8$ | $155^{\circ}$ | 24 | 1.0139 | 0.0406 | 0.0006 | 0.0007 | 0.0406
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 | 11.914 | 1.191 | 0.046 | 0.023 | 1.193
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 |  42.78g | 5.13 | 0.04 | 0.06 | 5.13
NGC 4203 | 93 | 12:15:05.0 | +33:11:50 | $3.4\times 3.2$ | $10^{\circ}$ | 24 | 0.0759 | 0.0030 | 0.0004 | 0.0006 | 0.0031
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 | 0.895 | 0.090 | 0.013 | 0.017 | 0.092
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 | 4.11 | 0.49 | 0.01 | 0.02 | 0.49
NGC 4207 | 95 | 12:15:30.4 | +09:35:06 | $1.6\times 0.8$ | $124^{\circ}$ | 24 | 0.2359 | 0.0094 | 0.0003 | 0.0003 | 0.0094
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 |  |  |  |  |
NGC 4208 | 96 | 12:15:39.3 | +13:54:05 | $3.2\times 1.9$ | $75^{\circ}$ | 24 | 0.7779 | 0.0311 | 0.0009 | 0.0006 | 0.0311
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 | 9.041 | 0.904 | 0.040 | 0.015 | 0.905
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 | 20.97 | 2.52 | 0.03 | 0.02 | 2.52
NGC 4237 | 100 | 12:17:11.4 | +15:19:26 | $2.1\times 1.3$ | $108^{\circ}$ | 24 | 0.3020 | 0.0121 | 0.0002 | 0.0003 | 0.0121
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 |  |  |  |  |
NGC 4251 | 101 | 12:18:08.3 | +28:10:31 | $3.6\times 1.5$ | $100^{\circ}$ | 24 | 0.0259 | 0.0010 | 0.0003 | 0.0005 | 0.0012
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 | $<0.082$ |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 | $<0.13$ |  |  |  |
NGC 4254 | 102 | 12:18:49.6 | +14:24:59 | 5.4 |  | 24 | 4.2582 | 0.1703 | 0.0008 | 0.0008 | 0.1703
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 | 44.920 | 4.492 | 0.051 | 0.023 | 4.492
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 | 123.29 | 14.80 | 0.72 | 0.05 | 14.81
NGC 4260 | 103 | 12:19:22.2 | +06:05:55 | $2.7\times 1.3$ | $58^{\circ}$ | 24 | 0.0290 | 0.0012 | 0.0002 | 0.0003 | 0.0012
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 | 0.375 | 0.037 | 0.010 | 0.009 | 0.040
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 | 1.38 | 0.17 | 0.01 | 0.02 | 0.17
NGC 4262 | 105 | 12:19:30.5 | +14:52:40 | 1.9 |  | 24 | 0.0182 | 0.0007 | 0.0002 | 0.0003 | 0.0008
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 | $<0.152$ |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 | $<0.35$ |  |  |  |
NGC 4294 | 110 | 12:21:17.8 | +11:30:38 | $3.2\times 1.2$ | $155^{\circ}$ | 24 | 0.2259 | 0.0090 | 0.0002 | 0.0003 | 0.0090
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 | 3.860 | 0.386 | 0.009 | 0.008 | 0.386
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 | 6.69 | 0.80 | 0.02 | 0.02 | 0.80
Table 5: Photometry for the Herscher Reference Survey (continued) Galaxy | HRS | Optical Disc | Wave- | Flux Density |  Flux Density Uncertainty (Jy)e
---|---|---|---|---|---
|  Numbera | R. A. | Declination | Axes | Position | length | Measurement | Calibration | Error | Back- | Total
|  |  (J2000)b |  (J2000)b |  (arcmin)c |  Anglecd |  ($\mu$m) | (Jy) |  | Map | ground |
NGC 4298 | 111 | 12:21:32.7 | +14:36:22 | $3.2\times 1.8$ | $140^{\circ}$ | 24 | 0.5129 | 0.0205 | 0.0002 | 0.0003 | 0.0205
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 | 5.672 | 0.567 | 0.010 | 0.008 | 0.567
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 | 19.18 | 2.30 | 0.03 | 0.01 | 2.30
NGC 4302 | 113 | 12:21:42.4 | +14:35:54 | $5.5\times 1.0$ | $178^{\circ}$ | 24 | 0.4855 | 0.0194 | 0.0002 | 0.0004 | 0.0194
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 | 6.286 | 0.629 | 0.014 | 0.010 | 0.629
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 | 26.88 | 3.23 | 0.03 | 0.02 | 3.23
NGC 4303 | 114 | 12:21:54.8 | +04:28:25 | 6.5 |  | 24 | 3.9380 | 0.1575 | 0.0021 | 0.0029 | 0.1576
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 |  99.78f | 11.97 | 0.20 | 0.04 | 11.98
NGC 4305 | 116 | 12:22:03.6 | +12:44:27 | $2.2\times 1.2$ | $32^{\circ}$ | 24 | $<0.0043$ |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 | $<0.128$ |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 | $<0.21^{g}$ |  |  |  |
NGC 4312 | 119 | 12:22:31.3 | +15:32:17 | $4.6\times 1.1$ | $170^{\circ}$ | 24 | 0.2225 | 0.0089 | 0.0004 | 0.0004 | 0.0089
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 | 3.070 | 0.307 | 0.016 | 0.009 | 0.308
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 |  |  |  |  |
NGC 4313 | 120 | 12:22:38.5 | +11:48:03 | $4.0\times 1.0$ | $143^{\circ}$ | 24 | 0.1512 | 0.0060 | 0.0004 | 0.0006 | 0.0061
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 | 1.666 | 0.167 | 0.010 | 0.010 | 0.167
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 |  5.42g | 0.65 | 0.02 | 0.04 | 0.65
NGC 4321 | 122 | 12:22:54.9 | +15:49:21 | $7.4\times 6.3$ | $30^{\circ}$ | 24 | 3.4082 | 0.1363 | 0.0009 | 0.0009 | 0.1363
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 | 36.015 | 3.602 | 0.066 | 0.028 | 3.602
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 | 123.21 | 14.79 | 0.43 | 0.04 | 14.79
NGC 4330 | 124 | 12:23:17.2 | +11:22:05 | $4.5\times 0.9$ | $59^{\circ}$ | 24 | 0.1086 | 0.0043 | 0.0002 | 0.0003 | 0.0044
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 | 1.382 | 0.138 | 0.007 | 0.009 | 0.139
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 | 4.77 | 0.57 | 0.02 | 0.01 | 0.57
IC 3259 | 128 | 12:23:48.5 | +07:11:13 | $1.7\times 0.9$ | $15^{\circ}$ | 24 |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 | $<0.107$ |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 |  |  |  |  |
NGC 4350 | 129 | 12:23:57.8 | +16:41:36 | $3.0\times 1.4$ | $28^{\circ}$ | 24 | 0.0370 | 0.0015 | 0.0001 | 0.0002 | 0.0015
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 | 0.641 | 0.064 | 0.006 | 0.008 | 0.065
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 | 1.06 | 0.13 | 0.01 | 0.02 | 0.13
NGC 4351 | 130 | 12:24:01.5 | +12:12:17 | $2.0\times 1.3$ | $80^{\circ}$ | 24 | 0.0635 | 0.0025 | 0.0002 | 0.0003 | 0.0026
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 | 0.951 | 0.095 | 0.005 | 0.006 | 0.095
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 | 2.41 | 0.29 | 0.01 | 0.01 | 0.29
NGC 4356 | 134 | 12:24:14.5 | +08:32:09 | $2.8\times 0.5$ | $40^{\circ}$ | 24 | 0.0890 | 0.0036 | 0.0007 | 0.0008 | 0.0037
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 | 0.650 | 0.065 | 0.018 | 0.023 | 0.071
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 | 1.93 | 0.23 | 0.01 | 0.02 | 0.23
NGC 4365 | 135 | 12:24:28.2 | +07:19:03 | $6.9\times 5.0$ | $40^{\circ}$ | 24 | 0.0571 | 0.0023 | 0.0010 | 0.0015 | 0.0029
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 | $<0.352$ |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 | $<1.03^{g}$ |  |  |  |
NGC 4370 | 136 | 12:24:54.9 | +07:26:42 | $1.4\times 0.7$ | $83^{\circ}$ | 24 | 0.0483 | 0.0019 | 0.0005 | 0.0007 | 0.0021
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 | 1.284 | 0.128 | 0.023 | 0.019 | 0.132
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 |  2.88g | 0.35 | 0.01 | 0.02 | 0.35
NGC 4371 | 137 | 12:24:55.4 | +11:42:15 | $4.0\times 2.2$ | $95^{\circ}$ | 24 | 0.0251 | 0.0010 | 0.0007 | 0.0010 | 0.0016
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 | 0.123 | 0.012 | 0.005 | 0.006 | 0.014
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 | $<0.27^{g}$ |  |  |  |
NGC 4374 | 138 | 12:25:03.7 | +12:53:13 | $6.5\times 5.6$ | $135^{\circ}$ | 24 | 0.1299 | 0.0052 | 0.0005 | 0.0011 | 0.0053
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 | 0.584 | 0.058 | 0.027 | 0.033 | 0.072
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 |  0.99g | 0.12 | 0.02 | 0.04 | 0.13
NGC 4376 | 139 | 12:25:18.0 | +05:44:28 | $1.4\times 0.9$ | $157^{\circ}$ | 24 | 0.0467 | 0.0019 | 0.0002 | 0.0003 | 0.0019
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 | 0.790 | 0.079 | 0.008 | 0.008 | 0.080
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 | 2.04 | 0.24 | 0.01 | 0.02 | 0.25
NGC 4378 | 140 | 12:25:18.1 | +04:55:31 | $2.9\times 2.7$ | $167^{\circ}$ | 24 | 0.0820 | 0.0033 | 0.0005 | 0.0007 | 0.0034
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 |  |  |  |  |
NGC 4380 | 141 | 12:25:22.2 | +10:00:57 | $3.5\times 1.9$ | $153^{\circ}$ | 24 | 0.1301 | 0.0052 | 0.0002 | 0.0003 | 0.0052
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 | 1.237 | 0.124 | 0.006 | 0.009 | 0.124
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 | 6.25 | 0.75 | 0.02 | 0.01 | 0.75
NGC 4383 | 142 | 12:25:25.5 | +16:28:12 | $1.9\times 1.0$ | $28^{\circ}$ | 24 | 0.9641 | 0.0386 | 0.0010 | 0.0002 | 0.0386
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 | 1.237 | 0.124 | 0.006 | 0.009 | 0.124
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 | 9.10 | 1.09 | 0.02 | 0.01 | 1.09
Table 5: Photometry for the Herscher Reference Survey (continued) Galaxy | HRS | Optical Disc | Wave- | Flux Density |  Flux Density Uncertainty (Jy)e
---|---|---|---|---|---
|  Numbera | R. A. | Declination | Axes | Position | length | Measurement | Calibration | Error | Back- | Total
|  |  (J2000)b |  (J2000)b |  (arcmin)c |  Anglecd |  ($\mu$m) | (Jy) |  | Map | ground |
IC 3322A | 143 | 12:25:42.5 | +07:13:00 | $3.5\times 0.4$ | $157^{\circ}$ | 24 | 0.1816 | 0.0073 | 0.0007 | 0.0009 | 0.0074
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 | 2.872 | 0.287 | 0.023 | 0.024 | 0.289
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 |  7.97g | 0.96 | 0.04 | 0.05 | 0.96
NGC 4388 | 144 | 12:25:46.7 | +12:39:44 | $5.6\times 1.3$ | $92^{\circ}$ | 24 | 2.5714 | 0.1029 | 0.0041 | 0.0004 | 0.1029
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 | 10.730 | 1.073 | 0.029 | 0.010 | 1.073
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 | 16.08 | 1.93 | 0.20 | 0.02 | 1.94
NGC 4390 | 145 | 12:25:50.6 | +10:27:33 | $1.7\times 1.3$ | $95^{\circ}$ | 24 | 0.0775 | 0.0031 | 0.0004 | 0.0006 | 0.0032
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 | 0.980 | 0.098 | 0.005 | 0.007 | 0.098
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 |  2.12g | 0.25 | 0.01 | 0.03 | 0.26
IC 3322 | 146 | 12:25:54.1 | +07:33:17 | $2.3\times 0.5$ | $156^{\circ}$ | 24 | 0.0603 | 0.0024 | 0.0005 | 0.0007 | 0.0026
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 | 1.000 | 0.100 | 0.017 | 0.020 | 0.103
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 |  2.23g | 0.27 | 0.02 | 0.02 | 0.27
NGC 4396 | 148 | 12:25:58.8 | +15:40:17 | $3.3\times 1.0$ | $125^{\circ}$ | 24 | 0.1290 | 0.0052 | 0.0002 | 0.0003 | 0.0052
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 | 2.090 | 0.209 | 0.006 | 0.008 | 0.209
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 | 4.95 | 0.59 | 0.02 | 0.01 | 0.59
NGC 4402 | 149 | 12:26:07.5 | +13:06:46 | $3.9\times 1.1$ | $90^{\circ}$ | 24 | 0.6473 | 0.0259 | 0.0002 | 0.0003 | 0.0259
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 | 8.281 | 0.828 | 0.017 | 0.010 | 0.828
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 | 22.05 | 2.65 | 0.04 | 0.02 | 2.65
NGC 4406 | 150 | 12:26:11.7 | +12:56:46 | $8.9\times 5.8$ | $130^{\circ}$ | 24 | 0.1221 | 0.0049 | 0.0003 | 0.0005 | 0.0049
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 | $<0.204$ |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 |  0.97g | 0.12 | 0.03 | 0.02 | 0.12
NGC 4407 | 151 | 12:26:32.2 | +12:36:40 | $2.3\times 1.5$ | $60^{\circ}$ | 24 | 0.1445 | 0.0058 | 0.0002 | 0.0003 | 0.0058
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 | 1.381 | 0.138 | 0.005 | 0.008 | 0.138
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 | 3.78 | 0.45 | 0.01 | 0.01 | 0.45
NGC 4412 | 152 | 12:26:36.0 | +03:57:53 | 1.4 |  | 24 | 0.4029 | 0.0161 | 0.0011 | 0.0003 | 0.0162
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 |  |  |  |  |
NGC 4416 | 153 | 12:26:46.7 | +07:55:08 | 1.7 |  | 24 | 0.1114 | 0.0045 | 0.0005 | 0.0007 | 0.0045
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 | 1.506 | 0.151 | 0.016 | 0.019 | 0.153
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 |  3.44g | 0.41 | 0.02 | 0.02 | 0.41
NGC 4411B | 154 | 12:26:47.2 | +08:53:05 | 2.5 |  | 24 | 0.0601 | 0.0024 | 0.0006 | 0.0008 | 0.0026
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 | 1.188 | 0.119 | 0.017 | 0.022 | 0.122
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 |  2.79g | 0.34 | 0.02 | 0.02 | 0.34
NGC 4417 | 155 | 12:26:50.6 | +09:35:03 | $3.4\times 1.3$ | $49^{\circ}$ | 24 | 0.0213 | 0.0009 | 0.0006 | 0.0009 | 0.0014
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 | $<0.115$ |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 | $<0.26^{g}$ |  |  |  |
NGC 4419 | 156 | 12:26:56.4 | +15:02:51 | $3.3\times 1.1$ | $133^{\circ}$ | 24 | 1.2483 | 0.0499 | 0.0022 | 0.0003 | 0.0500
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 | 8.091 | 0.809 | 0.032 | 0.008 | 0.810
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 | 13.71 | 1.65 | 0.03 | 0.02 | 1.65
NGC 4409 | 157 | 12:26:58.5 | +02:29:40 | $2.0\times 1.0$ | $8^{\circ}$ | 24 | 0.2485 | 0.0099 | 0.0002 | 0.0003 | 0.0099
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 |  |  |  |  |
NGC 4424 | 159 | 12:27:11.5 | +09:25:14 | $3.6\times 1.8$ | $95^{\circ}$ | 24 | 0.3235 | 0.0129 | 0.0004 | 0.0003 | 0.0130
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 | 3.636 | 0.364 | 0.014 | 0.008 | 0.364
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 | 5.19 | 0.62 | 0.02 | 0.01 | 0.62
NGC 4429 | 161 | 12:27:26.5 | +11:06:28 | $5.6\times 2.6$ | $99^{\circ}$ | 24 | 0.1452 | 0.0058 | 0.0010 | 0.0014 | 0.0060
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 | 2.856 | 0.286 | 0.039 | 0.037 | 0.291
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 |  4.45g | 0.53 | 0.26 | 0.05 | 0.60
NGC 4435 | 162 | 12:27:40.4 | +13:04:44 | $2.8\times 2.0$ | $13^{\circ}$ | 24 | 0.1342 | 0.0054 | 0.0002 | 0.0003 | 0.0054
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 | 2.569 | 0.257 | 0.014 | 0.008 | 0.257
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 | 4.20 | 0.50 | 0.02 | 0.01 | 0.50
NGC 4438 | 163 | 12:27:45.5 | +13:00:32 | $8.5\times 3.2$ | $27^{\circ}$ | 24 | 0.3026 | 0.0121 | 0.0004 | 0.0006 | 0.0121
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 | 5.932 | 0.593 | 0.024 | 0.018 | 0.594
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 | 15.01 | 1.80 | 0.04 | 0.02 | 1.80
NGC 4440 | 164 | 12:27:53.5 | +12:17:36 | 1.9 |  | 24 | 0.0191 | 0.0008 | 0.0005 | 0.0007 | 0.0011
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 | $<0.117$ |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 | $<0.11^{g}$ |  |  |  |
NGC 4442 | 166 | 12:28:03.8 | +09:48:13 | $4.6\times 1.8$ | $87^{\circ}$ | 24 | 0.0429 | 0.0017 | 0.0003 | 0.0006 | 0.0018
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 | $<0.057$ |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 | $<0.47$ |  |  |  |
Table 5: Photometry for the Herscher Reference Survey (continued) Galaxy | HRS | Optical Disc | Wave- | Flux Density |  Flux Density Uncertainty (Jy)e
---|---|---|---|---|---
|  Numbera | R. A. | Declination | Axes | Position | length | Measurement | Calibration | Error | Back- | Total
|  |  (J2000)b |  (J2000)b |  (arcmin)c |  Anglecd |  ($\mu$m) | (Jy) |  | Map | ground |
NGC 4445 | 167 | 12:28:15.9 | +09:26:10 | $2.6\times 0.5$ | $106^{\circ}$ | 24 | 0.0366 | 0.0015 | 0.0006 | 0.0008 | 0.0018
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 | 0.538 | 0.054 | 0.012 | 0.017 | 0.058
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 |  1.62g | 0.19 | 0.02 | 0.07 | 0.21
UGC 7590 | 168 | 12:28:18.7 | +08:43:46 | $1.3\times 0.4$ | $168^{\circ}$ | 24 | 0.0320 | 0.0013 | 0.0005 | 0.0007 | 0.0015
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 | 0.528 | 0.053 | 0.015 | 0.019 | 0.058
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 |  0.94g | 0.11 | 0.01 | 0.02 | 0.11
NGC 4450 | 170 | 12:28:29.6 | +17:05:06 | $5.2\times 3.9$ | $175^{\circ}$ | 24 | 0.2089 | 0.0084 | 0.0004 | 0.0006 | 0.0084
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 | 2.890 | 0.289 | 0.013 | 0.015 | 0.290
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 | 13.54 | 1.62 | 0.02 | 0.03 | 1.62
NGC 4451 | 171 | 12:28:40.5 | +09:15:32 | $1.5\times 1.0$ | $162^{\circ}$ | 24 | 0.1504 | 0.0060 | 0.0005 | 0.0007 | 0.0061
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 | 2.497 | 0.250 | 0.023 | 0.018 | 0.251
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 |  4.48g | 0.54 | 0.02 | 0.02 | 0.54
IC 3392 | 172 | 12:28:43.2 | +14:59:58 | $2.3\times 1.0$ | $40^{\circ}$ | 24 | 0.1184 | 0.0047 | 0.0002 | 0.0003 | 0.0047
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 | 1.579 | 0.158 | 0.007 | 0.007 | 0.158
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 | 3.64 | 0.44 | 0.09 | 0.02 | 0.45
NGC 4457 | 173 | 12:28:59.0 | +03:34:14 | 2.7 |  | 24 | 0.4012 | 0.0160 | 0.0005 | 0.0003 | 0.0161
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 | 5.478 | 0.548 | 0.021 | 0.010 | 0.548
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 | 9.16 | 1.10 | 0.02 | 0.01 | 1.10
NGC 4459 | 174 | 12:29:00.0 | +13:58:43 | $3.5\times 2.7$ | $110^{\circ}$ | 24 | 0.1292 | 0.0052 | 0.0008 | 0.0010 | 0.0053
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 | 2.364 | 0.236 | 0.033 | 0.028 | 0.240
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 |  3.71g | 0.45 | 0.02 | 0.06 | 0.45
NGC 4461 | 175 | 12:29:03.0 | +13:11:02 | $3.5\times 1.4$ | $9^{\circ}$ | 24 | 0.0222 | 0.0009 | 0.0005 | 0.0005 | 0.0011
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 | $<0.153$ |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 | $<0.16^{g}$ |  |  |  |
NGC 4469 | 176 | 12:29:28.0 | +08:44:60 | $3.8\times 1.3$ | $89^{\circ}$ | 24 | 0.0876 | 0.0035 | 0.0007 | 0.0010 | 0.0037
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 | 1.367 | 0.137 | 0.024 | 0.026 | 0.141
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 |  3.24g | 0.39 | 0.02 | 0.08 | 0.40
NGC 4470 | 177 | 12:29:37.7 | +07:49:27 | $1.3\times 0.9$ | $0^{\circ}$ | 24 | 0.1511 | 0.0060 | 0.0003 | 0.0005 | 0.0061
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 | 2.352 | 0.235 | 0.022 | 0.018 | 0.237
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 | 3.93 | 0.47 | 0.02 | 0.01 | 0.47
NGC 4472 | 178 | 12:29:46.7 | +08:00:02 | $10.2\times 8.3$ | $155^{\circ}$ | 24 | 0.2047 | 0.0082 | 0.0013 | 0.0019 | 0.0082
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 | $<0.354$ |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 | $<1.38^{g}$ |  |  |  |
NGC 4473 | 179 | 12:29:48.8 | +13:25:46 | $4.5\times 2.5$ | $100^{\circ}$ | 24 | 0.0335 | 0.0013 | 0.0003 | 0.0005 | 0.0014
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 | $<0.203$ |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 | $<0.21^{g}$ |  |  |  |
NGC 4477 | 180 | 12:30:02.1 | +13:38:12 | $3.8\times 3.5$ | $15^{\circ}$ | 24 | 0.0518 | 0.0021 | 0.0005 | 0.0007 | 0.0022
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 | 0.682 | 0.068 | 0.025 | 0.032 | 0.080
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 |  0.81g | 0.10 | 0.02 | 0.05 | 0.11
NGC 4478 | 181 | 12:30:17.4 | +12:19:43 | $1.9\times 1.6$ | $140^{\circ}$ | 24 | 0.0256 | 0.0010 | 0.0005 | 0.0007 | 0.0013
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 | $<0.117$ |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 | $<0.17$ |  |  |  |
NGC 4486 | 183 | 12:30:49.4 | +12:23:28 | 8.3 |  | 24 | 0.2511 | 0.0100 | 0.0014 | 0.0020 | 0.0105
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 | 0.429 | 0.043 | 0.028 | 0.042 | 0.066
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 |  0.30g | 0.04 | 0.03 | 0.05 | 0.07
NGC 4491 | 184 | 12:30:57.1 | +11:29:01 | $1.7\times 0.9$ | $148^{\circ}$ | 24 | 0.3183 | 0.0127 | 0.0021 | 0.0007 | 0.0129
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 | 2.490 | 0.249 | 0.038 | 0.019 | 0.253
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 |  1.71g | 0.21 | 0.02 | 0.03 | 0.21
NGC 4492 | 185 | 12:30:59.7 | +08:04:40 | 1.7 |  | 24 | 0.0415 | 0.0017 | 0.0005 | 0.0007 | 0.0019
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 | 0.288 | 0.029 | 0.012 | 0.020 | 0.037
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 |  1.62g | 0.19 | 0.01 | 0.02 | 0.20
NGC 4494 | 186 | 12:31:24.0 | +25:46:30 | 4.8 |  | 24 | 0.0600 | 0.0024 | 0.0005 | 0.0007 | 0.0025
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 | 0.342 | 0.034 | 0.015 | 0.017 | 0.041
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 |  0.43f | 0.05 | 0.01 | 0.02 | 0.06
NGC 4496 | 187 | 12:31:39.2 | +03:56:22 | $4.0\times 3.0$ | $70^{\circ}$ | 24 | 0.4920 | 0.0197 | 0.0006 | 0.0006 | 0.0197
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 | 5.956 | 0.596 | 0.022 | 0.025 | 0.597
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 | 13.84 | 1.66 | 0.02 | 0.02 | 1.66
NGC 4498 | 188 | 12:31:39.5 | +16:51:10 | $3.0\times 1.6$ | $133^{\circ}$ | 24 | 0.1343 | 0.0054 | 0.0002 | 0.0002 | 0.0054
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 | 2.050 | 0.205 | 0.006 | 0.008 | 0.205
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 | 5.48 | 0.66 | 0.02 | 0.01 | 0.66
Table 5: Photometry for the Herscher Reference Survey (continued) Galaxy | HRS | Optical Disc | Wave- | Flux Density |  Flux Density Uncertainty (Jy)e
---|---|---|---|---|---
|  Numbera | R. A. | Declination | Axes | Position | length | Measurement | Calibration | Error | Back- | Total
|  |  (J2000)b |  (J2000)b |  (arcmin)c |  Anglecd |  ($\mu$m) | (Jy) |  | Map | ground |
IC 797 | 189 | 12:31:54.7 | +15:07:26 | $1.3\times 0.9$ | $108^{\circ}$ | 24 | 0.0731 | 0.0029 | 0.0002 | 0.0003 | 0.0029
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 | 1.105 | 0.111 | 0.006 | 0.010 | 0.111
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 | 2.31 | 0.28 | 0.01 | 0.02 | 0.28
NGC 4501 | 190 | 12:31:59.2 | +14:25:14 | $6.9\times 3.7$ | $140^{\circ}$ | 24 | 2.2216 | 0.0889 | 0.0004 | 0.0006 | 0.0889
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 | 28.284 | 2.828 | 0.024 | 0.016 | 2.829
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 | 98.41 | 11.81 | 0.08 | 0.04 | 11.81
NGC 4506 | 192 | 12:32:10.5 | +13:25:11 | $1.6\times 1.1$ | $110^{\circ}$ | 24 | 0.0126 | 0.0005 | 0.0005 | 0.0007 | 0.0010
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 | 0.357 | 0.036 | 0.012 | 0.018 | 0.042
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 |  0.34g | 0.04 | 0.01 | 0.02 | 0.05
NGC 4517 | 194 | 12:32:45.5 | +00:06:54 | $10.5\times 1.5$ | $83^{\circ}$ | 24 | 1.1476 | 0.0459 | 0.0007 | 0.0007 | 0.0459
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 | 11.273 | 1.127 | 0.023 | 0.019 | 1.128
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 | 45.06 | 5.41 | 0.11 | 0.03 | 5.41
NGC 4516 | 195 | 12:33:07.5 | +14:34:30 | $1.7\times 1.0$ | $0^{\circ}$ | 24 | 0.0077 | 0.0003 | 0.0005 | 0.0007 | 0.0009
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 | $<0.16^{g}$ |  |  |  |
NGC 4519 | 196 | 12:33:30.2 | +08:39:17 | $3.2\times 2.5$ | $145^{\circ}$ | 24 | 0.5386 | 0.0215 | 0.0023 | 0.0011 | 0.0217
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 | 5.006 | 0.501 | 0.029 | 0.020 | 0.502
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 |  8.44g | 1.01 | 0.04 | 0.03 | 1.01
NGC 4522 | 197 | 12:33:40.0 | +09:10:30 | $3.7\times 1.0$ | $33^{\circ}$ | 24 | 0.1542 | 0.0062 | 0.0002 | 0.0003 | 0.0062
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 | 2.011 | 0.201 | 0.009 | 0.008 | 0.201
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 | 5.53 | 0.66 | 0.02 | 0.01 | 0.66
IC 800 | 199 | 12:33:56.6 | +15:21:17 | $1.5\times 1.1$ | $148^{\circ}$ | 24 | 0.0421 | 0.0017 | 0.0002 | 0.0003 | 0.0017
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 | 0.636 | 0.064 | 0.005 | 0.010 | 0.065
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 | 1.35 | 0.16 | 0.01 | 0.03 | 0.16
NGC 4526 | 200 | 12:34:03.0 | +07:41:57 | $7.2\times 2.4$ | $113^{\circ}$ | 24 | 0.3144 | 0.0126 | 0.0009 | 0.0010 | 0.0126
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 |  8.098f | 0.810 | 0.047 | 0.017 | 0.811
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 |  11.84f | 1.42 | 0.03 | 0.04 | 1.42
IC 3510 | 202 | 12:34:14.8 | +11:04:17 | $0.9\times 0.6$ | $0^{\circ}$ | 24 | $<0.0043$ |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 | $<0.112$ |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 | $<0.65^{g}$ |  |  |  |
NGC 4532 | 203 | 12:34:19.3 | +06:28:04 | $2.8\times 1.1$ | $160^{\circ}$ | 24 | 0.8125 | 0.0325 | 0.0004 | 0.0003 | 0.0325
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 | 9.742 | 0.974 | 0.022 | 0.008 | 0.974
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 | 12.93 | 1.55 | 0.02 | 0.02 | 1.55
NGC 4535 | 204 | 12:34:20.3 | +08:11:52 | $7.1\times 5.0$ | $0^{\circ}$ | 24 | 1.7829 | 0.0713 | 0.0024 | 0.0015 | 0.0714
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 | 16.427 | 1.643 | 0.052 | 0.031 | 1.644
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 |  58.76g | 7.05 | 0.05 | 0.05 | 7.05
NGC 4536 | 205 | 12:34:27.1 | +02:11:16 | $7.6\times 3.2$ | $130^{\circ}$ | 24 | 3.5045 | 0.1402 | 0.0047 | 0.0008 | 0.1403
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 | 26.991 | 2.699 | 0.122 | 0.019 | 2.702
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 | 49.47 | 5.94 | 0.05 | 0.03 | 5.94
NGC 4548 | 208 | 12:35:26.4 | +14:29:47 | $5.4\times 4.3$ | $150^{\circ}$ | 24 | 0.4331 | 0.0173 | 0.0003 | 0.0006 | 0.0173
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 | 4.350 | 0.435 | 0.013 | 0.014 | 0.435
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 | 26.01 | 3.12 | 0.03 | 0.03 | 3.12
NGC 4546 | 209 | 12:35:29.5 | -03:47:35 | $3.3\times 1.4$ | $78^{\circ}$ | 24 | 0.0498 | 0.0020 | 0.0003 | 0.0005 | 0.0021
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 | 0.206 | 0.021 | 0.010 | 0.015 | 0.028
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 |  |  |  |  |
NGC 4550 | 210 | 12:35:30.6 | +12:13:15 | $3.3\times 0.9$ | $178^{\circ}$ | 24 | 0.0273 | 0.0011 | 0.0004 | 0.0005 | 0.0013
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 | 0.406 | 0.041 | 0.018 | 0.022 | 0.050
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 | $<0.11^{g}$ |  |  |  |
NGC 4552 | 211 | 12:35:39.8 | +12:33:23 | 5.1 |  | 24 | 0.0960 | 0.0038 | 0.0003 | 0.0006 | 0.0039
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 | 0.119 | 0.012 | 0.009 | 0.011 | 0.019
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 | $<0.87^{g}$ |  |  |  |
NGC 4561 | 212 | 12:36:08.1 | +19:19:21 | $1.5\times 1.3$ | $30^{\circ}$ | 24 | 0.0805 | 0.0032 | 0.0001 | 0.0002 | 0.0032
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 | 1.551 | 0.155 | 0.005 | 0.006 | 0.155
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 | 2.50 | 0.30 | 0.01 | 0.01 | 0.30
NGC 4565 | 213 | 12:36:20.7 | +25:59:16 | $15.8\times 2.1$ | $136^{\circ}$ | 24 | 1.6495 | 0.0660 | 0.0005 | 0.0007 | 0.0660
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 | 19.257 | 1.926 | 0.026 | 0.022 | 1.926
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 | 86.49 | 10.38 | 0.07 | 0.03 | 10.38
NGC 4564 | 214 | 12:36:26.9 | +11:26:22 | $3.5\times 1.5$ | $47^{\circ}$ | 24 | 0.0138 | 0.0006 | 0.0006 | 0.0009 | 0.0012
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 | $<0.168$ |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 | $<0.14^{g}$ |  |  |  |
Table 5: Photometry for the Herscher Reference Survey (continued) Galaxy | HRS | Optical Disc | Wave- | Flux Density |  Flux Density Uncertainty (Jy)e
---|---|---|---|---|---
|  Numbera | R. A. | Declination | Axes | Position | length | Measurement | Calibration | Error | Back- | Total
|  |  (J2000)b |  (J2000)b |  (arcmin)c |  Anglecd |  ($\mu$m) | (Jy) |  | Map | ground |
NGC 4567 | 215 |  |  |  |  | 24 | 2.0960 | 0.0838 | 0.0019 | 0.0020 | 0.0839
/4568h | /216 |  |  |  |  | 70 | 27.005 | 2.700 | 0.109 | 0.054 | 2.703
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 |  68.02g | 8.16 | 0.49 | 0.05 | 8.18
NGC 4569 | 217 | 12:36:49.7 | +13:09:46 | $9.5\times 4.4$ | $23^{\circ}$ | 24 | 1.4279 | 0.0571 | 0.0019 | 0.0009 | 0.0572
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 | 11.451 | 1.145 | 0.041 | 0.021 | 1.146
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 | 35.98 | 4.32 | 0.05 | 0.05 | 4.32
NGC 4570 | 218 | 12:36:53.4 | +07:14:48 | $3.8\times 1.1$ | $159^{\circ}$ | 24 | 0.0287 | 0.0011 | 0.0002 | 0.0003 | 0.0012
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 | $<0.047$ |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 | $<0.07$ |  |  |  |
NGC 4578 | 219 | 12:37:30.5 | +09:33:18 | $3.3\times 2.5$ | $35^{\circ}$ | 24 | 0.0206 | 0.0008 | 0.0003 | 0.0006 | 0.0011
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 | $<0.119$ |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 | $<0.30$ |  |  |  |
NGC 4579 | 220 | 12:37:43.6 | +11:49:05 | $5.9\times 4.7$ | $95^{\circ}$ | 24 | 0.8077 | 0.0323 | 0.0007 | 0.0008 | 0.0323
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 | 9.585 | 0.958 | 0.020 | 0.019 | 0.959
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 | 36.16 | 4.34 | 0.30 | 0.05 | 4.35
NGC 4580 | 221 | 12:37:48.3 | +05:22:07 | $2.1\times 1.6$ | $165^{\circ}$ | 24 | 0.1448 | 0.0058 | 0.0002 | 0.0003 | 0.0058
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 | 1.937 | 0.194 | 0.007 | 0.007 | 0.194
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 | 5.65 | 0.68 | 0.02 | 0.01 | 0.68
NGC 4584 | 222 | 12:38:17.8 | +13:06:36 | 5.1 |  | 24 | 0.0751 | 0.0030 | 0.0022 | 0.0029 | 0.0047
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 |  0.60g | 0.07 | 0.01 | 0.03 | 0.08
NGC 4592 | 227 | 12:39:18.7 | -00:31:55 | $5.8\times 1.5$ | $97^{\circ}$ | 24 | 0.1504 | 0.0060 | 0.0004 | 0.0005 | 0.0061
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 |  |  |  |  |
NGC 4596 | 231 | 12:39:55.9 | +10:10:34 | $4.0\times 3.0$ | $135^{\circ}$ | 24 | 0.0554 | 0.0022 | 0.0005 | 0.0007 | 0.0024
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 | 0.650 | 0.065 | 0.025 | 0.033 | 0.077
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 |  |  |  |  |
NGC 4606 | 232 | 12:40:57.5 | +11:54:44 | $3.2\times 1.6$ | $33^{\circ}$ | 24 | 0.0877 | 0.0035 | 0.0002 | 0.0003 | 0.0035
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 | 1.335 | 0.133 | 0.008 | 0.008 | 0.134
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 | 2.80 | 0.34 | 0.05 | 0.02 | 0.34
NGC 4607 | 233 | 12:41:12.4 | +11:53:12 | $2.9\times 0.7$ | $2^{\circ}$ | 24 | 0.2676 | 0.0107 | 0.0002 | 0.0002 | 0.0107
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 | 4.108 | 0.411 | 0.013 | 0.007 | 0.411
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 | 8.55 | 1.03 | 0.05 | 0.01 | 1.03
NGC 4612 | 235 | 12:41:32.7 | +07:18:53 | $2.5\times 1.9$ | $145^{\circ}$ | 24 | 0.0139 | 0.0006 | 0.0002 | 0.0005 | 0.0008
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 | $<0.101$ |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 | $<0.11$ |  |  |  |
NGC 4621 | 236 | 12:42:02.3 | +11:38:49 | $5.4\times 3.7$ | $165^{\circ}$ | 24 | 0.1028 | 0.0041 | 0.0011 | 0.0015 | 0.0045
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 | $<0.240$ |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 | $<0.83^{g}$ |  |  |  |
NGC 4630 | 237 | 12:42:31.1 | +03:57:37 | $1.8\times 1.3$ | $10^{\circ}$ | 24 | 0.2877 | 0.0115 | 0.0006 | 0.0003 | 0.0115
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 |  |  |  |  |
NGC 4638 | 240 | 12:42:47.4 | +11:26:33 | $2.2\times 1.4$ | $125^{\circ}$ | 24 | 0.0159 | 0.0006 | 0.0003 | 0.0004 | 0.0008
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 | $<0.110$ |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 | $<0.25$ |  |  |  |
NGC 4636 | 241 | 12:42:49.8 | +02:41:16 | $6.0\times 4.7$ | $150^{\circ}$ | 24 | 0.1134 | 0.0045 | 0.0009 | 0.0014 | 0.0048
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 | 0.40 | 0.05 | 0.01 | 0.01 | 0.05
NGC 4639 | 242 | 12:42:52.3 | +13:15:27 | $2.8\times 1.9$ | $123^{\circ}$ | 24 | 0.1554 | 0.0062 | 0.0003 | 0.0006 | 0.0062
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 |  3.55g | 0.43 | 0.12 | 0.13 | 0.46
NGC 4647 | 244 | 12:43:32.3 | +11:34:55 | $2.9\times 2.3$ | $125^{\circ}$ | 24 | 0.6396 | 0.0256 | 0.0006 | 0.0008 | 0.0256
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 | 7.480 | 0.748 | 0.030 | 0.021 | 0.749
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 |  16.30g | 1.96 | 0.14 | 0.15 | 1.97
NGC 4649 | 245 | 12:43:39.9 | +11:33:10 | $7.4\times 6.0$ | $105^{\circ}$ | 24 | 0.1758 | 0.0070 | 0.0010 | 0.0014 | 0.0075
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 | $<0.570$ |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 | $<1.95^{g}$ |  |  |  |
NGC 4651 | 246 | 12:43:42.6 | +16:23:36 | $4.0\times 2.6$ | $80^{\circ}$ | 24 | 0.5691 | 0.0228 | 0.0002 | 0.0003 | 0.0228
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 | 7.818 | 0.782 | 0.014 | 0.009 | 0.782
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 | 20.72 | 2.49 | 0.03 | 0.02 | 2.49
Table 5: Photometry for the Herscher Reference Survey (continued) Galaxy | HRS | Optical Disc | Wave- | Flux Density |  Flux Density Uncertainty (Jy)e
---|---|---|---|---|---
|  Numbera | R. A. | Declination | Axes | Position | length | Measurement | Calibration | Error | Back- | Total
|  |  (J2000)b |  (J2000)b |  (arcmin)c |  Anglecd |  ($\mu$m) | (Jy) |  | Map | ground |
NGC 4654 | 247 | 12:43:56.5 | +13:07:36 | $4.9\times 2.8$ | $128^{\circ}$ | 24 | 1.6726 | 0.0669 | 0.0005 | 0.0004 | 0.0669
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 | 19.503 | 1.950 | 0.021 | 0.012 | 1.950
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 | 48.60 | 5.83 | 0.07 | 0.02 | 5.83
NGC 4660 | 248 | 12:44:31.9 | +11:11:26 | $2.2\times 1.6$ | $100^{\circ}$ | 24 | 0.0173 | 0.0007 | 0.0001 | 0.0001 | 0.0007
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 | $<0.072$ |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 | $<0.05^{g}$ |  |  |  |
IC 3718 | 249 | 12:44:45.9 | +12:21:05 | $2.7\times 1.0$ | $72^{\circ}$ | 24 | $<0.0104$ |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 | $<0.232$ |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 | $<0.85$ |  |  |  |
NGC 4666 | 251 | 12:45:08.5 | -00:27:43 | $4.6\times 1.3$ | $42^{\circ}$ | 24 | 3.2683 | 0.1307 | 0.0018 | 0.0008 | 0.1307
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 |  |  |  |  |
NGC 4688 | 252 | 12:47:46.5 | +04:20:10 | 3.2 |  | 24 | 0.1753 | 0.0070 | 0.0005 | 0.0006 | 0.0071
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 |  |  |  |  |
NGC 4689 | 254 | 12:47:45.5 | +13:45:46 | 4.3 |  | 24 | 0.4682 | 0.0187 | 0.0003 | 0.0004 | 0.0187
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 | 4.949 | 0.495 | 0.011 | 0.015 | 0.495
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 | 17.45 | 2.09 | 0.04 | 0.02 | 2.09
NGC 4698 | 257 | 12:48:22.9 | +08:29:14 | $4.0\times 2.5$ | $170^{\circ}$ | 24 | 0.1173 | 0.0047 | 0.0002 | 0.0003 | 0.0047
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 | 0.688 | 0.069 | 0.007 | 0.010 | 0.070
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 | 5.41 | 0.65 | 0.02 | 0.02 | 0.65
NGC 4697 | 258 | 12:48:35.9 | -05:48:03 | $7.2\times 4.7$ | $70^{\circ}$ | 24 | 0.0786 | 0.0031 | 0.0009 | 0.0012 | 0.0035
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 | 0.502 | 0.050 | 0.028 | 0.031 | 0.065
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 | 1.32 | 0.16 | 0.09 | 0.04 | 0.19
NGC 4701 | 259 | 12:49:11.5 | +03:23:19 | $2.8\times 2.1$ | $45^{\circ}$ | 24 | 0.2414 | 0.0097 | 0.0003 | 0.0004 | 0.0097
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 |  |  |  |  |
NGC 4725 | 263 | 12:50:26.6 | +25:30:03 | $10.7\times 7.6$ | $35^{\circ}$ | 24 | 0.8748 | 0.0350 | 0.0008 | 0.0012 | 0.0350
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 | 7.469 | 0.747 | 0.023 | 0.028 | 0.748
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 | 51.70 | 6.20 | 0.05 | 0.04 | 6.20
NGC 4754 | 269 | 12:52:17.5 | +11:18:49 | $4.6\times 2.5$ | $23^{\circ}$ | 24 | 0.0401 | 0.0016 | 0.0002 | 0.0004 | 0.0017
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 | $<0.065$ |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 | $<0.82^{f}$ |  |  |  |
NGC 4762 | 272 | 12:52:56.0 | +11:13:51 | $8.7\times 1.7$ | $32^{\circ}$ | 24 | 0.0463 | 0.0019 | 0.0003 | 0.0004 | 0.0019
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 | $<0.072$ |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 | $<0.17^{f}$ |  |  |  |
NGC 4772 | 274 | 12:53:29.1 | +02:10:06 | $3.4\times 1.7$ | $147^{\circ}$ | 24 | 0.0568 | 0.0023 | 0.0003 | 0.0005 | 0.0023
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 | 0.748 | 0.075 | 0.011 | 0.015 | 0.077
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 |  |  |  |  |
UGC 8041 | 279 | 12:55:12.6 | +00:06:60 | $3.1\times 1.9$ | $165^{\circ}$ | 24 | 0.0859 | 0.0034 | 0.0002 | 0.0004 | 0.0035
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 |  |  |  |  |
NGC 4808 | 283 | 12:55:48.9 | +04:18:15 | $2.8\times 1.1$ | $127^{\circ}$ | 24 | 0.6398 | 0.0256 | 0.0003 | 0.0002 | 0.0256
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 | 8.688 | 0.869 | 0.018 | 0.008 | 0.869
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 | 15.99 | 1.92 | 0.03 | 0.01 | 1.92
NGC 4941 | 288 | 13:04:13.1 | -05:33:06 | $3.6\times 1.9$ | $15^{\circ}$ | 24 | 0.4272 | 0.0171 | 0.0010 | 0.0007 | 0.0171
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 | 1.845 | 0.184 | 0.021 | 0.034 | 0.189
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 |  |  |  |  |
NGC 5147 | 293 | 13:26:19.7 | +02:06:03 | $1.9\times 1.5$ | $120^{\circ}$ | 24 | 0.2554 | 0.0102 | 0.0003 | 0.0005 | 0.0102
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 | 4.023 | 0.402 | 0.010 | 0.012 | 0.403
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 | 6.18 | 0.74 | 0.02 | 0.02 | 0.74
NGC 5248 | 295 | 13:37:32.0 | +08:53:06 | $6.2\times 4.5$ | $110^{\circ}$ | 24 | 2.4003 | 0.0960 | 0.0016 | 0.0013 | 0.0960
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 | 28.384 | 2.838 | 0.081 | 0.028 | 2.840
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 | 66.48 | 7.98 | 0.19 | 0.05 | 7.98
NGC 5273 | 296 | 13:42:08.3 | +35:39:15 | $2.8\times 2.5$ | $10^{\circ}$ | 24 | 0.1076 | 0.0043 | 0.0006 | 0.0004 | 0.0044
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 | 0.817 | 0.082 | 0.011 | 0.015 | 0.084
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 | 0.91 | 0.11 | 0.01 | 0.02 | 0.11
NGC 5303 | 298 | 13:47:44.9 | +38:18:17 | $0.9\times 0.4$ | $92^{\circ}$ | 24 | 0.2983 | 0.0119 | 0.0003 | 0.0002 | 0.0119
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 |  |  |  |  |
Table 5: Photometry for the Herscher Reference Survey (continued)

Galaxy | HRS | Optical Disc | Wave- | Flux Density |  Flux Density Uncertainty (Jy)e
---|---|---|---|---|---
|  Numbera | R. A. | Declination | Axes | Position | length | Measurement | Calibration | Error | Back- | Total
|  |  (J2000)b |  (J2000)b |  (arcmin)c |  Anglecd |  ($\mu$m) | (Jy) |  | Map | ground |
NGC 5363 | 306 | 13:56:07.2 | +05:15:17 | $4.1\times 2.6$ | $135^{\circ}$ | 24 | 0.1421 | 0.0057 | 0.0004 | 0.0007 | 0.0057
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 | 2.167 | 0.217 | 0.030 | 0.018 | 0.220
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 | 4.54 | 0.54 | 0.12 | 0.04 | 0.56
NGC 5576 | 312 | 14:21:03.6 | +03:16:16 | $3.5\times 2.2$ | $95^{\circ}$ | 24 | 0.0270 | 0.0011 | 0.0003 | 0.0006 | 0.0013
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 | $<0.096$ |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 | $<0.33^{f}$ |  |  |  |
NGC 5577 | 313 | 14:21:13.1 | +03:26:09 | $3.4\times 1.0$ | $56^{\circ}$ | 24 | 0.0879 | 0.0035 | 0.0003 | 0.0003 | 0.0035
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 |  |  |  |  |
NGC 5669 | 319 | 14:32:43.4 | +09:53:26 | $4.0\times 2.8$ | $50^{\circ}$ | 24 | 0.1959 | 0.0078 | 0.0004 | 0.0007 | 0.0079
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 | 3.006 | 0.301 | 0.024 | 0.036 | 0.304
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 | 7.83 | 0.94 | 0.01 | 0.03 | 0.94
NGC 5668 | 320 | 14:33:24.3 | +04:27:02 | 3.3 |  | 24 | 0.2561 | 0.0102 | 0.0004 | 0.0007 | 0.0103
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 | 4.444 | 0.444 | 0.025 | 0.024 | 0.446
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 | 11.49 | 1.38 | 0.02 | 0.02 | 1.38
NGC 5692 | 321 | 14:38:18.1 | +03:24:37 | $0.9\times 0.6$ | $35^{\circ}$ | 24 | 0.1163 | 0.0047 | 0.0005 | 0.0007 | 0.0047
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 | 1.873 | 0.187 | 0.022 | 0.017 | 0.189
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 |  2.07g | 0.25 | 0.18 | 0.09 | 0.32
IC 1048 | 323 | 14:42:58.0 | +04:53:22 | $2.2\times 0.7$ | $163^{\circ}$ | 24 | 0.1624 | 0.0065 | 0.0010 | 0.0013 | 0.0067
|  |  |  |  |  | 70 |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  | 160 |  5.08g | 0.61 | 0.15 | 0.12 | 0.64

a The HRS number corresponds to the numbers given by Boselli et al. (2010).

b Data are from NED.

c Data are from de Vaucouleurs et al. (1991) unless otherwise specified. If de
Vaucouleurs et al. (1991) specify both the minor/major axis ratio and the
position angle, then both axes and the position angle are listed. If de
Vaucouleurs et al. (1991) did not specify either of these data, then we
performed photometry on circular regions, and so only the major axis is
specified.

d The position angle is defined as degrees from north through east.

e Details on the sources of these uncertainties are given in Section 3.1.

f These measurements are from data in which significant portions of the
optical discs ($>10$%) of the galaxies were not covered in this specific wave
band. The measurements here are for the region that was covered in the MIPS
data. We have applied no corrections for the missing flux density.

g These 160 $\mu$m measurements are for galaxies that were covered in scan map
observations in which the final 160 $\mu$m images for these galaxies contain
NaN values within the optical disc as a consequence of incomplete coverage.
This typically occurs when scan maps are performed using the fast scan rate,
although NaN values within the optical discs of galaxies occasionally appear
in other data. The 160 $\mu$m measurements for these galaxies is based upon
interpolating over these pixels; see the text for details.

h These objects consist of two galaxies with optical discs that overlap. See
Table 2 for the dimensions of the measurement apertures for these objects.

Table 6: Photometry for additional Herschel Virgo Cluster Survey galaxiesa

Galaxy | Optical Disc | Wavelength | Flux Density |  Flux Density Uncertainty (Jy)e
---|---|---|---|---
| R. A. | Declination | Axes | Position |  ($\mu$m) | Measurement | Calibration | Error | Background | Total
|  (J2000)b |  (J2000)b |  (arcmin)c |  Anglecd |  | (Jy) |  | Map |  |
NGC 4165 | 12:12:11.7 | +13:14:47 | $1.3\times 0.9$ | $160^{\circ}$ | 24 | 0.0264 | 0.0011 | 0.0003 | 0.0004 | 0.0012
|  |  |  |  | 70 |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  | 160 |  |  |  |  |
NGC 4234 | 12:17:09.1 | +03:40:59 | 1.3 |  | 24 | 0.1547 | 0.0062 | 0.0002 | 0.0003 | 0.0062
|  |  |  |  | 70 |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  | 160 |  |  |  |  |
NGC 4252 | 12:18:30.8 | +05:33:34 | $1.5\times 0.4$ | $48^{\circ}$ | 24 | 0.0098 | 0.0004 | 0.0002 | 0.0002 | 0.0005
|  |  |  |  | 70 | 0.183 | 0.018 | 0.005 | 0.005 | 0.020
|  |  |  |  | 160 | 0.46 | 0.06 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.06
NGC 4266 | 12:19:42.3 | +05:32:18 | $2.0\times 0.4$ | $76^{\circ}$ | 24 | 0.0329 | 0.0013 | 0.0004 | 0.0005 | 0.0015
|  |  |  |  | 70 | 0.494 | 0.049 | 0.007 | 0.011 | 0.051
|  |  |  |  | 160 | 2.04 | 0.24 | 0.01 | 0.02 | 0.25
NGC 4273 | 12:19:56.0 | +05:20:36 | $2.3\times 1.5$ | $10^{\circ}$ | 24 | 1.0295 | 0.0412 | 0.0011 | 0.0005 | 0.0412
|  |  |  |  | 70 | 12.387 | 1.239 | 0.030 | 0.013 | 1.239
|  |  |  |  | 160 | 18.50 | 2.22 | 0.03 | 0.02 | 2.22
NGC 4299 | 12:21:40.9 | +11:30:12 | $1.7\times 1.6$ | $26^{\circ}$ | 24 | 0.2350 | 0.0094 | 0.0002 | 0.0002 | 0.0094
|  |  |  |  | 70 | 3.346 | 0.335 | 0.008 | 0.006 | 0.335
|  |  |  |  | 160 | 4.32 | 0.52 | 0.02 | 0.01 | 0.52
NGC 4309 | 12:22:12.3 | +07:08:40 | $1.9\times 1.1$ | $85^{\circ}$ | 24 | 0.0620 | 0.0025 | 0.0003 | 0.0003 | 0.0025
|  |  |  |  | 70 |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  | 160 |  |  |  |  |
IC 3258 | 12:23:44.4 | +12:28:42 | 1.6 |  | 24 | 0.0764 | 0.0031 | 0.0005 | 0.0007 | 0.0032
|  |  |  |  | 70 | 0.776 | 0.078 | 0.014 | 0.019 | 0.081
|  |  |  |  | 160 | 0.87 | 0.10 | 0.01 | 0.02 | 0.11
NGC 4411 | 12:26:30.1 | +08:52:20 | 2.0 |  | 24 | 0.0234 | 0.0009 | 0.0005 | 0.0006 | 0.0012
|  |  |  |  | 70 | 0.474 | 0.047 | 0.014 | 0.017 | 0.052
|  |  |  |  | 160 | 1.40 | 0.17 | 0.01 | 0.01 | 0.17
UGC 7557 | 12:27:11.0 | +07:15:47 | 3.0 |  | 24 | 0.0326 | 0.0013 | 0.0007 | 0.0010 | 0.0018
|  |  |  |  | 70 | 0.659 | 0.066 | 0.020 | 0.029 | 0.075
|  |  |  |  | 160 |  1.55f | 0.19 | 0.03 | 0.04 | 0.19
NGC 4466 | 12:29:30.5 | +07:41:47 | $1.3\times 0.4$ | $101^{\circ}$ | 24 | 0.0243 | 0.0010 | 0.0005 | 0.0007 | 0.0013
|  |  |  |  | 70 | 0.602 | 0.060 | 0.014 | 0.020 | 0.065
|  |  |  |  | 160 |  1.13f | 0.14 | 0.01 | 0.02 | 0.14
IC 3476 | 12:32:41.8 | +14:03:02 | $2.1\times 1.8$ | $30^{\circ}$ | 24 | 0.1881 | 0.0075 | 0.0006 | 0.0007 | 0.0076
|  |  |  |  | 70 | 1.961 | 0.196 | 0.016 | 0.019 | 0.198
|  |  |  |  | 160 |  2.88f | 0.35 | 0.01 | 0.02 | 0.35
NGC 4531 | 12:34:15.8 | +13:04:31 | $3.1\times 2.0$ | $155^{\circ}$ | 24 | 0.0351 | 0.0014 | 0.0006 | 0.0009 | 0.0018
|  |  |  |  | 70 | 0.539 | 0.054 | 0.017 | 0.023 | 0.061
|  |  |  |  | 160 |  2.76f | 0.33 | 0.02 | 0.04 | 0.33

a These are galaxies that are not in the HRS but that appear in the 500
$\mu$m-selected sample published by Davies et al. (2012).

b Data are from NED.

c Data are from de Vaucouleurs et al. (1991) unless otherwise specified. If de
Vaucouleurs et al. (1991) specify both the minor/major axis ratio and the
position angle, then both axes and the position angle are listed. If de
Vaucouleurs et al. (1991) did not specify either of these data, then we
performed photometry on circular regions, and so only the major axis is
specified.

d The position angle is defined as degrees from north through east.

e Details on the sources of these uncertainties are given in Section 3.1.

f These 160 $\mu$m measurements are for galaxies that were covered in scan map
observations in which the final 160 $\mu$m images for these galaxies contain
NaN values within the optical disc as a consequence of incomplete coverage.
This typically occurs when scan maps are performed using the fast scan rate,
although NaN values within the optical discs of galaxies occasionally appear
in other data. The 160 $\mu$m measurements for these galaxies is based upon
interpolating over these pixels; see the text for details.

####  3.1.1 Notes on photometry

Aside from typical issues described above with the data processing and
photometry, we encountered multiple problems that were unique to individual
targets. Notes on these issues (in the order in which the galaxies appear in
the table) are listed below.

Notes on the VNGS data

Arp 220 \- The centre of the galaxy, which is unresolved in the MIPS bands,
saturated the 24 $\mu$m detector, and so no 24 $\mu$m flux density is reported
for the source. The 160 $\mu$m error contains two anomalously high pixels
(pixels with error map values at least an order of magnitude higher than the
image map values) located off the peak of the emission. We ascertained that
the corresponding image map pixels did not look anomalous compatred to
adjacent pixels, so the unusually high values in the error map were probably
some type of artefact of the data reduction possibly related to a combination
of high surface brightness issues and coverage issues. We therefore excluded
these pixels when calculating the error map uncertainty.

NGC 891 \- This is an edge-on spiral galaxy in which the central plane is very
bright, and so features that look similar to Airy rings (except that they are
linear rather than ring-shaped) appear above and below the plane of the galaxy
in the 160 $\mu$m image. The measurement aperture we used for all three bands
has a major axis corresponding to 1.5 times the D25 isophote but a much
broader minor axis that encompasses the vertically-extended emission. Note
that this is the only edge-on galaxy where we have encountered this problem.

NGC 1068 \- This is another galaxy that is unresolved in the MIPS bands and
that saturatesd the 24 $\mu$m detector. It is not practical to perform 24
$\mu$m photometry measurements on this galaxy. The 160 $\mu$m error contains a
few anomalously high pixels (pixels with error map values at least an order of
magnitude higher than the image map values). This seemed similar to the
phenomenon described for the anomalous 160 $\mu$m error map pixels for Arp
220. We excluded these pixels when calculating the error map uncertainty.

NGC 3031 \- The 160 $\mu$m image includes residual cirrus emission between the
D25 isophote and the measurement aperture that was masked out when calculating
the 160 $\mu$m flux density. See Sollima et al. (2010) and Davies et al.
(2010b) for details on the features.

NGC 3034 \- The galaxy saturates the MIPS detectors in all three bands and
causes unusually severe artefacts to appear in the data, and so we report no
photometric measurements for this galaxy.

NGC 4038/4039 \- The 70 $\mu$m image is strongly affected by streaking from
latent image effects.

NGC 5128 \- The centre of the galaxy produced latent image effects that appear
as a broad streak in the final image. The artefact was masked out when
photometry was performed.

NGC 5236 \- The central 8 arcsec of the galaxy saturated the 24 $\mu$m and 160
$\mu$m data, but this region appears to contribute a relatively small fraction
of the total emission from NGC 5236. We think the 24 $\mu$m measuements should
still be reliable to within the calibration uncertainty of 4%. As for the 160
$\mu$m image, we interpolated across the single central saturated pixel to
estimate the flux density for the pixel; the correction is much smaller than
the calibration uncertainty.

Notes on the DGS data

HS 0052+2536 \- The 24 $\mu$m image shows an unresolved 24 $\mu$m source at
the central position of HS 0052+2536 and an unresolved 24 $\mu$m source with a
similar surface brightness at the central position of HS 0052+2537, which is
located $\sim 15$ arcsec to the north. We masked out HS 0052+2537 when
performing photometry.

IC 10 \- This galaxy was observed with MIPS only in the photometry map mode.
However, the photometry map mode is intended for objects smaller than 5
arcmin, while the optical disc of IC 10 and the infrared emission from it are
much more extended than this. While $~{}\hbox to0.0pt{$>$\hss}{\lower
4.30554pt\hbox{$\sim$}}90$ % of the optical disc was covered at 24 $\mu$m,
only part of the galaxy was observed at 70 and 160 $\mu$m, and a significant
fraction of the infrared emission may have fallen outside the observed
regions. Given this, we will not report 70 and 160 $\mu$m measurements for
this galaxy.

Mrk 153 \- In the 160 $\mu$m image, the galaxy becomes blended with another
galaxy to the east. We therefore do not report 160 $\mu$m flux densities for
this galaxy.

NGC 5253 \- This is another case where the galaxy is unresolved in the MIPS
bands and where the galaxy saturated the 24 $\mu$m detector, which is why we
report no 24 $\mu$m flux density for this galaxy.

NGC 6822 \- The galaxy has an extension to the south (Cannon et al., 2006)
that is not included within the optical disk given by de Vaucouleurs et al.
(1991), so for photometry, we used a 30 arcmin diameter circle centered on the
optical position of the galaxy given by NED. This galaxy also lies in a field
with cirrus structure on the same size as the galaxy. The version of the 70
and 160 $\mu$m data processing that we applied has removed the gradient in the
cirrus emission present in this part of the sky, which causes the final map to
appear significantly different from the SINGS version of the map for this
specific galaxy.

SBS 1249+493 \- The 24 $\mu$m image includes a bright central source and a
fainter source $\sim 12$ arcsec to the south. It is unclear as to whether this
source is associated with the galaxy; we masked it out before performing flux
density measurements.

Tol 0618-402 \- The brightest feature in the 160 $\mu$m photometry map image
is a streak-like feature running from northwest to southeast near the location
of the galaxy. It is unclear from this image alone if this is an artefact of
the data processing or a real large-scale feature, although based on what we
have seen in similar 160 $\mu$m photometry map data, the latter may be more
likely. No feature in the image appears to correspond to the source itself,
and so we reported the integrated 160 $\mu$m flux density within the 3 arcmin
diameter aperture on the source as the upper limit on the emission, using
regions flanking this region as the best background measurements available.

Tol 1214-277 \- We excldued a marginally-resolved source at approximately
right ascension 12:17:17.7 and declination -28:02:56 from the 24 and 70 $\mu$m
measurements, as this is likely to be a background galaxy. However, the source
became blended with Tol 1214-277 at 160 $\mu$m, so we do not report 160 $\mu$m
flux density measurements for Tol 1214-277.

II Zw 40 \- The 160 $\mu$m image contains only a few square arcmin of
background. The 160 $\mu$m background appears to contain a signficant surface
brightness gradient, which may be expected given that the galaxy lies at a
galactic latitude of $\sim-11$. Additionally, we had difficulty reproducing
the 160 $\mu$m flux density published by Engelbracht et al. (2008). Given
this, we did not feel confident reporting a 160 $\mu$m flux density for this
source.

Notes on the HRS data

NGC 4356 \- The galaxy falls near a 24 $\mu$m artefact we describe as also
affecting the NGC 4472 data (see below). However, the feature appears
relatively faint and broad in the viscinity of NGC 4356, and so we treat it as
part of the background.

NGC 4472 \- The 24 $\mu$m image in the scan map data from AORs 22484480,
22484736, 22484992, and 22455248 were affected by two streak-like regions that
run roughly perpendicular to the scan map direction. These features do not
appear in overlapping maps taken on other dates during the mission. We were
unable to identify the origin of this line. All we can say is that the
positions of these streaks vary with respect to the scan leg position and that
the width of the features is variable. One of these streak-like regions runs
across the optical disc of NGC 4472, and we masked it out before making 24
$\mu$m flux density measurements.

NGC 4486 \- The 160 $\mu$m data within the optical disc of NGC 4486 were
notably affected by residual striping in the images. Two strips approximately
3 arcmin in width to the north and south of the nucleus were affected and were
masked out when the 160 $\mu$m flux density was measured.

NGC 4526 \- Both the 70 and 160 $\mu$m images cover only the central 3 arcmin
of the galaxy, and the 160 $\mu$m image does not include a section on the
western side of the optical disc that is 2 arcmin in width. However, the
emission is relatively centralised, so these problems may not significantly
affect the photometry.

NGC 4552 \- In the 160 $\mu$m data, a cirrus feature oriented roughly east-
west can be seen crossing through the optical disc of this galaxy. We
otherwise detect no 160 $\mu$m emission; we found no 160 $\mu$m counterparts
to the 24 and 70 $\mu$m central source in this galaxy. Hence, we are reporting
the integrated flux density as an upper limit even though we get a $>5\sigma$
detection for the integrated flux densty within the optical disc and we detect
surface brightness features at $>5\sigma$ level.

NGC 4567/4568 \- The 70 $\mu$m data near this galaxy are heavily affected by
latent image effects.

NGC 4636 \- This is an elliptical galaxy with an optical disc with a size of
$6.0\times 4.7$ arcmin (de Vaucouleurs et al., 1991). At 160 $\mu$m, we detect
multiple off-center point sources within the optical disc of the galaxy that
are approximately half the brightness of the central source and that do not
appear to correspond to structure within the galaxy. We assume that the
central source is associated with the galaxy and the off-central sources are
background galaxies, but masking out the off-central sources was equivalent to
masking out the equivalent of most of the optical disc. We therefore perform a
160 $\mu$m measurement within a circle with a diameter of 80 arcsec and then
apply the multiplicative aperture correction of 1.745 given by Stansberry et
al. (2007) for a 30 K source (which, among the spectra used to calculate
aperture corrections, is the closest to the expected spectrum for this
object).

NGC 4647/4649 \- While the optical disc of these two galaxies overlap, NGC
4649 produces relatively compact 24 $\mu$m emission and no detectable 70 or
160 $\mu$m emission. We assume that the optical disc of NGC 4647 contains
negligible emission from NGC 4649. Hence, we are able to report separate flux
densities for each source at 24 $\mu$m, flux densities for NGC 4647 at 70 and
160 $\mu$m, and upper limits for the 70 and 160 $\mu$m flux densities for NGC
4649 using the part of NGC 4649 that does not include NGC 4647. Also, the 70
$\mu$m image is strongly affected by latent image artefacts.

NGC 4666 \- This galaxy was observed in photometry map mode. The galaxy is
observed in such a way that the latent image removal in the 24 $\mu$m data
processing leaves a couple of NaN values near the center of the galaxy. These
pixels correspond to locations between peaked emission, so it is clear that
the data are not related to saturation of the detectors. We interpolated over
these pixels before performing photometric measurements.

###  3.2 Comparisons of photometry to previously-published results

The MIPS calibration at this point is very well established, and comparisons
between MIPS and IRAS photometry have already been performed (Engelbracht et
al., 2007). Therefore, we believe that the most appropriate check of our
photometry would be to compare our measurements to other published MIPS
photometry measurements. As indicated above, MIPS photometric measurements
have previously been published for a significant fraction of the data that we
used. While it is impractical to cite every paper that has been published
based on the MIPS data for these galaxies, three papers have published MIPS
data for significant subsets of galaxies in the SAG2 and HeViCS samples. We
use these papers to check our data processing.

####  3.2.1 Comparisons with SINGS data

SINGS was a survey with all of the Spitzer instruments that observed a cross-
section of a representative sample of galaxies within 30 Mpc. A total of 15
galaxies from the SAG2 surveys and in HeViCS were originally observed with
MIPS in SINGS. Preliminary photometry for the survey was published by Dale et
al. (2005), while the final photometry was published by Dale et al. (2007). We
compared our data to the data from Dale et al. (2007). However, we exclude NGC
5194/5195 because we are reporting one set of measurements for the system
while Dale et al. report separate flux densities for each galaxy.

The ratio of the Dale et al. (2007) 24 $\mu$m flux densities to ours is
$0.97\pm 0.08$, which is very good. The largest outlier is NGC 6822, where we
measure a $\sim 30$% higher flux density than Dale et al. However, as we
indicated above, this is a galaxy that is large in angular size and that has
infrared emission that extends outside its optical disk. Additionally, the
emission from foreground cirrus structure is relatively strong compared to the
diffuse emission from the galaxy itself. Ultimately, this may be a case where
measuring the diffuse emission from the target galaxy is simply frought with
uncertainty. Aside from this case, however, the comparison has produced very
pleasing results.

In comparing the Dale et al. (2007) 70 $\mu$m flux densities to our own, we
found one galaxy with a factor of $\sim 5$ difference in the flux densities.
This was NGC 4552, an elliptical galaxy with relatively weak emission from a
central source. Dale et al. reported a flux density of $0.52\pm 0.11$ Jy for
this galaxy, which is a factor of 5 higher than our measurement. The Dale et
al. number could be a factor of 10 too high because of a typographical error;
when we measured the flux density the SINGS Data Release 5 (DR5)
data111Available at
http://data.spitzer.caltech.edu/popular/sings/20070410_enhanced_v1/ . using
the same apertures that we used for our data, we obtained $0.04\pm 0.02$ Jy.
This measurement from the SINGS data is a factor of 2 lower than the
measurement from our mosaic. However, our image of this galaxy was made using
both SINGS data and additional 70 $\mu$m data that was taken after the SINGS
photometry was published, and so the measurement from our new mosaic may be
more reliable.

At 160 $\mu$m for NGC 4552, we reported an upper limit that is a factor of
$\sim 1.5$ lower than the Dale et al. (2007) measurement. Again, we think our
measurement could be more reliable because we combined SINGS data with other
scan map data not available to Dale et al., and so the signal-to-noise in our
data should be better.

Excluding NGC 4552, the ratio of the Dale et al. (2007) 70 $\mu$m flux
densities to ours is $1.11\pm 0.07$. At 160 $\mu$m, the ratio of the Dale et
al. flux densities to ours is $1.20\pm 0.07$. This shows that some systematic
effects cause the Dale et al. measurements to be slightly higher than ours,
although the agreement is close to the calibration uncertainty of the data,
and the scatter in the ratios is very small.

If Dale et al. used the data in DR5, then their 160 $\mu$m measurements would
have been based on data in which the flux calibration factor is 5% higher than
the one we used, which could explain part of the discrepancy at 160 $\mu$m.
However, this does not completely explain the discrepancy, and since the flux
calibration factor in the SINGS DR5 70 $\mu$m data is the same as ours,
differences in the factor cannot explain the discrepancies in that wave band.
Although we used data not available to Dale et al. to produce some of our
images, we still see the systematic effects in the cases where we used exactly
the same data as SINGS, so differences in the data used should not lead to
differences in the photometry.

One possible cause for the systematic offsets in the photometry could be the
differences in the way the short term drift was removed. The other possible
cause is differences in the way flux densities were measured and handled.
While we used relatively large apertures (1.5 times the D25 isophote) to
measure flux densities, Dale et al. used the D25 isophotes as apertures and
then applied aperture corrections. To check whether the data processing was
the primarily culprit for the discrepancy, we downloaded the SINGS DR5 data
and performed photometry on those data using the same software and apertures
that we had applied to our own (after correcting the 160 $\mu$m flux
calibration to match ours). The ratio of the measurements from the SINGS DR5
data to the measurements from our data is $0.95\pm 0.07$ at 70 $\mu$m and
$1.08\pm 0.04$ in the 160 $\mu$m data. This shows that the measurement
techniques are responsible for a significant part of the systematic offsets
between the Dale et al. measurements and ours, while the data processing
differences probably cause an additional offset in the 160 $\mu$m data.

Overall, we are satisfied with how our measurements compares to the data from
Dale et al. (2007). The scatter in the measurements is relatively small when
difficult cases are excluded. The remaining differences are at levels that are
comparable to the calibration uncertainties and that are in part related to
the measurement techniques, and these differences probably reflect limitations
in the photometric accuracy that can be achieved with MIPS data for nearby
galaxies in general.

####  3.2.2 Comparisons with Engelbracht et al. (2008) data

Engelbracht et al. (2008) published data a survey of starburst galaxies that
spanned a broad range of metallicities. 22 of the 66 galaxies overlap with the
SAG2 sample: 21 of the galaxies are in the DGS, and NGC 5236 is in the VNGS.
Although Engelbracht et al. applied colour corrections while we have not, it
is still useful to compare the data.

The ratio of the Engelbracht et al. (2008) 24 $\mu$m measurements to our 24
$\mu$m measurements is $1.00\pm 0.13$, indicating that our measurements agree
with the Engelbracht et al. to within 13%. However, this includes some
infrared-faint galaxies where both Engelbracht et al. and we report $>10$%
uncertainties in the flux density measurements. If we use data where the 24
$\mu$m flux densities from both datasets are $>0.1$ Jy, the ratio becomes
$1.00\pm 0.05$. The remaining dispersion is equivalent to the uncertainty in
the flux calibration, which is very good.

Engelbracht et al report 24 $\mu$m flux densities for two objects for which we
do not report flux densities. For Tol 0618-402, we have reported an upper
limit of 0.0015 Jy, while Engelbracht et al. have reported a $\sim 4\sigma$
detection ($(4.4\pm 1.2)\times 10^{-4}$ Jy). We are reporting $<5\sigma$
detections as upper limits, so, given the signal-to-noise in the Engelbracht
et al. measurement, we would not report a flux density for this galaxy. None
the less, our upper limit for Tol 0618-402 is consistent with the Engelbracht
et al. flux density. The other object is NGC 5253, for which we reported no
flux density measurement because the 24 $\mu$m emission originates from an
unresolved source that saturates the 24 $\mu$m array. Engelbracht et al.
report a flux density for this galaxy but made no special notes about it.
Although the saturation may not be too difficult to deal with when measuring
the flux density, we prefer to be more conservative and report no flux density
for this object.

In comparing the Engelbracht et al. (2008) 70 $\mu$m data to ours, we found
one galaxy where the flux density measurements differ by a factor of 2. For
Tol 1214-277, our 70 $\mu$m flux density measurement is $0.073\pm 0.010$ Jy,
whereas Engelbracht et al. report $0.031\pm 0.003$ Jy. The signal from the
source is hardly $5\sigma$ above the noise in our image of this galaxy. We
also probably used a broader measurement aperture than Engelbracht et al.
Engelbracht et al. used apertures that were adjusted to radii that encompassed
all pixels with emission above a set signal-to-noise level, whereas we used a
3 arcmin diameter aperture, which was our standard aperture for point-like
sources. Our aperture may have included additional signal not included by
Engelbracht et al.

Excluding Tol 0618-402 (where we report an upper limit and Engelbracht et al.
(2008) report a $\sim 1.5$ detection) and Tol 1214-277 (discussed above), our
70 $\mu$m flux density measurements agree well with those from Engelbracht et
al. The ratio of the Engelbracht et al. (2008) 70 $\mu$m measurements to ours
is $1.04\pm 0.17$. For sources above 1 Jy, where the signal-to-noise is
primarily limited by the calibration uncertainty, the ratio is $1.02\pm 0.09$,
which is comparable to the calibration uncertainty of 10%.

A comparison of the Engelbracht et al. (2008) 160 $\mu$m measurements with
ours (for galaxies we detected above the $5\sigma$ level and where we did not
encounter problems with photometry) does not show agreement that is as good as
for the 24 and 70 $\mu$m data. Aside from non-detections, the ratio of the
Engelbracht 160 $\mu$m flux densities to ours is $0.88\pm 0.28$. Measurements
for UGC 4483 and UM 461 are particularly discrepant. We measure 160 $\mu$m
flux densities that are greater than a factor of 2 higher than the Engelbracht
et al. measurements. Howver, these are very faint galaxies; the flux densities
are $<0.2$ Jy. The Engelbracht et al. measurements are at the $<3\sigma$
level, and we used 160 $\mu$m data that would have been unavailable when the
Engelbracht et al. results were published, so the improved signal-to-noise in
our data could have allowed us to make more accurate measurements for these
faint galaxies. Excluding UGC 4483 and UM 461, the ratio of Engelbracht et al.
160 $\mu$m measurements to ours is $0.96\pm 0.19$. The scatter in the ratio is
still larger than the calibration uncertainty of 12%, but this may reflect
issues with simply measuring 160 $\mu$m flux densities in the MIPS data for
these dwarf galaxies, many of which are fainter than 1 Jy or in small fields.
Additionally, the colour correction applied by Engelbracht et al. could have
increased the dispersion in the ratios.

Overall, this comparison has shown excellent agreement between the 24 and 70
$\mu$m flux densities measured by us and by Engelbracht et al. (2008). In the
160 $\mu$m data, we found two discrepancies that cause some concern, but we
think these are unique cases. Our 160 $\mu$m flux densities for other DGS
sources were in general agreement with the Engelbracht et al. measurements,
thus demonstrating the reliability of our data reduction and photometry for
these data.

####  3.2.3 Comparisons with Ashby et al. (2011) data

Ashby et al. (2011) published a multiwavelength survey of 369 nearby star-
forming galaxies that includes 24 $\mu$m data. 23 of the galaxies in the HRS
and 2 of the additional HeViCS galaxies overlap with the galaxies in the Ashby
et al. sample. Ashby et al. used SExtractor to measure flux densities and then
applied appropriate aperture corrections, which is notably different from the
aperture photometry that we applied.

We have one galaxy where our 24 $\mu$m measurements differ notably from Ashby
et al. (2011). For NGC 3430, we measured $0.4101\pm 0.0164$ Jy, but Ashby et
al. measured $0.17\pm 0.01$ Jy. We used the same data as Ashby et al. to
produce our image, so differences in the raw data cannot explain the
difference in flux densities. An examination of the image does not reveal any
indication of any problems with producing the image or making the photometric
measurement. The IRAS 25 $\mu$m flux density measurements of $0.27\pm 0.04$ Jy
given by the Faint Source Catalog Moshir et al. (1990) and $0.78\pm 0.05$ Jy
given by Surace et al. (2004) are also higher than the Ashby et al.
measurements numbers but still disagree with ours and with each other. We
ultimately suspect that the mismatching flux densities could be indicatinve of
a problem with the Ashby et al. measurement obtained using SExtractor for this
specific galaxy, as the Ashby et al. measurement is lower than all other
measurements at this wavelength. Unfortunately, we do not have access to the
final Ashby et al. images and cannot make any assessment of the differences
between their image and ours, which would help us to understand the problem
further.

Excluding NGC 3430, the ratio of the Ashby et al. (2011) measurements to ours
is $0.90\pm 0.09$. Ashby et al. assume that their uncertainties are 8%, so the
dispersion in the ratio of measurements is reasonably good. The systematic
offset may be a consequence of differences between the flux density
measurement methods. The second largest mismatch between our measurements and
the measurements from Ashby et al. is for NGC 4688, a late-type galaxy with