arxiv: v2 [astro-ph.sr] 9 Nov 2016

Transcription

1 MNRAS,?? () Preprint November 6 Compiled using MNRAS LATEX style file v. arxiv:69.78v [astro-ph.sr] 9 Nov 6 Primeval very low-mass stars and brown dwarfs I. Six new L subdwarfs, classification and atmospheric properties Z. H. Zhang,, D. J. Pinfield, M. C. Gálvez-Ortiz, B. Burningham, N. Lodieu,, F. Marocco, A. J. Burgasser, 5 A. C. Day-Jones, F. Allard, 6 H. R. A. Jones, D. Homeier, 7 J. Gomes, R. L. Smart 8 Instituto de Astrofísica de Canarias, E-85 La Laguna, Tenerife, Spain Deptment Astrofísica, Universidad de La Laguna, E-86 La Laguna, Tenerife, Spain Centre for Astrophysics Research, Science and Technology Research Institute, University of Hertfordshire, Hatfield AL 9AB, UK Centro de Astrobiología (CSIC-INTA), Ctra. Ajalvir km, E-885 Torrejón de Ardoz, Madrid, Spain 5 Center for Astrophysics and Space Science, University of California San Diego, La Jolla, CA 99, USA 6 Centre de Recherche Astrophysique de Lyon UMR557, Université Lyon, ENS de Lyon, Université Lyon, CNRS, F-697, Lyon, France 7 Zentrumfür Astronomie der Universität Heidelberg, Landessternwarte Königstuhl, D-697 Heidelberg, Germany 8 Istituto Nazionale di Astrofisica, Osservatorio Astronomico di Torino, Strada Osservatrio, I-5 Pino Torinese, Italy Accepted 6 September. Received 6 September ; in original form 6 April 5 ABSTRACT We have conducted a search for L subdwarf candidates within the photometric catalogues of the UKIRT Infrared Deep Sky Survey and Sloan Digital Sky Survey. Six of our candidates are confirmed as L subdwarfs spectroscopically at optical and/or nearinfrared wavelengths. We also present new optical spectra of three previously known L subdwarfs (WISEA J , MASS J79+57 and ULAS J ). We examined the spectral type and metallicity classification of subclasses of known L subdwarfs. We summarized the spectroscopic properties of L subdwarfs with different spectral types and subclasses. We classify these new L subdwarfs by comparing their spectra to known L subdwarfs and L dwarf standards. We estimate temperatures and metallicities of late-type M and L subdwarfs by comparing their spectra to BT-Settl models. We find that L subdwarfs have temperatures between 5 and 7 K, which are higher than similar-typed L dwarfs by around K depending on different subclasses and subtypes. We constrained the metallicity ranges of subclasses of M, L, and T subdwarfs. We also discussed the spectral-type and absolute magnitude relationships for L and T subdwarfs. Key words: (stars:) brown dwarfs stars: chemically peculiar stars: individual: ULAS J , ULAS J , SDSS J , ULAS J , SDSS J , ULAS J59.. stars: low-mass stars: Population II (stars:) subdwarfs INTRODUCTION Metal-deficient very low-mass stars (VLMS) and brown dwarfs (BDs) are primeval populations in the Galaxy s ancient halo, and represent extremes in low metallicity and old age among Galactic populations. They can reveal the fundamental interior structure physics around the substellar mass zenghuazhang@gmail.com Based on observations made with ESO telescopes at the La Silla Paranal Observatory under programmes 88.C-8, 9.C-5, 9.C-, 96.C-. limit, and are crucial to our understanding of complex ultracool atmospheres and the star formation mechanisms of the early Universe. VLMS (M <.5 M ; Grossman, Hays, & Graboske 97; Baraffe et al. 995) are red dwarfs at the lowmass end of the Hertzsprung Russell diagram s stellar main sequence. BDs are substellar objects with masses below the hydrogen burning minimum mass, which ranges from.75 to.9 M for solar to primordial metallicities according to theoretical models (Burrows et al. ). Primeval VLMS with M <. M and BD have subsolar metallicity and are generally referred to as ultra-cool subdwarfs (UCSDs). VLMS and BDs are classified as M, L, T, and Y c The Authors

2 Z. H. Zhang et al. types according to spectral morphology that is dominated by temperature-dependent chemistry and thermal emission (Kirkpatrick, Henry, & McCarthy 99; Kirkpatrick et al. 999; Martín et al. 999; Burgasser et al. ; Cushing et al. ). A massive BD could be a late-type M dwarf when it is about. Gyr old, but then cools becoming a late-type L dwarf after about Gyr. L subdwarfs represent the lowest mass stars with subsolar metallicity and also include massive metal-poor BDs (e.g. MASS J , referred to as M5; Burgasser et al. 8b). L subdwarfs (e.g. M5; Burgasser et al. ) exhibit characteriztic spectral signatures due to strong metal hydrides (e.g. FeH), weak or absent metal oxides (e.g. VO and CO), and enhanced collision-induced H absorption (CIA H ; Bates 95; Borysow, Frommhold, & Moraldi 989; Borysow, Jorgensen, & Fu ; Abel et al. ; Saumon et al. ) in the nearinfrared (NIR). Modern large-scale optical and NIR surveys have the capability to identify L subdwarfs, although they are very rare compared to L dwarfs. About L subdwarfs have been reported in the literature from different surveys (see Section.). The Two Micron All Sky Survey (MASS; Skrutskie et al. 6) observed in three NIR filters (J, H, and Ks), and searches therein have yielded eight L subdwarfs (Burgasser et al. ; Burgasser a; Burgasser et al. b, 8c; Cushing et al. 9; Kirkpatrick et al. ). Scholz, Lodieu, & McCaughrean () discovered an L subdwarf by its high proper motion, measured across MASS and SuperCOSMOS Sky Survey epochs (Hambly et al. ). The Sloan Digital Sky Survey (SDSS; York et al. ) has imaged 555 deg of the sky in five optical bands (u, g, r, i, z), yielding several L subdwarfs with i and z band detections. In addition two L subdwarfs have been identified using the SDSS spectroscopic survey (e.g. Sivarani et al. 9; Bowler, Liu, & Dupuy ; Schmidt et al. ; Burningham et al. ). The UKIRT Infrared Deep Sky Survey (UKIDSS; Lawrence et al. 7) Large Area Survey (hereafter ULAS) has imaged 5 deg of sky in four NIR filters (Y, J, H, and K), and is about three magnitudes deeper than MASS (thus being sensitive to a volume of about 5.5 times larger). UKIDSS has yielded three L subdwarfs to date (e.g. Lodieu et al., ). Most recently the Wide-field Infrared Survey Explorer (WISE; Wright et al. ) has revealed eight L subdwarfs (Luhman & Sheppard ; Kirkpatrick et al., 6). Model atmospheres (Allard & Hauschildt 995; Witte, Helling, & Hauschildt 9) have been developed and used to characterize VLMS and BD (e.g. Burgasser et al. 9). The BT-Settl models (Allard, Homeier, & Freytag ; Allard et al. ; Allard, Homeier, & Freytag ) cover a wide range of metallicity, and their success at reproducing observed L subdwarf spectral energy distributions (SEDs) suggests that they are an effective means to estimate their atmospheric parameters. The classification scheme for L subdwarfs has not been fully established due to the small number of confirmed objects. A method is proposed to assign spectral types for L subdwarfs by comparing their optical spectra to those of L dwarfs (Burgasser, Cruz, & Kirkpatrick 7a). Metallicity subclasses for L subdwarfs are also unclear; however, d/sdl (mildly metal-poor), sdl, and esdl (extremely metal-poor) subclasses have been proposed (e.g. Burgasser, Cruz, & Kirkpatrick 7a; Kirkpatrick et al. ), and metallicitysensitive signatures are observed in a number of L subdwarf spectra (e.g. Fig 9 of Kirkpatrick et al. ). To properly understand and characterize L subdwarfs, it is necessary to identify a sample that covers a wide range of effective temperature (T eff ) and metallicity. In this paper we present the discovery of six new L subdwarfs. Our candidate selection process is presented in Section. Section presents the follow up spectroscopic observations. Section describes our spectral classification and characterization of L subdwarfs. Atmospheric properties of UCSDs derived through model comparison are presented in Section 5. Finally, Sections 6 and 7 present further discussion and a summary. CANDIDATE SELECTION L subdwarfs are kinematically associated with the Galactic halo and thick disc, and thus they generally have high space velocities relative to the Sun, and hence have higher proper motions and larger dispersion of radial velocities than the disc population. L subdwarfs also have bluer optical and NIR colours (e.g. i J and J K, see Fig. ) than L dwarfs due to a variety of factors including flux suppression due to enhanced CIA H which is stronger in the K band than in the J band. We conducted a search for L subdwarf candidates by combining the ULAS and SDSS data bases. We used both photometric and proper motion (> mas yr ) criteria to select L subdwarf candidates from the th data release of ULAS and the 8th data release of SDSS, which have a coverage overlap of over deg. Our photometric selection criteria consist of five colour cuts and one magnitude cut: Y J >.6 () J K < Y J () J K <. (i J) (). < i J < 6. (). < z J <. (5) < J < 8.. (6) These criteria are based on the colours of known L subdwarfs (e.g. table 6 in Kirkpatrick et al. ) and consideration of the colours of M, L, and T dwarfs (West et al. 8; Day- Jones et al. ) which we wish to reject. Criterion () rejects early-type stars which have bluer Y J colour. Criteria () and () reject M and L dwarfs which have redder J K colours. Criteria () and (5) reject M subdwarfs and T dwarfs which are bluer and redder (by i J or z J colours) than L subdwarfs, respectively. Criterion (6) rejects bright early-type stars and targets which are too faint to have good optical detection by SDSS or difficult for spectroscopic follow up. To take account of a broader range of SDSS imaging, we also performed a visual inspection of candidates using the SDSS Navigate tool. Known L subdwarfs all appear red in the combined g, r, i false colour images presented by Navigate, and we thus rejected objects that appeared as blue, yellow or orange. Typically, such objects are mismatches or earlier-type objects with poor photometric calibration. Objects that survived our colour cuts and visual inspection were advanced for proper motion assessment based on MNRAS,?? ()

3 Primeval VLMS and brown dwarfs I L-L9 sdl (known) sdl (new) esdl (known) esdl (new) usdl (known) M8 M9 M7 L J K M6.. 8 sdm5-8.5 esdm5-8 usdm5-7.5 M SSS.5.5 i J. 5 6 Figure. The i J versus J K colours of L subdwarfs compared to M and L dwarfs. Filled circles are known L subdwarfs (with updated metallicity subclasses from this paper, red for sdl, blue for esdl, and black for usdl) from the literature with SDSS detections. Filled squares are the six new L subdwarfs (red for sdl, and blue for esdl) from this paper. Red, blue, and black crosses are sdm5-8.5, esdm5-8, and usdm5-7.5 subdwarfs confirmed with SDSS spectra and classified based on Le pine, Rich, & Shara (7). A diamond filled with blue is MASS J (M; Burgasser, Cruz, & Kirkpatrick 7a). SSSPM -56 (SSS; Scholz et al. ) is indicated with a black filled circle and a larger open circle. MASS photometry of some known L subdwarfs has been converted into the MKO system according to Hewett et al. (6). Some objects do not show error bars because these are smaller than the symbol size. Grey dots are 5 point sources selected from a deg area of UKIDSS with < J < 6. Yellow dots are 8 spectroscopically confirmed late-type M dwarfs (for which mean spectral types are indicated) from West et al. (8). Black asterisks are L dwarfs from DwarfArchives.org with UKIDSS and SDSS detections. The BT-Settl model grids (Allard, Homeier, & Freytag ; Baraffe et al. 5) with log g = 5.5 (magenta) are over plotted for comparison, with Teff and metallicity being indicated. The dashed cyan lines indicate our i J and J K colour selection criteria [equations () and ()]. Table. Photometry of six new and five known L subdwarfs in our sample. References: this paper; Lodieu et al. (); Kirkpatrick et al. (); Lodieu et al. (); 5 Bowler, Liu, & Dupuy () and Schmidt et al. (). Name SpT SDSS i SDSS z UKIDSS Y UKIDSS J UKIDSS H UKIDSS K Ref ULAS J ULAS J SDSS J ULAS J SDSS J ULAS J59.. sdl sdl sdl sdl7 sdl esdl.±.5.9±..5±.5.7± ±..6±.9.±. 8.66±. 8.75±..6±. 8.6±. 9.±.6 8.±.5 7.6±. 7.7±. 8.56± ±. 8.9±. 7.±. 6.8±. 7.7±. 7.7±. 5.85±. 7.±. 6.96±. 6.±. 6.6±. 6.8±. 5.6±. 7.7±. 6.5±. 6.±. 6.±. 6.7±.5 5.7±. 6.97±. ULAS J MASS J ULAS J ULAS J SDSS J sdl sdl7 esdl.5 usdl sdl7 9.±..±.8 9.8±..5±.8 8.7±. 7.87±. 8.5±. 8.±. 9.5± ±. 6.8±. 6.6±. 6.98±. 8.66±.5.6±. 6.±. 5.±. 6.6±. 7.9±..99±. 5.77±..88±. 6.±. 8.7±..7±. 5.5±..7±. 5.77±. 7.95±.5.5±. 5 ULAS and SDSS multi-epochs imaging (following Zhang et al. 9). Proper motions were calculated based on coordinate and epoch differences between SDSS and UKIDSS observations. We only use proper motions for 8 percent of our candidates which have baselines of yr. Objects with MNRAS,?? () proper motion less than mas yr were rejected unless they had very blue J K <.. We thus only used our proper motion criterion for less extreme colours where contamination rates will be greater. The proper motion criterion

4 Z. H. Zhang et al. 5 UL9 (sdl) M756 (sdl) CrH TiO UL59 (esdl) M66 (esdl6) M66 (X-shooter) M66 (esdl6) UL6 (sdl) M66 (esdl6) SD7 (sdl) M5 (M9) LSR86 (sdl) CaH SD7 (sdl) M5 (L) SD (sdl) M7 (L.5) TiO VO TiO K I VO Na I FeH UL8 (sdl7) M58 (sdl7) SD (sdl) M9 (L) r i z Y J H K Figure. NIR spectra of four new L subdwarfs (black) compared to known L subdwarfs (red). Spectra are normalised near. µm. For comparison, L subdwarf SDSS UKIDSS photometric flux points (converted from magnitudes with VOSA; Bayo et al. 8) are shown as blue crosses. The spectrum of M756 is from Kirkpatrick et al. (). Our new X-shooter spectrum (red) of M66 is over plotted with the optical and NIR spectra of M66 (blue) from Cushing et al. (9) in the middle. Telluric absorption regions are highlighted in light yellow and have been corrected for our objects observed with X-shooter. Lightand thick-shaded bands indicate regions with weak and strong telluric effects. Figure. Optical spectra of two new L subdwarfs (black) compared to dwarf standards (red). Spectra of MASS J7+5 B (M7), MASS J5+5 (M5), MASS J5+5 (M5) and MASS J (M9) are from Kirkpatrick et al. (999). The spectrum of LSR 86+ (LSR86) is from (Burgasser et al. b). Spectra are normalised at.85 µm. Telluric absorption regions are highlighted in yellow, which are corrected for SD7 observed by SDSS, but not corrected for SD observed with OSIRIS. was not adopted for the percent of objects for which the SDSS UKIDSS baseline was less than a year. In this way we selected 66 candidates, which included 5 previously known L subdwarfs. Six of our new candidates were subsequently confirmed spectroscopically as L subdwarfs (see Section ), and their J K and i J colours are plotted in Fig. which provide a comparison with other populations and models. Table presents the photometry of five known and six new L subdwarfs. Another 8 new subdwarfs (including usdl5, 6 esdl esdl5, and sdl sdt) spectroscopically confirmed from our sample will be presented in a following paper. MNRAS,?? ()

5 Table. Summary of the characteriztics of the spectroscopic observations. Name Telescope Instrument UT date Seeing Airmass λ (VIS) Slit Tint λ (NIR) Slit Tint Telluric SpT ( ) (µm) (arcsec) (s) (µm) (arcsec) (s) Star () () () () (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) () () () () () WISEA J GTC OSIRIS MASS J79+57 GTC OSIRIS ULAS J VLT X-shooter HD 6 FV ULAS J VLT X-shooter HD 6 FV MASS J VLT X-shooter HR AV ULAS J Magellan IMACS ULAS J Magellan FIRE HD79 AV SDSS J SDSS SDSS Unknown SDSS J GTC OSIRIS ULAS J Magellan FIRE HD79 AV SDSS J SDSS BOSS Unknown ULAS J59.. VLT X-shooter HD 688 AV ULAS J59.. VLT X-shooter HD 6 AV ULAS J59.. VLT X-shooter HR 66 B9/AIII Primeval VLMS and brown dwarfs I 5 MNRAS,?? ()

6 6 Z. H. Zhang et al. M (sdl.5) M7 (L.5) TiO CaH WI (esdl) M5 (L) UL (esdl.5) M7 (L.5) VO TiO K I VO Figure. New optical spectra of three known L subdwarfs (black) compared to L dwarf standards, M7 and M5 (red). Spectra are normalised at.85 µm. Telluric absorption regions are highlighted in light yellow, which are not corrected. SPECTROSCOPIC OBSERVATIONS A summary of the characteriztics of the spectroscopic observations presented in this paper is given in Table. Columns 6 give names of targets, telescope, spectrograph, observation date, seeing and airmass. Columns 7 9 and give wavelength ranges, slit width (fibre diameter for SDSS), numbers of exposures, and integration times for optical and NIR observations, respectively. Columns give telluric stars and their spectral types. Observed spectra are plotted in Figs.. New L subdwarfs ULAS J59.. (UL59) and ULAS J (UL6) were first confirmed with the X-shooter spectrograph (Vernet et al. ) on the Very Large Telescope (VLT) on January 9 with total integration times of 96 s in the NIR and 6 s in the visible (VIS), as backup targets of a large programme (Day-Jones et al. ; Marocco et al. 5). X-shooter has a resolving power of 5 in the NIR arm and 88 in the VIS arm with a.9 arcsec slit. With a. arcsec slit it has a resolving power of in the NIR arm and 67 in VIS arm. A second X-shooter spectrum of UL59 was observed in much better seeing and at lower airmass on April 6 with a total integration time of 6 s in the NIR and 8 s in the VIS arms. We started a follow up programme of known L subdwarfs with X-shooter in. We observed UL6 on February 7 with total integration times of 55 s in the NIR and 96 s in the Na I TiO CrH FeH VIS. We observed UL59 on 6 March with total integration times of 6 s in the NIR and 8 s in the VIS. All X-shooter spectra were observed in an ABBA nodding mode, and reduced with ESO Reflex (Freudling et al. ). Telluric correction was achieved using telluric standard stars observed on the same night as our targets and at similar airmass; see Table for more details of our observations. The first and the second spectra of both UL6 and UL59 have a signal-to-noise ratio (SNR per pixel) of at.9 µm. The first and the second spectra of UL6 have SNR 7 and at. µm, respectively. The first and second spectra of UL59 both have an SNR of 8 at. µm. The third spectrum of UL59 has SNR of at both.9 and. µm. Two spectra of UL6 were also combined to produce a better SNR ( at.9µm and at. µm) with a total integration time of 55 s in the NIR and 996 s in the VIS arm. Three spectra of UL59 were combined to produce a better SNR ( at.9µm and 6 at. µm) with a total integration time of 67 s in the NIR and 59 s in the VIS arms. X-shooter spectra plotted in Fig. are smoothed by pixels for the VIS arm and 5 pixels for the NIR arm, which increased the SNR by a factor of and 7 times, respectively and reduced the resolving power to 8 in both VIS and NIR. ULAS J (UL9) and ULAS J (UL8) were observed with the Folded-port InfraRed Echellette (FIRE; Simcoe et al. 8) spectrograph on the Magellan Telescopes on May 8, using a total integration time of 59 s for UL9 and 8 s for UL8. Spectra were obtained in the prism mode which provides a resolving power of near.5 µm. Spectra were reduced with the FIREHOSE data reduction pipeline which is based on the MASE pipeline (Bochanski et al. 9), and the telluric correction methodology of Vacca, Cushing, & Simon () as integrated into SpeXtool (Cushing et al. ). Telluric absorptions in UL9 and UL8 are corrected with an AV star (see Table ). Spectra of UL9 and UL8 have SNR of 5 and, respectively at around. µm. SDSS J (SD) and SDSS J (SD7) were observed by the SDSS Legacy and BOSS spectroscopic surveys, respectively. An optical spectrum of SD was observed with the original SDSS spectrographs on 8 February 8. The SDSS spectrum of SD has an SNR of about at.9 µm. Another optical spectrum of SD was obtained with the Optical System for Imaging and low-intermediate-resolution Integrated Spectroscopy (OSIRIS; Cepa et al. ) instrument on the Gran Telescopio Canaries (GTC). The spectrum was reduced using standard procedures within IRAF. It has a The pipeline tools are implemented in IDL, and are written by Rob Simcoe, John Bochanski, and Mike Matejek. Many others have contributed unwittingly to the underlying algorithms, including Joe Hennawi, Scott Burles, David Schlegel, and Jason Prochaska. Several of the routines draw from the Spextool pipeline, written by Mike Cushing, Bill Vacca, and John Rayner. IRAF is distributed by the National Optical Observatory, which is operated by the Association of Universities for Research in Astronomy, Inc., under contract with the National Science Foundation. MNRAS,?? ()

7 Primeval VLMS and brown dwarfs I 7 mean resolving power of 5 and an SNR of 5 at.8 µm. A B-type star, Hilt 6, was used as a standard for flux calibration. Telluric absorptions in the spectrum are not corrected. An optical spectrum of SD7 was observed with the BOSS Spectrographs on October. The SDSS spectrum of SD7 has an SNR of at.9 µm and a resolving power of. Telluric absorptions in SDSS spectra are corrected. The spectrum of SD7 in Fig. is smoothed by 5 pixels for display.. Known L subdwarfs ULAS J (UL) was discovered as an sdl.5 subdwarf by Lodieu et al. (). We observed it as an L subdwarf candidate with the Inamori Magellan Areal Camera and Spectrograph (IMACS; Dressler et al. ) Short-Camera on the Baade Magellan Telescope with a total integration time of 5 s on May 5. The spectrum covered a wavelength range of.65. µm, and has a resolving power of. The spectrum was reduced using standard procedures within IRAF and has an SNR of 6 around.8 µm. A B9V-type star, Hip 7767, was used as a standard for flux calibration. Telluric absorptions in the spectrum are not corrected. WISEA J (WI) was discovered as an sdl subdwarf in the optical (Kirkpatrick et al. ) and NIR (Luhman & Sheppard ). The confirmed optical spectrum of WI has a spectral range covering.55.8 µm, and we obtained a new optical spectrum covering the.65. µm with OSIRIS on 5 August. The OSIRIS spectrum of WI has a resolving power of, and an SNR of at.8 µm. MASS J79+57 (M) was identified as an sdl candidate by its NIR spectrum (Burgasser et al. b). There are no optical spectra of M in the literature, and we Therefore, obtained an optical spectrum with OSIRIS on 5 August. The OSIRIS spectrum of M has a mean resolving power of, and an SNR of 7 at.8 µm. Spectra of WI and M were reduced using standard procedures within IRAF. A DZA5.5-type white dwarf, Ross 6, was used as a standard for flux calibration. Telluric absorptions in the spectrum are not corrected. MASS J (M66) was discovered by (Cushing et al. 9) with optical and NIR spectra observed individually. The.. µm spectrum of M66 is missing. We observed M66 with X-shooter on 6 January. The total integration time is 6 s in the NIR and 8 s in the VIS. The observation and data reduction are performed in the same way as UL59 (see Section.). The spectrum of M66 has SNR of 5 at.9 µm and 8 at. µm. CLASSIFICATION & CHARACTERIZATION The classification of UCSDs is a challenge for several reasons. First, a wide variety of both optical and NIR spectral features are sensitive not only to T eff changes, but also to a wide range of metallicities. Secondly, the sample of known UCSDs (particularly L type) is small. And thirdly, there are no well-resolved UCSD companions (to the more common subdwarf stars) that can be used to calibrate the metallicity consistency of a classification scheme.. Classification schemes for ultra-cool subdwarfs Burgasser, Cruz, & Kirkpatrick (7a) extended the M subdwarf classification scheme of Gizis (997) out into the late M- and L-type regimes. Gizis (997) tested the spectroscopic metallicity scale of their subclasses of M subdwarfs with HubbleSpaceT elescope photometry of globular clusters, but this test was only done for early M spectral types. Kirkpatrick et al. (6) proposed a spectral sequence of latetype M and L subdwarfs as an extension of the M subdwarf classification scheme of Lépine, Rich, & Shara (7, hereafter LRS7). LRS7 used a metallicity index ζ TiO/CaH to define metallicity subclasses of M subdwarfs. The ζ TiO/CaH index is based on CaH, CaH and TiO5 indices, which are calculated from the ratio of the average flux over Å (CaH), Å (CaH), Å (TiO5), and 7 76Å (Denominator), see table of LRS7). The consistency of ζ TiO/CaH as a metallicity index was examined using six resolved binaries (whose components would be expected to share the same metallicity) containing earlytype M subdwarfs. The metallicity consistency of subclasses of mid late types (e.g. sdm+ and esdm5+) could not be tested due to the lack of binaries with companions in this spectral type/subclass domain. Fig. shows four objects lying between the esdm5 esdm8 subdwarfs and SSS (which has been classified as esdm9.5 by Burgasser, Cruz, & Kirkpatrick 7a), but classified as late-type sdm according to LRS7. This means late-type sdms classified according to LRS7 could be as metal-poor as mid type esdms. This is because the metallicity is not consistent across all M subtypes defined by LRS7. The metallicity consistency is tested only for early-type M subdwarfs (<esdm.5 and <usdm6) in their Fig. 6. The NextGen models (Hauschildt, Allard, & Baron 999) supported the metallicity consistency of subclasses for earlytype esdm and usdm subdwarfs, but not for the late-types. Fig. 8 of LRS7 shows the isometallicity data points derived from the NextGen model grid and their metallicity subclass boundaries in a space of CaH+CaH versus TiO5. These isometallicity data points with log Z =. and. fit in between the sdm esdm and esdm usdm boundaries at CaH+CaH >. (equivalent to esdm.5 or usdm.5). Then these isometallicity data points start to go off the middle of the subclass boundaries, and finally cross these boundaries at around CaH+CaH =.5 (equivalent to esdm7.5 or usdm7.5). The solar metallicity model data points do not follow the M dwarf sequence in fig. 8 of LRS7, presumably because M dwarfs have more complicated atmospheres and are more difficult to reproduce with models compared to M subdwarfs. The TiO5 band becomes more sensitive to temperature than metallicity for late-type M subdwarfs. Fig. 5 shows that the CaH absorption bands strengthen with decreasing T eff while the TiO5 band generally remains constant through 6- K. Then the strengthening of CaH absorption bands slows down and reaches a maximum at 6 K, being less sensitive to temperature. However, TiO5 absorption band starts to strengthen fast after K, and becomes very strong at 6 K. It is thus not a uniform metallicity MNRAS,?? ()

8 8 Z. H. Zhang et al. Normalised flux (Fλ) 6, -., usdm, -., usdm, -., usdm5, -., usdm7 8, -., usdm8.5 6, -., usdl.5 CaH CaH TiO5 Normalised Flux (F λ ) 6K, -.5 6K, -. 6K, -.5 6K, -. 6K, -.5 6K, -. CaH CaH TiO Figure 5. BT-Settl model spectra with an [Fe/H] of. and T eff of 6,,,, 8 and 6 K (Allard, Homeier, & Freytag ). Approximate spectral types of each model spectrum are given based on model fitting of optical spectra of known UCSDs. Spectral wavelengths shaded in grey are regions used to define CaH ( µm), CaH ( µm) and TiO5 ( µm) indices. Spectra are normalised to an average of unity over the range.7.76 µm. Thus the average fluxes of the shaded areas represent the strengths of the CaH, CaH and TiO5 indices. Equivalent spectral types of these model spectra are based on model fitting of optical spectra of M subdwarfs. indicator across all M subtypes. Fig. 6 shows that at 6 K, the TiO5 absorption band strengthens slowly as [Fe/H] decreases from. to.5, but weakens as [Fe/H] decreases from.5 to.5. The relationship between the strengths of TiO5 absorption and [Fe/H] is thus not monotonic for late-type M and early-type L subdwarfs. Simple index-based classification (e.g. using TiO and CaH) can Therefore, misrepresent [Fe/H] for later type M subdwarfs. Instead we determine subclasses via an empirical assessment of a broader range of spectral features in the optical and NIR (e.g..8 µm VO and. µm CO). However, since the metallicity consistency of early M subclasses has been tested (by LRS7), we aim to anchor our classification scheme within this framework. We use classes d, sd, esd, and usd, and later show (see Section 6.) that the metallicity ranges of these subclasses are reasonably consistent with those of the early M subdwarfs.. Spectral classification of L subdwarfs Spectral types of L subdwarfs are determined by comparing their red optical spectra to those of L dwarf spectral standards (Burgasser, Cruz, & Kirkpatrick 7a; Kirkpatrick et al. 999, ). The optical spectra of L subdwarfs and dwarfs are different but comparable. We are mainly considering the.7.88 µm region to make a comparison, because this region changes constantly with type (e.g., Kirkpatrick et al. 999) and similar features are present in the spectra of both L dwarfs and L subdwarfs. A subclass sdl is used to classify L subdwarfs following the sdm sub- Figure 6. BT-Settl model spectra with an T eff of 6 K, and [Fe/H] of.,.5,.,.5,. and.5 (Allard, Homeier, & Freytag ). Shaded areas are explained in the caption to Fig. 5. class of M subdwarfs (Gizis 997). A subclass esdl was proposed for L subdwarfs with very strong metal-poor features (e.g. M5; Kirkpatrick et al. ). Some marginal cases are classed as d/sdl (mildly metal-poor) if their spectra have weaker metal-poor features. Burgasser, Cruz, & Kirkpatrick (7a) defined a d/sdm subclass for late-type M subdwarfs. A d/sdl7 spectral type was used for SDSS J (SD6; Burningham et al. ), which was classified as sdl7 by Kirkpatrick et al. (). For the naming of L subclasses, we followed the basis of LRS7 and Kirkpatrick et al. (), in which d/sdl and sdl of Burgasser, Cruz, & Kirkpatrick (7a) are generally equivalent to sdl and esdl, respectively. We also defined a usdl subclass following the suppression strength of NIR spectra caused by enhanced CIA H. Here we re-examine the spectral type and metallicity subclasses of some previously defined L subdwarfs, and then use them as spectral standards to classify our new sample. The K I doublet around.77 µm is one of the most notable features in the spectra of L dwarfs. This feature is sensitive to T eff and mildly to gravity, keeps broadening from early to late L type, and is one of the main criteria for classifying L dwarfs (e.g. Kirkpatrick et al. 999). The first known L subdwarf, M5 was classified as sdl7± because its optical spectrum compares well to those of L7 dwarfs (Burgasser et al. ). However, Kirkpatrick et al. () propose to classify M5 as an esdl7 to indicate its extreme nature and unusual spectral morphology, and also suggest that M5 may be somewhat later than L7. Fig. 7 shows that M5 compares well with either L7 or L7.5 spectra in the optical. M5 also compares well with the L8 dwarf MASS J69+97 (Kirkpatrick et al. 999), but compares slightly less well with another L8 dwarf, MASS J (Kirkpatrick et al. ). Although M5 compares well with either L7 or L7.5 dwarfs, we suggest to classify it as esdl7 in the absence of an object with spectral features intermediate between M5 and MNRAS,?? ()

9 Primeval VLMS and brown dwarfs I M5 (esdl7) M (L8) M5 (esdl7) M6 (L8) M5 (esdl7) M85 (L7.5) M5 (esdl7) M78 (L7) M66 (esdl6) M85 AB (L6) M66 (esdl6) M (L6) M66 (esdl6) M57 (L5) M66 (esl6) M66 (X-shooter) UL6 (sdl) M66 (esdl6) UL6 (sdl) M66 (usdl) UL59 (esdl) M66 (usdl) Figure 8. X-shooter optical spectra of UL59 and UL6 compared to those of M66 and M66. Spectra are normalised at.8 µm. Telluric absorption regions are highlighted in yellow, and have been corrected for our objects observed with X-shooter. TiO Figure 7. Optical spectra of M5 (Burgasser et al. ) and M66 (Cushing et al. 9) compared to L dwarf standards. Spectra are normalised at.85 µm. The spectra of MASS J69+97 (M6) and MASS J AB (M85 AB) are from Kirkpatrick et al. (999). Spectra of MASS J (M), MASS J (M78), MASS J+956 (M), and MASS J (M57) are from Kirkpatrick et al. (). M66. M66 was found and classified as sdl5 by Cushing et al. (9). However, Fig. 7 shows that M66 compares rather more favourably with the L6 spectral standard (compared to the L5) in the K I region. We thus adopt a classification of esdl6 for M66 here. Fig. 8 shows optical spectra of UL59 and UL6 compared to those of MASS J (M66; Burgasser a) and M66. The new spectrum of M66 (observed with X-shooter) compares well with the optical spectrum from Cushing et al. (9), except for the telluric absorption region around.9 µm. UL59 compares well with M66 at.6-.9 µm. Stronger TiO absorption at.85 µm (TiO absorption decreases from [Fe/H] =.5 to.5; Fig. 6) and extra flux beyond.9 µm compared to M66 indicate a higher metallicity. UL6 compares bet- ter with M66 than M66 at µm. UL6 has a higher metallicity than M66 and M66 because it has stronger TiO absorption at.85 µm and a redder spectrum than M66 beyond.9 µm. Red optical and NIR spectra redden with increasing metallicity, and become bluer with increasing temperature. Therefore, UL6 could have a similar spectral profile to M66 at.9-. µm, while their NIR spectra are different due to CIA H. The CIA H and. µm CO absorption bands are strong indicators of metallicity for L dwarfs and subdwarfs. NIR spectral emission becomes more suppressed at lower metallicity due to enhanced CIA H. The CO band is present in the spectra of late-type M, L, and early-type T dwarfs (e.g. Kirkpatrick et al. ). The CO band weakens as metallicity decreases, and eventually disappears. Fig. 9 shows the optical and NIR spectra of L, L6, and L7 dwarfs and subdwarfs normalised in the optical. The top panel of Fig. 9 shows the spectra of MASS J95+5 (M95; Burgasser 7b), SD6 (Schmidt et al. ), and M5. Although these objects have very similar optical spectra, they show large diversity in the NIR due to very different metallicity, and can be naturally classified in three different subclasses: L7, sdl7, and esdl7. The. µm CO band gets weaker from L7 to sdl7, MNRAS,?? ()

10 Z. H. Zhang et al. 6 H O FeH H O CIA H H O 5 M95 (L7) SD6 (sdl7) M5 (esdl7) FeH CrH FeH K I FeH CO K I M85 AB (L6) SD6 (sdl7) M66 (esdl6) M (L) UL6 (sdl) UL59 (esdl) M66 (usdl) Figure 9. Optical and NIR spectra of L, L6, and L7 dwarfs/subdwarfs with different sub-classes. Spectra have been normalised at.89 µm. The spectrum of M5 at.8.5 µm wavelength is missing. The best-fitting BT-Settl model spectrum of M5 (T eff = 6 K, [Fe/H] =.6, and log g = 5.5) is plotted to fill the gap (in magenta). and disappears for esdl7. The middle panel of Fig. 9 shows the spectra of M85 AB, M66 and SD6, which are very similar in the optical but very different in the NIR. There is no sdl6 currently known, so we show the spectra of SD6 instead. The bottom panel of Fig. 9 shows the spectra of MASS J (M; Burgasser et al. ), UL6, UL59, and M66. We classified UL6 as sdl because it compares well with M66 at.6.89 µm (Fig. 8), and has a suppressed NIR spectrum due to enhanced CIA H. UL59 compares well with M66 at.6.89 µm (Fig. 8), and has stronger NIR suppression than UL6, which is very similar to M66 (Fig. ). Therefore, we classify UL59 as an esdl subdwarf. M66 was previously classified as sdl based on the similarity of its optical spectrum to those of L dwarfs (Burgasser 7b). However, it has weaker TiO absorption at.85 µm (Fig. 8) and stronger NIR suppression compared to UL59 suggesting it should be in a lower metallicity MNRAS,?? ()

11 Primeval VLMS and brown dwarfs I SSS (usdl) UL (esdl.5) SD (sdl) SD7 (sdl) M5 (L) TiO CaH VO TiO VO Na I TiO (L) SD7 (sdl) LSR86 K, -., 5.5 K, -.5, 5.5 K, -., 5.5 K, -.5, 5.5 K, -., 5.5 K, -., 5.5 K, -.5, 5.5 K, -., 5.5 K, -.5, 5.5 K, -., 5.5 K I (L) SD (sdl) (L) UL (esdl.5) (L) WI (esdl) r i z Y J H K Figure. Comparison of BT-Settl optical spectra with different [Fe/H] (.,.5,.,.5,.) at T eff of and K. All spectra have log g of 5.5 dex. Spectra are normalised at.85 µm. Shaded grey area indicates the region with VO and TiO absorptions, which shows large differences between the spectra with different metallicity. Observed spectra of a few objects with similar profiles as model spectra in the middle panel are plotted on the top panel for comparison. subclass. Therefore, we classify M66 as an usdl subdwarf. MASS J (M756) and MASS J (M58) are classified as sdl and sdl7 based on their similar optical spectra to sdl and sdl7 subdwarfs (Kirkpatrick et al. ). Fig. shows that the NIR spectra of UL9 and UL8 compare well with M756 and M58; thus, we classify them as sdl and sdl7, respectively. The.8 µm VO band is present in the spectra of latetype M and early-type L dwarfs (e.g., Bochanski et al. 7; Zhang et al. 9). The.8 µm VO absorption band coexists with the. µm CO absorption band in early-type sdl subdwarfs (e.g. M756; Kirkpatrick et al. ), and is a strong indicator of metallicity. The VO band weakens as metallicity decreases, and eventually disappears. The top panel of Fig. shows optical spectra of early-type L subdwarfs with very different VO band strengths due to different metallicity. This effect is reproduced in the BT-Settl model (Allard, Homeier, & Freytag ) spectra. Middle and bottom panels of Fig. show BT-Settl optical spectra with T eff of and K (corresponding to early and mid L types according to Section 5.). Section 5. shows that the best-fitting model parameters for SD7 are T eff = K and [F e/h] =.5 and for SSS are T eff = 7K and Figure. SDSS UKIDSS photometric flux points and optical spectra of four L subdwarfs (black) compared to Spex spectra of L dwarfs which are plotted as greyed out. The photometric flux points of each object are joined with dotted/dashed lines. The spectrum of LSR 86+ (LSR86; Lépine et al. ) plotted in green is from Burgasser et al. (b). These L dwarfs are: MASS J , MASSW J8+578 (Burgasser et al. 8a), MASSI J76 7, and MASS J+758 (Kirkpatrick et al. ). These L dwarfs are: MASS J8+585 (Kirkpatrick et al. ), MASSW J88+55 (Burgasser et al. 8a), SDSS J (Burgasser et al. 8a), and MASS J (Burgasser et al. ). [F e/h] =.8. The.77.8 µm region changes continuously with decreasing metallicity. We classify objects that have a weaker VO band (compared to L dwarfs) as sdl subdwarfs (e.g. M756), and classify objects without a.8 µm VO absorption band as esdl. The.77.8 µm spectral profile of an early-type esdl should be well approximated by a straight slope. early-type L subdwarfs with significantly more flux in the.77.8 µm region should be classified as usdl to indicate an even more extreme effect, which is also contributed by a weakening of TiO absorption at.77 µm (as [Fe/H] changes from.5 to.5; see Fig. 6). We classify early-type L subdwarfs by comparing their optical spectra to L dwarfs. Fig. shows the optical spectra of SD and SD7 compared to dwarf standards. The optical spectrum of SD7 is very similar to L, but there are slightly stronger CaH and TiO absorption bands, and the NIR photometric flux points are suppressed (see Fig. ). We thus classified SD7 as sdl. SD was previously classified as sdl based on its low SNR SDSS spectrum in Zhang et al. (). Our new OSIRIS spectrum MNRAS,?? ()

12 Z. H. Zhang et al. SD56 (usdl) M66 (usdl) Figure. Optical spectra of SD56 and M66. Spectra are normalised at.86 µm. Telluric absorptions are corrected. of SD has a much better SNR ( 5) and is very similar to the spectra of L.5 L types. However, it has also somewhat stronger CaH and TiO absorption bands, very weak.8 µm VO absorption, and largely suppressed NIR photometric flux points (Fig. ). We thus re-classify SD as sdl. Kirkpatrick et al. (6) also obtained a new optical spectrum of SD and classified it as sdl. Within the sdl subclass, SD7 is relatively metal-rich and SD is relative metal-poor, according to the strength of their.8 µm VO bands. Following the same strategy as for SD7 and SD, we classify M, WI, and UL as sdl.5, esdl, and esdl.5, respectively (see Fig. and ). Table presents a note summary of the spectral characteriztics of the L subdwarf metallicity subclasses that we have used to make our classifications.. Spectral type of other known L subdwarfs TiO We have re-examined spectral types and subclasses of some known L subdwarfs: M5 (esdl7), M66 (esdl6), M66 (usdl), M (sdl.5), WI (esdl), and UL (esdl.5) in Section.. We also classified six new L subdwarfs: UL6 (sdl), UL9 (sdl), SD (sdl), UL8 (sdl7), SD7 (sdl), and UL59 (esdl). Here we discuss the spectral types and spectral subclasses of other known blue L dwarfs and L subdwarfs based on the properties summarised in Table. Fig. shows that it is more and more difficult to assign spectral type to early-type L subdwarfs when [F e/h] <.5 by direct comparison to optical spectra of L dwarfs. This is because TiO bands become very sensitive to metallicity and shape the spectra of early-type usdl subdwarfs in a way that is significantly different from L dwarfs. SDSS J (SD56; Sivarani et al. 9) was classified as sdl.5 by Burgasser et al. (9). Its NIR spectrum has very similar properties as in M66, i.e. flat in the K band and.85 µm TiO absorption; thus, we classify it as an usdl subdwarf. Fig. shows that SD56 has an optical spectrum that is significantly different from M66, justifying that an SD56 spectral type is one subtype earlier than M66. We Therefore, classify SD56 as usdl. ULAS J (UL5) was classified as sdl5 by comparing its optical spectrum to those of M66 and M66 (see Figure. of Lodieu et al. ). If one only examines the spectrum at.7.9 µm in Figure. of Lodieu et al. (), UL5 is much more similar to SD56 or M66 than to M66. The spectrum of UL5 beyond.9 µm may not be reliable due to low SNR and/or poor second-order flux calibration. UL5 is not plotted in Fig. because it will overlap with SD56 as they have identical i J and J K colours. We Therefore, classify UL5 as usdl. The.8 µm VO absorption is absent in spectra of early-type esdl subdwarfs like SD and WI. Other known objects have this feature including: SSSPM J (SSS; fig.. of Scholz, Lodieu, & McCaughrean ), MASS J (M6; fig. 9. of Burgasser, Cruz, & Kirkpatrick 7a), ULAS J (UL; fig.. of Lodieu et al. ), and WISEA J (WI), WISEA J (WI6), WISEA J (WI5), and WISEA J (WI) in fig. 5 of Kirkpatrick et al. (). Thus we proposed to classify these objects as esdl. By comparing the optical spectra of known late-type M and early-type L subdwarfs, Kirkpatrick et al. () discovered that there is a plateau at µm that can be used to assign spectral types of L subdwarfs. The slope at the top of this plateau slowly changes from slightly redward to flat through the sdm9 sdl.5 sequence, then becomes blueward for sdl. This phenomenon is reproduced by the BT-Settl models (Allard, Homeier, & Freytag ). Fig. shows that this spectral slope (light yellow shaded region) changes continuously across the T eff = 6 6 K region. WI, WI, WI, WI6, and WI5 discovered by Kirkpatrick et al. () have plateaus with flat or slightly blueward slopes and were classified as sdl. We classify these objects as esdl subdwarfs as we discussed earlier in this section. If we re-examine the spectra in fig. 5 of Kirkpatrick et al. (), we find that WI and WI actually have µm plateaus as flat as UL, thus suggesting esdl.5. Although WI6 and WI5 have different metallicity subclass to M756, they all have blueward plateaus, and we thus classify WI6 and WI5 as esdl. Fig. shows that WI has an almost flat plateau but has a dip around.756 µm, and we thus classify it as esdl. M6 has similar spectrum as UL, which suggests it is also an esdl (see fig. 9. of Burgasser, Cruz, & Kirkpatrick 7a). SSS has similar spectrum to WI6 and WI5, which suggests they should have an esdl classification (see fig.. of Scholz, Lodieu, & Mc- Caughrean ). SSS (Fig. ) was classified as esdm9.5 by Burgasser, Cruz, & Kirkpatrick (7a). The µm plateau of this object appears fairly flat but with a dip at.76 µm. The µm profile of SSS is significantly above a straight line slope (due to weakening of.77 µm TiO), which indicates an usdl subclass. Therefore, we classify SSS as usdl. WISEA J MNRAS,?? ()

13 Primeval VLMS and brown dwarfs I Table. Spectral characteriztics of the metallicity subclasses of L subdwarfs. Subclass Spectral Characteriztics Examples sdl H and K bands are more suppressed than in L dwarfs (normalizing in optical) SD6, UL6 (Fig. 9) CaH and TiO at around.7 µm are slightly deeper than in L dwarfs M756 (Kirkpatrick et al. ) VO band at.8 µm in early-type sdl is weaker than in L dwarfs M756 (Kirkpatrick et al. ).77.8 µm spectral profile of early-type esdl dips below a straight line SD (Fig. ) FeH at.99 µm in mid-late-type sdl is stronger than in L dwarfs SD6 (Fig. 9) CO band at. µm is weaker than in dl M756, SD6 (Fig. 9) TiO at.85 µm stronger than for same spectral type L dwarfs SD7 (Fig. ) esdl J, H, and K bands are strongly suppressed compared to L dwarfs (normalizing in optical). M66, UL59 (Fig. 9) CaH and TiO at around.7 µm are deeper than in L dwarfs UL (Fig. ) VO band at.8 µm in early-type esdl disappears WI, UL (Fig. ).77.8 µm spectral profile of early-type esdl well approximated by a straight slope UL (Fig. ) FeH at.99 µm in mid-late-type esdl is much stronger than in L dwarfs M66, M5 (Fig. 9) CO band at. µm disappears, K band is almost flat M66, M5 (Fig. 9) TiO at.85 µm weaker than same spectral type sdl UL, M66 (Fig. 8) usdl J, H, and K bands are significantly suppressed compared to L dwarfs (normalizing in optical). M66 (Fig. 9) CaH and TiO at around.7 µm are deeper than in dl SSS (Fig. ) VO band at.8 µm in early-type usdl disappears SSS (Fig. ).77.8 µm spectral profile of early-type usdl appears well above a straight line SSS (Fig. ) FeH at.99 µm in mid late-type usdl is much stronger than in L dwarfs M66 (Fig. 9) CO band at. µm disappears, K band is somewhat flat M66 (Fig. 9) TiO at.85 µm weaker than same spectral type esdl M66 (Fig. 8) (WI) was classified as sdm9 (fig. 6. Kirkpatrick et al. 6). Its µm plateau appears somewhat flat, suggesting a later type than sdm9. The µm profile of WI is significantly above a straight line slope (similar to SSS) indicating an usdl subclass, and we thus classify WI as usdl.5. LSR86 was classified as d/sdm8.5 from its NIR spectrum by Burgasser et al. (b). Fig. shows that LSR86 has the same optical spectrum as SD7, and we thus classify it as sdl. WISEA J and WISEA J in fig.. of Schneider et al. (6) compare well with LSR86, and we thus classify them as sdl. Table shows a list of currently known L subdwarfs with updated spectral types. 6 are sdl, are esdl and 5 are usdl.. Enhancement and suppression for the different L dwarf subclasses To consider relative enhancement/suppression for the different L dwarf subclasses, we plot Fig. and Fig. 5. Fig. shows spectra for a confined range of L7 spectral type spanning a range of spectral peculiarity and subclass. Objects in this spectral type range should all be BDs. To give an indication of relative flux levels the spectra are normalised at.6 µm in Fig.. Since L dwarfs/subdwarfs have similar M H magnitudes (see Figure of Zhang et al. ), this plot indicates relative brightness levels in an absolute sense. The full sequence runs through; L7 pec, L7, sdl7, and esdl7. At the two extremes WI7 is a young (. Gyr) and lowmass BD ( 9 M Jup; Gizis et al. 5), while M5 is an old (> Gyr) and massive BD ( 8 M Jup; Burgasser et al. 8b). The redistribution of flux from longer to shorter wavelength leads to higher absolute flux level for subdwarfs at.8. µm. It is also clear that in addition to differences in metallicity, a large spread in mass (and log g) and age is also evident for any particular spectral type. Similar to Fig., Fig. 5 shows spectra of L, sdl, esdl, and usdl normalised at.6 µm. It is obvious that an usdl subdwarf would have a much warmer T eff than an L dwarf according to their SED..5 Kinematics of L subdwarfs Dwarf stars orbit the Galactic Centre in a similar direction as part of the Galactic thin disc, while cool subdwarfs may be part of the (more dispersed) thick disc or could be on more extended orbits within the Galactic halo. Thus cool subdwarfs will generally have more dispersed U, V and W space velocities compared to dwarfs (U is positive in the direction of the Galactic anti centre, V is positive in the direction of galactic rotation, and W is positive in the direction of the North Galactic Pole; Johnson & Soderblom 987). The U, V, W space velocity components are thus indicators for membership of the different Galactic populations. We calculated U, V, W space velocities for L subdwarfs based on their distances, radial velocities (RV) and proper motions following Clarke et al. (). Proper motions were calculated based on SDSS and UKIDSS astrometry. To measure the spectroscopic distances of our objects we updated the spectral type versus absolute magnitude relationships in Zhang et al. (). Fig. 6 shows the spectral type and absolute magnitude relationships for M J and M H in MKO photometry. Table 5 shows the coefficients of polynomial fits to these relationships in both MKO and MASS photometric systems. These relationships are fitted with M and L subdwarfs of esd and usd subclasses. From Fig. 6 we can see that the spectral type and M H relationships of dwarfs and subdwarfs are very similar between M7 and L7. This MNRAS,?? ()

14 Z. H. Zhang et al. Table. Known L subdwarfs. 5 6K, -. K, -. K, -. K, -. 8K, -. 6K, -. 6K, -.5 K, -.5 K, -.5 K, -.5 8K, -.5 6K, -.5 6K, -. K, -. K, -. K, -. 8K, -. 6K, -. 6K, -.5 K, -.5 K, -.5 K, -.5 8K, -.5 6K, Figure. Comparison of BT-Settl optical spectra with different T eff. All spectra have log g = 5.5. T eff and [Fe/H] are labelled above each set of spectra. Spectra are normalised at.85 µm. Normalised Flux (F λ ) M5 (esdl7) SD6 (sdl7) M95 (L7) WI7 (L7 pec) Figure. Spectra of L7 dwarfs/subdwarfs normalised in the H band at.6 µm. WISEP J (WI7) is from Gizis et al. (). Name SpT a Ref b SpT c SSSPM J7 56 sdm9.5 9,6 usdl SDSS J sdl.5,7 usdl ULAS J sdl5 6 usdl MASS J sdl usdl WISEA J sdm9 usdl.5 WISEA J sdl,5 esdl WISEA J sdl esdl.5 WISEA J sdl,5 esdl ULAS J sdl 7 esdl WISEA J sdl,5 esdl MASS J sdl7 esdl7 MASS J sdl5 9 esdl6 ULAS J sdl.5 7 esdl.5 SSSPM J sdl 8, esdl ULAS J59.. esdl esdl MASS J sdm9/sdl, esdl WISEA J sdl,5 esdl.5 MASS J79+57 sdl? sdl.5 WISEA J sdl7,5 WISEA J d/sdm8.5 sdl WISEA J d/sdm8.5 sdl ULAS J sdl sdl MASS J sdl8 WISEA J sdl? MASS J sdl7 ULAS J sdl sdl SDSS J sdl sdl ULAS J sdl7 sdl7 SDSS J sdl sdl WISEA J sdl5? SDSS J d/sdl7 8, sdl7 MASS J sdl LSR J d/sdm8.5, sdl a Spectral types from the literature. b. This paper;. Burgasser et al. ();. Burgasser (a);. Burgasser et al. (b); 5. Burgasser & Kirkpatrick (6); 6. Burgasser, Cruz, & Kirkpatrick (7a); 7. Burgasser et al. (9); 8. Burningham et al. (); 9. Cushing et al. (9);. Gizis & Harvin (6);. Kirkpatrick et al. ();. Kirkpatrick et al. ();. Kirkpatrick et al. (6);. Lépine et al. (); 5. Luhman & Sheppard (); 6. Lodieu et al. (); 7. Lodieu et al. (); 8. Scholz, Lodieu, & McCaughrean (); 9. Scholz et al. ();. Schneider et al. (6);. Sivarani et al. (9). c Spectral types adopted in this paper. Objects not examined in this paper have no value here. means M7 L7 subdwarfs of different metallicity subclasses have similar M H if they have same subtypes. Therefore, we estimated distances of our objects with the spectral type and M H relationship which minimised the uncertainty due to subclass classification. The radial velocities of UL6, UL59, UL9 and UL8 were measured using their K I lines in the J band, while radial velocities of SD and SD7 were calculated from redshifts in the SDSS data base (based on cross-correlated SDSS spectroscopy). Table 6 presents the distance constraints and astrometric measurements for our six new L subdwarfs. Fig. 7 shows the U, V, W velocities of subdwarfs including 5 known L subdwarfs with parallax distances, and MNRAS,?? ()