Are Narrow Line Seyfert 1s a special class of Active Galactic Nuclei?

Abstract: No. Due to their apparently extreme optical to X-ray properties, Narrow Line Seyfert 1s (NLSy1s) have been considered a special class of active galactic nuclei (AGN). Here, we summarize observational results from different groups to conclude that none of the characteristics that are typically used to define the NLSy1s as a distinct group - from the, nowadays called, Broad Line Seyfert 1s (BLSy1s) - is unique, nor ubiquitous of these particular sources, but shared by the whole Type 1 AGN. Historically, the NLSy1s have been distinguished from the BLSy1s by the narrow width of the broad Hbeta emission line. The upper limit on the full width at half maximum of this line is 2000 km/s for NLSy1s, while in BLSy1s it can be of several thousands of km/s. However, this border has been arbitrarily set and does not correspond to the change of any physical property. All observed parameters in Type 1 AGN cover continues ranges of values, which does not allow to infer the existence of two different kind of populations with FWHM(Hbeta,broad) = 2000 km/s as dividing point. We argue that the usage of this velocity limit to define samples of NLSy1s galaxies - as it is usually done in comparative studies -, together with the well known observational biases, naturally favors the selection of sources with low black hole masses and high Eddington ratios that are hosted by blue spiral galaxies. Therefore selection biases might be responsible for the reported differences between NLSy1 and BLSy1 sources.

\section{Introduction}

Irrespective of their luminosity, active galactic nuclei (AGN) have been classified in
two main types according to the possibility of having a clear view
toward the central engine. Those with their symmetry axes close to the line of sight --
indicated by their radio emission and/or the presence of broad lines in the spectrum --
are classified as Type~1, while those at higher inclinations -- suggested by the high
absorption column densities in the X-rays probably originating in dusty clumps
at outer regions of the accretion disk -- are considered Type~2 sources.
Unobscured Type~1 sources are ideal targets to study the physics of accretion onto supermassive black holes,
because they allow us to reconstruct the AGN intrinsic spectral energy distributions and
constrain the theoretical models (e.g., \cite{antonucci1,antonucci2} and refs. therein).

In the local universe, Type~1 AGN -- constituted mostly by Seyfert 1s -- span a wide
range of bolometric luminosities ($44 \lesssim \log(L_{\rm bol}/\,{\rm erg\,s}^{-1}) \lesssim 47$),
black hole masses ($6 \lesssim \log(M_{\rm BH}/\,M_{\odot}) \lesssim 9$)
and Eddington ratios ($-2 \lesssim \log(L_{\rm bol}/L_{\rm Edd}) \lesssim 1$). These objects show
broad recombination emission lines with typical widths of the order of several thousands of $\kms$.
Osterbrock \& Pogge (1985) identified a group of AGN with ``all the properties of
Seyfert 1 or 1.5 galaxies, but unusually [by that time] narrow H{\sc i} lines'', which they
called Narrow Line Seyfert 1s (NLSy1s) \cite{osterbpogge}.
Later, the quantitative limit ${\rm FWHM_{H\beta, broad}} \leq 2000 \kms$ was
adopted \cite{osterbpogge87}. Other properties of
these objects are the relatively strong Fe{\sc ii} emission, soft X-ray excess,
steep 2-10\,keV power-law (with photon index $\Gamma \gtrsim 2$), and
short term X-ray variability.
The extreme NLSy1 properties, as it has been discussed extensively in the literature,
seem to be driven by the Eddington ratio -- as a surrogate of the unobservable mass-accretion
rate --, the black hole mass (e.g., \cite{sulentic, boroson02,dongfe}), and probably
also by the conditions in the narrow line region (e.g., \cite{xu,popovik}).

In the following, we examine some of the properties ascribed to NLSy1s in
order to enlighten the discussion of whether these sources constitute a particular class of AGN,
or are just normal members of the Type~1 population.
Reviewing the related literature in the past couple of decades,
and using published available data of thousands of Type~1 sources,  we show that
the properties used to characterize and define the NLSy1s as a special group of AGN
neither are shared by all the members, nor they are exclusive of this kind of sources.
We discuss some observational biases that affect the selection of samples,
and that might also lead to conclude that NLSy1s are different from other Type~1 AGN in comparative studies.
Throughout the text, we use the term Broad Line Seyfert 1s (BLSy1s) to designate Type~1
sources with broad hydrogen-line widths larger than $2000\kms$. The term NLSy1s
is employed following the designation of the authors in each contribution. In that
sense, it is not uniformely defined and e.g., one finds that a source classified as NLSy1 by
one group is called low-$M_{\rm BH}$ AGN (with broad line emission) by another.

\section{Properties of Narrow Line Seyfert 1s (only?)}

From statistical studies of Type~1 samples, relations between different line emission parameters have been derived.
NLSy1s seem to lie at one extreme of some of those relations, however a direct interpretation
is not trivial essentially for two reasons:
i) The sample selection. Groups of sources that span narrower parameter ranges display ambiguously
correlated data, and cluster in smaller regions on the diagrams than `control' samples
with wider parameter ranges.
When selecting a sample, the narrower the limit imposed to the broad line width is,
the smaller the ranges in e.g., $M_{\rm BH}$, $L_{\rm bol}$, and consequently $L_{\rm bol}/L_{\rm Edd}$ ~become,
as we discuss later.
ii) The choice of parameters to derive possible trends. Correlations between parameters
that are intimately related to each other can mimic real physical trends
and mislead the interpretation of the data (\cite{veron,antonucci2}).
To these caveats, one has to add the fact that data is treated in different ways by different groups.
Hence, some of the correlations are not confirmed by different samples.
For these reasons, we leave the discussion on correlations and trends for other ocassion,
and concentrate here only on the most common properties used to describe -- and to select -- NLSy1s.

{\bf Hydrogen beta broad-line is narrow: ${\rm FWHM} \leq 2000\kms$.}
The most commonly used selection criterium for NLSy1s is the width of the broad H$\beta$ line.
In the literature, the $2000\kms$ limit appears for the first time in Osterbrock
\& Pogge (1987)\cite{osterbpogge87}\footnote{Thought the most cited references are \cite{osterbpogge,goodrich}!}.
Although from the beginning this limit was recognized as arbitrary and unphysical \cite{goodrich},
it is still used to derive ``physically motivated'' differences between NLSy1s and BLSy1s.
Sources with broad-line widths larger than $2000\kms$, but that have visible Fe{\sc ii} emission
and/or soft X-ray excess should also be considered as members of the NLSy1 group
\cite{veron,goodrich} (and refs.~therein). To account for that, a luminosity-dependent definition of
NLSy1 has been suggested several times (e.g. \cite{laor,veron,dultzin}).
On the other hand, the broad line profiles are not all the same, one (or two) Gaussians (or Lorentzians)
are required to model them \cite{veron,peterson}. The classification of Type~1s
into population A or B sources -- that has a flexible limit at ${\rm FWHM_{H\beta, broad}} \sim 4000 \kms$
-- seems to account for this difference and for other observed properties \cite{sulentic}.
Broad lines can also be narrowed due to the inclination of a ring-like broad line
region \cite{gaskell}.
However, the effects of the AGN orientation might not be equally important in all NLSy1s,
as has been pointed out in particular sources \cite{peterson,collin}, and also using
larger samples \cite{boroson}.

{\bf Emission-line ratios as indicators of the ionizing mechanism: [O{\sc iii}]$\lambda 5007$/H$\beta<3$.}
The denominator of this fraction refers to the total H$\beta$ emission.
In cases where the broad line region is obscured, like in Seyfert~2 galaxies, this ratio
increases up to $\sim 5-10$. However, for Seyfert~1s that do not suffer extinction\footnote{
Even in cases where the broad line region is obscured by the dust in the host galaxy
-- not that from the torus --, [O{\sc iii}]$\lambda 5007$/H$\beta<3$, like in NGC 7172 \cite{semir}.}
it remains $\lesssim 3$ (e.g., \cite{veron}), and therefore it seems to be a condition of
all unobscured Type~1 AGN\footnote{We verify this fact using the sample of Seyfert 1s
and QSOs of Dong et al. (2011). Out of 4178 objects only one, SDSS~J015142.72+132003.3,
has [O{\sc iii}]/H$\beta>3$ ($=4.29$) \cite{dongfe}. Note that the sample selection in this case favored sources
with minimal galaxy contamination. In other samples, where fitting the stellar component
in the optical is required, this criterium is full filled by $\gtrsim 90$\% of the sources,
as we corroborate using the measurements of Zhou et al. (2006) and Dong et al. (2012) \cite{zhou,dong2012}.}.
When comparing the [O{\sc iii}] emission with the narrow H$\beta$ component, NLSy1s span
similar ranges as BLSy1s, but some objects also have [O{\sc iii}]/H$\beta$
and [N{\sc ii}]/H$\alpha$ narrow-line ratios in the ranges of composite and
star-forming galaxies (according to the classification by Kewley et al. 2001).
Although it has been argued that this intrusion in the regions occupied by H{\sc ii} galaxies
in the optical diagnostic diagrams might be an effect of the fitting procedure
used to model the recombination lines\footnote{V\'eron-Cetty et al. (2001)
show that fitting the broad components with Lorentzians and the narrow ones with
Gaussians in their sample of $\sim 60$ NLSy1s produce an overall shift in the
 distribution of these sources in the [O{\sc iii}]/H$\beta$ vs. [N{\sc ii}]/H$\alpha$
diagram. In this way, only $\sim 10$\% instead of $\sim 30$\% of their sources are
out of the Seyfert region.},
it has been shown by independent studies that this can also be a combined effect of
the low-$M_{\rm BH}$ and dilution by the stellar component. For example, in the
intermediate-$M_{\rm BH}$ sample of Xiao et al. (2011), 30\% of the objects lie under
the Seyfert/star-formation division \cite{xiao}.
The authors interpret this as a dilution effect because the median redshift
of the H{\sc ii} sources is somewhat larger ($z\sim 0.1$) than that of the whole sample ($z\sim0.08$).
Interestingly, Stern \& Laor (2012) find that the fraction of Type~1 AGN classified as
star forming sources (in the optical diagrams) increases when decreasing $M_{\rm BH}$:
from 6\% at $\log (M_{\rm BH}/\,M_{\odot}) = 8.8$ to 32\% at  $\log (M_{\rm BH}/\,M_{\odot}) = 6.3$ (Fig.~B1 in \cite{sternlaor}).

{\bf Strong Fe{\sc ii} optical emission}. Fe{\sc ii} multiplets are present in the spectra of Type~1 AGN
from the UV to the infrared \cite{borosong,ardila}.
The detection of optical Fe{\sc ii} was the first property that allowed the identification
of NLSy1 candidates among the Seyfert~2s in the available surveys\cite{osterbpogge87}.
The strength of the iron emission is usually quantified
as the ratio $R_{4570}$ between the fluxes (or equivalent widths) of the Fe{\sc ii} blend centered
at $\lambda4570$ and the H$\beta$ broad component. NLSy1s were initially found to have
$R_{4570} \gtrsim 0.5$. However, some research groups have pointed out that
NLSy1s might not be strong Fe{\sc ii} emitters, but faint H$\beta$ sources (\cite{veron} and refs.~therein).
Using the measurements of Dong et al. (2011)\footnote{In order to allow comparison
with other samples, we use the total iron flux, i.e., we sum up the contributions
 of narrow and broad Fe{\sc ii} fitted by the authors \cite{dongfe}.}
in a sample of $\sim 4000$ Type~1 AGN, we find that both statements are probably correct (see Fig.~1).
We selected random subsamples of $\sim 200$ objects in three ranges of ${\rm FWHM_{H\beta,broad}}$:
$1500-2000$, $5000-6000$, and $>8500\kms$.

\begin{figure}[t]
    \begin{minipage}[h]{210pt
       \includegraphics[width=210pt]{./newFepaper.png
    \end{minipage}
      \hspace*{10pt}
    \begin{minipage}[h]{210pt}
    	\includegraphics[width=210pt]{./newHbpaper.png}
    \end{minipage}
\caption{\small
Iron and H$\beta$,broad luminosities in Type 1 AGN. The symbols(colours) represent
sources having ${\rm FWHM_{H\beta,broad}}$ within certain ranges, as shown in the
caption. Here, only 200 (randomly selected from the sample of Dong et al. 2011)
objects from each group are shown. Big symbols and bars represent the mean and standar
deviation of the distribution of luminosities and $R_{4570}$ for each group.
}
\label{fig:firsb}
\end{figure}

We found that, on average, the Fe{\sc ii} luminosity stays approximately constant
over the first two intervals $\langle\log(L_{\rm Fe{\textsc {ii}}}/\,{\rm erg\,s}^{-1})\rangle\sim 42.45$ and drops
in the last one ($\sim 42.35$), while the luminosity of the H$\beta$ broad
component is lower in the first group of sources $\langle\log(L_{\rm H\beta,broad}/\,{\rm erg\,s}^{-1})\rangle\sim 42.50$
than in the other two ($\sim 42.90$)\footnote{It must be noticed that the measurement uncertainties
of the Fe{\sc ii} flux are $\sim  15$\% \cite{dongfe}, which corresponds to $\sim 0.08\,{\rm dex}$.
However, if the difference in $\langle L_{\rm Fe{\textsc {ii}}} \rangle$ between the three intervals
were dominated by this kind of uncertainties, one would expect the average luminosity values
to scatter around a mean value when one uses different subsamples of randomly selected 200 objects
 in each interval to estimate the average.
In this case instead, we see a systematic shift in $\langle L_{\rm Fe{\textsc {ii}}} \rangle$
from the first two ${\rm FWHM_{H\beta,broad}}$-bins to the last one.
The measurement uncertainties in the H$\beta$ broad-line fluxes are only $\sim 8$\% \cite{dongfe}.}.
On the other hand, the large range of $R_{4570}$ seen in sources with low-${\rm FWHM_{H\beta,broad}}$
is due to the higher spread in the luminosity measurements of the H$\beta$ broad component ($\sim0.5$\,dex)
compared to that in other Type~1s ($\sim0.2$\,dex) -- is this broad $R_{4570}$-range
related to inclination effects?
As a result, not all low-${\rm FWHM_{H\beta,broad}}$ are high-$R_{4570}$ sources.
In the NLSy1 sample of Zhou el at. (2006), the authors
point out the presence of objects with very faint or non-detectable Fe{\sc ii} emission,
which they called Fe{\sc ii}-deficient NLSy1s \cite{zhou}.

{\bf Steep soft X-ray spectrum (soft X-ray excess) and short-term X-ray variability}.
In the soft X-rays (i.e. below $\sim 1$\,keV), NLSy1s seem to be brighter and more variable
than BLSy1s (e.g. \cite{sulentic,veron,laor} and ref.~therein). This has been associated
with high Eddington ratios. However, not all NLSy1s behave the same.
For example, Panessa et al. (2011) found that ``hard [$>20$\,keV] X-ray selected NLSy1s
do not display particularly strong soft excess emission''\footnote{The authors also pointed out
that ``...indeed only one source [out of 14], IGRJ $19378-0617$, shows a dominant and
strongly variable soft-X-ray component''.} \cite{panessanlsy1}. Similar results had been
reported by Williams et al. (2002, 2004). They noticed that a substantial number of
optically bright, low-redshift NLSy1s did not have soft X-ray counterparts detected by ROSAT.
Follow-up Chandra observations of 17 sources (with NLSy1 characteristics, i.e.
${\rm FWHM_{H\beta,broad}}<2000\kms$ and $R_{4570}>0.5$)
showed that their soft X-ray indices ($\Gamma=1.1-3.4$) ``extended far
below those normally observed in NLSy1s''\cite{williams04}. On the other hand,
the extreme variability on short-time scales observed in the soft X-rays seems to be
related to the comparatively low black hole masses found in these AGN rather than to the
possibly high Eddington ratios \cite{dewangan,ai11}.
Ai et al. (2011) suggested the existence of two kinds of low-$M_{\rm BH}$ AGN: those NLSy1-like
with strong Fe{\sc ii}, soft X-ray excess and high-$L_{\rm bol}/L_{\rm Edd}$, and others more similar to BLSy1s,
i.e., weak Fe{\sc ii} and non-ubiquitous soft X-ray excess.
However, in the NLSy1 sample of Zhou et al. (2006) about 15\% of the objects
have weak iron strength, but high Eddington ratio (i.e. $R_{4570}<0.5$ and $L_{\rm bol}/L_{\rm Edd}>0.5$).
Another case is the source IRAS 01072+4954 with no detected optical Fe{\sc ii}, but $L_{\rm bol}/L_{\rm Edd}>0.2$ \cite{me}.

\section{Do comparative studies suffer from selection biases?}

Here, we briefly describe how a sample selection that uses the width of the broad hydrogen
lines as a criterium produces a bias in the physical properties of the selected AGN
that affects the results of comparative studies between NLSy1s and BLSy1s.

Accepting that the broad line region is virialized \cite{peterson} and that its radius
depends on the optical continuum luminosity at 5100\AA ~(after starlight correction) as
$r_{\rm BLR} \propto L_{5100}^{\sim0.5}$ \cite{kaspi}, it is easy to find that
$(M_{\rm BH}/\,M_{\odot}) \approx L_{\rm bol}/L_{\rm Edd}\, (f/592.5)^2 \, ({\rm FWHM_{H\beta,broad}}/\kms)^4 $,
where $f$ is the scaling factor. Therefore, selecting sources with ${\rm FWHM_{H\beta, broad}} <2000 \kms$
imposes a maximum limit on the black hole masses of $\sim 2.5\times 10^7\,M_{\odot}$ when $L_{\rm bol}/L_{\rm Edd}=1$ and the
typical value $f=0.75$ are assumed\footnote{Correcting by the broad line profile
(Gaussian or Lorentzian) can result in one order of magnitude higher black hole
masses. See \cite{collin} for details.}.
An upper boundary on $M_{\rm BH}$ also implies an upper limit for the bolometric luminosity
of $\sim (3-10) \times 10^{45}\,{\rm erg\,s}^{-1}$ (even when allowing super-Eddington sources).
At these luminosities, low and high Eddington-ratio AGN are detected in complete samples,
i.e. depending on their $M_{\rm BH}$, both BLSy1s and NLSy1s are observed.
However at $M_{\rm BH} {\rm \sim few} ~10^6\,M_{\odot}$, or correspondingly $L_{\rm bol} \sim 10^{44}\,{\rm erg\,s}^{-1}$,
observational biases only favor the detection of high Eddington sources.
While this kind of selection bias is extensively discussed by Hopkins et al. (2009) \cite{hopkins},
there are indications that the dilution effects on low-$M_{\rm BH}$ sources might be even more
severe particularly at optical/infrared bands -- i.e. where most of the AGN
with narrow broad components are identified -- than it is estimated there.
If the $M_{\rm BH}$ vs. bulge-mass relation is not a single power law across the whole
black hole mass range, but is steeper at low black hole masses -- as it has been
suggested and observed in samples of nearby objects \cite{laormass,graham} --,
then dilution effects become $10-100$ times more severe at $10^6-10^5 \,M_{\odot}$
than previously estimated\footnote{The dilution of the AGN signatures by the stellar
emission of the host galaxy can be estimated as
the contrast between the AGN ($L_{\rm AGN,B}\sim L_{\rm bol}/9$) and the host luminosities, in the B-band
$L_{\rm AGN,B}/L_{\rm host,B} = \frac{1}{3} \times 10^3\, (\lambda_{\rm Edd}/0.1)\,(M_{\rm BH}/\,M_{\odot})\,(L_{\rm host,B}/L_{\rm \odot,B})$, with $\lambda_{\rm Edd} \equiv L_{\rm bol}/L_{\rm Edd}$. The relation between the
black hole and the bulge mass for a source with $M_{\rm BH}\sim10^7\,M_{\odot}$ is $M_{\rm BH} \sim 0.001 M_{\rm bulge}$.
However for lower-$M_{\rm BH}$ Sersic galaxies, following the relation found by Scott et al. (2013),
at $M_{\rm BH} =10^6\,M_{\odot}$, $M_{\rm BH} \sim 10^{-4} M_{\rm bulge}$ \cite{graham}.}.
Hopkins et al. also show that samples with an implicit high Eddington-ratio selection
--like those that are produced when selecting only narrow H$\beta$ broad-line emitters --
favor low-mass disk-dominated host galaxies, as has been found in the case of NLSy1s.

As an example, we compiled information about the initial group of
NLSy1 sources studied by Osterbrock \& Pogge (1985) \cite{osterbpogge}. We noticed that
all of them have relatively low black hole masses $\log(M_{\rm BH}/\,M_{\odot}) \sim 5.8-7.2$,
and that most of them (9/11)\footnote{The other two sources: Mrk~1388 seems to be a
high-ionization Seyfert~2 galaxy \cite{osterbrock1388,gordon},
and Mrk~684 presents broad H$\beta$ and strong Fe{\sc ii} emission, but its
Eddington ratio $L_{\rm bol}/L_{\rm Edd} \sim 10^{-7}$ is very unusual for a Type~1 source
($M_{\rm BH}$ and $L_{\rm bol}$ from \cite{wanglu, grupe}, see spectrum in \cite{vaughan}).}
also have high Eddington ratios $L_{\rm bol}/L_{\rm Edd} > 0.4$. As it was mentioned before,
also the calibration and fitting procedures, even when using data from the same survey,
can introduce biases in the sample selection.
For example, the very careful selection process of low-$M_{\rm BH}$ sources applied by
Dong et al. (2012) allowed them to detect AGNs with lower Eddington ratios
($\langle L_{\rm bol}/L_{\rm Edd}\sim \rangle -0.7$ versus $-0.4$)
than previously published samples with similar selection criteria \cite{dong2012}.

\section{Final comments}

Narrow Line Seyfert 1 have been considered a special class of AGN because of their
apparently extreme properties.
After an extensive literature review (not covered in the References of this short
paper due to space  restrictions) and studying some statistical properties of recently
published samples of Type~1, NLSy1s, and low-$M_{\rm BH}$ sources \cite{dongfe,zhou,dong2012},
we find that apart from the width of the broad H$\beta$ component, which is an arbitrarily defined
limit, none of the other properties is unique, nor ubiquitous of the NLSy1s. Moreover, these sources
seem to be normal Type~1 AGN that naturally cover the lower end of the ${\rm FWHM_{H\beta,broad}}$ range.

Implicit selection effects (${\rm FWHM_{H\beta, broad}} < 2000 \kms$) in NLSy1s samples
can account -- at least partially -- for the following averaged observed properties
when they are analyzed in comparison to those of BLSy1s: lower $M_{\rm BH}$,
faster soft X-ray variability, higher $L_{\rm bol}/L_{\rm Edd}$, lower $L_{\rm bol}$, higher bolometric corrections,
lower redshifts, bluer disk-dominated hosts, $M_{\rm BH}$ below the bulge mass (or bulge luminosity)
correlations and thereby higher importance of secular evolution processes.

On the other hand, it is possible to define a `special' subgroup of sources that meet a certain
set of observational requirements (in ${\rm FWHM_{H, broad}}$, $R_{4570}$, $\Gamma$, $L_{\rm bol}$-correction,
radio-loudness, narrow line ratios, host galaxy morphology...), but that might be of
little physical interest. Selecting samples based on physical properties would be probably
more helpful to understand the accretion phenomena. In the words of Goodrich
(1989)\footnote{This is Goodrich's reading of the review made by Lawrence (1987) on the
AGN classification and its meaning.} "...a taxonomic system, based not necessarily
on the most easily observed parameters but rather on the most physically relevant
quantities and some theoretical picture, is required in order to make substantial
progress in our interpretation of AGN" \cite{goodrich}.

Cosmology and Nongalactic Astrophysics (astro-ph.CO)


Elemental Abundance Measurements in Low-redshift Damped Lyman Alpha Absorbers

Abstract: We present elemental abundance measurements for 9 damped Ly-alpha systems (DLAs) and 1 sub-DLA at 0.1 < z < 1.5 from recent observations with the Multiple Mirror Telescope. Most of these absorbers are found to be metal-poor, while 2 are found to have ~ 30-50 solar metallicities. Combining our data with other data from the literature, we find that the systems with higher [Zn/H] also have stronger depletion as measured by [Cr/Zn] and [Fe/Zn]. The relationship between the metallicity and H I column density is also investigated. Together with our previous MMT survey (Khare et al. 2004) we have discovered 2 of the 4 known absorbers at z < 1.5 that lie above (although near) the "obscuration threshold". This appears to be a result of selecting absorbers with strong metal lines in our sample. It would be interesting to find other similar systems by observing a larger sample and study how much such systems contribute to the cosmic budget of metals. Finally, an analysis of the N(H I)-weighted mean metallicity vs. redshift for our sample combined with data from the literature supports previous conclusions that the N(H I)-weighted mean global DLA metallicity rises slowly at best and falls short of solar levels by a factor of > 4 even at z=0.

\section{Introduction}

Absorption line systems in QSO spectra provide a unique window into the high-redshift universe. These systems have been detected
 in the range 0 $\la z \la 6$, corresponding to $\sim$ 90$\%$ of the age of the universe.  As the absorption line strengths
 depend primarily on the gas content, they are selected independent of the stellar luminosities of the galaxies.
 Thus in principle they may be expected to provide less biased probes of galaxies than objects used
 to study the high redshift universe through emission, which are biased toward brighter galaxies including actively star forming galaxies
 such as Lyman-break galaxies, active galaxy nuclei, and QSOs.

Damped Lyman-$\alpha$ Absorption systems (DLAs) with log N$_{\rm HI}$ $\ge$ 20.3 and sub-DLAs with 19.0 $\le$ log N$_{\rm HI} <$
 20.3 seen in QSO spectra can be used as probes of the neutral gas content of the universe. DLAs and sub-DLAs are known to
 contain the majority of the neutral gas in the universe (e.g. Wolfe et al. 1995, Peroux et al. 2003). With such high neutral
 hydrogen column densities DLAs are believed to be closely linked to galaxies. DLAs may also be the neutral gas reservoirs used in
 star formation. Furthermore, DLAs and sub-DLAs provide detailed gas-phase abundances of a number of elements and can thus be used
 to test galactic chemical evolution models.

Several elements have been detected in DLAs including C, N, O, Mg, Si, S, Ca, Ti, Cr, Mn, Fe, Ni, and Zn.
 Zn is often used as a tracer of gas-phase metallicity as it is typically relatively undepleted in the Galactic ISM when the
 fraction of H in molecular form is low, which is the case for DLAs \citep{Sem95}, Zn tracks the abundance of Fe in
 Galactic stars \citep{Mis02}, and the lines of Zn II $\lambda$$\lambda$ 2026,2062 are fairly weak
 and unsaturated. Also, Zn II can be detected with ground-based observations over a wide range of redshifts (0.6 $\la z \la 3.
5$).  Elemental abundances relative to Zn such as [Cr/Zn] or [Fe/Zn] can be used to estimate the dust content of the QSO absorber.
Here and throughout the paper we adopt the standard notation [X/H] = log (N$_{\rm X}$/N$_{\rm H I}$) - log (X/H)$_{\sun}$.

If DLAs do constitute a representative sample of galaxies, it would be expected that their global mean metallicity of these objects
 should rise to roughly solar values at low redshift. It is uncertain whether or not DLAs show this
 trend. The most recent evaluations of this by Kulkarni and Fall (2002), Prochaska et al. (2003b), and Kulkarni et al. (2005) show
 at best a weak evolution in the metallicity-redshift relation with slopes of $\sim$ - 0.20$\pm$0.07.

One proposed explanation of the lack of metal-rich DLAs in observed samples is that this population is being under-sampled
 due to dust obscuration (e.g.; Boisse et al. 1998; Pei $\&$ Fall 1993; Vladilo $\&$ Peroux 2005).
 Absorbers with higher metallicity may also contain more dust, making any background QSOs fainter and keeping
 those objects out of magnitude-limited samples \citep{York06}. In fact, it has been claimed that up to 50 $\%$ of QSOs may be hidden
in optical surveys due to dust obscuration \citep{Vlad05}. Recently, Akerman et al. (2005) measured the metal abundances of $z > 1.8$
 DLAs from the Complete Optical and Radio Absorption Line System survey (CORALS), and found that N$_{\rm HI}$ weighted mean metallicity
 based on the Zn abundance is only marginally higher but within error limits of previous samples. However, the effects of dust may be expected
 to be stronger at low redshifts.  The role of dust in DLAs is still unclear, and more investigation is needed. We discuss dust and
 reddening in our sample of absorbers in more detail in $\S$ 5.2.

Assuming a cosmology with $\Omega_{m}$ = 0.3 and $\Omega_{\Lambda}$ = 0.7, $z < $ 1.5 spans $\sim$70
 $\%$ of the age of the universe. It is therefore critical to obtain more abundance measurements at low
 redshift. One reason for the uncertainty in the metallicity-redshift relation
 is the lack of abundance measurements in low-redshift absorbers. In fact $\sim$ 70$\%$ of the existing Zn measurements are for
 2 $\la$ z $\la$ 3.5, which corresponds to only $\sim$ 10$\%$ of the age of the universe. The paucity of Zn measurements at
 low  z is primarily because the Zn $\lambda$$\lambda$ 2026, 2062 lines lie in the UV for z $<$ 0.6, and deeply in the blue end of the
 spectrum for 0.6 $<$ z $\la$ 1.3, where most existing spectrographs are inefficient. In this paper we present new MMT observations
 toward 10 QSOs. The observations presented in this paper increases the
 size of the sample of absorbers at z  $\la$ 1.5 by $\sim$ 40$\%$.

 In $\S$ 2 we describe our observations and our data reduction routines. $\S$ 3 describes the estimation of column densities. In
 $\S$ 4 we present notes on the individual objects. We present results from these measurements in $\S$ 5, and in $\S$ 6 we
 discuss our results and their implications.

\section{Observations and Data Reduction}
  Our sample consists of 10 confirmed DLA and sub-DLA absorbers at 0.2 $\la$ $z$ $\la$ 1.5, for which N$_{\rm H I}$ is known
 from $HST$ spectra \citep{Rao05}. Seven of these targets were observed in the Sloan Digital Sky Survey (SDSS),
 and most show the presence of strong Mg II or Fe II absorption features from SDSS spectra.  Apparent magnitudes for these 7 QSOs are
 available from the SDSS Quasar Catalog III, Data release 3 \citep{Abaz05}.

 The spectra presented here were obtained at the Multiple Mirror Telescope (MMT) during two separate epochs, 2004 May and 2005
 February. Nearly 2.7 nights out of a total of 5 were lost due to poor weather. The Blue Chanel spectrograph was used with the 832 l
 mm$^{-1}$ grating in the first order, or the 1200 l mm$^{-1}$ grating in the second order, depending on the redshift of the absorber.
 A CuSO$_{4}$ blocking filter was used with the 832 l mm$^{-1}$ grating to block first order red light. The central wavelength for the
 832 l mm$^{-1}$ grating
 was at 3670 $\mbox{\AA}$ and 3600 $\mbox{\AA}$ for the 2004  May and 2005 Feb epochs respectively. For the 1200 l mm$^{-1}$ grating
 the wavelength was centered at 4935 $\mbox{\AA}$
 and 4770  $\mbox{\AA}$ during the 2004  May and 2005 Feb epochs respectively. In order to achieve the desired S/N while minimizing
 cosmic rays, multiple exposures of each target were taken with exposure times ranging from 1800 to 2700 s depending on the magnitude of
 the QSO. Each target observation was followed by a comparison spectrum from a He+Ne+Ar lamp for wavelength calibration. Quartz flat
 fields and bias frames were taken at both the beginning and end of the night.  Table 1 lists the
 vacuum wavelengths and oscillator strengths used in identification of the features and subsequent analysis.Table 2 gives a summary of our
 observations.

\begin{table}
\begin{center}
\caption{Atomic Data}
\begin{tabular}{lccc}
\hline
\hline
Species & $\lambda_{rest}$ & $f$ & References \\
        & $\mbox{\AA}$    &     &                      \\
\hline
Be II       &   3130.4219 & 3.321E-1 &  1   \\
C IV        &   1548.2040 & 1.899E-1 &  1   \\
            &   1550.7810 & 9.475E-2 &  1    \\
Mg I        &   1827.9351 & 2.420E-2 & 1  \\
	    &   2026.4768 & 1.130E-1 & 1 \\
	    &   2852.9631 & 1.830E00 & 1  \\
Mg II       &   2796.3543 & 6.155E-1 & 1 \\
            &   2803.5315 & 3.058E-1 & 1 \\
Al II       &   1670.7886 & 1.710E00 & 1 \\
Al III      &   1854.7184 & 5.590E-1 &  1 \\
            &   1862.7910 & 2.780E-1 &  1 \\
Si II       &   1808.0129 & 2.080E-3 & 1,2 \\
Si IV       &   1393.7602 & 5.130E-1 & 1    \\
            &   1402.7729 & 2.540E-1 &  1   \\
Ca II       &   3933.6614 & 6.267E-1 & 1   \\
            &   3968.4673 & 3.116E-1 &  1   \\
Ti II       &   1910.6123 & 1.040E-1 & 1,3 \\
            &   3383.7588 & 3.580E-1 & 1  \\
Cr II       &   2056.2569 & 1.030E-1 &  1,2 \\
            &   2062.2361 & 7.590E-2 & 1,2 \\
Mn II       &   2576.8770 & 3.610E-1 &  1  \\
            &   2594.4990 & 2.800E-1 &  1   \\
            &   2606.4620 & 1.980E-1 & 1   \\
Fe II       &   2249.8768 & 1.820E-3 &  4  \\
            &   2260.7805 & 2.440E-3 & 4   \\
            &   2344.2139 & 1.140E-1 & 1,5 \\
            &   2374.4612 & 3.130E-2 &  1  \\
            &   2382.7652 & 3.200E-1 & 1,5 \\
Zn II       &   2026.1370 & 5.010E-1 & 1,6 \\
            &   2062.6604 & 2.460E-1 & 1,6 \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\vspace{0.2cm}
\begin{minipage}{140mm}
References. (1) Morton 2003; (2) Bergeson $\&$ Lawler 1993b; \\ (3) Wiesse et al. 1996;
                 (4) Bergeson et al. 1994; (5) Bergeson et al. 1996;  \\ (6) Bergeson $\&$ Lawler 1993a
\end{minipage}
\end{center}
\end{table}

\begin{table*}
{\footnotesize
\caption{Summary of Observations}
\begin{tabular}{ccccccccc}
\hline
\hline
QSO & $g$ & $z_{em}$ & $z_{DLA}$ & log N$_{\rm H I}$ & Grating & FWHM  & Exposure Time & Epoch  \\
    &     &          &           &     cm$^{-2}$      &   lines mm$^{-1}$ & $\mbox{\AA}$ &        &         \\
\hline
0738+313  & 16.1 & 0.630        & 0.0912  & 21.18$\pm$0.06   & 832   & 1.10 & 3000 & 2005 Feb.       \\
$\cdots$  & $\cdots$ & $\cdots$ & 0.2210  & 20.90$\pm$0.09 & 832   & 1.10 & 3000 & 2005 Feb.         \\
0827+243  & 17.3 & 0.941        & 0.5247  & 20.30$\pm$0.05 & 832   & 1.10 & 3600 & 2005 Feb.         \\
1010+0003 & 18.3 & 1.398        & 1.2651 & 21.52$\pm$0.07  & 1200  & 1.33 & 3600  & 2005 Feb.        \\
1107+0003 & 18.7 & 1.741        & 0.9547  & 20.26$\pm$0.14 & 832   & 1.10 & 8100 & 2005 Feb.         \\
1137+3907 & 17.4 & 1.023        & 0.7190  & 21.10$\pm$0.10 & 832   & 1.10 & 5400 & 2004 May         \\
1225+0035 & 18.9 & 1.226        & 0.7731  & 21.38$\pm$0.11 & 832   & 1.10 & 5400 & 2005 Feb.         \\
1501+0019 & 18.1 & 1.930        & 1.4832 & 20.85$\pm$0.13 & 1200  & 1.33 & 5400  & 2004 May         \\
1712+5559 & 18.7 & 1.356        & 1.2095 & 20.72$\pm$0.05 & 1200  & 1.33 & 5400 &  2004 May         \\
1715+4606 & 18.1 & 0.989        & 0.6511  & 20.44$\pm$0.13 & 832   & 1.10 & 5400 & 2004 May         \\
1733+5533 & 18.1 & 1.074        & 0.9981  & 20.70$\pm$0.03 & 832   & 1.10 & 3600 & 2004 May         \\

\hline
\end{tabular}
}
\end{table*}

Data reduction was carried out using standard IRAF routines. Images were bias subtracted, trimmed, and flat fielded using the task
 CCDPROC. These reduced 2-d spectra were then extracted and wavelength calibrated using the task DOSLIT. The wavelengths were
 converted to vacuum using the task DISPTRANS. Finally the spectrum was normalized using the  task CONINUUM. The solar abundances
used as reference while calculating the abundances are adopted from Lodders et al. (2003).

Figures 1-10 plot the co-added and continuum-fitted spectra obtained with the MMT, along with line identifications from the DLAs
 as well as other absorption systems along the line of sight. Unmarked, minor depressions have been verified to be artifacts.

\section{Estimation of Column Densities}
 Column densities were estimated by fitting the observed absorption line profiles using the package FITS6P \citep{Wel91}, which has
 evolved from the code by Vidal-Madjar et al (1977). FITS6P iteratively minimizes the $\chi^{2}$ value between the data and
 a theoretical Voigt profile that is convolved with the instrumental profile. All lines were fit with a single component Voigt profile. If
 a multiplet was available such as Fe II $\lambda$$\lambda$ 2344, 2374, 2382 the lines were fit simultaneously until convergence for a
 common N, $b_{eff}$, and $v$. Equivalent width measurements were obtained with the package SPECP, also written by D.E. Welty.
 The 1$\sigma$ equivalent width uncertainties were estimated using the photon noise uncertainties and the continuum uncertainties obtained
 by allowing the continuum to vary by $\pm$ 10 $\%$. In all cases these uncertainties were dominated by the photon noise uncertainties.

 The prescription  of Khare et al. (2004) for fitting the Cr II and Zn II lines of was followed. Specifically,
 the Cr II $\lambda$$\lambda$2056, 2066 lines were fit simultaneously to obtain N, $b_{eff}$, and $v$ values.  Then, the blended Cr II+Zn
 II  $\lambda$ 2062 line was fit starting with the values obtained from the previous fits, holding the Cr II component fixed.
 The Zn II $\lambda$ 2026 line was then fit using the $b_{eff}$ and $v$ value from the Cr $\lambda$$\lambda$ 2056, 2062 fit while holding
 the Mg I component fixed. If the Cr II $\lambda$ 2056 line could not be fit due to noise, we fit the Zn II $\lambda$2026 line, holding
 the Mg I $\lambda$  2026 contribution fixed, then fit the Cr II + Zn II $\lambda$ 2062 blend holding the Zn II component fixed. The Mg I column density was
 estimated by fitting the Mg I $\lambda$ 2852 line from the SDSS spectra.
 York et al. (2006) showed that the Mg I $\lambda$ 2852 lies on the linear portion of the curve of growth for W$^{\rm rest}_{\rm Mg I}$ $\sim$
 0.6 to 0.7. The Mg I $\lambda$ 2852 line is often moderately saturated in DLAs and the assumption of a linear curve of growth may lead to
 an underestimation of the Mg I column density, therefor we did not assume Mg I $\lambda$ 2852 to be on the linear portion of the curve
 of growth, and instead used the results of a profile fit to that line. To judge the effects of possible saturation of Mg I $\lambda$ 2852
 on N$_{\rm Mg I}$ and hence on N$_{\rm Zn II}$, we also estimated the maximum N$_{\rm Mg I }$ that would be consistent with W$_{\rm 2852}$
 within a 3$\sigma$ level. We then used this maximum N$_{\rm Mg I}$ to estimate the minimum N$_{\rm Zn II}$ in the $\lambda$ 2026 line.
  In any case, in our experience the contribution of Mg I to the blended $\lambda$ 2026 line
 is typically small (eg. Peroux et al. 2006a). For Q1501+0019 we also have a constraint on N$_{\rm Mg I}$ from the non-detection of the Mg I
 $\lambda$ 1827 line which gives log N$_{\rm Mg I}$ $<$ 13.47.

 Tables 3 and 4 list the derived equivalent widths and column densities respectively. If a certain species was not detected,
 3$\sigma$ upper limits were placed on the equivalent widths and column densities based on the signal to noise ratio (S/N) in the region
 based on a 3 pixel resolution element. It was assumed that these lines lie on the linear portion of the curve of growth. As can be seen
 in figures 1-10, none of the detected Zn II or Cr II lines are saturated. In fact, none of the lines detected appear to show significant saturation even in those cases where the
 equivalent widths are large. This is likely due to the line profile being composed of multiple components that could not be resolved at
 the resolution of our data.

\section{Discussion of Individual Objects}

$Q0738+313$ ($z_{em}$ = 0.630, $z_{abs}$ = 0.0912 for system A and $z_{abs}$ = 0.2210 for system B): Both of the systems listed are DLAs.
 The Zn and Cr lines were studied by Kulkarni et al. (2005) using $HST$ data.
 The $\lambda$$\lambda$ 3933,3969 lines of Ca II appear in both
 systems A and B.  We also placed upper limits on Ti II $\lambda$ 3383 of system B. As the background QSO is very bright (g = 16.1), we
 were able to obtain high S/N of $\sim$ 100 in the region. This gives an upper limit of log (N$_{\rm Ti II}$/N$_{\rm H I}$) $<$ -9.42,
 with [Ti/H] $<$ -2.32. The feature located at $\sim$ 5070 $\mbox{\AA}$ is an artifact from bad pixels in the CCD.

$Q0827+243$ ($z_{em}$ = 0.941, $z_{abs}$ = 0.259 for system A and $z_{abs}$ = 0.5247 for system B): The Zn and Cr lines of system B were
 studied in detail at lower wavelengths by Khare at al. (2004). The Fe II $\lambda$$\lambda$ 2249, 2260, 2344, 2374, 2382, 2586, 2600
 lines were measured previously. Strong Mg II $\lambda$$\lambda$ 2796, 2803 and Mg I $\lambda$ 2852 lines were present in system B in the
 new spectra. The Mg I $\lambda$ 2852 line was fit first to estimate $b_{eff}$ and $v$ values, which were used when fitting the Mg II
 doublet. Due to the strong saturation of the Mg II $\lambda$$\lambda$ 2796, 2803 doublet we give the derived column density
 as a lower limit. We were able to place upper limits on Ti II $\lambda$ 3383 of [Ti/H] = -1.45 at S/N $\sim$ 60 in the region. The
 feature located at $\sim$ 5070 $\mbox{\AA}$ is again an artifact from bad pixels in the CCD.

 $Q1010+0003$ ($z_{em}$ = 1.4007, $z_{abs}$ =1.2651): The Cr II $\lambda$$\lambda$ 2056, 2062, 2066 lines, as well as
 the Zn II $\lambda$$\lambda$ 2026, 2062 lines were detected with S/N of $\sim$ 30. As all the lines were detected, the full
 prescription outlined in $\S$ 2 was followed. The Mg I contribution to the  blended Zn II+Mg I $\lambda$ 2026 line was estimated
 from the SDSS spectrum. The Mg I $\lambda$ 2852 has an equivalent width of W$_{rest}$ = 404 $\mbox{m\AA}$.
  This line was fit using a
 single component model, yielding log N$_{\rm Mg I}$ = 12.67$\pm$0.05. This component was held fixed in Mg I $\lambda$ 2026 while
 the Zn II and Cr II $\lambda$$\lambda$ 2026, 2056, 2062, 2066 lines
 were fit simultaneously giving log N$_{\rm Zn II}$ = 12.96.

\begin{table*}
{\footnotesize
\caption{Equivalent Widths}
\begin{tabular}{cclcr|cclcr}
\hline
\hline
QSO & $z_{abs}$ & Species & $\lambda_{rest}$ & W$_{rest}$  &   QSO & $z_{abs}$ & Species & $\lambda_{rest}$ & W$_{rest}$  \\
    &           &         &  $\mbox{\AA}$    & m$\mbox{\AA}$ &                &         &  &  $\mbox{\AA}$   & m$\mbox{\AA}$ \\
\hline
0738+313  	&	 0.0912:A   	&	  Ca II       	&	3933	&	  189$\pm$13  	&	  1501+0019 	&	 1.4832:A  	&	 Mg I         	&	2852	&	  952$^{a}$   \\
$z_{em}=0.630$ 	&	          	&	  Ca II       	&	3969	&	  54$\pm$10   	&	 $z_{em}=1.930$    	&	         	&	 Al III       	&	1854	&	  334$\pm$17   \\
          	&	 0.2210:B   	&	  Ca II       	&	3933	&	 63$\pm$10    	&	    	&	         	&	 Al III       	&	1862	&	  216$\pm$18    \\
          	&	          	&	  Ca II       	&	3969	&	   35$\pm$10  	&	       	&	         	&	 Si II        	&	1808	&	     295$\pm$16   \\
          	&	          	&	  Ti II       	&	3383	&	 $<$14        	&	      	&	         	&	 Cr II        	&	2056	&	  105$\pm$16 \\
0827+243  	&	 0.2590:A  	&	  Ca II       	&	3933	&	 $<$34        	&	        	&	         	&	 Cr II        	&	2066	&	  $<$26    \\
$z_{em}=0.941$ 	&	          	&	  Ca II       	&	3969	&	 $<$34        	&	   	&	         	&	 Zn II+Mg I   	&	2026	&	     231$\pm$21     \\
          	&	          	&	  Ti II       	&	3383	&	 $<$33        	&	     	&	         	&	 Zn II+Cr II  	&	2062	&	   191$\pm$18      \\
          	&	  0.5247:B 	&	 Mg I         	&	2852	&	 602$\pm$29   	&	        	&	 1.8510:B  	&	 C IV         	&	1548	&	  154$\pm$18        \\
          	&	         	&	 Mg II        	&	2796	&	 2416$\pm$27  	&	        	&	         	&	 C IV         	&	1550	&	   116$\pm$18  \\
          	&	         	&	 Mg II        	&	2803	&	  2316$\pm$28 	&	       	&	 1.9260:C  	&	 C IV         	&	1548	&	  254$\pm$14     \\
          	&	         	&	 Ti II        	&	3383	&	 $<$30        	&	       	&		&	 C IV         	&	1550	&	  154$\pm$14    \\
1010+0003 	&	 1.2651:A  	&	 Mg I         	&	2852	&	 404$^a$      	&		&		&	 Al II        	&	1670	&	  88$\pm$11 \\
$z_{em}=1.398$ 	&	         	&	 Al III       	&	1854	&	 104$\pm$21   	&	  1712+5559 	&	 1.1590:A  	&	 Cr II        	&	2056	&	  $<$33 \\
          	&	         	&	 Al III       	&	1862	&	 $<$46        	&	  $z_{em}=1.356$      	&	         	&	 Cr II        	&	2066	&	  $<$33    \\
          	&	         	&	 Cr II        	&	2056	&	 91$\pm$19    	&		&		&	 Fe II        	&	2344	&	  415$\pm$30  \\
          	&	         	&	 Cr II        	&	2066	&	 69$\pm$15    	&	      	&		&	 Fe II        	&	2374	&	  240$\pm$27\\
          	&	         	&	 Fe II        	&	2249	&	 144$\pm$26   	&	    	&	         	&	 Fe II        	&	2382	&	  592$\pm$32 \\
          	&	         	&	 Fe II        	&	2260	&	  184$\pm$26  	&	   	&	         	&	 Zn II+Mg I   	&	2026	&	  $<$33 \\
          	&	         	&	 Fe II        	&	2344	&	  564$\pm$28  	&	      	&	         	&	 Zn II+Cr II  	&	2062	&	  $<$33   \\
          	&	         	&	 Fe II        	&	2374	&	  543$\pm$35 	&	   	&	 1.2093:B  	&	 Mg I         	&	2852	&	  367$^{a}$ \\
          	&	         	&	 Fe II        	&	2382	&	   715$\pm$30 	&	     	&	         	&	 Cr II        	&	2056	&	  $<$35 \\
          	&	         	&	 Zn II+Mg I   	&	2026	&	  233$\pm$23  	&	   	&	        	&	 Cr II        	&	2066	&	  $<$35 \\
          	&	         	&	 Zn II+Cr II  	&	2062	&	  181$\pm$22  	&	   	&	          	&	 Fe II        	&	2344	&	  973$\pm$33 \\
1107+0003 	&	 0.5252:A  	&	 Mn II        	&	2576	&	 $<$30        	&	    	&	        	&	 Fe II        	&	2374	&	  723$\pm$31  \\
$z_{em}=1.741$  	&		&	 Mn II        	&	2594	&	 $<$34        	&	    	&	         	&	 Fe II        	&	2382	&	  1168$\pm$35    \\
          	&	         	&	 Mn II        	&	2606	&	 $<$20        	&		&		&	 Zn II+Mg I   	&	2026	&	  $<$35\\
          	&	         	&	 Fe II        	&	2344	&	 139$\pm$36   	&		&		&	 Zn II+Cr II  	&	2062	&	  $<$35 \\
          	&	         	&	 Fe II        	&	2374	&	 $<$47        	&	  1715+4606              	&	 GAL$^{b}$     	&	 Ca II   	&	3933	&	  1556$\pm$46$^{c}$ \\
          	&	         	&	 Fe II        	&	2382	&	  269$\pm$36  	&	  $z_{em}=0.989$     	&		&	 Ca II    	&	3969	&	   205$\pm$36  \\
          	&	         	&	 Fe II        	&	2586	&	  185$\pm$25  	&	  	&	 0.6544:A  	&	 Cr II        	&	2056	&	  $<$165  \\
          	&	         	&	 Fe II        	&	2600	&	   342$\pm$27 	&		&		&	 Cr II        	&	2066	&	  $<$165    \\
          	&	 0.9547:B  	&	 Ti II        	&	1910	&	 $<$42        	&		&		&	 Fe II        	&	2344	&	  1264$\pm$42\\
          	&	         	&	 Cr II        	&	2056	&	 $<$27        	&	   	&	         	&	 Fe II        	&	2374	&	  851$\pm$40\\
          	&	         	&	 Cr II        	&	2066	&	 $<$27        	&	  	&		&	 Fe II        	&	2382	&	    1556$\pm$46$^{c}$  \\
          	&	         	&	 Zn II+Mg I   	&	2026	&	 $<$27        	&	   	&	         	&	 Zn II+Mg I   	&	2026	&	  $<$165 \\
          	&	         	&	 Zn II+Cr II  	&	2062	&	 $<$27        	&	   	&	         	&	 Zn II+Cr II  	&	2062	&	  $<$165  \\
          	&	 1.711:C   	&	 Si IV        	&	1393	&	  618$\pm$36  	&	 1733+5533  	&   GAL$^{b}$ 		&	 Ca II         	&	3933	&	 482$\pm$36\\
          	&	         	&	 Si IV        	&	1402	&	  447$\pm$40  	&	  $z_{em}=1.074$  	&	 	&	 Ca II         	&	3969	&	  257$\pm$33\\
1137+3907 	&	 GAL$^{b}$     	&	Ca II    	&	3933	&	336$\pm$58	&	  	&	   	&	 Mg I         	&	2852	&	  362$^{a}$ \\
$z_{em}=1.023$  	&	        	&	Ca II	&	3969	&	241$\pm$51	&	   	&	 0.9984:A  	&	 Al III       	&	1854	&	 179$\pm$31\\
	&	 0.7190:A  	&	 Cr II        	&	2056	&	 $<$74        	&		&		&	 Al III       	&	1862	&	 100$\pm$27   \\
	&	         	&	 Cr II        	&	2066	&	 $<$74        	&		&		&	 Si II        	&	1808	&	  178$\pm$30    \\
	&		&	 Fe II        	&	2249	&	  150$\pm$31  	&		&		&	 Ti II        	&	1910	&	  $<$30    \\
          	&	         	&	 Fe II        	&	2260	&	  291$\pm$34  	&		&		&	 Cr II        	&	2056	&	 $<$35    \\
          	&	         	&	 Fe II        	&	2344	&	 1768$\pm$67  	&		&		&	 Cr II        	&	2066	&	  $<$29\\
          	&	         	&	 Fe II        	&	2374	&	 1300$\pm$37  	&	   	&	         	&	 Zn II+Mg I    	&	2026	&	  $<$29\\
          	&	         	&	 Fe II        	&	2382	&	  2009$\pm$70 	&	   	&	         	&	 Zn II+Cr II    	&	2062	&	  $<$29\\
	&		&	 Zn II+Mg I   	&	2026	&	 447$\pm$56   	&	   	&	 1.1496:B    	&	 C IV          	&	1548	&	  453$\pm$55 \\
	&		&	 Zn II+Cr II  	&	2062	&	 266$\pm$70   	&	  	&	         	&	 C IV          	&	1550	&	  341$\pm$51  \\
1225+0035 	&	 0.7731:A  	&	 Mg I         	&	2852	&	 929$^{a}$    	&	  	&	          	&	 Al II         	&	1670	&	  $<$40\\
$z_{em}=1.226$ 	&	           	&	 Cr II        	&	2056	&	   259$\pm$81 	&	  	&	         	&	 Al III        	&	1854	&	  $<$30\\
          	&	         	&	 Cr II        	&	2066	&	   177$\pm$76  	&	  	&	         	&	 Al III        	&	1862	&	  $<$30    \\
          	&	         	&	 Fe II        	&	2249	&	  339$\pm$73  	&	  	&	         	&	 Si II         	&	1808	&	  $<$25\\
          	&	         	&	 Fe II        	&	2260	&	    372$\pm$80 	&	$\cdots$ 	&	$\cdots$ 	&	$\cdots$ 	&	$\cdots$ 	&	$\cdots$ \\
	       &		&	 Zn II+Mg I   	&	2026	&	  $<$122         	&	$\cdots$ 	&	$\cdots$ 	&	$\cdots$ 	&	$\cdots$ 	      &	$\cdots$       \\
	       &		&	 Zn II+Cr II  	&	2062	&	   181$\pm$91    	&	$\cdots$ 	&	$\cdots$ 	&	$\cdots$ 	&	$\cdots$ 	      &	$\cdots$         \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\vspace{0.2cm}
\begin{minipage}{140mm}
{\bf $^a$:}  From SDSS spectra.
{\bf $^b$:}  Entries with GAL identifier are from lines originating in the Milky Way.
{\bf $^c$:}  The Galactic Ca II $\lambda$ 3933 line and Fe II $\lambda$ 2383 line from the DLA at
z$_{abs}$ = 0.6544 are blended in the spectra.
\end{minipage}
}
\end{table*}

\begin{figure*}
\includegraphics[width=7.0in,height=8.5in,angle=180]{fig1.eps}
\caption{Combined and normalized spectrum of Q0738+313. The expected positions of several lines of interest are
marked above the continuum with their rest wavelength and species. The letters after the wavelengths refer to
the different systems indicated at the top of the figure. An ``X'' signifies a defect in the CCD.}
\end{figure*}
\clearpage

\begin{figure*}
\includegraphics[width=7.0in,height=8.5in,angle=180]{fig2.eps}
\caption{Same as Figure 1, but for Q0827+243.}
\end{figure*}
\clearpage

\begin{figure*}
\includegraphics[width=7.0in,height=8.5in,angle=180]{fig3.eps}
\caption{Same as Figure 1, but for Q1010+0003.}
\end{figure*}
\clearpage

\begin{figure*}
\includegraphics[width=7.0in,height=8.5in,angle=180]{fig4.eps}
\caption{Same as Figure 1, but for Q1107+0003.}
\end{figure*}
\clearpage

\begin{figure*}
\includegraphics[width=7.0in,height=8.5in,angle=180]{fig5.eps}
\caption{Same as Figure 1, but for Q1137+3907.}
\end{figure*}
\clearpage

\begin{figure*}
\includegraphics[width=7.0in,height=8.5in,angle=180]{fig6.eps}
\caption{Same as Figure 1, but for Q1225+0035.}
\end{figure*}
\clearpage

\begin{figure*}
\includegraphics[width=7.0in,height=8.5in,angle=180]{fig7.eps}
\caption{Same as Figure 1, but for Q1501+0019.}
\end{figure*}
\clearpage

\begin{figure*}
\includegraphics[width=7.0in,height=8.5in,angle=180]{fig8.eps}
\caption{Same as Figure 1, but for Q1712+5559.}
\end{figure*}
\clearpage

\begin{figure*}
\includegraphics[width=7.0in,height=8.5in,angle=180]{fig9.eps}
\caption{Same as Figure 1, but for Q1715+4606.}
\end{figure*}
\clearpage

\begin{figure*}
\includegraphics[width=7.0in,height=8.5in,angle=180]{fig10.eps}
\caption{Same as Figure 1, but for Q1733+5533.}
\end{figure*}
\clearpage

------------

To judge the effect of potential saturation of Mg I $\lambda$ 2852 we estimated
 the maximum N$_{\rm Mg I}$ and hence the minimum N$_{\rm Zn II}$ as described in $\S$ 3.
 This gave log N$_{\rm Zn II}$ $>$ 12.95, affirming the assumption that the Mg I
 contribution to the blended $\lambda$ 2026 line is small. Fe II $\lambda$$\lambda$ 2249, 2260, 2344, 2374, 2382 lines were also detected.

$Q1107+0003$ ($z_{em}$ = 1.7408, $z_{abs}$ = 0.5252 for system A, $z_{abs}$ = 0.9547 for system B and $z_{abs}$ = 1.711 for system C):
 System B is of primary interest to this paper, and contains a confirmed sub-DLA from HST spectra with log N$_{\rm H I}$ = 20.26.
 This QSO also has a broad absorption line system (BAL) at $z$ $\approx$ 1.711. Si IV $\lambda$$\lambda$ 1393, 1403 lines from the BAL
 were detected. No Zn II or Cr II lines were detected from the sub-DLA at $z$ = 0.9547, but upper limits were placed on the column
 densities. There is also a system at $z$ = 0.5252 with weak Fe II lines detected in SDSS spectra. Lines of Fe II $\lambda$$\lambda$ 2344,
 2382, 2586, 2600 were detected from this system. The weaker Fe II $\lambda$ 2374 line however was not detected.  The Fe II $\lambda$
 $\lambda$ 2344, 2382 lines were fit simultaneously, as were the $\lambda$$\lambda$ 2586, 2600 lines with the same $b_{eff}$ and $v$.
 Mn II $\lambda$$\lambda$ 2576, 2594, 2606 fell within the observable region for system B, but none were
 detected.

$Q1137+3907$ ($z_{em}$ = 1.023 and $z_{abs}$ = 0.7193): This is a BAL system. The Zn II + Mg I $\lambda$ 2026 blend was detected at $\sim$ 3$\sigma$ level in
 this system. The S/N in the region was $\sim$ 15, leading to larger errors in the column density estimates.  There are no data available
 on Mg I for this system, so it could not be included in the fit of the blended Zn II+Mg I $\lambda$ 2026. We are however confident of
 the Zn II column density quoted, because based on our experience so far, the contribution from Mg I $\lambda$ 2026 is relatively small
 for most systems.  For example, the $z = 1.2651$ DLA toward Q1010+0003 showed differences in the Zn II column density of only $\sim$ 0.05
 dex with and without the contribution from Mg I $\lambda$ 2026.The Zn II $\lambda$ 2026 line was fit using the $b_{eff}$ value from the fit of the Fe II $\lambda$$\lambda$ 2249, 2260
 lines. The Zn II component was held fixed in the blended $\lambda$ 2062 line to determine N$_{\rm Cr II}$.
 Strong Fe II $\lambda$$\lambda$ 2249, 2260, 2344, 2374, 2382 were also
 detected. The feature at $\sim$ 3740 $\mbox{\AA}$ is caused by a defect in the CCD.

$Q1225+0035$ ($z_{em}$ = 1.226 and $z_{abs}$ = 0.7730): The spectra of this object were taken near daybreak, which resulted in
 additional noise due to increased background. The Cr II
 $\lambda$$\lambda$ 2056, 2062 lines was detected at $\sim$ 3$\sigma$, allowing for moderately accurate determination of the column
 density. The Zn II+Mg I $\lambda$ 2026 blend lies in a noisy region and was not detected, and the Zn II upper limit had to be
 estimated from S/N. We also detected Fe II $\lambda$ 2249, 2260 lines which were fit simultaneously with the same $b_{eff}$ and $v$.
 The feature at $\sim$ 3735 $\mbox{\AA}$ is caused by a defect in the CCD.

$Q1501+0019$ ($z_{em}$ = 1.930, $z_{abs}$ = 1.4832 for system A, $z_{abs}$ = 1.8510 for system B, and $z_{abs}$ = 1.9260 for system C):
 System A is the system of primary interest in this paper, and has a confirmed DLA from HST spectra. We detected only the C IV
 $\lambda$$\lambda$ 1548, 1550 lines in system B.  The Zn II+Mg I $\lambda$ 2026 blend, along with the Cr II+Zn II $\lambda$ 2062 and Cr
 II $\lambda$ 2056 lines were all detected in
 system A. Because the Cr II $\lambda$ 2066 line was not detected, the Cr II column density was determined from Cr II $\lambda$ 2056
 solely. The Mg I contribution to the blended Zn II+Mg I  $\lambda$ 2026 line was determined from SDSS spectra, which yields a W$_{rest}$
 for the Mg I  $\lambda$ 2852 line of 952 $\mbox{m\AA}$. This line was fit using a one component model, giving
 log N$_{\rm Mg I}$ = 12.93$\pm$0.05. This component was held fixed in the MMT spectrum of the $\lambda$ 2026 line
 while the Zn II and Cr II $\lambda$$\lambda$ 2056, 2062, and 2066 lines were fit simultaneously.
 To judge the effects of saturation of Mg I $\lambda$ 2852, we again estimated the maximum Mg I contribution to the blended
 $\lambda$ 2026 line as described in $\S$ 3. This gave N$_{\rm Zn II}$ $>$ 12.89, only 0.04 dex less than the ``best fit'' model.
 Al III $\lambda$$\lambda$ 1854, 1862 lines were also detected and
 fit together while simultaneously varying N, $b_{eff}$, and $v$. The feature at $\sim$ 5220 $\mbox{\AA}$ is caused by a defect in the CCD.

$Q1712+5559$ ($z_{em}$ = 1.930, $z_{abs}$ = 1.2093 for system A and $z_{abs}$ = 1.1584 system B): System A is the system of primary
 interest  for this paper, and contains a confirmed DLA from HST spectra with log N$_{\rm H I}$ = 20.72. Both systems contain strong Fe
 II  $\lambda$$\lambda$ 2344, 2374, 2382 lines. No other lines from system B appear to be present. No Zn II or Cr II lines were
 detected in either system, with S/N $\sim$ 30 in the region. The feature at $\sim$ 5220 $\mbox{\AA}$ is caused by a defect in the CCD.

$Q1715+4606$ ($z_{em}$ = 0.989 and $z_{abs}$ = 0.6511)  We have determined the H I column density for this object from archival $HST$
 data. By fitting the line profile, we have determined a column density of log N$_{\rm H I}$=20.44. Strong Fe II $\lambda$$\lambda$
 2344, 2374, 2382 lines were detected. No lines of Zn II or Cr II were seen, although the S/N in the region was only $\sim$ 10 due to poor
 weather during the observations. A weak Galactic Ca II $\lambda$ 3698 feature was seen, but the stronger Ca II $\lambda$ 3933 line was
 blended with the Fe II $\lambda$ 2382 line from the $z_{abs}$=0.6511 system. The feature located at $\sim$ 3690 $\mbox{\AA}$ is an artifact of the CCD.

$Q1733+5533$ ($z_{em}$ = 1.074 and $z_{abs}$ = 0.9984 for system A and $z_{abs}$ = 1.1496 for system B) System A is of primary interest
 for this study, as it has a confirmed DLA with log N$_{\rm H I}$ = 20.70. System B appears to be a C IV system with no other
 absorption features at this redshift detected in SDSS spectra. No Zn II or Cr II lines were detected in system A, but the relatively
 high S/N ($\sim$33) in the region allows us to place tight upper limits on the abundances. Al III $\lambda$$\lambda$ 1854,1862 lines
 were weakly detected and were fit together varying N, $b_{eff}$, and $v$ simultaneously. We also detected strong Galactic Ca II $\lambda$
$\lambda$ 3933, 3968 lines.

\begin{table*}
{\footnotesize
\begin{center}
\caption{Column Densities }
\begin{tabular}{ccccl|ccccl}
\hline
\hline
QSO & $z_{abs}$ & Species & log N     & $b_{eff}$  & QSO    &  $z_{abs}$ & Species & log N & $b_{eff}$       \\
    &           &         & cm$^{-2}$ &  km s$^{-1}$  &    &             &        &  cm$^{-2}$ & km s$^{-1}$ \\
\hline
0738+313 	&	0.0912	&	 Ca II 	&	 12.32$\pm$0.02  	&	51.2	&	1225+0035 	&		0.7731	&	 Mg I  	&	 12.85$\pm$0.06$^{c}$    &	52.4 \\
          	&	          	&	 Ti II 	&	 12.53$\pm$0.10$^{a}$ 	&	 $\cdots$             	&	&         	&	 Cr II 	&	 13.99$\pm$0.11 	&	74.7 \\
          	&	          	&	 Cr II 	&	 13.28$\pm$0.22$^{b}$ 	&	 $\cdots$  	&		&	   	&	 Fe II 	&	 15.69$\pm$0.03 	&	  74.7  \\
          	&	          	&	 Zn II 	&	 $<$12.66$^{a}$   	&	 $\cdots$     	&	  	&	       	&	 Zn II 	&	 $<$13.01    		&	 $\cdots$     \\
          	&	0.2210	&	 Mg I  	&	 12.00$\pm$0.10$^{a}$ 	&	 $\cdots$    	&	 1501+0019 	&	1.4832	&	 Mg I  	&	  12.92$\pm$0.05$^{c}$  &	 96.6     \\
          	&	          	&	 Mg II 	&	 $>$13.30$\pm$0.03$^{a}$ 	&	 $\cdots$ 	&	  	&	&	 Al III	&	 13.35$\pm$0.01   	&	  87.1     \\
          	&	          	&	 Ca II 	&	 11.91$\pm$0.03 	&	34.2	&	  	&	         	&	 Si II 	&	 15.71$\pm$.02  	&	 86.5     \\
          	&	          	&	 Ti II 	&	 $<$11.48  	&	 $\cdots$         	&	  	&	        &	 Cr II 	&	 13.40$\pm$0.09  	&	 86.5  \\
          	&	          	&	 Cr II 	&	  13.11$\pm$0.24$^{b}$ 	&	 $\cdots$   	&	              &	   	&	 Zn II 	&	 12.93$\pm$0.06  	&	     86.5                \\
          	&	          	&	 Zn II 	&	  $<$12.83$^{b}$  	&	 $\cdots$      	&	     	&	1.8510	&	 C IV  	&	 13.64$\pm$0.04  	&	  74.1      \\
0827+243 	&	0.2590	&	 Ca II 	&	  $<$11.60     	&	  $\cdots$       	&	      	&	1.9260		&	 C IV  	&	  13.87$\pm$0.03 	&	  88.8     \\
          	&	          	&	 Ti II 	&	  $<$11.96     	&	 $\cdots$        	&	        &        	&	 Al II 	&	  12.33$\pm$0.04 	&	  53.4     \\
          	&	0.5247	&	 Mg I  	&	 12.69$\pm$0.02 	&	80.3	&	 1712+5559 	&	1.1584		&	 Cr II 	&	 $<$12.93    		&	  $\cdots$  \\
          	&	          	&	 Mg II 	&	 $>$14.59   	&	80.3	&	     	&	           		&	 Fe II 	&	 13.98$\pm$0.03 	&	 74.9 \\
          	&	          	&	 Ti II 	&	 $<$11.76    	&	 $\cdots$     	&	        	&	   	&	 Zn II 	&	 $<$12.25       	&	  $\cdots$           \\
          	&	          	&	 Cr II 	&	 $<$13.42$^{b}$ 	&	 $\cdots$     	&	    	&	1.2093	&	 Mg I  	&	 12.44$^{c}$     	&	  76.7      \\
	&		&	Fe II	& 	14.59$\pm$0.02$^{a}$	&	 $\cdots$     	&	  	&	         		&	 Cr II 	&	 $<$12.86       	&	  $\cdots$      \\
          	&	          	&	 Zn II 	&	 $<$12.80$^{b}$ 	&	 $\cdots$  	&	  	&	        &	 Fe II 	&	 $>$14.54 		&	  76.7       \\
1010+0003 	&	1.2651	&	 Mg I  	&	  12.67$\pm$0.05$^{c}$  	&	184.3	&	  	&	         	&	 Zn II 	&	 $<$12.19        	&	  $\cdots$            \\
          	&	          	&	 Al III &	 12.67$\pm$0.10 	&	10.8	&	    1715+4606  	&GAL$^{d}$ 	&	 Ca II 	&	 12.66$\pm$0.10	 	&	 35.5 \\
          	&	          	&	 Cr II 	&	 13.54$\pm$0.07 	&	22.5	&	        	&	0.6511	&	 Cr II 	&	 $<$13.54        	&	$\cdots$      \\
          	&	          	&	 Fe II 	&	 15.26$\pm$0.05 	&	22.5	&	  	&	         	&	 Fe II 	&	 14.94$\pm$0.03  	&	  57.4        \\
          	&	          	&	 Zn II 	&	 12.96$\pm$0.06 	&	22.5	&	  	&	         	&	 Zn II 	&	 $<$12.87        	&	$\cdots$        \\
1107+0003 	&	0.5252	&	 Mn II 	&	 $<$12.16    	&	$\cdots$	&	 1733+5533  	&	 GAL$^{d}$    	&	 Ca II 	&	  12.79$\pm$0.03 	&	 88.2 \\
          	&	          	&	 Fe II 	&	 13.54$\pm$0.08 	&	37	&	    	&	0.9984		&	 Mg I  	&	   12.44$^{b}$ 		&       $\cdots$ 	   \\
          	&	0.9547	&	 Ti II 	&	 $<$13.01  	&	 $\cdots$       	&	    	&	        	&	 Al III	&	 13.13$\pm$0.05 	&	133.7\\
          	&	          	&	 Cr II 	&	 $<$12.76  	&	 $\cdots$       	&	  	&	       	&	 Si II 	&	 15.48$\pm$0.06 	&	118.9\\
          	&	          	&	 Zn II 	&	 $<$12.08  	&	  $\cdots$     	&	  	&	        	&	 Cr II 	&	 $<$12.79      		&	$\cdots$   \\
          	&	1.7110	&	 Si IV 	&	 13.99$\pm$0.03 	&	198.3	&	   	&	        		&	 Zn II 	&	 $<$12.11     		&	$\cdots$    \\
1137+3907 	&	 GAL$^{d}$ 	&	Ca II	&	12.63$\pm$0.05	&	87.8	&	  	&	1.1496			&	 C IV  	&	  14.19$\pm$0.04 	&	 88.8 \\
          	&	0.7193	&	 Cr II 	&	 13.71$\pm$0.20 	&	122.9	&	  	&	          		&	 Al II 	&	  $<$11.77    		&	$\cdots$            \\
          	&	          	&	 Fe II 	&	 15.45$\pm$0.05 	&	122.9	&	       	&	   		&	 Si II 	&	  $<$14.6    	 	&	$\cdots$        \\
	&		&	 Zn II 	&	 13.43$\pm$0.05 	&	122.9	&	  $\cdots$     	&	  $\cdots$     		& $\cdots$     	&	  $\cdots$   	  	&	$\cdots$ \\

\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\vspace{0.2cm}
\begin{minipage}{140mm}
{\bf $^a$:}  Khare et al. (2004)
{\bf $^b$:}  Kulkarni et al. (2005)
{\bf $^c$:}  From SDSS spectra.
{\bf $^d$:}  Entries with GAL identifier are from lines originating in the Milky Way.
\end{minipage}
}
\end{table*}

\begin{table*}
\begin{center}
\caption{Relative Abundances
\label{t:JoO}}
\begin{tabular}{ccccccc}
\hline
\hline
QSO & $z_{abs}$ & [Zn/H]  & [Cr/Zn] & [Fe/Zn] & [Ti/Zn] & [Si/Zn] \\
\hline
Q0738+313  & 0.0912 & $<$-1.14$^{a}$ & $>$-0.21$^{a}$ & $>$-0.48$^{a}$ & $\cdots$   & $\cdots$        \\
 $\cdots$  & 0.2213 & $<$-0.7$^{a}$  &  $<$0.7$^{a}$  & $\cdots$ & $\cdots$         & $\cdots$        \\
Q0827+243  & 0.5247 & $<$-0.04$^{a}$ & $<$-0.3$^{a}$  & $\cdots$ & $\cdots$         & $\cdots$       \\
Q1010+0003 & 1.2651 & -1.19          &    -0.46       & -0.54    & $<$-1.01         & $\cdots$      \\
Q1107+0003 & 0.9547 & $<$-0.72       &  $\cdots$      & $\cdots$ & $\cdots$         & $\cdots$         \\
Q1137+3907 & 0.7190 & -0.30          &    -0.67       &  -0.82   & $\cdots$         & $\cdots$         \\
Q1225+0035 & 0.7731 & $<$-1.15       &    $>$0.09      & $>$0.07  & $\cdots$         & $\cdots$          \\
Q1501+0019 & 1.4832 & -0.54         &    -0.56       & $\cdots$ & $<$-1.24 &  -0.28        \\
Q1712+5559 & 1.2093 & $<$-1.07       &    $\cdots$    & $>$-0.51 &  $\cdots$        & $\cdots$          \\
Q1715+4606 & 0.6511 & $<$-0.61       &    $\cdots$    & $>$-0.78 & $\cdots$         &  $\cdots$         \\
Q1733+5533 & 0.9981 & $<$-1.13       &    $\cdots$    & $\cdots$ & $\cdots$        &  $>$0.37         \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\vspace{0.2cm}
\begin{minipage}{140mm}
{\bf $^a$:} Abundance measurements from Kulkarni et al. (2005).
\end{minipage}
\end{table*}

\section{Results and Discussion}
\subsection{Relative Abundances}

The observed relative abundances of the elements are a combination of both the nucleosynthetic processes and of dust depletion. If
 dust is significantly present in DLAs, then refractory elements such as Cr, Mn, Fe, Co, and Ni should show substantial depletions. As
 already discussed in $\S$ 1, Zn is a relatively undepleted element due to its low condensation temperature. Ratios such as [Cr/Zn]
 and [Fe/Zn] are therefore a measure of dust depletion. Table 5 lists abundances of Cr, Fe, and Ti relative to Zn for the systems in our
 sample. Also given is the metallicity [Zn/H]. Although it is customary to estimate metallicity  based on measurements of
 N$_{\rm Zn II}$, it has been shown that [Zn/H] is not much affected by ionization \citep{Vlad01}.

   No Ti II was found in any of the systems sampled. We determined [Ti/Zn] upper limits of -1.01 and -1.24 for the DLAs toward Q1010+0003
and Q1501+0019 respectively. The measured [Fe/Zn] in Q1010+0003 was also sub-solar (-0.69) also
 suggesting dust depletion. No Fe lines were sampled in the spectra of Q1501+0019, so [Fe/Zn] could not be measured.

 Si is an $\alpha$-capture element, and its abundance relative to Fe group elements can provide clues into the chemical evolution
 of DLAs. Disk stars in the Milky Way show a systematic decrease in [$\alpha$/Fe] with increasing [Fe/H], which indicates an increase with
 time of Fe contributed to the ISM from type Ia supernovae, relative to type II supernovae \citep{Edv93}.
 Prochaska $\&$ Wolfe (1999) observed that the DLAs in their sample showed no such trend, and that most of the objects were
 $\alpha$-enhanced. In DLAs, Zn is a better
 indicator of Fe group abundances than Fe because of the large depletion of Fe on dust grains. We detected Si II $\lambda$ 1808 in
 Q1501+0019 and Q1733+5533. [Si/H] = -0.68 in Q1501+0019, and [Si/H] = -0.76 in Q1733+5533. We unfortunately did not cover any Fe II
 lines in the region. However, [Si/Zn] = -0.28 in Q1501+0019, and [Si/Zn] $>$ 0.37 in Q1733+5533, implying significant
 $\alpha$-enhancement in the latter system.

Figure 11 shows [Cr/Zn] vs. [Zn/H] for our data as well as those from the literature. Only detections, not limits have been plotted.
 There is intrinsic scatter in the data, which is to be expected, but there appears to be a general trend suggesting that
 the most metal rich DLAs also show the most depletion. If this is true, then one would expect the most metal rich absorbers to be
 under-sampled because they would also most likely be the most reddened. A Spearman rank-order correlation test on the 48 data points
 plotted in Fig. 11 gives the Spearman rank-order coefficient R$_{\rm S}$=-0.623, with a probability of obtaining such a value by chance
 of  P(R$_{\rm S}$)=1.95$\times$10$^{-5}$.

 Figure 12 shows [Fe/Zn] vs [Zn/H] for our data as well as from the literature. Again, only detections have been plotted.
 Both figures 11 and 12 show a trend toward higher depletion with higher metallicity.
 Previous investigations have shown a similar anti-correlation between [Cr/Zn] or [Fe/Zn] and [Zn/H]
although the vast majority of their data set has come from absorbers at $z > 1.5$ \citep{Pet97, Pro02, Ak05}.
  Our study increases the number of Zn measurements at $z < 1.0$ by $\sim$ 30$\%$
  A Spearman rank-order correlation test on this data set gives R$_{\rm S}$=-0.428, with a probability of obtaining such a value by
 chance of P(R$_{\rm S}$)=6.00$\times$10$^{-3}$.

\begin{figure}
\vspace{8mm}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{fig11.eps}
\vspace{2mm}
\caption{[Cr/Zn] vs. [Zn/H] for our data as well as measurements from the literature. Only detections are plotted.}
\end{figure}

\begin{figure}
\vspace{4mm}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{fig12.eps}
\vspace{2mm}
\caption{[Fe/Zn] vs. [Zn/H] for our data as well as from the literature. Only detections are plotted.}
\end{figure}

\subsection{Dust Obscuration Bias}

Several studies have tried to understand whether current DLA observations are affected by a dust obscuration bias.
  Recently, York et al. (2006) conducted a survey of 809 Mg II
 systems from the SDSS with 1.0 $\leq$ $z$ $\leq$ 1.9 and found that QSOs with an intervening
 absorber are at least three times more
 likely to have highly reddened spectra than QSOs without any absorption systems in their spectra. Furthermore, York et al. (2006) found a
 trend toward higher Zn II column densities but lower [Zn/H] and lower abundances of the first ions as the reddening E(B-V) increased.
Significant reddening has also been seen in a sample of strong Ca II absorbers \citep{WH05,Wild06}.

 If dust obscuration effects are significant, highly reddened QSOs would be under-sampled due to their faintness.
 Boisse et al. (1998) pointed out that there is a deficit of systems with high $N_{\rm H I}$ and high [Zn/H], and
suggested that this may be caused by a dust obscuration bias (because such systems may also have high dust content and
may obscure the background quasars more). They speculated that observations of fainter QSOs might reveal systems
with high $N_{\rm H I}$ and high
metallicity. Figure 13 shows a plot of [Zn/H] vs. $N_{\rm H I}$ for DLAs from our sample as well as the literature
(Akerman et al. 2005, Rao et al. 2005). Clearly, there is a deficit of systems that are seen with both low
 metallicity and low $N_{\rm H I}$. This could be attributed to observational limitations in detecting weak Zn II lines,
 although recent high resolution, high S/N observations still find a dearth of systems in this region. More
 interestingly though, there are
 few absorbers with high metallicity and high $N_{\rm H I}$, as noted by Boisse et al. (1998) and also by Akerman et al. (2005).
 This cannot be credited to observational limitations, because systems
 with similar metallicities have been detected at lower $N_{\rm H I}$, and seems to suggest that these types of systems are being
 under-sampled.  Also, there is nothing unphysical
 about systems with high $N_{\rm H I}$ and high metallicity. It is thus surprising that only
 3 points from the literature (of which 1 came from our previous
 sample in Khare et al. 2004) lie above the dashed line indicating the
 empirical ``obscuration threshold" log $N_{\rm Zn II}$ $<$ 13.15 suggested by
 Boisse et al. (1998).

  Two of the systems at $z < 1.5$ that lie above the ``obscuration threshold'' came from our samples (this paper and Khare et al. 2004),
 although it is still remarkable that all points in Fig. 13 lie fairly close to the threshold suggested by Boisse et al. (1998).
Indeed, all but two of the points are consistent, within the errors, with being below the obscuration threshold. It should also be
noted that the Boisse et al. threshold is not meant to be a hard limit, but an observationally determined boundary based on the
much smaller sample available to Boisse et al. (1998). Indeed, hydrodynamical simulations by Cen et al. (2003) predict
the existence of absorbers above this threshold. Thus, it may not be completely surprising that we are now finding some
objects above the threshold.

We emphasize that the higher proportion of systems with N$_{\rm Zn II}$ close to the Boisse et al. threshold
in our studies (this paper and Khare et al. 2004) is not due to errors in the column density estimations from the
moderate resolution of the MMT spectrograph. Column densities derived from our observations of several systems with
both the MMT and with the higher resolution
 ($\sim$ 5 km s$^{-1}$) Ultraviolet-Visual Echelle Spectrograph (UVES) on the Very Large Telescope (VLT) agree
 to within 0.1 dex \citep{Pe06a, Pe06b}. A similar agreement was also found between column densities derived
by Khare et al. (2004) from MMT spectra and those derived by Rao et al. (2005b) from Keck HIRES spectra. The reason for
the higher proportion of metal-rich systems
in our studies is that the targets in this
 paper and Khare et al. (2004) were chosen partially because of strong metal line absorption features seen in SDSS spectra. Thus, these
 systems may have been more likely to have higher Zn column densities.
Indeed, composite SDSS quasar spectra indicate that systems with
larger W$_{rest}$ of Mg II $\lambda 2796$ tend to have stronger Zn II lines
(Nestor et al. 2003; York et al. 2006).
 One of our two systems has a large depletion consistent with the obscuration selection effect while the other system
 shows a moderate depletion, so it is not clear
whether the small number of such systems found so far is caused by dust obscuration or small sample size especially at $z
 < 1.5$ where the effects of dust are expected to be the most pronounced \citep{Boi98}. It could also be the case that the most
  metal rich systems are truly rare.

Figures 14 and 15 show the dust content as measured by [Cr/Zn] and [Fe/Zn] respectively vs. log $N_{\rm H I}$ for
 these DLAs as well as those from the literature. As can be seen, there is very little trend in the data.
It may appear surprising from Figs. 11-15 that there is no (anti)-correlation between
[Cr/Zn] (or [Fe/Zn]) and log N(HI) even though there is an (anti)-correlation between [Cr/Zn]
(or [Fe/Zn]) and [Zn/H] and between [Zn/H] and log N$_{\rm HI}$. If one traces some of the
extreme points in Figs. 11 (or 12) and 13 that do show the correlation, one can see
that the correlations in these two figures arise from different systems.
For example, consider the 3 points A, B, and C with ([Cr/Zn], [Zn/H], log N$_{\rm HI}$ $\approx$
(-0.46, -1.19, 21.52); (-0.74, -0.30, 21.10); and (-0.54; -.57; 20.85).
Points such as A and B are responsible for the correlation in Fig 11.
 Points such as B and C are responsible
for the correlation in Fig. 13. When one plots these points in Fig. 14, there is no
strong correlation. (More generally, if data sets x,y and y,z show correlations,
x and z do not necessarily show a correlation; whether or not they do
depends on the distribution of the individual data values. See, for example, Casella $\&$ Berger 2002.)

\subsection{Constraints on Metallicities and Potential Implications for Metallicity Evolution}

The Zn abundances for our DLAs are listed in Table 5.  In 4 of the systems at
$0.6 < z < 1.5$ the abundances of Zn
 are about 10$\%$ solar or lower, while in 2 systems, the abundances are 30-50 $\%$ solar. We now briefly discuss the implications of our
 data for the metallicity evolution of DLAs. Our analysis is based on the statistical
 procedures outlined in Kulkarni \& Fall (2002), and uses our data, the data
 compiled in Kulkarni et al. (2005), and other recent data
 from the literature (Rao et al. 2005; Akerman et al. 2005).
 We binned the  combined sample of 109 DLAs in 6 redshift bins with 18 or 19
 systems each and calculated the global N$_{\rm H I}$-weighted metallicity in
 each bin. Figure 16 shows [Zn/H] vs. $z$
 for the data in the literature as well as from this paper.

 We constructed two samples for these 109 DLAs: a
 ``maximum limits'' sample where the Zn limits are treated as detections, and
 a ``minimum limits'' sample, where the Zn limits are treated
 as zeros. For an individual system these extreme cases cover the full range of
  possible values the Zn column densities can take in the
 case of the limits. The $N_{\rm H I}$-weighted mean metallicity in the lowest
 redshift bin $0.1 < z < 1.2$ is $- 0.78 \pm
 0.11$ for the ``maximum limits'' sample and
 $- 0.99 \pm 0.17$ for the ``minimum limits'' sample. The linear regression
 slope of the metallicity-redshift relation for the redshift range
 $0.1 < z < 3.9$ is $-0.18 \pm 0.07$ for the
 ``maximum limits'' sample, and $-0.25 \pm 0.10$ for the ``minimum limits''
 sample. The corresponding estimates for the intercept of the
 metallicity-redshift relation are $-0.65 \pm 0.15$ for the ``maximum limits''
 sample and $-0.63 \pm 0.21$ for the ``minimum limits''
 sample. Thus our data support the conclusions of Khare et al. (2004) and
 Kulkarni et al. (2005) that the global mean metallicity of DLAs
 shows at best a slow evolution with redshift.

\section{Conclusions and Future Work}

The MMT observations presented here, together with our previous MMT and HST data
have more than doubled the DLA Zn sample at $z < 1.5$ and more than tripled the sample at $z < 1$.
Combining our data with data from the literature, we find that
 the systems with higher [Zn/H] also have stronger Cr depletion [Cr/Zn].
  Analysis of the $N_{\rm H I}$-weighted mean metallicity vs. redshift for
 our sample combined with previous data from the literature supports previous conclusions
 that the $N_{\rm H I}$-weighted mean global DLA metallicity rises slowly at best and
 does not reach solar levels by $z = 0$.

  Questions still remain pertaining to dust depletion and selection effects,
  and linked to this, the metallicity-redshift relationship of
 DLAs. Despite the large improvement from our surveys, DLA samples at $z < 1.5$
 are still relatively small. Clearly, more observations of DLAs
 at $z < 1.5$ are needed for improved statistics in this vast epoch ($\sim 9$ Gyr).
 The large number of SDSS absorbers now available present a good opportunity
 for this purpose.

\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{fig13.eps}
\vspace{2mm}
\caption{[Zn/H] vs. log $N_{\rm H I}$ for our data as well as previous
measurements from the literature. The dashed line indicates the empirical
upper limit log $N_{\rm Zn II} < 13.15$ inferred from previous studies
and suspected to be the ``obscuration threshold''. Only detections are plotted.}
\end{figure}

\begin{figure}
\vspace{7mm}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{fig14.eps}
\vspace{4mm}
\caption{[Cr/Zn] vs. log $N_{\rm H I}$ for our data as well as measurements
from the literature. Only detections are plotted.}

\end{figure}

\begin{figure}
\vspace{5mm}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{fig15.eps}
\vspace{3mm}
\caption{[Fe/Zn] vs. log $N_{\rm H I}$ for our data as well as measurements
from the literature. Only detections are plotted.}

\end{figure}

\begin{figure}
\vspace{7mm}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{fig16.eps}
\vspace{4mm}
\caption{The metallicity [Zn/H] vs. z for the DLAs in this sample as well as from the literature.}
\end{figure}

 Two of our systems have higher $N_{\rm Zn II}$ than the empirical upper limit (log $N_{\rm Zn II} < 13.15$) that has been
 attributed to dust obscuration in previous studies. The fairly high Zn abundances
 in  these 2 DLAs suggests that metal-rich DLAs may be a rare
 class of objects, but can be found in a large enough sample. It would be
 interesting to confirm the metal-rich nature of these DLAs with
 higher resolution spectra in the future, and find similar other systems by
 observing a larger sample. If a large number of such systems are found,
 they may make a significant contribution to the cosmic budget of metals.

 It has been suggested that the low metallicity found in DLAs is caused by metallicity gradients. On the basis of a small sample
 of objects Chen et al. (2005) reported a difference between emission line and absorption line metallicities. If metallicity gradients are
 present in DLAs, then metal poor DLAs may be more likely to be found because larger impact parameters are more probable.
 This may be because (a) they correspond to larger cross-sections and (b) they correspond to less dust. On the other hand, other studies
 \citep{Sch05, Bow05} have found no difference between emission and absorption line metallicities for other DLAs. Given that the
 metallicity gradients are not well
 established and fairly weak even in nearby spirals, it is not clear if metallicity gradients fully explain the low metallicities seen in
 DLAs.

 So far, no DLA has been observed with a super-solar metallicity. The key
 to finding such systems may lie in observing faint, reddened QSOs. Vladilo \& P\'eroux (2005) have estimated that dusty DLAs may
 contribute as much as 17 $\%$ of the total metals.
 $\Delta$($g$ - $i$) measurements are available from SDSS photometry for thousands of quasars with
 candidate DLAs and sub-DLAs. It would be interesting to obtain [Cr/Zn] and [Fe/Zn] for a
 large sample of such objects to study dust depletion patterns in quasar
 absorbers and to examine trends between quasar reddening and dust depletion.

\section*{Acknowledgments}
 We thank the staff of the MMT observatory for assistance
 during our observing runs. We thank C. P\'eroux
 for helpful comments on an earlier version of this paper and J. Grego for discussions on statistical techniques.
 JM and VPK gratefully acknowledge support from the National Science
 Foundation grant AST-0206197 and the NASA/STScI grant GO-9441. PK acknowledges
 support from the University of South Carolina Research Foundation during
 a visit there in Spring and Summer 2004. We also would like to thank the anonymous referee
 for the insightful and helpful comments concerning this paper.


J/$ψ$ production measurements by the PHENIX experiment at RHIC

Abstract: Measurements of J/$\psi$ production by the PHENIX experiment in p+p, d+Au, Cu+Cu and Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$=200 GeV are reviewed. The results show a suppression beyond what can be explained by cold nuclear matter effects in the most central Au+Au and to a lesser extent in Cu+Cu collisions. In addition, the suppression observed at mid rapidity in Au+Au is smaller than at forward rapidity, a tendency opposite to what is expected from the higher energy density at mid rapidity. Regeneration, a possible explanation, can be tested by measuring the elliptic flow parameter v$_2$ of J/$\psi$.

\section{Introduction}
J/$\psi$ suppression is considered to be one of the key probes of the Quark
Gluon Plasma (QGP) formation in heavy ion collisions. Color screening
was proposed~\cite{satz} as a mechanism leading to {\it anomalous }
suppression beyond {\it normal} hadronic absorption if J/$\psi$s are
created in a deconfined medium. The CERN SPS experiments NA38, NA50
and NA60 were the first to investigate this phenomenon by measuring
J/$\psi$ suppression in a variety of colliding systems and energies. The
results show a statistically significant anomalous
suppression in central Pb+Pb~\cite{spsqgp} and In+In~\cite{spsqgp2}
collisions, that can be interpreted in terms of melting in the QGP.

\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
  \begin{tabular}{cc}
  \includegraphics[height=4.5cm]{sigvsy.eps}
  & \includegraphics[height=4.5cm]{rda.eps}
  \end{tabular}
\end{center}
\vspace{-2ex}
\caption{ J/$\psi$ cross section vs. rapidity in p+p collisions
  (left). J/$\psi$ R$_{dA}$ in d+Au collisions vs. rapidity (right).
\label{fig:1}}
\vspace{-2ex}
\end{figure}

The PHENIX experiment at RHIC has also measured the production of
J/$\psi$ in a variety of colliding systems, and provided further
insights by exploring this phenomenon at higher energies. J/$\psi$s
are detected in PHENIX through their dielectron decay at mid rapidity
($|y|<0.35$) and through their dimuon decay at forward rapidity
($1.2<|y|<2.4$). J/$\psi$ suppression is characterized by a ratio
called the {\it nuclear modification factor}, obtained by normalizing the
J/$\psi$ yields in heavy ion collisions ($dN_{AB}$) by the J/$\psi$
yields in p+p collisions at the same energy ($dN_{pp}$) times the
average number of binary inelastic nucleon-nucleon collisions
($<N_{coll}>$):
\begin{equation}
R_{AB} (y, p_{T}) = \frac{ dN_{AB}(y, p_{T})/dydp_{T}} { <N_{coll}>
  dN_{pp}(y,p_{T})/dydp_{T}}.
\label{eq:raa}
\end{equation}
If the heavy ion collision is a superposition of independent N$_{coll}$
inelastic nucleon-nucleon collisions, R$_{AB}$ will be equal to unity,
whereas it will be larger than one in case of enhancement and lower
than one in case of suppression.

At typical RHIC energies ($\sqrt{s_{NN}}=$~19.6~-~200~GeV), J/$\psi$s are
dominantly produced through gluon fusion. The J/$\psi$ yield is
therefore sensitive to gluon shadowing~\footnote{
Shadowing refers to
  the depletion of low momentum partons in nucleons bound
  in nuclei as compared to free nucleons.}. Part of the
ground state charmonia yield also comes from feed down of excited
states ($\psi'$ and $\chi_c$), and can contribute up to
$\sim$~40\% to the total J/$\psi$ yield. In subsequent stages of the
collision involving heavy ions, there are a number of competing
mechanisms that can enhance or suppress the J/$\psi$ yield. The two
major contributors to the suppression are absorption by nuclear
fragments from incident nuclei, and an eventual melting in the
QGP. Finally it is not impossible that a pair of uncorrelated $c$
and $\bar{c}$ quarks that are close enough in phase space recombine to
form a bound charmonium state and enhance the J/$\psi$ yield.

\section{Baseline and cold nuclear matter effect measurements }

The differential cross section of J/$\psi$ in p+p collisions as a
function of rapidity measured by PHENIX is shown in
Fig.~\ref{fig:1}~(left)~\cite{pp}. In addition to providing normalization
cross sections essential for the calculation of R$_{AA}$ as in
Eq. \ref{eq:raa}, J/$\psi$ measurements in p+p collisions constrain the
poorly understood J/$\psi$ production mechanism. In the same figure,
predictions from various LO and NLO calculations are shown. The current
precision does not discriminate between the models, but there is
potential for improvement through better precision in cross section
and additional information from J/$\psi$ polarization measurements.

Nuclear absorption and shadowing, collectively referred to as {\it
  cold nuclear matter effects (CNM) } can be constrained by
measurements in proton (or light ion) on heavy ion collisions. In
PHENIX this was performed in deuteron-gold collisions. The resulting
suppression ratio R$_{dAu}$ is shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:1}~(right)~\cite{dau} as a
function of rapidity, where the positive rapidity coincides with the
deuteron going direction. J/$\psi$s detected in different rapidity
regions probe specific gluon x$_2$ regions~\footnote{
By x$_2$,
  we refer to the parton longitudinal momentum fraction in the
  nucleus.}. Forward rapidity corresponds to x$_{2}$
$\sim$~0.002~-~0.01 where the depletion due to shadowing is important
whereas backward rapidity corresponds to x$_{2}$
$\sim$~0.05~-~0.2 where a slight enhancement due to
anti-shadowing is expected. The rapidity dependence of R$_{dA}$ therefore
reflects the gluon shadowing, whereas the global vertical scale
is determined by the amount of {\it normal} absorption.

To quantitatively disentangle the shadowing component from the
absorption component, a rapidity dependence using two shadowing
schemes, EKS~\cite{eks} and NDSG~\cite{ndsg} was fitted to R$_{dA}$
leaving the overall vertical scale a free parameter to account for the
absorption~\cite{dau}. J/$\psi$ absorption cross sections of
$2.8 ^{+1.7}_ {-1.4}$~mb and $2.2^{+1.6}_{-1.5}$~mb
were obtained for EKS and NDSG schemes respectively. This is in
agreement with the absorption cross section
reported by the SPS of $4.2 \pm 0.5$~mb~\cite{sps}
but such a comparison should not be taken at face value because
shadowing is not taken into account in the SPS~\footnote{
Taking
  into account nuclear PDF modification would increase the SPS
  absorption cross section, because the SPS rapidity corresponds to
  the anti-shadowing regime, requiring more absorption to
  account for the observed suppression.} absorption cross sections
evaluation.

\section{Anomalous suppression in heavy ion systems}
PHENIX has also measured J/$\psi$ suppression in Au+Au~\cite{auau} and
Cu+Cu~\cite{cucu} collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} = 200$~GeV. The
J/$\psi$ R$_{AA}$ in Au+Au collisions as a function of the number of
participants N$_{part}$, at forward and mid rapidity ranges is shown in
Fig.~\ref{fig:3}~(left)~\cite{auau} together with data points from NA38,
NA50 and NA60 experiments. The R$_{AA}$ goes down to $\sim$~0.2
for the most central Au+Au collisions (large N$_{part}$), and
approaches unity for peripheral ones (small N$_{part}$). To see the
extent of anomalous suppression, extrapolations of the CNM and
shadowing constraints obtained from d+Au measurements were calculated
using a model dependent method which assumes the above mentioned
shadowing schemes as well as with a data driven method which has
minimal model dependence. The result~\cite{dau} from both methods is a
statistically significant suppression beyond CNM extrapolation in the
most central forward rapidity Au+Au collisions, less pronounced at mid
rapidity Au+Au or in Cu+Cu collisions.

\begin{figure}[htbp]
\begin{center}
  \begin{tabular}{cc}
  \includegraphics[height=4.5cm]{raa_sps_rhic.eps}
  & \includegraphics[height=4.5cm]{v2.eps}
  \end{tabular}
\end{center}
\vspace{-2ex}
\caption{ J/$\psi$ R$_{AA}$ vs. N$_{part}$ at SPS compared to
  RHIC (left). J/$\psi$ v$_2$ vs. p$_T$ measurement by PHENIX (right).\label{fig:3}}
\vspace{-2ex}
\end{figure}

The data show two features that contradict local density induced
suppression models. The mid
rapidity suppression is lower than the forward rapidity suppression
(cf.~Fig.~\ref{fig:3}~(left)), despite experimental evidence~\footnote{
The rapidity density of charged particles which
  increases with the deposited energy peaks at mid
  rapidity~\cite{phobos}. } that energy density is higher at mid
rapidity than at forward rapidity. The same remark holds for the
comparison between R$_{AA}$ at mid rapidity in PHENIX and R$_{AA}$
at SPS~\footnote{
Care must be taken when comparing with SPS, because the CNM effects
are not the same at the two energies.}
(cf.~Fig.~\ref{fig:3}~(left)). The two are in agreement within error bars, a
surprising result considering that the energy density reached at RHIC
is larger than the one reached at SPS. A number of explanations have
been put forth, including sequential melting, where only $\psi$' and
$\chi_c$ are dissociated leading to a suppression of only the
feed down component of the $J/\psi$ yield~\cite{kks}, and gluon
saturation that leads to a lower charm quark yield at forward
rapidity~\cite{tuchin}.

\section{Regeneration}

A strong regeneration of J/$\psi$ from uncorrelated $c$ and $\bar{c}$
quarks is another good candidate to explain the tendency of R$_{AA}$ as a
function of rapidity at RHIC. This is supported by the high charm quark yield
measurements~\cite{openc} ($\sim$10 $c\bar{c}$ pairs are created in
the most central Au+Au collisions). A number of model predictions that
incorporate regeneration have been proposed~\cite{regen} and all of
them reproduce qualitatively the rapidity dependence of J/$\psi$
R$_{AA}$ observed by PHENIX.

However, important inputs to regeneration models such as the precise number of
$c$$\bar{c}$ pairs available for recombination and the phase space
conditions for recombination to take place are poorly constrained. It
is thus very compelling to have a direct experimental check
of regeneration. The J/$\psi$ elliptic flow is one candidate. Elliptic
flow refers to the azimuthal angle correlation of  particle emission
with respect to the reaction plane orientation~\footnote{
The reaction
  plane is the plane defined by the beam axis and the line joining the
  center of colliding nuclei. It is measured in PHENIX from azimuthal
  angle distribution of charged particles close to beam rapidity.}. It
is quantified by the second Fourier coefficient v$_2$ of the azimuthal
angle distribution of identified particles. The measured v$_2$ of
electrons from D and B meson decays is remarkably
high~\cite{flowc}. This is believed to originate from the elliptic
flow of underlying charm and beauty quarks. J/$\psi$s from
recombination should inherit the charm quark flow, resulting in a
higher v$_2$ than the case of direct production in hard collisions.

The first measurement of J/$\psi$ v$_2$ at RHIC energy was performed by
PHENIX at mid rapidity and is shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:3}~(right) as a function
of transverse momentum. Predictions from models that assume various
amounts of recombination from none to full coalescence at freeze out
are plotted together. Data points are compatible within the error bars
simultaneously with zero flow as well as with the model that predicts
maximum flow. This result should therefore be seen as {\it proof of
  principle} of the feasibility of J/$\psi$ v$_2$ measurements. There
is still room for improvement using already existing data,
but it is to be noted that a much larger sample will probably be
needed to be able to distinguish between the different models.

\section*{References}