there are many observational examples of starbursts occurring in active galaxies ( e.g. mauder et al .
1994 ; maiolino , rieke & keller 1995 ; heckman et al . , 1997 ; gonzalez - delgado et al . , 1998 ;
nelson & whittle , 1998 ; kunth & contini , 1999 ) . as a result ,
possible connections between active galaxies and circumnuclear starbursts are the subject of extensive speculation
.    such associations might arise just because circumnuclear starbursts have a common cause with agns .
for example , mergers , interactions between galaxies , and bars ( shlosman , frank & begelman , 1989 ; shlosman , begelman & frank , 1990 ; maiolino et al . ,
1997 ; knapen , shlosman & peletier , 1999 ) have all been invoked as a means to distort the gravitational potential of the host galaxy , allowing the gas to lose angular momentum to the stars , so it can fall inward toward the agn .
all of these phenomena appear also to be associated with nuclear starbursting .
a more direct connection has been proposed by von linden et al .
( 1993 ) , who suggest that starburst - induced turbulence in the ism is responsible for the final stages of infall of gas into the nuclear engine .
weedman ( 1983 ) pioneered an agn model involving a large number of small accretors - the remnants of the massive stars in a compact circumnuclear starburst , preceding the agn stage .
bailey ( 1980 ) , david ( 1987a , 1987b ) , and norman & scoville ( 1988 ) refined this idea , pointing out that a compact star cluster can form a super massive black hole .
the theoretical understanding of this process was advanced by the efforts of perry & dyson ( 1985 ) , perry ( 1992 ) , and more recently , of williams , baker & perry ( 1999 ) .
it has also been proposed that a starburst can mimic an agn ( terlevich & melnick , 1985 ) .
terlevich et al .
( 1992 ) showed that at least low luminosity seyfert 2 s can be explained via active circumnuclear star formation alone .
however , this model has difficulties explaining the rapid x - ray variability , and the broad iron emission lines of more luminous active galaxies .
cid fernandes ( 1997 ) summarized the current status of the model and suggested a dichotomy among agns , in which some are powered by a black hole and others by a nuclear starburst .
still another possibility is that circumnuclear starbursts strongly alter the observed properties of agns .
for example , ohsuga & umemura ( 1999 ) consider a model in which the wind from the circumnuclear starburst forms an obscuring dust wall .
the alternative process , in which an agn disturbs the galactic ism and triggers a starburst was reported by van breugel et al .
( 1985 ) , van breugel & dey ( 1993 ) , and dey et al .
this behavior is usually related to the expansion of a radio source into the ambient medium .
also , once formed , by whatever means , the black hole can gravitationally disturb the interstellar gas , triggering a starburst .    a better understanding of the frequency of agn and starburst coincidences is required to probe the connection between the two phenomena . a conventional method to search for young starbursts
is to look for stellar absorption features in the ultraviolet spectra of galaxies ( e.g. heckman et al .
, 1997 ; gonzalez - delgado et al . , 1998 ) .
current instrumentation allows this approach to be applied in just a few cases ; heckman ( 1999 ) found only four seyfert 2 nuclei bright enough to obtain uv spectra with sufficiently high signal - to - noise to identify young stars .
it is possible that they show starburst signatures because of the selection bias toward galaxies with high surface brightness , which could be a result of the active star formation .
in addition , application of this technique to agns is restricted by the extinction .
since the ism lies around the agn in a complex three - dimensional distribution , a significant component of the observed uv flux may come from the stellar population in front of the active nucleus and not be associated closely with it .
in the optical , kunth & contini ( 1999 ) detected emission signatures of wolf - rayet stars in the spectra of two seyfert 2 galaxies out of five observed .
caii triplet absorption at @xmath3 is strong in the spectra of massive stars and can also indicate the presence of starbursts ( terlevich , diaz & terlevich , 1989 ; terlevich , diaz & terlevich , 1990 ; forbes , boisson & ward , 1992 ; nelson & whittle , 1998 ) .
however , studies of this line in seyfert galaxies were not conclusive because for a fraction of these galaxies the caii index values were inconsistent with a normal galaxy spectrum diluted by a featureless power law continuum ( see also persson , 1988 ; diaz , terlevich & terlevich , 1989 ) .
the infrared range has an advantage in probing agn environments because of the lower extinction .
since the strengths of the co bands at @xmath4 and @xmath2 are sensitive to the stellar surface gravity , they can indicate the presence of young red supergiants .
the co band strength is also a function of metallicity .
however , in the bulges of large spirals , the typical haunt of a seyfert nucleus , the surface gravity dependence dominates .
empirically , quiescent spirals have a very narrow range of @xmath2 band strengths ( frogel et al .
, 1978 ; frogel , 1985 ) and most starburst galaxies have bands substantially deeper than this value ( ridgway , wynn - williams & becklin 1994 ; goldader et al . 1995 ; engelbracht 1997 )    although the @xmath2 strength has proven useful in identifying and studying starbursts , in applying similar techniques to seyfert galaxies one must contend with the possibility that the band can be diluted by radiation from the warm dust surrounding the central engine in the agn .
oliva et al . (
1995 ) therefore used the second overtone at @xmath4 to probe the environments of agns .
unfortunately , this band is weak and its dependence on metallicity is strong comparable to @xmath5 m co band . to avoid these issues , oliva et al .
( 1999 ) derived the mass to luminosity of the nuclear region and identified starburst / seyfert combinations where this ratio was low , rather than relying on the co band strengths .
both of these approaches require high signal to noise spectra of moderately high resolution .
thus , they can only be applied to agns that are bright in the near infrared , which may result in a selection bias toward examples with strong circumnuclear starbursts .    to address the seyfert - starburst connection
more thoroughly , we obtained @xmath6-band spectra of 46 seyfert galaxies in the cfa sample at the @xmath0 m co bandhead .
in addition , we obtained spectra of 5 ellipticals , and used 19 starburst galaxy spectra from engelbracht ( 1997 ) for comparison . with this sample ,
we hope to alleviate the typical small number statistics of previous studies , and to overcome the bias toward galaxies with high surface brightness .
we apply a technique based on @xmath1 aperture photometry and imaging to correct for the dilution of the co band from dust heated by the agn .
we then compare the corrected co band strengths with those of the ellipticals and starbursts .
the infrared spectra were taken over a period of four years at three different telescopes with fspec ( williams et al . , 1993 ) , a cryogenic long slit near infrared spectrometer utilizing a nicmos3 256x256 array .
we used @xmath7 , @xmath8 , and @xmath9 resolution modes , corresponding to gratings of 75 , 300 , and 600 lines / mm . the slit width was 1.2 arcsec at the mmt , 2.4 and 3.6 arcsec at steward observatory 2.3 m and 1.55 m telescopes .
the plate scales were 0.4 , 1.2 and 1.8 arcsec / pixel respectively .
the observing log is presented in table  [ tbl-1 ] .
the galaxies are sorted in order of right ascension .
the spectra were reduced using iraf tasks written specifically for fspec ( engelbracht , 1999 ) .
an average of sky background images taken immediately before and after each object image was subtracted to remove the sky emission lines , and simultaneously , the dark current and offset level .
dark - subtracted dome flats were used to correct for pixel - to - pixel sensitivity variations . then the object images were shifted and combined to produce a single two - dimensional spectrum .
known bad pixels were masked out .
the large number of object images allowed us to exclude any remaining bad pixels and cosmic rays .
the one - dimensional spectrum was extracted by fitting a 3 - 5 order polynomial to the continuum in the two - dimensional image .
the angular sizes of the extraction apertures are given in table  [ tbl-1 ] .
the object spectra were divided by spectra of stars close to solar type , observed at the same airmass , and then multiplied by a solar spectrum to remove the effects of the atmospheric absorption ( maiolino , rieke & rieke , 1996 ) .
the true shape of the continuum was restored by multiplying the spectra by the ratio of black bodies with standard star and solar effective temperatures .
we used the oh airglow lines ( oliva & origlia , 1992 ) , complemented when necessary with ne - kr comparison lamp spectra , for wavelength calibration .
special attention was paid to determining the signal - to - noise of our data .
the main sources of uncertainty are the photon statistics for faint objects , the strong sky emission lines and sky variation .
first , we calculated the photon statistics , taking into account the object , the sky emission and the contribution from the standard star used for atmospheric correction .
this is an optimistic estimate since it neglects the sky variations .
second , we calculated the noise from a relatively featureless part of the spectrum , which gives a pessimistic estimate because weak absorption lines were included as noise . finally , for a few galaxies we calculated the signal - to - noise in the process of combining one - dimensional spectra extracted from each individual two - dimensional image .
this is the most robust method and it accounts for all possible sources of error .
the last two determinations gave virtually the same answers .
the second technique is easier to implement but it has the disadvantage of estimating the noise level only on a clear continuum part of the spectra . to obtain the noise level at the lines and bands of interest , we rescaled the photon statistics noise spectrum to match the noise determined from the clear part of the spectra .
the corresponding averaged signal - to - noise ratio is shown in table  [ tbl-1 ] .
the line measurements used gaussian fitting .
broadband @xmath6 images , kindly provided by mcleod & rieke ( 1995 ) , were used to flux calibrate the spectra using the absolute calibration of campins , rieke & lebofsky ( 1985 ) . in turn , most of the images were re - calibrated using our aperture photometry ( discussed below ) .
the spectra in figure  [ fig1 ] are divided by a low - order polynomial fit to the continuum , and shifted vertically , for display purposes .
the individual absorption feature measurements are listed in tables  [ tbl-2 ] , and  [ tbl-3 ] .
emission lines will be discussed in a separate paper .
@xmath10 errors for the flux measurements include uncertainties both in the spectra ( sky variation , continuum placement , shot noise ) and in the flux calibration .
@xmath10 errors for the equivalent line widths include only the uncertainties in the spectra which are dominated by the continuum placement error .
the latter was estimated by taking measurements at different continuum positions .
empty items in the tables denote a lack of spectral coverage , and zero equivalent widths stand for a non - detection . in the latter case
, the @xmath10 error has the meaning of a @xmath10 upper limit .      our high resolution spectra lack the wavelength coverage to measure the photometric co index of frogel et al .
( 1978 ) or the spectroscopic co index of doyon , joseph & wright ( 1994 ) .
we defined a narrower co index to utilize the complete set of data .
our index has the advantage of being insensitive to extinction .
it follows the recipe of doyon , joseph & wright ( 1994 ) , but the measured regions are narrower and closer : @xmath11 where @xmath12 is flux averaged in the band within a @xmath13 wide window centered at @xmath14 , and @xmath15 is flux averaged on nearby continuum within a @xmath13 wide window centered at @xmath16 , in the rest frame of the object .
a narrow index that does not encompass totally the spectral feature is sensitive to velocity dispersion variations . to alleviate this problem ,
we left out ngc  5990 and ngc  6240 from the comparison starburst sample , since they are known to have exceptionally large velocity dispersions .
ngc  6240 is also not a typical starburst galaxy , since its faint @xmath17 is indicative of a relatively old burst of star formation .
an additional incentive to use narrower bandpasses is related to possible uncertainties in the continuum shape of the infrared spectra .
the co feature is close to the edge of an atmospheric window and we can not measure the continuum level on both sides of the spectral feature .
although during the data reduction the original continuum shape was restored after the spectra were multiplied by the solar spectrum , we could not exclude some small deviations in the continuum shape .
the narrow co index minimizes the effect of the continuum shape on our analysis . to quantify this effect we used our @xmath18 aperture photometry to calculate the continuum slope at @xmath2 via simple linear interpolation .
we imposed this slope on continuum divided spectrum and measured the co index again .
the statistical errors in the co index @xmath19 mag for a spectrum with s / n=30 per pixel ) are negligible , compared to the systematic errors due to the uncertain continuum slope .
to determine the true uncertainties , we took advantage of the multiple spectra of some galaxies , taken on different nights , and with different spectral resolution .
we found the typical total uncertainty in the co index to be 0.02 mag .    finally , we compared our co index with that of doyon , joseph & wright ( 1994 ) calculating both indices for the set of stellar spectra by kleinmann & hall ( 1986 ) . for 26 stars ,
the linear conversion is : @xmath20 with standard deviation of residuals of 0.02 .
that is , within the errors the two indices are equivalent .
our co index is related to other systems of co indices via transformations derived by doyon , joseph & wright ( 1994 ) .
the aperture photometry was carried out at the mmt using the facility single pixel insb aperture photometer .
aperture diameters , fluxes and observed colors with @xmath10 errors are shown in table  [ tbl-4 ] .
the calibration is based on the standard star network of elias et al .
( 1982 ) with zero points based on campins , rieke & lebofsky ( 1985 ) . with data already available in the literature ,
a full set ( jhkln ) of ground - based photometry is now available for the entire cfa sample .
@xmath6-band imaging was taken from the survey of mcleod & rieke ( 1995 ) .
all the images were calibrated using our aperture photometry .
many of the images had independent calibrations from mcleod & rieke ( 1995 ) , and a comparison with the result from the photometry showed good agreement .
the calibration was transferred to the spectra by extracting fluxes with a rectangular aperture that matched the slit size for the corresponding spectrum . to obtain an upper limit to the uncertainties imposed by field rotation at the mmt
, we placed this pseudo slit in 4 orientations rotated by 45 degrees on the nucleus of each galaxy . in most cases ,
the errors due to slit rotation were the dominant source of uncertainty .
these uncertainties and the statistical ones were propagated through our co band correction procedure to obtain a final error on the co correction .
the goal of this study is to probe the presence of circumnuclear starbursts in the seyfert galaxies by measuring their 2.3@xmath21 m first overtone co bandhead strength .
the strength of this band depends on stellar temperature , metallicity , and surface gravity / luminosity .
these multiple dependencies suggest that interpretation of the band would be difficult .
however , in the case of nuclear starbursts in luminous galaxies , the behavior is dominated by the stellar luminosity .
the best evidence for this conclusion is empirical . from the work of ridgway , wynn - williams & becklin ( 1994 )
, we compute that 23 `` normal '' galaxies recalibrated to the spectroscopic scale have a co index of 0.20 . because of the tight distribution
, this value is very well determined . in comparison , from this same work
we find that the average co band absorption index in 14 nuclear starbursts is more widely distributed , but with an average value of 0.27 ( as suggested by ridgway et al . , we include only starbursts with @xmath22 the study of luminous infrared galaxies by goldader et al .
( 1995 ) includes 31 examples dominated by star formation , for which the average co index corrected to the spectroscopic scale is also 0.27 .
the average photometric co index of the higher quality spectra of engelbracht ( 1997 ) is @xmath23 .
the data of oliva et al .
( 1995 ) show a similar behavior .    for four low metallicity
starbursting galaxies with well developed co bands , the band strengths fall close to the average for normal galaxies ( vanzi & rieke , 1997 ) .
the metallicities of these galaxies are typically 3 to 5 times lower than solar .
thus , metallicity does have the expected effect on starburst co band strengths , but it is only a modest one . because of this modest dependence , it is unlikely that the strong co bands in starbursts could arise from high metallicity , particularly since there is little evidence for higher than solar metallicities in starbursts .    the starburst co band strengths measured by ridgway , winn - williams & becklin ( 1994 ) and goldader et al .
( 1995 ) do show a range that overlaps with the average value for normal galaxies , so it would be hazardous to conclude that any given galaxy with a normal co band depth could not harbor a starburst . however , there are few if any normal galaxies with bands as deep as the average for the starbursts , so deep bands are a relatively reliable indication of a recent starburst .
this conclusion becomes even stronger in comparing samples of galaxies , since a few outliers in the distributions will have little effect on average values of the co index .    in principle
, the co bands will be weak if the starburst is so young that hot stars make a significant contribution to the @xmath6-band light .
this situation may underly the few starbursts with weak co. however , this phase is short - lived ; the red supergiants start to dominate the near infrared after only a few million years , and continue to do so , until the burst is 50 - 100 myr old .
agns often have spectral energy distributions peaking in the mid infrared due to emission by hot dust , and this component could fill in the @xmath2 absorption and weaken it .
to use our spectra to estimate intrinsic co band strengths requires that we correct for this emission .
the hot dust emission rises steeply between the @xmath6 and @xmath24(3.5@xmath21 m ) bands ( e.g. , mcalary & rieke 1988 ) . in most sy1s
, where the hot dust dominates the emission in l , the estimates of hot dust emission at 2.3@xmath21 m are too uncertain to allow an accurate correction to the co band strength . in most sy2s , the excess emission above the stellar contribution at l is relatively weak , however , and we can conclude that the dust emission at 2.3@xmath21 m is small enough that even approximate corrections can yield a useful determination of the intrinsic co band strength .
the distribution of observed co indices is shown on the top panel in figure  [ fig2 ] .
we assume that the observed fluxes at @xmath2 are the sums of similar stellar and non - stellar contributions .
we have developed a procedure to disentangle the two based on a priori knowledge of their typical infrared colors .
\(i ) our first step is to assume that the @xmath6-band emission is totally of stellar origin .
as we shall see , this assumption is usually not accurate but by repeating the procedure iteratively we can correct for the remaining non - stellar contribution .
\(ii ) next we estimate the stellar component in @xmath24-band using the typical @xmath25 color for stars .
the infrared colors of normal galaxy nuclei are well known and are not a strong function of the stellar population .
we adopted the typical colors of ellipticals as determined by aaronson ( 1977 ) : @xmath26 , @xmath27 , and by impey , wynn - williams & becklin ( 1986 ) : @xmath28 .
\(iii ) then we subtract the stellar contribution at @xmath24 from the observed flux , and obtain the non - stellar @xmath24-band flux .
this step is facilitated by the equal diameter of @xmath6 and @xmath24 band apertures .
\(iv ) the next step is to use the typical @xmath25 color for the non - stellar component to estimate the non - stellar contribution in the @xmath6-band .
typical colors of the non - stellar component were inferred from seyferts which show no or very weak co absorption , hence excluding galaxies with a significant stellar contribution .
we selected eight galaxies with observed co index  @xmath29 and obtained an average nuclear color @xmath30 mag , as a difference between the @xmath6 flux measured within the slit aperture and the @xmath24-band flux within the circular aperture . here
we assume that the non - stellar component is concentrated in a point - source , and is fully encompassed by both the circular apertures and the slit .
\(v ) we then subtract a featureless spectrum , normalized to the non - stellar @xmath6-band flux , from the flux - normalized @xmath6-band spectrum .
the resulting spectrum is corrected for dilution .
the procedure has to be repeated to correct for the inaccurate initial assumption but it converges after only one or two iterations .
the correction can be applied in other ways , such as starting at @xmath31 , or @xmath32 rather than @xmath6-band .
the final results converge closely to the similar values .
an underlying assumption in this approach is that the nuclear sources in the sample galaxies all have similar @xmath25 colors .
it appears that the near infrared nuclear emission is characterized approximately by a blackbody at the typical destruction temperature of dust grains ( rieke & lebofsky , 1981 ; mcalary & rieke , 1988 ; alonso - herrero et al . , 1998 ) . as a test
, we combined in various fractions a spectrum of an elliptical galaxy , representing the dominant old stellar population , with a diluting black body spectrum , and measured the colors and the co index of the composite spectra .
most of our galaxies are consistent with @xmath33 ( figure  [ fig3 ] ) , supporting our assumption for the universal nature of the diluting spectra in seyfert galaxies .
in addition , the near infrared continuum appears to be `` uncovered '' abruptly at an appropriate viewing angle rather than showing a succession of galaxy types with differing colors in this continuum ( ruiz , rieke , & schmidt , 1994 ; maiolino , rieke & keller , 1995 ; quillen et al . , 2000b ) .
therefore , this underlying assumption is plausible , although differences in nuclear color will limit our approach to galaxies where the corrections are modest .
we also assume that the non - stellar nuclear flux at @xmath24-band flux comes from a source smaller than our slit width ; that is , that there is no significant level of extended featureless emission .
typical scale sizes for the hot dust source component are @xmath34 10 pc , judged from variability time scales ( rieke & lebofsky , 1979 ; glass , 1992 ; glass , 1997 ; glass , 1998 ; quillen et al . , 2000a ) .
the central engine is not expected to heat up the dust at 0.5 - 1 kpc from the center or further , which is the typical linear size of the slit at the distance of most of our targets .
the dust can also be heated by an extended starburst in the disk . in that case
, the @xmath24-band nuclear component will be overestimated , leading to an overcorrection of the co band , and deduction of a stronger starburst .
this effect would only strengthen our conclusions if we do not detect excess starburst activity .
we minimized the effect of reddening by starting our correction procedure from the @xmath6-band .
however , we can put limits on the reddening by comparing the observed @xmath35 colors of the seyferts with those of a typical stellar population .
this comparison is not exact because of both the likely variations in the reddening within our photometric aperture and the emission associated with the central engine .
however , the derived @xmath35 color excesses are small , so these potential difficulties are relatively unimportant .
we derive that @xmath25 color excesses for the stars are only a couple of percent , smaller than or comparable to the observational uncertainties .
hence , in our analysis we neglected the effects of reddening in @xmath25
. we will discuss in more detail the colors of some of the galaxies in the next section .
the procedure described above can not be applied to all of our targets .
many type 1 seyferts have too strong a non - stellar component .
we adopted the criterion for attempting a correction that the @xmath24-to-@xmath6 aperture flux ratio has to be smaller or equal to 1.0 , equivalent to @xmath36 mag .
the limit was chosen after an error propagation analyses showed that the co absorption in galaxies with larger @xmath24 band excess can not be reliably corrected for the non - stellar contribution .
table  [ tbl-5 ] includes all seyferts with corrected co indices .
we excluded from further analysis 2237 + 07 because of the insufficient signal - to - noise ratio at the long wavelength edge of the k - band .
we also discarded galaxies with corrections larger than 25 % in flux at @xmath6 to keep the additional uncertainty added to the corrected co indices by the correction procedure itself to @xmath37 0.01 mag .
this constraints our maximum co index correction to 0.05 mag .    for comparison purposes we carried out the same procedure on a sample of starburst galaxies from engelbracht ( 1997 ) .
the photometric data for these galaxies were collected mostly from the literature ( table  [ tbl-6 ] ) . unlike the seyferts , starburst galaxies display significant reddening . for
most of the targets engelbracht ( 1997 ) inferred @xmath38 mag , from infrared spectroscopy .
we also used the infrared colors to supplement the reddening estimates .
we carried out the co correction for the starbursts twice .
first , we neglected the extinction .
second , we dereddened the photometry before correcting the co band . the reddening accounts for part of the @xmath25 color excess leading to smaller co corrections
this would strengthen a conclusion for the absence of strong starbursts in seyferts .
the results of the co correction procedure starting at @xmath6 , as described in the previous section , are shown in table  [ tbl-5 ] for seyferts and table  [ tbl-7 ] for starburst galaxies .
the histograms of the co indices are plotted in figure  [ fig2 ] .
the top panel shows the observed co indices , the middle panel shows the corrected co indices neglecting the reddening ( @xmath39 ) in starbursts , and the bottom panel shows again the corrected co indices but the colors of the starbursts were dereddened prior to the co correction .
ticks on the horizontal axis show the bin borders .
the co absorption strength in luminous ellipticals is narrowly distributed within the 0.18 - 0.22 bin ( we excluded abell  770 as a double nucleus galaxy , and m  87 because of its mildly active nucleus ) .
see also ridgway et al .
as shown in figure  [ fig2 ] , our corrections to the co index in the type 2 seyfert galaxies usually recovered the co indices of an underlying old stellar population , similar to that of the elliptical galaxies .
we do not find evidence for a significant contribution from young red stars , except in a few of the active galaxies .    to determine the significance of this result we ran a monte - carlo simulation .
we fitted a gaussian to the distribution of the corrected co indices of starburst galaxies , with reddening taken into account .
next , we drew random realizations , and counted the cases that match or have an excess of shallower co indices compared with the corrected distribution of the co indices of type 1.8 - 2 seyfert galaxies .
based on @xmath40 realizations , there is a probability of only 0.2% that the two distributions are drawn from the same parent distribution .
color - color diagrams ( @xmath35 vs. @xmath41 and @xmath41 vs. @xmath25 ) from our sample of seyfert galaxies are shown in figure  [ fig4 ] , with @xmath10 errors along both axes .
solid circles represent seyfert types 1.8 and later , and open circles represent earlier seyferts .
crosses and stars represent the typical colors of elliptical ( frogel et al . , 1978 ) and starburst ( engelbracht , 1997 ) galaxies , respectively . the circle on the right hand side color - color diagram represents the typical colors of an elliptical galaxy
giants lie along the solid lines and supergiants along the dashed lines .
stellar colors are from johnson ( 1966 ) and frogel et al .
although the photometric systems may not be exactly the same , particularly the @xmath24-band , they are sufficiently close to our system for qualitative comparison .
the giants span the range between g5 and m8 on left panel and between g5 and m5 on the right .
the supergiants span the range between b0 and m5 on both panels . reddening vectors according to the rieke & lebofsky ( 1985 ) reddening law
are also shown .
most of our targets are redder then a typical old , red giant dominated stellar population as represented by the elliptical galaxy locus .
the spread of colors can not be explained just by reddening , as in pure starburst galaxies which are distributed along a line approximately parallel to the reddening line .
there is an additional component , showing the non - stellar nuclear contribution .
it is present more strongly in @xmath42 ( glass & moorwood , 1985 ; spinoglio et al . , 1995 ; alonso - herrero , ward & kotilainen , 1996 ; alonso - herrero et al . , 1998 ) .
a number of galaxies show peculiar blue colors . in these cases ,
we have searched the literature for additional measurements , shown in table  [ tbl-8 ] .
although comparisons are undermined to some extend by possible variability , from them we can get a feeling for the external accuracy of our measurements . in the case of ngc  1144 , we believe the best measurement is @xmath43 from carico et al .
( 1988 ) . 1058
+ 45 is a faint source and given the observational uncertainties , we attributed the peculiar @xmath25 color to a statistical error .
our literature search for mkn  270 and ngc  7682 yielded measurements consistent with ours .
the blue colors ( @xmath41 and @xmath25 ) of ngc  7682 can be partially explained if it has a relatively weak non - stellar component .
this explanation is consistent with the observed co index of 0.18 , which is close to the typical purely stellar value .
still , the colors are bluer than expected from a giant dominated stellar population , suggesting perhaps the presence of blue young stars of early spectral types .
in contrast , mkn  270 has peculiar @xmath35 and @xmath25 colors , while @xmath41 is close to the typical values of other target galaxies .
it has a co index of 0.11 , suggesting some dilution .
the observed colors can be produced by a heavily reddened @xmath44 blue population , even younger than in ngc  7682 .
oliva et al . ( 1999 ) have used the near infrared stellar absorption bands to determine velocity dispersions and mass to luminosity ratios , @xmath45 , for active galaxies .
eleven `` obscured '' seyferts ( types 1.8 - 2 ) have a distribution of @xmath45 that is consistent with a combination of those for normal spirals and starbursts . in this comparison , we exclude ngc 1052 and m87 because their nuclear properties are rather different from the other objects in their sample .
five of these eleven have sufficiently low @xmath45 to suggest recent circumnuclear starbursts . by comparison , in 14 type 1.8 - 2 seyferts , we find two ( mkn  993 and mkn  461 ) with deep co indicative of starbursts . because of the broad distribution of co band strength in starbursts , we can not exclude other members of the sample from this group .
however , from the distributions in figure 3 , we can conclude that such events are present in only a minority of the galaxies we have observed .
the oliva et al .
( 1999 ) sample favors galaxies with bright nuclei ; our study is less biased in this direction .
nonetheless , the results are consistent in indicating that the near infrared stellar luminosities in the majority of type 1.8 - 2 seyfert galaxies are not dominated by red supergiants from starbursts .
oliva et al .
show that the @xmath45 distribution for eight seyfert 1 galaxies is indistinguishable from that of normal spirals , because of the relatively strong nuclear emission of type 1 seyfert galaxies , we have been able to measure co band strengths for only two , but neither is strong .
it therefore appears that the near infrared luminosities of type 1 seyfert nuclei are seldom dominated by starburst - generated supergiants .
we quantified the role of starbursts in our sample by constructing a set of composite spectra .
we added increasing portions of starburst spectra to an average spectrum of an elliptical galaxy , and ran the same monte - carlo simulation described above .
we took an elliptical galaxy co strength distribution and added the distribution typical of starbursts until there was less than a 5% probability that the co strengths in the synthetic spectra were drawn from the same distribution as the observed distribution of co strengths in the seyfert galaxies .
we excluded mkn  993 from the fitting because its extremely strong co index may partially result from the relatively low signal - to - noise ratio of that spectrum . increasing the starburst component in the composite spectrum
quickly lowers the probability to draw a matching co index distribution .
the simulation suggests that typically less than 1/3 of the @xmath6-band flux originates from a starburst in our sample of type 1.8 - 2 seyfert galaxies , at the 95% confidence level .
let us assume that the starburst and the old population are represented by single bursts of ages @xmath46 and @xmath47 years , respectively .
then , the upper limit on the k luminosity implies that the starburst would contribute no more than 31% of the bolometric luminosity , 8% of the flux in the v - band and 11% of the flux in the b - band .
that is , the blue continuum of a typical type 1.8 - 2 seyfert galaxy in our sample may have a weak contribution from young blue stars , but is unlikely to be dominated by such stars .
the starburst masses can not typically exceed 10@xmath48 , or in the most extreme cases , 10@xmath49 m@xmath50 .
the corresponding limits on the starburst luminosities are similar to or lower than those of the agns in these galaxies .    according to the predictions of the same model
, the co strength reaches the typical value of an old stellar population about 50 - 100 myr after the beginning of the starburst .
thus , our technique is not sensitive to very old starbursts .
however , after 100 myr , the starburst absolute @xmath51 flux decreases by 3 - 4 mag , and its contribution to the total @xmath51 flux from the galaxy nucleus would become negligible .
we obtained @xmath6 band spectroscopy of a set of seyfert galaxies , to measure their stellar first overtone co band strengths at @xmath2 .
we used @xmath1 aperture photometry to estimate the non - stellar contribution at this wavelength .
we successfully corrected the co band for the dilution for 16 galaxies which were not dominated by the non - stellar component .
the comparison to co indices measured in elliptical and purely starbursting galaxies yielded no evidence for strong starbursts in the majority of seyfert 1.8 - 2 galaxies .
this result suggests the nuclear activity in many seyfert 2 galaxies arises independently of any strong circumnuclear starbursts .
we used an evolutionary starburst model to place an upper limit of @xmath52 11% on the contribution to the b band light from hot , young stars in a typical type 1.8 - 2 seyfert .
the research has made use of the nasa / ipac extragalactic database ( ned ) which is operated by the jet propulsion laboratory , california institute of technology , under contract with nasa .
this work has been supported by nsf grant ast 95 - 29190 .
we thank the anonymous referee for the useful suggestions which helped to improve the paper .
rrlllllcrcrrc - & 334 & 00:00:35 + 21:40:54&pec & 1.8&6582@xmath532 & 95/10/09&2.3&1440&2.25&75 & 80 & 2.4x4.8 & 00:48:53 + 29:07:46&(r)sb(s)b & 1 & 10770 & 95/10/10&2.3&720 & 2.25&75 & 30 & 2.4x4.8- & 993 & 01:22:43 + 31:52:36&sab0/a & 2 & 4658@xmath536 & 97/10/12&mmt&960 & 2.33&300&15 & 1.2x1.6- & 573 & 01:41:23 + 02:05:56&(r)sab(rs)0 + & 2 & 5174@xmath5323 & 95/10/09&2.3&720 & 1.60&75 & 30 & 2.4x4.8 & & & & & & 95/10/09&2.3&720 & 2.25&75 & 50 & 2.4x4.8 & & & & & & 97/10/12&mmt&2160&2.33&300&30 & 1.2x1.6 & 0152:45 + 06:22:02&sa(rs)b & 1.9&5208 & 95/10/09&2.3&1440&2.25&75 & 25 & 2.4x4.8863 & 590 & 02:12:00 -00:59:58&sa(s)a : & 1.2&7910@xmath5312 & 95/10/09&2.3&720 & 2.25&75 & 90 & 2.4x4.81144&- & 02:52:39 -00:23:08&ringb & 2 & 8648@xmath5314 & 97/10/18&mmt&5520&2.33&300&45 & 1.2x1.6- & 3 & 06:09:48 + 71:03:11&s0 : & 2 & 4050@xmath535 & 95/03/13&mmt&4320&2.34&600&40 & 1.2x1.62273&620 & 06:45:38 + 60:54:13&sb(r)a : & 2 & 1849 & 95/03/14&mmt&5760&2.32&600&30 & 1.2x2.03081&- & 09:57:10 -22:35:10&(r@xmath54)sab(r)0/a&2 & 2358@xmath537 & 95/03/14&mmt&1920&2.34&600&20 & 1.2x1.63080&1243&09:57:14 + 13:17:03&sa & 1 & 10608 & 96/02/06&mmt&1920&2.25&75 & 35 & 1.2x2.03227&- & 10:20:47 + 20:07:06&sab(s ) pec & 1.5&1157@xmath533 & 96/02/07&mmt&480 & 2.20&75 & 70 & 1.2x2.4 & & & & & & 94/03/23&2.3&960 & 2.31&600&25 & 2.4x6.0 & & & & & & 95/03/13&mmt&1440&2.32&600&40 & 1.2x2.0 & 10:58:43 + 45:55:22&sa ? & 2 & 8778 & 96/04/06&mmt&480 & 2.20&75 & 15 & 1.2x2.03516&- & 11:03:23 + 72:50:20&(r)sb(s)00 : & 1.5&2649@xmath537 & 93/11/25&mmt&2880&2.34&600&50 & 1.2x1.63786&744 & 11:37:05 + 32:11:11&sab(rs)a pec & 1.8&2678@xmath536 & 96/02/05&mmt&960 & 2.25&75 & 80 & 1.2x2.03982&- & 11:53:52 + 55:24:18&sab(r)b : &
2 & 1109@xmath536 & 96/02/10&mmt&1920&2.20&75 & 35 & 1.2x2.44051&- & 12:00:36 + 44:48:35&sab(rs)bc & 1.5&0725@xmath535 & 96/02/10&mmt&1440&2.20&75 & 80 & 1.2x2.0 & & & & & & 95/03/13&mmt&2880&2.32&600&40 & 1.2x1.64151&- & 12:08:01 + 39:41:02&(r)sab(rs)ab : & 1.5&0995@xmath533 & 96/02/10&mmt&1440&2.20&75 & 140&1.2x2.04235&- & 12:14:37 + 07:28:09&sa(s)a & 1 & 2410@xmath5310 & 96/02/10&mmt&1440&2.20&75 & 60 & 1.2x2.0 & & & & & & 95/03/14&mmt&12960&2.34&600&30&1.2x1.64253&766 & 12:15:56 + 30:05:26&(r)sb(s)a : & 1.5&3876@xmath5316 & 96/02/10&mmt&960 & 2.20&75 & 70 & 1.2x2.04258&- & 12:16:29 + 47:34:53&sab(s)bc & 1.9&0448@xmath533 & 95/03/13&mmt&1440&2.31&600&40 & 1.2x1.64388&- & 12:23:15 + 12:56:17&sa(s)b : sp & 2 & 2524@xmath531 & 96/02/06&mmt&480 & 2.25&75 & 30 & 1.2x2.4- & 231 & 12:54:05 + 57:08:38&sa(rs)c ? pec & 1 & 12651@xmath536 & 94/04/02&1.55&360 & 1.60&75 & 110&3.6x7.2 & & & & & & 94/04/02&1.55&1080&2.21&75 & 90 & 3.6x7.25033&- & 13:11:09 + 36:51:31&sa(s)c & 1.9&0875@xmath531 & 96/02/06&mmt&240 & 2.25&75 & 60 & 1.2x2.4 & & & & & & 95/03/13&mmt&2880&2.32&600&30 & 1.2x1.6- & 789 & 13:29:55 + 11:21:44&- & 1 & 9476@xmath5322 & 96/03/29&mmt&2400&2.20&75 & 30 & 1.2x2.0 & 13:35:28 + 39:24:31&s ? & 1.8&6023 & 96/03/29&mmt&2880&2.20&75 & 25 & 1.2x2.05252&- & 13:35:44 + 04:47:47&s0 & 1.9&6926 & 96/03/29&mmt&1440&2.20&75 & 45 & 1.2x2.05256&266 & 13:36:15 + 48:31:48&compact pec & 2 & 8360@xmath5381 & 96/03/27&mmt&1800&2.20&75 & 35 & 1.2x1.6 & & & & & & 96/03/28&mmt&1440&2.20&75 & 40 & 1.2x2.05283&270 & 13:39:41 + 67:55:28&s0 ? & 2 & 2700@xmath5377 & 96/03/29&mmt&960 & 2.20&75 & 70 & 1.2x2.0 & & & & & & 95/03/13&mmt&5280&2.31&600&30 & 1.2x1.65273&- & 13:39:55 + 35:54:21&sa(s)00 & 1.9&1089 & 96/02/09&mmt&1440&2.20&75 & 50 & 1.2x2.4- & 461 & 13:45:04 + 34:23:52&s & 2 & 4856@xmath5332 & 96/03/29&mmt&2880&2.20&75 & 40 & 1.2x2.0- & 279 & 13:51:54 + 69:33:13&s0 & 1.5&8814@xmath5390 & 96/02/09&mmt&480 & 2.20&75 & 75 & 1.2x2.05427&- & 14:00:48 -05:47:19&sa(s)c pec & 2 & 2730@xmath534 & 95/03/14&mmt&960 & 2.33&600&5 & 1.2x1.65548&1509&14:15:44 + 25:22:01&(r)sa(s)0/a & 1.5&5149@xmath537 & 96/02/07&mmt&960 & 2.20&75 & 80 & 1.2x1.65674&- & 14:31:22 + 05:40:38&sabc & 1.9&7442 & 96/03/28&mmt&3360&2.20&75 & 65 & 1.2x2.4 & & & & & & 95/03/14&mmt&3840&2.37&600&20 & 1.2x1.65695&686 & 14:35:20 + 36:47:02&sbb & 2 & 4225@xmath539 & 96/03/29&mmt&1440&2.20&75 & 40 & 1.2x2.0 & & & & & & 95/03/14&mmt&1920&2.34&600&20 & 1.2x1.6- & 841 & 15:01:36 + 10:37:56&e & 1.5&10860@xmath5390&96/03/29&mmt&480 & 2.20&75 & 70 & 1.2x2.05929&- & 15:24:19 + 41:50:41&sab : pec & 2 & 2492@xmath538 & 96/03/29&mmt&960 & 2.20&75 & 45 & 1.2x2.05940&1511&15:28:51 + 07:37:38&sbab & 1 & 10122 & 96/02/06&mmt&1440&2.20&75 & 25 & 1.2x2.46104&(1614 + 35)&16:14:40 + 35:49:50&- & 1.5&8382@xmath5350 & 95/10/10&2.3&2880&2.25&75 & 30 & 2.4x4.8(iizw136)&1513&21:30:01 + 09:55:01&- & 1 & 18630@xmath5390&95/10/10&2.3&4320&2.25&75 & 100&2.4x4.8 & 22:37:46 + 07:47:34&sba & 1.8&7375@xmath5390 & 95/10/07&2.3&1440&2.20&75 & 70 & 2.4x6.0 & & & & & & 95/10/10&2.3&720 & 2.25&75 & 50 & 2.4x4.87469&1514&23:00:44 + 08:36:16&(r)sab(rs)a & 1.2&4892@xmath532 & 94/11/19&mmt&720 & 2.35&600&40 & 1.2x1.67603&530 & 23:16:23 -00:01:47&sa(rs)b : pec & 1.5&8851@xmath5322 & 95/10/07&2.3&720 & 2.20&75 & 60 & 2.4x6.0 & & & & & & 95/10/10&2.3&720 & 2.25&75 & 90 & 2.4x4.87674&533 & 23:25:24 + 08:30:13&sa(r)bc pec & 2 & 8713@xmath5310 & 95/10/10&2.3&720 & 2.25&75 & 70 & 2.4x4.87682&- & 23:26:31 + 03:15:28&sb(r)ab & 2 & 5107 & 95/10/09&2.3&1440&1.60&75 & 30 & 2.4x4.8 & & & & & & 95/10/09&2.3&2160&2.25&75 & 30 & 2.4x4.8 & 09:14:12 + 60:38:00&e & - & - & 94/04/04&1.55&1860&2.21&75 & 90 & 3.6x7.2 & 09:14:12 + 60:38:00&e & - & - & 94/04/04&1.55&1860&2.21&75 & 50 & 3.6x5.43379&(m105)&10:45:11 + 12:50:48&e1 & - & 0920@xmath5310 & 94/04/02&1.55&5520&2.21&75 & 90 & 3.6x7.24472&(m49)&12:27:14 + 08:16:36&e2/s0 & - & 0868@xmath538 & 94/04/02&1.55&4860&2.21&75 & 70 & 3.6x7.24486&(m87)&12:28:18 + 12:39:58&e+0 - 1 pec & sy & 1282@xmath539 & 94/04/04&1.55&3060&2.21&75 & 110&3.6x7.2      lrrrrr mkn334 & @xmath67&@xmath68 & @xmath69&@xmath70&0.070048 + 29 & & @xmath57 & @xmath71 & & 0.18mkn993 & & @xmath72 & @xmath73&@xmath74&0.26mkn573 & @xmath75&@xmath76 & @xmath77&@xmath78&0.150152 + 06 & & @xmath79 & @xmath80 & & 0.16mkn590 & @xmath75&@xmath81 & @xmath82&@xmath70&0.06ngc1144 & & @xmath83 & @xmath84&@xmath70&0.15mkn3 & & & & @xmath85&0.20ngc2273 & & & & @xmath86&0.13ngc3081 & & & & & 0.20mkn1243 & @xmath87&@xmath88 & @xmath89&@xmath90&0.04ngc3227 & @xmath70&@xmath91 & @xmath92&@xmath70&0.101058 + 45 & @xmath85&@xmath93&@xmath94&@xmath60&0.22ngc3516 & & & & & 0.06mkn744 & @xmath95&@xmath96 & @xmath92&@xmath70&0.09ngc3982 & @xmath70&@xmath97 & @xmath98&@xmath60&0.17ngc4051 & @xmath95&@xmath99 & @xmath100&@xmath70&0.06ngc4151 & @xmath85&@xmath101 & @xmath102&@xmath70&0.01ngc4235 & @xmath103&@xmath65 & @xmath69&@xmath104&0.09mkn766 & @xmath70&@xmath101 & @xmath99&@xmath105&0.02ngc4258 & & & & @xmath106&0.18ngc4388 & @xmath107&@xmath108 & @xmath109&@xmath60&0.09mkn231 & @xmath60&@xmath70 & @xmath110&@xmath60&0.01ngc5033 & @xmath60&@xmath111 & @xmath61&@xmath62&0.14mkn789 & @xmath112&@xmath113&@xmath114&@xmath112&0.131335 + 39 & @xmath115&@xmath116 & @xmath117&@xmath112&0.04ngc5252 & @xmath118&@xmath119 & @xmath120&@xmath121&0.10mkn266 & @xmath122&@xmath123&@xmath124&@xmath78&0.17mkn270 & @xmath125&@xmath126 & @xmath127&@xmath104&0.11ngc5273 & @xmath101&@xmath128 & @xmath129&@xmath119&0.25mkn461 & @xmath64&@xmath130 & @xmath60&@xmath131&0.19mkn279 & @xmath132&@xmath133 & @xmath104&@xmath134&0.03ngc5427 & & & & & 0.05ngc5548 & @xmath135&@xmath136 & @xmath70&@xmath70&0.03ngc5674 & @xmath132&@xmath137 & @xmath116&@xmath60&0.14mkn686 & @xmath138&@xmath139 & @xmath140&@xmath60&0.16mkn841 & @xmath101&@xmath56 & @xmath60&@xmath60&0.02ngc5929 & @xmath95&@xmath141 & @xmath91&@xmath60&0.17ngc5940 & @xmath132&@xmath132 & @xmath142&@xmath60&0.031614 + 35 & @xmath112&@xmath143 & @xmath144&@xmath132&0.05iizw136 & @xmath70&@xmath102 & @xmath60&@xmath70&0.012237 + 07 & @xmath135&@xmath145 & @xmath146&@xmath147&0.06ngc7469 & & & & & 0.25mkn530 & @xmath86&@xmath148 & @xmath103&@xmath70&0.06mkn533 & @xmath132&@xmath149 & @xmath62&@xmath60&0.03ngc7682 & @xmath56&@xmath150 & @xmath151&@xmath78&0.18a770a & @xmath101&@xmath152 & @xmath153&@xmath60&0.16a770b & @xmath60&@xmath154&@xmath155&@xmath156&0.23ngc3379 & @xmath86&@xmath157 & @xmath96&@xmath62&0.20ngc4472 & @xmath101&@xmath157 & @xmath158&@xmath104&0.20m87 & @xmath101&@xmath159 & @xmath81&@xmath160&0.16    lcrrrrrrrrl mkn334&8.6&@xmath161&@xmath162&@xmath163&@xmath164&@xmath165&@xmath166&@xmath167&@xmath168&0048 + 29&5.4&@xmath169&@xmath170&@xmath171&@xmath172&@xmath173&@xmath174&@xmath175&@xmath176 & mkn993&8.6&@xmath177&@xmath178&@xmath179&@xmath172&@xmath180&@xmath181&@xmath182&@xmath183 & mkn573&8.6&@xmath184&@xmath185&@xmath186&@xmath187&@xmath188&@xmath174&@xmath189&@xmath190&@xmath191 & & & & & & @xmath192 & & & & @xmath1930152 + 06&5.4&@xmath194&@xmath195&@xmath196&@xmath197&@xmath198&@xmath199&@xmath200&@xmath201 & mkn590&5.4&@xmath202&@xmath203&@xmath204&@xmath205&@xmath206&@xmath207&@xmath208&@xmath209&ngc1144&5.4&@xmath210&@xmath211&@xmath212&@xmath195&@xmath213&@xmath181&@xmath214&@xmath215&mkn1243&5.4&@xmath216&@xmath217&@xmath218&@xmath219&@xmath220&@xmath221&@xmath222&@xmath223&ngc3227&8.6&@xmath224&@xmath225&@xmath225&@xmath226&@xmath227&@xmath228&@xmath229&@xmath230&@xmath231 & & & & & & @xmath232 & & & & @xmath193 & & & & & & @xmath233 & & & & @xmath234ngc3362&5.4&@xmath235&@xmath236&@xmath237&@xmath238 & & @xmath239&@xmath240&@xmath241&1058 + 45&5.4&@xmath242&@xmath243&@xmath244&@xmath245&@xmath246&@xmath199&@xmath240&@xmath247 & mkn744&8.6&@xmath248&@xmath249&@xmath250&@xmath251&@xmath252&@xmath253&@xmath254&@xmath255&ngc3982&5.4&@xmath256&@xmath257&@xmath258&@xmath259 & & @xmath260&@xmath182&@xmath261&ngc4051&8.6&@xmath262&@xmath263&@xmath264&@xmath265&@xmath266&@xmath267&@xmath268&@xmath269&@xmath193 & & & & & & @xmath270 & & & & @xmath231ngc4151&8.6&@xmath271&@xmath272&@xmath273&@xmath274&@xmath275&@xmath228&@xmath276&@xmath277&ngc4235&5.4&@xmath278&@xmath279&@xmath280&@xmath281&@xmath282&@xmath283&@xmath182&@xmath284&@xmath193 & & & & & & @xmath285 & & & & @xmath231 mkn766&5.4&@xmath286&@xmath287&@xmath288&@xmath289&@xmath290&@xmath291&@xmath292&@xmath293 & mkn231&5.8&@xmath294&@xmath265&@xmath295&@xmath296&@xmath297&@xmath298&@xmath299&@xmath300&ngc5033&8.6&@xmath301&@xmath302&@xmath303&@xmath304&@xmath305&@xmath306&@xmath307&@xmath308&@xmath193 & & & & & & @xmath309 & & & & @xmath231 & & & & & & @xmath310 & & & & @xmath3111335 + 39&5.4&@xmath312&@xmath313&@xmath314&@xmath258&@xmath315&@xmath316&@xmath317&@xmath318&ngc5252&5.4&@xmath319&@xmath320&@xmath320&@xmath321&@xmath322&@xmath306&@xmath229&@xmath323 & mkn266&8.6&@xmath324&@xmath325&@xmath326&@xmath195&@xmath327&@xmath328&@xmath329&@xmath330&@xmath193 & & & & & & @xmath331 & & & & @xmath231 mkn270&5.8&@xmath332&@xmath333&@xmath334&@xmath195&@xmath335&@xmath336&@xmath175&@xmath337&@xmath231 & & & & & & @xmath338 & & & & @xmath193 mkn461&5.4&@xmath339&@xmath340&@xmath341&@xmath342&@xmath327&@xmath343&@xmath344&@xmath345 & mkn279&8.6&@xmath346&@xmath347&@xmath187&@xmath348&@xmath349&@xmath174&@xmath350&@xmath351 & ic4397&5.4&@xmath352&@xmath353&@xmath236&@xmath354 & & @xmath355&@xmath240&@xmath356&ngc5548&8.6&@xmath357&@xmath358&@xmath359&@xmath360&@xmath361&@xmath174&@xmath283&@xmath362&ngc5674&5.4&@xmath363&@xmath364&@xmath365&@xmath366&@xmath367&@xmath181&@xmath368&@xmath369&@xmath193 & & & & & & @xmath370 & & & & @xmath311 mkn686&5.4&@xmath371&@xmath372&@xmath170&@xmath373&@xmath374&@xmath375&@xmath376&@xmath377&@xmath193 & & & & & & @xmath378 & & & & @xmath231ngc5929&5.4&@xmath379&@xmath380&@xmath372&@xmath381&@xmath382&@xmath383&@xmath384&@xmath385&ngc5940&5.4&@xmath352&@xmath195&@xmath386&@xmath387 & & @xmath316&@xmath222&@xmath388&1614 + 35&5.4&@xmath389&@xmath390&@xmath390&@xmath391 & & @xmath392&@xmath393&@xmath394&2237 + 07&8.6&@xmath210&@xmath395&@xmath396&@xmath179&@xmath397&@xmath398&@xmath399&@xmath400&@xmath234 & & & & & & @xmath401 & & & & @xmath191ngc7469&8.6&@xmath402&@xmath403&@xmath404&@xmath405&@xmath406&@xmath407&@xmath408&@xmath409 & mkn530&8.6&@xmath410&@xmath203&@xmath203&@xmath203&@xmath411&@xmath167&@xmath229&@xmath412&@xmath234 & & & & & & @xmath413 & & & & @xmath191 mkn533&8.6&@xmath414&@xmath415&@xmath416&@xmath417&@xmath418&@xmath419&@xmath420&@xmath421&ngc7682&8.6&@xmath422&@xmath320&@xmath218&@xmath423&@xmath424&@xmath268&@xmath425&@xmath426 &    lccccccccl 0048 + 29&0.76&0.18&0.21&10&1&0.20 & 6&2&mkn993 & 0.62&0.26&0.33&18&1&0.29&10&1&mkn573 & 0.87&0.15&0.21&29&1&0.19&21&1&0152 + 06&0.75&0.16&0.18&11&1&0.18 & 5&2&ngc1144&0.48&0.15&0.15 & 2&1&0.15 & 0&0&ngc3227&0.91&0.10&0.15&40&1&0.13&28&1&1058 + 45&0.40&0.22&0.22 & 0&0&0.22 & 0&0&@xmath427ngc4235&0.74&0.09&0.11&27&1&0.10&19&1&ngc5033&0.90&0.14&0.23&48&1&0.22&42&1&mkn266 & 0.80&0.17&0.22&22&1&0.20&14&1&mkn270 & 0.41&0.11&0.11 & 0&0&0.11 & 0&0&@xmath427mkn461 & 0.93&0.19&0.26&29&1&0.24&23&1&mkn686 & 0.64&0.16&0.18&11&1&0.18 & 7&1&ngc5929&0.80&0.17&0.23&25&1&0.21&18&1&2237 + 07&0.82&0.06&0.08&14&1&0.08 & 8&2&ngc7682&0.48&0.18&0.18 & 0&0&0.18 & 0&0&@xmath427    lccrrrrrrrc ngc253 & @xmath428&6.1 & 6.0 & 115.0 & 226.7 & 280.6 & 278.1 & 390.3 & 7.4 & 1,8 ngc660 & @xmath429&5.4 & 5.0 & 27.9 & 40.9 & 36.7 & 69.2 & 34.7 & 6.4 & 6 maffei2 & @xmath234&4.3&slit & 16.6 & 45.6 & 55.5 & 55.5 & - & 8.5 & 1 ic342 & @xmath234&4.3 & 3.8 & 49.0 & 74.0 & 71.0 & 87.1 & 44.0 & 5.1 & 9 ngc1614 & @xmath234&4.3 & 6.0 & 32.3 & 52.4 & 51.5 & 27.6 & 55.9 & 3.5 & 11 ngc2146 & @xmath234&4.3&17.0 & 132.1 & 253.2 & 270.5 & 94.3 & 285.7 & 6.4 & 2 ngc2782 & @xmath234&4.3&17.0 & 55.1 & 73.7 & 62.5 & 22.1 & 65.6 & 2.9 & 2 m82 & @xmath430&8.9 & 7.8 & 161.0 & 350.0 & 475.0 & - & 436.0&10.2 & 10 ngc3079 & @xmath234&4.3 & 6.0 & 29.2 & 66.6 & 82.4 & 34.7 & 63.9 & 7.8 & 4 ngc3628 & @xmath234&4.3&slit & 06.2 & 14.8 & 19.4 & 19.4 & - & 9.7 & 1 ngc4102 & @xmath234&4.3 & 3.8 & 80.5 & 118.0 & 117.0 & 87.1 & 89.0 & 5.7 & 5 ngc4194 & @xmath234&4.3&13.0 & 73.3 & 78.6 & 67.3 & 24.9 & 69.0 & 3.5 & 3 ngc4339 & @xmath234&4.3&slit & 15.0 & 21.6 & 17.2 & 17.2 & - & 1.0 & 1 ngc5990 & @xmath234&4.3&slit & 16.6 & 23.7 & 27.6 & 27.6 & - & 7.7 & 1 ngc6000 & @xmath234&4.3&slit & 30.3 & 37.3 & 37.3 & 37.3 & - & 5.1 & 1 ngc6240 & @xmath234&4.3 & 9.0 & 27.9 & 50.5 & 53.5 & 31.3 & 43.2 & 9.9 & 3 ngc6946 & @xmath431&4.7 & 3.0 & 23.8 & 35.3 & 36.3 & - & - & 4.3 & 1 ngc7714 & @xmath234&4.3 & 5.0 & 20.4 & 25.6 & 21.5 & 18.5 & 22.4 & 4.3 & 4 mkn331 & @xmath234&4.3 & 5.0 & 26.0 & 36.4 & 34.9 & 23.8 & 29.1 & 4.8 & 7    lrrrcrrrc ngc253 & 0.24&0.31&0.29&1 & 7.4&0.27&0.26&1ngc660 & 0.22&0.23&0.23&1 & 6.4&0.22&0.22&1maffei2&0.22&0.22&0.22&0 & 8.5&0.22&0.22&0ic342 & 0.26&0.27&0.26&1 & 5.1&0.25&0.27&2ngc1614&0.28&0.28&0.28&0 & 3.5&0.28&0.28&0ngc2146&0.18&0.27&0.24&1 & 6.4&0.21&0.20&1ngc2782&0.14&0.19&0.18&1 & 2.9&0.17&0.17&1m82 & 0.27&0.27&0.27&0&10.2&0.27&0.27&0ngc3079&0.17&0.22&0.19&1 & 7.8&0.17&0.17&1ngc3628&0.24&0.24&0.24&0 & 9.7&0.24&0.24&0ngc4102&0.19&0.21&0.22&1 & 5.7&0.19&0.20&2ngc4194&0.15&0.21&0.20&1 & 3.5&0.18&0.18&1ngc4339&0.25&0.25&0.25&0 & 1.0&0.25&0.25&0ngc5990&0.12&0.12&0.12&0 & 7.7&0.12&0.12&1ngc6000&0.25&0.25&0.25&0 & 5.1&0.25&0.25&0ngc6240&0.18&0.22&0.21&2 & 9.9&0.17&0.18&1ngc6946&0.26&0.26&0.26&0 & 4.3&0.26&0.26&0ngc7714&0.26&0.30&0.29&1 & 4.3&0.27&0.28&1mkn331 & 0.22&0.25&0.26&2 & 4.8&0.23&0.23&2    lrcccc ngc1144 & 4.0&0.89&0.38 & 0.55&1 & 5.0&0.72&0.44 & 0.73&2 & 5.4&1.01&0.47 & & 3 & 8.5&1.43&0.58 & & 4 & 12.0&0.75&0.41 & & 5 & 30.0&0.75&0.21 & & 6mkn270 & 5.9&0.50&0.46 & -0.07&7 & 15.0&0.50&0.35&@xmath340.84&8ngc7682 & 8.5&0.80&0.02 & & 4    aaronson , m , 1977 , ph.d .
thesis , harvard university alonso - herrero , a. , ward , m.j . , &
kotilainen , j.k .
, 1996 , , 278 , 902 alonso - herrero , a. , simpson , c. , ward , m.j . ,
wilson , a.s .
, 1998 , , 495 , 196 allen , d.a . , 1976 , , 207 , 367 becklin , e.e . ,
gatley , i. , matthews , k. , neugebauer , g. , sellgren , k. , werner , m.w . , winn - williams , c.g . , 1980 , , 236 , 441 bailey , m.e . , 1980 , , 191 , 195 brindle , c. , hough , j.h . , bailey , j.a .
, axon , d.j . ,
sparks , w.b . , 1991 , , 252 , 288 bushouse , h.a . , & stanford , s.a . , 1992 , , 79 , 213 campins , h. , rieke , g.h . , & lebofsky , m.j . , 1985 , , 90 , 896 carico , d.p . , sanders , d.b . ,
soifer , b.t .
, elias , j.h . ,
matthews , k. , & neugebauer , g. , 1988 , , 95 , 365 cid fernandes , r. , 1997 , in starburst activity in galaxies , eds .
franco j. , terlevich , r.j . ,
serrano , a. , rev .
a. a. conf .
, 6 , 201 cutri , r.m . , & mcalary , c.w . , 1985 , , 296 , 90 david , l.p . , durstein , r.h . , &
cohn , h.n .
, 1987a , , 313 , 556 david , l.p . , 1987b , , 316 , 505 dey , a. , breugel , w. , vacca , w.d . , & antonucci , r. , 1997 , , 490 , 698 diaz , a.i . , terlevich , e. , & terlevich , r. , 1989 , , 239 , 325 doyon , r. , joseph , r.d . , & wright g.s . , 1994 , , 421 , 101 edelson , r.a . , malkan , m.a . , & rieke , g.h . , 1987 , , 321 , 233 elias , j.h . , frogel , j.a . , matthews , k. , & neugebauer , g. , 1982 , , 87 , 1029 engelbracht , c.,w . , 1997 , ph.d
. thesis , the university of arizona engelbracht , c.,w .
, 1999 , private communication forbes , d.a .
, boisson , c. , ward , m.j .
, 1992 , , 259 , 293 frogel , j.a . ,
persson , s.e .
, aaronson , m. , & matthews , k. , 1978 , , 220 , 75 frogel , j. a. , 1985 , , 298 , 528 goldader , j.d . , joseph , r.d . , doyon , r. , sanders , d.b . , 1995 , , 444 , 97 glass , i.s . ,
& moorwood , a.f.m . , 1985 , , 214 , 429 glass , i.s . , 1992 , , 256 , 23 glass , i.s . , 1997 , , 292 , l50 glass , i.s . , 1998 , , 297 , 18 gonzalez - delgado , r.m . , heckman , t. , leitherer , c. , meurer , g. , krolik , j. , wilson , a.s . ,
kinney , a. , koratkar , a. , 1998 , , 505 , 174 heckman , t.m .
, gonzalez - delgado , r. , leitherer , c. , meurer , g.r . ,
krolik , j. , wilson , a.s . , koratkar , a. , & kinney , a. , 1997 , , 482 , 114 heckman , t.m .
, 1999 , preprint ( astro - ph/9912029 ) hunt , l.k . , & giovanardi , c. , 1992 , , 104 , 1018 impey , c.d . , winn - williams , c.g . ,
& becklin , e.e . , 1986 , , 309 , 572 johnson , h.l . , , 4 , 193 joy , m. , & ghigo , f.d . , 1988 , , 332 , 179 kleinmann , s.g . , & hall , d.n.b . , , 62 , 501 knapen , j.h . ,
shlosman , i. , & peletier , r.f . , 1999 ,
preprint kunth , d. , & contini , t. , 1999 , in wolf - rayet phenomena in massive stars and starburst galaxies , 193th symp . of iau , eds . van der hucht , k. , koenigsberger , g. , & eenens , p.r.j . , p. 725
lawrence , a. , ward , m. , elvis , m. , fabbiano , g. , willner , s.p . ,
carleton , n.p . ,
longmore , a. , 1985 , , 291 , 117 maiolino , r. , rieke g.h . , & keller , l.d . , 1995 , , 446 , 561 maiolino , r. , rieke g.h . , & rieke , m.j . , 1996 , , 111 , 537 maiolino , r. , ruiz , m. , rieke g.h . , & papadopoulos , p. , 1997
, , 485 , 552 mauder , w. , weigelt , g. , appenzeller , i. , wagner , s.j . , 1994 , , 285 , 44 mcalary , c.w . , mclaren , r.a . , & crabtree , d.r . , 1979 , , 234 , 471 mcalary , c.w . , & rieke , g.h . , 1988 , , 333 , 1 mcleod , k.k . , & rieke g.h . , 1995 , , 441 , 96 nelson ,
c. , & whittle , m. , 1998 , in the agn / host galaxy connection as part of the scientific assembly of cospar ( astro - ph/9811035 ) norman , c. , & scoville . , n. , 1988 , , 332 , 124 ohsuga , k. , & umemura , m. , 1999 , , 521 , l13 oliva , e. , & origlia , l. 1992 , , 254 , 466 oliva , e. , origlia , l. , kotilainen , j.k .
, & moorwood , a.f.m . , 1995 , , 301 , 55 oliva , e. , origlia , l. , maiolino , r. , & moorwood , a.f.m .
, 1999 , , 350 , 9 perry , j.j . , & dyson , j.e . , 1985 , , 235 , 665 perry , j.j . , 1992 , in relationships between active galactic nuclei and starburst galaxies , ed .
filippenko , a.v .
, asp conf .
ser . , 31 , 169 persson , s.e . , 1988 , , 330 , 751 quillen , a.c . , shaked , s. , alonso - herrero , a. , mcdonald , c. , lee , a. , rieke , m.j . , rieke , g.h . , 2000a , apj , 532 , l17 quillen , a.c .
et al . , 2000b , in preparation ridgway , s.e . , winn - williams , c.g . , & becklin , e.e . , 1994 , , 428 , 609 rieke , g.h . , & low , f.j . , 1975 , , 197 , 17 rieke , g.h . , 1978 , , 226 , 550 rieke , g.h
, & lebofsky , m.j . , 1979 , , 229 , l111 rieke , g.h . , lebofsky , m.j . , thompson , r.i . ,
low , f.j . ,
tokunaga , a.t .
, 1980 , , 238 , 24 rieke , g.h . , & lebofsky , m.j . , 1981 , , 250 , 87 rieke , g.h . ,
& lebofsky , m.j . , 1985 , , 288 , 618 roche , p.f . ,
aitken , d.k . ,
smith , c.h . ,
ward , m.j .
, 1991 , , 248 , 606 ruiz , m. , rieke , g.h .
, & schmidt , g.d . , 1994 , , 423 , 608 shlosman , i. , frank , j. , & begelman , m.c . , 1989 , , 338 , 45 shlosman , i. , begelman , m.c . , & frank , j. , 1990 , , 345 , 679 spinoglio , l. , malkan , m.a .
, rush , b. , carrasco , l. , & recillas - cruz , 1995 , , 453 , 616 terlevich , e. , diaz , a.i . , & terlevich , r. , 1989 , , 157 , 15 terlevich , e. , diaz , a.i .
, & terlevich , r. , 1990 , , 242 , 284 terlevich , r. , & melnick , j. , 1985 , , 213 , 841 terlevich , r. , tenorio - tagle , g. , franco , j. , & melnick , j. , 1992 , , 255 , 713 van breugel , w. , filippenko , a.v . , heckman , t. , & miley , g. , 1985 , , 293 , 83 van breugel , w.j.m .
, & dey , a. , 1993 , , 414 , 563 vanzi , l. , & rieke , g.h . , 1997 , , 479 , 694 von linden , s. , biermann , p.l . ,
duschl , w.j . , lesch , h. , & schmutzler , t. , 1993 , , 280 , 468 weedman , d.w .
, 1983 , , 266 , 479 williams , d.m . ,
thompson , c.l . ,
rieke , g.h . , & montgomery , e.f . , 1993 ,
s.p.i.e . , 1946 , 482 williams , r.j.r . , baker , a.c . , & perry , j.j . , 1999 , , 310 , 913