deletions | additions       diff --git a/quenching_time.tex b/quenching_time.tex  index 9e3b03d..abf2c04 100644  --- a/quenching_time.tex  +++ b/quenching_time.tex 
...
Thus, the left panel of Figure~\ref{fig:quench_times} uses time since infall into the MW/M31 halo, ignoring group preprocessing, while the right panel uses time since infall into \emph{any} host halo, including group preprocessing.  The latter necessarily results in longer quenching timescales, though it primarily shifts the upper 16\% of the distribution (error bars).  Both panels show shorter median quenching timescales for less massive satellites: $\sim5\gyr$ at $\mstar=10^{8-9}\msun$, $2-3\gyr$ at $\mstar=10^{7-8}\msun$, and $<1.5\gyr$ replace_contentlt;1.5\gyr$  at $\mstar<10^7\msun$, depending on the inclusion of group preprocessing. Moreover, the median timescale for two of the lowest $\mstar$ bins is $0\gyr$ because 100\% of satellites are quiescent there, which implies that quenching must be nearly instantaneous to eliminate all star-forming satellites.  %(modulo uncertainty from the limited number of observed satellites). 
...
This is significantly higher than the MW/M31, which could mean that their quenching timescales are \emph{shorter} than for similar mass satellites of MW/M31-like hosts.  Similarly, the green curves in Figure~\ref{fig:quench_times} show the timescales for more massive satellites from \citet{Wetzel2013}, who also used identical methodology, combining galaxy groups from SDSS \citep{Tinker2011, Wetzel2012} with satellite infall times (including group preprocessing) from mock group catalogs in their cosmological simulation.  We show their result for groups with $\mvir=10^{12-13}\msun$, which are most similar to MW/M31 masses. Summarize overlapping mass ranges and overall trends.