deletions | additions       diff --git a/quenching_time.tex b/quenching_time.tex  index 2cacbf9..8622486 100644  --- a/quenching_time.tex  +++ b/quenching_time.tex 
...
Similarly, the green curves in Figure~\ref{fig:quench_times} show the quenching 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) measured in 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.  Combining our results with these works Altogether, Figure~\ref{fig:quench_times}  indicates a complex dependence of the  environmental quenching timescales timescale  on satellite $\mstar$. Our resultsalone  suggest that the typicalquenching  timescale for satellites in the MW/M31 halos increase increases  with satellite mass, $\mstar$,  from $\lesssim1\gyr$ at $\mstar<10^7\msun$ to $\sim5\gyr$ at $\mstar\approx10^{8.5}\msun$. The results of \citet{Wheeler2014} indicate a continuation of this trend, though with a \emph{rapid} rapid  increase ($\sim2\times$) of the timescale to $\approx9.5\gyr$, though interestingly they find no dependence change  from $\mstar\approx10^{8.5}$ to $10^{9.5}\msun$. This rapid increase suggests some tension with NGC 205 and M32, our results, specifically,  two satellites of M31 with $\mstar\approx10^{8.5}\msun$ that M31, NGC 205 and M32 ($\mstar\approx10^{8.5}\msun$), which  are quiescent, unless both satellites experienced unusually early infall (the infall, or M31 is particularly efficient at quenching its satellites, even compared with more massive hosts.  (\citealt{Wheeler2014}'s  results are consistent with the star-forming LMC and SMC.) LMC/SMC of the MW.)  Finally, the results of \citet{Wetzel2013}... \citet{Wetzel2013} indicates that the quenching timescale rapidly \emph{decreases} by $\mstar=5\times10^9\msun$ and continues to decline with increasting $\mstar$.  Thus, the environmental quenching timescales are shortest for the lowest-mass satellites, and the timescale is longer for satellites near Magellanic-Cloud masses.