deletions | additions       diff --git a/quenching_time.tex b/quenching_time.tex  index 915c6c7..224d24b 100644  --- a/quenching_time.tex  +++ b/quenching_time.tex 
...
%(coincident with its pericentric passage at $\approx90\kpc$)  We also compare these timescales for satellites with $\mstar\lesssim10^9\msun$ within the MW/M31 halos with previous studies of more massive satellites within other host halos.  The red squares in Figure~\ref{fig:quench_times} show the timescales from \citet{Wheeler2014}, who used nearly identical methodology, combining the the galaxy catalog from \citet{Geha2012} with satellite infall times (including group preprocessing) from simulation.  %  the Millennium IIsimulation  \citep{BoylanKolchin2009} They examined satellites with $\mstar\approx10^{8.5}$ and $10^{9.5}\msun$ around hosts with $\mstar>2.5\times10^{10}\msun$, which they found likely spans $\mvir\approx10^{12.5-14}\msun$.  %$8.25<\log(\mstar/\msun)<8.75$ and $9.25<\log(\mstar/\msun)<9.65$  %\citet{Wheeler2014} defined the infall time of a satellite as the first time that it became a satellite, so their definition include group preprocessing, with the caveat that if a satellite orbits beyond its host, as defined by the FoF group, becoming a backsplash/ejected satellite, and then falls back into a host again, they include only the latter infall time.