deletions | additions       diff --git a/quenching_time.tex b/quenching_time.tex  index 21120b6..d090f1e 100644  --- a/quenching_time.tex  +++ b/quenching_time.tex 
...
Blue circles show the satellite galaxies in the MW and M31, and we shade the lowest $\mstar$ bin lighter to highlight caution in interpretation because of reionization, as explained above.  We derive error bars from the 68\% uncertainty in the observed quiescent fractions in Figure~\ref{fig:quiescent_fraction}; these uncertainties are typically larger than the host-to-host scatter in satellites' infall times in ELVIS.  As explored in \citet{Wetzel2015}, many satellites first fell into a another host halo (group), typically of $\mvir=10^{10-12}\msun$, before falling into the MW/M31 halo. halos.  Because the importance this environmental preprocessing in lower-mass groups remains unclear, we present quenching timescales both including and neglecting such group preprocessing.  Thus, the left panel of Figure~\ref{fig:quench_times} uses time since infall into the MW/M31 halo, halos,  ignoring group preprocessing, while the right panel uses time since infall into \emph{any} host halo, including group preprocessing. The latter results in longer quenching timescales, though it primarily shifts the upper 16\% of the distribution.  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 less than $1.5\gyr$ at $\mstar<10^7\msun$, depending on the inclusion of group preprocessing. 
...
Altogether, Figure~\ref{fig:quench_times} indicates a complex dependence of the environmental quenching timescale on satellite $\mstar$.  Specifically, the typical timescale for satellites in the MW/M31 halos increases with $\mstar$, from $\lesssim1\gyr$ at $\mstar<10^7\msun$ to $\sim5\gyr$ at $\mstar\approx10^{8.5}\msun$.  \citet{Wheeler2014} indicate that this mass dependence continues, though with a rapid increase ($\sim2\times$) to $\approx9.5\gyr$, and no change from $\mstar\approx10^{8.5}$ to $10^{9.5}\msun$.  This rapid increase implies some tension with our results, specifically, the two satellites of M31, NGC 205 and M32 ($\mstar\approx10^{8.5}\msun$), unless either (1) both experienced unusually early infall $>9.5\gyr$ replace_contentgt;9.5\gyr$  ago, or (2) M31 quenches its satellites particularly rapidly, even compared with the massive hosts in \citet{Wheeler2014}. %(\citeauthor{Wheeler2014}'s results are consistent with the star-forming LMC/SMC of the MW.)  Finally, \citet{Wetzel2013} indicate that the quenching timescale rapidly \emph{decreases} at $\mstar>5\times10^9\msun$ and continues to decline with increasing $\mstar$.  Overall, the typical environmental quenching timescales are shortest for the lowest-mass satellites and is longest for satellites with $\mstar\sim10^9\msun$ (roughly Magellanic-Cloud mass).