mag\] [@holland01]. As another example, the expected $B$ band magnitude of the GRB 010921 afterglow would be 3 magnitudes fainter than the host magnitude reported in @price02 at the time of the observations 21 days after the burst.

Ideally, the magnitudes of a host should be derived using one consistent photometric technique for all filters. For example, in the case of aperture photometry the magnitudes should be derived using the same aperture. We can not be sure that this is the case for the magnitudes given in Table \[tab:allmag\]. In the cases where the hosts are more extended than point sources the effect should be negligible as long as the authors have applied a large enough aperture for deriving the host magnitudes.

Furthermore, one should note that we have restricted ourselves to analysing only the bright end of the luminosity function since it is easier to perform multiband observations of the brightest hosts. Only little is known about the nature of the fainter host galaxies [@berger02b; @jaunsen03; @hjorth03b].

[llll]{} Host & Filter (Mag) & Telescope & Reference\
& $B>26.08$ &VLT &[@sok01]\
& $V=25.77\pm0.2$ &HST/STIS & [@gal00b]\
& $R_c=25.22\pm0.2$ &HST/STIS &\
& $I=24.4\pm0.2$ & HST/WFPC2 &[@fruchter99]\
& $H=23.2\pm$0.3 &HST/NICMOS2\
& $K=22.6\pm$0.2 & NIRC/Keck I &[@chary01]\
& $B=25.89\pm$0.19 & BTA &[@sok01]\
&$V=25.34\pm$0.22 &BTA\
&$R_c=25.06\pm0.17$&BTA\
&$I_c=24.11\pm0.25$&BTA\
&$K=22.7\pm0.2$& Keck I/NIRC& [@chary01]\
& $B=23.40\pm0.12$ &BTA&[@sok01
mag\ ] [ @holland01 ]. As another example, the expected $ B$ band magnitude of the GRB   010921 afterglow would be 3 magnitude fainter than the server magnitude reported in @price02 at the time of the observation 21 days after the burst. 

 Ideally, the magnitude of a host should be derived use one consistent photometric technique for all filter. For example, in the case of aperture photometry the order of magnitude should be derive using the like aperture. We cannot be sure that this is the shell for the magnitude given in Table   \[tab: allmag\ ]. In the cases where the hosts are more extensive than point sources the effect should be negligible equally long as the authors have put on a large enough aperture for deriving the server magnitudes. 

 Furthermore, one should note that we have restricted ourselves to analysing only the bright end of the luminosity function since it is easier to perform multiband observations of the brightest hosts. Only little is known about the nature of the fainter host galaxy [ @berger02b; @jaunsen03; @hjorth03b ]. 

 [ llll ] { } Host & Filter (Mag) & Telescope & Reference\ 
 & $ B>26.08 $ & VLT & [ @sok01]\ 
 & $ V=25.77\pm0.2 $ & HST / STIS & [ @gal00b]\ 
 & $ R_c=25.22\pm0.2 $ & HST / STIS & \ 
 & $ I=24.4\pm0.2 $ & HST / WFPC2 & [ @fruchter99]\ 
 & $ H=23.2\pm$0.3 & HST / NICMOS2\ 
 & $ K=22.6\pm$0.2 & NIRC / Keck I & [ @chary01]\ 
 & $ B=25.89\pm$0.19 & BTA & [ @sok01]\ 
 & $ V=25.34\pm$0.22 & BTA\ 
 & $ R_c=25.06\pm0.17$&BTA\ 
 & $ I_c=24.11\pm0.25$&BTA\ 
 & $ K=22.7\pm0.2 $ & Keck I / NIRC & [ @chary01]\ 
 & $ B=23.40\pm0.12 $ & BTA&[@sok01
mag\] [@holland01]. As another examkle, the expected $Y$ band kagnithde of tfe GRB 010921 afterglow would be 3 megnirudes fainter than the host magnitudv reportee in @price02 at tis time of the lbsexvetions 21 days afjer the bursd.

Ideally, the mdgvicudes of a host should be derived usyng one clnsistent photjmetgis tedhnique for all filters. For exampls, in tht case of aperture photometry the magnitudes shokld be derived usijg the same apewrure. We can vot be surt chat this ia the case for the magnitudes gkven nn Table \[tab:qlomah\]. In the casxs whege the hosts are more extendrd than point xoucces the effect should be negligible as lond as the duchors have applied a oaege etougv apdetufe roc dsrivinh tie host maghitudes.

Furtyermore, one should moev that we havs restwisted ourselves to analysing only the brpght end of the luminosity dunction since it is gasier to [erform multiband observations of the brightest hmsts. Kvly llttld id known about the nature of the fainter host dzlsxpes [@berger02b; @jaunscn03; @hjorth03b].

[llll]{} Hosy & Fojter (Mag) & Telgscope & Rererence\
& $B>26.08$ &VLT &[@sok01]\
& $G=25.77\pm0.2$ &HST/FTIS & [@gal00b]\
& $R_c=25.22\pi0.2$ &HSY/STIS &\
& $I=24.4\pm0.2$ & HST/WFPC2 &[@fruchtee99]\
& $H=23.2\pm$0.3 &HST/NICIIS2\
& $K=22.6\pm$0.2 & NIRC/Keck I &[@chary01]\
& $B=25.89\pm$0.19 & BTA &[@sok01]\
&$V=25.34\lm$0.22 &BTA\
&$R_c=25.06\pm0.17$&BTA\
&$I_c=24.11\pm0.25$&BTA\
&$K=22.7\pm0.2$& Keci I/NIRC& [@chagy01]\
& $B=23.40\pm0.12$ &BTZ&[@rok01
mag\] [@holland01]. As another example, the expected magnitude the GRB afterglow would be host reported in @price02 the time of observations 21 days after the burst. the magnitudes of a host should be derived using one consistent photometric technique all filters. For example, in the case of aperture photometry the magnitudes should derived the aperture. can not be sure that this is the case for the magnitudes given in Table \[tab:allmag\]. the cases where the hosts are more extended point sources the effect be negligible as long as authors applied a enough for the host magnitudes. one should note that we have restricted ourselves to analysing only the bright end of the luminosity since it to perform observations the hosts. Only little about the nature of the fainter @jaunsen03; @hjorth03b]. [llll]{} Host & Filter (Mag) & & Reference\ $B>26.08$ &VLT &[@sok01]\ & $V=25.77\pm0.2$ &HST/STIS [@gal00b]\ & $R_c=25.22\pm0.2$ &HST/STIS &\ & $I=24.4\pm0.2$ & &[@fruchter99]\ & $H=23.2\pm$0.3 &HST/NICMOS2\ & $K=22.6\pm$0.2 & NIRC/Keck I &[@chary01]\ & $B=25.89\pm$0.19 & BTA &[@sok01]\ &$R_c=25.06\pm0.17$&BTA\ &$I_c=24.11\pm0.25$&BTA\ &$K=22.7\pm0.2$& Keck [@chary01]\ & $B=23.40\pm0.12$
mag\] [@holland01]. As another examplE, the expectEd $B$ baNd mAgnItUde oF the gRB 010921 afterglow woULd be 3 Magnitudes fainter than tHe hosT mAGnitUDe ReporTed in @prICe02 AT The TiMe Of tHe OBsErvatIonS 21 days afTer the bursT.

IdEaLly, the magnitUDeS of a host shOulD be derived usIng One conSiSteNT photOmeTric tEchniqUE for alL filters. FOr EXample, IN the casE OF aPertUre photometry the mAGnITudes should be dErived UsINg THE saMe aPerture. We cAn Not be SUre that THiS IS The CAse for the magnItudes given IN TaBle \[tab:AlLmaG\]. in the cAses wHeRE thE hosts are moRe exTended thaN point SOurces tHE effect Should Be nEglIgibLE aS lOng As THe aUThOrs HAve Applied a LaRgE enouGh apERTURe foR deRiviNg the Host magnitudeS.

FuRtheRMorE, one sHould Note ThAt we hAve resTrictEd Ourselves to analYsinG only the bRigHt End Of The luMInositY fuNctIon sincE it is eaSIer To PERFoRm multiband observaTiONS oF the brigHtest hOStS. ONLy little Is KnoWn abOUT the nAturE Of The faintEr host GAlAxIes [@bergEr02B; @jaunsEn03; @HjoRth03B].

[llll]{} hOst & FIlter (MAg) & TelescOpe & ReFErence\
& $B>26.08$ &VLT &[@sok01]\
& $V=25.77\PM0.2$ &HST/STIS & [@gal00b]\
& $R_C=25.22\Pm0.2$ &hst/StiS &\
& $I=24.4\pM0.2$ & HSt/WFPC2 &[@fruchtEr99]\
& $H=23.2\pM$0.3 &hST/NiCMOs2\
& $k=22.6\pM$0.2 & NIrc/Keck i &[@charY01]\
& $B=25.89\PM$0.19 & Bta &[@sok01]\
&$V=25.34\pm$0.22 &BTA\
&$R_c=25.06\pm0.17$&BTA\
&$I_c=24.11\Pm0.25$&bTA\
&$K=22.7\pm0.2$& keck I/nIRC& [@chary01]\
& $B=23.40\pm0.12$ &BtA&[@sok01
mag\] [@holland01]. As ano ther examp le, t heexp ec ted$B$band magnitude of t he GRB 010921 afterglo w wou ld be 3 ma gnitu des fai n te r tha nth e h os t  m agnit ude  report ed in @pri ce0 2at the timeo fthe observ ati ons 21 daysaft er the  b urs t .

Id eal ly, t he mag n itudes  of a hos ts houldb e deriv e d  u sing  one consistent p h ot o metric techniq ue for  a l lf i lte rs.  For examp le , int he case of a p ert u re photometry  the magnit u des  shoul dbed erived  usin gt hesame apertu re.We can no t be s u re that this is  the c ase  fo r th e  m ag nit ud e s g i ve n i n  Ta ble \[ta b: al lmag\ ]. I n t h e ca ses  whe re th e hosts are m ore  ext e nde d tha n poi nt s ou rcesthe ef fectsh ould be negligi bleas long a s t he  au th ors h a ve app lie d a  largeenougha per tu r e fo r deriving the hos tm a gn itudes.
Furth e rm or e , one sh ou ldnote t hat w e ha v erestrict ed our s el ve s to an al ysingon lythe  brig h t en d of t he lumin osity function since it is easiert op e rf o rm m ult iband obser vati o ns o f th e  b rig h testhosts .O nl y  little is known ab ou t thenatur e of the fain ter host g a l a xies [@b erge r 02 b ; @jaunsen03;@hjor th03b].

[ l lll]{} H ost &  Filter(Mag) & T e l escope &  Re fer enc e\& $B >26.08$ &VLT& [ @sok 01 ]\
& $V =25 .77\pm0 .2$  &H ST/ STI S& [@gal00 b]\
& $R _c =2 5. 22 \pm 0.2$& HST/STIS  & \
&  $ I=2 4.4\p m 0.2$ &  HST/ WFPC 2&[ @ fru chter99 ] \& $H=2 3. 2\ pm$0 .3&H ST/NI CMOS 2 \
&  $K=22. 6\pm$0.2& N I RC/K ec kI &[@ch ary01]\
& $B= 25 .89\pm$0.1 9& B TA &[@ s o k01]\
&$ V=25.34\pm$0.22 &BTA\
& $ R_c=25. 06\ pm0.1 7$&B TA\
&$I_c =24 .11\pm 0.2 5 $&BTA\ 
&$K=2 2.7\p m0 .2$ & KeckI / NI RC&  [ @chary01]\ &  $B =23.4 0\ pm0. 12$ &BT A&[@sok01
mag\] [@holland01]._As another_example, the expected $B$_band magnitude_of_the GRB 010921_afterglow_would be 3_magnitudes fainter than_the host magnitude reported_in @price02 at_the_time of the observations 21 days after the burst.

Ideally, the magnitudes of a host_should_be derived_using_one_consistent photometric technique for all_filters. For example, in the_case of_aperture photometry the magnitudes should be derived using_the_same aperture. We_can not be sure that this is the case_for the magnitudes given in Table \[tab:allmag\]._In the cases_where_the_hosts are more extended_than point sources the effect should_be negligible as long as the_authors have applied a large enough aperture_for deriving the host magnitudes.

Furthermore, one_should note that we have_restricted ourselves_to analysing only the bright_end of the_luminosity function_since it is_easier to perform multiband observations of_the brightest hosts._Only little is known about the_nature_of the fainter_host_galaxies_[@berger02b; @jaunsen03;_@hjorth03b].

[llll]{} Host &_Filter_(Mag) &_Telescope_& Reference\
& $B>26.08$ &VLT &[@sok01]\
& $V=25.77\pm0.2$_&HST/STIS_& [@gal00b]\
& $R_c=25.22\pm0.2$ &HST/STIS &\
& $I=24.4\pm0.2$ &_HST/WFPC2 &[@fruchter99]\
& $H=23.2\pm$0.3 &HST/NICMOS2\
&_$K=22.6\pm$0.2_& NIRC/Keck I &[@chary01]\
&_$B=25.89\pm$0.19 & BTA &[@sok01]\
&$V=25.34\pm$0.22 &BTA\
&$R_c=25.06\pm0.17$&BTA\
&$I_c=24.11\pm0.25$&BTA\
&$K=22.7\pm0.2$&_Keck I/NIRC& [@chary01]\
& $B=23.40\pm0.12$ &BTA&[@sok01