 data from @mieske08ucds. Note that while the status of UCDs as large examples of purely stellar systems is debated [e.g. @evst07ucd; @goerdt08ucds; @baum08ucds; @dab09ucds; @taylor10gcucds and references therein] we find that their scaling relations are more in line with GCs than similarly luminous dSphs and therefore treat them as lacking dark matter halos below.

The CSph data set stands out compared to the other data sets in two distinct ways. First, while all other data sources are in the V band, the CSph data [summarized by @zar06fman] use Cousins I-band luminosities. We convert these data to V-band using averaged colors of E galaxies from @fuk95. While this does not account for the possibility of a systematic error in $R_e$ for the CSph data points due to a different choice of band, this effect is likely to be small given the large dynamic range in this data set. Furthermore, @labarbera08 find that the fundamental plane for early-type galaxies is nearly independent of band from optical to the K-band. Given the similarity of the stellar populations for those galaxies and the CSph, it is therefore likely that the band mismatch is not a significant effect.

The second way that the CSph data set differs is that the velocity dispersions from [@zar06fman] are derived from galaxies in the cluster, rather than the CSph (mostly ICS) light itself. This is of course not ideal, but the measurement of ICS velocity dispersions is very difficult with current spectroscopic capabilities. While this has been accomplished both in integrated light [@kel02] and planetary nebula kinematics [e.g. @arn04] for a few clusters, there is not yet a large, homogenous sample. This is required for generality and to compare to our other samples, and hence we are forced to use galaxy dispersions until large direct measurement samples become available. In principle this could impose a bias in our mass estimator (described below) because the ICS and cluster galaxies follow different distribution functions. We explore in more detail how this bias might affect our results in §\[sec:err\].

The normal elliptical galaxy data comprise a sample of $\sim$16,000 galaxies selected from the Sloan Digital Sky Survey (SDSS, @york
data from @mieske08ucds. Note that while the status of UCDs as large exemplar of strictly stellar systems is debate [ for example @evst07ucd; @goerdt08ucds; @baum08ucds; @dab09ucds; @taylor10gcucds and references therein ] we find that their scaling relations are more in pipeline with GCs than similarly luminous dSphs and consequently regale them as lacking colored matter halos under. 

 The CSph datum set stands out compare to the other data hardening in two distinct ways. First, while all early data sources are in the volt band, the CSph datum [ summarized by @zar06fman ] practice Cousins I - band luminosities. We convert these data to vanadium - band using averaged colors of E galaxy from @fuk95. While this does not account for the possibility of a systematic error in $ R_e$ for the CSph data points due to a different choice of band, this effect is probable to be minor given the big active stove in this data set. Furthermore, @labarbera08 rule that the fundamental plane for early - type galaxies is about independent of band from optical to the K - band. Given the similarity of the leading populations for those galaxies and the CSph, it is therefore likely that the band mismatch is not a significant effect. 

 The second manner that the CSph data set differs is that the velocity dispersions from [ @zar06fman ] are derived from galaxy in the cluster, rather than the CSph (mostly ICS) ignite itself. This is of course not ideal, but the measurement of ICS velocity dispersions is very difficult with current spectroscopic capability. While this has been accomplished both in integrated luminosity [ @kel02 ] and planetary nebula kinematics [ for example @arn04 ] for a few clusters, there is not yet a large, homogeneous sample. This is required for generality and to compare to our early samples, and hence we are forced to use galaxy dispersions until large direct measurement samples become available. In principle this could impose a bias in our batch estimator (described below) because the ICS and bunch galaxies follow different distribution functions. We explore in more detail how this bias might feign our results in § \[sec: err\ ]. 

 The normal elliptical galaxy data comprise a sample of $ \sim$16,000 galaxy choose from the Sloan Digital Sky Survey (SDSS, @york
 daha from @mieske08ucds. Note uhat while the stcrus of UCDs zs large examples of purely stellar dywtems is debated [e.g. @evst07ucd; @goerdt08ucfs; @baum08uxds; @vab09ucds; @taylor10gcndds and referskces chxrein] we find tmat their swaling relatiots axe more in line with GCs than similawly lumonlus dSphs and jheregjre fgect them as lacking dark matter galos btlow.

The CSph data xet stands out compared to the other data sets ij two distibct rqys. First, whkle all other data soutces are in the V band, the CSph aata [xummarized bt @zwt06fman] use Consins P-band luminoslnies. We convery these data tp V-uand using averaged colorv of E galaxies frjm @fuk95. Whhlz this does not accoubt for jhe pmssiculigy kf a systelatmc error in $R_e$ for the CSph data points die np a differenf choise of band, this effect is likely to be smdll given the large dynamix range in this data det. Furthqrmore, @labarbera08 find that the fundamental plane xor eeruy-tvic gauqxles is nearly independent of band from opticaj tp nhe K-band. Given tme similarity of tne sygllar populatiuns fox tgose galaxies and hhe CSpr, it us therefjre kikely that the band mismatxh is not a fugnificant effect.

Tke second wav that the VSph data set differs ir thzt the velofity dispsfsions from [@zar06foan] ase derivta from galaxies ig the cluwter, rather tham the SSph (mostlj ICS) light itself. This ls of cmurse not ldeal, but the measurement of ICS velocity diskerviots is vexy difnicult with curwent spectroscppic ca'abiligies. While this hes been accoiplished both ln integratev light [@kql02] abd poanetarh nebula kinemayics [e.g. @agn04] for a few clusters, thcre ir not yet a largz, yomogenous sampke. Ghif ps cequiwad for generdlith avc to zompare to ijr oyher samples, and henwe ws are forced to usr nalaxy diwpersionf until large direct measuremenu sampnes becoke wvailable. In principle this cohld imposf a bias in our masw estimator (bescribed below) because the ICS and clusver galaxies follow difderent distribution nunctions. We expljre in mose detail how this buas might affect pur results in §\[sec:err\].

Fhe nosmal flliptical galaxy data comprise a sample of $\sim$16,000 galaxies selected from thw Sloai Qigital Sky Surfey (SGSF, @york
data from @mieske08ucds. Note that while the UCDs large examples purely stellar systems @baum08ucds; @taylor10gcucds and references we find that scaling relations are more in line GCs than similarly luminous dSphs and therefore treat them as lacking dark matter below. The CSph data set stands out compared to the other data sets two ways. while other data sources are in the V band, the CSph data [summarized by @zar06fman] use Cousins luminosities. We convert these data to V-band using colors of E galaxies @fuk95. While this does not for possibility of systematic in for the CSph points due to a different choice of band, this effect is likely to be small given the dynamic range data set. @labarbera08 that fundamental plane for is nearly independent of band from K-band. Given the similarity of the stellar populations those galaxies the CSph, it is therefore likely the band mismatch is not a significant effect. second way that the CSph data set differs is that the velocity dispersions from [@zar06fman] from galaxies in the rather than the (mostly light This of course ideal, but the measurement of ICS velocity dispersions is very difficult current spectroscopic capabilities. While this has been accomplished both in [@kel02] planetary nebula kinematics @arn04] for a few there not yet a large, This required to to other samples, and hence are forced to use galaxy until large direct measurement this could impose a bias in our mass (described below) because the ICS and cluster follow different distribution functions. We explore in more detail how this bias affect our §\[sec:err\]. The normal elliptical galaxy data comprise a of $\sim$16,000 galaxies selected the Sloan Digital Sky Survey (SDSS, @york
 data from @mieske08ucds. Note thaT while the sTatus Of UcDs As LargE exaMples of purely sTEllaR systems is debated [e.g. @evsT07ucd; @gOeRDt08ucDS; @bAum08ucDs; @dab09ucDS; @tAYLor10GcUcDs aNd REfErencEs tHerein] wE find that tHeiR sCaling relatiONs Are more in lIne With GCs than sImiLarly lUmInoUS dSphS anD therEfore tREat theM as lackinG dARk mattER halos bELOw.

the Csph data set stands oUT cOMpared to the othEr data SeTS iN TWo dIstInct ways. FiRsT, whilE All otheR DaTA SOurCEs are in the V baNd, the CSph daTA [suMmarizEd By @zAR06fman] uSe CouSiNS I-bAnd luminosiTies. we convert These dATa to V-baND using aVerageD coLorS of E GAlAxIes FrOM @fuK95. whIle THis Does not aCcOuNt for The pOSSIBiliTy oF a syStemaTic error in $R_e$ fOr tHe CSPH daTa poiNts duE to a DiFfereNt choiCe of bAnD, this effect is liKely To be small GivEn The LaRge dyNAmic raNge In tHis data Set. FurtHErmOrE, @LABaRbera08 find that the fuNdAMEnTal plane For earLY-tYpE Galaxies Is NeaRly iNDEpendEnt oF BaNd from opTical tO ThE K-Band. GivEn The simIlAriTy oF the sTEllaR populAtions foR thosE Galaxies and the csph, it is therefORe LIKeLY thaT thE band mismatCh is NOt a sIgniFIcAnt EFfect.

the seCoND wAY that the CSph data set DiFfers iS that The velocity diSpersions fROM [@Zar06fman] aRe deRIvED from galaxies iN the cLuster, rathER than the cSph (mOstly ICS) Light itseLF. this is of CouRse Not IdeAL, BuT the measuremeNT Of ICs vElocity DisPersionS is VerY diFfiCuLt with curRent specTrOsCoPiC caPabilITies. WhilE tHis HaS beEn accOMplishEd botH in iNtEgRAteD light [@kEL02] aND PlanEtArY nebUla KiNematIcs [e.G. @Arn04] For a few Clusters, tHerE Is noT yEt A large, hOmogenous sampLe. this is requIrEd fOr geneRALity and tO compare to our other samplES, and henCe wE are fOrceD to use galAxy DisperSioNS until Large dIrect MeAsuREMent sAMPlEs bEcOme availabLE. in pRinciPlE thiS could iMpose a bias in our masS EstImator (describEd bElow) BECaUse THe icS aNd CLusTER galaxies follow Different dIsTRiBution funcTIonS. WE explorE in more DetaiL How this Bias might Affect our ReSultS IN §\[seC:err\].

The norMal ellipTical galaXY data COmPrise A saMple of $\SiM$16,000 gaLaxieS selecTEd fRom thE Sloan diGital SKy SurVeY (SDSS, @yorK
 data from @mieske08ucds.Note thatwhile  th e s ta tusof U CDs as large e x ampl es of purely stellar s ystem si s de b at ed [e .g. @ev s t0 7 u cd;  @ go erd t0 8 uc ds; @ bau m08ucds ; @dab09uc ds;  @ taylor10gcuc d sand refere nce s therein] w e f ind th at  th e ir sc ali ng re lation s  are m ore in li ne with G C s thans i mi larl y luminous dSphsa nd therefore trea t them  a s  l a c kin g d ark matter  h alosb elow.
T he C S phd ata set stand s out compa r edto the  o the r  datasetsin two  distinct w ays.  First, w hile a l l other data so urcesare  in  the Vba nd,  t h e C S ph  da t a [ summariz ed  b y @za r06f m a n ]  use  Co usin s I-b and luminosit ies . We con vertthese  dat ato V- band u singav eraged colors o f Egalaxiesfro m@fu k9 5. Wh i le thi s d oes  not ac count f o r t he p o ss ibility of a syste ma t i cerror in  $R_e$ fo rt he CSphda tapoin t s  dueto a di fferentchoice of  b and, th is  effec tislik ely t o  besmallgiven th e lar g e dynamic rang e  in this data se t .  F u rthe rmo re, @labarb era0 8  fin d th a tthe funda menta lp la n e for early-type ga la xies i s nea rly independe nt of band f r om optic al t o  t h e K-band. Give n the  similarit y  of thestell ar popul ations fo r those ga lax ies  an d t h e  C Sph, it is th e r efor elikelytha t the b and  mi sma tch  i s not a s ignifica nt  e ff ec t.
Thes econd wa ytha tthe  CSph data s et di ffer sis tha t the v e lo c i ty d is pe rsio nsfr om [@ zar0 6 fma n] arederived f rom gala xi es  in the  cluster, rat he r than the  C Sph  (most l y  ICS) li ght itself. This is ofc ourse n otideal , bu t the mea sur ementofI CS vel ocitydispe rs ion s is ve r y  d iff ic ult with c u r ren t spe ct rosc opic ca pabilities. Whilet his  has been acc omp lish e d  b oth in int eg r ate d light [@kel02]and planet ar y  n ebula kine m ati cs  [e.g.@arn04]  fora  few cl usters, t here is n ot  yet a  la rge, homog enous sa mple. Thi s  is r e qu iredfor  gener al ity  andto com p are  to o ur oth er  sampl es, a nd  hence w e are forced to use gal axy di spers ion s until l arg e  di rect meas urem ent sample s b eco me av ail a ble.In p r in cip l e thi s co u ld impose abia s in  our mass e s t i mat or (d esc r ibed b elow ) because the ICS and cluster ga laxi e s  fo llo w  dif fe rent distribut ion  f u n ctions.We  explore in  more de ta i l how  thisbias m ight af f e ct our re sult s i n §\[sec: err \] . 

The n or ma l  ellip tica lgalaxy  datac ompr i s e a sample of $\ sim$1 6 , 000 g a lax ies s el ected f r om t he Sloan D igital SkySurvey  (SD SS, @ york
 data_from @mieske08ucds._Note that while the_status of_UCDs_as large_examples_of purely stellar_systems is debated_[e.g. @evst07ucd; @goerdt08ucds; @baum08ucds;_@dab09ucds; @taylor10gcucds and_references_therein] we find that their scaling relations are more in line with GCs than_similarly_luminous dSphs_and_therefore_treat them as lacking dark_matter halos below.

The CSph data_set stands_out compared to the other data sets in_two_distinct ways. First,_while all other data sources are in the V_band, the CSph data [summarized by_@zar06fman] use Cousins_I-band_luminosities._We convert these data_to V-band using averaged colors of_E galaxies from @fuk95. While this_does not account for the possibility of_a systematic error in $R_e$ for_the CSph data points due_to a_different choice of band, this_effect is likely_to be_small given the_large dynamic range in this data_set. Furthermore, @labarbera08_find that the fundamental plane for_early-type_galaxies is nearly_independent_of_band from_optical to the_K-band._Given the_similarity_of the stellar populations for those_galaxies_and the CSph, it is therefore likely_that the band mismatch_is_not a significant effect.

The_second way that the CSph_data set differs is that the_velocity dispersions_from [@zar06fman]_are derived from galaxies in the cluster, rather than the CSph_(mostly ICS) light itself. This is_of course not ideal,_but the_measurement_of ICS velocity_dispersions_is very_difficult with current spectroscopic capabilities. While this_has been_accomplished both in integrated light [@kel02]_and planetary nebula kinematics_[e.g._@arn04] for a few clusters, there_is not yet a large, homogenous_sample. This is required for_generality_and_to compare to our other_samples, and hence we are forced_to use galaxy_dispersions until large direct measurement samples become_available._In principle this could impose a_bias_in our mass estimator (described below)_because_the_ICS and cluster galaxies follow_different distribution functions. We explore in_more detail how this bias might affect our results_in §\[sec:err\].

The normal_elliptical galaxy data comprise a_sample_of_$\sim$16,000 galaxies selected from the Sloan Digital Sky Survey (SDSS,_@york