Asymmetry at Low Surface Brightness as an Indicator of Environmental Processes in the Fornax Cluster

M. A. Raj; P. Awad; R. F. Peletier; R. Smith; X. Xu

REVIEW 4 major objections 5 minor 120 references

Asymmetry at Low Surface Brightness as an Indicator of Environmental Processes in the Fornax Cluster

T0 review · 4 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-08 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

Pith's one-line read Dwarf galaxies in the outer parts of the Fornax cluster, and in its very centre, are more asymmetric than dwarfs at intermediate radii, with ram-pressure stripping and tidal effects respectively driving the excess.

desk verdict A promising new isophotal asymmetry diagnostic for Fornax dwarfs, but the outer-region ram-pressure claim needs a Fornax A exclusion before it can be believed. read the letter →

arxiv 2502.04091 v1 pith:PXEUTEBZ submitted 2025-02-06 astro-ph.GA

X. Xu , R. F. Peletier , P. Awad , M. A. Raj , R. Smith This is my paper · ORCID

classification astro-ph.GA

keywords dwarfgalaxiesFornaxclustergalaxymorphologyisophotalasymmetryrampressurestrippingtidaldisruptionclusterslowsurfacebrightness

verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

This paper asks whether the faint outer light of dwarf galaxies records what the cluster environment has done to them. Using 556 early-type dwarfs from the Fornax Deep Survey, it measures isophotal asymmetry in surface-brightness annuli of 26 to 29 mag arcsec$^{-2}$ (labelled A26–A29), a regime more sensitive to outer disturbance than the usual whole-image CAS asymmetry. The central finding is a U-shaped radial trend: dwarfs beyond about 1 Mpc from the cluster centre, and dwarfs inside about 0.12 Mpc, are statistically more asymmetric than dwarfs in between. The authors interpret the outer excess as recent ram-pressure stripping, with gas blown out as dwarfs fall through the hot intracluster medium and leaving young blue features that have not yet faded, and the inner excess as tidal disruption by the cluster potential. If correct, this turns faint outer asymmetry into a quantitative, morphology-based record of where and when environmental processes act on low-mass cluster galaxies.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the isophotal asymmetry parameter $A$, computed by rotating the galaxy image by 180 degrees, subtracting the rotated image from the original, and summing the absolute residuals inside elliptical annuli whose position angle and ellipticity are fixed; the four variants A26–A29 restrict this sum to annuli with surface brightness between roughly 26 and 29 mag arcsec$^{-2}$. That restriction is what makes the measurement sensitive to the faint outer parts where tidal tails, stripped gas, and disturbed stellar halos appear first, rather than to the bright inner light that dominates standard CAS asymmetry. A companion smoothness (S) measurement and a projected phase-space diagram built from spectroscopic redshifts and projected cluster-centric radius are used to connect the asymmetry signal to infall stage.

What would settle it

A decisive check is spatially resolved HI or H-$\alpha$ imaging of the high-asymmetry outer dwarfs: if most of them show no gas tails, no truncated disks, and no gas-star centroid offsets, the ram-pressure interpretation fails. A complementary check is an injection-recovery test in which artificial asymmetric features at 26–29 mag arcsec$^{-2}$ are inserted into FDS images and run through the same pipeline; if they are not recovered, the measured excess would be a systematic artifact rather than environmental disturbance.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On its own terms, this paper establishes that the radial pattern of dwarf morphology in Fornax is U-shaped rather than monotonic. The weighted mean asymmetries in the outer region ($R > 1$ Mpc) exceed those in the intermediate region at the faintest annuli (e.g., A29: 0.716 versus 0.421), and the very central region ($R \leq 0.12$ Mpc) exceeds the central region just outside it (e.g., A28: 0.492 versus 0.195). The outer dwarfs are bluer in $g-r$, so their asymmetry is tied to recent star formation, plausibly in gas-stripping tails; the inner dwarfs are redder, so the central excess is attributed to tidal distortion rather than star formation. In projected phase space, dwarfs near pericentre show significantly higher asymmetry, while backsplash-dominated regions do not, indicating that the disturbance is generated at first pericentric passage and then decays. The paper also finds that fainter and bluer dwarfs are more asymmetric throughout, and that smoothness shows no environmental correlation except a decline with stellar mass.

Load-bearing premise

The argument assumes that asymmetry measured in the faint outer isophotes ($26$ to $29$ mag arcsec$^{-2}$) traces genuine environmental disturbance, such as tides or gas stripping, rather than sky-subtraction residuals, point-spread-function artifacts, or unresolved star-forming clumps and dust.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

Resolved gas observations of the outer high-asymmetry dwarfs should reveal ram-pressure signatures such as HI or H-alpha tails, truncated gas disks, or gas-star centroid offsets if the outer interpretation is right.
The inner enhancement is confined to $R \leq 0.12$ Mpc, so destruction of dwarfs by the cluster core is a small-radius phenomenon that should be modelled and observed on that scale.
The asymmetry–magnitude and asymmetry–colour trends imply that environmental disturbance and internal star-forming clumpiness are entangled, making faint, blue, high-$A$ dwarfs the natural targets for spectroscopic follow-up.
The phase-space result predicts that asymmetry peaks on first infall and fades afterwards, so comparing Fornax dwarfs with orbital-phase estimates from cluster simulations would test the proposed sequence.
The absence of smoothness correlations with environment indicates that S is not a useful disturbance tracer at these radii, and future morphological work should rely on the faint-isophote asymmetry instead.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

A calibration the paper leaves implicit: injecting model tidal tails and ram-pressure winds into FDS images and measuring whether A26–A29 recovers the injected disturbance would set the method's sensitivity floor and directly test the weakest assumption.
Cross-correlating A26–A29 with existing HI maps of Fornax dwarfs would discriminate between ram-pressure stripping and internal star formation: high-$A$ outer dwarfs that are HI-poor or have asymmetric HI support the stripping story, while HI-rich high-$A$ dwarfs would point to internal processes.
The U-shaped radial trend suggests that projected cluster-centric radius is only a coarse proxy for environment; binning the same sample by local galaxy density or by an estimate of tidal acceleration might sharpen the inner and outer signals.
The concentration of the inner excess inside 0.12 Mpc, together with the deficit of non-nucleated dwarfs in the core, implies that the cluster core can dismantle a dwarf's outer body before destroying its nucleus; comparing the A-excess with the local nucleated fraction could quantify that disruption timescale.

Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

Quick take: the genuinely new thing here is measuring asymmetry in fixed isophotes at 26-29 mag/arcsec2 rather than global CAS values, and that choice produces a radial signal in Fornax dwarfs. The paper also builds the first A-r phase-space map for Fornax dwarfs. But the headline claim--outer dwarfs are more asymmetric because of ram pressure--has a hole the authors should have addressed. The FDS includes an extra 5 deg2 centered on the Fornax A group, which lies around 1.3 Mpc from NGC 1399, inside their R > 1 Mpc bin. Su et al. (2021) already show Fornax A dwarfs are bluer and more asymmetric than Fornax main-cluster dwarfs. The paper never excludes Fornax A or reruns the analysis without it, so the outer-region excess may be the known Fornax A difference, not a cluster-wide radial trend. That is the first thing I'd ask about.

What works: the measurement pipeline is transparent--centroiding, elliptical isophotes, background plane fitting, bootstrap uncertainties, and a detection-completeness simulation in Appendix D. The isophotal A profiles are a real methodological addition, and the central-region excess, though driven mostly by A28/A29, is consistent with the Asencio et al. tidal discussion and is worth taking seriously. The A-colour and A-magnitude relations are sensible and agree with prior work.

Soft spots, in order of importance. The Fornax A contamination is the load-bearing one; it directly affects the RPS interpretation in Section 5.1 and the summary. Second, the 26-29 mag/arcsec2 regime is exactly where sky-subtraction residuals and PSF artifacts live, and the paper doesn't validate the isophotal A against simulations or against independent tracers like HI or tidal tails. The background model is a linear plane; that is a reasonable starting point but not a proof. Third, the phase-space analysis is qualitative: region means are shown without error bars or galaxy counts, and the claim that Region B near pericentre has higher asymmetry is not statistically established. Fourth, the comparison with Venhola et al.'s visual tidal classes (Fig. 8) finds no correlation, which the paper brushes off as a visual/quantitative discrepancy; that is a bit too quick.

The paper deserves a serious referee. The measurement is new, reproducible, and the central tidal question is interesting, especially given the MOND discussion in Asencio et al. I'd send it to review with the instruction that the Fornax A cut needs to be done, and the phase-space statistics need numbers. If that gets fixed, I'd cite it.

Referee Report

4 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper uses Fornax Deep Survey imaging to measure isophotal asymmetry (A) and smoothness (S) parameters for 556 early-type dwarf galaxies in the Fornax cluster. The authors define four faint-isophote asymmetry measures, A26 through A29, and study how they depend on projected cluster-centric radius, magnitude, colour, and projected phase-space position. They report that dwarfs in the outer region (R > 1 Mpc) and in the very central region (R <= 0.12 Mpc) have higher asymmetry than dwarfs at intermediate radii, that fainter and bluer dwarfs tend to be more asymmetric, and that phase-space region B, associated with pericentric passage, shows enhanced asymmetry. The paper interprets the outer enhancement as ram-pressure stripping and the inner enhancement as tidal effects.

Significance. If the reported trends are robust, isophotal asymmetry at surface brightness levels of 26-29 mag/arcsec2 could be a valuable quantitative tracer of environmental processing in cluster dwarfs. The paper has notable strengths: it uses a well-defined magnitude-limited sample from a deep survey, provides bootstrap confidence intervals for the radial trends, includes detection-completeness simulations in Appendix D, and compares its quantitative asymmetry measure with visual tidal classifications. The main caveats are that the outer-region signal is not separated from the known Fornax A subgroup, the significance of the outer enhancement is confined to the faintest isophotes, and the phase-space assertions lack error estimates. Because these issues directly affect the central claims, the paper needs revision before the conclusions can be accepted.

major comments (4)

[§2, §5.1, Table 1] The outer region R > 1 Mpc includes the Fornax A group: Section 2 states that the FDS contains an additional 5 deg2 centred on Fornax A, and the introduction cites Su et al. (2021) showing that Fornax A dwarfs are bluer and have higher A and S than main-cluster dwarfs. The analysis never excludes Fornax A or treats it separately. Since Fornax A is at roughly 1.3 Mpc from NGC 1399, the A28/A29 excess in the R > 1 Mpc bin may simply reproduce the known Fornax A properties rather than establish a cluster-wide radial environmental trend. Please repeat the analysis excluding galaxies in the Fornax A footprint or present the radial trends separately for the main cluster and the Fornax A subgroup, and discuss how the conclusions change.
[§4.1, Table 1] The claim that the outer region has 'statistically significant' higher asymmetry than the intermediate region is not supported by the A26 and A27 measurements: the Table 1 differences are 0.0134 ± 0.0101 and 0.0015 ± 0.0134, both consistent with zero. Only A28 and A29 show significant differences. The text should explicitly restrict the outer-enhancement claim to the faintest isophotes and should discuss the multiple-comparison issue across the four A measurements, rather than stating that asymmetry is systematically higher in the outer region.
[§5.2, Fig. 7] The statement that galaxies near pericentre in phase-space region B exhibit 'significantly higher asymmetry' is not substantiated, because the region means in Fig. 7 are shown without confidence intervals or sample sizes. Please provide bootstrap uncertainties for the mean asymmetry in each phase-space region and perform a significance test against the other regions, or soften the claim to a qualitative trend.
[§3.1, §3.2, Fig. 1] The A28 and A29 measurements probe isophotes at 28.5-29.5 mag/arcsec2, close to the sky level, where residual sky gradients, PSF artefacts, and unmasked background sources can mimic asymmetry. The background subtraction in Section 3.2 uses only a linear plane fit, and Appendix D tests detection completeness rather than the systematics of the asymmetry measurement itself. Please add a robustness test, for example varying the sky-subtraction model or comparing the faintest-isophote asymmetries with simulations or with independent tracers such as HI or tidal features, to validate that the observed faint-isophote asymmetries trace galaxy structure rather than measurement systematics.

minor comments (5)

[§4.1] The phrase 'the g-r colour slowly bluens towards the outer regions' should be reworded as 'the g-r colour slowly becomes bluer towards the outer regions.'
[Eq. (2)] The summation limits and the placement of the background term in the Smoothness equation are difficult to read; please reformat the equation so that the numerator and denominator are clearly separated.
[Fig. 1 caption] The caption refers to asymmetry profiles in the 'g, r, and z bands,' while the text and data are based on g, r, and i bands; please correct the band labels.
[§3.2] The minimum uncertainty floor of 0.002, estimated from 25 galaxies, is introduced without explaining how it is combined with Poisson statistics to produce the Table 1 uncertainties; please clarify the error propagation.
[General] Some references in the text (e.g., the photutils package) are given as URLs rather than formal citations; please include full bibliographic entries in the reference list.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the asymmetry measurements are direct observables, and the radial, magnitude, colour, and phase-space trends are empirical correlations rather than outputs of a model fitted to the same data.

full rationale

The derivation chain is observational rather than self-referential. The asymmetry parameters A26-A29 are defined directly from isophotal annuli of the images, following the standard CAS definition in Eq. (1), and are then compared with clustercentric radius, magnitude, colour, and phase-space position. No parameter is fitted to a subset of the data and later used to predict the same or a closely related quantity; no uniqueness theorem or ansatz is imported from the authors' prior work to force the interpretation; and the conclusions are not equivalent to the inputs by construction. The analysis does rely on the FDS dwarf catalogue, masks, and photometric products from Venhola et al. (2018) and Su et al. (2021), but those are independent data products and measurements, not restatements of the paper's new asymmetry results. The most serious non-circular concern is that the outer radial bin (R > 1 Mpc) may be contaminated by the Fornax A subgroup, which Su et al. (2021) already found to be bluer and more asymmetric; if so, the outer-region enhancement would be a known subgroup difference rather than a new radial environmental trend. That is a confounding or interpretation issue, not a circular reduction of a prediction to its input, and the hard rules forbid raising the circularity score on that basis. Likewise, restricting the analysis to early-type dwarfs is a sample-selection choice that could correlate with the measured asymmetry, but it is not a self-definitional derivation. The paper is therefore not circular in the sense defined here.

Assumptions & free parameters 4 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No new physical entities are introduced. The analysis depends on data selection choices (isophotal limits, radial bins, HSB/LSB split) rather than on fitted physical model parameters; these choices shape which asymmetry bands show the reported trends.

free parameters (4)

HSB/LSB split line intercept and slope = Re = -1.8 * Mr + 41.466
Used to divide the sample into high and low surface brightness galaxies in Section 4.1 and Fig. 3; fitted to the r-band magnitude-effective radius data.
Minimum asymmetry uncertainty floor = 0.002
Estimated from a subsample of 25 galaxies in Section 4 and used to compute photometric errors for all asymmetry measurements; if underestimated, quoted uncertainties are too small.
Radial bin boundaries for the four regions = 0.12, 0.4, 1.0 Mpc
Chosen by hand in Section 4 to define Very Central, Central, Intermediate, and Outer regions; the key Outer versus Intermediate comparison depends on the 1 Mpc cut.
Isophotal surface brightness limits = 26 to 29 mag/arcsec2
Chosen in Section 3.1 to define A26 through A29; the outer-region signal appears mainly in A28 and A29, so the choice of range affects the headline result.

assumptions (4)

domain assumption The asymmetry parameter A, computed after 180-degree rotation, measures morphological disturbance in the outer light of dwarf galaxies.
Section 3.1 and Eq. 1; the entire A-r analysis relies on interpreting A in the faint outer isophotes as an environmental tracer rather than noise.
domain assumption Early-type dwarf classification from the FDSDC is reliable and unaffected by asymmetry or surface brightness.
Section 4 restricts the analysis to early-type dwarfs because late-types are intrinsically irregular; if classification is biased by the same features used to measure A, the trends could be circular.
domain assumption The phase-space region classification of Rhee et al. (2017) applies to Fornax dwarf galaxies.
Section 5.2 and Fig. 7 divide the PPS diagram into infall regions based on models for bright galaxies; spectroscopic coverage of faint dwarfs is sparse.
domain assumption Cluster membership and distances to NGC 1399 are correct for the 556 galaxies.
Section 2 uses the FDSDC of Venhola et al. (2018); interlopers in the outer parts could mimic enhanced asymmetry.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Asymmetry at Low Surface Brightness as an Indicator of Environmental Processes in the Fornax Cluster." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/PXEUTEBZ

@misc{pith2026250204091,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Asymmetry at Low Surface Brightness as an Indicator of Environmental Processes in the Fornax Cluster},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/PXEUTEBZ}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2502.04091}
}

read the original abstract

Dwarf galaxies play an important role in studying the effects of the environment on galaxy formation and evolution. In this study, we aim to explore the relationship between the morphology, in particular the asymmetries of galaxies, and their distances to the cluster centre. For galaxies in the Fornax Deep Survey, we quantified the morphologies of dwarf galaxies using Asymmetry (A) and Smoothness (S). Unlike previous work, we use isophotal CAS-parameters, which are sensitive to the outer parts of galaxies. We constructed the A-r and S-r diagrams to investigate the relationship between morphology and distance. Additionally, we examined the effects of asymmetry on magnitude and colour. Furthermore, to better understand the assembly history of the galaxy cluster, we performed a phase-space analysis for Fornax dwarf galaxies. We find that dwarf galaxies in the outer regions of the Fornax cluster have higher values of asymmetry compared to other dwarfs in the cluster, indicating a greater degree of morphological disturbances within dwarf galaxies in these regions. We also find that galaxies in the very inner regions are more asymmetric than those further out. The A-magnitude relation reveals a trend where asymmetry increases as galaxies become fainter, and the A-colour relation shows that galaxies with bluer colours tend to exhibit higher asymmetry. We do not find any correlations with smoothness, except that smoothness strongly decreases with stellar mass. We propose that the higher asymmetry of dwarfs in the outer regions is most likely caused by ram pressure stripping. In the very inner parts, the asymmetries most likely are caused by tidal effects. In addition, our phase-space diagram suggests that galaxies near pericentre in the Fornax cluster exhibit significantly higher asymmetry, indicating that morphological disturbances happened during their first pericentric passage.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2502.04091 by the authors.

**Figure 1.** Two representative dwarf galaxies from the FDS sample. upper panel: r-band image of dwarf galaxy F4D000 (left) and the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_1.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 2.** The dependence of parameter A on the projected cluster-centric radius R (upper panel) and the variation of colour with R (lower panel). The black dots represent the median values of the measurements in each bin, with the error bars indicating the bootstrapped 95% confidence interval. The colour bar corresponds to the g − r colour.The yellow dashed line at 0.7 Mpc indicates the virial radius. vividly show the morphol… view at source ↗

**Figure 3.** Effective radius (Re) versus r-band magnitude for Fornax dwarf galaxies. We define the galaxies below the best-fitting relation as HSB galaxies (blue) and the ones above as LSB galaxies (red) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_3.png] view at source ↗

Figures from the paper (8 more)

**Figure 4.** Figure 4: Same as [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_4.png]

**Figure 5.** Figure 5: Left panel: Asymmetry-magnitude relation for dwarf galaxies in the Fornax cluster. The colour bar represents the g-r colour. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_5.png]

**Figure 6.** Figure 6: Same as Fig. 5 for the S – magnitude relation. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_6.png]

**Figure 7.** Figure 7: Distribution of Fornax dEs in projected phase-space. The diagram is divided into five regions following the classification by [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_7.png]

**Figure 8.** Figure 8: Comparison of median asymmetry values with tidal mor [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_8.png]

**Figure 9.** Figure 9: Surface number density of galaxies as a function of dis [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_9.png]

**Figure 10.** Figure 10: Distribution of dwarf elliptical galaxies in the Fornax [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_10.png]

**Figure 10.** Figure 10: The figure shows the distributions of all dEs, nucleated [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_10.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

120 extracted references · 72 canonical work pages

[1]

, " * write output.state after.block = add.period write newline

ENTRY address archiveprefix author booktitle chapter edition editor howpublished institution eprint journal key month note number organization pages publisher school series title type volume year label extra.label sort.label short.list INTEGERS output.state before.all mid.sentence after.sentence after.block FUNCTION init.state.consts #0 'before.all := #1 ...
[2]

write newline

" write newline "" before.all 'output.state := FUNCTION n.dashify 't := "" t empty not t #1 #1 substring "-" = t #1 #2 substring "--" = not "--" * t #2 global.max substring 't := t #1 #1 substring "-" = "-" * t #2 global.max substring 't := while if t #1 #1 substring * t #2 global.max substring 't := if while FUNCTION word.in bbl.in " " * FUNCTION format....
[3]

G., Moore, B., & Bower, R

Abadi, M. G., Moore, B., & Bower, R. G.\ 1999, , 308, 947

1999
[4]

G., Valdes, F., Yee, H

Abraham, R. G., Valdes, F., Yee, H. K. C., et al.\ 1994, , 432, 75

1994
[5]

G., Tanvir, N

Abraham, R. G., Tanvir, N. R., Santiago, B. X., et al.\ 1996, , 279, L47

1996
[6]

G., van den Bergh, S., Glazebrook, K., et al.\ 1996, , 107, 1

Abraham, R. G., van den Bergh, S., Glazebrook, K., et al.\ 1996, , 107, 1

1996
[7]

B., Seo, M., & Ha, D

Ann, H. B., Seo, M., & Ha, D. K.\ 2015, , 217, 27

2015
[8]

Asencio, E., Banik, I., Mieske, S., et al.\ 2022, , 515, 2981

2022

Show all 120 references

[9]

D., Binggeli, B., & Jerjen, H.\ 2002, , 391, 823

Barazza, F. D., Binggeli, B., & Jerjen, H.\ 2002, , 391, 823

2002
[10]

Barnes, J. E. & Hernquist, L.\ 1992, , 30, 705

1992
[11]

P., Faifer, F

Bassino, L. P., Faifer, F. R., Forte, J. C., et al.\ 2006, , 451, 789

2006
[12]

L., McGee, S

Bellhouse, C., Jaff \'e , Y. L., McGee, S. L., et al.\ 2019, , 485, 1157

2019
[13]

A., Jangren, A., & Conselice, C

Bershady, M. A., Jangren, A., & Conselice, C. J.\ 2000, , 119, 2645

2000
[14]

& Arnouts, S.\ 1996, , 117, 393

Bertin, E. & Arnouts, S.\ 1996, , 117, 393

1996
[15]

A., & Sandage, A.\ 1987, , 94, 251

Binggeli, B., Tammann, G. A., & Sandage, A.\ 1987, , 94, 251

1987
[16]

Binggeli, B.\ 1994, European Southern Observatory Conference and Workshop Proceedings, 49, 13

1994
[17]

Boselli, A., Fossati, M., & Sun, M.\ 2022, , 30, 3

2022
[18]

Bradley, L., Sip o cz, B., Robitaille, T., et al.\ 2021, Zenodo

2021
[19]

& Valtonen, M.\ 1990, , 350, 89

Byrd, G. & Valtonen, M.\ 1990, , 350, 89

1990
[20]

Cantiello, M., Venhola, A., Grado, A., et al.\ 2020, , 639, A136

2020
[21]

Choque-Challapa, N., Aguerri, J. A. L., Mancera Pi \ n a, P. E., et al.\ 2021, , 507, 6045

2021
[22]

J.\ 1997, , 109, 1251

Conselice, C. J.\ 1997, , 109, 1251

1997
[23]

J.\ 1999, , 269, 585

Conselice, C. J.\ 1999, , 269, 585

1999
[24]

J., Bershady, M

Conselice, C. J., Bershady, M. A., & Gallagher, J. S.\ 2000, , 354, L21

2000
[25]

J., Bershady, M

Conselice, C. J., Bershady, M. A., & Jangren, A.\ 2000, , 529, 886

2000
[26]

J.\ 2003, , 147, 1

Conselice, C. J.\ 2003, , 147, 1

2003
[27]

J.\ 2014, , 52, 291

Conselice, C. J.\ 2014, , 52, 291

2014
[28]

C \^o t \'e , P., Piatek, S., Ferrarese, L., et al.\ 2006, , 165, 57

2006
[29]

Cuillandre, J.-C., Bertin, E., Bolzonella, M., et al.\ 2024, arXiv:2405.13496

2024
[30]

D'Abrusco, R., Cantiello, M., Paolillo, M., et al.\ 2016, , 819, L31

2016
[31]

& Blaizot, J.\ 2007, , 375, 2

De Lucia, G. & Blaizot, J.\ 2007, , 375, 2

2007
[32]

de Vaucouleurs, G.\ 1959, Handbuch der Physik, 53, 275

1959
[33]

F., Seth, A., et al.\ 2014, , 445, 2385

den Brok, M., Peletier, R. F., Seth, A., et al.\ 2014, , 445, 2385

2014
[34]

Dressler, A.\ 1980, , 236, 351

1980
[35]

J., et al.\ 1997, , 490, 577

Dressler, A., Oemler, A., Couch, W. J., et al.\ 1997, , 490, 577

1997
[36]

J., Gregg, M

Drinkwater, M. J., Gregg, M. D., & Colless, M.\ 2001, , 548, L139

2001
[37]

J., Gregg, M

Drinkwater, M. J., Gregg, M. D., Hilker, M., et al.\ 2003, , 423, 519

2003
[38]

S., Peletier, R

Eftekhari, F. S., Peletier, R. F., Scott, N., et al.\ 2022, , 517, 4714. doi:10.1093/mnras/stac2606

2022 doi
[39]

H., Taylor, M

Eigenthaler, P., Puzia, T. H., Taylor, M. A., et al.\ 2018, , 855, 142

2018
[40]

Fahrion, K., M \"u ller, O., Rejkuba, M., et al.\ 2020, , 634, A53

2020
[41]

Fahrion, K., Lyubenova, M., van de Ven, G., et al.\ 2021, , 650, A137

2021
[42]

& Shapiro, S

Farouki, R. & Shapiro, S. L.\ 1980, , 241, 928

1980
[43]

M., Bettoni, D., et al.\ 2015, , 449, 3927

Fasano, G., Poggianti, B. M., Bettoni, D., et al.\ 2015, , 449, 3927

2015
[44]

C.\ 1989, , 98, 367

Ferguson, H. C.\ 1989, , 98, 367

1989
[45]

Ferguson, H. C. & Sandage, A.\ 1989, , 346, L53

1989
[46]

E., Izbicki, R., Lee, A

Freeman, P. E., Izbicki, R., Lee, A. B., et al.\ 2013, , 434, 282

2013
[47]

Fujita, Y.\ 1998, , 509, 587

1998
[48]

Y., Hilker, M., Puzia, T

Georgiev, I. Y., Hilker, M., Puzia, T. H., et al.\ 2009, , 396, 1075

2009
[49]

G., et al.\ 2020, , 635, A36

Gozaliasl, G., Finoguenov, A., Khosroshahi, H. G., et al.\ 2020, , 635, A36

2020
[50]

Gunn, J. E. & Gott, J. R.\ 1972, , 176, 1

1972
[51]

& White, S

Guo, Q. & White, S. D. M.\ 2008, , 384, 2

2008
[52]

D., Haines, C

Hern \'a ndez-Fern \'a ndez, J. D., Haines, C. P., Diaferio, A., et al.\ 2014, , 438, 2186

2014
[53]

P.\ 1926, , 64, 321

Hubble, E. P.\ 1926, , 64, 321

1926
[54]

Iodice, E., Capaccioli, M., Grado, A., et al.\ 2016, , 820, 42

2016
[55]

Iodice, E., Spavone, M., Cantiello, M., et al.\ 2017, , 851, 75

2017
[56]

Iodice, E., Spavone, M., Capaccioli, M., et al.\ 2019, , 623, A1

2019
[57]

L., Smith, R., Candlish, G

Jaff \'e , Y. L., Smith, R., Candlish, G. N., et al.\ 2015, , 448, 1715

2015
[58]

L., Poggianti, B

Jaff \'e , Y. L., Poggianti, B. M., Moretti, A., et al.\ 2018, , 476, 4753

2018
[59]

P., C \^o t \'e , P., et al.\ 2007, , 169, 213

Jord \'a n, A., Blakeslee, J. P., C \^o t \'e , P., et al.\ 2007, , 169, 213

2007
[60]

Kauffmann, G., White, S. D. M., & Guiderdoni, B.\ 1993, , 264, 201

1993
[61]

B., Cornell, M

Kormendy, J., Fisher, D. B., Cornell, M. E., et al.\ 2009, , 182, 216

2009
[62]

& Bender, R.\ 2012, , 198, 2

Kormendy, J. & Bender, R.\ 2012, , 198, 2

2012
[63]

Kuijken, K., Bender, R., Cappellaro, E., et al.\ 2002, The Messenger, 110, 15

2002
[64]

B., Tinsley, B

Larson, R. B., Tinsley, B. M., & Caldwell, C. N.\ 1980, , 237, 692

1980
[65]

Laureijs, R., Amiaux, J., Arduini, S., et al.\ 2011, arXiv:1110.3193

2011 arXiv
[66]

Lisker, T., Glatt, K., Westera, P., et al.\ 2006, , 132, 2432

2006
[67]

K., Binggeli, B., et al.\ 2007, , 660, 1186

Lisker, T., Grebel, E. K., Binggeli, B., et al.\ 2007, , 660, 1186

2007
[68]

M., Primack, J., & Madau, P.\ 2004, , 128, 163

Lotz, J. M., Primack, J., & Madau, P.\ 2004, , 128, 163

2004
[69]

M., Jonsson, P., Cox, T

Lotz, J. M., Jonsson, P., Cox, T. J., et al.\ 2008, , 391, 1137

2008
[70]

& Ebeling, H.\ 2011, , 410, 2593

Ma, C.-J. & Ebeling, H.\ 2011, , 410, 2593

2011
[71]

Maddox, N., Serra, P., Venhola, A., et al.\ 2019, , 490, 1666

2019
[72]

A., & Raychaudhury, S.\ 2011, , 416, 2882

Mahajan, S., Mamon, G. A., & Raychaudhury, S.\ 2011, , 416, 2882

2011
[73]

R., Cuillandre, J.-C., Cantiello, M., et al.\ 2024, arXiv:2405.13502

Marleau, F. R., Cuillandre, J.-C., Cantiello, M., et al.\ 2024, arXiv:2405.13502

2024
[74]

Mayer, L., Mastropietro, C., Wadsley, J., et al.\ 2006, , 369, 1021

2006
[75]

& Sargent, W

Melnick, J. & Sargent, W. L. W.\ 1977, , 215, 401

1977
[76]

Meusinger, H., Rudolf, C., Stecklum, B., et al.\ 2020, , 640, A30

2020
[77]

Michea, J., Pasquali, A., Smith, R., et al.\ 2022, , 164, 18

2022
[78]

J., et al.\ 2008, , 385, 1374

Michielsen, D., Boselli, A., Conselice, C. J., et al.\ 2008, , 385, 1374

2008
[79]

Moore, B., Katz, N., Lake, G., et al.\ 1996, , 379, 613

1996
[80]

Moore, B., Lake, G., & Katz, N.\ 1998, , 495, 139

1998
[81]

Moore, B., Lake, G., Quinn, T., et al.\ 1999, , 304, 465

1999
[82]

P., Eigenthaler, P., Puzia, T

Mu \ n oz, R. P., Eigenthaler, P., Puzia, T. H., et al.\ 2015, , 813, L15

2015
[83]

Muzzin, A., van der Burg, R. F. J., McGee, S. L., et al.\ 2014, , 796, 65

2014
[84]

A., Hudson, M

Oman, K. A., Hudson, M. J., & Behroozi, P. S.\ 2013, , 431, 2307

2013
[85]

H., Eigenthaler, P., et al.\ 2018, , 860, 4

Ordenes-Brice \ n o, Y., Puzia, T. H., Eigenthaler, P., et al.\ 2018, , 860, 4

2018
[86]

Pasquali, A., Smith, R., Gallazzi, A., et al.\ 2019, , 484, 1702

2019
[87]

M., Wild, V., Walcher, C

Pawlik, M. M., Wild, V., Walcher, C. J., et al.\ 2016, , 456, 3032

2016
[88]

Peebles, P. J. E.\ 1982, , 258, 415

1982
[89]

Peletier, R. F. & Balcells, M.\ 1996, , 111, 2238

1996
[90]

Peletier, R., Iodice, E., Venhola, A., et al.\ 2020, arXiv:2008.12633

2020
[91]

J., Conselice, C

Penny, S. J., Conselice, C. J., de Rijcke, S., et al.\ 2011, , 410, 1076

2011
[92]

A., Iodice, E., Napolitano, N

Raj, M. A., Iodice, E., Napolitano, N. R., et al.\ 2019, , 628, A4. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201935433

2019 doi
[93]

Rhee, J., Smith, R., Choi, H., et al.\ 2017, , 843, 128

2017
[94]

Rhee, J., Smith, R., Choi, H., et al.\ 2020, , 247, 45

2020
[95]

Romero-G \'o mez, J., Aguerri, J. A. L., Peletier, R. F., et al.\ 2024, , 527, 9715

2024
[96]

F., et al.\ 2021, , 504, 3580

Saifollahi, T., Janz, J., Peletier, R. F., et al.\ 2021, , 504, 3580

2021
[97]

J., Crampton, D., et al.\ 1995, , 451, L1

Schade, D., Lilly, S. J., Crampton, D., et al.\ 1995, , 451, L1

1995
[98]

Schipani, P., Capaccioli, M., Arcidiacono, C., et al.\ 2012, , 8444, 84441C

2012
[99]

M., Kleiner, D., et al.\ 2023, , 673, A146

Serra, P., Maccagni, F. M., Kleiner, D., et al.\ 2023, , 673, A146

2023
[100]

D.\ 2019, , 57, 375

Simon, J. D.\ 2019, , 57, 375

2019
[101]

Smith, R., Pacifici, C., Pasquali, A., et al.\ 2019, , 876, 145

2019
[102]

Spavone, M., Iodice, E., van de Ven, G., et al.\ 2020, , 639, A14

2020
[103]

S., & White, S

Springel, V., Frenk, C. S., & White, S. D. M.\ 2006, , 440, 1137

2006
[104]

H., Salo, H., Janz, J., et al.\ 2021, , 647, A100

Su, A. H., Salo, H., Janz, J., et al.\ 2021, , 647, A100

2021
[105]

Tanoglidis, D., Drlica-Wagner, A., Wei, K., et al.\ 2021, , 252, 18

2021
[106]

A., Conselice, C

Taylor-Mager, V. A., Conselice, C. J., Windhorst, R. A., et al.\ 2007, , 659, 162

2007
[107]

Toomre, A.\ 1977, Evolution of Galaxies and Stellar Populations, 401

1977
[108]

G., Ellis, R

van den Bergh, S., Abraham, R. G., Ellis, R. S., et al.\ 1996, , 112, 359

1996
[109]

C., Aquino, D., Yang, X., et al.\ 2008, , 387, 79

van den Bosch, F. C., Aquino, D., Yang, X., et al.\ 2008, , 387, 79

2008
[110]

van der Kruit, P. C. & Searle, L.\ 1981, , 95, 105

1981
[111]

Venhola, A., Peletier, R., Laurikainen, E., et al.\ 2018, , 620, A165

2018
[112]

Venhola, A., Peletier, R., Laurikainen, E., et al.\ 2019, , 625, A143

2019
[113]

F., Salo, H., et al.\ 2022, , 662, A43

Venhola, A., Peletier, R. F., Salo, H., et al.\ 2022, , 662, A43

2022
[114]

Voggel, K., Hilker, M., & Richtler, T.\ 2016, , 586, A102

2016
[115]

White, S. D. M. & Rees, M. J.\ 1978, , 183, 341

1978
[116]

C., Gilmore, D

Whitmore, B. C., Gilmore, D. M., & Jones, C.\ 1993, , 407, 489

1993
[117]

Wittmann, C., Lisker, T., Pasquali, A., et al.\ 2016, , 459, 4450

2016
[118]

Yang, Y., Ianjamasimanana, R., Hammer, F., et al.\ 2022, , 660, L11

2022
[119]

Yuan, F.-T., Lu, J., Shen, S., et al.\ 2021, , 911, 145

2021
[120]

A., Smith, M

Zabel, N., Davis, T. A., Smith, M. W. L., et al.\ 2019, , 483, 2251

2019

Pith tools

Reviewed August 8, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [1]

, " * write output.state after.block = add.period write newline

ENTRY address archiveprefix author booktitle chapter edition editor howpublished institution eprint journal key month note number organization pages publisher school series title type volume year label extra.label sort.label short.list INTEGERS output.state before.all mid.sentence after.sentence after.block FUNCTION init.state.consts #0 'before.all := #1 ...

[2] [2]

write newline

" write newline "" before.all 'output.state := FUNCTION n.dashify 't := "" t empty not t #1 #1 substring "-" = t #1 #2 substring "--" = not "--" * t #2 global.max substring 't := t #1 #1 substring "-" = "-" * t #2 global.max substring 't := while if t #1 #1 substring * t #2 global.max substring 't := if while FUNCTION word.in bbl.in " " * FUNCTION format....

[3] [3]

G., Moore, B., & Bower, R

Abadi, M. G., Moore, B., & Bower, R. G.\ 1999, , 308, 947

1999

[4] [4]

G., Valdes, F., Yee, H

Abraham, R. G., Valdes, F., Yee, H. K. C., et al.\ 1994, , 432, 75

1994

[5] [5]

G., Tanvir, N

Abraham, R. G., Tanvir, N. R., Santiago, B. X., et al.\ 1996, , 279, L47

1996

[6] [6]

G., van den Bergh, S., Glazebrook, K., et al.\ 1996, , 107, 1

Abraham, R. G., van den Bergh, S., Glazebrook, K., et al.\ 1996, , 107, 1

1996

[7] [7]

B., Seo, M., & Ha, D

Ann, H. B., Seo, M., & Ha, D. K.\ 2015, , 217, 27

2015

[8] [8]

Asencio, E., Banik, I., Mieske, S., et al.\ 2022, , 515, 2981

2022