Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 6 minor 2 cited by

In Search of the First Stars: An Ultra-Compact and Very Low Metallicity Lyman-$\alpha$ Emitter Deep Within the Epoch of Reionization

T0 review · 3 major / 6 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 A gravitationally lensed galaxy at z=8.203 shows the lowest oxygen abundance yet measured at z>7, about 1.4% of the solar value, and is a 4.7-sigma outlier from the mass-metallicity relation.

desk verdict A careful, honest single-object discovery paper whose qualitative result—an extremely low-metallicity, ultra-compact galaxy at z=8.2—survives the calibration and lensing caveats, while the quantitative headline (1.4% solar, 4.7-sigma outlier) is softer than the abstract implies. read the letter →

arxiv 2502.07733 v2 pith:QHDPBRNV submitted 2025-02-11 astro-ph.GA

Chris J. Willott , Yoshihisa Asada , Kartheik G. Iyer , Jon Judez , Gregor Rihtarsic , Nicholas S. Martis , Ghassan T. E. Sarrouh , Guillaume Desprez
show 11 more authors
Anishya Harshan Lamiya Mowla Gael Noirot Giordano Felicioni Marusa Bradac Gabe Brammer Adam Muzzin Marcin Sawicki Jacqueline Antwi-Danso Vladan Markov Roberta Tripodi
This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.GA
keywords high-redshiftgalaxiesLyman-alphaemittersgas-phasemetallicityreionizationgravitationallensingJWSTcompactmass-metallicityrelation
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

JWST spectroscopy of a gravitationally lensed galaxy in the Abell 370 cluster field reveals a gas-phase oxygen abundance of $12+\log(\mathrm{O/H})=6.85$, about 1.4% of the solar value, at redshift $z=8.203$. This is the lowest metallicity securely measured for any galaxy at $z>7$, and the galaxy sits 4.7 standard deviations below the mass-metallicity relation defined by other JWST galaxies at this epoch. The same data show that the galaxy is ultra-compact, with a half-light radius around 38 pc, and is forming stars at a very high surface density, with a Lyman-$\alpha$ escape fraction of about 20 percent that is hard to explain unless it sits inside an ionized bubble. The authors conclude that the low metallicity is more likely caused by infall of pristine gas diluting the interstellar medium than by the galaxy being a first-generation stellar population, and that the ionized bubble was probably carved by two close companion galaxies at nearly the same redshift.

What carries the argument

The central diagnostic is the $R_{23}$ strong-line metallicity indicator, $R_{23}=([\mathrm{O\,III}] \lambda4959+\lambda5007+[\mathrm{O\,II}]\lambda3727)/\mathrm{H}\beta$, used together with $O_{32}=[\mathrm{O\,III}]\lambda5007/[\mathrm{O\,II}]\lambda3727$ to place the galaxy on the low-metallicity branch of the $R_{23}$-metallicity relation. The paper adopts the Nakajima et al. (2022) calibration derived for galaxies with high H$\beta$ equivalent width, which is appropriate given EW(H$\beta$)=225\,$\pm$\,50 \AA; the non-detection of [O\,II]$\lambda3727$ gives $O_{32}>8.8$ and pushes the inference to a very low oxygen abundance. Supporting machinery includes the CANUCS lens model of Abell 370 (magnification about 8), source-plane morphology fitting that yields the 38 pc half-light radius, and a Lyman-$\alpha$ radiative transfer model with a fully neutral IGM and a 2 pMpc ionized bubble that reproduces the observed Lyman-$\alpha$ line.

What would settle it

Detect the [O III] lambda4363 auroral line in deeper, higher-resolution spectroscopy of CANUCS-A370-z8-LAE to obtain a direct electron-temperature metallicity: if the direct-method value is not lower than or consistent with the R23 value and still places the galaxy below the z>7 mass-metallicity relation, the central claim of record-low metallicity would be falsified.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On its own terms, the paper establishes that CANUCS-A370-z8-LAE, a strongly lensed galaxy at $z=8.203\pm0.001$, has the lowest $R_{23}$ ratio ($1.76\pm0.23$) of any known $z>7$ galaxy, translating through the Nakajima et al. (2022) $R_{23}$ calibration for high equivalent-width H$\beta$ galaxies into $12+\log(\mathrm{O/H})=6.85\pm0.16$, or 0.014 solar. It is a 4.7$\sigma$ outlier from the $7<z<10$ mass-metallicity relation, with a stellar mass of about $4.7\times10^7\,M_\odot$, a half-light radius of 38 pc, and a star-formation-rate surface density of $50\!-\!100\,M_\odot\,\mathrm{yr}^{-1}\,\mathrm{kpc}^{-2}$. The spectrum also shows strong Lyman-$\alpha$ emission with rest EW 63 \AA\ and an escape fraction of $0.21\pm0.05$, requiring a large ionized bubble; two companion galaxies at $z\approx8.20$ within about 0.1 pMpc projected separation are proposed as the agents that reionized the local environment. The authors argue that the combination of substantial stellar mass and very low metallicity is best explained by dilution of the interstellar medium by infalling metal-poor gas, rather than by the galaxy being caught during its very first burst of star formation.

Load-bearing premise

The entire metallicity claim rests on the R23-metallicity calibration of Nakajima et al. (2022) being valid when extrapolated to R23 values below 2 with high H-beta equivalent width, a regime in which only four local galaxies are known and none share the galaxy's high EW(H-beta); if that calibration is biased at low metallicity, the claimed 1.4% solar abundance could shift significantly.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If this measurement holds, CANUCS-A370-z8-LAE becomes the first $z>7$ galaxy found with gas metallicity approaching 1% solar, showing that such extremely metal-poor systems exist during reionization.
  • The high Lyman-$\alpha$ escape fraction of 0.21 at $z>8$ would be among the highest known at this epoch and implies that line-of-sight transmission is possible only inside an ionized bubble of about 1\,--\,2 pMpc, which the galaxy's own ionizing output cannot sustain alone.
  • The detection of two companion galaxies within $\delta z=0.01$ and about 0.1 pMpc suggests that small groups or overdensities are responsible for creating local ionized regions during the epoch of reionization.
  • The galaxy's high star-formation surface density ($50\!-\!100\,M_\odot\,\mathrm{yr}^{-1}\,\mathrm{kpc}^{-2}$) indicates that ultra-compact starbursts are a real mode of star formation at $z>8$, and may be the sites where metal-poor gas is most easily observed.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Because the $R_{23}$ calibration lacks local calibrators at $R_{23}<2$ with high EW(H$\beta$), the absolute metallicity scale is uncertain; a deeper spectrum with a detected [O\,III]$\lambda4363$ auroral line would test whether the true metallicity is even lower than 1.4% solar, as seen for similar compact starbursts.
  • The paper's dilution interpretation implies a specific prediction: the galaxy should show an older underlying stellar population and possibly a metallicity gradient, which could be tested with spatially resolved spectroscopy.
  • If record-low-metallicity objects are preferentially found among strongly lensed ultra-compact galaxies, then current JWST surveys may be systematically missing the most metal-poor systems because of surface-brightness and aperture effects rather than because such systems are absent.
  • The triplet of galaxies at the same redshift offers a testable probe of reionization topology: measuring Lyman-$\alpha$ transmission along the three sightlines in higher-resolution spectra would constrain the size and geometry of the ionized bubble.
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.

Referee Report

3 major / 6 minor

Summary. The paper reports JWST NIRSpec prism and NIRCam/NIRISS observations of a gravitationally lensed galaxy at z=8.203 in Abell 370. From R23=1.76±0.23 it derives 12+log(O/H)=6.85±0.16 (1.4% solar) using the Nakajima et al. (2022) high-EW(Hβ) calibration, and identifies the galaxy as a 4.7σ outlier from the z>7 mass–metallicity relation. Additional measurements include EW(Lyα)=63±9 Å, fesc(Lyα)=0.21±0.05, half-light radius 38+3−19 pc, and SFR surface density 50–100 M⊙ yr−1 kpc−2. The paper interprets the low metallicity as dilution by infalling metal-poor gas and attributes the Lyα transmission to an overdensity of at least three z≈8.2 galaxies creating an ionized bubble.

Significance. If correct, this is one of the most metal-poor galaxies known at z>7 and an important data point for enrichment and reionization studies. The paper is careful in several ways: it rescales NIRSpec uncertainties using a noise test, checks for an AGN via line widths, considers multiple metallicity calibrations, and explicitly states lens-model and calibration limitations. These strengths make the qualitative discovery credible. The main concerns are that the headline metallicity rests on an extrapolated calibration, the 4.7σ outlier significance is overestimated, and the nominal lensing magnification lies outside the 68% range of its own model ensemble. None of these concerns appears to undermine the qualitative conclusion that the galaxy is very metal-poor and extremely compact, but they affect the quantitative claims.

major comments (3)
  1. [Section 4.1, Table 1] The central value 12+log(O/H)=6.85 depends on the Nakajima et al. (2022) high-EW(Hβ) R23 calibration at R23=1.76, a regime the paper states is populated by only four local galaxies with R23<2 and none with high EW(Hβ); there is no direct-Te anchor because [OIII]4363 is undetected. The quoted uncertainty ±0.16 therefore does not include the extrapolation systematic. The paper should quote a metallicity range that includes the spread among plausible calibrations (it already notes that Sanders et al. 2024 would lower the value by about 0.3 dex), or add an explicit systematic term. This is not a fatal issue for the qualitative conclusion that the galaxy is very metal-poor, but it is load-bearing for the exact "1.4% solar" headline.
  2. [Section 4.1, Figure 4] The 4.7σ outlier claim is computed as the -0.77 dex offset divided by only the 0.16 dex dispersion of the comparison sample. The galaxy's own metallicity uncertainty is also 0.16 dex, so including it reduces the significance to about 3σ; adding a calibration systematic of 0.2–0.3 dex reduces it further. Please propagate both uncertainties and state the revised significance. The qualitative position of the galaxy below the mass–metallicity relation is not in question, but the quoted significance overstates the constraint.
  3. [Section 3.2, Table 1] The default magnification µ=8.0 is the best-fit lens model, yet the paper reports that the Bayesian lens-model sample gives 9.6<µ<21.8 at 68% confidence and that the best-fit is outside this interval. Adopting this value as "conservative" is not self-evident, and the quoted M*, SFR, and MUV are corrected for µ=8.0 without including lensing uncertainty. The size analysis does propagate the 100-model ensemble, which is good, but the stellar mass and SFR values need either a representative magnification with asymmetric uncertainties or an explicit statement of how the values change across the 68% range.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Section 1] "ΛCMD" should be "ΛCDM".
  2. [Section 3.2] The text "from9.6 < µ <21.8" is missing a space after "from".
  3. [Section 5] The sentence "Marszewski et al. (2024) find in FIRE-2 simulations show that our galaxy's position..." is ungrammatical; suggest "Marszewski et al. (2024) find in FIRE-2 simulations that our galaxy's position...".
  4. [Section 4.1] "none of these have a high EW(Hβ)" should be "none of these has a high EW(Hβ)" or "no object in the sample has a high EW(Hβ)".
  5. [Figure 3] The middle-panel label "half-light radius = 8milliarcsec" lacks a space; use "8 milliarcsec" or "8 mas" for consistency with the text.
  6. [Table 1 note] The table note "M∗, SFR, and MUV arecorrectedforbestfit µ = 8.0" is missing spaces in the displayed manuscript text and should be corrected.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 1.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the metallicity and outlier claims rest on direct line-ratio measurements and external calibrations, not on the paper's own definitions.

full rationale

The derivation chain is self-contained with respect to the central claims. The gas-phase metallicity 12+log(O/H)=6.85 is obtained by measuring R23=1.76±0.23 and O32>8.8 directly from the NIRSpec prism spectrum and applying the externally published Nakajima et al. (2022), Curti et al. (2024), and Nakajima et al. (2022) high-EW(Hβ) calibrations; the adopted value is not fit to this galaxy and is not defined by any property that is itself the conclusion. The 4.7-sigma outlier claim is computed against a mass-metallicity relation fitted to an external sample from which this object and other low-metallicity-selected objects are explicitly excluded, so the offset is not forced by construction. The Lyman-α escape fraction of 0.21±0.05 follows from the observed Lyα/Hβ flux ratio under Case B recombination, which is standard physics and does not depend on the conclusions being tested. Self-citations to CANUCS data products (Willott et al. 2022, 2024; Desprez et al. 2024; Gledhill et al. 2024; Sarrouh et al. 2025) support data reduction, photometric redshifts, and lensing magnification, but none of them supplies the metallicity, the outlier significance, the size, or the escape fraction by definition. The acknowledged calibration extrapolation (only four local galaxies in Nakajima et al. 2022 have R23<2 and none have high EW(Hβ) like the target) is an external systematic uncertainty, not a circular step. No equation in the paper reduces a predicted quantity to an input fitted from that same quantity, and no load-bearing premise is justified solely by a self-citation.

Assumptions & free parameters 5 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The paper introduces no new physical entities. The free parameters are model choices (Sersic index, ellipticity, IGM neutral fraction and bubble radius, ionization parameter) that influence derived sizes and star formation rates. The central metallicity claim relies on an extrapolated empirical calibration, listed as a domain assumption.

free parameters (5)
  • Sersic index n = 1 (fixed)
    The source is too compact to constrain the light profile shape, so n=1 is adopted for the size measurement (Section 3.3). Tests with n=0.5 and n=2 give half-light radii within the quoted uncertainty.
  • Source ellipticity = 0 (assumed)
    A zero-ellipticity Sersic profile is assumed to estimate the size because the lensing shear constrains only one axis; a free-ellipticity fit gives e=0.50 with a similar circularized radius (Section 3.3).
  • IGM neutral fraction xHI = 1.0 (default)
    Set to a fully neutral IGM for the default Lyman-alpha line fit; xHI=0.7 changes the intrinsic Ly-alpha flux by about 3% (Section 3.1).
  • Ionized bubble radius Rion = 2 pMpc
    A 2 pMpc fully-ionized bubble around the galaxy allows a good fit; the data cannot constrain Rion and xHI simultaneously (Section 3.1).
  • Ionization parameter logU = -1.5
    Chosen in the SED fitting based on the high observed O32 ratio and prior work (Section 3.4).
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption The Nakajima et al. (2022) R23-metallicity calibration for high EW(H-beta) galaxies can be extrapolated to R23=1.76 and O32>8.8.
    Used in Section 4.1 to convert line ratios to 12+log(O/H)=6.85. The paper notes the calibration has few local calibrators below R23=2 and none at high EW(H-beta), so the extrapolation is uncertain.
  • domain assumption Case B recombination applies to the nebular gas with negligible dust extinction.
    Assumed when using the H-delta/H-beta ratio to set no dust (Section 3.1) and when converting Ly-alpha/H-beta to fesc(Ly-alpha)=0.21 (Section 4.2).
  • domain assumption The CANUCS lens model of Abell 370 (Gledhill et al. 2024) provides a valid magnification at this location (best-fit mu=8.0).
    Used for all physical sizes, masses, and SFRs (Sections 3.2-3.4). The paper notes the best-fit is outside the 68% credible range of the Bayesian model sample.
  • domain assumption The H-beta emission is powered by star formation, not an AGN broad-line region.
    Based on the absence of broad line wings in the NIRSpec prism data (Section 3.1). This underlies the metallicity and star-formation interpretations.
  • domain assumption The UV continuum slope beta=-1.8 derived from NIRCam photometry is representative of the stellar continuum under the Ly-alpha line.
    Used in the spectral decomposition of the Ly-alpha region (Section 3.1); beta uncertainty of +/-0.15 is included.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of In Search of the First Stars: An Ultra-Compact and Very Low Metallicity Lyman-$\alpha$ Emitter Deep Within the Epoch of Reionization." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/QHDPBRNV

@misc{pith2026250207733,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: In Search of the First Stars: An Ultra-Compact and Very Low Metallicity Lyman-$\alpha$ Emitter Deep Within the Epoch of Reionization},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/QHDPBRNV}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2502.07733}
}
abstract

We present {\it JWST} observations of a gravitationally-lensed, extremely metal-poor galaxy at redshift $z=8.203\pm 0.001$ from the CANUCS survey. Based on the low oxygen to Balmer line ratios we infer a gas-phase metallicity of $12+{\rm log(O/H)}=6.85$ (1.4\% solar), making CANUCS-A370-z8-LAE one of the most metal-poor galaxies known at $z>7$. With a high H$\beta$ equivalent width of $225\pm50$\,\AA\ and a half-light radius of only $r_{\rm hl} = 38 ^{+3}_{-19} $\,pc, the galaxy has a high star-formation-rate density of $50 - 100\,M_{\odot}$\,yr$^{-1}$\,kpc$^{-2}$. The galaxy shows high equivalent width Lyman-$\alpha$ emission with an inferred Lyman-$\alpha$ escape fraction of $0.21 \pm 0.05$. The high escape fraction of Lyman-$\alpha$ is likely due to the compact starbursting nature of the galaxy combined with its location in an overdensity traced by at least two other galaxies spectroscopically confirmed to lie within $\delta z = 0.01$ that have helped to reionize the environment. The low metallicity of CANUCS-A370-z8-LAE is best explained by a model where infalling metal-poor gas dilutes the interstellar medium, rather than being a young galaxy forming its first stellar populations.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2502.07733 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. NIRSpec prism spectrum of CANUCS-A370-z8-LAE. The upper panel shows the 2D spectrum of the target in the central row with a lower redshift galaxy spectrum near the top of the panel. Several emission lines, including Lyman-α, are clearly visible in the 2D spectrum. The lower panel shows a 1D optimal extraction. Expected strong emission lines are labeled. As well as strong Lyman-α, this spectrum is notable for the ver… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Emission line fits (red lines) for CANUCS-A370-z8-LAE compared to the data (black steps with 1σ uncertainties). Left: The Lyman-α line is modeled as a Gaussian at the systemic redshift (marked by the dashed vertical line) added to an underlying β = −1.8 UV continuum. This model is subjected to absorption from a fully neutral IGM with the galaxy at the center of a 2 pMpc radius ionized bubble. The full model is convo… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Left: NIRCam F200W image of CANUCS-A370- z8-LAE on a 20 milli-arcsec pixel scale in units of nJy per pixel. The field shown is 0.8 arcsec. The galaxy appears slightly elongated at a position angle close to the lensing shear direction of 108◦ . Middle: Lenstruction model re￾construction of a zero ellipticity Sérsic n = 1 model with half-light radius = 8 milliarcsec. This reconstruction is for the best fit lensing mod… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (1 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Left: strong emission line ratio diagnostic for redshift 7 < z < 10 galaxies with JWST measurements (colored symbols) and SDSS local galaxies (gray density hexmap). CANUCS-A370-z8-LAE has the lowest R23 ratio of known z > 7 galaxies, indicating a very low oxygen abunda…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. CECILIA: Ultra-Deep Rest-Optical Spectra of Faint Galaxies at Cosmic Noon

    astro-ph.GA 2025-07 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Ultra-deep JWST/NIRSpec spectra of nine faint galaxies at z~2.5 yield low SFRs, low dust, low electron densities, and hints of a very-low-metallicity turnover in the [OIII]/Hβ diagnostic.

  2. CANUCS/Technicolor Data Release 1: Imaging, Photometry, Slit Spectroscopy, and Stellar Population Parameters

    astro-ph.GA 2025-06 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    The CANUCS/Technicolor Data Release 1 provides public JWST imaging, photometric catalogs, spectra, and stellar population fits for about 100,000 galaxies in five lensing clusters.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

84 extracted references · 5 canonical work pages · cited by 2 Pith papers

  1. [1]

    2022, Nature Astronomy, 6, 48, doi: 10.1038/s41550-021-01575-x Arrabal Haro, P., Dickinson, M., Finkelstein, S

    Annibali, F., & Tosi, M. 2022, Nature Astronomy, 6, 48, doi: 10.1038/s41550-021-01575-x Arrabal Haro, P., Dickinson, M., Finkelstein, S. L., et al. 2023, ApJL, 951, L22, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/acdd54

    doi:10.1038/s41550-021-01575-x 2022

  2. [2]

    J., et al

    Asada, Y., Desprez, G., Willott, C. J., et al. 2025, ApJL, 983, L2, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/adc388

    doi:10.3847/2041-8213/adc388 2025

  3. [3]

    2018, Physics of the Dark Universe, 22, 189, doi: 10.1016/j.dark.2018.11.002

    Birrer, S., & Amara, A. 2018, Physics of the Dark Universe, 22, 189, doi: 10.1016/j.dark.2018.11.002

    doi:10.1016/j.dark.2018.11.002 2018

  4. [4]

    2015, ApJ, 813, 102, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/813/2/102

    Birrer, S., Amara, A., & Refregier, A. 2015, ApJ, 813, 102, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/813/2/102

    doi:10.1088/0004-637x/813/2/102 2015

  5. [5]

    2022, gbrammer/msaexp: Full working version with 2d drizzling and extraction, 0.3, Zenodo, doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7299501

    Brammer, G. 2022, gbrammer/msaexp: Full working version with 2d drizzling and extraction, 0.3, Zenodo, doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7299501

    doi:10.5281/zenodo.7299501 2022

  6. [6]

    B., van Dokkum, P

    Brammer, G. B., van Dokkum, P. G., & Coppi, P. 2008, ApJ, 686, 1503, doi: 10.1086/591786

    doi:10.1086/591786 2008

  7. [7]

    S., & Larson, R

    Bromm, V., Coppi, P. S., & Larson, R. B. 1999, ApJL, 527, L5, doi: 10.1086/312385

    doi:10.1086/312385 1999

  8. [8]

    J., Saxena, A., Bunker, A

    Cameron, A. J., Saxena, A., Bunker, A. J., et al. 2023, A&A, 677, A115, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202346107

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202346107 2023

Show all 84 references
  1. [9]

    C., McLure, R

    Carnall, A. C., McLure, R. J., Dunlop, J. S., & Davé, R. 2018, MNRAS, 480, 4379, doi: 10.1093/mnras/sty2169 12 Willott et al

    2018 doi

  2. [10]

    2016, MNRAS, 457, 2605, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stw064

    Ceverino, D., Sánchez Almeida, J., Muñoz Tuñón, C., et al. 2016, MNRAS, 457, 2605, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stw064

    2016 doi

  3. [11]

    P., Mason, C., et al

    Chen, Z., Stark, D. P., Mason, C., et al. 2024, MNRAS, 528, 7052, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stae455

    2024 doi

  4. [12]

    A., Gebhardt, K., & Henriques, B

    Chiang, Y.-K., Overzier, R. A., Gebhardt, K., & Henriques, B. 2017, The Astrophysical Journal Letters, 844, L23, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/aa7e7b

    2017 doi

  5. [13]

    C., Scholte, D., et al

    Cullen, F., Carnall, A. C., Scholte, D., et al. 2025, MNRAS, 540, 2176, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staf838

    2025 doi

  6. [14]

    2023, MNRAS, 518, 425, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac2737

    Curti, M., D’Eugenio, F., Carniani, S., et al. 2023, MNRAS, 518, 425, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac2737

    2023 doi

  7. [15]

    2024, A&A, 684, A75, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202346698 de Graaff, A., Rix, H.-W., Carniani, S., et al

    Curti, M., Maiolino, R., Curtis-Lake, E., et al. 2024, A&A, 684, A75, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202346698 de Graaff, A., Rix, H.-W., Carniani, S., et al. 2024, A&A, 684, A87, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202347755

    2024 doi

  8. [16]

    S., Asada, Y., et al

    Desprez, G., Martis, N. S., Asada, Y., et al. 2024, MNRAS, 530, 2935, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stae1084

    2024 doi

  9. [17]

    Dijkstra, M., Mesinger, A., & Wyithe, J. S. B. 2011, MNRAS, 414, 2139, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2011.18530.x

    2011

  10. [18]

    J., Hutchings, J

    Doyon, R., Willott, C. J., Hutchings, J. B., et al. 2023, PASP, 135, 098001, doi: 10.1088/1538-3873/acd41b

    2023 doi

  11. [19]

    2022, A&A, 661, A81, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202142673

    Ferruit, P., Jakobsen, P., Giardino, G., et al. 2022, A&A, 661, A81, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202142673

    2022 doi

  12. [20]

    2024, ApJ, 964, 146, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad235c

    Fujimoto, S., Ouchi, M., Nakajima, K., et al. 2024, ApJ, 964, 146, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad235c

    2024 doi

  13. [21]

    P., Chisholm, J., et al

    Fujimoto, S., Naidu, R. P., Chisholm, J., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2501.11678, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2501.11678

    2025 doi arXiv

  14. [22]

    P., Mather, J

    Gardner, J. P., Mather, J. C., Abbott, R., et al. 2023, PASP, 135, 068001, doi: 10.1088/1538-3873/acd1b5

    2023 doi

  15. [23]

    2024, ApJ, 973, 77, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad684a

    Gledhill, R., Strait, V., Desprez, G., et al. 2024, ApJ, 973, 77, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad684a

    2024 doi

  16. [24]

    2023, MNRAS, 522, 1556, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad959

    Nanayakkara, T. 2023, MNRAS, 522, 1556, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad959

    2023 doi

  17. [25]

    Y.-Y., Abdurro’uf, Coe, D., et al

    Hsiao, T. Y.-Y., Abdurro’uf, Coe, D., et al. 2024, ApJ, 973, 8, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad5da8

    2024 doi

  18. [26]

    2021, MNRAS, 503, 3698, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stab602

    Hutter, A., Dayal, P., Yepes, G., et al. 2021, MNRAS, 503, 3698, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stab602

    2021 doi

  19. [27]

    2018, ApJ, 854, 73, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aaa544

    Ishigaki, M., Kawamata, R., Ouchi, M., et al. 2018, ApJ, 854, 73, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aaa544

    2018 doi

  20. [28]

    I., Thuan, T

    Izotov, Y. I., Thuan, T. X., Guseva, N. G., et al. 2024, MNRAS, 527, 281, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad3151

    2024 doi

  21. [29]

    L., Kumari, N., Emerick, A., et al

    James, B. L., Kumari, N., Emerick, A., et al. 2020, MNRAS, 495, 2564, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staa1280

    2020 doi

  22. [30]

    C., Bunker, A

    Jones, G. C., Bunker, A. J., Saxena, A., et al. 2025, MNRAS, 536, 2355, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stae2670

    2025 doi

  23. [31]

    L., Arrabal Haro, P., et al

    Jung, I., Finkelstein, S. L., Arrabal Haro, P., et al. 2024, ApJ, 967, 73, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad3913

    2024 doi

  24. [32]

    2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2501.05834, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2501.05834

    Kageura, Y., Ouchi, M., Nakane, M., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2501.05834, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2501.05834

    2025 doi arXiv

  25. [33]

    S., Devriendt, J., & Slyz, A

    Katz, H., Kimm, T., Ellis, R. S., Devriendt, J., & Slyz, A. 2023, MNRAS, 524, 351, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad1903

    2023 doi

  26. [34]

    2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2501.07548

    Kim, K., Alavi, A., Snapp-Kolas, C., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2501.07548. https://arxiv.org/abs/2501.07548

    2025

  27. [35]

    2001, MNRAS, 322, 231, doi: 10.1046/j.1365-8711.2001.04022.x

    Kroupa, P. 2001, MNRAS, 322, 231, doi: 10.1046/j.1365-8711.2001.04022.x

    2001

  28. [36]

    2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2409.07455, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2409.07455

    Langeroodi, D., & Hjorth, J. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2409.07455, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2409.07455

    2024 doi

  29. [37]

    H., Maseda, M

    Laseter, I. H., Maseda, M. V., Curti, M., et al. 2024, A&A, 681, A70, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202347133

    2024 doi

  30. [38]

    2022, MNRAS, 509, 595, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stab3034

    Legrand, L., Hutter, A., Dayal, P., et al. 2022, MNRAS, 509, 595, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stab3034

    2022 doi

  31. [39]

    J., Carollo, C

    Lilly, S. J., Carollo, C. M., Pipino, A., Renzini, A., & Peng, Y. 2013, ApJ, 772, 119, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/772/2/119

    2013 doi

  32. [40]

    M., Koekemoer, A., Coe, D., et al

    Lotz, J. M., Koekemoer, A., Coe, D., et al. 2017, ApJ, 837, 97, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/837/1/97

    2017 doi

  33. [41]

    C., & Feldmann, R

    Marszewski, A., Sun, G., Faucher-Giguère, C.-A., Hayward, C. C., & Feldmann, R. 2024, ApJL, 967, L41, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ad4cee

    2024 doi

  34. [42]

    A., & Gronke, M

    Mason, C. A., & Gronke, M. 2020, MNRAS, 499, 1395, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staa2910

    2020 doi

  35. [43]

    2018, A&A, 619, A136, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201833528

    Matthee, J., Sobral, D., Gronke, M., et al. 2018, A&A, 619, A136, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201833528

    2018 doi

  36. [44]

    H., Burkhart, B., Somerville, R

    Menon, S. H., Burkhart, B., Somerville, R. S., Thompson, T. A., & Sternberg, A. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2408.14591, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2408.14591

    2024 doi arXiv

  37. [45]

    2024a, ApJ, 971, 43, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad5290

    Morishita, T., Stiavelli, M., Grillo, C., et al. 2024a, ApJ, 971, 43, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad5290

    doi

  38. [46]

    2024b, ApJ, 963, 9, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad1404

    Morishita, T., Stiavelli, M., Chary, R.-R., et al. 2024b, ApJ, 963, 9, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad1404

    doi

  39. [47]

    2024, Nature, 636, 332, doi: 10.1038/s41586-024-08293-0

    Mowla, L., Iyer, K., Asada, Y., et al. 2024, Nature, 636, 332, doi: 10.1038/s41586-024-08293-0

    2024 doi

  40. [48]

    2023, ApJS, 269, 33, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/acd556

    Nakajima, K., Ouchi, M., Isobe, Y., et al. 2023, ApJS, 269, 33, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/acd556

    2023 doi

  41. [49]

    2022, ApJS, 262, 3, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ac7710

    Nakajima, K., Ouchi, M., Xu, Y., et al. 2022, ApJS, 262, 3, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ac7710

    2022 doi

  42. [50]

    2023, ApJ, 952, 11, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/accf14

    Nishigaki, M., Ouchi, M., Nakajima, K., et al. 2023, ApJ, 952, 11, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/accf14

    2023 doi

  43. [51]

    B., & Gunn, J

    Oke, J. B., & Gunn, J. E. 1983, ApJ, 266, 713, doi: 10.1086/160817

    1983 doi

  44. [52]

    C., Estrada-Carpenter, V., et al

    Papovich, C., Simons, R. C., Estrada-Carpenter, V., et al. 2022, ApJ, 937, 22, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac8058

    2022 doi

  45. [53]

    Y., Ho, L

    Peng, C. Y., Ho, L. C., Impey, C. D., & Rix, H.-W. 2010, AJ, 139, 2097, doi: 10.1088/0004-6256/139/6/2097 In Search of the First Stars 13

    2010 doi

  46. [54]

    D., Sivaramakrishnan, A., Lajoie, C.-P., et al

    Perrin, M. D., Sivaramakrishnan, A., Lajoie, C.-P., et al. 2014, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, Vol. 9143, Space Telescopes and Instrumentation 2014: Optical, Infrared, and Millimeter Wave, ed. J. M. Oschmann, Jr., M. Clampin, G...

    2014 doi

  47. [55]

    A., Dey, A., et al

    Pucha, R., Reddy, N. A., Dey, A., et al. 2022, AJ, 164, 159, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/ac83a9

    2022 doi

  48. [56]

    A., Topping, M

    Reddy, N. A., Topping, M. W., Shapley, A. E., et al. 2022, ApJ, 926, 31, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac3b4c

    2022 doi

  49. [57]

    E., Wold, I

    Rhoads, J. E., Wold, I. G. B., Harish, S., et al. 2023, ApJL, 942, L14, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/acaaaf

    2023 doi

  50. [58]

    J., Kelly, D

    Rieke, M. J., Kelly, D. M., Misselt, K., et al. 2023, PASP, 135, 028001, doi: 10.1088/1538-3873/acac53

    2023 doi

  51. [59]

    2013, MNRAS, 429, 3658, doi: 10.1093/mnras/sts653

    Rydberg, C.-E., Zackrisson, E., Lundqvist, P., & Scott, P. 2013, MNRAS, 429, 3658, doi: 10.1093/mnras/sts653

    2013 doi

  52. [60]

    L., Shapley, A

    Sanders, R. L., Shapley, A. E., Topping, M. W., Reddy, N. A., & Brammer, G. B. 2024, ApJ, 962, 24, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad15fc

    2024 doi

  53. [61]

    Sarrouh, G. T. E., Asada, Y., Martis, N. S., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2506.21685, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2506.21685

    2025 doi arXiv

  54. [62]

    E., Bunker, A

    Saxena, A., Robertson, B. E., Bunker, A. J., et al. 2023, A&A, 678, A68, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202346245

    2023 doi

  55. [63]

    P., Ellis, R

    Stark, D. P., Ellis, R. S., Chiu, K., Ouchi, M., & Bunker, A. 2010, MNRAS, 408, 1628, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2010.17227.x

    2010

  56. [64]

    P., Topping, M

    Tang, M., Stark, D. P., Topping, M. W., Mason, C., & Ellis, R. S. 2024, ApJ, 975, 208, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad7eb7

    2024 doi

  57. [65]

    A., Quataert, E., & Murray, N

    Thompson, T. A., Quataert, E., & Murray, N. 2005, ApJ, 630, 167, doi: 10.1086/431923

    2005 doi

  58. [66]

    W., Stark, D

    Topping, M. W., Stark, D. P., Senchyna, P., et al. 2025, ApJ, 980, 225, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ada95c

    2025 doi

  59. [67]

    2017, MNRAS, 470, 224, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stx1060

    Slyz, A. 2017, MNRAS, 470, 224, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stx1060

    2017 doi

  60. [68]

    2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2412.04983, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2412.04983

    Tripodi, R., Martis, N., Markov, V., et al. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2412.04983, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2412.04983

    2024 doi arXiv

  61. [69]

    R., Arrabal Haro, P., Simons, R

    Trump, J. R., Arrabal Haro, P., Simons, R. C., et al. 2023, ApJ, 945, 35, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/acba8a

    2023 doi

  62. [70]

    2023, A&A, 678, A173, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202346981

    Vanzella, E., Loiacono, F., Bergamini, P., et al. 2023, A&A, 678, A173, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202346981

    2023 doi

  63. [71]

    2024, MNRAS, 527, 5102, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad3513

    Schneider, R. 2024, MNRAS, 527, 5102, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad3513

    2024 doi

  64. [72]

    J., Doyon, R., Albert, L., et al

    Willott, C. J., Doyon, R., Albert, L., et al. 2022, PASP, 134, 025002, doi: 10.1088/1538-3873/ac5158

    2022 doi

  65. [73]

    J., Desprez, G., Asada, Y., et al

    Willott, C. J., Desprez, G., Asada, Y., et al. 2024, ApJ, 966, 74, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad35bc

    2024 doi

  66. [74]

    A., Timmes, F

    Windhorst, R. A., Timmes, F. X., Wyithe, J. S. B., et al. 2018, ApJS, 234, 41, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/aaa760

    2018 doi

  67. [75]

    H., Turk, M

    Wise, J. H., Turk, M. J., Norman, M. L., & Abel, T. 2012, ApJ, 745, 50, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/745/1/50

    2012 doi

  68. [76]

    2025a, MNRAS, 536, 27, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stae2535

    Witstok, J., Maiolino, R., Smit, R., et al. 2025a, MNRAS, 536, 27, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stae2535

    doi

  69. [77]

    2025b, Nature, 639, 897, doi: 10.1038/s41586-025-08779-5

    Witstok, J., Jakobsen, P., Maiolino, R., et al. 2025b, Nature, 639, 897, doi: 10.1038/s41586-025-08779-5

    doi

  70. [78]

    2024, Nature Astronomy, 8, 384, doi: 10.1038/s41550-023-02179-3

    Witten, C., Laporte, N., Martin-Alvarez, S., et al. 2024, Nature Astronomy, 8, 384, doi: 10.1038/s41550-023-02179-3

    2024 doi

  71. [79]

    E., Willott, C

    Woods, T. E., Willott, C. J., Regan, J. A., et al. 2021, ApJL, 920, L22, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ac2a45

    2021 doi

  72. [80]

    2015, MNRAS, 451, 418, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stv974

    Yajima, H., Shlosman, I., Romano-Díaz, E., & Nagamine, K. 2015, MNRAS, 451, 418, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stv974

    2015 doi

  73. [81]

    2017, ApJ, 844, 171, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aa7d4d

    Yang, H., Malhotra, S., Gronke, M., et al. 2017, ApJ, 844, 171, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aa7d4d

    2017 doi

  74. [82]

    2020, MNRAS, 496, 2648, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staa1649

    Yang, L., Birrer, S., & Treu, T. 2020, MNRAS, 496, 2648, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staa1649

    2020 doi

  75. [83]

    2022, MNRAS, 514, 1148, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac1236

    Yang, L., Leethochawalit, N., Treu, T., et al. 2022, MNRAS, 514, 1148, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac1236

    2022 doi

  76. [84]

    2015, MNRAS, 449, 3057, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stv492

    Zackrisson, E., González, J., Eriksson, S., et al. 2015, MNRAS, 449, 3057, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stv492

    2015 doi

Pith tools

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