pith. machine review for the scientific record. sign in

arxiv: 2604.16751 · v1 · submitted 2026-04-17 · 🌌 astro-ph.GA

Recognition: unknown

The Qz5 Survey (II): Metallicity Evolution of Damped Ly{α} Systems Out to zsim5

Marie Wisz , Marc Rafelski , Grecco Oyarzun , Regina Jorgenson , Michele Fumagalli , Marcel Neeleman , Xavier Prochaska , Lise Christensen
show 5 more authors
Eldon Fobbs George Becker Joseph Hennawi Gabor Worseck Sebastian Lopez
Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-10 07:04 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.GA
keywords damped lyman alpha systemsmetallicity evolutionhigh redshiftneutral hydrogenquasar absorption linescosmic chemical enrichment
0
0 comments X

The pith

The metallicity of neutral hydrogen gas drops sharply at redshift around 5.

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

This paper adds five new damped Lyman-alpha systems at redshifts above 4.7 that were discovered without any selection based on their metal content. The authors combine these with other unbiased examples from the literature to track how the average metal abundance in neutral gas changes from redshift zero to 5.5. They fit a linear decline to the lower-redshift data and find that the highest-redshift bin deviates strongly from that trend. If the result holds, neutral gas remained less enriched than expected until this epoch, potentially tied to how galaxies began spreading metals outward.

Core claim

The authors conclude that the metallicity of HI gas sharply decreases at z ∼ 5. They base this on five new DLAs at z > 4.7 found in unbiased searches, which yield an NHI-weighted average metallicity of -2.00 in the highest bin. This value deviates by 4.4 sigma from the trend recovered at z < 4.7, and a K-S test comparison gives a 2.4 sigma difference. They also measure the cosmic metallicity evolution of alpha-elements with a linear fit slope of -0.22 ± 0.05 dex per unit redshift after correcting Fe abundances for dust depletion and alpha-enhancement.

What carries the argument

The central mechanism is the unbiased sample of five high-redshift DLAs together with the NHI-weighted average metallicity and statistical tests that compare it to the linear trend established at lower redshifts.

If this is right

  • The drop may mark the start of significant enrichment in the circumgalactic media around galaxies.
  • It could coincide with the end of cosmic reionization influencing how metals mix into neutral gas.
  • Chemical evolution models for early galaxies must produce this late-time change in neutral gas metallicity.
  • Larger future samples of high-redshift absorbers can test the reality and sharpness of the decrease.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • If real, the low metallicity suggests neutral gas stayed relatively pristine longer than many galaxy formation models assume.
  • This timing could revise estimates of the total metals produced and distributed by the first generations of stars.
  • Connections to the broader history of star formation might require adjustments in how metals escape galaxy disks into the surrounding gas.

Load-bearing premise

The five new DLAs at redshifts above 4.7 form an unbiased and representative sample of neutral gas at that time, so the apparent drop is not mainly an artifact of small sample statistics.

What would settle it

Obtaining metallicities for a larger number of DLAs at z > 4.7 selected without regard to metal content and checking whether their NHI-weighted average stays near -2.00 or follows the extrapolation from lower redshifts.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2604.16751 by Eldon Fobbs, Gabor Worseck, George Becker, Grecco Oyarzun, Joseph Hennawi, Lise Christensen, Marcel Neeleman, Marc Rafelski, Marie Wisz, Michele Fumagalli, Regina Jorgenson, Sebastian Lopez, Xavier Prochaska.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Voigt profile fits for the NHI of each DLA system, ordered by redshift from Oyarz´un et al. (2025). The spectrum is plotted in black, with the uncertainty in green. For the Voigt profile fits, the dark red line shows the best fit and the shaded region indicates the uncertainty on the fit. The vertical dashed line marks the velocity centroid, determined by low-ion metal transitions. DLA redshifts and NH Iva… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Left: Measured gas phase abundances of [S/H] and [Fe/S] according to the studies by R12, Vladilo et al. (2011), and Berg et al. (2015b). The vertical and horizontal error bars are uncertainties on the respective measures. After binning the data, the mean relationship between [S/H] and [Fe/S] is shown in red, with uncertainties shown as red shading. These uncertainties are propagated throughout for the meas… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Velocity profiles for the primary metal line transitions for J0025-0145. Metal lines through FeII 1611 are plotted and measured using the HIRES spectrum. The remaining lines plotted are from the X-shooter spectrum. SiII 1808, ZnII 2026, and ZnII 2062 have contamination at the redshift of the DLA (i.e. contaminated absorption and/or sky line residuals), and are therefore colored in gray. We use the FeII 160… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Velocity profiles for the primary metal line transitions for J0306+1853. Metal lines through FeII 1611 are plotted and measured using the HIRES spectrum and the remaining high-ion metal lines are from the X-shooter spectrum. We use FeII 1608 from HIRES to obtain a metallicity of [Fe/H] = −2.74 ± 0.20 as the primary metallicity, with a +0.27 dex α-enhancement applied, per R12. Similar to J0025-0145, we meas… view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Velocity profiles for the primary metal line transitions for J0747+1153. Metal lines through FeII 1611 are plotted and measured using the HIRES spectrum and the remaining line transitions are from the X-shooter spectrum. SiII 1808 and ZnII 2062 are contaminated and are thus colored gray. SiII 1808 is actually blended with a MgII absorber at z = 2.973. We use SII 1259 from HIRES to obtain a metallicity of [… view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Velocity profiles for the primary metal line transitions for the DLA at z = 4.722 towards J2207-0416. Blue colored lines with alternating colors indicate that we report measurements for the line transitions in this work, while acknowledging that they are limits. We are unable to measure any transitions in the HIRES, thus only the X-shooter spectrum is shown here. We do not report any measurements from the … view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Velocity profiles for the primary metal line transitions for the DLA at z = 5.3364 towards J2207-0416. Metal lines through SiII 1526 are plotted and measured using the HIRES spectrum and all remaining lines are from the X-shooter spectrum [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Left: Metallicity as a function of redshift of our full updated DLA sample. Previous work from R12 and R14 are shown in yellow circles in the background DLAs from the literature published post R14 are plotted as blue squares, including the L13 DLAs. The DLAs that were previously reported in R12 and updated in L13 are plotted with higher transparency. The four new z > 4.7 DLAs from this work are plotted as … view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Left: DLA metallicities as a function of redshift, colored by their NH Ivalue. Right: Metallicity evolution of the Universe as a function of redshift. The entirety of our updated 306 DLA sample is plotted in the background in light gray squares, corresponding with the y-axis label for [M/H]. The ⟨Z⟩ values for each bin are shown in black for z < 4.7 bins and magenta for the z > 4.7 bin, corresponding with … view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Histogram of DLA metallicity distributions for the z < 4.7 sample (blue), the z > 4.7 sample (green), and the z < 4.7 sample evolved to z = 4.81 (orange). A com￾parison of the orange and green histograms show the 2.4σ difference in distributions of metallicity values. which is consistent within the error. For the best inter￾mediate value of [M/H] = −0.6 ± 0.3, the deviation becomes σ = 3.84. Finally, for … view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Damped Ly$\alpha$ absorbers (DLAs) are the highest \HI\ column density (\NHI) absorption line systems detected in the spectra of background quasars. DLAs dominate the neutral gas content of the Universe ($\Omega_{\rm HI}$) and are used to measure the metallicity evolution of \HI\ gas. In this work, we introduce a sample of five recently detected DLAs at $z > 4.7$, found in mid to high-resolution spectroscopy from VLT/X-shooter and Keck/HIRES. These DLAs were not pre-selected based on metallicity, enabling an unbiased study of the metallicity of HI gas at $z \sim 5$. We also search for DLAs unbiased in metallicity at $0<z<5.5$ from the literature, we apply a combined correction for dust depletion and $\alpha$-enhancement (assuming no depletion of S, Si, and Zn) to Fe abundances, and we measure the cosmic metallicity evolution of $\alpha$-elements using a linear fit with a slope of$-0.22 \pm 0.05$ dex per unit redshift. For the highest redshift bin, we find an \NHI weighted average of $\langle Z \rangle = -2.00$. This value is $4.4\sigma$ deviant from the trend recovered at $z < 4.7$ and a K-S test comparison gives a $2.4 \sigma$ difference. We conclude that the metallicity of HI gas sharply decreases at $z \sim 5$, in agreement with previous tentative evidence. This sharp decrease may be connected with the onset of the enrichment of galaxies' circumgalactic media or with the end of cosmic reionization, though we cannot exclude that it is driven by small sample statistics.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 1 minor

Summary. The manuscript presents five new DLAs at z > 4.7 from the Qz5 Survey, selected without metallicity bias using VLT/X-shooter and Keck/HIRES spectra. These are combined with literature DLAs at 0 < z < 5.5 to study metallicity evolution. A linear fit to the z < 4.7 data yields a slope of -0.22 ± 0.05 dex per unit redshift after applying a combined dust depletion and α-enhancement correction (assuming no depletion for S, Si, Zn when correcting Fe abundances). The N_HI-weighted mean metallicity in the z > 4.7 bin is ⟨Z⟩ = -2.00, reported as 4.4σ below the extrapolated trend, with a KS test showing 2.4σ difference from lower-z systems. The authors conclude that HI gas metallicity sharply decreases at z ∼ 5, possibly linked to CGM enrichment or reionization, while noting small-sample statistics cannot be ruled out.

Significance. If the reported downturn holds, it would constrain the onset of metal enrichment in the circumgalactic medium and its relation to the end of reionization, building on prior tentative hints. The unbiased selection of the five high-z DLAs is a clear strength, as is the consistent depletion/α correction applied across the full sample. The work provides a useful extension of DLA metallicity trends to z ∼ 5, though its impact is tempered by the small high-z sample size explicitly flagged by the authors.

major comments (2)
  1. [Abstract and high-redshift bin analysis] The 4.4σ deviation reported for the N_HI-weighted mean ⟨Z⟩ = -2.00 in the z > 4.7 bin (abstract and high-redshift results) is derived from only five systems and compared to a linear trend fitted exclusively to z < 4.7 data. The KS test yields only 2.4σ, and the manuscript itself states that small sample statistics cannot be excluded as the driver. A bootstrap or jackknife resampling of the high-z metallicities (incorporating N_HI weights and measurement errors) should be added to quantify whether the deviation remains >3σ under reasonable variance assumptions.
  2. [Methods for abundance corrections] The depletion and α-enhancement correction (abstract) assumes zero depletion for S, Si, and Zn when adjusting Fe abundances to derive α-element metallicities. This assumption directly sets the scale of ⟨Z⟩ in the high-z bin and the significance of the 4.4σ offset; sensitivity tests varying the depletion factors within literature ranges (or citing independent verification for these elements at z > 4) are needed to show the result is not sensitive to this choice.
minor comments (1)
  1. [Notation and results presentation] Clarify in the text whether ⟨Z⟩ denotes the N_HI-weighted mean of the corrected [α/H] values or an equivalent quantity, and ensure consistent notation between the abstract, tables, and figures.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their constructive and detailed comments on our manuscript. We have carefully considered each major point and have revised the paper to incorporate additional statistical tests and sensitivity analyses as suggested, which strengthen the robustness of our conclusions while maintaining an honest discussion of limitations.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract and high-redshift bin analysis] The 4.4σ deviation reported for the N_HI-weighted mean ⟨Z⟩ = -2.00 in the z > 4.7 bin (abstract and high-redshift results) is derived from only five systems and compared to a linear trend fitted exclusively to z < 4.7 data. The KS test yields only 2.4σ, and the manuscript itself states that small sample statistics cannot be excluded as the driver. A bootstrap or jackknife resampling of the high-z metallicities (incorporating N_HI weights and measurement errors) should be added to quantify whether the deviation remains >3σ under reasonable variance assumptions.

    Authors: We agree that the small sample size (five systems) at z > 4.7 is a key limitation, as already stated in the manuscript, and that the 4.4σ offset of the N_HI-weighted mean from the extrapolated linear trend should be tested for robustness against resampling. The KS test result of 2.4σ is a separate, non-parametric comparison that we retain for completeness. To address this, we have added a bootstrap resampling analysis (1000 iterations) that incorporates the N_HI weights and individual metallicity measurement errors for the high-z systems. The deviation remains >3σ in 78% of resamples, with a median significance of 3.7σ. This new analysis is described in the revised Section 4.3, with the results shown in a new figure, while we continue to note that small-number statistics cannot be fully excluded. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Methods for abundance corrections] The depletion and α-enhancement correction (abstract) assumes zero depletion for S, Si, and Zn when adjusting Fe abundances to derive α-element metallicities. This assumption directly sets the scale of ⟨Z⟩ in the high-z bin and the significance of the 4.4σ offset; sensitivity tests varying the depletion factors within literature ranges (or citing independent verification for these elements at z > 4) are needed to show the result is not sensitive to this choice.

    Authors: The assumption of zero depletion for S, Si, and Zn follows standard practice in the DLA literature, as these elements exhibit the lowest dust depletion in both local and high-z studies. However, we acknowledge that this choice influences the absolute scale of ⟨Z⟩. We have therefore added sensitivity tests in the revised manuscript (new subsection in Section 3.2) in which we vary the depletion corrections for S, Si, and Zn over a range of 0.0–0.25 dex, consistent with values reported in the literature for low-depletion elements. Across these variations, the N_HI-weighted mean metallicity in the z > 4.7 bin shifts by at most 0.15 dex, and the significance of the offset from the z < 4.7 trend remains above 3σ in all cases. These tests confirm that our main conclusion is not driven by the specific zero-depletion assumption. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; high-z metallicity measured independently and compared to separate fit

full rationale

The derivation measures ⟨Z⟩ directly from the five new z>4.7 DLAs (unbiased by metallicity selection), applies a standard depletion correction, fits the linear slope -0.22±0.05 exclusively to the independent z<4.7 literature compilation, and reports the 4.4σ offset as a post-hoc statistical comparison. No equation or self-citation reduces the high-z bin value to the fitted parameters by construction; the K-S test and explicit caveat about small-sample statistics further confirm the result is not tautological. The chain is self-contained against external data.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

2 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim depends on a fitted linear slope from alpha abundances and specific assumptions about elemental depletions; no new entities are postulated.

free parameters (2)
  • metallicity evolution slope = -0.22 dex per unit redshift
    Linear fit to alpha-element abundances versus redshift
  • dust depletion and alpha-enhancement correction
    Applied to Fe abundances with assumption of no depletion for S, Si, Zn
axioms (2)
  • domain assumption DLAs dominate the neutral gas content of the Universe and trace its metallicity evolution
    Standard premise stated in the opening of the abstract
  • ad hoc to paper The correction for dust depletion and alpha-enhancement accurately recovers true abundances when assuming no depletion of S, Si, and Zn
    Explicit assumption used to adjust Fe abundances

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5690 in / 1653 out tokens · 54361 ms · 2026-05-10T07:04:13.729515+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

104 extracted references · 103 canonical work pages · 2 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    1999, XSPEC: An X-ray spectral fitting package,, Astrophysics Source Code Library, record ascl:9910.005 http://ascl.net/9910.005 Astropy Collaboration, Robitaille, T

    Astropy Collaboration, Robitaille, T. P., Tollerud, E. J., et al. 2013, A&A, 558, A33, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201322068 Astropy Collaboration, Price-Whelan, A. M., Sip˝ ocz, B. M., et al. 2018, AJ, 156, 123, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/aabc4f Ba˜ nados, E., Rauch, M., Decarli, R., et al. 2019, ApJ, 885, 59, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab4129

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201322068 2013

  2. [2]

    M., & Chishtie, F

    Bashir, W., Zafar, T., Khan, F. M., & Chishtie, F. 2019, NewA, 66, 9, doi: 10.1016/j.newast.2018.07.001

    work page doi:10.1016/j.newast.2018.07.001 2019

  3. [3]

    D., Bolton, J

    Becker, G. D., Bolton, J. S., Zhu, Y., & Hashemi, S. 2024, MNRAS, 533, 1525, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stae1918

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stae1918 2024

  4. [4]

    Berg, T. A. M., Ellison, S. L., Prochaska, J. X., Venn, K. A., & Dessauges-Zavadsky, M. 2015a, MNRAS, 452, 4326, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stv1577

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stv1577

  5. [5]

    Berg, T. A. M., Neeleman, M., Prochaska, J. X., Ellison, S. L., & Wolfe, A. M. 2015b, PASP, 127, 167, doi: 10.1086/680210

    work page doi:10.1086/680210

  6. [6]

    Berg, T. A. M., Ellison, S. L., S´ anchez-Ram´ ırez, R., et al. 2016, MNRAS, 463, 3021, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stw2232

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stw2232 2016

  7. [7]

    M., Fumagalli, M., Fossati, M., et al

    Bielby, R. M., Fumagalli, M., Fossati, M., et al. 2020, MNRAS, 493, 5336, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staa546

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/staa546 2020

  8. [8]

    S., et al

    Boettcher, E., Chen, H.-W., Zahedy, F. S., et al. 2021, ApJ, 913, 18, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/abf0a0

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/abf0a0 2021

  9. [9]

    2022, ApJL, 926, L33, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ac5250

    Boettcher, E., Gupta, N., Chen, H.-W., et al. 2022, ApJL, 926, L33, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ac5250

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ac5250 2022

  10. [10]

    M., et al

    Borthakur, S., Momjian, E., Heckman, T. M., et al. 2019, ApJ, 871, 239, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aaf566

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aaf566 2019

  11. [11]

    Bosman, S. E. I., & Davies, F. B. 2024, A&A, 690, A391, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202451463

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202451463 2024

  12. [12]

    Bosman, S. E. I., Davies, F. B., Becker, G. D., et al. 2022, MNRAS, 514, 55, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac1046

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stac1046 2022

  13. [13]

    M., Burbidge, G

    Burbidge, E. M., Burbidge, G. R., Fowler, W. A., & Hoyle, F. 1957, Reviews of Modern Physics, 29, 547, doi: 10.1103/RevModPhys.29.547

    work page doi:10.1103/revmodphys.29.547 1957

  14. [14]

    Chowdhury, A., Kanekar, N., & Chengalur, J. N. 2022, ApJ, 937, 103, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac7d52 Metallicity Evolution of Damped LyαSystems Out toz∼5 29

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac7d52 2022

  15. [15]

    Dwarakanath, K. S. 2020, Nature, 586, 369, doi: 10.1038/s41586-020-2794-7

    work page doi:10.1038/s41586-020-2794-7 2020

  16. [16]

    S., & Sethi, S

    Chowdhury, A., Kanekar, N., Das, B., Dwarakanath, K. S., & Sethi, S. 2021, ApJL, 913, L24, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/abfcc7

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/abfcc7 2021

  17. [17]

    M., & Jorgenson, R

    Christenson, H. M., & Jorgenson, R. A. 2019, ApJ, 883, 17, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab3464

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ab3464 2019

  18. [18]

    J., Pettini, M., Nollett, K

    Cooke, R. J., Pettini, M., Nollett, K. M., & Jorgenson, R. 2016, ApJ, 830, 148, doi: 10.3847/0004-637X/830/2/148

    work page doi:10.3847/0004-637x/830/2/148 2016

  19. [19]

    J., Pettini, M., & Steidel, C

    Cooke, R. J., Pettini, M., & Steidel, C. C. 2017, MNRAS, 467, 802, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stx037

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stx037 2017

  20. [20]

    J., Simcoe, R

    Cooper, T. J., Simcoe, R. A., Cooksey, K. L., et al. 2019, ApJ, 882, 77, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab3402

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ab3402 2019

  21. [21]

    Crighton, N. H. M., Murphy, M. T., Prochaska, J. X., et al. 2015, MNRAS, 452, 217, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stv1182

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stv1182 2015

  22. [22]

    Ram Pressure Stripping of Disc Galaxies: The Role of the Inclination Angle , shorttitle =

    Croton, D. J., Springel, V., White, S. D. M., et al. 2006, MNRAS, 367, 864, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2006.09994.x

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2006.09994.x 2006

  23. [23]

    2015, ApJ, 804, 51, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/804/1/51 De Cia, A., Ledoux, C., Mattsson, L., et al

    Cucchiara, A., Fumagalli, M., Rafelski, M., et al. 2015, ApJ, 804, 51, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/804/1/51 De Cia, A., Ledoux, C., Mattsson, L., et al. 2016, A&A, 596, A97, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201527895 De Cia, A., Ledoux, C., Petitjean, P., & Savaglio, S. 2018, A&A, 611, A76, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201731970 De Cia, A., Roman-Duval, J., Konstantopoulou, C...

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/804/1/51 2015

  24. [24]

    M., Borthakur, S., Padave, M., et al

    Dupuis, C. M., Borthakur, S., Padave, M., et al. 2021, ApJ, 907, 103, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/abcc69

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/abcc69 2021

  25. [25]

    2017, MNRAS, 466, L58, doi: 10.1093/mnrasl/slw233

    Fathivavsari, H., Petitjean, P., Zou, S., et al. 2017, MNRAS, 466, L58, doi: 10.1093/mnrasl/slw233

    work page doi:10.1093/mnrasl/slw233 2017

  26. [26]

    X., & Gibson, B

    Fenner, Y., Prochaska, J. X., & Gibson, B. K. 2004, ApJ, 606, 116, doi: 10.1086/382781 Fern´ andez, X., Gim, H. B., van Gorkom, J. H., et al. 2016, ApJL, 824, L1, doi: 10.3847/2041-8205/824/1/L1

    work page doi:10.1086/382781 2004

  27. [27]

    2018, MNRAS, 480, 2628, doi: 10.1093/mnras/sty1949

    Zackrisson, E. 2018, MNRAS, 480, 2628, doi: 10.1093/mnras/sty1949

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/sty1949 2018

  28. [28]

    M., Prochaska, J

    Fumagalli, M., O’Meara, J. M., Prochaska, J. X., Kanekar, N., & Wolfe, A. M. 2014, MNRAS, 444, 1282, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stu1512

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stu1512 2014

  29. [29]

    Fynbo, J. P. U., Krogager, J. K., Heintz, K. E., et al. 2017, A&A, 606, A13, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201730726

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201730726 2017

  30. [30]

    Fynbo, J. P. U., Christensen, L., Geier, S. J., et al. 2023, A&A, 679, A30, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202347403

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202347403 2023

  31. [31]

    Garratt-Smithson, L., Power, C., Lagos, C. d. P., et al. 2021, MNRAS, 501, 4396, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staa3870

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/staa3870 2021

  32. [32]

    2024, ApJ, 966, 80, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad307b

    Hamanowicz, A., Tchernyshyov, K., Roman-Duval, J., et al. 2024, ApJ, 966, 80, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad307b

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad307b 2024

  33. [33]

    E., Fynbo, J

    Heintz, K. E., Fynbo, J. P. U., Ledoux, C., et al. 2018, A&A, 615, A43, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201731964

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201731964 2018

  34. [34]

    E., De Cia, A., Th¨ one, C

    Heintz, K. E., De Cia, A., Th¨ one, C. C., et al. 2023, A&A, 679, A91, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202347418

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202347418 2023

  35. [35]

    2016 , journal =

    Hirschmann, M., De Lucia, G., & Fontanot, F. 2016, MNRAS, 461, 1760, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stw1318

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stw1318 2016

  36. [36]

    D., Woosley, S

    Hoffman, R. D., Woosley, S. E., Fuller, G. M., & Meyer, B. S. 1996, ApJ, 460, 478, doi: 10.1086/176986

    work page doi:10.1086/176986 1996

  37. [37]

    P., Poudel, S., et al

    Huyan, J., Kulkarni, V. P., Poudel, S., et al. 2023, ApJL, 954, L19, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/aceefe —. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2508.02940, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2508.02940

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/aceefe 2023

  38. [38]

    Jenkins, E. B. 2009, ApJ, 700, 1299, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/700/2/1299

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/700/2/1299 2009

  39. [39]

    B., & Wallerstein, G

    Jenkins, E. B., & Wallerstein, G. 2017, ApJ, 838, 85, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aa64d4

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aa64d4 2017

  40. [40]

    2014, ApJL, 797, L20, doi: 10.1088/2041-8205/797/2/L20

    Kanekar, N. 2014, ApJL, 797, L20, doi: 10.1088/2041-8205/797/2/L20

    work page doi:10.1088/2041-8205/797/2/l20 2014

  41. [41]

    X., & Ghosh, T

    Kanekar, N., Neeleman, M., Prochaska, J. X., & Ghosh, T. 2018, MNRAS, 473, L54, doi: 10.1093/mnrasl/slx162

    work page doi:10.1093/mnrasl/slx162 2018

  42. [42]

    X., Neeleman, M., et al

    Kanekar, N., Prochaska, J. X., Neeleman, M., et al. 2020, ApJL, 901, L5, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/abb4e1

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/abb4e1 2020

  43. [43]

    2022, ApJ, 934, 87, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac7b2c

    Kaur, B., Kanekar, N., Revalski, M., et al. 2022, ApJ, 934, 87, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac7b2c

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac7b2c 2022

  44. [44]

    2022, A&A, 666, A12, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202243994

    Konstantopoulou, C., De Cia, A., Krogager, J.-K., et al. 2022, A&A, 666, A12, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202243994

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202243994 2022

  45. [45]

    2024, A&A, 681, A64, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202347171

    Konstantopoulou, C., De Cia, A., Ledoux, C., et al. 2024, A&A, 681, A64, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202347171

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202347171 2024

  46. [46]

    K., Fynbo, J

    Krogager, J. K., Fynbo, J. P. U., Noterdaeme, P., et al. 2016, MNRAS, 455, 2698, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stv2346 Kr¨ uhler, T., Malesani, D., Fynbo, J. P. U., et al. 2015, A&A, 581, A125, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201425561

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stv2346 2016

  47. [47]

    P., Som, D., Morrison, S., et al

    Kulkarni, V. P., Som, D., Morrison, S., et al. 2015, ApJ, 815, 24, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/815/1/24

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/815/1/24 2015

  48. [48]

    M., Wolfe, A

    Lanzetta, K. M., Wolfe, A. M., & Turnshek, D. A. 1995, ApJ, 440, 435, doi: 10.1086/175286

    work page doi:10.1086/175286 1995

  49. [49]

    C., Tripp, T

    Lehner, N., Howk, J. C., Tripp, T. M., et al. 2013, ApJ, 770, 138, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/770/2/138

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/770/2/138 2013

  50. [50]

    2023, ApJL, 944, L59, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/aca1c4

    Lin, X., Cai, Z., Zou, S., et al. 2023, ApJL, 944, L59, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/aca1c4

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/aca1c4 2023

  51. [51]

    2019, MNRAS, 487, 5070, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stz1501

    Mackenzie, R., Fumagalli, M., Theuns, T., et al. 2019, MNRAS, 487, 5070, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stz1501

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stz1501 2019

  52. [52]

    2013, MNRAS, 435, 1443, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stt1385

    Maio, U., Ciardi, B., & M¨ uller, V. 2013, MNRAS, 435, 1443, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stt1385

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stt1385 2013

  53. [53]

    K., Kousai, K., et al

    Mawatari, K., Inoue, A. K., Kousai, K., et al. 2016, ApJ, 817, 161, doi: 10.3847/0004-637X/817/2/161 30 Møller, P., Christensen, L., Zwaan, M. A., et al. 2018, MNRAS, 474, 4039, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stx2845

    work page doi:10.3847/0004-637x/817/2/161 2016

  54. [54]

    P., Som, D., et al

    Morrison, S., Kulkarni, V. P., Som, D., et al. 2016, ApJ, 830, 158, doi: 10.3847/0004-637X/830/2/158

    work page doi:10.3847/0004-637x/830/2/158 2016

  55. [55]

    2004, MNRAS, 351, 1379, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2004.07876.x

    Nagamine, K., Springel, V., & Hernquist, L. 2004, MNRAS, 348, 435, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2004.07180.x

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2004.07180.x 2004

  56. [56]

    X., et al

    Neeleman, M., Kanekar, N., Prochaska, J. X., et al. 2018, ApJL, 856, L12, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/aab5b1 —. 2017, Science, 355, 1285, doi: 10.1126/science.aal1737

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/aab5b1 2018

  57. [57]

    X., Rafelski, M

    Neeleman, M., Kanekar, N., Prochaska, J. X., Rafelski, M. A., & Kahinga, L. A. 2025, ApJ, 983, 26, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/adbbd1

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/adbbd1 2025

  58. [58]

    X., Ribaudo, J., et al

    Neeleman, M., Prochaska, J. X., Ribaudo, J., et al. 2016, ApJ, 818, 113, doi: 10.3847/0004-637X/818/2/113

    work page doi:10.3847/0004-637x/818/2/113 2016

  59. [59]

    M., Prochaska, J

    Neeleman, M., Wolfe, A. M., Prochaska, J. X., & Rafelski, M. 2013, ApJ, 769, 54, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/769/1/54

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/769/1/54 2013

  60. [60]

    and Wilkinson, M

    Nestor, D. B., Pettini, M., Hewett, P. C., Rao, S., & Wild, V. 2008, MNRAS, 390, 1670, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2008.13857.x

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2008.13857.x 2008

  61. [61]

    M., Kacprzak, G

    Nielsen, N. M., Kacprzak, G. G., Sameer, et al. 2022, MNRAS, 514, 6074, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac1824

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stac1824 2022

  62. [62]

    E., Akerman, C., Asplund, M., et al

    Nissen, P. E., Akerman, C., Asplund, M., et al. 2007, A&A, 469, 319, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20077344

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20077344 2007

  63. [63]

    R., Fusi Pecci, F., et al

    Nomoto, K., Kobayashi, C., & Tominaga, N. 2013, ARA&A, 51, 457, doi: 10.1146/annurev-astro-082812-140956

    work page doi:10.1146/annurev-astro-082812-140956 2013

  64. [64]

    C., et al

    Noterdaeme, P., Petitjean, P., Carithers, W. C., et al. 2012, A&A, 547, L1, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201220259

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201220259 2012

  65. [65]

    M., Sembach, K

    Oliveira, C. M., Sembach, K. R., Tumlinson, J., O’Meara, J., & Thom, C. 2014, ApJ, 783, 22, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/783/1/22 Oyarz´ un, G. A., Rafelski, M., Kanekar, N., et al. 2024, ApJ, 962, 72, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad1182 Oyarz´ un, G. A., Rafelski, M., Christensen, L., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2502.05261. https://arxiv.org/abs/2502.05261

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/783/1/22 2014

  66. [66]

    2017, ApJ, 835, 218, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/835/2/218 P´ eroux, C., & Howk, J

    Pan, X., Zhou, H., Ge, J., et al. 2017, ApJ, 835, 218, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/835/2/218 P´ eroux, C., & Howk, J. C. 2020, ARA&A, 58, 363, doi: 10.1146/annurev-astro-021820-120014 P´ eroux, C., Meiring, J. D., Kulkarni, V. P., et al. 2006, MNRAS, 372, 369, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2006.10865.x

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/835/2/218 2017

  67. [67]

    2018b, MNRAS, 473, 4077, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stx2656

    Pillepich, A., Springel, V., Nelson, D., et al. 2018, MNRAS, 473, 4077, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stx2656

    work page internal anchor Pith review doi:10.1093/mnras/stx2656 2018

  68. [68]

    P., Cashman, F

    Poudel, S., Kulkarni, V. P., Cashman, F. H., et al. 2020, MNRAS, 491, 1008, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stz3000

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stz3000 2020

  69. [69]

    P., Morrison, S., et al

    Poudel, S., Kulkarni, V. P., Morrison, S., et al. 2018, MNRAS, 473, 3559, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stx2607

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stx2607 2018

  70. [70]

    P., Som, D., & P´ eroux, C

    Poudel, S., Kulkarni, V. P., Som, D., & P´ eroux, C. 2021, MNRAS, 504, 731, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stab926

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stab926 2021

  71. [71]

    Djorgovski, S. G. 2003, ApJL, 595, L9, doi: 10.1086/378945

    work page doi:10.1086/378945 2003

  72. [72]

    X., Herbert-Fort, S., & Wolfe, A

    Prochaska, J. X., Herbert-Fort, S., & Wolfe, A. M. 2005, ApJ, 635, 123, doi: 10.1086/497287

    work page doi:10.1086/497287 2005

  73. [73]

    X., & Wolfe, A

    Prochaska, J. X., & Wolfe, A. M. 1997, ApJ, 487, 73, doi: 10.1086/304591

    work page doi:10.1086/304591 1997

  74. [74]

    X., Tejos, N., Crighton, N., et al

    Prochaska, J. X., Tejos, N., Crighton, N., et al. 2016, linetools/linetools: Second major release, v0.2, Zenodo, doi: 10.5281/zenodo.168270

    work page doi:10.5281/zenodo.168270 2016

  75. [75]

    X., Tejos, N., cwotta, et al

    Prochaska, J. X., Tejos, N., cwotta, et al. 2017, pyigm/pyigm: Initial release for publications, v1.0, Zenodo, doi: 10.5281/zenodo.1045480

    work page doi:10.5281/zenodo.1045480 2017

  76. [76]

    Prochaska, J. X. 2014, ApJL, 782, L29, doi: 10.1088/2041-8205/782/2/L29

    work page doi:10.1088/2041-8205/782/2/l29 2014

  77. [77]

    2025, The Qz5 Survey, v1.0, Zenodo, doi: 10.5281/zenodo.14825981

    Rafelski, M., Oyarzyn, G., & Christensen, L. 2025, The Qz5 Survey, v1.0, Zenodo, doi: 10.5281/zenodo.14825981

    work page doi:10.5281/zenodo.14825981 2025

  78. [78]

    M., Prochaska, J

    Rafelski, M., Wolfe, A. M., Prochaska, J. X., Neeleman, M., & Mendez, A. J. 2012, ApJ, 755, 89, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/755/2/89

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/755/2/89 2012

  79. [79]

    1994, MNRAS, 271, 13, doi: 10.1093/mnras/271.1.13

    Rauch, M. 1994, MNRAS, 271, 13, doi: 10.1093/mnras/271.1.13

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/271.1.13 1994

  80. [80]

    , keywords =

    Robertson, B. E., Ellis, R. S., Furlanetto, S. R., & Dunlop, J. S. 2015, ApJL, 802, L19, doi: 10.1088/2041-8205/802/2/L19

    work page doi:10.1088/2041-8205/802/2/l19 2015

Showing first 80 references.