pith. machine review for the scientific record. sign in

arxiv: 2605.05327 · v1 · submitted 2026-05-06 · 🌌 astro-ph.GA

Recognition: unknown

Shape of Direct-Method Mass-Metallicity Relation with JWST: Fast-Track Nitrogen and Helium Enrichment

A.Gim\'enez-Alc\'azar , R.Amor\'in , J.M.Vilchez
Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-08 15:52 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.GA
keywords mass-metallicity relationJWSTauroral linesdirect methodgalaxy chemical evolutionstar-formation historynitrogen abundancehelium abundance
0
0 comments X

The pith

Auroral-line selection biases the low-mass high-redshift mass-metallicity relation traced by JWST toward lower metallicities.

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

The paper compiles 286 JWST star-forming galaxies at redshifts 1 to 9 with individual detections of the [O III] auroral line and measures their gas-phase oxygen abundances using the direct electron-temperature method. It then stacks the spectra of galaxies without such detections at fixed stellar mass to recover metallicities in the regimes missed by auroral lines alone. The auroral-detected sample defines an MZR with slope 0.38, yet the stacked non-detections sit 0.2-0.3 dex higher in metallicity while showing lower specific star-formation rates and closer adherence to the fundamental metallicity relation. This indicates that recent star-formation history and selection effects together shape the low-mass end of the high-redshift MZR observed with JWST.

Core claim

Using a homogeneous sample of 286 galaxies with [O III] λ4363 detections, the direct-method mass-metallicity relation has a linear slope γ = 0.38 ± 0.09 across log(M*/M⊙) = 6.77-10.5. Stacked spectra of non-detections produce a relation of similar slope but with metallicities higher by 0.2-0.3 dex at fixed mass; these non-detections also exhibit lower SFRs, smaller equivalent widths, and smaller offsets from the fundamental metallicity relation, while several stacked bins show enhanced N/O and He/H ratios.

What carries the argument

The direct Te method applied to [O III] λ4363 auroral-line detections for electron temperature and oxygen abundance, combined with spectral stacking of non-detections to extend coverage.

Load-bearing premise

That the stacked spectra of galaxies without individual auroral-line detections provide an unbiased representation of the underlying population at fixed stellar mass, without residual selection or aperture effects.

What would settle it

A complete, auroral-line-independent metallicity survey of the same low-mass high-redshift population, or deeper observations that detect the auroral line across a representative range of star-formation rates, would show whether the 0.2-0.3 dex metallicity offset disappears.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2605.05327 by A.Gim\'enez-Alc\'azar, J.M.Vilchez, R.Amor\'in.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Diagnostic diagrams used to separate AGN from star view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Diagnostic diagram based on the emission-line ratios view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Comparison between stellar mass estimates from this view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Comparison of oxygen abundances derived in this view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Difference in oxygen abundances as a function of the T[O II]. The reference curve is computed using a density￾dependent T[O II] relation with Ne = 300 cm−3 . The four ∆ curves show the difference relative to the reference when us￾ing T[O II]derived for Ne = 100 cm−3 (density-dependent), the Campbell et al. (1986), Izotov et al. (2006) and Cataldi et al. (2025a) prescriptions. dependent T[O II], Ne = 300 cm… view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Black circles show individual JWST/NIRSpec galax￾ies with detections of the [O III] λ4363 auroral line from this work, while blue squares correspond to stacked measurements of galaxies with individual λ4363 detections. The solid blue line and shaded band indicate the median MZR and its in￾trinsic scatter inferred from our MCMC fitting. The hatched red region shows the prediction by the SPHINX simulations (… view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: MZR derived in this work. Blue squares show metallic view at source ↗
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Residuals from the Fundamental Metallicity Relation (FMR) of view at source ↗
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: Nitrogen-to-oxygen ratio for our sample shown against view at source ↗
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: Helium-to-oxygen ratio for our sample shown against view at source ↗
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: Nitrogen-to-oxygen ratio as a function of helium abun view at source ↗
Figure 15
Figure 15. Figure 15: Relation between changes in helium abundance ( view at source ↗
read the original abstract

We investigate the mass-metallicity relation (MZR) from z=1 to z=9 using electron-temperature-based gas-phase metallicities and examine how auroral-line selection, star-formation history, and secondary abundances affect its interpretation in the early Universe. We compile a homogeneous sample of 286 star-forming galaxies observed with JWST/NIRSpec medium resolution spectroscopy, selected through detections of the [O\,III]\,$\lambda$4363 auroral line from the public DAWN JWST Archive (DJA). We derive electron densities, temperatures, and oxygen abundances using the direct $T_e$ method, along with relative N/O and He/H abundances. Stellar masses are obtained via SED fitting and star-formation rates from reddening-corrected Balmer emission lines. To quantify auroral-line selection biases, we additionally stack galaxy spectra with and without auroral-line detections, extending the MZR into regimes inaccessible to individual measurements. The auroral-line-detected sample spans log(M*/Msun)=6.77-10.5 and 12+log(O/H)=6.9-8.4. A linear fit gives an MZR slope of $\gamma$=0.38 $\pm$ 0.09. Stacked galaxies without individual $\lambda$4363 detections define a relation with a similar slope but metallicities higher by ~0.2-0.3 dex at fixed stellar mass. Auroral-line detections also show higher SFRs, larger equivalent widths, and larger offsets from the fundamental metallicity relation, whereas non-detections appear more chemically evolved and closer to it. Several stacked bins also show enhanced N/O and He/H ratios. These results indicate that the low-mass high-redshift MZR traced by JWST is shaped by both recent star-formation history and auroral-line selection effects. Auroral lines preferentially identify high-EW, high-sSFR galaxies in the low-metallicity envelope, whereas non-detections reveal a more enriched sequence closer to the metallicity expected from the FMR.

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 investigates the shape of the direct-method mass-metallicity relation (MZR) at high redshifts (z=1-9) using JWST/NIRSpec spectroscopy. Using a sample of 286 star-forming galaxies with [O III] λ4363 auroral line detections from the DAWN JWST Archive, the authors derive oxygen abundances via the electron temperature method and fit a linear MZR with slope γ = 0.38 ± 0.09. They additionally stack spectra of galaxies without individual auroral detections to extend the relation, finding that these stacks exhibit metallicities 0.2-0.3 dex higher at fixed stellar mass, closer to the fundamental metallicity relation (FMR). The paper argues that auroral-line selection effects preferentially select high specific star-formation rate (sSFR), high equivalent width galaxies in the low-metallicity envelope, while non-detections trace a more chemically evolved population.

Significance. If the stacking procedure is shown to be unbiased, this work would be significant for understanding selection biases in high-redshift metallicity measurements and the interplay between star-formation history and chemical enrichment. The homogeneous analysis of public JWST data, use of direct Te method, and inclusion of N/O and He/H ratios are strengths. The reported offset from the FMR for auroral-detected galaxies provides a testable prediction for future observations. However, the central interpretation hinges on the validity of the stacked spectra as representative of the parent population.

major comments (2)
  1. The assertion that stacked spectra of non-detections provide an unbiased proxy for the underlying population at fixed stellar mass is load-bearing for the claim of a 0.2-0.3 dex offset. The manuscript should include quantitative tests, such as matching detected and non-detected samples on stellar mass and redshift, and comparing their exposure time distributions, slit loss corrections, or equivalent width distributions to rule out residual observational biases.
  2. Details on error propagation for electron densities, temperatures, and ionization corrections into the final abundances and MZR fit (including the reported slope of 0.38±0.09) are insufficiently described. This affects assessment of whether the offset between the auroral-detected sample and the stacked non-detections is statistically significant.
minor comments (1)
  1. The abstract states that 'several stacked bins also show enhanced N/O and He/H ratios' without quantifying the enhancement or its significance; this should be specified with reference to the relevant table or figure.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their constructive and insightful comments, which help clarify key aspects of our analysis on selection biases and error handling in the direct-method MZR. We address each major comment below and will revise the manuscript to incorporate the suggested improvements.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: The assertion that stacked spectra of non-detections provide an unbiased proxy for the underlying population at fixed stellar mass is load-bearing for the claim of a 0.2-0.3 dex offset. The manuscript should include quantitative tests, such as matching detected and non-detected samples on stellar mass and redshift, and comparing their exposure time distributions, slit loss corrections, or equivalent width distributions to rule out residual observational biases.

    Authors: We agree that quantitative validation of the stacking procedure is essential to support the claimed offset and the interpretation of auroral-line selection effects. In the revised manuscript, we will add a new subsection detailing these tests: we will construct mass- and redshift-matched subsamples of detected and non-detected galaxies, compare their exposure time, slit-loss correction, and equivalent-width distributions using Kolmogorov-Smirnov tests, and perform additional stacking experiments on observationally similar subsets. These results will be presented alongside the existing MZR comparison to demonstrate that the 0.2-0.3 dex metallicity offset is not driven by residual observational biases. revision: yes

  2. Referee: Details on error propagation for electron densities, temperatures, and ionization corrections into the final abundances and MZR fit (including the reported slope of 0.38±0.09) are insufficiently described. This affects assessment of whether the offset between the auroral-detected sample and the stacked non-detections is statistically significant.

    Authors: We acknowledge that the current Methods section provides insufficient detail on error propagation. In the revision, we will expand this section to describe the full propagation chain: uncertainties in n_e (from [S II] doublet ratios), T_e (from [O III] auroral-to-nebular ratios), and ionization correction factors will be propagated via Monte Carlo resampling (drawing 10,000 realizations from the posterior distributions of each quantity) into the final 12+log(O/H) values. We will also report bootstrap or MCMC uncertainties on the MZR slope (γ = 0.38 ± 0.09) and intercept, and include a statistical assessment (likelihood-ratio test or χ² comparison) of the significance of the offset between the auroral-detected points and the stacked non-detections. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; results are direct empirical measurements from archival data and standard methods.

full rationale

The paper selects a sample of 286 galaxies from the public DJA archive based on [OIII] λ4363 detections, derives Te-based abundances and stellar masses via standard SED fitting and emission-line methods, performs a linear fit to obtain the MZR slope, and stacks non-detected spectra for comparison. These steps produce measured quantities (slope γ=0.38±0.09, ~0.2-0.3 dex offset) without any self-definitional reduction, fitted parameter renamed as prediction, or load-bearing self-citation chain. The central claim follows from the data processing and stacking procedure itself rather than tautological redefinition of inputs. Minor self-citation (if present) is not load-bearing for the reported relations.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

1 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on standard assumptions of the direct Te method (electron temperature and density diagnostics from optical lines) and on the representativeness of stacked spectra. No new entities are postulated.

free parameters (1)
  • MZR linear slope
    Fitted value 0.38±0.09 to the auroral-line sample; the offset between detected and stacked relations also depends on binning choices.
axioms (2)
  • domain assumption Direct Te method yields accurate gas-phase oxygen abundances when auroral lines are detected
    Invoked throughout the abundance derivation section implied by the abstract.
  • domain assumption Stacked spectra without individual detections represent the average properties of the parent population at fixed mass
    Central to the claim that non-detections trace a more enriched sequence.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5699 in / 1435 out tokens · 50560 ms · 2026-05-08T15:52:04.109348+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

135 extracted references · 14 canonical work pages · 2 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    Andrews, B. H. & Martini, P. 2013, ApJ, 765, 140 Arellano-Córdova, K. Z., Berg, D. A., Mingozzi, M., et al. 2025, MNRAS, 544, 1588

    2013

  2. [2]

    E., Cleri, N

    Backhaus, B. E., Cleri, N. J., Trump, J. R., et al. 2025, ApJ, 994, 125

    2025

  3. [3]

    2017, MNRAS, 469, 151

    Belfiore, F., Maiolino, R., Tremonti, C., et al. 2017, MNRAS, 469, 151

    2017

  4. [4]

    L., et al

    Belli, S., Park, M., Davies, R. L., et al. 2024, Nature, 630, 54

    2024

  5. [5]

    A., Skillman, E

    Berg, D. A., Skillman, E. D., Marble, A. R., et al. 2012, ApJ, 754, 98

    2012

  6. [6]

    2026, The k-MENDEL sample of local analogs to reionization galaxies

    Bonatto, L., Amorín, R., Giménez-Alcázar, A., et al. 2026, The k-MENDEL sample of local analogs to reionization galaxies. Spectral identification of EELGs and properties of green peas in DESI

    2026

  7. [7]

    2019, A&A, 622, A103

    Boquien, M., Burgarella, D., Roehlly, Y ., et al. 2019, A&A, 622, A103

    2019

  8. [8]

    2008, MNRAS, 385, 769

    Brinchmann, J., Pettini, M., & Charlot, S. 2008, MNRAS, 385, 769

    2008

  9. [9]

    & Charlot, S

    Bruzual, G. & Charlot, S. 2003, MNRAS, 344, 1000 Calabrò, A., Amorín, R., Fontana, A., et al. 2017, A&A, 601, A95 Calabrò, A., Pentericci, L., Santini, P., et al. 2024, A&A, 690, A290

    2003

  10. [10]

    C., et al

    Calzetti, D., Armus, L., Bohlin, R. C., et al. 2000, ApJ, 533, 682 Article number, page 14 A. Giménez-Alcázar, R. Amorín, J.M. Vilchez: Shape of Direct-Method Mass-Metallicity Relation with JWST

    2000

  11. [11]

    J., Carreira, C., Simmonds, C., et al

    Cameron, A. J., Carreira, C., Simmonds, C., et al. 2026, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2601.15964

    work page arXiv 2026

  12. [12]

    J., Katz, H., Rey, M

    Cameron, A. J., Katz, H., Rey, M. P., & Saxena, A. 2023, MNRAS, 523, 3516

    2023

  13. [13]

    1986, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 223, 811

    Campbell, A., Terlevich, R., & Melnick, J. 1986, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 223, 811

    1986

  14. [14]

    A., Clayton, G

    Cardelli, J. A., Clayton, G. C., & Mathis, J. S. 1989, ApJ, 345, 245

    1989

  15. [15]

    C., Cullen, F., McLure, R

    Carnall, A. C., Cullen, F., McLure, R. J., et al. 2024, MNRAS, 534, 325

    2024

  16. [16]

    2024, ApJ, 972, 143

    Castellano, M., Napolitano, L., Fontana, A., et al. 2024, ApJ, 972, 143

    2024

  17. [17]

    2003, PASP, 115, 763

    Chabrier, G. 2003, PASP, 115, 763

    2003

  18. [18]

    2025, ApJ, 985, 24

    Chakraborty, P., Sarkar, A., Smith, R., et al. 2025, ApJ, 985, 24

    2025

  19. [19]

    2024, ApJ, 976, L15

    Chemerynska, I., Atek, H., Dayal, P., et al. 2024, ApJ, 976, L15

    2024

  20. [20]

    A., Endsley, R., et al

    Chisholm, J., Berg, D. A., Endsley, R., et al. 2024, MNRAS, 534, 2633

    2024

  21. [21]

    2023, A&A, 680, A82

    Christensen, L., Jakobsen, P., Willott, C., et al. 2023, A&A, 680, A82

    2023

  22. [22]

    L., Aird, J., Reddy, N., et al

    Coil, A. L., Aird, J., Reddy, N., et al. 2015, ApJ, 801, 35

    2015

  23. [23]

    2012, MNRAS, 421, 262

    Cresci, G., Mannucci, F., Sommariva, V ., et al. 2012, MNRAS, 421, 262

    2012

  24. [24]

    R., Hutter, A., Dayal, P., et al

    Cueto, E. R., Hutter, A., Dayal, P., et al. 2024, A&A, 686, A138

    2024

  25. [25]

    2020, MNRAS, 492, 821

    Curti, M., Maiolino, R., Cirasuolo, M., et al. 2020, MNRAS, 492, 821

    2020

  26. [26]

    2024, A&A, 684, A75 Davé, R., Oppenheimer, B

    Curti, M., Maiolino, R., Curtis-Lake, E., et al. 2024, A&A, 684, A75 Davé, R., Oppenheimer, B. D., & Finlator, K. 2011, MNRAS, 415, 11 de Graaff, A., Brammer, G., Weibel, A., et al. 2025, A&A, 697, A189 D’Eugenio, F., Cameron, A. J., Scholtz, J., et al. 2025, ApJS, 277, 4 Duarte Puertas, S., Vilchez, J. M., Iglesias-Páramo, J., et al. 2022, A&A, 666, A186

    2024

  27. [27]

    Nitrogen enhancement of GN-z11 by metal pollution from supermassive stars

    Ebihara, S., Fujii, M. S., Saitoh, T. R., et al. 2026, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2601.04344

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  28. [28]

    J., Johnson, B

    Eisenstein, D. J., Johnson, B. D., Robertson, B., et al. 2025, ApJS, 281, 50

    2025

  29. [29]

    K., Shapley, A

    Erb, D. K., Shapley, A. E., Pettini, M., et al. 2006, ApJ, 644, 813

    2006

  30. [30]

    L., Fujimoto, S., Tsujita, A., et al

    Faisst, A. L., Fujimoto, S., Tsujita, A., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2510.16111

    work page arXiv 2025

  31. [31]

    J., Porter, R

    Ferland, G. J., Porter, R. L., van Hoof, P. A. M., et al. 2013, Rev. Mexicana Astron. Astrofis., 49, 137 Fernández, V ., Amorín, R., Firpo, V ., & Morisset, C. 2024, A&A, 688, A69 Fernández, V ., Terlevich, E., Díaz, A. I., Terlevich, R., & Rosales-Ortega, F. F. 2018, MNRAS, 478, 5301

    2013

  32. [32]

    M., Meléndez, M., Kraemer, S., et al

    Feuillet, L. M., Meléndez, M., Kraemer, S., et al. 2024, ApJ, 962, 104

    2024

  33. [33]

    L., Bagley, M

    Finkelstein, S. L., Bagley, M. B., Arrabal Haro, P., et al. 2022, ApJ, 940, L55

    2022

  34. [34]

    L., Bagley, M

    Finkelstein, S. L., Bagley, M. B., Ferguson, H. C., et al. 2023, ApJ, 946, L13

    2023

  35. [35]

    W., Lang, D., & Goodman, J

    Foreman-Mackey, D., Hogg, D. W., Lang, D., & Goodman, J. 2013, PASP, 125, 306

    2013

  36. [36]

    L., Pascale, M., Pierel, J., et al

    Frye, B. L., Pascale, M., Pierel, J., et al. 2024, ApJ, 961, 171 Hägele, G. F., Pérez-Montero, E., Díaz, Á. I., Terlevich, E., & Terlevich, R. 2006, MNRAS, 372, 293

    2024

  37. [37]

    E., Watson, D., Brammer, G., et al

    Heintz, K. E., Watson, D., Brammer, G., et al. 2024, Science, 384, 890

    2024

  38. [38]

    L., Finlator, K., & Dressler, A

    Henry, A., Martin, C. L., Finlator, K., & Dressler, A. 2013, ApJ, 769, 148

    2013

  39. [39]

    F., Wetzel, A., Kereš, D., et al

    Hopkins, P. F., Wetzel, A., Kereš, D., et al. 2018, MNRAS, 480, 800

    2018

  40. [40]

    arXiv e-prints , keywords =

    Ito, K., Valentino, F., Brammer, G., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2506.22642

    work page arXiv 2025

  41. [41]

    I., Stasi´nska, G., Meynet, G., Guseva, N

    Izotov, Y . I., Stasi´nska, G., Meynet, G., Guseva, N. G., & Thuan, T. X. 2006, A&A, 448, 955

    2006

  42. [42]

    Izotov, Y . I. & Thuan, T. X. 2004, ApJ, 602, 200

    2004

  43. [43]

    2026, MNRAS, 545, staf2110

    Ji, X., Belokurov, V ., Maiolino, R., et al. 2026, MNRAS, 545, staf2110

    2026

  44. [44]

    2014, ApJ, 788, 88

    Juneau, S., Bournaud, F., Charlot, S., et al. 2014, ApJ, 788, 88

    2014

  45. [45]

    2023, The Open Journal of Astrophysics, 6, 44

    Katz, H., Rosdahl, J., Kimm, T., et al. 2023, The Open Journal of Astrophysics, 6, 44

    2023

  46. [46]

    M., Tremonti, C., et al

    Kauffmann, G., Heckman, T. M., Tremonti, C., et al. 2003, MNRAS, 346, 1055

    2003

  47. [47]

    J., Dopita, M

    Kewley, L. J., Dopita, M. A., Sutherland, R. S., Heisler, C. A., & Trevena, J. 2001, ApJ, 556, 121

    2001

  48. [48]

    Kewley, L. J. & Ellison, S. L. 2008, ApJ, 681, 1183

    2008

  49. [49]

    A., Sanders, R

    Khostovan, A. A., Sanders, R. L., Shapley, A. E., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2512.16989

    work page arXiv 2025

  50. [50]

    & Ferrara, A

    Kobayashi, C. & Ferrara, A. 2024, ApJ, 962, L6 Korhonen Cuestas, N. A., Strom, A. L., Miller, T. B., et al. 2025, ApJ, 984, 188

    2024

  51. [51]

    2026, A&A, 706, A165

    Kotiwale, G., Matthee, J., Kashino, D., et al. 2026, A&A, 706, A165

    2026

  52. [52]

    2002, Science, 295, 82

    Kroupa, P. 2002, Science, 295, 82

    2002

  53. [53]

    & Sargent, W

    Kunth, D. & Sargent, W. L. W. 1983, ApJ, 273, 81 Lara-López, M. A., Cepa, J., Bongiovanni, A., et al. 2010, A&A, 521, L53

    1983

  54. [54]

    H., Maseda, M

    Laseter, I. H., Maseda, M. V ., Bunker, A. J., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2510.15024

    work page arXiv 2025

  55. [55]

    F., Serrano, A., & Torres-Peimbert, S

    Lequeux, J., Peimbert, M., Rayo, J. F., Serrano, A., & Torres-Peimbert, S. 1979, A&A, 80, 155

    1979

  56. [56]

    2023, ApJ, 955, L18

    Li, M., Cai, Z., Bian, F., et al. 2023, ApJ, 955, L18

    2023

  57. [57]

    J., Carollo, C

    Lilly, S. J., Carollo, C. M., Pipino, A., Renzini, A., & Peng, Y . 2013, ApJ, 772, 119

    2013

  58. [58]

    C., Vijayan, A

    Lovell, C. C., Vijayan, A. P., Thomas, P. A., et al. 2021, MNRAS, 500, 2127

    2021

  59. [59]

    Luridiana, V ., Morisset, C., & Shaw, R. A. 2015, A&A, 573, A42

    2015

  60. [60]

    A., Rigby, J

    Ly, C., Malkan, M. A., Rigby, J. R., & Nagao, T. 2016, ApJ, 828, 67

    2016

  61. [61]

    & Mannucci, F

    Maiolino, R. & Mannucci, F. 2019, A&A Rev., 27, 3

    2019

  62. [62]

    2008, A&A, 488, 463

    Maiolino, R., Nagao, T., Grazian, A., et al. 2008, A&A, 488, 463

    2008

  63. [63]

    2024, Nature, 627, 59

    Maiolino, R., Scholtz, J., Witstok, J., et al. 2024, Nature, 627, 59

    2024

  64. [64]

    2010, MN- RAS, 408, 2115

    Mannucci, F., Cresci, G., Maiolino, R., Marconi, A., & Gnerucci, A. 2010, MN- RAS, 408, 2115

    2010

  65. [65]

    2025, ApJ, 991, L4

    Marszewski, A., Faucher-Giguère, C.-A., Feldmann, R., & Sun, G. 2025, ApJ, 991, L4

    2025

  66. [66]

    C., & Feldmann, R

    Marszewski, A., Sun, G., Faucher-Giguère, C.-A., Hayward, C. C., & Feldmann, R. 2024, ApJ, 967, L41

    2024

  67. [67]

    2024, A&A, 690, A2

    Mascia, S., Roberts-Borsani, G., Treu, T., et al. 2024, A&A, 690, A2

    2024

  68. [68]

    V ., Lewis, Z., Matthee, J., et al

    Maseda, M. V ., Lewis, Z., Matthee, J., et al. 2023, ApJ, 956, 11

    2023

  69. [69]

    A., et al

    Matthee, J., Mackenzie, R., Simcoe, R. A., et al. 2023, ApJ, 950, 67

    2023

  70. [70]

    A., et al

    Matthee, J., Mackenzie, R., Simcoe, R. A., et al. 2023, The Astrophysical Jour- nal, 950, 67

    2023

  71. [71]

    2024, A&A, 691, A345

    Mazzolari, G., Übler, H., Maiolino, R., et al. 2024, A&A, 691, A345

    2024

  72. [72]

    2026, MN- RAS[arXiv:2507.08787] Méndez-Delgado, J

    McClymont, W., Tacchella, S., Smith, A., et al. 2026, MN- RAS[arXiv:2507.08787] Méndez-Delgado, J. E., Esteban, C., García-Rojas, J., et al. 2023, MNRAS, 523, 2952 Méndez-Delgado, J. E., Esteban, C., García-Rojas, J., Arellano-Córdova, K. Z., & Valerdi, M. 2020, MNRAS, 496, 2726 Mollá, M. & Terlevich, R. 2012, MNRAS, 425, 1696

    work page arXiv 2026

  73. [73]

    2024, ApJ, 963, 9

    Morishita, T., Stiavelli, M., Chary, R.-R., et al. 2024, ApJ, 963, 9

    2024

  74. [74]

    C., Tremonti, C

    Moustakas, J., Kennicutt, Jr., R. C., Tremonti, C. A., et al. 2010, ApJS, 190, 233

    2010

  75. [75]

    L., Kereš, D., Faucher-Giguère, C.-A., et al

    Muratov, A. L., Kereš, D., Faucher-Giguère, C.-A., et al. 2015, MNRAS, 454, 2691

    2015

  76. [76]

    2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2506.11846, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2506.11846

    Nakajima, K., Ouchi, M., Harikane, Y ., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2506.11846

    work page arXiv 2025

  77. [77]

    2023, ApJS, 269, 33

    Nakajima, K., Ouchi, M., Isobe, Y ., et al. 2023, ApJS, 269, 33

    2023

  78. [78]

    2024, A&A, 688, A142

    Nandal, D., Sibony, Y ., & Tsiatsiou, S. 2024, A&A, 688, A142

    2024

  79. [79]

    C., Sutherland, R

    Nicholls, D. C., Sutherland, R. S., Dopita, M. A., Kewley, L. J., & Groves, B. A. 2017, MNRAS, 466, 4403

    2017

  80. [80]

    M., Lilly, S., et al

    Onodera, M., Carollo, C. M., Lilly, S., et al. 2016, ApJ, 822, 42

    2016

Showing first 80 references.