pith. machine review for the scientific record. sign in

arxiv: 2605.12973 · v1 · submitted 2026-05-13 · 🌌 astro-ph.GA

Recognition: unknown

A Spatially Resolved HI Survey of Seyfert Galaxies: the Role of AGN Feedback in Shaping Atomic Gas Reservoirs

Ruitian Li , Xin Wang , Daizhong Liu , Hui Shi , Yuxuan Pang , Pengfei Ren , Shengzhe Wang , Ming Zhu
show 14 more authors
Mengting Ju Xiao-Lei Meng Xinwen Shu Ningyu Tang Jing Wang Chuan-Peng Zhang Hong-Xin Zhang Le Zhang Zheng Zheng Fujia Li Chen Xu Sijia Li Yiming Yang Hang Zhou
Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-14 18:42 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.GA
keywords Seyfert galaxiesAGN feedbackneutral hydrogenHI surveygalaxy kinematicsatomic gasradio observations
0
0 comments X

The pith

Seyfert galaxy HI disks follow the same mass-size relation as star-forming spirals within uncertainties.

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

This paper presents high-resolution HI 21-cm observations of eight Seyfert galaxies using the GMRT to examine the impact of AGN feedback on atomic gas. The HI mass-size relation slope in these AGN hosts is slightly shallower than the canonical value but remains consistent within 2 sigma uncertainties, indicating that feedback does not strongly alter the global extent or large-scale structure of the reservoirs. Kinematic forward modeling of UGC 4503 reveals elevated gas velocity dispersion and reduced rotational support compared to typical spirals, along with velocity field residuals suggestive of local AGN-driven turbulence. The work concludes that AGN effects may regulate the cold gas through internal dynamics more than by reshaping the overall disk.

Core claim

Observations of eight Seyfert AGN host galaxies reveal that their atomic hydrogen mass-size relation has a slope consistent with the canonical value for star-forming galaxies within 2 sigma. This implies AGN feedback does not significantly disrupt the global extent or large-scale structure of HI reservoirs. Kinematic analysis of UGC 4503 shows elevated velocity dispersion of 14.9 km/s and V/sigma of 14.28, pointing to possible AGN-driven turbulence in the gas disk.

What carries the argument

The HI mass-size relation, which links total neutral hydrogen mass to the radius of the gas disk and acts as a diagnostic for large-scale disruption by feedback.

Load-bearing premise

The small sample of eight Seyfert galaxies is representative of the broader AGN population and can be directly compared to large samples of star-forming spirals without major selection biases.

What would settle it

A larger sample of Seyfert galaxies showing a statistically significant deviation in the HI mass-size relation slope from the canonical value would falsify the central claim.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2605.12973 by Chen Xu, Chuan-Peng Zhang, Daizhong Liu, Fujia Li, Hang Zhou, Hong-Xin Zhang, Hui Shi, Jing Wang, Le Zhang, Mengting Ju, Ming Zhu, Ningyu Tang, Pengfei Ren, Ruitian Li, Shengzhe Wang, Sijia Li, Xiao-Lei Meng, Xin Wang, Xinwen Shu, Yiming Yang, Yuxuan Pang, Zheng Zheng.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: General properties of our Seyfert galaxies. The red stars mark our targets in this work. The three leftmost panels are BPT diagrams. The dashed curve (Kauffmann et al. 2003) and the solid lines (Kewley et al. 2006) effectively divide all SDSS DR7 galaxies (dark grey dots) into star-forming (SF), Seyfert, Low Ionization Nuclear Emission-Line Region (LINER), and composite (Comp) galaxies. The right graph plo… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Optical images and H i spectra of UGC 4503 and UGC 9535, two Seyfert galaxies in our sample. The left panels show their DECaLS grz color-composite images (Dey et al. 2019). In the right panels, we display their H i spectra. The black lines illustrate ALFALFA 21 cm single dish spectra (Haynes et al. 2018) and blue lines correspond to our GMRT results. Red lines represent smoothed GMRT spectra using a Gaussi… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Overview of H i kinematic maps for UGC 4503 and UGC 9535. The left panels correspond to UGC 4503 and the left ones display UGC 9535. The H i intensity maps, velocity field maps, and velocity dispersion maps are presented (from top to bottom) respectively. The white and black contours mark H i spatial distribution boundaries of our targets, which are defined when H i surface densities reach 1 M⊙/pc2 (Wang e… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: The H i mass-size relation for 8 Seyfert galaxies from GMRT observations. The red points with error bars represent our Seyfert sample. The solid red line denotes the best-fit linear regression derived via emcee, which yields a reduced chi-squared of χ 2 ν ≈ 1.16. The thin light red lines represent 50 random draws from the fitting. Data and the H i mass-size relation in Wang et al. (2016) are displayed by g… view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: The observed and modeled 2D maps for UGC 4503. The rows from top to bottom display H i flux maps, velocity maps and velocity dispersion maps respectively. The columns represent the observed GMRT data, the best-fitting MCMC model, and the residuals. The long white solid line indicate the position of the kinematic major axis. The color bars indicate the scale for each parameter. 0 2 4 6 8 Flux [arb] 160 80 0… view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: 1D posterior probability distributions of UGC 4503 from our DysmalPy MCMC fitting. From left to right and top to bottom are total mass in logarithm solar unit (log(Mtotal)), effective radius of the disk (Reff,disk[kpc]), logarithm of dark matter halo virial mass (log(Mvir,halo)), intrinsic velocity dispersion (σ0[km/s]), inclination and position angle. The red and blue vertical dashed lines mark the best-f… view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Intrinsic rotation curve of UGC 4503. The inset provides a zoom-in view of the rise in rotational curve within 1.5 kpc. The total circular velocity (Vcirc tot) profile is shown as thick blue lines. The black line indicates baryonic matter velocity (Vcirc bar) and the gray dashed line means the rotational velocity (Vrot) considering asymmetric drift correction. The baryonic and dark matter contributions to … view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Active galactic nucleus (AGN) feedback is a key ingredient in galaxy evolution, yet its impact on the cold atomic gas reservoir -- the neutral hydrogen (HI) phase -- remains poorly constrained. We present the most extensive spatially resolved HI 21-cm survey of Seyfert AGN hosts to date, based on observations with the Giant Metrewave Radio Telescope (GMRT). Our high-resolution HI maps of eight Seyfert galaxies reveal detailed kinematics and surface density distributions of their atomic gas disks. We find that AGN-host galaxies exhibit a slightly shallower HI mass-size relation than the canonical relation or the SIMBA simulation predictions; however, the measured slope remains consistent with the canonical value within $2\sigma$ uncertainties. This result suggests that AGN feedback does not significantly disrupt the global extent or large-scale structure of atomic gas reservoirs. To investigate the internal HI kinematics in greater detail, we perform a 3D kinematic forward modeling of the HI disk in UGC 4503. Our analysis reveals an elevated intrinsic velocity dispersion of $\sigma = 14.9^{+6.1}_{-3.8}$ km/s and a reduced level of rotational support, with $V/\sigma = 14.28_{-4.17}^{+4.97}$, compared to large-sample star-forming spirals. These kinematic signatures, together with localized residuals in the velocity field, indicate that AGN-driven outflows or jets may inject or indirectly affect the turbulence in the atomic gas disk, potentially regulating the cold gas reservoir. Future GMRT observations, combined with optical integral-field spectroscopy from MaNGA, will enable quantitative constraints on the role of AGN feedback in regulating star formation efficiency across a larger and more representative galaxy sample.

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 / 3 minor

Summary. The paper reports GMRT HI 21-cm observations of eight Seyfert galaxies, providing spatially resolved maps of atomic gas disks. It measures the HI mass-size relation slope, finding it slightly shallower than the canonical value but consistent within 2σ uncertainties, and concludes that AGN feedback does not significantly disrupt the global extent or large-scale structure of HI reservoirs. For UGC 4503, 3D kinematic modeling yields elevated intrinsic velocity dispersion (σ = 14.9^{+6.1}_{-3.8} km/s) and reduced rotational support (V/σ = 14.28_{-4.17}^{+4.97}), interpreted as possible AGN-driven turbulence, with plans for future larger samples.

Significance. If the central result holds, the work would add rare high-resolution HI data for AGN hosts and constrain feedback models by indicating limited global impact on atomic gas reservoirs despite local kinematic perturbations. The resolved maps and forward modeling provide a useful template for multi-wavelength studies combining radio and optical IFU data.

major comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: the claim that AGN feedback 'does not significantly disrupt the global extent or large-scale structure' is based solely on the fitted HI mass-size slope remaining consistent with the canonical relation within 2σ for N=8. With such a small sample the slope uncertainty is dominated by sampling variance; a 15-25% shallower slope (plausible for moderate feedback) would still lie inside the reported interval, so the data cannot yet distinguish 'no disruption' from 'disruption below detection threshold'. A power analysis or direct scatter comparison to a feedback-free control sample is required.
  2. [Kinematic analysis (UGC 4503)] Kinematic modeling of UGC 4503: the reported σ = 14.9^{+6.1}_{-3.8} km/s and V/σ = 14.28_{-4.17}^{+4.97} are presented as evidence for AGN-induced turbulence, yet the large asymmetric uncertainties and absence of a quantitative statistical test against a matched sample of non-AGN spirals prevent a firm attribution to feedback rather than other disk properties.
minor comments (3)
  1. [Abstract] The abstract states consistency 'within 2σ uncertainties' but does not quote the actual fitted slope value and its uncertainty; these numbers should be reported explicitly.
  2. [Results] No data table listing individual galaxy HI masses, sizes, uncertainties, or kinematic parameters is mentioned; such a table is needed for reproducibility and independent verification.
  3. [Discussion] The comparison to 'large-sample star-forming spirals' requires explicit discussion of selection biases and matching criteria to justify the claim that the sample is representative.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their careful reading and constructive comments, which have prompted us to clarify the statistical limitations of our sample and strengthen the presentation of the kinematic results. We address each major comment below and have revised the manuscript accordingly.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract: the claim that AGN feedback 'does not significantly disrupt the global extent or large-scale structure' is based solely on the fitted HI mass-size slope remaining consistent with the canonical relation within 2σ for N=8. With such a small sample the slope uncertainty is dominated by sampling variance; a 15-25% shallower slope (plausible for moderate feedback) would still lie inside the reported interval, so the data cannot yet distinguish 'no disruption' from 'disruption below detection threshold'. A power analysis or direct scatter comparison to a feedback-free control sample is required.

    Authors: We agree that the small sample size (N=8) limits the strength of any claim regarding the absence of disruption. The slope consistency within 2σ does not rule out moderate feedback effects, as the referee correctly notes. We have revised the abstract to remove the phrasing 'does not significantly disrupt' and instead state that the HI mass-size relation 'remains consistent with the canonical value within 2σ uncertainties, indicating that any global disruption lies below the detection threshold of the current sample.' We have added a dedicated paragraph in the discussion section acknowledging the dominance of sampling variance and the need for larger samples. A brief power analysis assuming a 20% shallower slope (as suggested) has been included, showing that N≈25 would be required for 80% power to detect such an effect at 2σ. We have also compared the observed scatter in our sample to literature values for non-AGN spirals from the THINGS and HALOGAS surveys, finding no significant excess. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Kinematic analysis (UGC 4503)] Kinematic modeling of UGC 4503: the reported σ = 14.9^{+6.1}_{-3.8} km/s and V/σ = 14.28_{-4.17}^{+4.97} are presented as evidence for AGN-induced turbulence, yet the large asymmetric uncertainties and absence of a quantitative statistical test against a matched sample of non-AGN spirals prevent a firm attribution to feedback rather than other disk properties.

    Authors: We acknowledge that the large uncertainties on σ and V/σ preclude a definitive statistical attribution to AGN feedback alone. We have revised the relevant section to present these values as 'suggestive of elevated turbulence' rather than firm evidence, and we explicitly note the asymmetric errors. To address the lack of a matched control sample, we have added a direct comparison to the median intrinsic velocity dispersion (≈10 km/s) and V/σ ratios (typically >20) reported for star-forming spirals in the THINGS survey and in the kinematic modeling of Leroy et al. (2008). While a formal Kolmogorov-Smirnov test against a new matched sample is not possible with the current data, the UGC 4503 values lie outside the 1σ range of the literature distribution. We have also clarified that the localized velocity residuals provide supporting (though not conclusive) evidence for AGN influence. These changes are presented as preliminary indications motivating future observations rather than a robust detection. revision: partial

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: purely observational measurements with no self-referential derivations

full rationale

The paper reports direct GMRT HI observations of eight Seyfert galaxies, constructs the HI mass-size relation from the measured masses and sizes of those galaxies, and performs a standard 3D kinematic forward model on the velocity field of UGC 4503 to extract dispersion and V/σ. The slope consistency statement is a statistical comparison of the fitted value against an external canonical relation; it does not reduce to a fitted parameter being renamed as a prediction, nor does any step invoke self-citation for uniqueness or smuggle an ansatz. The derivation chain is self-contained against the telescope data and standard modeling assumptions.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The work rests on standard radio astronomy data reduction and 3D kinematic disk modeling assumptions rather than new free parameters or postulated entities.

axioms (1)
  • domain assumption Standard assumptions in 3D kinematic forward modeling of HI disks hold for UGC 4503
    Invoked for the velocity dispersion and V/sigma measurements.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5692 in / 1105 out tokens · 51990 ms · 2026-05-14T18:42:31.590715+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

91 extracted references · 83 canonical work pages · 2 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    N., Adelman-McCarthy, J

    Abazajian, K. N., Adelman-McCarthy, J. K., Ag¨ ueros, M. A., et al. 2009, ApJS, 182, 543, doi: 10.1088/0067-0049/182/2/543 Astropy Collaboration, Price-Whelan, A. M., Lim, P. L., et al. 2022, ApJ, 935, 167, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac7c74

    work page doi:10.1088/0067-0049/182/2/543 2009

  2. [2]

    R., Wuyts, S., F¨ orster Schreiber, N

    Avery, C. R., Wuyts, S., F¨ orster Schreiber, N. M., et al. 2021, MNRAS, 503, 5134, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stab780 Bah´ e, Y. M., Crain, R. A., Kauffmann, G., et al. 2016, MNRAS, 456, 1115, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stv2674

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stab780 2021

  3. [3]

    1981 , month = feb, journal =

    Baldwin, J. A., Phillips, M. M., & Terlevich, R. 1981, PASP, 93, 5, doi: 10.1086/130766

    work page doi:10.1086/130766 1981

  4. [4]

    2006, A&A, 447, 49, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20053210

    Battaglia, G., Fraternali, F., Oosterloo, T., & Sancisi, R. 2006, A&A, 447, 49, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20053210

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20053210 2006

  5. [5]

    Begeman, K. G. 1989, A&A, 223, 47

    1989

  6. [6]

    2010, AJ, 140, 1194, doi: 10.1088/0004-6256/136/6/2846

    Bigiel, F., Leroy, A., Walter, F., et al. 2010, AJ, 140, 1194, doi: 10.1088/0004-6256/136/6/2846

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-6256/136/6/2846 2010

  7. [7]

    1981, AJ, 86, 1825, doi: 10.1086/113063

    Bosma, A. 1981, AJ, 86, 1825, doi: 10.1086/113063

    work page doi:10.1086/113063 1981

  8. [8]

    H., & Rhee, M.-H

    Broeils, A. H., & Rhee, M.-H. 1997, A&A, 324, 877

    1997

  9. [9]

    Overview of the SDSS-IV MaNGA Survey: Mapping Nearby Galaxies at Apache Point Observatory

    Bundy, K., Bershady, M. A., Law, D. R., et al. 2014, ApJ, 798, 7, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/798/1/7

    work page Pith review doi:10.1088/0004-637x/798/1/7 2014

  10. [10]

    2014, A&A, 562, A21, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201322464

    Cicone, C., Maiolino, R., Sturm, E., et al. 2014, A&A, 562, A21, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201322464

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201322464 2014

  11. [11]

    P., & Proga, D

    Ciotti, L., Ostriker, J. P., & Proga, D. 2010, ApJ, 717, 708, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/717/2/708

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/717/2/708 2010

  12. [12]

    2021, CARTA: Cube Analysis and Rendering Tool for Astronomy, Astrophysics Source Code Library, record ascl:2103.031

    Comrie, A., Wang, K.-S., Hsu, S.-C., et al. 2021, CARTA: Cube Analysis and Rendering Tool for Astronomy, Astrophysics Source Code Library, record ascl:2103.031. http://ascl.net/2103.031

    2021

  13. [13]

    H., Riffel, R

    Costa-Souza, J. H., Riffel, R. A., Souza-Oliveira, G. L., et al. 2024, ApJ, 974, 127, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad702a

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad702a 2024

  14. [14]

    A., Schaye, J., Bower, R

    Crain, R. A., Schaye, J., Bower, R. G., et al. 2015, MNRAS, 450, 1937, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stv725

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stv725 2015

  15. [15]

    Cresci, G., Hicks, E. K. S., Genzel, R., et al. 2009, ApJ, 697, 115, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/697/1/115

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/697/1/115 2009

  16. [16]

    2005 , month = sep, journal =

    Croton, D. J., Springel, V., White, S. D., et al. 2006, MNRAS, 365, 11, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2005.09675.x

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2005.09675.x 2006

  17. [17]

    2020, ApJ, 889, 10, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab5fcd 15 Dav´ e, R., Angl´ es-Alc´ azar, D., Narayanan, D., et al

    Schombert, J., & Dwarakanath, K. 2020, ApJ, 889, 10, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab5fcd 15 Dav´ e, R., Angl´ es-Alc´ azar, D., Narayanan, D., et al. 2019, MNRAS, 486, 2827, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stz937

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ab5fcd 2020

  18. [18]

    M., Cresci, G., et al

    Davies, R., F¨ orster Schreiber, N. M., Cresci, G., et al. 2011, ApJ, 741, 69, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/741/2/69

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/741/2/69 2011

  19. [19]

    I., Tacconi, L

    Davies, R. I., Tacconi, L. J., & Genzel, R. 2004a, ApJ, 602, 148, doi: 10.1086/380995 —. 2004b, ApJ, 613, 781, doi: 10.1086/423315

    work page doi:10.1086/380995

  20. [20]

    L., Belli, S., Park, M., et al

    Davies, R. L., Belli, S., Park, M., et al. 2024, MNRAS, 528, 4976, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stae327 De Blok, W., Walter, F., Brinks, E., et al. 2008, AJ, 136, 2648, doi: 10.1088/0004-6256/136/6/2648

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stae327 2024

  21. [21]

    A., Ilha, G

    Deconto-Machado, A., Riffel, R. A., Ilha, G. S., et al. 2022, A&A, 659, A131, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202140613

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202140613 2022

  22. [22]

    J., Lang, D., et al

    Dey, A., Schlegel, D. J., Lang, D., et al. 2019, AJ, 157, 168, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/ab089d

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/ab089d 2019

  23. [23]

    M., & Rieke, G

    Diamond-Stanic, A. M., & Rieke, G. H. 2012, ApJ, 746, 168, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/746/2/168

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/746/2/168 2012

  24. [24]

    Diemer, B., Stevens, A. R. H., Lagos, C. d. P., et al. 2019, MNRAS, 487, 1529, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stz1323 do Nascimento, J. C., Dors, O. L., Storchi-Bergmann, T., et al. 2022, MNRAS, 513, 807, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac771

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stz1323 2019

  25. [25]

    L., Brown, T., Catinella, B., & Cortese, L

    Ellison, S. L., Brown, T., Catinella, B., & Cortese, L. 2019, MNRAS, 482, 5694, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ac794f

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ac794f 2019

  26. [26]

    L., Wong, T., S´ anchez, S

    Ellison, S. L., Wong, T., S´ anchez, S. F., et al. 2021, MNRAS, 505, L46, doi: 10.1093/mnrasl/slab047

    work page doi:10.1093/mnrasl/slab047 2021

  27. [27]

    R., Audibert, A., et al

    Esparza-Arredondo, D., Almeida, C. R., Audibert, A., et al. 2025, A&A, 693, A174, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202452488

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202452488 2025

  28. [28]

    , archivePrefix = "arXiv", eprint =

    Fabello, S., Kauffmann, G., Catinella, B., et al. 2011, MNRAS, 416, 1739, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2011.18825.x

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2011.18825.x 2011

  29. [29]

    Fabian, A. C. 2012, ARA&A, 50, 455, doi: 10.1146/annurev-astro-081811-125521

    work page internal anchor Pith review doi:10.1146/annurev-astro-081811-125521 2012

  30. [30]

    and Lang, Dustin and Goodman, Jonathan , title =

    Foreman-Mackey, D., Hogg, D. W., Lang, D., & Goodman, J. 2013, PASP, 125, 306, doi: 10.1086/670067 Garc´ ıa-Burillo, S., Alonso-Herrero, A., Ramos Almeida, C., et al. 2021, A&A, 652, A98, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202141075

    work page doi:10.1086/670067 2013

  31. [31]

    2023, MNRAS, 521, 5645, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad792

    Gebek, A., Baes, M., Diemer, B., et al. 2023, MNRAS, 521, 5645, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad792

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stad792 2023

  32. [32]

    G., Garc´ ıa-Burillo, S., & Combes, F

    Haan, S., Schinnerer, E., Mundell, C. G., Garc´ ıa-Burillo, S., & Combes, F. 2007, AJ, 135, 232, doi: 10.1088/0004-6256/135/1/232

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-6256/135/1/232 2007

  33. [33]

    P., Giovanelli, R., Kent, B

    Haynes, M. P., Giovanelli, R., Kent, B. R., et al. 2018, ApJ, 861, 49, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aac956 Hermosa Mu˜ noz, L., Alonso-Herrero, A., Pereira-Santaella, M., et al. 2024, A&A, 690, A350, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202450262

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aac956 2018

  34. [34]

    F., Hernquist, L., Cox, T

    Hopkins, P. F., Hernquist, L., Cox, T. J., et al. 2006, ApJS, 163, 1, doi: 10.1086/499298

    work page Pith review doi:10.1086/499298 2006

  35. [35]

    2017, MNRAS, 470, 3071, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stx1447

    Jensen, J., H¨ onig, S., Rakshit, S., et al. 2017, MNRAS, 470, 3071, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stx1447

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stx1447 2017

  36. [36]

    2025, Science and Technology Review, 43, 55, doi: 10.3981/j.issn.1000-7857.2024.10.01446

    Jiang, P., LIU, b., & Yu, D. 2025, Science and Technology Review, 43, 55, doi: 10.3981/j.issn.1000-7857.2024.10.01446

    work page doi:10.3981/j.issn.1000-7857.2024.10.01446 2025

  37. [37]

    2019, Science China

    Jiang, P., Yue, Y., Gan, H., et al. 2019, Science China

    2019

  38. [38]

    Physics, Mechanics & Astronomy, 62, 959502, doi: 10.1007/s11433-018-9376-1

    work page doi:10.1007/s11433-018-9376-1

  39. [39]

    2024, Astronomical Techniques and Instruments, 1, 84, doi: 10.61977/ati2024012

    Jiang, P., Chen, R., Gan, H., et al. 2024, Astronomical Techniques and Instruments, 1, 84, doi: 10.61977/ati2024012

    work page doi:10.61977/ati2024012 2024

  40. [40]

    , archivePrefix = "arXiv", eprint =

    Jones, M. G., Haynes, M. P., Giovanelli, R., & Moorman, C. 2018, MNRAS, 477, 2, doi: 10.1093/mnras/sty521

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/sty521 2018

  41. [41]

    2021, Experimental Astronomy, 51, 95, doi: 10.1007/s10686-020-09677-6

    Kale, R., & Ishwara-Chandra, C. 2021, Experimental Astronomy, 51, 95, doi: 10.1007/s10686-020-09677-6

    work page doi:10.1007/s10686-020-09677-6 2021

  42. [42]

    2019, MNRAS, 483, L98, doi: 10.1093/mnrasl/sly203

    Katz, H., Desmond, H., McGaugh, S., & Lelli, F. 2019, MNRAS, 483, L98, doi: 10.1093/mnrasl/sly203

    work page doi:10.1093/mnrasl/sly203 2019

  43. [43]

    Merloni, S

    Kauffmann, G., Heckman, T. M., Tremonti, C., et al. 2003, MNRAS, 346, 1055, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2003.07154.x

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2003.07154.x 2003

  44. [44]

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

    Kewley, L. J., Groves, B., Kauffmann, G., & Heckman, T. 2006, MNRAS, 372, 961, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2006.10859.x

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2006.10859.x 2006

  45. [45]

    Kormendy, J., & Ho, L. C. 2013, ARA&A, 51, 511, doi: 10.1146/annurev-astro-082708-101811

    work page internal anchor Pith review doi:10.1146/annurev-astro-082708-101811 2013

  46. [46]

    R., & Burkhart, B

    Krumholz, M. R., & Burkhart, B. 2016, MNRAS, 458, 1671, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stw434

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stw434 2016

  47. [47]

    G., Ibarra-Medel, H., et al

    Lammers, C., Iyer, K. G., Ibarra-Medel, H., et al. 2023, ApJ, 953, 26, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/acdd57

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/acdd57 2023

  48. [48]

    M., Genzel, R., et al

    Lang, P., F¨ orster Schreiber, N. M., Genzel, R., et al. 2017, ApJ, 840, 92, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aa6d82

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aa6d82 2017

  49. [49]

    L., F¨ orster Schreiber, N

    Lee, L. L., F¨ orster Schreiber, N. M., Price, S. H., et al. 2025, ApJ, 978, 14, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad90b5

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad90b5 2025

  50. [50]

    S., & Schombert, J

    Lelli, F., McGaugh, S. S., & Schombert, J. M. 2016, AJ, 152, 157, doi: 10.3847/0004-6256/152/6/157

    work page doi:10.3847/0004-6256/152/6/157 2016

  51. [51]

    R., et al

    Li, S.-L., Grasha, K., Krumholz, M. R., et al. 2024a, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 529, 4993, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stae869

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stae869

  52. [52]

    R., & S´ anchez, S

    Li, S.-L., Li, Z., Wisnioski, E., Krumholz, M. R., & S´ anchez, S. F. 2024b, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 536, 430, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stae2603

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stae2603

  53. [53]

    F., Genzel, R., et al

    Liu, D., Schreiber, N. F., Genzel, R., et al. 2023, ApJ, 942, 98, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aca46b

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aca46b 2023

  54. [54]

    2022, The Astrophysical Journal, 941, 205, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aca326 16

    Ma, W., Liu, K., Guo, H., et al. 2022, The Astrophysical Journal, 941, 205, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aca326 16

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aca326 2022

  55. [55]

    2007, in Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series, Vol

    Golap, K. 2007, in Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series, Vol. 376, Astronomical Data Analysis Software and Systems XVI, 127

    2007

  56. [56]

    2011, International Journal of Modern Physics D, 20, 989, doi: 10.1142/S0218271811019335

    Nan, R., Li, D., Jin, C., et al. 2011, International Journal of Modern Physics D, 20, 989, doi: 10.1142/S0218271811019335

    work page doi:10.1142/s0218271811019335 2011

  57. [57]

    S., et al

    Narayanan, D., Smith, J.-D., Hensley, B. S., et al. 2023, ApJ, 951, 100, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/accf8d

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/accf8d 2023

  58. [58]

    F., Frenk, C

    Navarro, J. F., Frenk, C. S., & White, S. D. M. 1996, ApJ, 462, 563, doi: 10.1086/177173

    work page doi:10.1086/177173 1996

  59. [59]

    B., et al

    Newville, M., Stensitzki, T., Allen, D. B., et al. 2016, Astrophysics Source Code Library, ascl, doi: 10.5281/zenodo.11813

    work page doi:10.5281/zenodo.11813 2016

  60. [60]

    A., Brinks, E., et al

    Oh, S.-H., Hunter, D. A., Brinks, E., et al. 2015, AJ, 149, 180, doi: 10.1088/0004-6256/149/6/180

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-6256/149/6/180 2015

  61. [61]

    J., Masters, K

    Penny, S. J., Masters, K. L., Smethurst, R., et al. 2018, MNRAS, 476, 979, doi: 10.1093/mnras/sty202

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/sty202 2018

  62. [62]

    M., Bluck, A

    Piotrowska, J. M., Bluck, A. F. L., Maiolino, R., & Peng, Y. 2022, MNRAS, 512, 1052, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stab3673

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stab3673 2022

  63. [63]

    H., Shimizu, T

    Price, S. H., Shimizu, T. T., Genzel, R., et al. 2021, ApJ, 922, 143, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac22ad

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac22ad 2021

  64. [64]

    2025, arXiv preprint arXiv:2512.04582

    Rabyang, O., & Elson, E. 2025, arXiv preprint arXiv:2512.04582

    work page arXiv 2025

  65. [65]

    2021, ApJ, 910, 139, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/abdcad

    Revalski, M., Meena, B., Martinez, F., et al. 2021, ApJ, 910, 139, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/abdcad

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

  66. [66]

    H., et al

    Rhee, J., Lah, P., Briggs, F. H., et al. 2018, MNRAS, 473, 1879, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stx2461

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stx2461 2018

  67. [67]

    Scannapieco, C. e. a., Wadepuhl, M., Parry, O., et al. 2012, MNRAS, 423, 1726, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2012.20993.x

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2012.20993.x 2012

  68. [68]

    A., Bower, R

    Schaye, J., Crain, R. A., Bower, R. G., et al. 2015, MNRAS, 446, 521, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stu2058

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stu2058 2015

  69. [69]

    2020, ApJ, 899, 112, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aba8a1

    Treister, E. 2020, The Astrophysical Journal, 899, 112, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aba8a1

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aba8a1 2020

  70. [70]

    C., & Xie, Y

    Shangguan, J., Ho, L. C., & Xie, Y. 2018, The Astrophysical Journal, 854, 158, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aaa9be

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aaa9be 2018

  71. [71]

    2022, A&A, 659, A123, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201936803

    Singha, M., Husemann, B., Urrutia, T., et al. 2022, A&A, 659, A123, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201936803

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201936803 2022

  72. [72]

    2005 , month = sep, journal =

    Springel, V., Di Matteo, T., & Hernquist, L. 2005, MNRAS, 361, 776, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2005.09238.x

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2005.09238.x 2005

  73. [73]

    R., Diemer, B., Lagos, C

    Stevens, A. R., Diemer, B., Lagos, C. d. P., et al. 2019, MNRAS, 490, 96, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stz2513

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stz2513 2019

  74. [74]

    R., Brown, T., Diemer, B., et al

    Stevens, A. R., Brown, T., Diemer, B., et al. 2023, The Astrophysical Journal Letters, 957, L19, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ad014b

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ad014b 2023

  75. [75]

    1991, Current science, 60, 95

    Swarup, G., Ananthakrishnan, S., Kapahi, V., et al. 1991, Current science, 60, 95

    1991

  76. [76]

    2002, A&A, 390, 829, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20011755

    Swaters, R., Van Albada, T., Van Der Hulst, J., & Sancisi, R. 2002, A&A, 390, 829, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20011755

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20011755 2002

  77. [77]

    2009, AJ, 137, 4424, doi: 10.1088/0004-6256/137/5/4424 Van Albada, T

    Tamburro, D., Rix, H.-W., Leroy, A., et al. 2009, AJ, 137, 4424, doi: 10.1088/0004-6256/137/5/4424 Van Albada, T. S., Bahcall, J. N., Begeman, K., & Sancisi, R. 1985, AJ, 295, 305, doi: 10.1086/163375

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-6256/137/5/4424 2009

  78. [78]

    D., & Aalto, S

    Veilleux, S., Maiolino, R., Bolatto, A. D., & Aalto, S. 2020, A&A Rv, 28, 2, doi: 10.1007/s00159-019-0121-9

    work page doi:10.1007/s00159-019-0121-9 2020

  79. [79]

    Veilleux, S., & Osterbrock, D. E. 1987, ApJS, 63, 295, doi: 10.1086/191166

    work page doi:10.1086/191166 1987

  80. [80]

    2017, Frontiers in Astronomy and Space Sciences, 4, 46, doi: 10.3389/fspas.2017.00046

    Venturi, G., Marconi, A., Mingozzi, M., et al. 2017, Frontiers in Astronomy and Space Sciences, 4, 46, doi: 10.3389/fspas.2017.00046

    work page doi:10.3389/fspas.2017.00046 2017

Showing first 80 references.