Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 59 references

Deep CO(2-1) observations show that the dwarf galaxy VCC 1249 has lost both its atomic and molecular gas, with faint molecular emission appearing only in the stripped HI tail, marking a rare snapshot of rapid environmental quenching.

Reviewed by Pith at T0; open to challenge. T0 means a machine referee read the full paper against a public rubric. the ladder, T0–T4 →

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

T0 review · deepseek-v4-flash

2026-08-01 09:47 UTC pith:OZL4L6XS

load-bearing objection First CO detection in a completely HI-stripped dwarf tail, but the tail detections are marginal and overlapping; the disk non-detection is solid; the stacked signal is partly a selection artifact. the 3 major comments →

arxiv 2607.20626 v1 pith:OZL4L6XS submitted 2026-07-22 astro-ph.GA

A Naked Dwarf: Molecular Gas in the Completely Stripped HI Tail of VCC 1249

Bumhyun Lee , Aeree Chung , Paolo Serra , Nikki Zabel , Sungsoon Lim , Hyein Yoon , A. Boselli , Matteo Fossati
show 7 more authors
Yongjung Kim Tomonari Michiyama Juan Molina Kana Morokuma-Matsui Jaehyun Lee Jeong Hwan Lee Se-Heon Oh
This is my paper
classification astro-ph.GA
keywords dwarf galaxiesmolecular gasram pressure strippingtidal interactionVirgo ClusterCO(2-1)environmental quenchingVCC 1249
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved

The pith

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

This paper sets out to show that the Virgo Cluster dwarf VCC 1249 has lost essentially all of its cold gas—both atomic hydrogen and molecular gas—to the combined action of ram-pressure stripping and tidal interaction with its giant neighbor. The evidence is a set of deep CO(2-1) observations: no molecular emission within the galaxy's stellar disk, but marginal detections at three positions in the long HI tail that has already been torn away. The detected masses, about 1e5 to 1e6 solar masses, are comparable to individual giant molecular clouds. If the detections hold, the galaxy is caught in a brief transitional phase between star-forming and quiescent, with its removed gas still visible nearby—a laboratory for rapid environmental quenching.

Core claim

The central claim is that VCC 1249 is undergoing severe, compound stripping of its cold interstellar medium. Using deep CO(2-1) spectroscopy at six positions, the authors detect no molecular gas in the stellar disk or in a bright ultraviolet region between the disk and the tail, but find faint CO emission in three regions of the detached HI tail. They interpret these as molecular clouds that have either been pulled out with the atomic gas or, more likely, formed in situ from the stripped HI, since the 176-Myr travel time far exceeds typical giant-molecular-cloud lifetimes. The paper argues that ram pressure alone can strip HI across the whole disk and can strip molecular gas down to a radius

What carries the argument

The observations are 12CO(2-1) spectra taken with a 20-arcsecond beam (1.64 kpc at the assumed distance), reaching rms noise of ~0.7–1.0 mK. The argument turns on three pieces: (i) marginal CO detections (peak S/N 3.4–4.9) at P4–P6 whose velocities coincide with the HI peaks in the same beams; (ii) a stacked spectrum of the three tail positions giving a peak S/N of 6.7; and (iii) a pressure-balance calculation comparing the local ram pressure to the gravitational anchoring pressure, which yields the radii out to which gas of a given surface density can be stripped. A travel-time estimate (~176 Myr) then supports in-situ molecular-cloud formation in the tail.

Load-bearing premise

The faint CO features in the tail at peak signal-to-noise 3.4–4.9 are real molecular emission from stripped gas, rather than noise fluctuations or a background source; if they are not, the molecular-gas-in-the-tail claim and the stacked detection lose their foundation.

What would settle it

A targeted interferometric observation of the P4–P6 fields with high resolution and depth would settle it: detection of compact, spatially resolved CO sources with velocities matching the HI peaks would confirm the claim, while failure to reproduce the emission at comparable sensitivity would show the marginal features were noise. Additionally, a search for a background continuum source in the same fields would rule out contamination.

Watch this falsifier — get emailed when new claim-graph text bears on it.

If this is right

  • If the central claim holds, VCC 1249 becomes the first dwarf galaxy observed during the actual removal of both atomic and molecular gas, placing it in a short-lived transitional state between actively star-forming and quiescent.
  • The non-detection in the disk, at the achieved sensitivity, implies that CO-dark gas is not masking a substantial molecular reservoir; the disk is genuinely empty of its cold ISM.
  • The presence of molecular gas in the tail, with masses at the scale of giant molecular clouds, implies that stripped atomic gas can cool and reassemble into star-forming clouds on timescales shorter than ~176 Myr.
  • The pressure-balance calculation quantifies how far ram pressure can strip molecular gas from a dwarf galaxy, giving a concrete radius (~0.5–0.7 kpc) and surface-density threshold for future models of dwarf-galaxy quenching.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • As an editorial extension: if confirmed, this would suggest that many apparently gas-free dwarf galaxies in clusters may have their missing cold gas floating nearby as stripped tails, detectable only with deep molecular-line observations.
  • The method of comparing ram pressure to anchoring pressure could be applied systematically to larger samples of cluster dwarfs to predict which ones should show this 'naked disk + filled tail' morphology, turning a single object into a testable population prediction.
  • A testable extension: the in-situ formation scenario predicts that the molecular clouds in the tail should share the velocity and metallicity of the stripped HI, and should not show a smooth age gradient along the tail; mapping cloud kinematics with an interferometer would discriminate direct stripping from in-situ formation.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper presents JCMT 12CO(2-1) observations of six pointings in and around the Virgo dwarf VCC 1249, which has a completely detached HI tail. It reports marginal CO detections in three tail regions (P4–P6) with peak S/N 3.4–4.9 and integrated S/N 3.7–5.2, plus a stacked spectrum reaching S/N ~6.7 after aligning the three spectra on their peak velocities. CO is not detected in the stellar disk (P1, P2) or in a bright NUV region (P3); the paper converts these non-detections into 3σ upper limits and, using an expected molecular mass from scaling relations, argues that the molecular gas has been severely removed from the disk along with the HI. The authors combine this with a ram-pressure/tidal analysis and a comparison of travel times to argue that the tail CO likely formed in situ from stripped HI, and that VCC 1249 is a rare example of rapid environmental quenching of a dwarf galaxy.

Significance. If the CO detections are genuine, the paper provides a rare observational snapshot of a dwarf galaxy in the process of losing both its atomic and molecular gas, with the stripped gas still detectable outside the stellar disk. The authors are honest about the marginal nature of the individual detections, and they present the non-detections with explicit upper limits using two CO-to-H2 conversion factors. The environmental analysis (tidal radius, ram pressure stripping threshold, travel-time comparison) is a useful framework for interpreting the system. However, the central new claim — molecular gas in the stripped HI tail — rests on low-S/N features whose statistical robustness is not established. The stacked 6.7σ detection is not an independent confirmation because the spectra were aligned on their own detected peaks before averaging, and the three pointings are not spatially independent given the 20'' beam. The kinematic agreement with HI was itself part of the detection criterion, so it cannot serve as external validation. The disk non-detection is solid at the quoted sensitivity, but the conclusion of 'severe removal' depends on the assumed expected molecular mass and linewidth;

major comments (3)
  1. [§3, Table 2] The stacked CO spectrum is produced by 'shifting the CO peak velocities to zero' for the three spectra that already showed 3.4–4.9σ peaks. This peak-aligned averaging is a classic source of bias: even pure noise, when each spectrum is selected because it has a noise peak and then that peak is shifted to zero, yields a stacked feature with S/N close to the mean of the selected peak S/N times sqrt(N) — here roughly (4.9+3.4+3.7)/3 × sqrt(3) ≈ 6.9, matching the reported 6.7. The stacking therefore does not provide independent confirmation of real emission. Moreover, P4–P6 are separated by only 12–15'' (Table 2), less than the 20'' beam (§2), so these are not independent pointings; the same sky emission is observed in heavily overlapping beams. The paper should report a trials-corrected false-detection probability (e.g., stacking on off-line noise windows, or Monte Carlo shuffles) and explic
  2. [§4.2, Table 2] The detection criteria in §3 are (i) peak S/N > 3 and (ii) consistency of the peak velocity with the HI peak velocity. The subsequent statement that the CO and HI velocities show 'good agreement' is therefore not an independent kinematic check — it was part of the selection. With six pointings and a 10 km/s channel width over a ~300 km/s band, the expected number of 3.4σ noise peaks is non-negligible unless a global trials factor is applied. The integrated S/N values (3.7–5.2) are computed after identifying the peak and including 'consecutive neighboring channels with S/N > 1', which further inherits selection bias. The authors should quantify the effective number of independent trials (pointings × statistically independent channels, accounting for the 20'' beam oversampling of P4–P6) and provide a posterior probability or false-positive rate for the reported detections. Without this, th
  3. [§4.4] The conclusion that molecular gas has been 'severely removed' from the disk rests on comparing the non-detection upper limits (log M_H2 < 6.1–6.4 for the MW conversion factor, assuming a 50 km/s linewidth for P1/P2 and 10 km/s for P3) with an expected molecular mass of 1.08×10^8 Msun from the Cicone et al. (2017) / Brown et al. (2021) scaling relations and an assumed exponential profile. This comparison is sensitive to (a) the assumed linewidth in the upper-limit calculation — a 10 km/s linewidth would lower the upper limits by ~0.7 dex, while a broader line would raise them; (b) the appropriateness of the scaling relation for a low-metallicity dwarf; and (c) the adopted CO-to-H2 conversion and R21. The paper acknowledges in §4.4 that 'the current JCMT non-detection may be sensitivity-limited.' The 'severe removal' claim would be more defensible if the upper limits were presented as a fu
minor comments (5)
  1. [Throughout] The text consistently writes 'Hi' rather than the standard 'H I' (e.g., in the abstract, §1, §4). This is a formatting issue but should be corrected for clarity.
  2. [§2, Fig. 1 caption] The caption states 'CO detections are shown in blue' for panels (b)–(g), but P1–P3 are non-detections. The figure would be clearer if only the P4–P6 panels indicated blue shading, or if the non-detection panels were explicitly labeled as such.
  3. [§3, Table 2] The table lists integrated intensities and masses but not the velocity ranges used for the CO integrations. Because the features are marginal, quoting the integration windows (and the number of channels) would improve reproducibility.
  4. [§4.2] The ram-pressure model uses n_halo ≈ 2.8×10^-3 cm^-3 estimated from a beta model (Schindler et al. 1999; Vollmer 2009). The uncertainty in this density is not propagated into the stripping radii or the strippable surface densities shown in Fig. 3. A short caveat on the systematic uncertainty of n_halo would be appropriate.
  5. [References] Several citations in the text are to 'Serra et al. in prep.' (e.g., §1, Fig. 1 caption). Since these are central to the HI kinematics, the authors should state whether the MeerKAT HI data are public or under embargo, and provide a reference or data release URL if available.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity: detections, non-detections, and mass estimates rest on independent data and external calibrations.

full rationale

The paper's chain is: (1) deep JCMT CO(2-1) observations yield marginal 3.4-4.9σ peaks in P4-P6 and non-detections in P1-P3; (2) molecular masses are computed from integrated CO fluxes using Eq. 1 with external CO-to-H2 conversion factors (Bolatto et al. 2013; Accurso et al. 2017; Zabel et al. 2019) and an assumed R21 (Leroy et al. 2013), not from fits to VCC 1249; (3) the expected disk molecular gas mass and HI mass come from external scaling relations (Cicone et al. 2017; Brown et al. 2021; Parkash et al. 2018) and are compared with the observed upper limits and tail masses; (4) the ram-pressure and tidal arguments use standard equations (Gunn & Gott 1972) and independently derived halo parameters. None of these steps fits a parameter to the very quantity it is then used to predict. The HI velocity agreement is part of the detection criterion, but the CO flux itself is an independent measurement, so the velocity match is a selection prior rather than a derived output. The stacked 6.7σ spectrum is formed by aligning spectra to their own detected peak velocities, which is a statistical calibration concern that can bias significance estimates, but it does not make the molecular-mass estimates or the disk/tail distinction circular. The paper explicitly labels the detections 'marginal' and calls for ALMA follow-up, and no load-bearing conclusion depends on a self-citation or an imported uniqueness theorem. Therefore no circular step can be exhibited under the stated criteria.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

6 free parameters · 5 axioms · 0 invented entities

No new physics is introduced. The paper's quantitative conclusions borrow external calibrations (distance, alpha_CO, R21, scaling relations, halo density). The main quantities chosen or adopted by hand are the encounter angles, assumed line widths for upper limits, and conversion factors. These are conventional for this type of study, but they control the claim of 'complete removal.'

free parameters (6)
  • CO-to-H2 conversion factor = 4.35 and 6.05 Msun pc^-2 (K km/s)^-1
    Adopted from Bolatto et al. 2013 and Accurso et al. 2017; molecular gas masses and non-detection upper limits scale linearly with alpha_CO. A much larger alpha_CO would weaken the 'severe removal' conclusion.
  • CO(2-1)/(1-0) ratio R21 = 0.7
    Adopted typical value from Leroy et al. 2013; used to convert CO(2-1) luminosities to molecular gas masses. The masses scale as 1/R21.
  • Assumed CO linewidth for non-detection upper limits = 50 km/s (P1, P2); 10 km/s (P3)
    Used in Section 3 for the disk non-detections. The upper limits in Table 2 depend on this ad hoc choice; a different linewidth changes the derived mass limits.
  • Expected molecular gas mass = 1.08e8 Msun
    Taken from stellar-mass-H2 scaling relations (Cicone et al. 2017; Brown et al. 2021). Used in Section 4.4 to state that only 2.5% of expected molecular gas remains. If the scaling relation does not apply to this dwarf, the severity of removal is overstated.
  • Encounter angle for ram pressure = 0 deg and 45 deg
    Adopted in Section 4.2 to bracket stripping geometries. Determines the strippable gas surface densities and stripping radii in Figure 3.
  • Halo gas number density n_halo = 2.8e-3 cm^-3
    Derived from ROSAT X-ray measurements and a beta model for the NGC 4472 halo. The ram-pressure estimate is proportional to n_halo and to cos^2(theta), so this is a controlling uncertainty.
axioms (5)
  • domain assumption VCC 1249 is at the same distance as NGC 4472, 16.9 Mpc.
    Adopted in Section 1; all luminosities and masses scale with D_L^2, so a different distance changes molecular masses and tail masses.
  • domain assumption A standard CO-to-H2 conversion factor (MW or metallicity-dependent) applies to VCC 1249.
    Used in Section 3; if the true alpha_CO is much higher, or if a large fraction of gas is CO-dark, the disk non-detection does not imply absence of molecular gas.
  • domain assumption The expected molecular gas mass follows the stellar-mass-H2 scaling relation, with R90,mol = 2.4 kpc.
    Used in Sections 4.2 and 4.4; supports the claim that 97.5% of expected molecular gas is missing. If VCC 1249 was already gas-poor before interaction, 'severe removal' is weaker.
  • domain assumption The peak-velocity coincidence between CO and HI establishes association of the faint CO features with VCC 1249.
    Used in Section 3; the detections are only 3-5 sigma, so the physical association rests on velocity agreement to within about 7 km/s.
  • domain assumption The ROSAT-derived n_halo ≈ 2.8e-3 cm^-3 describes the hot halo of NGC 4472 at the location of VCC 1249.
    Used in Section 4.2; the ram-pressure estimate and all stripping radii depend on this density and on the assumed encounter angle.

pith-pipeline@v1.3.0-alltime-deepseek · 13867 in / 14546 out tokens · 118458 ms · 2026-08-01T09:47:30.231757+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

We present the first observational hints of the severe removal of both molecular and HI gas from the dwarf galaxy VCC 1249. This extreme stripping event is thought to be driven by the combined effects of tidal interaction and ram pressure. Using deep CO (2$-$1) observations from the James Clerk Maxwell Telescope (JCMT), we obtained marginal CO detections in three regions within the stripped HI tail, with molecular masses of $\sim$10$^{5}$ to 10$^{6}$$M_{\odot}$, comparable to typical masses of giant molecular clouds. In contrast, we did not find CO emission within the stellar disk of VCC 1249. This indicates the severe removal of cold gas, which likely caused the sudden cessation of star formation in the galaxy. This identifies VCC 1249 as a unique laboratory for witnessing the rapid, environmentally-driven quenching of a dwarf galaxy. Our findings provide a critical observational link between gas removal mechanisms and the dramatic phase transition of cluster dwarfs from star-forming to quiescent systems.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.20626 by A. Boselli, Aeree Chung, Bumhyun Lee, Hyein Yoon, Jaehyun Lee, Jeong Hwan Lee, Juan Molina, Kana Morokuma-Matsui, Matteo Fossati, Nikki Zabel, Paolo Serra, Se-Heon Oh, Sungsoon Lim, Tomonari Michiyama, Yongjung Kim.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: (a): A panchromatic map of VCC 1249, including optical color image created by combining the Next Generation Virgo Cluster Survey (NGVS) u, g, z band data (L. Ferrarese et al. 2012, 2016), GALEX NUV data (green contours), and MeerKAT H i data (yellow contours, F. de Gasperin et al. 2025, Serra et al. in prep.). The GALEX NUV data, based on GALEX GR6 data from the MAST GALEX archive, were retrieved through N… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Stacked CO spectrum (red) by combining CO spectra from P4 - P6 regions. The peak S/N is ∼6.7. 3. RESULTS We determine CO detection based on two criteria: (i) the peak CO emission has a signal-to-noise ratio (S/N) >3, and (ii) the CO peak velocity is approximately con￾sistent with the H i peak velocity. After confirming the peak emission, consecutive neighboring CO emis￾sion channels with the S/N >1 are als… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Strippable gas surface densities due to RPS as a function of radius for encounter angles of 0 and 45 degrees (red and blue dashed lines), alongside the expected molecular gas profile (green line) and the stellar surface density profile (black line) of VCC 1249. Black stars indicate strippable molecular gas densities (19.2 M⊙ pc−2 and 15.1 M⊙ pc−2 ) at radii of 0.5 kpc and 0.7 kpc, respectively. Black horiz… view at source ↗

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

59 extracted references · 13 canonical work pages · 1 internal anchor

  1. [1]

    2017, MNRAS, 470, 4750, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stx1556 Arrigoni Battaia, F., Gavazzi, G., Fumagalli, M., et al

    Accurso, G., Saintonge, A., Catinella, B., et al. 2017, MNRAS, 470, 4750, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stx1556 Arrigoni Battaia, F., Gavazzi, G., Fumagalli, M., et al. 2012, A&A, 543, A112, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201218895 Astropy Collaboration, Robitaille, T. P., Tollerud, E. J., et al. 2013, A&A, 558, A33, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201322068 Astropy Collaboration, P...

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stx1556 2017

  2. [2]

    D., Wolfire, M., & Leroy, A

    Bolatto, A. D., Wolfire, M., & Leroy, A. K. 2013, ARA&A, 51, 207, doi: 10.1146/annurev-astro-082812-140944

    doi:10.1146/annurev-astro-082812-140944 2013

  3. [3]

    2008, ApJ, 674, 742, doi: 10.1086/525513

    Boselli, A., Boissier, S., Cortese, L., & Gavazzi, G. 2008, ApJ, 674, 742, doi: 10.1086/525513

    doi:10.1086/525513 2008

  4. [4]

    2022, A&A Rv, 30, 3, doi: 10.1007/s00159-022-00140-3

    Boselli, A., Fossati, M., & Sun, M. 2022, A&A Rv, 30, 3, doi: 10.1007/s00159-022-00140-3

    doi:10.1007/s00159-022-00140-3 2022

  5. [5]

    2014, A&A Rv, 22, 74, doi: 10.1007/s00159-014-0074-y

    Boselli, A., & Gavazzi, G. 2014, A&A Rv, 22, 74, doi: 10.1007/s00159-014-0074-y

    doi:10.1007/s00159-014-0074-y 2014

  6. [6]

    D., Zabel, N., et al

    Brown, T., Wilson, C. D., Zabel, N., et al. 2021, ApJS, 257, 21, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ac28f5

    doi:10.3847/1538-4365/ac28f5 2021

  7. [7]

    R., McLeod, A

    Chevance, M., Krumholz, M. R., McLeod, A. F., et al. 2023, in Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference

    2023

  8. [8]

    534, Protostars and Planets VII, ed

    Series, Vol. 534, Protostars and Planets VII, ed. S. Inutsuka, Y. Aikawa, T. Muto, K. Tomida, & M. Tamura, 1, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2203.09570

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2203.09570

  9. [9]

    2022, ApJ, 936, 133, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac82ba

    Choi, W., Kim, C.-G., & Chung, A. 2022, ApJ, 936, 133, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac82ba

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac82ba 2022

  10. [10]

    Choque-Challapa, N., Aguerri, J. A. L., Mancera Pi˜ na, P. E., et al. 2021, MNRAS, 507, 6045, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stab2420

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stab2420 2021

  11. [11]

    2007, ApJL, 659, L115, doi: 10.1086/518034

    Vollmer, B. 2007, ApJL, 659, L115, doi: 10.1086/518034

    doi:10.1086/518034 2007

  12. [12]

    2017, A&A, 604, A53, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201730605

    Cicone, C., Bothwell, M., Wagg, J., et al. 2017, A&A, 604, A53, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201730605

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201730605 2017

  13. [13]

    2021, PASA, 38, e035, doi: 10.1017/pasa.2021.18 Cˆ ot´ e, P., McLaughlin, D

    Cortese, L., Catinella, B., & Smith, R. 2021, PASA, 38, e035, doi: 10.1017/pasa.2021.18 Cˆ ot´ e, P., McLaughlin, D. E., Cohen, J. G., & Blakeslee, J. P. 2003, ApJ, 591, 850, doi: 10.1086/375488

    doi:10.1017/pasa.2021.18 2021

  14. [14]

    J., Berry, D

    Currie, M. J., Berry, D. S., Jenness, T., et al. 2014, in Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series, Vol. 485, Astronomical Data Analysis Software and Systems XXIII, ed. N. Manset & P. Forshay, 391 de Gasperin, F., Edler, H. W., Boselli, A., et al. 2025, A&A, 693, A189, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202452060

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202452060 2014

  15. [15]

    2006, A&A, 452, 795, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20053921

    Domainko, W., Mair, M., Kapferer, W., et al. 2006, A&A, 452, 795, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20053921

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20053921 2006

  16. [16]

    2012, ApJS, 200, 4, doi: 10.1088/0067-0049/200/1/4

    Ferrarese, L., Cˆ ot´ e, P., Cuillandre, J.-C., et al. 2012, ApJS, 200, 4, doi: 10.1088/0067-0049/200/1/4

    doi:10.1088/0067-0049/200/1/4 2012

  17. [17]

    2016, ApJ, 824, 10, doi: 10.3847/0004-637X/824/1/10

    Ferrarese, L., Cˆ ot´ e, P., S´ anchez-Janssen, R., et al. 2016, ApJ, 824, 10, doi: 10.3847/0004-637X/824/1/10

    doi:10.3847/0004-637x/824/1/10 2016

  18. [18]

    2001, ApJL, 563, L23, doi: 10.1086/338389

    Gavazzi, G., Boselli, A., Mayer, L., et al. 2001, ApJL, 563, L23, doi: 10.1086/338389

    doi:10.1086/338389 2001

  19. [19]

    2016, A&A, 590, A27, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201628123

    Grossi, M., Corbelli, E., Bizzocchi, L., et al. 2016, A&A, 590, A27, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201628123

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201628123 2016

  20. [20]

    E., & Gott, III, J

    Gunn, J. E., & Gott, III, J. R. 1972, ApJ, 176, 1, doi: 10.1086/151605

    doi:10.1086/151605 1972

  21. [21]

    R., Millman, K

    Harris, C. R., Millman, K. J., van der Walt, S. J., et al. 2020, Nature, 585, 357, doi: 10.1038/s41586-020-2649-2

    doi:10.1038/s41586-020-2649-2 2020

  22. [22]

    Hunter, J. D. 2007, Computing in Science & Engineering, 9, 90, doi: 10.1109/MCSE.2007.55

    doi:10.1109/mcse.2007.55 2007

  23. [23]

    A., Frayer, D

    Irwin, J. A., Frayer, D. T., & Sarazin, C. L. 1997, AJ, 113, 1580, doi: 10.1086/118375

    work page doi:10.1086/118375 1997

  24. [24]

    A., & Sarazin, C

    Irwin, J. A., & Sarazin, C. L. 1996, ApJ, 471, 683, doi: 10.1086/177998 J´ achym, P., Combes, F., Cortese, L., Sun, M., & Kenney, J. D. P. 2014, ApJ, 792, 11, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/792/1/11 J´ achym, P., Kenney, J. D. P., Rˇ zuiˇ cka, A., et al. 2013, A&A, 556, A99, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201220495 J´ achym, P., Sun, M., Kenney, J. D. P., et al. 2017, Ap...

    doi:10.1086/177998 1996

  25. [25]

    C., Kamphuis, P., Koribalski, B

    Johnson, M. C., Kamphuis, P., Koribalski, B. S., et al. 2015, MNRAS, 451, 3192, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stv1180

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stv1180 2015

  26. [26]

    2022, A&A, 667, A76, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202244237

    Junais, Boissier, S., Boselli, A., et al. 2022, A&A, 667, A76, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202244237

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202244237 2022

  27. [27]

    M., et al

    Kleiner, D., Serra, P., Maccagni, F. M., et al. 2023, A&A, 675, A108, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202346461

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202346461 2023

  28. [28]

    2025, A&A, 704, A350, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202556734

    Kleiner, D., Serra, P., Loni, A., et al. 2025, A&A, 704, A350, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202556734

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202556734 2025

  29. [29]

    2018, ApJL, 866, L10, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/aae4d9

    Lee, B., & Chung, A. 2018, ApJL, 866, L10, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/aae4d9

    doi:10.3847/2041-8213/aae4d9 2018

  30. [30]

    2017, MNRAS, 466, 1382, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stw3162 9

    Lee, B., Chung, A., Tonnesen, S., et al. 2017, MNRAS, 466, 1382, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stw3162 9

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stw3162 2017

  31. [31]

    G., & McCall, M

    Lee, H., Richer, M. G., & McCall, M. L. 2000, ApJL, 530, L17, doi: 10.1086/312483

    work page doi:10.1086/312483 2000

  32. [32]

    2022, ApJ, 928, 144, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac5595

    Lee, J., Kimm, T., Blaizot, J., et al. 2022, ApJ, 928, 144, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac5595

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac5595 2022

  33. [33]

    G., Kim, E., & Geisler, D

    Lee, M. G., Kim, E., & Geisler, D. 1997, AJ, 114, 1824, doi: 10.1086/118608

    work page doi:10.1086/118608 1997

  34. [34]

    2022, MNRAS, 517, 2912, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac2821

    Lee, S., Sheen, Y.-K., Yoon, H., Jaff´ e, Y., & Chung, A. 2022, MNRAS, 517, 2912, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac2821

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stac2821 2022

  35. [35]

    D., Simon, J

    Leroy, A., Bolatto, A. D., Simon, J. D., & Blitz, L. 2005, ApJ, 625, 763, doi: 10.1086/429578

    doi:10.1086/429578 2005

  36. [36]

    K., Walter, F., Sandstrom, K., et al

    Leroy, A. K., Walter, F., Sandstrom, K., et al. 2013, AJ, 146, 19, doi: 10.1088/0004-6256/146/2/19

    doi:10.1088/0004-6256/146/2/19 2013

  37. [37]

    2023, ApJ, 956, 148, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/accea2

    Lin, X., Wang, J., Kilborn, V., et al. 2023, ApJ, 956, 148, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/accea2

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/accea2 2023

  38. [38]

    A., et al

    Lisenfeld, U., Braine, J., Duc, P. A., et al. 2016, A&A, 590, A92, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201527887

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201527887 2016

  39. [39]

    2014, A&A, 570, A13, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201423496

    Vauglin, I. 2014, A&A, 570, A13, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201423496

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201423496 2014

  40. [40]

    1998, in IAU

    McGlynn, T., Scollick, K., & White, N. 1998, in IAU

    1998

  41. [41]

    R., Sancisi, R., Henning, P

    McNamara, B. R., Sancisi, R., Henning, P. A., & Junor, W. 1994, AJ, 108, 844, doi: 10.1086/117116

    work page doi:10.1086/117116 1994

  42. [42]

    P., Cˆ ot´ e, P., et al

    Mei, S., Blakeslee, J. P., Cˆ ot´ e, P., et al. 2007, ApJ, 655, 144, doi: 10.1086/509598

    doi:10.1086/509598 2007

  43. [43]

    C., Harding, P., Rudick, C

    Mihos, J. C., Harding, P., Rudick, C. S., & Feldmeier, J. J. 2013, ApJL, 764, L20, doi: 10.1088/2041-8205/764/2/L20

    work page doi:10.1088/2041-8205/764/2/l20 2013

  44. [44]

    M., et al

    Moretti, A., Paladino, R., Poggianti, B. M., et al. 2018, MNRAS, 480, 2508, doi: 10.1093/mnras/sty2021

    doi:10.1093/mnras/sty2021 2018

  45. [45]

    2026, A&A, 708, A125, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202558175

    Moretti, A., Paladino, R., Bacchini, C., et al. 2026, A&A, 708, A125, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202558175

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202558175 2026

  46. [46]

    Parkash, V., Brown, M. J. I., Jarrett, T. H., & Bonne, N. J. 2018, ApJ, 864, 40, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aad3b9

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aad3b9 2018

  47. [47]

    2025, A&A, 694, A159, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202451050

    Makhathini, S. 2025, A&A, 694, A159, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202451050

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202451050 2025

  48. [48]

    2006, MNRAS, 369, 567, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2006.10335.x

    Roediger, E., & Br¨ uggen, M. 2006, MNRAS, 369, 567, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2006.10335.x

    arXiv 2006

  49. [49]

    Sancisi, R., Thonnard, N., & Ekers, R. D. 1987, ApJL, 315, L39, doi: 10.1086/184857

    work page doi:10.1086/184857 1987

  50. [50]

    Morphology of the Virgo Cluster: Gas versus Galaxies

    Schindler, S., Binggeli, B., & B¨ ohringer, H. 1999, A&A, 343, 420, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.astro-ph/9811464

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.astro-ph/9811464 1999

  51. [51]

    M., & Vanden Bout, P

    Solomon, P. M., & Vanden Bout, P. A. 2005, ARA&A, 43, 677, doi: 10.1146/annurev.astro.43.051804.102221 STScI. 2013, GALEX/MCAT, STScI/MAST, doi: 10.17909/T9H59D

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2005

  52. [52]

    Tonnesen, S., & Bryan, G. L. 2021, ApJ, 911, 68, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/abe7e2

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/abe7e2 2021

  53. [53]

    E., et al

    Virtanen, P., Gommers, R., Oliphant, T. E., et al. 2020, Nature Methods, 17, 261, doi: 10.1038/s41592-019-0686-2

    doi:10.1038/s41592-019-0686-2 2020

  54. [54]

    2009, A&A, 502, 427, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/200911892

    Vollmer, B. 2009, A&A, 502, 427, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/200911892

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/200911892 2009

  55. [55]

    S., Serra, P., et al

    Wang, J., Koribalski, B. S., Serra, P., et al. 2016, MNRAS, 460, 2143, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stw1099

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stw1099 2016

  56. [56]

    2021, ApJ, 915, 70, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/abfc52

    Wang, J., Staveley-Smith, L., Westmeier, T., et al. 2021, ApJ, 915, 70, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/abfc52

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/abfc52 2021

  57. [57]

    G., Hollenbach, D., & McKee, C

    Wolfire, M. G., Hollenbach, D., & McKee, C. F. 2010, ApJ, 716, 1191, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/716/2/1191

    doi:10.1088/0004-637x/716/2/1191 2010

  58. [58]

    A., Smith, M

    Zabel, N., Davis, T. A., Smith, M. W. L., et al. 2019, MNRAS, 483, 2251, doi: 10.1093/mnras/sty3234

    doi:10.1093/mnras/sty3234 2019

  59. [59]

    2024, MNRAS, 535, 2538, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stae2495

    Zabel, N., Loni, A., Sarzi, M., et al. 2024, MNRAS, 535, 2538, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stae2495

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stae2495 2024