arxiv: 2601.04344 · v3 · submitted 2026-01-07 · 🌌 astro-ph.GA

Recognition: no theorem link

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

Sho Ebihara , Michiko S. Fujii , Takayuki R. Saitoh , Yutaka Hirai , Hideyuki Umeda , Yuki Isobe , Chris Nagele

Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-16 15:59 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.GA

keywords GN-z11nitrogen-to-oxygen ratiosupermassive starshigh-redshift galaxieschemical evolutionJWST abundancesgalaxy simulationsmetal pollution

0 comments

The pith

Supermassive star winds can reproduce the nitrogen-to-oxygen ratio and other abundances seen in GN-z11 when they pollute 10 to 30 percent of the galaxy gas.

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

The paper tests whether ejecta from supermassive stars can explain the high nitrogen abundances measured by JWST in some of the earliest galaxies. The authors start from a cosmological zoom-in simulation that already follows chemical evolution from rotating massive stars, supernovae, and asymptotic giant branch stars, then add the nitrogen-rich winds of a single supermassive star as a post-processing step. They find that mixing this material with 10 to 30 percent of the galaxy gas brings the full set of observed ratios for nitrogen, carbon, and oxygen into agreement with GN-z11 data at redshift 10.6. The required mixing fraction is reachable if the supermassive star ionizes a Stromgren sphere at gas densities of 10^4 to 10^5 cm^{-3}. A reader would care because the result supplies a specific physical channel that connects the formation of the largest stars to the chemical signatures of the first galaxies.

Core claim

Using a galaxy formation simulation with chemical evolution driven by rotating massive stars, supernovae, and asymptotic giant branch stars, the post-processed ejecta from a supermassive star of mass 10^3 to 10^5 solar masses enhances the N/O ratio. The abundance pattern of GN-z11, including C/O and O/H ratios, is reproduced when the pollution mass fraction lies between 10 and 30 percent. This fraction can be realized when the gas ionized by the supermassive star is polluted at densities of 10^4 to 10^5 cm^{-3} inside a Stromgren sphere. The same mechanism can account for the abundances of some other nitrogen-enhanced high-redshift galaxies.

What carries the argument

Post-processing addition of nitrogen-rich supermassive star ejecta to a simulated galaxy, where the pollution mass fraction sets the final nitrogen enhancement.

If this is right

High N/O ratios in GN-z11 and similar high-redshift galaxies can arise from supermassive star pollution on top of standard stellar chemical evolution.
A pollution fraction of 10-30 percent is physically plausible inside the ionized region around the supermassive star.
The same pollution scenario can explain abundance patterns in other nitrogen-enhanced galaxies observed at high redshift.
The model shows that localized supermassive star winds can alter global galaxy abundances without changing the underlying simulation of galaxy assembly.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

If supermassive stars form in many early galaxies, they could produce widespread rapid nitrogen enrichment before standard stellar populations dominate.
Spatially resolved abundance maps of high-redshift galaxies could reveal localized patches of elevated nitrogen left by individual supermassive star events.
This channel may need to be included in models of metal dispersal during the epoch of reionization to avoid underestimating early nitrogen levels.

Load-bearing premise

A supermassive star of 10^3 to 10^5 solar masses forms and its winds mix with 10 to 30 percent of the galaxy gas at densities of 10^4 to 10^5 per cubic centimeter.

What would settle it

A new abundance measurement in GN-z11 that places the C/O or O/H ratio outside the range produced by any 10-30 percent pollution fraction, or the absence of supermassive star formation in the relevant mass range at z approximately 10 in higher-resolution simulations.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2601.04344 by Chris Nagele, Hideyuki Umeda, Michiko S. Fujii, Sho Ebihara, Takayuki R. Saitoh, Yuki Isobe, Yutaka Hirai.

**Figure 1.** Figure 1: The effective temperature evolution of 104 M⊙ SMS model performed in Nagele & Umeda (2023). elements is similar to the lower mass models, however, due to this model’s collapse earlier in its evolution, meaning the total mass lost to winds is lower. 3. Results 3.1. Galaxy formation We present the evolution of the projected surface density of each component (stars, gas, and dark matter) in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:… view at source ↗

**Figure 2.** Figure 2: Projected surface densities of stars (left), gas (middle), and dark matter (right) at [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_2.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 3.** Figure 3: Mass evolution of stars (blue), gas (orange), and dark [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_3.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 4.** Figure 4: Time evolution of the star formation rate in the central region (within 10 pc) of our simulated galaxy. Red vertical lines [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_4.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 5.** Figure 5: Radial density profiles of dark matter (green), gas (orange), [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_5.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 6.** Figure 6: log(N/O) as a function of log(C/O) (left) and 12 + log(O/H) (right). The gray triangles indicate the chemical abundance of our simulated galaxy without SMS pollution between 𝑧 = 10.77 and 10.60. In the top two panels, the blue triangle indicates 𝑧 = 10.77. In contrast, in the bottom two panels, the blue triangle represents 𝑧 = 10.60. We added SMS ejecta for these two different time. The blue solid, yellow … view at source ↗

**Figure 7.** Figure 7: Same as Fig [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_7.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 8.** Figure 8: Abundance patterns of N/O-He/H (left) and O/H-He/H (right). Colored-circle markers are the same as Fig. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_8.png] view at source ↗

read the original abstract

Spectroscopic observations by the James Webb Space Telescope (JWST) have revealed young, compact, high-redshift ($z$) galaxies with high nitrogen-to-oxygen (N/O) ratios. GN-z11 at z=10.6 is one of these galaxies. One possible scenario for such a high N/O ratio is pollution from supermassive stars (SMSs), from which stellar winds are expected to be nitrogen-rich. The abundance pattern is determined by both galaxy evolution and SMS pollution, but so far, simple one-zone models have been used. Using a galaxy formation simulation, we tested the SMS scenario. We used a cosmological zoom-in simulation that includes chemical evolution driven by rotating massive stars (Wolf-Rayet stars), supernovae, and asymptotic giant branch stars. As a post-process, we assumed the formation of an SMS with a mass between $10^3$ and $10^5$ $M_\odot$ and investigated the contribution of its ejecta to the abundance pattern. The N/O ratio was enhanced by the SMS ejecta, and the abundance pattern of GN-z11, including carbon-to-oxygen and oxygen-to-hydrogen ratios, was reproduced by our SMS pollution model if the pollution mass fraction ranges within 10-30 per cent. Such a pollution fraction can be realized when the gas ionized by the SMS is polluted, and the gas density is $10^4$-$10^5$ cm$^{-3}$ assuming a Str\"omgren sphere. We also compared the abundance pattern with those of other N/O-enhanced high-$z$ galaxies. Some of these galaxies can also be explained by SMS pollution.

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.

Desk Editor's Note private letter to a colleague

The paper shows a zoom-in simulation plus 10-30% post-processed SMS pollution can match GN-z11 abundances, but the SMS step is assumed and tuned rather than evolved.

read the letter

The main takeaway is that a standard cosmological zoom-in run with rotating massive stars, supernovae, and AGB stars already produces a baseline abundance pattern, and then adding supermassive-star ejecta as post-processing at a 10-30% pollution fraction simultaneously reproduces GN-z11's observed N/O, C/O, and O/H. They also check that the same range works for a couple of other N-enhanced high-z galaxies. The simulation itself runs without reference to the JWST data, which is a step up from the one-zone models that have been used so far for this scenario. The Stromgren-sphere estimate they give for why 10-30% is plausible at 10^4-10^5 cm^{-3} is at least a concrete check on the numbers. The soft spot is exactly what the stress test flags: SMS formation and mixing are not followed inside the simulation. The pollution fraction is chosen to fit the data, and the final abundances scale linearly with it, so any realistic offset in what fraction can actually be achieved would move the prediction. There is no dynamical test shown that a 10^3-10^5 solar-mass star forms, remains stable, and pollutes the right gas mass before the next dynamical time or star-formation burst. The base chemical evolution looks solid and the citation pattern is appropriate, but the central claim rests on that post-processing assumption. This is useful for people working on early chemical evolution and JWST abundance patterns. It is coherent enough on its own terms to deserve a serious referee, who will probably focus on whether the SMS step can be made more self-consistent.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The paper uses a cosmological zoom-in simulation to follow chemical evolution in a high-redshift galaxy driven by rotating massive stars, core-collapse supernovae, and AGB stars. As a post-processing step, the authors assume formation of a supermassive star (SMS) in the mass range 10^3–10^5 M_⊙ and add its nitrogen-rich wind ejecta scaled by a pollution mass fraction f_poll. They report that f_poll = 0.1–0.3 simultaneously reproduces the observed C/O, O/H, and elevated N/O ratios of GN-z11 at z = 10.6. The chosen range is justified by a Stromgren-sphere estimate at gas densities 10^4–10^5 cm^{-3}. The same model is compared qualitatively to other JWST N-enhanced galaxies at high redshift.

Significance. The work improves on prior one-zone models by embedding the SMS pollution step inside a full galaxy-formation simulation that already tracks standard stellar yields. If the required pollution fraction proves dynamically realizable, the result supplies a concrete mechanism for the nitrogen excess seen in several z > 10 systems. The simulation framework itself is standard and reproducible; the novelty resides in the quantitative mapping from SMS ejecta to the final abundance vector.

major comments (2)

[§4] §4 (SMS post-processing): The central claim that the GN-z11 abundance pattern is reproduced rests on scaling the SMS yield pattern by an adjustable f_poll = 0.1–0.3. Because the final abundances are linear in f_poll, any offset between the assumed and physically realized pollution fraction directly scales N/O and breaks the reported match. The manuscript provides no self-consistent check that an SMS of the stated mass can form, remain stable, and mix its winds into exactly 10–30 % of the galaxy gas mass on a timescale shorter than the local dynamical or star-formation time.
[§4.2] Stromgren-sphere estimate (§4.2): The justification that f_poll = 0.1–0.3 is realizable assumes n_H = 10^4–10^5 cm^{-3} and a fixed ionizing luminosity, but the zoom-in run itself is not used to verify whether such densities persist long enough around a forming SMS or whether the total gas mass within the ionized volume matches the required polluted fraction. Without this closure, the range remains a fitting parameter rather than a prediction.

minor comments (2)

[§5] The comparison to other high-z N-enhanced galaxies in §5 is qualitative; adding a table of observed versus model abundance ratios (with χ² or residual metrics) would strengthen the claim that SMS pollution can explain multiple objects.
[Methods] Notation: the symbol f_poll is introduced only in the results; defining it explicitly in the methods section alongside the SMS mass range would improve readability.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 1 unresolved

We thank the referee for the constructive report and for recognizing the improvement over prior one-zone models. Our study is an exploratory post-processing analysis that demonstrates how SMS ejecta, when added to a full cosmological zoom-in simulation with standard stellar yields, can reproduce the GN-z11 abundance pattern for a physically motivated pollution fraction. We address the two major comments below and will incorporate clarifications and expanded discussion of limitations in the revised manuscript.

read point-by-point responses

Referee: [§4] §4 (SMS post-processing): The central claim that the GN-z11 abundance pattern is reproduced rests on scaling the SMS yield pattern by an adjustable f_poll = 0.1–0.3. Because the final abundances are linear in f_poll, any offset between the assumed and physically realized pollution fraction directly scales N/O and breaks the reported match. The manuscript provides no self-consistent check that an SMS of the stated mass can form, remain stable, and mix its winds into exactly 10–30 % of the galaxy gas mass on a timescale shorter than the local dynamical or star-formation time.

Authors: We agree that a fully self-consistent hydrodynamical treatment of SMS formation, stability, and mixing would strengthen the result. Our current approach is deliberately post-processing to isolate the chemical impact of SMS ejecta within a simulation that already follows realistic galaxy assembly and standard stellar chemical evolution. The f_poll range is not a free fit but is derived from a Stromgren-sphere estimate using gas densities realized in the zoom-in run. We will revise §4 to state more explicitly that the reported match holds only if an SMS can deliver its winds into 10–30 % of the gas mass on the relevant timescale, and we will add a dedicated paragraph outlining the requirements for future self-consistent simulations. revision: partial
Referee: [§4.2] Stromgren-sphere estimate (§4.2): The justification that f_poll = 0.1–0.3 is realizable assumes n_H = 10^4–10^5 cm^{-3} and a fixed ionizing luminosity, but the zoom-in run itself is not used to verify whether such densities persist long enough around a forming SMS or whether the total gas mass within the ionized volume matches the required polluted fraction. Without this closure, the range remains a fitting parameter rather than a prediction.

Authors: The Stromgren calculation is intended as an order-of-magnitude consistency check rather than a full time-dependent prediction. The adopted densities (10^4–10^5 cm^{-3}) are taken directly from the dense gas in the simulated galaxy at the relevant epoch. We acknowledge that the manuscript does not extract the precise gas mass within a time-evolving ionized volume from the zoom-in output. In the revision we will (i) report the actual gas-mass distribution within the central kiloparsec of the simulation at z ≈ 10.6 and (ii) explicitly note that a more precise f_poll would require radiation-hydrodynamical modeling of the SMS feedback, which lies outside the scope of the present work. revision: partial

standing simulated objections not resolved

A fully self-consistent simulation that includes the formation, stability, and dynamical mixing of a supermassive star within the cosmological zoom-in run (requiring major code extensions and new physics modules).

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged

Pollution mass fraction tuned post-process to reproduce GN-z11 abundances

specific steps

fitted input called prediction [Abstract]
"the abundance pattern of GN-z11, including carbon-to-oxygen and oxygen-to-hydrogen ratios, was reproduced by our SMS pollution model if the pollution mass fraction ranges within 10-30 per cent."

The final abundance vector is stated to be linear in the post-processed pollution fraction f_poll. Selecting the specific interval 0.1-0.3 precisely because it matches the observed ratios of GN-z11 means the reproduction is obtained by adjusting the free parameter to the data rather than emerging as an independent prediction from the simulation.

full rationale

The base zoom-in chemical evolution simulation (rotating massive stars + SNe + AGB) is independent of the GN-z11 target data. The SMS contribution is added only as a post-process linear scaling by an adjustable pollution mass fraction f_poll. The paper explicitly selects the 10-30% range because it reproduces the observed C/O, O/H and N/O ratios, so the match is achieved by construction via this choice. The Stromgren-sphere density argument supplies a plausibility check but does not remove the tuning step. No self-citation chains, uniqueness theorems, or ansatz smuggling appear in the provided text, keeping the circularity partial and limited to the fitted parameter.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

2 free parameters · 2 axioms · 1 invented entities

The model rests on the assumption that SMS ejecta are nitrogen-rich and that a 10-30% pollution fraction can be realized physically; the SMS itself is introduced as a post-process source without independent dynamical evidence.

free parameters (2)

pollution mass fraction = 10-30%
Adjusted between 10-30% to match observed N/O, C/O, and O/H in GN-z11
SMS mass range = 10^3-10^5 M_sun
Assumed 10^3 to 10^5 solar masses for the polluting star

axioms (2)

domain assumption SMS stellar winds are nitrogen-rich
Standard expectation for supermassive star evolution invoked to explain high N/O
standard math Base chemical evolution from rotating massive stars, SNe, and AGB stars
Included in the cosmological zoom-in simulation

invented entities (1)

Supermassive star (SMS) no independent evidence
purpose: Source of nitrogen-rich ejecta to pollute the galaxy
Postulated polluter whose formation and mixing are assumed rather than simulated

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5633 in / 1586 out tokens · 47350 ms · 2026-05-16T15:59:48.202591+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

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

Shape of Direct-Method Mass-Metallicity Relation with JWST: Fast-Track Nitrogen and Helium Enrichment
astro-ph.GA 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 6.0

JWST auroral-line selected galaxies at high redshift show an MZR slope of 0.38 with selection biases favoring high-SFR low-metallicity systems, while stacked non-detections lie closer to the fundamental metallicity relation.
Compact HII Regions as Clocks of Massive-Star Formation: Evidence for Long Formation Timescales
astro-ph.SR 2026-02 unverdicted novelty 6.0

Massive stars in the Milky Way form over Myr timescales that increase with final mass, inferred from joint LF fitting of compact HII regions and OB stars under the inertial-inflow model.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

76 extracted references · 76 canonical work pages · cited by 2 Pith papers

[1]

L., Coe, D., et al

Abdurro’uf, Larson, R. L., Coe, D., et al. 2024, ApJ, 973, 47 Álvarez-Márquez,J.,CrespoGómez,A.,Colina,L.,etal.2025,A&A,695,A250

work page 2024
[2]

M., & Grevesse, N

Asplund, M., Amarsi, A. M., & Grevesse, N. 2021, A&A, 653, A141

work page 2021
[3]

J., & Scott, P

Asplund, M., Grevesse, N., Sauval, A. J., & Scott, P. 2009, ARA&A, 47, 481

work page 2009
[4]

& Hut, P

Barnes, J. & Hut, P. 1986, Nature, 324, 446

work page 1986
[5]

A., Erb, D

Berg, D. A., Erb, D. K., Henry, R. B. C., Skillman, E. D., & McQuinn, K. B. W. 2019, ApJ, 874, 93 Berg,D.A.,Skillman,E.D.,Henry,R.B.C.,Erb,D.K.,&Carigi,L.2016,ApJ, 827, 126

work page 2019
[6]

J., Cameron, A

Bunker, A. J., Cameron, A. J., Curtis-Lake, E., et al. 2024, A&A, 690, A288

work page 2024
[7]

J., Saxena, A., Cameron, A

Bunker, A. J., Saxena, A., Cameron, A. J., et al. 2023, A&A, 677, A88 Calabrò, A., Castellano, M., Zavala, J. A., et al. 2024, ApJ, 975, 245

work page 2023
[8]

J., Katz, H., Rey, M

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

work page 2023
[9]

2024, ApJ, 972, 143

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

work page 2024
[10]

2003, PASP, 115, 763

Chabrier, G. 2003, PASP, 115, 763

work page 2003
[11]

1964, ApJ, 140, 417

Chandrasekhar, S. 1964, ApJ, 140, 417

work page 1964
[12]

2023, A&A, 673, L7

Charbonnel, C., Schaerer, D., Prantzos, N., et al. 2023, A&A, 673, L7

work page 2023
[13]

2018, MNRAS, 475, 4104

Chon, S., Hosokawa, T., & Yoshida, N. 2018, MNRAS, 475, 4104

work page 2018
[14]

F., McKee, C

Cioffi, D. F., McKee, C. F., & Bertschinger, E. 1988, ApJ, 334, 252 Cristallo,S.,Piersanti,L.,&Straniero,O.2016,inJournalofPhysicsConference

work page 1988
[15]

2014, in XIII Nuclei in the Cosmos (NIC XIII), 81

Cristallo, S., Straniero, O., & Piersanti, L. 2014, in XIII Nuclei in the Cosmos (NIC XIII), 81

work page 2014
[16]

2015, in Astronomical Society of the PacificConferenceSeries,Vol.497,WhyGalaxiesCareaboutAGBStarsIII: ACloserLookinSpaceandTime,ed.F.Kerschbaum,R.F.Wing,&J.Hron, 301

Cristallo, S., Straniero, O., & Piersanti, L. 2015, in Astronomical Society of the PacificConferenceSeries,Vol.497,WhyGalaxiesCareaboutAGBStarsIII: ACloserLookinSpaceandTime,ed.F.Kerschbaum,R.F.Wing,&J.Hron, 301

work page 2015
[17]

2025, A&A, 697, A89 D’Antona, F., Vesperini, E., Calura, F., et al

Curti, M., Witstok, J., Jakobsen, P., et al. 2025, A&A, 697, A89 D’Antona, F., Vesperini, E., Calura, F., et al. 2023, A&A, 680, L19

work page 2025
[18]

& Volonteri, M

Devecchi, B. & Volonteri, M. 2009, ApJ, 694, 302 Domínguez, I., Cristallo, S., Straniero, O., et al. 2011, in Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series, Vol. 445, Why Galaxies Care about AGB Stars II: Shining Examples and Common Inhabitants, ed. F. Kerschbaum, T. Lebzelter, & R. F. Wing, 57

work page 2009
[19]

J., Porter, R

Ferland, G. J., Porter, R. L., van Hoof, P. A. M., et al. 2013, Rev. Mexicana Astron. Astrofis., 49, 137

work page 2013
[20]

S., Wang, L., Tanikawa, A., Hirai, Y., & Saitoh, T

Fujii, M. S., Wang, L., Tanikawa, A., Hirai, Y., & Saitoh, T. R. 2024, Science, 384, 1488

work page 2024
[21]

2025, ApJ, 988, 46

Fukushima, K., Nagamine, K., Matsumoto, A., et al. 2025, ApJ, 988, 46

work page 2025
[22]

Gieles, M., Charbonnel, C., Krause, M. G. H., et al. 2018, MNRAS, 478, 2461

work page 2018
[23]

Gunawardhana, M. L. P., Brinchmann, J., Croom, S., et al. 2025, MN- RAS[arXiv:2504.12584]

work page arXiv 2025
[24]

& Madau, P

Haardt, F. & Madau, P. 2012, ApJ, 746, 125 Haemmerlé, L., Meynet, G., Mayer, L., et al. 2019, A&A, 632, L2

work page 2012
[25]

& Abel, T

Hahn, O. & Abel, T. 2011, MNRAS, 415, 2101

work page 2011
[26]

& Saitoh, T

Hirai, Y. & Saitoh, T. R. 2017, ApJ, 838, L23

work page 2017
[27]

N., & Basu, S

Hirano, S., Machida, M. N., & Basu, S. 2021, ApJ, 917, 34

work page 2021
[28]

F., Wetzel, A., Kereš, D., et al

Hopkins, P. F., Wetzel, A., Kereš, D., et al. 2018, MNRAS, 477, 1578

work page 2018
[29]

2023, MNRAS, 522, 330

Incatasciato, A., Khochfar, S., & Oñorbe, J. 2023, MNRAS, 522, 330

work page 2023
[30]

2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2509.18055

Isobe, Y., Maiolino, R., Ji, X., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2509.18055

work page arXiv 2025
[31]

2023, ApJ, 959, 100

Isobe, Y., Ouchi, M., Tominaga, N., et al. 2023, ApJ, 959, 100

work page 2023
[32]

I., Stasińska, G., Meynet, G., Guseva, N

Izotov, Y. I., Stasińska, G., Meynet, G., Guseva, N. G., & Thuan, T. X. 2006, A&A, 448, 955 Ji,X.,Belokurov,V.,Maiolino,R.,etal.2025,arXive-prints,arXiv:2505.12505

work page arXiv 2006
[33]

A., Khochfar, S., Schleicher, D., & Whalen, D

Latif, M. A., Khochfar, S., Schleicher, D., & Whalen, D. J. 2021, MNRAS, 508, 1756

work page 2021
[34]

A., Schleicher, D

Latif, M. A., Schleicher, D. R. G., Bovino, S., Grassi, T., & Spaans, M. 2014, ApJ, 792, 78

work page 2014
[35]

& Chieffi, A

Limongi, M. & Chieffi, A. 2018, ApJS, 237, 13

work page 2018
[36]

2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2507.08787

McClymont, W., Tacchella, S., Smith, A., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2507.08787

work page arXiv 2025
[37]

& Umeda, H

Nagele, C. & Umeda, H. 2023, ApJ, 949, L16

work page 2023
[38]

& Umeda, H

Nagele, C. & Umeda, H. 2024, Phys. Rev. D, 110, L061301

work page 2024
[39]

2023, MNRAS, 523, 1629

Nagele, C., Umeda, H., & Takahashi, K. 2023, MNRAS, 523, 1629

work page 2023
[40]

2020, MN- RAS, 496, 1224

Nagele, C., Umeda, H., Takahashi, K., Yoshida, T., & Sumiyoshi, K. 2020, MN- RAS, 496, 1224

work page 2020
[41]

2022, MN- RAS, 517, 1584

Nagele, C., Umeda, H., Takahashi, K., Yoshida, T., & Sumiyoshi, K. 2022, MN- RAS, 517, 1584

work page 2022
[42]

P., Oesch, P

Naidu, R. P., Oesch, P. A., Brammer, G., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2505.11263

work page arXiv 2025
[43]

A., Woods, T

Nandal, D., Regan, J. A., Woods, T. E., et al. 2024, A&A, 683, A156

work page 2024
[44]

2025, ApJ, 989, 75

Napolitano, L., Castellano, M., Pentericci, L., et al. 2025, ApJ, 989, 75

work page 2025
[45]

I., Iani, E., et al

Navarro-Carrera, R., Caputi, K. I., Iani, E., et al. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2407.14201

work page arXiv 2024
[46]

2013, ARA&A, 51, 457

Nomoto, K., Kobayashi, C., & Tominaga, N. 2013, ARA&A, 51, 457

work page 2013
[47]

A., Brammer, G., van Dokkum, P

Oesch, P. A., Brammer, G., van Dokkum, P. G., et al. 2016, ApJ, 819, 129

work page 2016
[48]

2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2509.02664 Pilyugin,L.S.,Vílchez,J.M.,Mattsson,L.,&Thuan,T.X.2012,MNRAS,421, 1624

Pacucci, F., Hernquist, L., & Fujii, M. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2509.02664 Pilyugin,L.S.,Vílchez,J.M.,Mattsson,L.,&Thuan,T.X.2012,MNRAS,421, 1624

work page arXiv 2025
[49]

1901, Annalen der Physik, 309, 553 Planck Collaboration, Aghanim, N., Akrami, Y., et al

Planck, M. 1901, Annalen der Physik, 309, 553 Planck Collaboration, Aghanim, N., Akrami, Y., et al. 2020, A&A, 641, A6 Portegies Zwart, S. F. & McMillan, S. L. W. 2002, ApJ, 576, 899

work page 1901
[50]

2024, MNRAS, 531, 3770 Article number, page 11 A&A proofs:manuscript no

Rantala, A., Naab, T., & Lahén, N. 2024, MNRAS, 531, 3770 Article number, page 11 A&A proofs:manuscript no. main

work page 2024
[51]

2025, A&A, 697, A96

Rizzuti, F., Matteucci, F., Molaro, P., Cescutti, G., & Maiolino, R. 2025, A&A, 697, A96

work page 2025
[52]

Saitoh, T. R. 2017, AJ, 153, 85

work page 2017
[53]

R., Daisaka, H., Kokubo, E., et al

Saitoh, T. R., Daisaka, H., Kokubo, E., et al. 2008, PASJ, 60, 667

work page 2008
[54]

R., Daisaka, H., Kokubo, E., et al

Saitoh, T. R., Daisaka, H., Kokubo, E., et al. 2009, PASJ, 61, 481

work page 2009
[55]

R., Hirai, Y., Fujii, M

Saitoh, T. R., Hirai, Y., Fujii, M. S., & Isobe, Y. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2511.23164

work page arXiv 2025
[56]

Saitoh, T. R. & Makino, J. 2013, ApJ, 768, 44

work page 2013
[57]

Saitoh, T. R. & Makino, J. 2016, ApJ, 823, 144

work page 2016
[58]

S., & Hirano, S

Sakurai, Y., Yoshida, N., Fujii, M. S., & Hirano, S. 2017, MNRAS, 472, 1677 Schaerer,D.,Marques-Chaves,R.,Xiao,M.,&Korber,D.2024,A&A,687,L11

work page 2017
[59]

2024, A&A, 687, A283

Scholtz, J., Witten, C., Laporte, N., et al. 2024, A&A, 687, A283

work page 2024
[60]

R., Ciaraldi-Schoolmann, F., Röpke, F

Seitenzahl, I. R., Ciaraldi-Schoolmann, F., Röpke, F. K., et al. 2013, MNRAS, 429, 1156

work page 2013
[61]

P., et al

Senchyna, P., Plat, A., Stark, D. P., et al. 2024, ApJ, 966, 92

work page 2024
[62]

2010, MNRAS, 407, 1581

Shen, S., Wadsley, J., & Stinson, G. 2010, MNRAS, 407, 1581

work page 2010
[63]

D., Bryan, G

Smith, B. D., Bryan, G. L., Glover, S. C. O., et al. 2017, MNRAS, 466, 2217

work page 2017
[64]

2025, ApJ, 981, 136 Strömgren, B

Stiavelli, M., Morishita, T., Chiaberge, M., et al. 2025, ApJ, 981, 136 Strömgren, B. 1939, ApJ, 89, 526

work page 2025
[65]

2014, ApJ, 792, 32

Susa, H., Hasegawa, K., & Tominaga, N. 2014, ApJ, 792, 32

work page 2014
[66]

J., Hainline, K., et al

Tacchella, S., Eisenstein, D. J., Hainline, K., et al. 2023, ApJ, 952, 74 Takahashi,K.,Sumiyoshi,K.,Yamada,S.,Umeda,H.,&Yoshida,T.2019,ApJ, 871, 153

work page 2023
[67]

2018, ApJ, 857, 111

Takahashi, K., Yoshida, T., & Umeda, H. 2018, ApJ, 857, 111

work page 2018
[68]

2016, MNRAS, 456, 1320 Tielens,A.G.G.M.2005,ThePhysicsandChemistryoftheInterstellarMedium (Cambridge University Press)

Takahashi, K., Yoshida, T., Umeda, H., Sumiyoshi, K., & Yamada, S. 2016, MNRAS, 456, 1320 Tielens,A.G.G.M.2005,ThePhysicsandChemistryoftheInterstellarMedium (Cambridge University Press)

work page 2016
[69]

W., Stark, D

Topping, M. W., Stark, D. P., Senchyna, P., et al. 2025, ApJ, 980, 225

work page 2025
[70]

W., Stark, D

Topping, M. W., Stark, D. P., Senchyna, P., et al. 2024, MNRAS, 529, 3301

work page 2024
[71]

Vink, J. S. 2018, A&A, 615, A119

work page 2018
[72]

2024, ApJ, 962, 50

Watanabe, K., Ouchi, M., Nakajima, K., et al. 2024, ApJ, 962, 50

work page 2024
[73]

2024, ApJ, 976, 142

Xu, Y., Ouchi, M., Yajima, H., et al. 2024, ApJ, 976, 142

work page 2024
[74]

1997, ApJ, 475, 720

Yamada, S. 1997, ApJ, 475, 720

work page 1997
[75]

2024, ApJ, 974, 266

Yanagisawa, H., Ouchi, M., Watanabe, K., et al. 2024, ApJ, 974, 266

work page 2024
[76]

2019, ApJ, 881, 16 Article number, page 12 S

Yoshida, T., Takiwaki, T., Kotake, K., et al. 2019, ApJ, 881, 16 Article number, page 12 S. Ebihara et al.: Nitrogen enhancement of GN-z11 by metal pollution from supermassive stars 0 1 2 3 4 5 Time [Myr] 100 101 102 103 104 Mass of the SMS [M ] SMS mass evolution 0.000 0.005 0.010 0.015 0.020 Rate [M /yr] Mass loss rate Mass increase rate Fig. A.1: Mass ...

work page 2019