pith. sign in

arxiv: 2605.00993 · v1 · submitted 2026-05-01 · 🌌 astro-ph.GA

The complex history of NGC 1427A revealed by its star clusters and star formation history

Katja Fahrion , Michael Hilker , Avinash Chaturvedi , Juan P. Carvajal , Thomas H. Puzia This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-09 18:36 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.GA
keywords NGC 1427Astar clustersstar formation historyFornax clusterram-pressure strippingtidal interactionsminor galaxy mergergalaxy evolution
0
0 comments X

The pith

NGC 1427A has experienced ram-pressure stripping as well as tidal interactions or a minor galaxy merger, revealed through its star clusters and star formation history.

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

The paper uses star cluster ages from photometry and MUSE spectroscopy along with full spectrum fitting to reconstruct the star formation history of NGC 1427A in the Fornax cluster. It identifies a young population of clusters around 10 million years old located along the star formation edge and in the northern object, plus intermediate-age clusters from 100 to 300 million years old that match peaks in the star formation rate. Placing these in the context of the galaxy's orbital evolution leads to the conclusion that environmental effects include both ram-pressure stripping and gravitational tidal interactions or even a minor merger. The northern object is seen as a normal part of the galaxy. A reader would care because this shows the layered ways dense cluster environments can influence the evolution of low-mass star-forming galaxies.

Core claim

The central claim is that the age distribution of the star clusters agrees reasonably with the star formation history from the MUSE data, with young clusters of about 10 Myr and intermediate-age ones of 100-300 Myr corresponding to star formation episodes. These are interpreted in the context of NGC 1427A's orbit in the Fornax cluster to indicate that the galaxy has experienced not only ram-pressure stripping but also tidal interactions or a minor galaxy merger, with the northern object being a regular component of the galaxy.

What carries the argument

Star clusters as surviving tracers of past star formation episodes, whose ages derived from spectral energy distribution fitting and MUSE spectra are compared to the galaxy-wide star formation history from integral-field spectroscopy.

If this is right

  • The star formation history of NGC 1427A includes multiple distinct episodes over the last few hundred million years.
  • Ram-pressure stripping alone cannot account for all observed features, requiring additional tidal or merger effects.
  • The northern object shares the same evolutionary history and is not a separate entity.
  • Star clusters provide reliable tracers for linking star formation to dynamical events in cluster galaxies.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • Applying this combined cluster and spectrum-fitting approach to other galaxies in the Fornax cluster or similar environments could reveal how frequently minor mergers occur.
  • Orbital simulations of NGC 1427A could be tested against the specific timings of the star formation peaks for better constraints on its path.
  • The agreement between photometric and spectroscopic age estimates supports using star clusters to study galaxy histories even where full spectroscopy is unavailable.

Load-bearing premise

The ages and positions of the star clusters can be directly mapped to specific past events in the galaxy's orbital history, such as tidal interactions or a merger, instead of resulting from internal star formation processes or inaccuracies in the age estimates.

What would settle it

New observations showing that the northern object has a significantly different velocity or chemical composition from the main galaxy body, or revised age models that eliminate the intermediate-age cluster population, would challenge the proposed history of tidal interactions or merger.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2605.00993 by Avinash Chaturvedi, Juan P. Carvajal, Katja Fahrion, Michael Hilker, Thomas H. Puzia.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Left: g-band image from FDS (Iodice et al. 2016) shown in greyscale, illustrating the arrow-head shape of NGC 1427A, which points towards the south-west. In comparison, the cyan contours show part of the MeerKAT H i contours (from Serra et al. 2024, 21′′ beam size, contours at 1, 10, 100, and 1000 Jy beam−1 m s−1 ), which demonstrate a H i tail pointing towards the south-east. The MUSE pointings are indica… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Stellar (top left) and Hα (top right) velocity maps. The left panel shows a Voronoi-binned map with S/N = 100, while the right panel shows the Hα velocity from a spaxel-by-spaxel analysis. The black con￾tours show the flux from the FDS g-band image (µg from 22 to 23.5 mag arcsec−1 in steps of 0.5). The dashed lines indicate axis of maximum ro￾tation, and the bottom panels shows the extracted mean velocity … view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Overview of the emission line analysis. Top panels: BPT diagrams showing the flux ratios of [OIII]/Hβ in comparison with [NII]6584Å/Hα (left), [SII]6717+6731Å/Hα (middle), and [OI]6300Å/Hα (right). Only spaxels where the relevant lines have S/N > 5 are shown. The solid grey lines show the demarkation line between AGN and star formation regions from Kewley et al. (2006), the grey dashed line shows the demar… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Maps of stellar population properties. Left: Light-weighted metallicity. Right: Light-weighted age. The greyscale image in the background shows the flux image of the MUSE white-light image. The white contours show the extent of the Hα flux to guide the eye. 15.8 Gyr and metallicities between [M/H] = −1.71 and 0.0 dex. In total, we used 295 different models. We show the resulting light-weighted metallicity … view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Comparison between SED fit results for photometric measure￾ments alone and combined with spectroscopy. Top: Best-fit age. Bot￾tom: Best-fit mass. 4.1. Fitting photometric candidates Typically, SEDs are fit using photometry in multiple bands to obtain redshifts, masses, and SFHs of galaxies in the local Uni￾verse and at higher redshifts (e.g. Carnall et al. 2024; Leung et al. 2025). We did not wish to const… view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Results of the star cluster SED fitting overplotted on the image of NGC 1427A. The first three panels show from left to right the star cluster ages, metallicities, and masses. Clusters where spectra and photometry were fitted simultaneously are shown as large symbols. Small symbols refer to photometric-only SED fits. Right panel: Binned stellar line-of-sight velocity field of NGC 1427A with star cluster ve… view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Age, masses, and metallicities of star clusters. Top: Age vs. mass, with photometric candidates in light blue. The inset shows histograms of the cluster masses. Bottom: Age vs. metallicity, only available for clusters with photometry and spectroscopy. Small blue points show the values from the binned maps (see view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Star formation history of NGC 1427A as traced by the star clusters (pink histograms) and from the integrated stellar light (grey and blue lines). The different panels show the distributions for different regions in the galaxy as indicated by the different shading in the rightmost panel. In each panel, the SFHs for the different bins from the DAP analysis are shown in the grey lines, while the blue lines re… view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Star-forming low-mass galaxies in the dense environments of galaxy clusters provide opportunities to study how environmental effects such as ram-pressure stripping, tidal interactions, or galaxy mergers shape a galaxy's star formation history. We combined integral-field spectroscopic observations with the Multi Unit Spectroscopic Explorer (MUSE) and available multi-band imaging of the star-forming galaxy NGC 1427A, located near the centre of the Fornax galaxy cluster, at a distance of 20 Mpc. Our aim was to trace the evolutionary history of NGC 1427A using the star formation history reconstructed from the integrated spectra and employing star clusters as surviving tracers of past star formation episodes. We fitted the spectral energy distribution of 222 star cluster candidates using archival $u,g,r$, and $i$ photometry to derive the ages and masses. For 58 clusters, we additionally incorporated their MUSE spectra in the fits and found an encouraging agreement between the photometric and spectroscopic results. The comparison of the age distribution of star clusters with star formation histories from a full spectrum fitting of the MUSE data found a reasonable agreement, with evidence for multiple episodes of star formation throughout the history of NGC 1427A. In particular, we found a population of young clusters ($\sim$ 10 Myr) that is located along the star formation edge and within the northern object, and a population of intermediate-age clusters ($\sim$ 100 - 300 Myr) with corresponding peaks in the star formation history of NGC 1427A. We interpret these populations in the context of the orbital evolution of NGC 1427A in the Fornax cluster and conclude that this galaxy has experienced not only ram-pressure stripping, but also tidal interactions or even a minor galaxy merger. The northern object is likely a regular component of the galaxy.

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 / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript analyzes the star formation history of the dwarf galaxy NGC 1427A in the Fornax cluster using MUSE integral-field spectroscopy and multi-band photometry of 222 star cluster candidates. Ages and masses are derived from SED fits, with 58 clusters also fitted using spectra, showing encouraging agreement. The age distribution of clusters is compared to SFH from full spectrum fitting, revealing multiple episodes, including young (~10 Myr) clusters along the SF edge and northern object, and intermediate-age (100-300 Myr) clusters. These are interpreted in the context of the galaxy's orbital evolution, concluding that NGC 1427A has undergone ram-pressure stripping as well as tidal interactions or a minor merger, with the northern object being a regular component of the galaxy.

Significance. If the central interpretation holds, the work contributes to understanding environmental influences on star formation in cluster galaxies by combining cluster populations as tracers with integrated SFH. The agreement between independent photometric and spectroscopic age determinations is a positive aspect that lends credibility to the multi-episode SFH. However, the significance is tempered by the qualitative nature of the link to specific dynamical events.

major comments (2)
  1. [Abstract and Discussion] Abstract and Discussion: The conclusion that the ~100-300 Myr cluster population and SFH peaks indicate tidal interactions or a minor galaxy merger relies on a qualitative overlay onto an assumed orbital history. No N-body simulations or ram-pressure-only models are presented to demonstrate that these features cannot arise from internal stochastic star formation processes or age-dating uncertainties. This weakens the attribution to external triggers beyond ram-pressure stripping.
  2. [Results on cluster ages] Results on cluster ages: While the agreement between photometric and spectroscopic fits for the 58 clusters is encouraging, the manuscript does not quantify the impact of age-extinction-metallicity degeneracies on the derived ages, which can shift ages by factors of ~2. This affects the robustness of identifying distinct episodes at 100-300 Myr.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] The abstract states 'reasonable agreement' and 'encouraging' consistency but provides no details on error bars, completeness corrections, or alternative models considered in the fits.
  2. [Methods and Results] Clarify how the spatial distribution of clusters is used to associate the northern object as a regular component, including any quantitative metrics for alignment with SFH peaks.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their thoughtful and constructive report. The comments have prompted us to clarify the interpretive aspects of our analysis and to strengthen the discussion of methodological limitations. We respond to each major comment below.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract and Discussion] Abstract and Discussion: The conclusion that the ~100-300 Myr cluster population and SFH peaks indicate tidal interactions or a minor galaxy merger relies on a qualitative overlay onto an assumed orbital history. No N-body simulations or ram-pressure-only models are presented to demonstrate that these features cannot arise from internal stochastic star formation processes or age-dating uncertainties. This weakens the attribution to external triggers beyond ram-pressure stripping.

    Authors: We agree that the link to tidal interactions or a minor merger is qualitative and rests on the alignment between the observed 100-300 Myr star-formation episode, the spatial distribution of the corresponding clusters, and the galaxy's known orbital history within the Fornax cluster as reported in the literature. No new N-body or hydrodynamical simulations are presented, as such modeling lies outside the scope of this observational study focused on MUSE spectroscopy and cluster photometry. Nevertheless, the data show a distinct peak rather than a continuous age distribution, and the intermediate-age clusters are preferentially located near the northern object and the star-forming edge, which is difficult to reconcile with purely stochastic internal processes. We will revise the abstract and discussion to state more explicitly that this is an interpretive conclusion, to acknowledge alternative explanations including internal star formation and age uncertainties, and to cite relevant literature on Fornax orbits. revision: partial

  2. Referee: [Results on cluster ages] Results on cluster ages: While the agreement between photometric and spectroscopic fits for the 58 clusters is encouraging, the manuscript does not quantify the impact of age-extinction-metallicity degeneracies on the derived ages, which can shift ages by factors of ~2. This affects the robustness of identifying distinct episodes at 100-300 Myr.

    Authors: We acknowledge that age-extinction-metallicity degeneracies are a well-known limitation of SED fitting and can produce age shifts of order a factor of two. The manuscript already highlights the independent spectroscopic fits for 58 clusters as providing additional leverage that helps mitigate these degeneracies. To address the referee's concern directly, we will add a dedicated paragraph in the results section that quantifies the typical uncertainties from the posterior distributions of the fits, reports the median age uncertainties for the 100-300 Myr population, and discusses how the observed clustering of ages remains significant even when allowing for factor-of-two shifts. This addition will make the robustness of the identified episodes more transparent. revision: partial

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; independent fits and qualitative interpretation

full rationale

The paper derives cluster ages/masses via SED fitting on photometry (and spectra for a subset) and reconstructs the SFH via independent full-spectrum fitting of the MUSE data. These steps operate on the same observations but are not mathematically equivalent or reduced to each other by construction. The noted 'reasonable agreement' and 'encouraging' consistency is a post-hoc comparison, not a prediction forced by fitted inputs. The final interpretation linking populations to orbital events (ram-pressure, tidal interactions, or minor merger) is a qualitative contextual conclusion without equations, self-citations, or ansatzes that close a loop back to the inputs. No load-bearing self-referential steps are present.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

1 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The analysis rests on standard stellar population synthesis assumptions for age and mass estimation; no new physical entities or ad-hoc parameters beyond routine fitting are introduced.

free parameters (1)
  • metallicity, extinction, and IMF parameters in SED and spectrum fits
    These are fitted or assumed during standard modeling of cluster photometry and spectra to derive ages and masses.
axioms (1)
  • domain assumption Stellar population synthesis models reliably convert photometry and spectra into cluster ages and masses.
    Invoked when fitting the 222 clusters and the 58 with spectra; standard in the field but not re-derived here.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5649 in / 1172 out tokens · 26425 ms · 2026-05-09T18:36:59.485792+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

70 extracted references · 70 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    S., Vazdekis, A., Cerviño, M., et al

    Asa’d, R. S., Vazdekis, A., Cerviño, M., et al. 2017, MNRAS, 471, 3599 Astropy Collaboration, Price-Whelan, A. M., Sip˝ocz, B. M., et al. 2018, AJ, 156, 123 Astropy Collaboration, Robitaille, T. P., Tollerud, E. J., et al. 2013, A&A, 558, A33

    work page 2017

  2. [2]

    2010, in Society of Photo-Optical In- strumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, V ol

    Bacon, R., Accardo, M., Adjali, L., et al. 2010, in Society of Photo-Optical In- strumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, V ol. 7735, Ground-based and Airborne Instrumentation for Astronomy III, ed. I. S. McLean, S. K. Ram- say, & H. Takami, 773508 7 http://www.astropy.org

    work page 2010

  3. [3]

    L., Navarro, J

    Balogh, M. L., Navarro, J. F., & Morris, S. L. 2000, ApJ, 540, 113

    work page 2000

  4. [4]

    2012, MNRAS, 419, 2606

    Bastian, N., Adamo, A., Gieles, M., et al. 2012, MNRAS, 419, 2606

    work page 2012

  5. [5]

    2022, A&A, 659, A26

    Belfiore, F., Santoro, F., Groves, B., et al. 2022, A&A, 659, A26

    work page 2022

  6. [6]

    P., Jordán, A., Mei, S., et al

    Blakeslee, J. P., Jordán, A., Mei, S., et al. 2009, ApJ, 694, 556

    work page 2009

  7. [7]

    2022, A&A Rev., 30, 3

    Boselli, A., Fossati, M., & Sun, M. 2022, A&A Rev., 30, 3

    work page 2022

  8. [8]

    2021, A&A, 646, A139

    Boselli, A., Lupi, A., Epinat, B., et al. 2021, A&A, 646, A139

    work page 2021

  9. [9]

    2021, astropy/photutils: 1.1.0

    Bradley, L., Sip˝ocz, B., Robitaille, T., et al. 2021, astropy/photutils: 1.1.0

    work page 2021

  10. [10]

    & Charlot, S

    Bruzual, G. & Charlot, S. 2003, MNRAS, 344, 1000

    work page 2003

  11. [11]

    2023, A&A, 679, A98

    Bulichi, T.-E., Fahrion, K., Mernier, F., et al. 2023, A&A, 679, A98

    work page 2023

  12. [12]

    R., & Staveley-Smith, L

    Bureau, M., Mould, J. R., & Staveley-Smith, L. 1996, ApJ, 463, 60

    work page 1996

  13. [13]

    C., et al

    Calzetti, D., Armus, L., Bohlin, R. C., et al. 2000, ApJ, 533, 682

    work page 2000

  14. [14]

    2020, A&A, 639, A136

    Cantiello, M., Venhola, A., Grado, A., et al. 2020, A&A, 639, A136

    work page 2020

  15. [15]

    2017, MNRAS, 466, 798

    Cappellari, M. 2017, MNRAS, 466, 798

    work page 2017

  16. [16]

    2023, MNRAS, 526, 3273

    Cappellari, M. 2023, MNRAS, 526, 3273

    work page 2023

  17. [17]

    & Copin, Y

    Cappellari, M. & Copin, Y . 2003, MNRAS, 342, 345

    work page 2003

  18. [18]

    & Emsellem, E

    Cappellari, M. & Emsellem, E. 2004, PASP, 116, 138

    work page 2004

  19. [19]

    A., Clayton, G

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

    work page 1989

  20. [20]

    C., Cullen, F., McLure, R

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

    work page 2024

  21. [21]

    C., McLure, R

    Carnall, A. C., McLure, R. J., Dunlop, J. S., et al. 2019, MNRAS, 490, 417

    work page 2019

  22. [22]

    C., McLure, R

    Carnall, A. C., McLure, R. J., Dunlop, J. S., & Davé, R. 2018, MNRAS, 480, 4379

    work page 2018

  23. [23]

    C., Walker, S., McLure, R

    Carnall, A. C., Walker, S., McLure, R. J., et al. 2020, MNRAS, 496, 695

    work page 2020

  24. [24]

    P., Puzia, T

    Carvajal, J. P., Puzia, T. H., Blaña, M., et al. 2026, submitted to A&A

    work page 2026

  25. [25]

    Cellone, S. A. & Forte, J. C. 1997, AJ, 113, 1239 Chanamé, J., Infante, L., & Reisenegger, A. 2000, ApJ, 530, 96

    work page 1997

  26. [26]

    2021, PASA, 38, e035 de Sá-Freitas, C., Gadotti, D

    Cortese, L., Catinella, B., & Smith, R. 2021, PASA, 38, e035 de Sá-Freitas, C., Gadotti, D. A., Fragkoudi, F., et al. 2025, A&A, 698, A5

    work page 2021

  27. [27]

    1980, ApJ, 236, 351

    Dressler, A. 1980, ApJ, 236, 351

    work page 1980

  28. [28]

    2021, astropy/specutils: V1.5.0

    Earl, N., Tollerud, E., Jones, C., et al. 2021, astropy/specutils: V1.5.0

    work page 2021

  29. [29]

    2022, A&A, 659, A191 Falcón-Barroso, J., Sánchez-Blázquez, P., Vazdekis, A., et al

    Emsellem, E., Schinnerer, E., Santoro, F., et al. 2022, A&A, 659, A191 Falcón-Barroso, J., Sánchez-Blázquez, P., Vazdekis, A., et al. 2011, A&A, 532, A95

    work page 2022

  30. [30]

    M., Bettoni, D., et al

    Fasano, G., Poggianti, B. M., Bettoni, D., et al. 2015, MNRAS, 449, 3927

    work page 2015

  31. [31]

    M., Couch, W

    Fasano, G., Poggianti, B. M., Couch, W. J., et al. 2000, ApJ, 542, 673

    work page 2000

  32. [32]

    J., Chatzikos, M., Guzmán, F., et al

    Ferland, G. J., Chatzikos, M., Guzmán, F., et al. 2017, Rev. Mexicana Astron. Astrofis., 53, 385

    work page 2017

  33. [33]

    Gallagher, III, J. S. & Ostriker, J. P. 1972, AJ, 77, 288

    work page 1972

  34. [34]

    Y ., Hilker, M., Puzia, T

    Georgiev, I. Y ., Hilker, M., Puzia, T. H., et al. 2006, A&A, 452, 141

    work page 2006

  35. [35]

    F., Baumgardt, H., et al

    Gieles, M., Portegies Zwart, S. F., Baumgardt, H., et al. 2006, MNRAS, 371, 793

    work page 2006

  36. [36]

    2000, A&AS, 141, 371

    Girardi, L., Bressan, A., Bertelli, G., & Chiosi, C. 2000, A&AS, 141, 371

    work page 2000

  37. [37]

    Gunn, J. E. & Gott, J. Richard, I. 1972, ApJ, 176, 1

    work page 1972

  38. [38]

    C., Johnson, B

    Hao, C.-N., Kennicutt, R. C., Johnson, B. D., et al. 2011, ApJ, 741, 124

    work page 2011

  39. [39]

    J., Infante, L., & Kissler-Patig, M

    Hilker, M., Bomans, D. J., Infante, L., & Kissler-Patig, M. 1997, A&A, 327, 562

    work page 1997

  40. [40]

    2016, ApJ, 820, 42

    Iodice, E., Capaccioli, M., Grado, A., et al. 2016, ApJ, 820, 42

    work page 2016

  41. [41]

    M., Tremonti, C., et al

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

    work page 2003

  42. [42]

    Kenney, J. D. P., Geha, M., Jáchym, P., et al. 2014, ApJ, 780, 119

    work page 2014

  43. [43]

    J., Dopita, M

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

    work page 2001

  44. [44]

    J., Groves, B., Kauffmann, G., & Heckman, T

    Kewley, L. J., Groves, B., Kauffmann, G., & Heckman, T. 2006, MNRAS, 372, 961

    work page 2006

  45. [45]

    M., et al

    Kleiner, D., Serra, P., Maccagni, F. M., et al. 2023, A&A, 675, A108

    work page 2023

  46. [46]

    2001, MNRAS, 322, 231

    Kroupa, P. 2001, MNRAS, 322, 231

    work page 2001

  47. [47]

    Lamers, H. J. G. L. M., Gieles, M., Bastian, N., et al. 2005, A&A, 441, 117

    work page 2005

  48. [48]

    2018, MNRAS, 474, 1108

    Lee-Waddell, K., Serra, P., Koribalski, B., et al. 2018, MNRAS, 474, 1108

    work page 2018

  49. [49]

    Leung, G. C. K., Finkelstein, S. L., Pérez-González, P. G., et al. 2025, ApJ, 992, 26

    work page 2025

  50. [50]

    Mastropietro, M., De Rijcke, S., & Peletier, R. F. 2021, MNRAS, 504, 3387

    work page 2021

  51. [51]

    G., Banerji, M., Gonzalez, E., et al

    McMahon, R. G., Banerji, M., Gonzalez, E., et al. 2013, The Messenger, 154, 35

    work page 2013

  52. [52]

    1996, Nature, 379, 613

    Moore, B., Katz, N., Lake, G., Dressler, A., & Oemler, A. 1996, Nature, 379, 613

    work page 1996

  53. [53]

    D., Chanamé, J., & Puzia, T

    Mora, M. D., Chanamé, J., & Puzia, T. H. 2015, AJ, 150, 93

    work page 2015

  54. [54]

    1974, ApJ, 194, 1

    Oemler, Jr., A. 1974, ApJ, 194, 1

    work page 1974

  55. [55]

    Osterbrock, D. E. & Ferland, G. J. 2006, Astrophysics of gaseous nebulae and active galactic nuclei Pérez-Millán, D., Fritz, J., González-Lópezlira, R. A., et al. 2023, MNRAS, 521, 1292

    work page 2006

  56. [56]

    2019, A&A, 623, A19

    Pinna, F., Falcón-Barroso, J., Martig, M., et al. 2019, A&A, 623, A19

    work page 2019

  57. [57]

    M., Moretti, A., Gullieuszik, M., et al

    Poggianti, B. M., Moretti, A., Gullieuszik, M., et al. 2017, ApJ, 844, 48 Rodríguez, M. J., Lee, J. C., Indebetouw, R., et al. 2025, ApJ, 983, 137

    work page 2017

  58. [58]

    J., Finkbeiner, D

    Schlegel, D. J., Finkbeiner, D. P., & Davis, M. 1998, ApJ, 500, 525

    work page 1998

  59. [59]

    A., Kamphuis, P., et al

    Serra, P., Oosterloo, T. A., Kamphuis, P., et al. 2024, A&A, 690, A4

    work page 2024

  60. [60]

    A., Westfall, K

    Shetty, S., Bershady, M. A., Westfall, K. B., et al. 2020, ApJ, 901, 101

    work page 2020

  61. [61]

    S., Toshikage, S., & Tanaka, M

    Shimakawa, R., Tanaka, T. S., Toshikage, S., & Tanaka, M. 2021, PASJ, 73, 1575

    work page 2021

  62. [62]

    J., & Rieke, G

    Sivanandam, S., Rieke, M. J., & Rieke, G. H. 2014, ApJ, 796, 89

    work page 2014

  63. [63]

    2015, ApJ, 805, 2 STScI Development Team

    Stierwalt, S., Besla, G., Patton, D., et al. 2015, ApJ, 805, 2 STScI Development Team. 2018, synphot: Synthetic photometry using Astropy, Astrophysics Source Code Library, record ascl:1811.001

    work page 2015

  64. [64]

    2016, MNRAS, 463, 3409

    Vazdekis, A., Koleva, M., Ricciardelli, E., Röck, B., & Falcón-Barroso, J. 2016, MNRAS, 463, 3409

    work page 2016

  65. [65]

    2010, MNRAS, 404, 1639

    Vazdekis, A., Sánchez-Blázquez, P., Falcón-Barroso, J., et al. 2010, MNRAS, 404, 1639

    work page 2010

  66. [66]

    2018, A&A, 620, A165

    Venhola, A., Peletier, R., Laurikainen, E., et al. 2018, A&A, 620, A165

    work page 2018

  67. [67]

    M., Palsa, R., Streicher, O., et al

    Weilbacher, P. M., Palsa, R., Streicher, O., et al. 2020, A&A, 641, A28

    work page 2020

  68. [68]

    C., Gilmore, D

    Whitmore, B. C., Gilmore, D. M., & Jones, C. 1993, ApJ, 407, 489

    work page 1993

  69. [69]

    2019, MNRAS, 483, 1042

    Yun, K., Pillepich, A., Zinger, E., et al. 2019, MNRAS, 483, 1042

    work page 2019

  70. [70]

    1951, PASP, 63, 61 Article number, page 11 of 12 A&A proofs:manuscript no

    Zwicky, F. 1951, PASP, 63, 61 Article number, page 11 of 12 A&A proofs:manuscript no. NGC1427a_star_clusters 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2Flux (erg s 1 cm 2 Å 1) 1e 18 Unsuccessful fit #9 Photometry Spectrum Model fluxes Model SED 0 1 2 3 4 5Flux (erg s 1 cm 2 Å 1) 1e 18 Unsuccessful fit #47 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 (Å) 0 1 2 3 4 5Flux (erg s 1 cm 2 Å 1) 1e...

    work page 1951