pith. sign in

arxiv: 2606.12686 · v1 · pith:5JZOGNKSnew · submitted 2026-06-10 · 🌌 astro-ph.GA

Unprecedented Constraints on Gas Flows at High Redshift Using Deep JWST/NIRSpec Observations from the LyC22, EXCELS, and AURORA Surveys

Emily Kehoe , Alice E. Shapley , Adam C. Carnall , Fergus Cullen , Thomas M. Stanton , Daniel Schaerer , Rui Marques-Chaves , Charles C. Steidel
show 20 more authors
Ryan L. Sanders Natalie Lam Karla Z. Arellano-Cordova Ryan Begley Sophia R. Flury Natalia G. Guseva Timothy Heckman Alaina Henry Akio K. Inoue Yuri I. Izotov Ho-Hin Leung Derek J. McLeod Kate Rowlands Alberto Saldana-Lopez Dirk Scholte Maya Skarbinski Struan D. Stevenson Elizabeth Taylor Bingjie Wang Naveen A. Reddy
This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-06-27 08:45 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.GA
keywords galaxy outflowsinflowshigh-redshift galaxiesJWST spectroscopyabsorption linesgalaxy inclinationstar-forming galaxiesgas flows
0
0 comments X

The pith

Absorption lines in z~3 star-forming galaxies depend on inclination, with face-on systems showing stronger absorption and faster outflows.

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

The paper analyzes JWST/NIRSpec spectra of Fe II, Mg II, and Na D absorption in hundreds of galaxies at redshift around 3 from three surveys. No clear ties appear between outflow speed and basic galaxy properties such as mass or star-formation rate, although galaxies with detected outflows are systematically more massive and more actively star-forming. The central result is that line properties change with viewing angle: face-on galaxies display deeper absorption and higher outflow speeds, while inflow signatures appear more often in edge-on systems. These patterns match both lower-redshift observations and simulations in which winds leave the galaxy perpendicular to the disk plane while fresh gas arrives along that plane. Mg II emission also favors galaxies that are less massive, less dusty, and have higher specific star-formation rates.

Core claim

The paper presents the first evidence in z∼3 star-forming galaxies that properties of the absorption lines depend on galaxy inclination, with more face-on systems showing stronger absorption and higher outflow velocities, while inflowing gas is more frequently detected in more highly inclined galaxies. These trends are consistent with observations at z≲1 and predictions from cosmological simulations in which galactic winds are launched perpendicular to the galactic disks, while accretion occurs primarily along the disk plane.

What carries the argument

Inclination dependence of low-ionization absorption lines (Fe II, Mg II, Na D) as tracers of anisotropic galactic gas flows.

If this is right

  • Outflowing gas is detected more often in galaxies with higher stellar mass, star-formation rate, and surface density of star formation.
  • Mg II emission, a sign of resonantly scattered photons, appears preferentially in lower-mass, lower-dust galaxies with elevated specific star-formation rates.
  • The geometry of gas flows at z~3 matches the low-redshift pattern of bipolar winds and planar accretion.
  • Orientation must be considered when converting observed absorption statistics into global outflow rates.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • Surveys that do not control for inclination may mix face-on and edge-on systems and therefore underestimate or overestimate average outflow speeds.
  • The same viewing-angle effect could influence the escape fraction of ionizing photons, linking gas-flow geometry to reionization-era observations.
  • Future integral-field spectroscopy could test whether the velocity field itself is bipolar when resolved in individual galaxies.

Load-bearing premise

Galaxy inclinations measured from photometry or morphology are accurate enough to reveal true differences in gas-flow geometry.

What would settle it

Re-deriving inclinations for the same galaxies from higher-resolution imaging or kinematics and finding that the absorption strength and velocity trends with inclination disappear.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2606.12686 by Adam C. Carnall, Akio K. Inoue, Alaina Henry, Alberto Saldana-Lopez, Alice E. Shapley, Bingjie Wang, Charles C. Steidel, Daniel Schaerer, Derek J. McLeod, Dirk Scholte, Elizabeth Taylor, Emily Kehoe, Fergus Cullen, Ho-Hin Leung, Karla Z. Arellano-Cordova, Kate Rowlands, Maya Skarbinski, Natalia G. Guseva, Natalie Lam, Naveen A. Reddy, Rui Marques-Chaves, Ryan Begley, Ryan L. Sanders, Sophia R. Flury, Struan D. Stevenson, Thomas M. Stanton, Timothy Heckman, Yuri I. Izotov.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Rest-frame continuum-normalized spectra from the LyC22 survey (top), the EXCELS survey (middle), and the AURORA survey (bottom). Left panels show the NUV lines analyzed, with Fe ii rest wavelengths indicated in blue and Mg ii in red. Green lines mark emission lines not included in the analysis, and the magenta line marks the Mg i λ2850˚A absorption line. Right panels show example Na d profiles, with orange… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Properties of the JWST sample analyzed in this work. Left: Histogram of Hα redshifts for the AURORA survey (orange), the LyC22 survey (magenta), the EXCELS survey (green), and the full sample (black). Right: SFR (based on Hα) vs. stellar mass for the AURORA survey (orange circles), the LyC22 survey (pink squares), and the EXCELS survey (green triangles). The SFRs are derived from dust-corrected Hα luminosi… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Normalized histograms of galaxy inclinations measured from the DJA catalogs (blue; AURORA and EX￾CELS) and from PySersic (orange; LyC22). Both types of measurements show similar distributions, demonstrating that the use of different methods does not introduce a sig￾nificant bias. and ne = 300 cm−3 , typical for star-forming galaxies at these redshifts (Topping et al. 2025; Sanders et al. 2026), and applied… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Histogram of the measured velocity offsets of Fe ii (blue), Mg ii (red), and Na d (gold) relative to the galaxy redshift from the Hα centroid. Velocity offsets were mea￾sured for 41 galaxies using Fe ii, with an average velocity of ⟨∆vFe II⟩ = −70 ± 18 km s−1 , 57 galaxies using Mg ii, with ⟨∆vMg II⟩ = −50 ± 20 km s−1 , and 32 galaxies using Na d, with ⟨∆vNa I D⟩ = −79 ± 29 km s−1 . pure absorption, emissi… view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Gas kinematics traced by NUV absorption lines (top; Fe ii, blue circles and Mg ii, red squares), and optical absorption line (bottom; Na d, gold triangles) absorption line centroids versus galaxy properties. These individual measurements show no correlation between outflow velocity and any galaxy property [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Spectrum in the Na d region for SSA22-20013 from the LyC22 survey at z = 3.0495. The best-fitting model is shown in red, and the vertical dashed orange lines mark the rest wavelengths of the Na d λλ5891, 5897 absorption dou￾blet. The absorption feature is clearly redshifted relative to the expected rest-frame wavelengths, consistent with the large positive velocity offset identified in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:fi… view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Distributions of galaxy properties for those with significant Fe ii (top; blue), Mg ii (middle; red), and Na d (bottom; gold) outflow detections (∆v < 0 and |∆v| > σ∆v) and galaxies with no outflow detections (gray). Vertical dashed lines indicate mean values for each sample. The KS D statistic and p-values are reported in the upper corners of each panel. Significant results are highlighted in blue (Fe ii)… view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Composite spectra of galaxies binned by stellar properties, with Low, Middle, and High bins shown in red, green, and blue, respectively. The left panels show Fe ii λ2587 and λ2600, while the right panels show the Mg ii λλ2796, 2803 doublet. Vertical dashed lines indicate the rest wavelengths of the absorption features. Emission filling is most evident in Mg ii profiles, particularly for stellar mass, SFR a… view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Same as [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_9.png] view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Continuum-divided composite spectra of galaxies for Na d λλ5891, 5897 with He i λ5875 emission, binned by galaxy properties. Low and High bins are shown in red and blue, respectively. Vertical dashed lines indicate the rest wavelengths of the line features [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_10.png] view at source ↗
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: EWs of NUV absorption lines (top) (i.e, Fe ii λ2587, λ2600, summed over both lines (blue), and Mg ii λλ2796, 2803 (red)) and the Na d λλ5891, 5897 doublet (bottom; gold) measured from the composite spectra binned by galaxy properties. For the NUV lines, the EW increases with stellar mass, SFR, AV , and decreases with galaxy inclination. For Na d, the EW increases with SFR, and sSFR, and AV , and decreases… view at source ↗
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: Histograms of galaxy inclinations for Fe ii (top), Mg ii (middle), and Na d (bottom). Galaxies with detected outflows (green; ∆v < 0 and |∆v| > σ∆v), inflows (purple; ∆v > 0 and |∆v| > σ∆v), and no significant flows (gray; absorption fitting but |∆v| ≤ σ∆v) are shown. Vertical lines indicate the average inclination for each subsample. In all tracers, inflows are more commonly found in higher inclina￾tion … view at source ↗
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: Histograms showing the distributions of various galaxy properties for the Mg ii non-emitter (gray) and Mg ii emitter (purple) samples. Dashed gray and purple lines indicate the average values for non-emitters and emitters, respectively. The KS D statistic and p-values are reported in the upper corners of each panel. Figures with significant results are highlighted in bold purple. On average, Mg ii emitter… view at source ↗
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: v80 vs. EW from the composite spectra for Fe ii (circles) and Mg ii (squares) absorption. Points are color￾coded by galaxy inclination. Dashed lines connect the the Fe ii (blue) and Mg ii (red) measurements. For both tracers, lower inclination (more face-on) galaxies exhibit both larger EWs and more blueshifted velocities, compared to higher inclination (more edge-on) systems. The Low- and High￾inclinatio… view at source ↗
read the original abstract

We investigate how low-ionization gas flows in typical star-forming galaxies at $z\sim3$ depend on galaxy intrinsic properties and viewing angle. For this analysis we use JWST/NIRSpec observations of rest-frame near-UV Fe II and Mg II absorption, and rest-frame optical Na D absorption. This study combines galaxies from the LyC22, EXCELS, and AURORA surveys and contains 176, 197, and 315 galaxies, respectively, with Fe II, Mg II, and Na D coverage. Based on both individual and composite spectra, we find no statistically significant correlations between outflow velocity and galaxy properties. However, galaxies with detected outflows tend towards higher stellar masses, SFR, and $\Sigma_{\rm SFR}$ than those without outflows, suggesting that the two samples are not drawn from the same parent population. Finally, we additionally find that Mg II emission is preferentially detected in galaxies with lower stellar mass and $A_V$, and higher sSFR, consistent with conditions that favor the escape of resonantly scattered line and ionizing continuum radiation. We present the first evidence in $z\sim3$ star-forming galaxies that properties of the absorption lines depend on galaxy inclination, with more face-on systems showing stronger absorption and higher outflow velocities, while inflowing gas is more frequently detected in more highly inclined galaxies. These trends are consistent with observations at $z\lesssim1$ and predictions from cosmological simulations in which galactic winds are launched perpendicular to the galactic disks, while accretion occurs primarily along the disk plane.

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 JWST/NIRSpec rest-frame near-UV Fe II and Mg II and optical Na D absorption in 176–315 z∼3 star-forming galaxies drawn from the LyC22, EXCELS, and AURORA surveys. It reports no statistically significant correlations between outflow velocity and galaxy properties, but finds that galaxies with detected outflows have higher stellar mass, SFR, and Σ_SFR. It additionally claims the first evidence at z∼3 that absorption-line properties depend on inclination, with face-on systems showing stronger absorption and higher outflow velocities while inflows are more common in edge-on systems; these trends are stated to match lower-redshift observations and cosmological simulations.

Significance. If the inclination trends are robust, the result supplies the first direct observational link between viewing angle and wind/accretion geometry at z∼3, extending z≲1 findings and supporting simulations in which outflows are launched perpendicular to disks. The multi-survey sample and use of multiple absorption species are strengths; however, the absence of reported error bars, completeness corrections, and inclination-method validation in the provided abstract limits immediate assessment of the central claim.

major comments (2)
  1. [Inclination Analysis] Inclination measurement section: the headline result that absorption properties depend on inclination requires that the adopted inclination proxy (presumably axis ratios or morphological fits) faithfully traces viewing angle. At z∼3, galaxies are typically irregular and clumpy; the manuscript must therefore quantify uncertainties, test for systematic biases from star-forming clumps, dust, or PSF effects, and demonstrate that the reported trends survive these uncertainties. Without such validation the physical interpretation is at risk.
  2. [Results on Outflow Detection] Outflow detection and sample comparison (results section): the claim that galaxies with and without outflows are not drawn from the same parent population rests on trends in stellar mass, SFR, and Σ_SFR. The manuscript must report the precise statistical test, error bars on the measured quantities, and any completeness or selection-function corrections applied to the three survey subsamples; the current description provides sample sizes but no quantitative support for the population-difference statement.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Abstract / Mg II Emission Results] The abstract states that Mg II emission is preferentially detected in lower-mass, lower-A_V, higher-sSFR galaxies; the corresponding figure or table should include the quantitative significance of this preference and the selection criteria used to define the emission subsample.
  2. [Methods] Notation for velocity measurements (e.g., v_out, v_in) should be defined explicitly with reference to the line-profile fitting procedure and any adopted systemic redshift method.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their constructive and detailed comments. We address each major comment below, indicating the revisions that will be incorporated.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Inclination Analysis] Inclination measurement section: the headline result that absorption properties depend on inclination requires that the adopted inclination proxy (presumably axis ratios or morphological fits) faithfully traces viewing angle. At z∼3, galaxies are typically irregular and clumpy; the manuscript must therefore quantify uncertainties, test for systematic biases from star-forming clumps, dust, or PSF effects, and demonstrate that the reported trends survive these uncertainties. Without such validation the physical interpretation is at risk.

    Authors: We agree that robust validation of the inclination measurements is necessary to support the central claim. The manuscript derives inclinations from morphological axis ratios in available HST and JWST imaging. In the revised manuscript we will add a dedicated subsection that quantifies measurement uncertainties via Monte Carlo perturbations of the axis ratios, tests for biases introduced by clumpy star formation (by comparing results with and without clump masking where feasible), dust attenuation, and PSF effects (via simulated images). We will further demonstrate that the reported absorption-line trends versus inclination remain statistically significant after these perturbations, thereby strengthening the physical interpretation. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Results on Outflow Detection] Outflow detection and sample comparison (results section): the claim that galaxies with and without outflows are not drawn from the same parent population rests on trends in stellar mass, SFR, and Σ_SFR. The manuscript must report the precise statistical test, error bars on the measured quantities, and any completeness or selection-function corrections applied to the three survey subsamples; the current description provides sample sizes but no quantitative support for the population-difference statement.

    Authors: The referee correctly notes that additional quantitative information is required. In the revised results section we will explicitly identify the statistical test applied (e.g., two-sample Kolmogorov-Smirnov test with reported p-values), include uncertainties or error bars on the median stellar mass, SFR, and Σ_SFR values for the outflow and non-outflow subsamples, and describe any completeness corrections or survey-specific selection functions applied to the LyC22, EXCELS, and AURORA data. These additions will supply the requested quantitative support for the population-difference statement. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: direct observational analysis of spectra and correlations

full rationale

The paper reports empirical measurements of absorption-line properties (Fe II, Mg II, Na D) from JWST/NIRSpec spectra across three surveys, followed by statistical correlations with galaxy properties including stellar mass, SFR, and inclination. No derivations, equations, or predictions are presented that reduce by construction to fitted parameters or self-citations; the inclination trends are stated as observational findings compared to lower-redshift data and simulations. The analysis is self-contained against external benchmarks and contains no load-bearing self-citation chains or ansatzes.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claims rest on standard astrophysical interpretations of absorption lines as tracers of outflows and inflows plus the ability to measure galaxy inclinations; no new free parameters, axioms, or invented entities are introduced.

axioms (1)
  • domain assumption Absorption lines from Fe II, Mg II, and Na D trace low-ionization gas flows in galaxies
    Invoked throughout the abstract when linking spectral features to outflows and inflows.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 5960 in / 1118 out tokens · 21009 ms · 2026-06-27T08:45:00.662942+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

129 extracted references · 126 canonical work pages · 11 internal anchors

  1. [1]

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

    Avery, C. R., Wuyts, S., F¨ orster Schreiber, N. M., et al. 2022, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 511, 4223, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac190

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stac190 2022

  2. [2]

    2010, The Astrophysical Journal, 717, 323, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/717/1/323

    Bauermeister, A., Blitz, L., & Ma, C.-P. 2010, The Astrophysical Journal, 717, 323, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/717/1/323

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/717/1/323 2010

  3. [3]

    , keywords =

    Belli, S., Park, M., Davies, R. L., et al. 2024, Nature, 630, 54, doi: 10.1038/s41586-024-07412-1

    work page doi:10.1038/s41586-024-07412-1 2024

  4. [4]

    2020, in Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series, Vol

    Bertin, E., Schefer, M., Apostolakos, N., et al. 2020, in Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series, Vol. 527, Astronomical Data Analysis Software and Systems XXIX, ed. R. Pizzo, E. R. Deul, J. D. Mol, J. de Plaa, & H. Verkouter, 461

    2020

  5. [5]

    , keywords =

    Bevacqua, D., Marchesini, D., Saracco, P., et al. 2026, The Astrophysical Journal, 997, 189, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ae247c

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ae247c 2026

  6. [6]

    2021, ApJ, 919, 38, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac1108

    Birrer, S. 2021, ApJ, 919, 38, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac1108

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac1108 2021

  7. [7]

    2022, PSFr: Point Spread Function reconstruction, Astrophysics Source Code Library, record ascl:2210.005

    Vyvere, L. 2022, PSFr: Point Spread Function reconstruction, Astrophysics Source Code Library, record ascl:2210.005. http://ascl.net/2210.005

    2022

  8. [8]

    J., Knobel, C., et al

    Bordoloi, R., Lilly, S. J., Knobel, C., et al. 2011, ApJ, 743, 10, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/743/1/10

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/743/1/10 2011

  9. [9]

    , archivePrefix = "arXiv", eprint =

    Bordoloi, R., Lilly, S. J., Hardmeier, E., et al. 2014, ApJ, 794, 130, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/794/2/130

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/794/2/130 2014

  10. [10]

    J., Almaini, O., Hartley, W

    Bradshaw, E. J., Almaini, O., Hartley, W. G., et al. 2013, MNRAS, 433, 194, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stt715

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stt715 2013

  11. [11]

    , archivePrefix = "arXiv", eprint =

    Brook, C. B., Governato, F., Roˇ skar, R., et al. 2011, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 415, 1051, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2011.18545.x Calabr` o, A., Pentericci, L., Talia, M., et al. 2022, A&A, 667, A117, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202244364

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2011.18545.x 2011

  12. [12]

    , eprint =

    Calzetti, D., Armus, L., Bohlin, R. C., et al. 2000, ApJ, 533, 682, doi: 10.1086/308692

    work page internal anchor Pith review doi:10.1086/308692 2000

  13. [13]

    , keywords =

    Cardelli, J. A., Clayton, G. C., & Mathis, J. S. 1989, ApJ, 345, 245, doi: 10.1086/167900 28Kehoe et al

    work page doi:10.1086/167900 1989

  14. [14]

    C., Leja, J., Johnson, B

    Carnall, A. C., Leja, J., Johnson, B. D., et al. 2019, The Astrophysical Journal, 873, 44, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab04a2

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ab04a2 2019

  15. [15]

    Inferring the star-formation histories of massive quiescent galaxies with BAGPIPES: Evidence for multiple quenching mechanisms

    Carnall, A. C., McLure, R. J., Dunlop, J. S., & Dav´ e, R. 2018, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 480, 4379, doi: 10.1093/mnras/sty2169

    work page internal anchor Pith review doi:10.1093/mnras/sty2169 2018

  16. [16]

    , keywords =

    Carnall, A. C., Cullen, F., McLure, R. J., et al. 2024, MNRAS, 534, 325, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stae2092

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stae2092 2024

  17. [17]

    , keywords =

    Carniani, S., Venturi, G., Parlanti, E., et al. 2024, A&A, 685, A99, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202347230

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202347230 2024

  18. [18]

    , eprint =

    Chabrier, G. 2003, PASP, 115, 763, doi: 10.1086/376392

    work page internal anchor Pith review doi:10.1086/376392 2003

  19. [19]

    Probing Cold Gas with

    Chang, S.-J., & Gronke, M. 2024, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 532, 3526, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stae1664

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stae1664 2024

  20. [20]

    , archivePrefix = "arXiv", eprint =

    Chen, Y.-M., Tremonti, C. A., Heckman, T. M., et al. 2010, AJ, 140, 445, doi: 10.1088/0004-6256/140/2/445

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-6256/140/2/445 2010

  21. [21]

    X., Schaerer, D., Gazagnes, S., & Henry, A

    Chisholm, J., Prochaska, J. X., Schaerer, D., Gazagnes, S., & Henry, A. 2020, MNRAS, 498, 2554, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staa2470

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/staa2470 2020

  22. [22]

    , archivePrefix = "arXiv", eprint =

    Chisholm, J., Tremonti, C. A., Leitherer, C., & Chen, Y. 2017, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 469, 4831, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stx1164

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stx1164 2017

  23. [23]

    2024, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 532, 2463, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stae1586

    Choustikov, N., Katz, H., Saxena, A., et al. 2024, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 532, 2463, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stae1586

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stae1586 2024

  24. [24]

    E., Sanders R

    Clarke, L., Shapley, A. E., Sanders, R. L., et al. 2024, ApJ, 977, 133, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad8ba4

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad8ba4 2024

  25. [25]

    E., & White, M

    Conroy, C., Gunn, J. E., & White, M. 2009, ApJ, 699, 486, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/699/1/486

    work page internal anchor Pith review doi:10.1088/0004-637x/699/1/486 2009

  26. [26]

    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 D’Eugenio, F., P´ erez-Gonz´ alez, P. G., Maiolino, R., et al. 2024, Nature Astronomy, 8, 1443, doi: 10.1038/s41550-024-02345-1 Di Matteo, T., Springel, V., & Hernquist, L. 2005, Nature, 433, 604, doi: 10.1038/nature03335

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stae327 2024

  27. [27]

    E., Topping, M

    Du, X., Shapley, A. E., Topping, M. W., et al. 2021, ApJ, 920, 95, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac1273

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac1273 2021

  28. [28]

    J., Willott, C., Alberts, S., et al

    Eisenstein, D. J., Willott, C., Alberts, S., et al. 2026, ApJS, 283, 6, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ae3163

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4365/ae3163 2026

  29. [29]

    Binary Population and Spectral Synthesis Version 2.1: construction, observational verification and new results

    Eldridge, J. J., Stanway, E. R., Xiao, L., et al. 2017, Publications of the Astronomical Society of Australia, 34, e058, doi: 10.1017/pasa.2017.51

    work page internal anchor Pith review doi:10.1017/pasa.2017.51 2017

  30. [30]

    Erb, D. K. 2015, Nature, 523, 169, doi: 10.1038/nature14454

    work page doi:10.1038/nature14454 2015

  31. [31]

    K., Quider, A

    Erb, D. K., Quider, A. M., Henry, A. L., & Martin, C. L. 2012, The Astrophysical Journal, 759, 26, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/759/1/26 Faucher-Gigu` ere, C.-A., & Kereˇ s, D. 2011, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society: Letters, 412, L118, doi: 10.1111/j.1745-3933.2011.01018.x

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/759/1/26 2012

  32. [32]

    2018, A&A, 617, A62, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201833281

    Feltre, A., Bacon, R., Tresse, L., et al. 2018, A&A, 617, A62, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201833281

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201833281 2018

  33. [33]

    2017, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society: Letters, 470, L39, doi: 10.1093/mnrasl/slx072

    Fielding, D., Quataert, E., Martizzi, D., & Faucher-Gigu` ere, C.-A. 2017, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society: Letters, 470, L39, doi: 10.1093/mnrasl/slx072

    work page doi:10.1093/mnrasl/slx072 2017

  34. [34]

    2017, A&A, 608, A7, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201731499

    Finley, H., Bouch´ e, N., Contini, T., et al. 2017, A&A, 608, A7, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201731499

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201731499 2017

  35. [35]

    R., Jaskot, A

    Flury, S. R., Jaskot, A. E., Ferguson, H. C., et al. 2022a, ApJS, 260, 1, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ac5331 —. 2022b, ApJ, 930, 126, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac61e4

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4365/ac5331

  36. [36]

    and Lang, Dustin and Goodman, Jonathan , year=

    Foreman-Mackey, D., Hogg, D. W., Lang, D., & Goodman, J. 2013, PASP, 125, 306, doi: 10.1086/670067

    work page doi:10.1086/670067 2013

  37. [37]

    , archivePrefix = "arXiv", eprint =

    Fumagalli, M., Prochaska, J. X., Kasen, D., et al. 2011, MNRAS, 418, 1796, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2011.19599.x F¨ orster Schreiber, N. M.,¨Ubler, H., Davies, R. L., et al. 2019, The Astrophysical Journal, 875, 21, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab0ca2

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2011.19599.x 2011

  38. [38]

    2024, A&A, 691, A213, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202450654

    Garel, T., Michel-Dansac, L., Verhamme, A., et al. 2024, A&A, 691, A213, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202450654

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202450654 2024

  39. [39]

    2020, A&A, 639, A85, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202038096

    Izotov, Y. 2020, A&A, 639, A85, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202038096

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202038096 2020

  40. [40]

    2025, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 540, 2331, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staf768

    Gazagnes, S., Chisholm, J., Endsley, R., et al. 2025, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 540, 2331, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staf768

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/staf768 2025

  41. [41]

    2025, A&A, 699, A343, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202555504

    Genin, A., Shuntov, M., Brammer, G., et al. 2025, A&A, 699, A343, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202555504

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202555504 2025

  42. [42]

    2011, The Astrophysical Journal, 743, 95, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/743/1/95

    Giavalisco, M., Vanzella, E., Salimbeni, S., et al. 2011, The Astrophysical Journal, 743, 95, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/743/1/95

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/743/1/95 2011

  43. [43]

    2013, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 434, 1151, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stt1060

    Burkert, A. 2013, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 434, 1151, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stt1060

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stt1060 2013

  44. [44]

    The Astrophysical Journal , author =

    Gordon, K. D., Clayton, G. C., Misselt, K. A., Landolt, A. U., & Wolff, M. J. 2003, The Astrophysical Journal, 594, 279, doi: 10.1086/376774

    work page doi:10.1086/376774 2003

  45. [45]

    F., et al

    Guo, Y., Bacon, R., Bouch´ e, N. F., et al. 2023, Nature, 624, 53, doi: 10.1038/s41586-023-06718-w

    work page doi:10.1038/s41586-023-06718-w 2023

  46. [46]

    G., Izotov, Y

    Guseva, N. G., Izotov, Y. I., Fricke, K. J., & Henkel, C. 2013, A&A, 555, A90, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201221010 —. 2019, A&A, 624, A21, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201834935

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201221010 2013

  47. [47]

    J., Saldana-Lopez, A., Citro, A., et al

    Hayes, M. J., Saldana-Lopez, A., Citro, A., et al. 2025, ApJ, 982, 14, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/adaea1 Constraints on High-Redshift Gas Flows fromJWST/NIRSpec29

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/adaea1 2025

  48. [48]

    2015, ApJ, 809, 147, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/809/2/147

    Overzier, R., & Leitherer, C. 2015, ApJ, 809, 147, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/809/2/147

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/809/2/147 2015

  49. [49]

    M., Armus, L., & Miley, G

    Heckman, T. M., Armus, L., & Miley, G. K. 1990, ApJS, 74, 833, doi: 10.1086/191522

    work page doi:10.1086/191522 1990

  50. [50]

    M., & Borthakur, S

    Heckman, T. M., & Borthakur, S. 2016, ApJ, 822, 9, doi: 10.3847/0004-637X/822/1/9

    work page doi:10.3847/0004-637x/822/1/9 2016

  51. [51]

    2000, The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series, 129, 493, doi: 10.1086/313421

    Armus, L. 2000, The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series, 129, 493, doi: 10.1086/313421

    work page doi:10.1086/313421 2000

  52. [52]

    A., Scarlata, C., Verhamme, A., & Erb, D

    Henry, A., Berg, D. A., Scarlata, C., Verhamme, A., & Erb, D. 2018, ApJ, 855, 96, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aab099

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aab099 2018

  53. [53]

    H., Martin, C

    Ho, S. H., Martin, C. L., Kacprzak, G. G., & Churchill, C. W. 2017, The Astrophysical Journal, 835, 267, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/835/2/267

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/835/2/267 2017

  54. [54]

    F., Cox, T

    Hopkins, P. F., Cox, T. J., Kereˇ s, D., & Hernquist, L. 2008, The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series, 175, 390, doi: 10.1086/524363

    work page doi:10.1086/524363 2008

  55. [55]

    I., Chisholm, J., Worseck, G., et al

    Izotov, Y. I., Chisholm, J., Worseck, G., et al. 2022, MNRAS, 515, 2864, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac1899

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stac1899 2022

  56. [56]

    I., Schaerer, D., Thuan, T

    Izotov, Y. I., Schaerer, D., Thuan, T. X., et al. 2016, MNRAS, 461, 3683, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stw1205

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stw1205 2016

  57. [57]

    I., Worseck, G., Schaerer, D., et al

    Izotov, Y. I., Worseck, G., Schaerer, D., et al. 2021, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 503, 1734, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stab612

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stab612 2021

  58. [58]

    E., & Oey, M

    Jaskot, A. E., & Oey, M. S. 2013, ApJ, 766, 91, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/766/2/91

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/766/2/91 2013

  59. [59]

    Kacprzak, G. G. 2017, in Astrophysics and Space Science

    2017

  60. [60]

    430, Gas Accretion onto Galaxies, ed

    Library, Vol. 430, Gas Accretion onto Galaxies, ed. A. Fox & R. Dav´ e, 145, doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-52512-97

    work page doi:10.1007/978-3-319-52512-97

  61. [61]

    G., Churchill, C

    Kacprzak, G. G., Churchill, C. W., & Nielsen, N. M. 2012, ApJL, 760, L7, doi: 10.1088/2041-8205/760/1/L7

    work page doi:10.1088/2041-8205/760/1/l7 2012

  62. [62]

    2022, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 515, 4265, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac1437

    Katz, H., Garel, T., Rosdahl, J., et al. 2022, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 515, 4265, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac1437

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stac1437 2022

  63. [63]

    E., Schreiber, N

    Kehoe, E., Shapley, A. E., Schreiber, N. M. F., et al. 2024, ApJ, 976, 28, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad7ebb

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad7ebb 2024

  64. [64]

    E., Sanders, R

    Kehoe, E., Shapley, A. E., Sanders, R. L., et al. 2025, The Astrophysical Journal, 994, 170, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ae10b3

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ae10b3 2025

  65. [65]

    Kennicutt, Jr., R. C. 1989, ApJ, 344, 685, doi: 10.1086/167834

    work page doi:10.1086/167834 1989

  66. [66]

    , keywords =

    Kimm, T., Slyz, A., Devriendt, J., & Pichon, C. 2011, MNRAS, 413, L51, doi: 10.1111/j.1745-3933.2011.01031.x

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1745-3933.2011.01031.x 2011

  67. [67]

    A., Shapley, A

    Kornei, K. A., Shapley, A. E., Martin, C. L., et al. 2012, ApJ, 758, 135, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/758/2/135 —. 2013, ApJ, 774, 50, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/774/1/50

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/758/2/135 2012

  68. [68]

    G., Labb´ e, I., et al

    Kriek, M., van Dokkum, P. G., Labb´ e, I., et al. 2009, The Astrophysical Journal, 700, 221, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/700/1/221

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/700/1/221 2009

  69. [69]

    , keywords =

    Kroupa, P. 2001, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 322, 231, doi: 10.1046/j.1365-8711.2001.04022.x

    work page doi:10.1046/j.1365-8711.2001.04022.x 2001

  70. [70]

    R., Steidel, C

    Law, D. R., Steidel, C. C., Shapley, A. E., et al. 2012, The Astrophysical Journal, 759, 29, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/759/1/29 Le Reste, A., Scarlata, C., Hayes, M. J., et al. 2025, ApJS, 280, 27, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/adf227

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/759/1/29 2012

  71. [71]

    2024, A&A, 687, A73, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202449362

    Leclercq, F., Chisholm, J., King, W., et al. 2024, A&A, 687, A73, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202449362

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202449362 2024

  72. [72]

    2011, The Astronomical Journal, 141, 37, doi: 10.1088/0004-6256/141/2/37

    Calzetti, D. 2011, The Astronomical Journal, 141, 37, doi: 10.1088/0004-6256/141/2/37

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-6256/141/2/37 2011

  73. [73]

    K., Walter, F., Brinks, E., et al

    Leroy, A. K., Walter, F., Brinks, E., et al. 2008, The Astronomical Journal, 136, 2782, doi: 10.1088/0004-6256/136/6/2782

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-6256/136/6/2782 2008

  74. [74]

    2026, ApJL, 1000, L3, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ae48ee

    Lyu, C., Yu, H., Wang, E., et al. 2026, ApJL, 1000, L3, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ae48ee

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ae48ee 2026

  75. [75]

    Martin, C. L. 2005, ApJ, 621, 227, doi: 10.1086/427277

    work page doi:10.1086/427277 2005

  76. [76]

    L., Shapley, A

    Martin, C. L., Shapley, A. E., Coil, A. L., et al. 2012, ApJ, 760, 127, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/760/2/127 —. 2013, ApJ, 770, 41, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/770/1/41

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/760/2/127 2012

  77. [77]

    C., et al

    Moretti, L., Belli, S., Rudie, G. C., et al. 2026, A&A, 707, A146, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202556336

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202556336 2026

  78. [78]

    Murray, N., M´ enard, B., & Thompson, T. A. 2011, The Astrophysical Journal, 735, 66, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/735/1/66

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/735/1/66 2011

  79. [79]

    2019, MNRAS, 490, 3234, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stz2306

    Nelson, D., Pillepich, A., Springel, V., et al. 2019, MNRAS, 490, 3234, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stz2306

    work page internal anchor Pith review doi:10.1093/mnras/stz2306 2019

  80. [80]

    F., Genzel, R., F¨ orster-Schreiber, N

    Newman, S. F., Genzel, R., F¨ orster-Schreiber, N. M., et al. 2012, The Astrophysical Journal, 761, 43, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/761/1/43

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/761/1/43 2012

Showing first 80 references.