Probing the Kinematics of Multiple- and Single-Protostar Systems in Perseus with N2H+

Adele Plunkett; Erica Behrens; Zhi-Yun Li

REVIEW 4 major objections 4 minor 40 references

Probing the Kinematics of Multiple- and Single-Protostar Systems in Perseus with N2H+

T0 review · 4 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-16 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Dense gas around young protostars shows no coherent rotation on scales of 1000–2700 AU.

desk verdict New 3" ALMA N2H+ data for two Perseus cores, feathered with GBT, are carefully handled and genuinely fill a resolution gap, but the central "not rotation" claim rests on a J(r) diagnostic that cannot discriminate rotation — worth a serious referee, not a desk reject. read the letter →

arxiv 2504.13998 v1 pith:52KLJ66I submitted 2025-04-18 astro-ph.GA

Erica Behrens , Adele Plunkett , Zhi-Yun Li This is my paper · ORCID

classification astro-ph.GA

keywords protostellarcorescorerotationvelocitygradientsspecificangularmomentumN2H+hyperfinestructureALMAGBTPerseusmolecularcloud

verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

The paper tries to settle whether the dense gas around young protostars is rotating before it feeds the disk. It maps the N2H+ J=1–0 line toward two Perseus cores—the isolated protostar Per 30 and the multiple-protostar system NGC 1333 IRAS 7—combining ALMA's 3-arcsecond resolution with GBT's 9-arcsecond single-dish data so that scales from roughly 900 to 2700 AU are covered at once. Fitting the hyperfine structure to get centroid velocities, the authors compute velocity gradients and specific angular momentum in apertures from 5 to 30 arcseconds around each protostar. They find that specific angular momentum rises with radius instead of staying constant, and that position-velocity cuts show fragmented, clumpy structure rather than coherent rotation. The conclusion is that the velocity structure is likely not core rotation, so angular momentum is probably not inherited from core to disk scales, with torques from irregular density distributions offered as the alternative driver.

What carries the argument

The argument runs on three pieces of machinery. First is the N2H+ J=1–0 hyperfine spectrum, whose 15 hyperfine components are fitted with a spectral fitting routine to deliver centroid velocities with uncertainties around $10^{-3}$ km s$^{-1}$ per pixel. Second is the feather method, which combines ALMA interferometric images with GBT single-dish images in the Fourier plane so that the analysis is sensitive to both compact and diffuse gas. Third is the rotation diagnostic: the linear velocity gradient $\nabla v$ is averaged within circular apertures of radius 5–30 arcseconds centered on each protostar, and converted to specific angular momentum through the identity $J = r^2 \nabla v$, following the standard relation from Goodman et al. (1993). The key test is whether $J$ stays roughly constant with radius, which would indicate conserved angular momentum and coherent rotation, or rises with radius, which the paper interprets as turbulence and non-rotational structure.

What would settle it

Run a radiative-transfer model of a rotating, infalling envelope with the same density and temperature profiles as Per 30 and IRAS 7, and compare the predicted N2H+ J=1–0 centroid velocities to the feathered maps: if the model reproduces the observed rise of specific angular momentum with radius, then rotation is not excluded by the data. A simpler observational check is to measure the velocity gradient in a smaller-aperture tracer like C18O or H2CO at radii below 1500 AU; a coherent, outflow-perpendicular gradient there would show that rotation resumes just inside the scales this paper probes.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On the paper's own terms, the central discovery is a null result: in four protostellar systems spanning one isolated source and one quintuple system, the N2H+ emission shows no evidence for organized, coherent rotation on scales of roughly 1000–2700 AU (0.005–0.01 pc). At every radius tested, the specific angular momentum $J = r^2 \nabla v$ increases outward rather than remaining constant, which the authors take as the signature of a region that does not conserve angular momentum as a rotating unit. This holds for the ALMA-only, GBT-only, and feathered data, although the small-scale ALMA maps show larger, less coherent gradients and position-angle swings up to 90 degrees while the larger-scale GBT maps are smoother. Because the isolated source Per 30 behaves like the members of IRAS 7, the authors argue that multiplicity is not the cause of the complex kinematics. They instead attribute the velocity structure to torques produced by irregular or asymmetric density distributions, in line with non-axisymmetric collapse scenarios, and note that previous subarcsecond observations do see rotation around Per 18 on disk scales below 1000 AU.

Load-bearing premise

The no-rotation conclusion assumes that true rotation would show up as a roughly constant amount of rotational motion per unit mass at every distance from the star; if a rotating envelope that is also falling inward can make that quantity grow with distance instead, the data would not rule out rotation.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

Rotation in these protostellar systems, if it exists, must set in below about 1000 AU, between the scales probed here and the subarcsecond disk scales where rotation has been detected.
Angular momentum is not simply passed down from core to disk in Per 30 and IRAS 7, so disk formation in these sources likely needs another channel than direct inheritance of core rotation.
The velocity gradients measured here are more naturally read as turbulence plus torques from irregular density structure than as solid-body rotation.
Because the isolated source and the multiple system behave the same way, the lack of a rotational signature is a property of the gas on these scales rather than an artifact of multiplicity.
Future surveys that combine interferometric and single-dish data can use the same $J(r)$ test, but must resolve scales below 1000 AU to catch rotation.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

A rotating envelope that is also collapsing inward can produce specific angular momentum that grows with radius, so the $J(r)$ trend alone may not fully exclude rotation; modeling an infalling rotating envelope against these spectra would test the authors' interpretation.
One testable extension: the same feathered-data analysis applied to a chemically different tracer such as C18O, which survives closer to the protostar, could reveal rotation just inside the N2H+ depletion zone.
If torques from irregular density distributions drive the kinematics, the orientation of the velocity gradient relative to the outflow should vary with radius and time, so repeated observations may show the gradient direction wandering.
The result supports non-axisymmetric collapse as a disk-formation path, implying that disks can form in cores with little or no net angular momentum.

Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

Colleague,

The thing to know about this paper is that the data are worth keeping and the headline is worth rewriting. Behrens, Plunkett and Li present new ALMA N2H+ J=1-0 maps at ~3" (900 AU) for two Perseus cores, Per 30 and the IRAS 7 quintuple, feathered with the 9" GBT cubes from Chen et al. (2019). That fills a real gap between the GBT-scale DiSCo survey and subarcsecond disk work. The reduction is careful: they check flux recovery after feathering, test two-component hyperfine fits and reject them on the strength of the fit, and reproduce Chen et al.'s GBT gradients for the IRAS 7 sources. That is honest, reproducible observational work, and the two cores are a legitimate incremental addition to the core-kinematics literature.

The soft spot is the central claim. The abstract and Section 4.2 conclude the velocity structure is "likely not a result of core rotation," and the quantitative support is Figure 9: J = r^2 times the velocity gradient increases with radius, which they take as the anti-rotation signature. That template is wrong, or at least inverted for the simplest case. Solid-body rotation has constant velocity gradient, so J(r) = Omega r^2 rises with radius; Keplerian-like and flat rotation curves also rise. A flat J(r) is specifically a conserved-specific-angular-momentum signature (Omega proportional to r^-2), not a general rotation test. So the rising trend in Figure 9 is fully consistent with rotation, turbulence, or infall, and the "likely not rotation" wording does not follow. I think the stress-test concern holds up on reading the paper itself.

Two smaller issues sit alongside. Figure 9 carries no error bars even though Table 2 shows the gradients at r >~ 15" (ALMA) and r >~ 25" (GBT/Feather) are consistent with zero; part of the plotted J(r) rise is noise. The torque-from-irregular-density explanation in Section 4.3 is a reasonable guess borrowed from simulations, not something this data tests, and the authors should say so more plainly. The qualitative evidence also cuts both ways: the PV diagrams look fragmented, but the Per 30 centroid map shows a clean east-west redshift-to-blueshift transition that the authors themselves flag as the classic rotation signature. If the abstract said "no evidence for coherent, conserved rotation on scales of 1000-9000 AU," the paper would be defensible as-is. As written, the headline overreaches the diagnostic.

Recommendation: send it to a serious referee, with the brief that the interpretation needs reworking, not just trimming. This is a publishable observational paper with an overstated conclusion, not a paper with a useless dataset.

Referee Report

4 major / 4 minor

Summary. This paper analyzes N2H+ J=1-0 emission toward two Perseus protostellar cores, Per 30 and NGC 1333 IRAS 7, combining ALMA and GBT data with CASA feather to recover intermediate spatial scales. The authors fit the hyperfine structure with PySpecKit, construct centroid-velocity maps, measure linear velocity gradients in circular apertures of 5–30 arcsec, and compute specific angular momentum J = r^2 \nabla v_{lsr} as a function of radius. The central claim, stated in the abstract and developed in Sections 4.2 and 5, is that the observed velocity structure is 'likely not a result of core rotation' and is instead attributed to torques from irregular density distributions. The paper also reports scale-dependent behavior: smaller-scale ALMA gas appears clumpy and turbulent, while larger-scale GBT/Feather gas shows smoother gradients.

Significance. If the central claim survives scrutiny, the paper would provide an interesting data point on the scales at which coherent rotation emerges in protostellar cores, with implications for angular-momentum transport and disk formation. The observational methodology has real strengths: the multi-scale feathering is carefully checked against single-dish spectra, the hyperfine fitting is standard and yields very small formal centroid-velocity uncertainties, Table 2 gives gradient values and uncertainties in a transparent form, and the authors successfully reproduce the earlier GBT gradient measurements of Chen et al. (2019). The paper is also honest about the large scatter in the ALMA gradients. However, the main quantitative diagnostic used to exclude rotation is flawed, and this flaw directly affects the paper's headline conclusion.

major comments (4)

[Sections 3.3 and 4.2, Figure 9] The diagnostic J = r^2 \nabla v_{lsr} with the expectation that rotation would give constant J is not valid for the type of rotation expected on core scales. For a core in solid-body rotation, the centroid-velocity gradient is approximately constant (|\nabla v| \approx \Omega), so J = \Omega r^2 increases with aperture radius. The observed increase of J in Figure 9 is therefore fully consistent with solid-body rotation, and a rotating infalling envelope with differential rotation can likewise produce a rising J(r). The statement in Section 4.2 that 'Jcore increases with distance rather than remaining constant' does not support the conclusion that the velocity structure is 'likely not a result of core rotation' (abstract, Section 4.2, Section 5). The paper conflates a lack of angular-momentum conservation with a lack of rotation. To make the no-rotation claim, the authors need a quantitative test that distinguishes rotation from turbulence, for example by comparing measured centroid-velocity maps or PV diagrams with synthetic observations of a rotating envelope, or by quantifying the coherence of gradient directions across apertures.
[Figure 9 and Table 2] Figure 9 plots J(r) without any error bars, yet Table 2 reports gradient uncertainties, and for many rows those uncertainties are enormous: for example, the ALMA gradient for Per 30 at radius 10 arcsec is 107.6 +/- 700.4 km/s/pc, and at radius 20 arcsec for Per 18 it is 30.6 +/- 618.9 km/s/pc. Even for the smoother GBT data, uncertainties at radii above 15 arcsec become comparable to or larger than the gradient values (e.g., Per 18 at 25 arcsec: 3.6 +/- 4.2 km/s/pc). Without propagating these uncertainties into J(r), the claimed monotonic increase in Figure 9 has no demonstrated statistical significance. The central interpretation should be re-examined after propagating the Table 2 uncertainties, and the large-aperture points where the gradients are formally consistent with zero should be identified.
[Section 3.2 versus Sections 4.2 and 5] The paper's own qualitative description of Per 30 is in tension with the abstract's no-rotation conclusion. Section 3.2 states that the Per 30 maps show 'the most likely indications of rotation among our four protostars' and a 'clear transition from redshifted to blueshifted gas from east to west,' which is precisely the signature that earlier studies such as Goodman et al. (1993) associate with rotation. The PV diagrams in Section 4.2 are described as not showing coherent rotation, but for Per 30 this is not reconciled with the centroid-velocity morphology. The claim that the N2H+ velocity structure is 'likely not a result of core rotation' therefore rests heavily on the flawed J(r) argument and is not supported by the qualitative maps alone.
[Section 4.3] The alternative explanation proposed in Section 4.3, that torques from irregular density distributions produce the observed velocity structure, is offered without a quantitative test against a rotating-envelope model. Since the paper's conclusion depends on excluding rotation, the authors should either provide a concrete model comparison (e.g., a rotating infalling envelope with and without an asymmetric density distribution, compared to the observed centroid-velocity maps and J(r) profiles) or substantially weaken the conclusion to state that the data do not require coherent rotation, rather than asserting that rotation is likely absent.

minor comments (4)

[Table 2, Per 21 row, radius 15 arcsec] The entry '91 , 8' appears to be a typo; it should presumably be '91.8'.
[Figure 9] The y-axis tick labels appear malformed in the preprint, with '10^3', '10^1', and '101' rendered inconsistently; the axis should be checked so that the logarithmic scale is legible.
[Section 2.2] The statement that 'at spatial frequencies where there is overlap in the GBT and ALMA images, the emission in the two datasets is equal' could be clarified: the adopted single-dish scaling factor of 1.0 is an assumption, not a measured result, and the comparison in Figure 4 only verifies recovery of flux at the protostar positions, not across the full field.
[Section 4.1] The discussion of ALMA gradient uncertainties would benefit from explicitly stating how many pixels contribute to each aperture measurement, since the large standard deviations at radii >15 arcsec are attributed to edge pixels with low SNR; reporting the number of fitted pixels per aperture would make this point easier to evaluate.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: the kinematic conclusion rests on measured centroid velocities and a standard J(r) definition, not on a fitted input or on a self-citation chain.

full rationale

The paper's quantitative chain is self-contained: N2H+ hyperfine spectra are fit with PySpecKit to obtain centroid velocities (Section 2.3); velocity gradients are computed numerically from these maps over apertures (Section 3.3); and specific angular momentum is formed from the standard definition J = r^2 * grad(v) (Section 3.3). The conclusion that the kinematics are 'likely not a result of core rotation' follows from comparing the observed J(r) profile with a physical expectation of conserved angular momentum (Section 4.2) and from qualitative centroid-velocity and PV-diagram inspection (Section 4.2). No parameter is fitted to the target conclusion, and no equation is defined in terms of the result; the constant-J rotation template is a physical assumption about what rotation would look like, not a definitional identity. The cited prior work, including Chen et al. (2019) and Li et al. (2014), supplies the GBT data, the measurement method, and literature context, but the no-rotation conclusion is not imported from those citations; it depends on the new ALMA+GBT measurements and the paper's own gradient calculations. A possible weakness, noted in the reader's take, is that solid-body rotation would also produce a rising J(r) because J = Omega * r^2, so the diagnostic template may be physically questionable. That is an interpretation/correctness concern, not a circular reduction: the paper does not define rotation in terms of constant J and then relabel that definition as a prediction. The central claim is therefore an observational inference with independent content, and no circular step can be exhibited from the text.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 3 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The paper's quantitative core is observational: it fits spectra and computes gradients. No hidden constants or new physical entities are introduced. The main assumptions are tracer fidelity, single-component fitting, and the J(r) rotation diagnostic. Analysis choices such as the SNR cutoff, feather scaling factor, and aperture radii enter the measurement but are disclosed.

free parameters (3)

SNR threshold for spectral fitting = 5 sigma
The authors chose the 5 sigma cutoff after seeing that 3 sigma included noisy edge pixels (Section 3.2); this determines which pixels contribute centroid velocities and thus gradients.
Single-dish scaling factor in CASA feather = 1.0
Adopted so that overlapping GBT and ALMA spatial frequencies are assumed to have equal flux (Section 2.2); this choice shapes the feathered velocity maps used in the analysis.
Aperture radii for gradient measurement = 5, 10, 15, 20, 25, and 30 arcsec
Chosen to keep apertures at least one ALMA beam wide and to avoid confusion between IRAS 7 protostars (Section 3.3); the resulting J(r) trend is the main rotation diagnostic.

assumptions (3)

domain assumption N2H+ J=1-0 hyperfine emission traces the bulk dense gas kinematics in these cores
Section 2.3 and 3.2 treat the fitted N2H+ centroid velocity as the gas velocity; this is standard in the literature but not independently verified here.
domain assumption A single velocity component is sufficient when fitting N2H+ spectra
The authors test a two-component fit only toward Per 18 and find the second component negligible; elsewhere single-component fits are assumed adequate (Section 2.3).
domain assumption Constant specific angular momentum with radius is the expected signature of rotation, so an increasing J(r) rules out rotation
Section 4.2 interprets J increasing with radius as no conserved-angular-momentum region; differential rotation or infall can also produce increasing J, which is not discussed.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Probing the Kinematics of Multiple- and Single-Protostar Systems in Perseus with N2H+." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/52KLJ66I

@misc{pith2026250413998,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Probing the Kinematics of Multiple- and Single-Protostar Systems in Perseus with N2H+},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/52KLJ66I}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2504.13998}
}

read the original abstract

We analyze the dense gas kinematics in two Class 0/I protostellar cores, Per 30 and NGC 1333 IRAS 7, in the Perseus molecular cloud to determine whether their velocity structures are indicative of rotation. We examine the hyperfine structure of the N2H+ J=1-0 transition by combining 3" (900 AU) Atacama Large Millimeter/Submillimeter Array (ALMA) measurements with 9" (2700 AU) measurements from the Green Bank Telescope (GBT). We use the CASA Feather method to combine these data in order to maximize our sensitivity across spatial scales. We fit the N2H+ spectra to constrain the centroid velocity of the gas at each pixel and use these values to calculate the linear velocity gradient and specific angular momentum within apertures centered on each protostar with radii ranging from 5-60". Our results indicate that the velocity structure probed by the N2H+ emission is likely not a result of core rotation. These findings are consistent with other studies in the literature which indicate rotation is often not evident on scales less than 1000 AU. We instead suggest that the velocity structure we see is a result of torques caused by irregular density distributions in these protostellar systems.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2504.13998 by the authors.

**Figure 1.** Integrated intensity maps of the Per 30 field from (a) ALMA-only data, (b) GBT-only data, and (c) Feather data. Black contours represent ALMA 93 GHz continuum emission at the 5, 10, and 15 σ levels (see [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_1.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 4.** Spectra from the locations of the Per 18 (a), Per 21 (b), Per 49 (c) and Per 30 protostellar systems from ALMA, GBT, and Feather data, smoothed to a common resolution of 9.′′4. fitter to fit the hyperfine components of the J = 1 − 0 transition in each of our datasets. We adopt a signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) cutoff of 5σ, where σ is the single-channel RMS of signal-free channels (see [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fi… view at source ↗

**Figure 5.** Sample N2H + J = 1 − 0 spectral fits (red curves) of the ALMA (a), GBT (b), and Feather (c) spectra (solid black curves) toward the ALMA Per 18 continuum peak. Each panel shows the best-fit values and uncertainties for excitation temperature Tex in K, the total optical depth τ (which is distributed across the 15 hyperfine components), centroid velocity v (also denoted by the dashed black lines) in km s−1 , and line… view at source ↗

Figures from the paper (7 more)

**Figure 6.** Figure 6: Fitted centroid velocity maps of Per 30 derived from spectral fits of our (a) ALMA-only, (b) GBT-only, and (c) Feather datasets. The translucent and opaque coloring denotes areas where the integrated intensity SNR ≥ 3 and SNR ≥ 5, respectively. The black solid contours…

**Figure 7.** Figure 7: Fitted centroid velocity maps of Per 18- 21 derived from spectral fits of our (a) ALMAonly, (b) GBT-only, and (c) Feather datasets. The translucent and opaque coloring denotes areas where the integrated intensity SNR ≥ 3 and SNR ≥ 5, respectively. 3 h29m16 s 14 s 12 …

**Figure 9.** Figure 9: Specific angular momentum as a function of distance from the protostar for each of our four protostars and three image types. 4.2. Testing for Signs of Rotation Using our values for ∇vlsr (Section 3.3), we calculate the specific angular momentum Jcore for each region s…

**Figure 10.** Figure 10: PV diagrams for Per 21 from ALMA (top), GBT (middle), and Feather (bottom) data. Left panels show data cube slices at v = 8.7 km s−1 . Thick white arrows correspond to the axes along which the PV diagrams are made, which are derived from the direction of ∇vlsr calcula…

**Figure 11.** Figure 11: Sample N2H + J = 1 − 0 spectral fits (red curves) of the ALMA (a), GBT (b), and Feather (c) spectra (solid black curves) toward the ALMA Per 30 continuum peak. Each panel shows the best-fit values and uncertainties for excitation temperature Tex in K, the total optica…

**Figure 12.** Figure 12: Sample N2H + J = 1 − 0 spectral fits (red curves) of the ALMA (a), GBT (b), and Feather (c) spectra (solid black curves) toward the ALMA Per 21 continuum peak. Each panel shows the best-fit values and uncertainties for excitation temperature Tex in K, the total optica…

**Figure 13.** Figure 13: Sample N2H + J = 1 − 0 spectral fits (red curves) of the ALMA (a), GBT (b), and Feather (c) spectra (solid black curves) toward the ALMA Per 49 continuum peak. Each panel shows the best-fit values and uncertainties for excitation temperature Tex in K, the total optica…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

40 extracted references · 5 canonical work pages

[1]

, " * write output.state after.block = add.period write newline

ENTRY address archivePrefix author booktitle chapter doi edition editor eprint howpublished institution journal key month number organization pages publisher school series title misctitle type volume year version url label extra.label sort.label short.list INTEGERS output.state before.all mid.sentence after.sentence after.block FUNCTION init.state.consts ...
[2]

write newline

" write newline "" before.all 'output.state := FUNCTION format.url url empty "" new.block "" url * "" * if FUNCTION format.eprint eprint empty "" archivePrefix empty "" archivePrefix "arXiv" = new.block " " eprint * " " * new.block " " eprint * " " * if if if FUNCTION format.doi doi empty "" " " doi * " " * if FUNCTION format.pid doi empty eprint empty ur...
[3]

0s QСC3<3ʪV&, X[͈# @! V @uYE - j +S O4Dy9Y z!U

thebibliography [1] 20pt to REFERENCES 6pt =0pt -12pt 10pt plus 3pt =0pt =0pt =1pt plus 1pt =0pt =0pt -12pt =13pt plus 1pt =20pt =13pt plus 1pt \@M =10000 =-1.0em =0pt =0pt 0pt =0pt =1.0em @enumiv\@empty 10000 10000 `\.\@m \@noitemerr \@latex@warning Empty `thebibliography' environment \@ifnextchar \@reference \@latexerr Missing key on reference command E...

arXiv 2021
[4]

2022, PASP, 134, 114501, 10.1088/1538-3873/ac9642

CASA Team , Bean , B., Bhatnagar , S., et al. 2022, PASP, 134, 114501, 10.1088/1538-3873/ac9642

doi:10.1088/1538-3873/ac9642 2022
[5]

J., Myers , P

Caselli , P., Benson , P. J., Myers , P. C., & Tafalla , M. 2002, ApJ, 572, 238, 10.1086/340195

doi:10.1086/340195 2002
[6]

2019, MNRAS, 490, 527, 10.1093/mnras/stz2633

Chen , C.-Y., Storm , S., Li , Z.-Y., et al. 2019, MNRAS, 490, 527, 10.1093/mnras/stz2633

doi:10.1093/mnras/stz2633 2019
[7]

2024, , 527, 10279, 10.1093/mnras/stad3868

Chen , C.-Y., Friesen , R., Li , J., et al. 2024, , 527, 10279, 10.1093/mnras/stad3868

work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stad3868 2024
[8]

C.-Y., Di Francesco , J., Pineda , J

Chen , M. C.-Y., Di Francesco , J., Pineda , J. E., Offner , S. S. R., & Friesen , R. K. 2022, ApJ, 935, 57, 10.3847/1538-4357/ac7d4a

work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac7d4a 2022

Show all 40 references

[9]

L., Evans , II, N

Enoch , M. L., Evans , II, N. J., Sargent , A. I., & Glenn , J. 2009, ApJ, 692, 973, 10.1088/0004-637X/692/2/973

2009 doi
[10]

J., Belloche , A., et al

Gaudel , M., Maury , A. J., Belloche , A., et al. 2020, A&A, 637, A92, 10.1051/0004-6361/201936364

2020 doi
[11]

2011, PySpecKit: Python Spectroscopic Toolkit , Astrophysics Source Code Library, record ascl:1109.001

Ginsburg , A., & Mirocha , J. 2011, PySpecKit: Python Spectroscopic Toolkit , Astrophysics Source Code Library, record ascl:1109.001. 1109.001

2011
[12]

2022, AJ, 163, 291, 10.3847/1538-3881/ac695a

Ginsburg , A., Sokolov , V., de Val-Borro , M., et al. 2022, AJ, 163, 291, 10.3847/1538-3881/ac695a

2022 doi
[13]

A., Benson , P

Goodman , A. A., Benson , P. J., Fuller , G. A., & Myers , P. C. 1993, ApJ, 406, 528, 10.1086/172465

1993 doi
[14]

E., Heitsch , F., et al

Hacar , A., Clark , S. E., Heitsch , F., et al. 2023, in Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series, Vol. 534, Protostars and Planets VII, ed. S. Inutsuka , Y. Aikawa , T. Muto , K. Tomida , & M. Tamura , 153, 10.48550/arXiv.2203.09562

2023 doi arXiv
[15]

2017, A&A, 606, A123, 10.1051/0004-6361/201630348

Hacar , A., Tafalla , M., & Alves , J. 2017, A&A, 606, A123, 10.1051/0004-6361/201630348

2017 doi
[16]

Hoffman , M., & Kepley , A. 2018, Correcting ALMA 12-m Array Data for Missing Short Spacings Using the Green Bank Telescope , Green Bank Telescope Memorandum 300, North American ALMA Science Center Memo 116, September 28, 2018, 17 pages

2018
[17]

G., Mardones , D., Kong , S., & Plunkett , A

Hsieh , C.-H., Arce , H. G., Mardones , D., Kong , S., & Plunkett , A. 2021, ApJ, 908, 92, 10.3847/1538-4357/abd034

2021 doi
[18]

R., Bate , M

Krumholz , M. R., Bate , M. R., Arce , H. G., et al. 2014, in Protostars and Planets VI, ed. H. Beuther , R. S. Klessen , C. P. Dullemond , & T. Henning , 243--266, 10.2458/azu_uapress_9780816531240-ch011

2014 doi
[19]

2019, ApJ, 876, 33, 10.3847/1538-4357/ab12ce

Kuznetsova , A., Hartmann , L., & Heitsch , F. 2019, ApJ, 876, 33, 10.3847/1538-4357/ab12ce

2019 doi
[20]

J., & Lada , E

Lada , C. J., & Lada , E. A. 2003, ARA&A, 41, 57, 10.1146/annurev.astro.41.011802.094844

2003 arXiv
[21]

Y., Banerjee , R., Pudritz , R

Li , Z. Y., Banerjee , R., Pudritz , R. E., et al. 2014, in Protostars and Planets VI, ed. H. Beuther , R. S. Klessen , C. P. Dullemond , & T. Henning , 173--194, 10.2458/azu_uapress_9780816531240-ch008

2014 doi
[22]

J., Belloche , A., Andr \'e , P., et al

Maury , A. J., Belloche , A., Andr \'e , P., et al. 2014, A&A, 563, L2, 10.1051/0004-6361/201323033

2014 doi
[23]

2023, ApJ, 943, 76, 10.3847/1538-4357/aca88d

Misugi , Y., Inutsuka , S.-i., & Arzoumanian , D. 2023, ApJ, 943, 76, 10.3847/1538-4357/aca88d

2023 doi
[24]

Offner , S. S. R., Clark , P. C., Hennebelle , P., et al. 2014, in Protostars and Planets VI, ed. H. Beuther , R. S. Klessen , C. P. Dullemond , & T. Henning , 53--75, 10.2458/azu_uapress_9780816531240-ch003

2014 doi
[25]

Offner , S. S. R., Moe , M., Kratter , K. M., et al. 2023, in Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series, Vol. 534, Protostars and Planets VII, ed. S. Inutsuka , Y. Aikawa , T. Muto , K. Tomida , & M. Tamura , 275, 10.48550/arXiv.2203.10066

2023 doi arXiv
[26]

N., Loinard , L., Dzib , S

Ortiz-Le \'o n , G. N., Loinard , L., Dzib , S. A., et al. 2018, ApJ, 865, 73, 10.3847/1538-4357/aada49

2018 doi
[27]

E., Zhao , B., Schmiedeke , A., et al

Pineda , J. E., Zhao , B., Schmiedeke , A., et al. 2019, ApJ, 882, 103, 10.3847/1538-4357/ab2cd1

2019 doi
[28]

E., Arzoumanian , D., Andre , P., et al

Pineda , J. E., Arzoumanian , D., Andre , P., et al. 2023, in Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series, Vol. 534, Protostars and Planets VII, ed. S. Inutsuka , Y. Aikawa , T. Muto , K. Tomida , & M. Tamura , 233, 10.48550/arXiv.2205.03935

2023 doi arXiv
[29]

K., Tobin , J

Reynolds , N. K., Tobin , J. J., Sheehan , P. D., et al. 2024, ApJ, 963, 164, 10.3847/1538-4357/ad151d

2024 doi
[30]

Sai , J. I. C., Ohashi , N., Yen , H.-W., Maury , A. J., & Maret , S. 2023, ApJ, 944, 222, 10.3847/1538-4357/acb3bd

2023 doi
[31]

M., Looney , L

Segura-Cox , D. M., Looney , L. W., Tobin , J. J., et al. 2018, ApJ, 866, 161, 10.3847/1538-4357/aaddf3

2018 doi
[32]

H., Adams , F

Shu , F. H., Adams , F. C., & Lizano , S. 1987, , 25, 23, 10.1146/annurev.aa.25.090187.000323

1987
[33]

W., Dunham , M

Stephens , I. W., Dunham , M. M., Myers , P. C., et al. 2017, ApJ, 846, 16, 10.3847/1538-4357/aa8262

2017 doi
[34]

2018, ApJS, 237, 22, 10.3847/1538-4365/aacda9

---. 2018, ApJS, 237, 22, 10.3847/1538-4365/aacda9

2018 doi
[35]

J., Bergin , E

Tobin , J. J., Bergin , E. A., Hartmann , L., et al. 2013, ApJ, 765, 18, 10.1088/0004-637X/765/1/18

2013 doi
[36]

J., Looney , L

Tobin , J. J., Looney , L. W., Li , Z.-Y., et al. 2016, ApJ, 818, 73, 10.3847/0004-637X/818/1/73

2016 doi
[37]

2018, ApJ, 867, 43, 10.3847/1538-4357/aae1f7

---. 2018, ApJ, 867, 43, 10.3847/1538-4357/aae1f7

2018 doi
[38]

F., Rosotti , G

Tychoniec , ., Manara , C. F., Rosotti , G. P., et al. 2020, A&A, 640, A19, 10.1051/0004-6361/202037851

2020 doi
[39]

van 't Hoff , M. L. R., Walsh , C., Kama , M., Facchini , S., & van Dishoeck , E. F. 2017, A&A, 599, A101, 10.1051/0004-6361/201629452

2017 doi
[40]

J., & Gaudel , M

Verliat , A., Hennebelle , P., Maury , A. J., & Gaudel , M. 2020, A&A, 635, A130, 10.1051/0004-6361/201936394

2020 doi

Pith tools

Reviewed August 16, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [1]

, " * write output.state after.block = add.period write newline

ENTRY address archivePrefix author booktitle chapter doi edition editor eprint howpublished institution journal key month number organization pages publisher school series title misctitle type volume year version url label extra.label sort.label short.list INTEGERS output.state before.all mid.sentence after.sentence after.block FUNCTION init.state.consts ...

[2] [2]

write newline

" write newline "" before.all 'output.state := FUNCTION format.url url empty "" new.block "" url * "" * if FUNCTION format.eprint eprint empty "" archivePrefix empty "" archivePrefix "arXiv" = new.block " " eprint * " " * new.block " " eprint * " " * if if if FUNCTION format.doi doi empty "" " " doi * " " * if FUNCTION format.pid doi empty eprint empty ur...

[3] [3]

0s QСC3<3ʪV&, X[͈# @! V @uYE - j +S O4Dy9Y z!U

thebibliography [1] 20pt to REFERENCES 6pt =0pt -12pt 10pt plus 3pt =0pt =0pt =1pt plus 1pt =0pt =0pt -12pt =13pt plus 1pt =20pt =13pt plus 1pt \@M =10000 =-1.0em =0pt =0pt 0pt =0pt =1.0em @enumiv\@empty 10000 10000 `\.\@m \@noitemerr \@latex@warning Empty `thebibliography' environment \@ifnextchar \@reference \@latexerr Missing key on reference command E...

arXiv 2021

[4] [4]

2022, PASP, 134, 114501, 10.1088/1538-3873/ac9642

CASA Team , Bean , B., Bhatnagar , S., et al. 2022, PASP, 134, 114501, 10.1088/1538-3873/ac9642

doi:10.1088/1538-3873/ac9642 2022

[5] [5]

J., Myers , P

Caselli , P., Benson , P. J., Myers , P. C., & Tafalla , M. 2002, ApJ, 572, 238, 10.1086/340195

doi:10.1086/340195 2002

[6] [6]

2019, MNRAS, 490, 527, 10.1093/mnras/stz2633

Chen , C.-Y., Storm , S., Li , Z.-Y., et al. 2019, MNRAS, 490, 527, 10.1093/mnras/stz2633

doi:10.1093/mnras/stz2633 2019

[7] [7]

2024, , 527, 10279, 10.1093/mnras/stad3868

Chen , C.-Y., Friesen , R., Li , J., et al. 2024, , 527, 10279, 10.1093/mnras/stad3868

work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stad3868 2024

[8] [8]

C.-Y., Di Francesco , J., Pineda , J

Chen , M. C.-Y., Di Francesco , J., Pineda , J. E., Offner , S. S. R., & Friesen , R. K. 2022, ApJ, 935, 57, 10.3847/1538-4357/ac7d4a

work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac7d4a 2022