Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 6 minor 42 references

FAST Reveals the Extended HI Halo and Accretion Signatures of NGC2683

T0 review · 4 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-15 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Using high-sensitivity FAST observations, this paper claims that the edge-on galaxy NGC 2683 has a neutral hydrogen halo four times taller than earlier VLA maps did, holding about 300 million solar masses of gas.

desk verdict Genuinely new FAST data reveal a much more extended HI distribution around NGC 2683, but the halo mass and the 'halo not flare' conclusion outrun the quantitative evidence. read the letter →

arxiv 2505.03158 v1 pith:IWHZXVMF submitted 2025-05-06 astro-ph.GA

Qian Jiao , Ming Zhu , Bernd Vollmer , Mei Ai , Haiyang Yu , Qinghua Tan , Cheng Cheng , Yang Gao This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.GA
keywords galaxyaccretioninteractionsinterstellarmediumneutralhydrogencloudsHIhaloedge-ongalaxiesdwarfhigh-velocity
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 claims that the edge-on spiral galaxy NGC 2683 is surrounded by a thick neutral hydrogen halo that earlier interferometric observations missed. Using high-sensitivity mapping with FAST, it detects HI emission extending about four times farther from the galactic plane than the VLA saw, corresponding to a halo of roughly $3\times 10^8$ solar masses, about 13% of the galaxy's atomic hydrogen. The vertical distribution cannot be explained by a flaring gas disk alone, so the authors add a halo component to the existing disk/flare model and find that it matches the FAST data. They interpret the halo as evidence of ongoing external gas accretion from dwarf companions such as KK 69 and infalling high-velocity clouds, rather than star-formation-driven galactic fountains. If correct, this would mean that single-dish HI surveys recover substantial extraplanar gas that interferometers systematically undercount.

What carries the argument

The central comparison is between FAST total-power data and VLA interferometric data reprocessed, tapered, and smoothed to a matched $3.1'$ beam. Because FAST measures total power, it retains the short-spacing information that the VLA misses, and its $5\sigma$ column-density sensitivity of $3.7\times10^{18}\,\mathrm{cm^{-2}}$ is roughly four times deeper than the reprocessed VLA limit. The model machinery is the earlier tilted thin-disk, flare, warp, and outer-ring model, augmented by an empirical vertical halo profile $\rho_{\rm halo}=\chi\rho_{\rm disk}\,\sinh(z/z_0)/\cosh^2(z/z_0)$, with scale heights fitted as a power law in radius from the VLA data and $\chi=0.1$ set by matching the model flux to FAST. The decisive evidence is the set of residual channel maps and vertical flux profiles: the flare-only model cannot fill the vertical extent that FAST sees, while the flare-plus-halo model leaves residuals of order $0.5\times10^{19}\,\mathrm{cm^{-2}}$.

What would settle it

Reprocess the FAST maps with an independent stray-radiation and baseline correction, or re-observe with an interferometric array that has complete short-spacing coverage, and check whether the vertical excess at column densities near $3\times10^{19}\,\mathrm{cm^{-2}}$ persists. If the excess vanishes or is traced to sidelobes or Galactic HI confusion, the halo claim would collapse; if the short-spacing-complete map recovers the full $112.1\,\mathrm{Jy\,km\,s^{-1}}$ flux with only a flaring disk, no halo would be needed.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper claims that NGC 2683 hosts an extended neutral hydrogen halo that earlier VLA observations did not reveal. FAST detects HI emission out to about 18.7 arcminutes perpendicular to the disk, roughly four times the vertical extent of the reprocessed VLA map, at a total flux $F_{\rm HI}=112.1\,\mathrm{Jy\,km\,s^{-1}}$, corresponding to $M_{\rm HI}=2.32\times10^9\,M_\odot$. Reproducing the FAST channel maps requires adding a halo component with the empirical vertical profile $\rho_{\rm halo}\propto \rho_{\rm disk}\,\sinh(z/z_0)/\cosh^2(z/z_0)$ to a flaring disk model; the flare-only model leaves large systematic residuals. The inferred halo mass is $3\times10^8\,M_\odot$, about 13% of the total HI mass, and the authors conclude that external gas accretion from dwarf companions and high-velocity clouds, rather than a galactic fountain, is the likely origin of this halo.

Load-bearing premise

The vertical excess seen by FAST consists of real, diffuse neutral hydrogen attached to NGC 2683, not artifacts of single-dish calibration, baseline subtraction, stray radiation, or Galactic HI confusion.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The total HI mass of NGC 2683 is about 10% larger than the earlier VLA-based estimate, so interferometric surveys can miss a substantial diffuse component.
  • A flaring disk alone cannot reproduce the vertical extent; realistic models of this galaxy must include an extraplanar HI halo.
  • The proximity and velocity structure of dw3? relative to the HI tail of KK 69 indicate that a dwarf companion is currently donating gas to NGC 2683.
  • Complex B appears to be in the process of being accreted, making infalling high-velocity clouds a plausible continuing supply for the halo.
  • Roughly 13% of the galaxy's atomic hydrogen resides outside the thin disk, pointing to external gas accretion rather than star formation as the mechanism building the reservoir.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Editorial inference: if the same FAST-versus-VLA comparison were applied to other edge-on galaxies, some previous interpretations of vertical HI extent as purely flaring disks might need revisiting, because missing short spacings could hide similar halos.
  • Editorial inference: the HI tail connecting KK 69 to dw3? may be a directly observable cold-accretion stream; mapping it at higher angular resolution and measuring its kinematics could put the accretion rate onto NGC 2683 on a quantitative footing.
  • Editorial inference: a straightforward testable extension is to apply the same mask-and-compare halo-mass estimate to a small sample of isolated edge-on spirals, to see whether a roughly 10-15% halo fraction is generic or specific to this interacting group.
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.

Referee Report

4 major / 6 minor

Summary. The paper presents FAST 19-beam HI observations of the edge-on galaxy NGC 2683 and its surroundings. Compared with the VLA data of Vollmer et al. (2016), the FAST maps reach about four times larger vertical extent and a slightly higher total flux (112.1 Jy km/s, M_HI = 2.32e9 Msun). The authors also report the detection of the dwarf galaxies KK69, dw1, and dw3?, and three compact high-velocity complexes A, B, and C. Interpreting the diffuse vertical excess as an HI halo, they add a halo component to the Vollmer et al. flare model, with normalization chi = 0.1 tuned to the FAST data, and claim the halo model matches the FAST data better than the pure flare model. The derived halo mass is about 3e8 Msun, roughly 13% of the total HI mass, which they attribute to external gas accretion from the dwarf companions and HVCs.

Significance. If the extended faint HI distribution around NGC 2683 is real, the paper provides a rare single-dish detection of a candidate neutral gas halo in an edge-on spiral, with a mass fraction comparable to HALOGAS extraplanar gas fractions. The detection of the dwarf galaxy dw3? and the HI tail of KK69, along with the three velocity complexes, adds useful information on gas accretion in a low-mass group. The paper also demonstrates the sensitivity of FAST for faint extended HI emission, which is a constructive result. The direct reprocessing of the VLA data to a matched beam is a step in the right direction. However, as explained in the major comments, the central 'halo not flare' conclusion and the quoted halo mass rest on model normalization, subtraction, and masking choices that are not yet quantitatively tested.

major comments (4)
  1. [Sec. 4.2, Figs. 8, 10, 11] The comparison between the V-model-flare and V-model+halo is not a fair test of the presence of a halo. The halo model is normalized to the FAST data via the parameter chi, which is explicitly 'derived from the comparison of the flux obtained from the model with the FAST observations' (chi = 0.1), whereas the V-model-flare is the original Vollmer et al. model not renormalized to FAST. A model fitted to the data is naturally expected to yield smaller residuals. To support the 'halo not flare' claim, the authors should either fix chi a priori (e.g., from the expected halo mass fraction or from fitting the halo model simultaneously to both VLA and FAST data) or present a comparison where both models are normalized in the same way.
  2. [Sec. 3, Fig. 3] The central evidence for the extended halo is the FAST minus VLA excess map, but the paper provides no quantitative uncertainty analysis or null tests for this subtraction. The few negative regions are dismissed as 'likely attributable to pointing uncertainties' without a quantitative estimate of the magnitude of the pointing offset (the pointing accuracy is ~12 arcsec against a 2.9' beam) or of the effect of baseline subtraction and stray radiation. Single-dish baseline errors and residual negative bowls from the VLA's missing short spacings can produce broad, faint positive residuals at the level of ~3e19 cm-2 claimed here. The authors should quantify these systematic effects, e.g., by jackknifing the data, by comparing two independent halves of the FAST observations, or by injecting and recovering a model disk into the FAST data to show that the excess is not an artifact.
  3. [Sec. 4.2, halo mass and scale-height fit] The halo mass of 3e8 Msun is derived by masking the FAST data with a model cube built from the VLA-based disk+flare model, using an arbitrary threshold of twice the rms noise. This mass therefore inherits the model's vertical structure; if the flare law is even slightly misestimated, the mask will misclassify disk or flare emission as halo, or vice versa. In addition, the scale-height power law used in the halo model is fitted to VLA data (Figure 9) that, by the authors' own statement, do not show the extended halo, creating a circularity: the halo's vertical structure is derived from the same data that supposedly lack the halo. The paper gives no error bars, no variation of the threshold, and no test of the sensitivity of the derived mass to the assumed disk/flare subtraction. A direct measurement of the halo column density and a proper propagation of uncertainties are needed.
  4. [Sec. 3, Fig. 2 and vertical extent statement] The claim that FAST detects HI about four times farther than the VLA in the vertical direction is not an apples-to-apples comparison. The two data sets have very different sensitivities: the reprocessed VLA has 5-sigma column-density sensitivity of 1.4e19 cm-2, while FAST reaches 3.7e18 cm-2. A more sensitive observation will naturally detect more extended faint emission. The paper should either match the sensitivity and then compare the extent, or model what vertical extent the VLA would have detected if the same extended HI distribution were present. Without this, the factor-of-four extent is not a robust property of the galaxy.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Sec. 1] "We not only detected the H i distribution of three dwarf galaxies" is ungrammatical; it should read "We not only detected the H i distribution of three dwarf galaxies, but also discovered three HI complexes."
  2. [Sec. 2] The sentence "The antenna temperature was convert to flux density" is a typo, should be "was converted".
  3. [Sec. 2, Table 1] The 5-sigma column-density sensitivity for NGC 2683 is listed as 3.7e18 cm-2, while in Sec. 3 it is also quoted as 5-sigma = 3.7e18 cm-2; please ensure the factor-5 convention is consistent throughout the text and table.
  4. [Fig. 4 caption] The contour list in the caption of Figure 4 is long and appears to include values not visible in the panel; consider trimming the description or referencing the velocity ranges in the text.
  5. [Sec. 4.2] The symbol 'chi' should be defined as a dimensionless normalization factor in the text before Eq. (1). Also, 'we adopted chi = 0.1' would benefit from an explicit statement of the range of chi that gives a reasonable fit, if explored.
  6. [Sec. 5] In conclusion (2), 'We also determined the mass of the three complex clouds by assuming them as the HVCs' is awkward; 'by assuming them to be HVCs' would be clearer.

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged · score 3.0 of 10

One fitted normalization enters the model-consistency argument, but the halo mass is a separate masked measurement; no full circularity.

  1. fitted input called prediction [Section 4.2, 'H i halo' (Eq. 8 discussion and Figure 10)]
    "The parameter χ is derived from the comparison of the flux obtained from the model with the FAST observations, for which we adopted χ = 0.1. ... The column density of the excess H i is predominantly distributed around∼ 0.5× 1019 cm−2, indicating that the V-model+halo model is generally consistent with the FAST observations."

    The halo component is normalized by fitting χ to the FAST flux level, and the same fitted model is then subtracted from the FAST data to produce the residual map whose smallness is quoted as evidence that the halo model is consistent. The overall flux-level agreement is therefore enforced by construction rather than predicted. The circularity is partial: the spatial profiles, channel-map extents, and the separate masked measurement of the 3e8 Msun halo mass are not set by the single fitted normalization χ, so the central halo claim retains independent content.

full rationale

The paper's central observation is an independent comparison between FAST and reprocessed VLA data: FAST sees more vertically extended HI, and the excess column densities cluster around 3e19 cm^-2. The halo is then modeled by adding a component from Eq. 8 of Vollmer et al. (2016), with scale heights derived from VLA data and a normalization χ adopted from a comparison with FAST fluxes. This is a transparent model fit rather than a hidden prediction. The reported halo mass of 3e8 Msun (about 13% of total HI) is not obtained from the fitted χ; it is derived by applying a mask built from the disk+flare model cube to the FAST data, following the external HALOGAS methodology of Marasco et al. (2019). Thus the mass is a direct masked measurement of the residual emission, not a quantity forced by the fitted normalization. There is some reliance on the self-cited Vollmer et al. (2016) flare model as the baseline, but the flare model is compared directly against FAST channel maps, providing an independent check. The main weakness is statistical rather than circular: the FAST-VLA excess map lacks quantitative null tests for baseline errors, stray radiation, pointing offsets, and missing short spacings. That concern belongs to correctness risk, not to a derivation that reduces to its own inputs.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central new quantity is the HI halo mass, estimated at 3x10^8 solar masses. Its derivation depends on two fitted ingredients: the halo normalization chi, adopted directly from a comparison with the FAST data, and the scale-height power law, fitted to VLA data. The mask threshold for separating disk and halo is an arbitrary analysis choice. No new physical entities are postulated; the HI halo and the high-velocity clouds are interpretations of detected emission.

free parameters (3)
  • Halo density normalization chi = 0.1
    Adopted to make the model flux match the FAST observations (Section 4.2: 'The parameter chi is derived from the comparison of the flux obtained from the model with the FAST observations, for which we adopted chi = 0.1'). The derived halo mass scales with this choice.
  • Halo scale-height power-law parameters = not stated numerically (fit shown in Figure 9)
    The vertical scale height as a function of radius is fitted to VLA data after subtracting the flare model; the power-law coefficients are not tabulated but the fitted curve is used to construct the halo model.
  • EPG mask threshold = 2 times the FAST rms noise
    The separation of disk and halo in the mass estimate uses a mask threshold of twice the rms noise, following Marasco et al. (2019). The resulting halo mass depends on this arbitrary threshold.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption FAST flux calibration and the 16 K/Jy gain conversion are accurate.
    All flux and mass measurements, including the total HI flux and the halo mass, depend on the absolute calibration described in Section 2; this is not independently verified in the paper.
  • domain assumption The reprocessed, uv-tapered VLA data faithfully represents the compact disk component, so the FAST-VLA difference is diffuse extended emission.
    The excess map in Figure 3 is interpreted as a diffuse HI component around the galaxy, with negative residuals attributed to pointing offsets; if the VLA data are not on the same flux scale, the halo inference is weakened.
  • domain assumption Equation 8 from Vollmer et al. (2016) is an appropriate empirical vertical density law for NGC 2683's halo.
    The halo model uses an empirical function calibrated for NGC 891 and the HALOGAS sample (Section 4.2); whether it applies to NGC 2683 is assumed, not tested independently.
  • domain assumption The flare model from Vollmer et al. (2016) is a correct starting description of the disk outside the halo.
    The halo mass and the conclusion that the flare alone cannot explain FAST data rely on the V-model-flare being an accurate representation of the disk and flare components.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of FAST Reveals the Extended HI Halo and Accretion Signatures of NGC2683." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/IWHZXVMF

@misc{pith2026250503158,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: FAST Reveals the Extended HI Halo and Accretion Signatures of NGC2683},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/IWHZXVMF}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2505.03158}
}
abstract

We present the results of our recent HI observations conducted on the edge-on galaxy NGC2683 using the Five-hundred-meter Aperture Spherical radio Telescope (FAST). In comparison to previous observations made by the VLA, FAST has detected a more extensive distribution of HI. Particularly noteworthy is that the detections made by FAST extend approximately four times farther than those of the VLA in the vertical direction from the galactic plane. The total HI flux measured for NGC2683 amounts to $F_{\rm HI} = 112.1\,\rm{Jy\,km\,s^{-1}}$ (equivalent to a total HI mass of $M_{\rm HI} = 2.32 \times 10^9\,{\rm M_\odot}$), which is slightly higher than that detected by VLA. FAST has also identified three dwarf galaxies in close proximity to NGC2683, namely KK69, NGC2683dw1 (hereafter dw1), and NGC2683dw3$?$ (hereafter dw3$?$). dw3$?$ is situated within the extended HI distribution of NGC2683 in projection and lies near the tail of KK69 extending towards NGC2683. These observations suggest that dw3$?$ is likely a result of the accretion process from NGC2683 to KK69. Furthermore, FAST has detected three high-velocity clouds (HVCs), with complex B potentially undergoing accretion with NGC2683. Based on the model from Vollmer et al. 2016 and incorporating the HI halo component, we found that the model with the added HI halo aligns more closely with our FAST observations in NGC2683. The estimated mass of this HI halo is $3 \times 10^8\,{\rm M_\odot}$, constituting approximately 13% of the total HI mass of the galaxy. We suggest that the origination of this HI halo is more likely attributed to external gas accretion.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2505.03158 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. The H i flux-density contours in red and blue colors, overlaid on the DECaLs optical image of the NGC 2683 galaxy group. The red contours represent the FAST data integrated over the velocity range of 170 − 650 km s−1 for the NGC 2683 galaxy, and the contour levels are (1, 3, 10, 15, 30, 60, 120, 180, 230) ×5σ (5σ corresponds to 0.1 Jy/beam km s−1 ). The blue contours represent integrated FAST data of satellite galax… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. H i flux-density contours overlaid on the DECaLs optical image for the NGC 2683 galaxy and dw1 in the left panel, and for KK69 and dw3? in the right panel. The red and blue contours correspond to the same contours as shown in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. The left panels and the top two panels on the right respectively illustrate the flux profiles perpendicular to the galactic plane at different distances from the galactic center along the major axis. R in each panel denotes the distance from the center, with positive offsets directed towards the north-east. In this context, the steel-blue lines represent the FAST observations, while the dark-orange lines correspond … view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (9 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: The velocity field derived from the H i data cube, specifically the first moment map, is depicted using a color scale for the galaxy NGC 2683 (left panel), as well as its satellites dw1 (middle panel), KK 69 and dw3? (right panel). The velocity contours are displayed a…
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: The H i channel map of the NGC 2683 group obtained from the FAST observations. Each channel corresponds to a velocity range of 17 km s−1 . The contour levels are set at 1, 2, 5, 15, 30, and 50 times the 5σ level, where σ represents the noise level of 0.5 mJy/beam for e…
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: We present five PV plots obtained along different directions. The top left panel corresponds to the same image as [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: The integrated H i spectra of complexes A, B, and C, obtained from the FAST observations, are presented in the left, middle, and right panels, respectively. The red curves overlaid on the spectra represent the results of Gaussian fitting. is exceptionally thin (e.g., ∼…
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: The panels in the first column represent the channel maps from FAST, while the second column displays the channel maps of reprocessed VLA data. The third column illustrates the channel maps derived from the foundational model proposed by Vollmer et al. (2016), which in…
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Gas distribution in the region of the halo. Scale height of the gaseous halo z (circles) with a power-law fit (solid red line) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_9.png]
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: The left panels and the top two panels on the right respectively illustrate the flux profiles perpendicular to the galactic plane at different distances from the galactic center along the major axis. R in each panel denotes the distance from the center, with positive …
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Similar to [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_11.png]
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: The H i PV diagram from FAST observations is presented in the first column, alongside the H i PV diagrams obtained using the V-model+halo while considering different velocity lags (the second to fourth columns correspond to lags of 0, 3 km/s, and 6 km/s, respectively)…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

42 extracted references · 33 canonical work pages

  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]

    P2B92E@c CB `֟G

    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...

    2021

  4. [4]

    A., Giovanelli, R., & Haynes, M

    Adams, E. A., Giovanelli, R., & Haynes, M. P. 2013, The Astrophysical Journal, 768, 77

    work page 2013

  5. [5]

    2015, Analyst, 140, 250

    Baek, S.-J., Park, A., Ahn, Y.-J., & Choo, J. 2015, Analyst, 140, 250

    2015

  6. [6]

    1975, Astronomy and Astrophysics, vol

    Barbon, R., & Capaccioli, M. 1975, Astronomy and Astrophysics, vol. 42, no. 2, Aug. 1975, p. 221-228. Research supported by the Consiglio Nazionale delle Ricerche., 42, 221

    work page 1975

  7. [7]

    N., Karachentsev, I., Sharina, M., & Kaisin, S

    Begum, A., Chengalur, J. N., Karachentsev, I., Sharina, M., & Kaisin, S. 2008, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 386, 1667

    work page 2008

  8. [8]

    1994, Astronomy and Astrophysics Suppl., Vol

    Broeils, A., & Van Woerden, H. 1994, Astronomy and Astrophysics Suppl., Vol. 107, p. 129-176 (1994), 107, 129

    work page 1994

Show all 42 references
  1. [9]

    G., Greene, J

    Carlsten, S. G., Greene, J. E., Beaton, R. L., Danieli, S., & Greco, J. P. 2022, The Astrophysical Journal, 933, 47

    2022

  2. [10]

    1991, Astronomical Journal (ISSN 0004-6256), vol

    Casertano, S., & Van Gorkom, J. 1991, Astronomical Journal (ISSN 0004-6256), vol. 101, April 1991, p. 1231-1241. Research supported by ZWO and Rijksuniversiteit Groningen., 101, 1231

    1991

  3. [11]

    2023, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 521, 4009

    Crosby, E., Jerjen, H., M \"u ller, O., et al. 2023, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 521, 4009

    2023

  4. [12]

    K., Zagursky, M

    de Naray, R. K., Zagursky, M. J., & McGaugh, S. S. 2009, The Astronomical Journal, 138, 1082

    2009

  5. [13]

    J., Lang, D., et al

    Dey, A., Schlegel, D. J., Lang, D., et al. 2019, The Astronomical Journal, 157, 168

    2019

  6. [14]

    M., & Lockman, F

    Dickey, J. M., & Lockman, F. J. 1990, IN: Annual review of astronomy and astrophysics. Vol. 28 (A91-28201 10-90). Palo Alto, CA, Annual Reviews, Inc., 1990, p. 215-261., 28, 215

    1990

  7. [15]

    2006, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 366, 449

    Fraternali, F., & Binney, J. 2006, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 366, 449

    2006

  8. [16]

    2002, The Astronomical Journal, 123, 3124

    Fraternali, F., van Moorsel, G., Sancisi, R., & Oosterloo, T. 2002, The Astronomical Journal, 123, 3124

    2002

  9. [17]

    G., Corsini, E., Cappellari, M., et al

    Funes, J. G., Corsini, E., Cappellari, M., et al. 2002, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 388, 50

    2002

  10. [18]

    2013, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 554, A125

    Gentile, G., J \'o zsa, G., Serra, P., et al. 2013, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 554, A125

    2013

  11. [19]

    1985, Astronomical Journal (ISSN 0004-6256), vol

    Harris, H., Hesser, J., Bothun, G., Hanes, D., & Harris, W. 1985, Astronomical Journal (ISSN 0004-6256), vol. 90, Dec. 1985, p. 2495-2498., 90, 2495

    1985

  12. [20]

    P., Hogg, D

    Haynes, M. P., Hogg, D. E., Maddalena, R. J., Roberts, M. S., & van Zee, L. 1998, The Astronomical Journal, 115, 62

    1998

  13. [21]

    2003, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 401, 483

    Huchtmeier, W., Karachentsev, I., & Karachentseva, V. 2003, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 401, 483

    2003

  14. [22]

    2016, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 588, A89

    Javanmardi, B., Martinez-Delgado, D., Kroupa, P., et al. 2016, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 588, A89

    2016

  15. [23]

    2019, Science China Physics, Mechanics & Astronomy, 62, 1

    Jiang, P., Yue, Y., Gan, H., et al. 2019, Science China Physics, Mechanics & Astronomy, 62, 1

    2019

  16. [24]

    2020, Research in Astronomy and Astrophysics, 20, 064

    Jiang, P., Tang, N.-Y., Hou, L.-G., et al. 2020, Research in Astronomy and Astrophysics, 20, 064

    2020

  17. [25]

    2024, arXiv preprint arXiv:2401.17364

    Jing, Y., Wang, J., Xu, C., et al. 2024, arXiv preprint arXiv:2401.17364

    2024 arXiv

  18. [26]

    M., & Kerp, J

    Kalberla, P. M., & Kerp, J. 2009, Annual review of astronomy and Astrophysics, 47, 27

    2009

  19. [27]

    2015 a , Astrophysical Bulletin, 70, 379

    Karachentsev, I., Riepe, P., Zilch, T., et al. 2015 a , Astrophysical Bulletin, 70, 379

    2015

  20. [28]

    D., Tully, R

    Karachentsev, I. D., Tully, R. B., Makarova, L. N., Makarov, D. I., & Rizzi, L. 2015 b , The Astrophysical Journal, 805, 144

    2015

  21. [29]

    1998, Astronomy and Astrophysics Supplement Series, 127, 409

    Karachentseva, V., & Karachentsev, I. 1998, Astronomy and Astrophysics Supplement Series, 127, 409

    1998

  22. [30]

    2019, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 631, A50

    Marasco, A., Fraternali, F., Heald, G., et al. 2019, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 631, A50

    2019

  23. [31]

    2011, International Journal of Modern Physics D, 20, 989

    Nan, R., Li, D., Jin, C., et al. 2011, International Journal of Modern Physics D, 20, 989

    2011

  24. [32]

    2007, The Astronomical Journal, 134, 1019

    Oosterloo, T., Fraternali, F., & Sancisi, R. 2007, The Astronomical Journal, 134, 1019

    2007

  25. [33]

    N., Forbes, D

    Proctor, R. N., Forbes, D. A., Brodie, J. P., & Strader, J. 2008, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 385, 1709

    2008

  26. [34]

    2012, Annual Review of Astronomy and Astrophysics, 50, 491

    Putman, M., Peek, J., & Joung, M. 2012, Annual Review of Astronomy and Astrophysics, 50, 491

    2012

  27. [35]

    2008, The Astronomy and Astrophysics Review, 15, 189

    Sancisi, R., Fraternali, F., Oosterloo, T., & Van Der Hulst, T. 2008, The Astronomy and Astrophysics Review, 15, 189

    2008

  28. [36]

    S., Patra, N

    Saponara, J., Koribalski, B. S., Patra, N. N., & Benaglia, P. 2020, Astrophysics and Space Science, 365, 1

    2020

  29. [37]

    2016, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 586, A98

    Vollmer, B., Nehlig, F., & Ibata, R. 2016, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 586, A98

    2016

  30. [38]

    1997, Annual Review of Astronomy and Astrophysics, 35, 217

    Wakker, B., & van Woerden, H. 1997, Annual Review of Astronomy and Astrophysics, 35, 217

    1997

  31. [39]

    2015, The Astronomical Journal, 150, 81

    Wiegert, T., Irwin, J., Miskolczi, A., et al. 2015, The Astronomical Journal, 150, 81

    2015

  32. [40]

    2021, The Astrophysical Journal, 922, 53

    Xu, J.-L., Zhang, C.-P., Yu, N., et al. 2021, The Astrophysical Journal, 922, 53

    2021

  33. [41]

    2023, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 521, 2719

    Yu, H., Zhu, M., Xu, J.-L., et al. 2023, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 521, 2719

    2023

  34. [42]

    2022, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 513, 1329

    Zheng, Y., Wang, J., Irwin, J., et al. 2022, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 513, 1329

    2022

Pith tools

Reviewed August 15, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.