Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 7 minor 129 references

The MUSE view of ram pressure stripped galaxies in clusters: the GASP sample

T0 review · 2 major / 7 minor · reviewed 2026-08-07 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Using VLT/MUSE integral-field spectroscopy of 76 galaxies in 39 clusters, the GASP survey confirms that 89% of galaxies selected as ram-pressure-stripping candidates from optical B-band images are genuinely affected by ram pressure.

desk verdict A useful reference census of ram-pressure-stripped cluster galaxies; the 89% confirmation rate is real but rests on subjective visual classification that the review should push to justify. read the letter →

arxiv 2505.21107 v1 pith:GRGIIV5C submitted 2025-05-27 astro-ph.GA

Bianca M. Poggianti (INAF-OaPD) , Benedetta Vulcani , Neven Tomicic , Alessia Moretti , Marco Gullieuszik , Cecilia Bacchini , Jacopo Fritz , Koshy George
show 9 more authors
Myriam Gitti Alessandro Ignesti Augusto Lassen Antonino Marasco Mario Radovich Paolo Serra Rory Smith Stephanie Tonnesen Anna Wolter
This is my paper
classification astro-ph.GA
keywords rampressurestrippingjellyfishgalaxiesgalaxyclustersintegralfieldspectroscopyMUSEH-alphaemissionevolutionGASPsurvey
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

This paper presents the complete GASP cluster sample and asks whether optical B-band images can reliably identify galaxies whose gas is being removed by ram pressure as they fall into clusters. It finds that 89% of the 64 imaging-selected candidates show extraplanar ionized gas on one side of an undisturbed stellar disk, the signature of ram pressure, and that three of four star-forming control galaxies also show weak stripping invisible in the images. The result matters because it calibrates a cheap selection method against direct gas kinematics, and because the confirmed sample spans the full range of stripping stages and galaxy and cluster masses.

What carries the argument

The operative criterion is kinematic contrast: a galaxy is undergoing ram pressure stripping if H-$\alpha$-emitting gas lies extraplanar and preferentially on one side of the disk while the stellar velocity field remains undisturbed, whereas chaotic stellar kinematics mark mergers or tidal interactions. For each galaxy, the stellar disk boundary is defined by a symmetric isophote fitted to the undisturbed side of the stellar continuum, so the fraction of H-$\alpha$ outside the disk, $f_{\rm out}^{\rm H\alpha}$, and the tail luminosity can be measured. The JType scale (0.3, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4) encodes stripping strength, and the phase-space position (projected radius versus velocity relative to the cluster dispersion) links each class to a characteristic infall stage.

What would settle it

Re-run the JType classification for the 64 candidates with a quantitative algorithm, such as measuring the one-sidedness of the H-alpha distribution relative to the fitted disk and the line-of-sight velocity offset between gas and stars, and check whether the 89% confirmation rate and the JType-to-tail-property correlations survive; if a large fraction of the mild cases flip to tidal or undisturbed under this metric, the visual criterion is not reproducible.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that a blue-light imaging selection in cluster fields is a reliable route to finding ram-pressure-stripped galaxies: 56 of 64 candidates, plus one fully stripped object, are confirmed by MUSE data, an 89% confirmation rate. The MUSE-based classification assigns each galaxy a JType from 0.3 (weakest) to 4 (fully stripped), and these classes correlate with measurable tail properties such as the fraction and luminosity of H-$\alpha$ emission outside the stellar disk. Strong and extreme stripping (jellyfish galaxies) appears across stellar masses from about $10^9$ to $10^{11.5}\,M_\odot$ and in clusters with velocity dispersions from about 500 to 1100 km/s, so a massive host cluster is not a prerequisite. Truncated H-$\alpha$ disks, with gas only in the center and little extraplanar emission, are interpreted as an advanced stage that precedes complete gas removal and the post-starburst quenching that follows.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that visual inspection of H-alpha maps and stellar velocity maps reliably distinguishes ram pressure from tidal interactions; the paper offers no quantitative or inter-rater test of that distinction, so the 89% confirmation rate and the assignment of failures to mergers rest on subjective judgment.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Optical B-band imaging in clusters can serve as a first-pass census of ram pressure stripping: roughly nine in ten candidates are genuine, and failed candidates are mostly mergers or interactions rather than random contamination.
  • Ram pressure stripping is not restricted to massive clusters or low-mass galaxies; strong and extreme stripping occurs across roughly $10^9$ to $10^{11.5}\,M_\odot$ and in clusters with velocity dispersions of 500 to 1100 km/s.
  • Weak stripping is common enough that three of four control star-forming galaxies, chosen for undisturbed B-band morphology, show detectable H-alpha asymmetry in MUSE data.
  • Truncated gas disks are a late stripping stage: their spatially resolved star formation histories show an outward-in retreat of star formation, linking them to fully stripped post-starburst galaxies.
  • The JType sequence is not necessarily an evolutionary ladder; jellyfish tails form preferentially on first infall with high radial velocity, so some galaxies may never pass through an extreme-stripping phase.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the 89% confirmation rate is corrected for the B-band selection's preference for already-formed star-forming tails, the true incidence of ram pressure among cluster galaxies may be higher than optical searches imply; an HI-selected or H-alpha-selected census could test this.
  • The [OI] ring at the edges of control and field disks suggests a common disk-halo interface process, possibly conduction or mixing with hotter gas, that may be observable in other IFU surveys and could serve as a diagnostic of stripping onset.
  • Applying the same kinematic-contrast JType scheme to integral-field samples at $z\approx0.3$ to $0.5$ would test whether the phase-space segregation of jellyfish galaxies (recent infall, radial orbits) holds at earlier epochs.
  • Cross-matching these 76 galaxies with HI and radio-continuum data should reveal a sequence where HI tails appear before H-alpha tails; if confirmed, multi-wavelength staging can replace the visual JType scale with physical stripping-time estimates.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

2 major / 7 minor

Summary. This paper presents MUSE integral-field observations for the full GASP cluster sample of 76 galaxies, comprising 64 ram-pressure stripping (RPS) candidates selected from B-band imaging and 12 control galaxies. The authors define a visual JType classification based on the morphology of extraplanar Hα emission relative to the stellar kinematics, measure extraplanar Hα fractions and luminosities, and report that 89% (57/64) of the stripping candidates are confirmed to be subject to RPS. They also report that 3 of the 4 star-forming control galaxies show signs of stripping, that truncated gas disks represent an advanced stripping stage, and that a ring of enhanced [OI]/Hα ratios is present at the edges of control and field galaxy disks. The paper discusses the incompleteness and biases of optical selection and presents the phase-space distribution of the different stripping classes.

Significance. If the confirmation rate stands, the paper provides a valuable validation of the commonly used B-band imaging selection method for finding RPS candidates, and the full GASP cluster sample is one of the largest IFU datasets of confirmed and candidate ram-pressure-stripped galaxies. The paper's strengths include the public availability of the complete atlas of maps in Appendix A, explicit S/N cuts for the measured quantities, and a candid discussion of selection biases and incompleteness. However, the headline confirmation rate is derived from a purely visual classification without inter-rater validation or quantitative thresholds, and the inclusion of JW36 in the 89% count is not consistent with the paper's own gas-based definition of RPS. These issues prevent the central statistic from being fully reproducible from the information given, though they are addressable in revision.

major comments (2)
  1. [Sec 3.1 and Table 1]
  2. [Sec 3.3, first paragraph]
minor comments (7)
  1. [Sec 6]
  2. [Table 2 header]
  3. [Sec 3.1]
  4. [Sec 3.3]
  5. [Sec 4]
  6. [Fig. 3 caption]
  7. [Abstract]

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the MUSE-based confirmation rate is an empirical classification count, not a fitted or self-referential derivation.

full rationale

The paper's central quantitative claim, that 89% (57/64) of optically selected stripping candidates show MUSE evidence of ram pressure, is an empirical tally of visual classifications rather than a quantity derived from a fitted model or from equations that presuppose the answer. The RPS criterion in Sec. 3.1 ('extraplanar ionized gas preferentially on one side of the disk while the disk stellar kinematics is undisturbed') is applied to MUSE gas and stellar kinematics and is not defined in terms of the B-band imaging selection of P16; the paper explicitly presents the JClass-JType comparison as an a posteriori check. No parameter is fit to a subset of data and then renamed a prediction, and no uniqueness theorem from the authors is invoked to force a choice. The many self-citations (P16, P17, Gullieuszik et al. 2020, Vulcani et al. 2021) supply the sample, data reduction, and earlier analyses, but they do not by themselves establish the per-galaxy classifications, which are shown as maps in the appendix. The inclusion of JW36 in the 57/64 count despite having no ionized gas slightly softens the strict criterion-based rate (56/64), and the visual classification would benefit from inter-rater or quantitative validation, but these are reproducibility and threshold-consistency concerns rather than circularity: the claimed confirmation rate is not equivalent by construction to any input quantity. No circular step can be quoted and exhibited, so the appropriate finding is no significant circularity.

Assumptions & free parameters 4 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claims are observational and do not rest on fitted constants. The main assumptions are the validity of the MUSE reduction and stellar population synthesis tools, the diagnostic interpretation of extraplanar gas as ram pressure stripping, and the applicability of phase-space infall classifications. The free parameters are hand-chosen analysis thresholds (S/N, disk isophote, tail-length definition) that affect measured tail fractions and class boundaries but not the qualitative conclusions.

free parameters (4)
  • S/N threshold for Hα tail measurements = S/N=4 (errors from S/N=3 and 5)
    Chosen to define where Hα is detected; sets f_out and L_Hα values in Fig. 3.
  • Spatial smoothing kernel = 5x5 pixels (~1 arcsec)
    Averaging before line fitting affects spatial resolution of tail maps.
  • Disk boundary isophote = 1 sigma above sky background
    Defines the stellar disk; changes the amount of emission classified as extraplanar.
  • JType=2 tail-length threshold = tail length at least equal to stellar disk diameter
    Hand-chosen boundary separating strong from extreme (jellyfish) stripping.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption Ram pressure stripping is the dominant mechanism when extraplanar ionized gas is present on one side of a galaxy with undisturbed stellar kinematics
    Invoked in Sec. 3.1 as the defining criterion for RPS; underpins all JType assignments.
  • domain assumption The sinopsis spectrophotometric code and Vazdekis stellar templates yield reliable stellar masses and star formation histories
    Used in Sec. 2 to derive masses and SFH maps used in Sec. 3.4.
  • domain assumption BPT diagrams with [NII] and [OI] correctly separate star formation, AGN, LINER, and shock ionization
    Used in Sec. 4 to identify the [OI] excess at disk edges.
  • domain assumption Phase-space regions from Rhee et al. (2017) map infall time onto projected radius and velocity
    Used in Sec. 3.3 to interpret locations of JTypes in Fig. 7.
  • domain assumption Cluster velocity dispersions from Biviano et al. (2017) and Gullieuszik et al. (2020) are accurate
    Used in Sec. 3.3 to relate stripping strength to cluster mass.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of The MUSE view of ram pressure stripped galaxies in clusters: the GASP sample." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/GRGIIV5C

@misc{pith2026250521107,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: The MUSE view of ram pressure stripped galaxies in clusters: the GASP sample},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/GRGIIV5C}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2505.21107}
}
read the original abstract

We present the full sample of 76 galaxies in 39 galaxy cluster fields at z=0.04-0.07 observed with VLT/MUSE by the GASP survey. Most of them (64) were observed as possible ram pressure stripped galaxies (stripping candidates) based on optical B-band images, while the remaining 12 were a control sample of both star-forming and passive galaxies. Based on spatially resolved ionized gas and stellar kinematics, we assess the physical origin of the gas asymmetries and find that 89% of the stripping candidates are confirmed by the VLT/MUSE data. In addition, also 3 of the 4 star-forming galaxies in the control sample show signs of ram pressure. These control galaxies display a ring of unusual emission line ratios, which we see also in field galaxies, possibly originating from the interaction with a hotter surrounding medium. The stripped galaxies are classified into various classes corresponding to different degrees of stripping, from weakest stripping to strong and extreme (jellyfish galaxies) stripping, as well as truncated gas disks with gas left only in the galaxy center. Our results show that selecting cluster stripping candidates based on optical imaging yields a sample that is indeed largely dominated by galaxies affected by ram pressure at different stages and stripping strength, though some contamination is present, mostly by tidal processes. Strong ram pressure cases are found in galaxies over the whole range of stellar masses studied (10^9-10^11.5 Msun) both in low-mass and high-mass clusters (cluster velocity dispersions sigma = 500-1100 km/s). We examine the possible connection between the progressive stages of stripping, up to the phase of a truncated gas disk, and the subsequent complete stripping of gas. We discuss the incompleteness intrinsic to this and other methods of selection to obtain a complete census of ram pressure stripping in clusters.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2505.21107 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Illustrative examples of stripped galaxies of di [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Illustrative examples of stripped galaxies of di [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Tail Hα luminosity versus fraction of Hα emission in the tail for different JTypes: 3=blue, 2=red, 1=orange, 0.5=grey. Values are computed for S/N Hα = 4 and errorbars are the range of values with cuts at S/N=3 and 5. The size of the points is proportional to the stellar mass. the stripped gas, here we judge directly the ionized gas that is detected outside of the galaxy disk, which is a direct evidence for strippin… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (7 more)
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Stellar mass distribution for galaxies of the di [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Morphological type distribution for galaxies of the di [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Stripping types distributed across the projected phase space diagram, as indicated in the legend. Overplotted are coloured [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_7.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Top: Velocity dispersion distribution of the clusters host [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_8.png]
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Example of a JType=3 (truncated galaxy): JO23. Top: Hα flux (top left), the gas kinematics (top right), the stellar kinematics (bottom left) and the color composite image (bottom right). Panels and colors are as in Fig.1. Bottom: Stellar maps of different ages, illustr…
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Illustrative example of the control sample galaxy [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_10.png]
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Diagnostic diagrams for [O III]5007/Hβ vs. [N II]6583/Hα and [OI]6300/Hα for the control sample galaxies. For each galaxy, the top panel shows the BPT line-ratio map, the bottom panel the corresponding spatially resolved BPT diagram. Lines are from Kauffmann et al. (2…

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

129 extracted references · 61 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    M., Smith, R., & Marasco, A

    Akerman, N., Tonnesen, S., Poggianti, B. M., Smith, R., & Marasco, A. 2023, ApJ, 948, 18

    2023

  2. [2]

    M., et al

    Akerman, N., Tonnesen, S., Poggianti, B. M., et al. 2024, MNRAS, 527, 9505

    2024

  3. [3]

    M., et al

    Bacchini, C., Mingozzi, M., Poggianti, B. M., et al. 2023, ApJ, 950, 24 Bahé, Y . M. & McCarthy, I. G. 2015, MNRAS, 447, 969

    2023

  4. [4]

    A., Phillips, M

    Baldwin, J. A., Phillips, M. M., & Terlevich, R. 1981, PASP, 93, 5

    1981

  5. [5]

    2022, ApJ, 936, 74

    Bartolini, C., Ignesti, A., Gitti, M., et al. 2022, ApJ, 936, 74

    2022

  6. [6]

    2016, MNRAS, 461, 3111

    Belfiore, F., Maiolino, R., Maraston, C., et al. 2016, MNRAS, 461, 3111

    2016

  7. [7]

    2022, A&A, 659, A26

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

    2022

  8. [8]

    L., Hau, G

    Bellhouse, C., Jaffé, Y . L., Hau, G. K. T., et al. 2017, ApJ, 844, 49

    2017

Show all 129 references
  1. [9]

    L., McGee, S

    Bellhouse, C., Jaffé, Y . L., McGee, S. L., et al. 2019, MNRAS, 485, 1157

    2019

  2. [10]

    L., Smith, R., et al

    Bellhouse, C., McGee, S. L., Smith, R., et al. 2021, MNRAS, 500, 1285

    2021

  3. [11]

    2022, ApJ, 937, 18

    Bellhouse, C., Poggianti, B., Moretti, A., et al. 2022, ApJ, 937, 18

    2022

  4. [12]

    2017, A&A, 607, A81

    Biviano, A., Moretti, A., Paccagnella, A., et al. 2017, A&A, 607, A81

    2017

  5. [13]

    M., Jaffé, Y ., et al

    Biviano, A., Poggianti, B. M., Jaffé, Y ., et al. 2024, ApJ, 965, 117 Article number, page 15 of 28 A&A proofs:manuscript no. aanda Bösch, B., Böhm, A., Wolf, C., et al. 2013, A&A, 549, A142

    2024

  6. [14]

    2019, A&A, 631, A114

    Boselli, A., Epinat, B., Contini, T., et al. 2019, A&A, 631, A114

    2019

  7. [15]

    2023, A&A, 675, A123

    Boselli, A., Fossati, M., Côté, P., et al. 2023, A&A, 675, A123

    2023

  8. [16]

    2018, A&A, 614, A56

    Boselli, A., Fossati, M., Ferrarese, L., et al. 2018, A&A, 614, A56

    2018

  9. [17]

    2020, A&A, 634, L1

    Boselli, A., Fossati, M., Longobardi, A., et al. 2020, A&A, 634, L1

    2020

  10. [18]

    2022, A&A, 659, A46

    Boselli, A., Fossati, M., Longobardi, A., et al. 2022, A&A, 659, A46

    2022

  11. [19]

    2021, A&A, 646, A139

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

    2021

  12. [20]

    D., Thorp, M., et al

    Brown, T., Roberts, I. D., Thorp, M., et al. 2023, ApJ, 956, 37

    2023

  13. [21]

    D., Zabel, N., et al

    Brown, T., Wilson, C. D., Zabel, N., et al. 2021, ApJS, 257, 21

    2021

  14. [22]

    A., Law, D

    Bundy, K., Bershady, M. A., Law, D. R., et al. 2015, ApJ, 798, 7

    2015

  15. [23]

    G., Ignesti, A., Gitti, M., et al

    Campitiello, M. G., Ignesti, A., Gitti, M., et al. 2021, ApJ, 911, 144

    2021

  16. [24]

    & Emsellem, E

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

    2004

  17. [25]

    M., et al

    Cava, A., Bettoni, D., Poggianti, B. M., et al. 2009, A&A, 495, 707

    2009

  18. [26]

    2003, PASP, 115, 763

    Chabrier, G. 2003, PASP, 115, 763

    2003

  19. [27]

    Collins, J. A. & Rand, R. J. 2001, ApJ, 551, 57

    2001

  20. [28]

    2017, A&A, 606, A83

    Consolandi, G., Gavazzi, G., Fossati, M., et al. 2017, A&A, 606, A83

    2017

  21. [29]

    2007, MNRAS, 376, 157

    Cortese, L., Marcillac, D., Richard, J., et al. 2007, MNRAS, 376, 157

    2007

  22. [30]

    M., Lawrence, J

    Croom, S. M., Lawrence, J. S., Bland-Hawthorn, J., et al. 2012, MNRAS, 421, 872

    2012

  23. [31]

    Deb, T., Verheijen, M. A. W., Gullieuszik, M., et al. 2020, MNRAS, 494, 5029

    2020

  24. [32]

    Deb, T., Verheijen, M. A. W., Poggianti, B. M., et al. 2022, MNRAS, 516, 2683

    2022

  25. [33]

    Deb, T., Verheijen, M. A. W., & van der Hulst, J. M. 2023, A&A, 676, A118

    2023

  26. [34]

    1980, ApJS, 42, 565

    Dressler, A. 1980, ApJS, 42, 565

    1980

  27. [35]

    M., et al

    Dressler, A., Smail, I., Poggianti, B. M., et al. 1999, ApJS, 122, 51

    1999

  28. [36]

    2021, A&A, 648, A63

    Durret, F., Chiche, S., Lobo, C., & Jauzac, M. 2021, A&A, 648, A63

    2021

  29. [37]

    2022, A&A, 662, A84

    Durret, F., Degott, L., Lobo, C., et al. 2022, A&A, 662, A84

    2022

  30. [38]

    & Kalita, B

    Ebeling, H. & Kalita, B. S. 2019, ApJ, 882, 127

    2019

  31. [39]

    2014, ApJS, 211, 21

    Ebeling, H., Ma, C.-J., & Barrett, E. 2014, ApJS, 211, 21

    2014

  32. [40]

    2006, A&A, 445, 805

    Fasano, G., Marmo, C., Varela, J., et al. 2006, A&A, 445, 805

    2006

  33. [41]

    2012, MNRAS, 420, 926

    Fasano, G., Vanzella, E., Dressler, A., et al. 2012, MNRAS, 420, 926

    2012

  34. [42]

    Fogarty, L. M. R., Bland-Hawthorn, J., Croom, S. M., et al. 2012, ApJ, 761, 169

    2012

  35. [43]

    2016, MNRAS, 455, 2028

    Fossati, M., Fumagalli, M., Boselli, A., et al. 2016, MNRAS, 455, 2028

    2016

  36. [44]

    M., et al

    Franchetto, A., Vulcani, B., Poggianti, B. M., et al. 2020, ApJ, 895, 106

    2020

  37. [45]

    2017, ApJ, 848, 132

    Fritz, J., Moretti, A., Gullieuszik, M., et al. 2017, ApJ, 848, 132

    2017

  38. [46]

    M., Cava, A., et al

    Fritz, J., Poggianti, B. M., Cava, A., et al. 2014, A&A, 566, A32

    2014

  39. [47]

    Fumagalli, M., Fossati, M., Hau, G. K. T., et al. 2014, MNRAS, 445, 4335

    2014

  40. [48]

    M., Bellhouse, C., et al

    George, K., Poggianti, B. M., Bellhouse, C., et al. 2019, MNRAS, 487, 3102

    2019

  41. [49]

    M., Gullieuszik, M., et al

    George, K., Poggianti, B. M., Gullieuszik, M., et al. 2018, MNRAS, 479, 4126

    2018

  42. [50]

    M., Omizzolo, A., et al

    George, K., Poggianti, B. M., Omizzolo, A., et al. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2409.10586

    2024 arXiv

  43. [51]

    M., Tomiˇci´c, N., et al

    George, K., Poggianti, B. M., Tomiˇci´c, N., et al. 2023, MNRAS, 519, 2426

    2023

  44. [52]

    M., Vulcani, B., et al

    George, K., Poggianti, B. M., Vulcani, B., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2505.15066

    2025 arXiv

  45. [53]

    2025, A&A, 696, A228 Göller, J., Joshi, G

    Giunchi, E., Scarlata, C., Werle, A., et al. 2025, A&A, 696, A228 Göller, J., Joshi, G. D., Rohr, E., Zinger, E., & Pillepich, A. 2023, MNRAS, 525, 3551

    2025

  46. [54]

    L., de Souza, R

    Gondhalekar, Y ., Chies-Santos, A. L., de Souza, R. S., et al. 2024, MNRAS, 532, 270

    2024

  47. [55]

    M., et al

    Gullieuszik, M., Giunchi, E., Poggianti, B. M., et al. 2023, ApJ, 945, 54

    2023

  48. [56]

    2015, A&A, 581, A41

    Gullieuszik, M., Poggianti, B., Fasano, G., et al. 2015, A&A, 581, A41

    2015

  49. [57]

    M., McGee, S

    Gullieuszik, M., Poggianti, B. M., McGee, S. L., et al. 2020, ApJ, 899, 13

    2020

  50. [58]

    M., Moretti, A., et al

    Gullieuszik, M., Poggianti, B. M., Moretti, A., et al. 2017, ApJ, 846, 27

    2017

  51. [59]

    Gunn, J. E. & Gott, III, J. R. 1972, ApJ, 176, 1

    1972

  52. [60]

    A., Seibert, M., Neill, J

    Hester, J. A., Seibert, M., Neill, J. D., et al. 2010, ApJ, 716, L14

    2010

  53. [61]

    2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2411.07034

    Ignesti, A., Brunetti, G., Gullieuszik, M., et al. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2411.07034

    2024 arXiv

  54. [62]

    M., et al

    Ignesti, A., Vulcani, B., Poggianti, B. M., et al. 2022b, ApJ, 924, 64 Jaffé, Y . L., Poggianti, B. M., Moretti, A., et al. 2018, MNRAS, 476, 4753

    2018

  55. [63]

    Kalita, B. S. & Ebeling, H. 2019, ApJ, 887, 158

    2019

  56. [64]

    2008, MN- RAS, 389, 1405

    Kapferer, W., Kronberger, T., Ferrari, C., Riser, T., & Schindler, S. 2008, MN- RAS, 389, 1405

    2008

  57. [65]

    2009, A&A, 499, 87

    Kapferer, W., Sluka, C., Schindler, S., Ferrari, C., & Ziegler, B. 2009, A&A, 499, 87

    2009

  58. [66]

    M., Tremonti, C., et al

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

    2003

  59. [67]

    J., Heisler, C

    Kewley, L. J., Heisler, C. A., Dopita, M. A., & Lumsden, S. 2001, ApJS, 132, 37

    2001

  60. [68]

    2023, ApJ, 954, 177

    Kulier, A., Poggianti, B., Tonnesen, S., et al. 2023, ApJ, 954, 177

    2023

  61. [69]

    H., et al

    Luber, N., Müller, A., van Gorkom, J. H., et al. 2022, ApJ, 927, 39

    2022

  62. [70]

    M., Fritz, J., et al

    Marasco, A., Poggianti, B. M., Fritz, J., et al. 2023, MNRAS, 525, 5359

    2023

  63. [71]

    2024, MNRAS, 532, 2016

    McClymont, W., Tacchella, S., Smith, A., et al. 2024, MNRAS, 532, 2016

    2024

  64. [72]

    2016, MNRAS, 455, 2994

    McPartland, C., Ebeling, H., Roediger, E., & Blumenthal, K. 2016, MNRAS, 455, 2994

    2016

  65. [73]

    A., et al

    Merluzzi, P., Busarello, G., Dopita, M. A., et al. 2016, MNRAS, 460, 3345

    2016

  66. [74]

    A., et al

    Merluzzi, P., Busarello, G., Dopita, M. A., et al. 2013, MNRAS, 429, 1747

    2013

  67. [75]

    C., Bothun, G

    Mihos, J. C., Bothun, G. D., & Richstone, D. O. 1993, ApJ, 418, 82

    1993

  68. [76]

    2017, A&A, 599, A81

    Moretti, A., Gullieuszik, M., Poggianti, B., et al. 2017, A&A, 599, A81

    2017

  69. [77]

    M., Fasano, G., et al

    Moretti, A., Poggianti, B. M., Fasano, G., et al. 2014, A&A, 564, A138

    2014

  70. [78]

    M., et al

    Moretti, A., Radovich, M., Poggianti, B. M., et al. 2022, ApJ, 925, 4

    2022

  71. [79]

    2023, ApJ, 955, 153 Müller, A., Poggianti, B

    Moretti, A., Serra, P., Bacchini, C., et al. 2023, ApJ, 955, 153 Müller, A., Poggianti, B. M., Pfrommer, C., et al. 2021, Nature Astronomy, 5, 159

    2023

  72. [80]

    S., Couch, W

    Owers, M. S., Couch, W. J., Nulsen, P. E. J., & Randall, S. W. 2012, ApJ, 750, L23

    2012

  73. [81]

    M., et al

    Paccagnella, A., Vulcani, B., Poggianti, B. M., et al. 2017, ApJ, 838, 148

    2017

  74. [82]

    2023, ApJ, 958, 147

    Peluso, G., Radovich, M., Moretti, A., et al. 2023, ApJ, 958, 147

    2023

  75. [83]

    M., et al

    Peluso, G., Vulcani, B., Poggianti, B. M., et al. 2022, ApJ, 927, 130

    2022

  76. [84]

    2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2504.18972

    Peluso, G., Vulcani, B., Radovich, M., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2504.18972

    2025 arXiv

  77. [85]

    2018, MNRAS, 473, 4077

    Pillepich, A., Springel, V ., Nelson, D., et al. 2018, MNRAS, 473, 4077

    2018

  78. [86]

    M., Fasano, G., Omizzolo, A., et al

    Poggianti, B. M., Fasano, G., Omizzolo, A., et al. 2016, AJ, 151, 78

    2016

  79. [87]

    M., Smail, I., Dressler, A., et al

    Poggianti, B. M., Smail, I., Dressler, A., et al. 1999, ApJ, 518, 576

    1999

  80. [88]

    L., et al

    Radovich, M., Poggianti, B., Jaffé, Y . L., et al. 2019, MNRAS, 486, 486

    2019

  81. [89]

    M., et al

    Ramatsoku, M., Serra, P., Poggianti, B. M., et al. 2020, A&A, 640, A22

    2020

  82. [90]

    M., et al

    Ramatsoku, M., Serra, P., Poggianti, B. M., et al. 2019, MNRAS, 487, 4580

    2019

  83. [91]

    Rand, R. J. 1998, ApJ, 501, 137

    1998

  84. [92]

    2017, ApJ, 843, 128

    Rhee, J., Smith, R., Choi, H., et al. 2017, ApJ, 843, 128

    2017

  85. [93]

    Roberts, I. D. & Parker, L. C. 2020, MNRAS, 495, 554

    2020

  86. [94]

    D., van Weeren, R

    Roberts, I. D., van Weeren, R. J., Lal, D. V ., et al. 2024, A&A, 683, A11

    2024

  87. [95]

    2006, MNRAS, 371, 609

    Roediger, E., Brüggen, M., & Hoeft, M. 2006, MNRAS, 371, 609

    2006

  88. [96]

    S., Ebeling, H., & Sun, M

    Roediger, E., Brüggen, M., Owers, M. S., Ebeling, H., & Sun, M. 2014, MNRAS, 443, L114

    2014

  89. [97]

    & Hensler, G

    Roediger, E. & Hensler, G. 2005, A&A, 433, 875

    2005

  90. [98]

    2023, MNRAS, 524, 3502

    Rohr, E., Pillepich, A., Nelson, D., et al. 2023, MNRAS, 524, 3502

    2023

  91. [99]

    L., Ferrari, F., Lucatelli, G., & Rodríguez Del Pino, B

    Roman-Oliveira, F., Chies-Santos, A. L., Ferrari, F., Lucatelli, G., & Rodríguez Del Pino, B. 2021, MNRAS, 500, 40

    2021

  92. [100]

    V ., Chies-Santos, A

    Roman-Oliveira, F. V ., Chies-Santos, A. L., Rodríguez del Pino, B., et al. 2019, MNRAS, 484, 892

    2019

  93. [101]

    L., Smith, R., et al

    Salinas, V ., Jaffé, Y . L., Smith, R., et al. 2024, MNRAS, 533, 341 Sánchez-García, O., Cervantes Sodi, B., Fritz, J., et al. 2023, ApJ, 945, 99

    2024

  94. [102]

    & Struck, C

    Schulz, S. & Struck, C. 2001, MNRAS, 328, 185

    2001

  95. [103]

    M., Kleiner, D., et al

    Serra, P., Maccagni, F. M., Kleiner, D., et al. 2023, A&A, 673, A146

    2023

  96. [104]

    A., Kamphuis, P., et al

    Serra, P., Oosterloo, T. A., Kamphuis, P., et al. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2407.09082

    2024 arXiv

  97. [105]

    Sharp, R. G. & Bland-Hawthorn, J. 2010, ApJ, 711, 818

    2010

  98. [106]

    D., Shull, J

    Slavin, J. D., Shull, J. M., & Begelman, M. C. 1993, ApJ, 407, 83

    1993

  99. [107]

    J., Lucey, J

    Smith, R. J., Lucey, J. R., Hammer, D., et al. 2010, MNRAS, 408, 1417

    2010

  100. [108]

    1991, ApJ, 375, 583

    Sokolowski, J., Bland-Hawthorn, J., & Cecil, G. 1991, ApJ, 375, 583

    1991

  101. [109]

    1999, Phys

    Struck, C. 1999, Phys. Rep., 321, 1

    1999

  102. [110]

    2010, ApJ, 708, 946

    Sun, M., Donahue, M., Roediger, E., et al. 2010, ApJ, 708, 946

    2010

  103. [111]

    2021, Nature Astronomy, 6, 270 Tomiˇci´c, N., Vulcani, B., Poggianti, B

    Sun, M., Ge, C., Luo, R., et al. 2021, Nature Astronomy, 6, 270 Tomiˇci´c, N., Vulcani, B., Poggianti, B. M., et al. 2021a, ApJ, 907, 22 Tomiˇci´c, N., Vulcani, B., Poggianti, B. M., et al. 2021b, ApJ, 922, 131 Tomiˇci´c, N., Werle, A., Vulcani, B., et al. 2024, ApJ, 976, 90

    2021

  104. [112]

    & Bryan, G

    Tonnesen, S. & Bryan, G. L. 2009, ApJ, 694, 789

    2009

  105. [113]

    & Bryan, G

    Tonnesen, S. & Bryan, G. L. 2012, MNRAS, 422, 1609

    2012

  106. [114]

    & Bryan, G

    Tonnesen, S. & Bryan, G. L. 2021, ApJ, 911, 68

    2021

  107. [115]

    L., & Chen, R

    Tonnesen, S., Bryan, G. L., & Chen, R. 2011, ApJ, 731, 98

    2011

  108. [116]

    2009, A&A, 497, 667

    Varela, J., D’Onofrio, M., Marmo, C., et al. 2009, A&A, 497, 667

    2009

  109. [117]

    2010, MNRAS, 404, 1639

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

    2010

  110. [118]

    M., et al

    Vulcani, B., Moretti, A., Poggianti, B. M., et al. 2017, ApJ, 850, 163

    2017

  111. [119]

    M., et al

    Vulcani, B., Moretti, A., Poggianti, B. M., et al. 2024, A&A, 682, A117

    2024

  112. [120]

    M., Aragón-Salamanca, A., et al

    Vulcani, B., Poggianti, B. M., Aragón-Salamanca, A., et al. 2011, MNRAS, 412, 246

    2011

  113. [121]

    M., Gullieuszik, M., et al

    Vulcani, B., Poggianti, B. M., Gullieuszik, M., et al. 2023, ApJ, 949, 73

    2023

  114. [122]

    M., Moretti, A., et al

    Vulcani, B., Poggianti, B. M., Moretti, A., et al. 2021, ApJ, 914, 27

    2021

  115. [123]

    M., Oemler, A., et al

    Vulcani, B., Poggianti, B. M., Oemler, A., et al. 2013, A&A, 550, A58

    2013

  116. [124]

    M., Smith, R., et al

    Vulcani, B., Poggianti, B. M., Smith, R., et al. 2022, ApJ, 927, 91

    2022

  117. [125]

    J., Vulcani, B., Werle, A., et al

    Watson, P. J., Vulcani, B., Werle, A., et al. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2409.15215

    2024 arXiv

  118. [126]

    2024, A&A, 682, A162

    Werle, A., Giunchi, E., Poggianti, B., et al. 2024, A&A, 682, A162

    2024

  119. [127]

    2022, ApJ, 930, 43

    Werle, A., Poggianti, B., Moretti, A., et al. 2022, ApJ, 930, 43

    2022

  120. [128]

    Zhu, J., Tonnesen, S., & Bryan, G. L. 2024, ApJ, 960, 54

    2024

  121. [129]

    D., Pillepich, A., Rohr, E., & Nelson, D

    Zinger, E., Joshi, G. D., Pillepich, A., Rohr, E., & Nelson, D. 2024, MNRAS, 527, 8257 Article number, page 16 of 28 Poggianti et al.: Ram pressure-stripped galaxies: the GASP sample Appendix A: All galaxies in the sample In this Appendix, we show the Hαflux, the gas kinematic...

    2024

Pith tools

Reviewed August 7, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.