Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 6 minor 72 references

Overmassive Black holes live in compact galaxies in the early Universe

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 Host galaxies of $z\sim6$ quasars with the most overmassive black holes are compact and gas-poor.

desk verdict First systematic [CII] size sample of z~6 quasars shows compact hosts, but the claim hinges on [CII] tracing the stellar distribution—worth peer review with that caveat on the table. read the letter →

arxiv 2506.14896 v2 pith:A3YLSDLG submitted 2025-06-17 astro-ph.GA astro-ph.CO

Yuxuan Wu , Tao Wang , Daizhong Liu , Qinghua Tan , Luis C. Ho , Zhiyu Zhang , Yong Shi , Ke Xu
show 4 more authors
Kotaro Kohno Ran Wang Takuma Izumi Zhaozhou Li
This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.GAastro-ph.CO
keywords high-redshiftquasars[CII]158micronemissionhostgalaxysizesovermassiveblackholescompactgalaxiesquiescentALMAevolution
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 assembles 22 quasars at $z\sim6$ with ALMA measurements of the [CII] 158-micron line and derives reliable host-galaxy sizes. It finds that these hosts have a median half-light radius of about 1.6 kpc, making them systematically more compact than typical star-forming galaxies of similar mass and redshift. The most compact hosts also contain the most overmassive black holes and the least cold gas, and their sizes already match the first massive quiescent galaxies seen at $z\sim4$–5. The authors conclude that these compact systems are late-stage galaxies whose black holes grew early and whose host growth has nearly finished, and that they are the likely progenitors of the first quiescent galaxy population.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the [CII] 158-micron half-light radius $R_{\rm e,[CII]}$ of quasar hosts, obtained by fitting a flexible single-component light profile to ALMA visibilities in the uv-plane and converting it to an effective (half-light) radius. That size is combined with the [CII] line width under a rotating thin-disk model to give a dynamical mass, from which a [CII]-luminosity-based gas mass is subtracted to estimate stellar mass. These measurements are placed in two diagnostic planes: the stellar-mass–size plane, where quasar hosts sit below normal star-forming galaxies, and the black-hole-to-stellar-mass versus effective surface-density plane, where they overlap local galaxies with the most overmassive black holes.

What would settle it

Resolve the rest-frame optical stellar light of several $z\sim6$ quasar hosts at the same angular scale as the ALMA [CII] maps: if the stellar half-light radii are found to be comparable to those of normal star-forming galaxies while the [CII] sizes remain compact, the claimed compactness of the stellar hosts is falsified.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central discovery is an observed connection between overmassive black holes and compact host galaxies at $z\sim6$. Using uniformly reduced ALMA [CII] 158$\mu$m observations and fitting a flexible single-component surface-brightness profile directly in the visibility plane, the authors measure half-light radii for 22 quasars and find $R_{\rm e}\sim1.6$ kpc, below the mass–size relation of typical star-forming galaxies at the same redshifts. Stellar masses are obtained by subtracting [CII]-based gas masses from dynamical masses, and the resulting black-hole-to-stellar-mass ratios are high, with the most compact, gas-poor hosts carrying the most massive black holes. The paper interprets these systems as being at the end of their rapid growth, with compactness comparable to $z\sim4$–5 quiescent galaxies, making them plausible direct progenitors of those galaxies.

Load-bearing premise

The central claim assumes that [CII] 158-micron emission traces the host galaxy's interstellar medium in quasars in the same way it does in normal star-forming galaxies, with negligible AGN heating, so that the compact size measured in [CII] is a property of the stellar host rather than an artifact of the active nucleus.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The host galaxies of $z\sim6$ quasars are systematically more compact than normal star-forming galaxies of the same mass and redshift, with a median half-light radius of about 1.6 kpc.
  • Among quasar hosts, the most compact galaxies have the most overmassive black holes and the lowest cold-gas fractions.
  • If current black-hole and star-formation growth rates continue for one gas-depletion timescale, these overmassive systems will move toward the local black-hole-to-stellar-mass relation, not further away from it.
  • The compact, gas-poor quasar hosts match the sizes of the first massive quiescent galaxies at $z\sim4$–5 and are strong candidates for their progenitors.
  • Compact quasar hosts at $z\sim6$ occupy the same region of the overmassive-black-hole compactness plane as local compact galaxies hosting overmassive black holes, suggesting a delayed evolutionary link.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the compactness reflects a deep gravitational potential funneling gas inward, the JWST-discovered Little Red Dots—compact AGN at $z\sim4$–8—may be lower-mass versions of the same phenomenon; a direct test is measuring their host sizes and gas fractions at comparable resolution.
  • A direct observational test would be to resolve rest-frame optical stellar light in several $z\sim6$ quasar hosts: if the stellar distribution is as compact as the [CII] gas, the structural claim is confirmed, but if it is extended, the compactness is not a property of the stars.
  • The paper's evolutionary scheme predicts that the most compact, gas-poor quasar hosts should have older stellar populations and higher stellar surface densities than the extended, gas-rich ones; spectroscopy of a larger sample could check this ordering.
  • Whether these systems become today's compact overmassive relics or normal ellipticals depends on the merger history; counting ultra-compact massive galaxies at intermediate redshifts would constrain which path dominates.
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 compiles archival ALMA [CII] 158 um observations of z~5.5-8 quasars, uniformly reduces them in CASA, and measures host sizes by fitting Spergel profiles to visibilities in GILDAS. From 22 sources with reliable size measurements, it reports that quasar hosts are systematically more compact (median R_e ~1.6 kpc) than z~4-6 [CII]-selected star-forming galaxies, that the most compact hosts tend to host overmassive BHs and have low cold-gas content, and that these systems are plausible progenitors of the first massive quiescent galaxies at z~4-5. Stellar masses are derived as M_dyn - M_gas assuming a thin rotating disk with negligible dark matter, with M_gas obtained from a [CII]-luminosity calibration.

Significance. If the compactness result survives a direct validation of the [CII]-vs-stellar size mapping, the paper would be an important contribution: it connects the overmassive BH population at z~6 to a specific host-galaxy property, offers an evolutionary path to z~4-5 quiescent galaxies and local compact overmassive BH hosts, and provides concrete targets for formation models. The strengths are the uniform ALMA reduction, uv-plane Spergel/visibility fitting, careful rejection of mergers and substructures, and several robustness tests (relaxed S/N threshold, exponential profile, empirical M_dyn). The main caveat is that the paper does not validate [CII] sizes against stellar sizes, and some mass-surface-density comparisons mix dynamical and stellar definitions; these issues are load-bearing for the title-level claims.

major comments (4)
  1. [Abstract / Methods 6.2, 6.3, 7.4] The central claim that quasar 'host galaxies' are compact rests on R_e measured from [CII] emission (Methods 6.2), but the paper does not establish that [CII] traces the stellar distribution. The statement in the Introduction that the FIR-mm continuum is powered mainly by star formation concerns the continuum, not the [CII] line; AGN can alter the [CII] spatial distribution through X-ray-dominated regions, outflows, or dust-bounded photodissociation regions. Since M* is derived from Eq. (1) using R_e,[CII], a biased [CII] size propagates into the compactness offset and the overmassive ratios, and the low f_cool trend in compact hosts could likewise be a [CII]-excitation artifact. Methods 7.4 tests only the L_bol distributions between subsamples. Please add a cross-check against JWST stellar sizes for overlapping sources (e.g., Ding et al. 2023, 2025) or a quantitative estimate of the expected [CII]-to-stellar size offset, and adjust the title/abstract wording if such a test is not possible.
  2. [Methods 2.3 / Figures 2 (right), 3 (right)] The comparison of compactness between z~6 quasars and local galaxies / z~4-5 quiescent galaxies uses different mass definitions: for quasars, Sigma_eff = M_dyn/(pi R_e^2), whereas the local sample uses stellar masses from M*/L_K and the quiescent galaxies use stellar masses and stellar sizes. Because M_dyn includes gas and possibly dark matter, the quasar points are not directly comparable to the stellar-only points. Methods 8 acknowledges this ('despite not tracing stars currently'), but the figures and abstract present the comparison as direct. Please compute stellar mass surface densities for the quasar sample using M* = M_dyn - M_gas, or rescale the comparison and quantify the systematic offset.
  3. [Results / Figure 2 (left)] The main claim that quasar hosts are systematically more compact than SFGs is supported by median R_e values (1.58 vs 2.26 kpc) and by the statement that nearly all quasars fall below the 1-sigma region of the M*-R_e relation, but the paper provides no statistical test for the difference (e.g., a bootstrap or KS test on residuals from the M*-R_e relation, or a test that accounts for the upper-limit M* values). With only 22 vs 21 sources, a quantitative significance statement is needed to support the central claim.
  4. [Methods 6.4, 6.5, 7.1-7.3] The stellar masses depend on the [CII]-to-M_gas calibration of Salvestrini et al. (2025) and on the assumption of negligible dark matter in Eq. (1). Methods 7.1-7.3 vary the sample selection, the fitting profile, and the V_circ normalization, but they do not vary the gas-mass calibration or the dark-matter fraction. The authors should quantify how much the M_BH-M* and M*-R_e conclusions shift for plausible changes in these two inputs, especially for the sources with M* set to upper limits in Methods 6.5.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Extended Data Table 1] Some entries in Extended Data Table 1 are unphysical as printed, e.g., J0055+0146 has log M_dyn = 19.46 +/- 86.25 and J239-07 has 16.01 +/- 13.34; please correct or explain these values.
  2. [Main text / Methods 7] The text says the compactness conclusion 'holds independently of the methods of size fitting and M* estimation,' but the tests change the profile and M_dyn normalization, not the M_gas calibration or the [CII]-to-stellar mapping; please revise the wording.
  3. [Methods 3.3] The aperture radius for spectrum extraction is described as 'manually chosen'; please specify the selection criteria and test the sensitivity of the measured line FWHM and flux to this choice.
  4. [References] The reference list contains duplicate numbers in the sentence 'Ref 2,4,38-48,48,49,49-51,51,52'; please clean up the citation list.
  5. [Figures 1-3 captions] The figure captions should state how many sources have M* upper limits and how these are treated in the median values and in the plotted relations.
  6. [Discussion / Introduction] The paper would benefit from a brief discussion of the known offset between [CII] sizes and rest-frame UV/optical stellar sizes in high-z SFGs, since that offset is directly relevant to interpreting the median R_e values as host-galaxy sizes.

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged · score 6.0 of 10

The [CII]-size comparison with SFGs is independent, but the headline overmassive-vs-compact correlation is partly built into the M*=Mdyn−Mgas estimator, since Mdyn is proportional to Re.

  1. self definitional [Methods 6.3 (Eq. 1), Methods 6.5; Results, Figure 2 right]
    "Here we assume a widely adopted rotating thin disk model M_dyn=1.16×10^5(0.75FWHM[CII]/sin i)^2 D, (1) where D is the diameter set to 2 R_e,[CII] ... We primarily estimate the M* by subtracting M_gas from M_dyn ... Motivated by this connection between the overmassive BHs and the compactness of their host galaxies, we directly explore the relation between the mass surface density (Sigma_eff = M_dyn/pi R^2_e,[CII]) and Gamma for these high-z quasar hosts."

    Because M* is defined as M_dyn - M_gas and Eq. (1) sets M_dyn proportional to R_e (D=2R_e), Gamma = M_BH/M* is a decreasing function of R_e for fixed FWHM and M_gas. Sigma_eff = M_dyn/(pi R_e^2) is also a decreasing function of R_e. Thus the plotted Gamma-Sigma_eff trend is partly guaranteed by the estimator definitions: a smaller R_e simultaneously raises Gamma and lowers M*, producing an apparent 'overmassive BHs live in compact galaxies' correlation even if M_BH, FWHM, and M_gas are uncorrelated with size. The paper interprets this built-in scaling as evidence for an intimate BH-compactness connection; only the independent size comparison with SFGs and the M_BH/M* trends of the compact low-gas subgroup escape this construction.

full rationale

The primary compactness claim is self-contained: it compares [CII] half-light radii of uniformly reduced ALMA quasars with ALPINE/CRISTAL [CII] sizes of SFGs, using the same tracer and similar fitting methods, and it survives the paper's robustness tests (S/N threshold, exponential vs Spergel profile, empirical Mdyn). That result does not reduce to a fit or to a self-citation. However, the second headline claim, that overmassive BHs preferentially live in compact hosts, is partly definitional. The paper computes M* = Mdyn - Mgas, with Mdyn proportional to Re through Eq. (1) because D=2Re. Consequently Gamma = MBH/M* and Sigma_eff = Mdyn/(pi Re^2) are both deterministic functions of the same measured Re, so the plotted Gamma-Sigma_eff relation has a component that is forced by construction rather than discovered from independent stellar masses. The local-galaxy comparison and the compact low-gas subgroup's high MBH provide some independent content, and the self-citations (Tan et al. 2024; Wang et al. 2024) are methodological or interpretive rather than load-bearing. Overall, the size finding is independent, but the central overmassive-compact connection is partially circular, giving a moderate circularity burden.

Assumptions & free parameters 6 free parameters · 8 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central results rest on a chain of external calibrations and model choices: a rotating thin-disk dynamical mass model, negligible dark matter within the effective radius, a [CII]-to-gas mass scaling from z>7 quasars, and adopted dust and Eddington-ratio assumptions. None are derived in this paper, so the quantitative Gamma values and evolutionary projections inherit their uncertainties.

free parameters (6)
  • Spergel index nu = per-source, stabilized then fixed in [-1, 0.5]
    Half-light radii are measured by fitting a Spergel profile; the index is tuned and then fixed to stabilize the fit, so the size measurement depends on this profile choice.
  • Dynamical mass virial factor = 1.16e5 and FWHM factor 0.75
    Adopted rotating thin-disk model (Eq. 1) directly sets Mdyn, hence Mstar and the overmassive ratio.
  • Gas mass scaling relation coefficients = slope 0.75, intercept 2.87 (from Ref 13)
    Mstar = Mdyn - Mgas, and Mgas is derived from L_CII with this external calibration; an error in this relation propagates to Mstar and Gamma.
  • Dust temperature and emissivity index = T_dust = 47 K, beta = 1.6
    Used to convert continuum flux to L_TIR and SFR; affects DeltaSFR_MS and the quenching-phase argument.
  • Eddington ratio for 7 quasars = 1.0
    For 7 sources without direct Mg II BH masses, MBH is assumed from L_bol at Eddington ratio 1; affects the Gamma comparison.
  • Radiative efficiency eta = 0.1
    Converts L_bol to BH growth rate in the predicted evolutionary tracks.
assumptions (8)
  • domain assumption The rotating thin disk model (Eq. 1) correctly estimates the circular velocity and dynamical mass from [CII] line width and size.
    Mdyn is used to derive Mstar; non-ordered rotation or thick disks would bias Mdyn.
  • domain assumption Dark matter is negligible within the effective radius, so Mstar = Mdyn - Mgas.
    If dark matter contributes, Mstar is overestimated, changing Gamma.
  • domain assumption The [CII]-to-gas-mass calibration of Ref 13 applies to z~6 quasar hosts.
    Mgas is derived from L_CII using this external relation fitted to z>7 quasars.
  • domain assumption Cold dust emission is powered entirely by star formation with no significant AGN contribution to L_IR.
    Affects SFR and gas fraction interpretation; authors test for L_bol differences between subgroups.
  • domain assumption The main-sequence SFR relation (Eq. 3) is valid at z~6 for quasar hosts.
    DeltaSFR_MS is computed from this adopted relation, which is used in the quenching-phase argument.
  • domain assumption Local galaxies with direct MBH measurements from Ref 31 have reliable Mstar via the M/L_K relation for compactness comparison.
    The z~0 comparison rests on the adopted mass-to-light calibration and K-band effective radii.
  • domain assumption The Spergel-to-Sersic conversion (Eq. 4 of Ref 12) accurately recovers true effective radii.
    All quasar sizes are converted from Spergel to Sersic effective radii using this external function.
  • domain assumption ALPINE and CRISTAL SFG sizes measured with Sersic n=1 profiles are directly comparable to quasar sizes measured with free Spergel index.
    The paper tests fixing nu=0.5 (exponential) for the quasars, partially addressing this assumption.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Overmassive Black holes live in compact galaxies in the early Universe." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/A3YLSDLG

@misc{pith2026250614896,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Overmassive Black holes live in compact galaxies in the early Universe},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/A3YLSDLG}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2506.14896}
}
abstract

A significant population of quasars have been found to exist within the first Gyr of cosmic time. Most of them have high black hole (BH) masses ($M_{\rm BH} \sim 10^{8-10} M_{\odot}$) with an elevated BH-to-stellar mass ratio compared to typical local galaxies, posing challenges to our understanding of the formation of supermassive BHs and their coevolution with host galaxies. Here, based on size measurements of [CII] 158$\mu$m emission for a statistical sample of $z \sim 6$ quasars, we find that their host galaxies are systematically more compact (with half-light radius $R_{\rm e} \sim 1.6$ kpc) than typical star-forming galaxies at the same redshifts. Specifically, the sizes of the most compact quasar hosts, which also tend to contain less cold gas than their more extended counterparts, are comparable to that of massive quiescent galaxies at $z \sim 4-5$. These findings reveal an intimate connection between the formation of massive BHs and compactness of their host galaxies in the early universe. These compact quasar hosts are promising progenitors of the first population of quiescent galaxies.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2506.14896 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. The 𝑀BH-𝑀★ distribution of the quasar sample (22 sources). The circles are our quasars with reliable size measurements and 𝑀BH. The dashed grey line represents 𝑀BH/𝑀★ = 0.01, and the dotted grey line represents 𝑀BH/𝑀★ = 0.001. For some sources with grey arrows, their 𝑀★ are upper limits (𝑀dyn/2, assuming that their gas masses are at least half of the 𝑀dyn). 6 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Comparison between high-z quasar host galaxies and normal galaxies in terms of galaxy compactness. Left: Comparison between high-z quasars and SFGs in the 𝑅e-𝑀★ plane. Right: Comparison between high-z quasars and local galaxies in the 𝑀BH/𝑀★-Σeff plane. The circles are our quasars, the open brown crosses are the non-merger SFGs at 𝑧 ∼ 4 − 6 from ALPINE survey 14, 15, and the purple stars are the local sample selecte… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Evolution in BH-to-galaxy mass ratio and SFR of quasar hosts. Left: Evolution path of each quasar host in the 𝑀BH-𝑀★ plane. The circles color-coded by 𝐿[CII]/𝑀dyn are our quasar sample, and the open grey dots are the local sample selected from literature 31. The arrows are the predicted evolution paths, of which blue ones represent galaxy-dominated growth, while light brown ones represent BH-dominated growth. The da… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (1 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Schematic diagram of evolution scenario for overmassive quasar host galaxies. The yellow dashed line represents Γ ∼ 0.001, while the purple dashed line corresponds to Γ ∼ 0.01. Blue ellipses denote star-forming galaxies, and red ellipses represent quiescent galaxies. W…

Review history (2 revisions) →

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

72 extracted references · 68 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Cosmology:We adopt a Kroupa IMF 36 to estimate star formation rates, and aΛCDM cosmology with𝐻 0 = 70 km s−1 Mpc−1,Ω 𝑀 = 0.3, andΩΛ = 0.7 throughout this paper

    work page

  2. [2]

    Sample selection: 2.1 The quasar sampleWe assemble an initial sample of 97 quasars at 5.5<𝑧<8 from archival ALMA [CII] observations and reduce them uniformly (Methods 3). After excluding 11 sources lacking [CII] line detections, 2 sources without direct BH mass or bolometric luminosity measure- ments, and 6 sources with resolved close companions within 2....

    work page 2012

  3. [3]

    Reduction of ALMA data for the quasar sampleFor projects in ALMA Cycles higher than 0, we restore the calibrated visibilities through running the default scripts in their corresponding versions of CASA (from 4.2.0 to 6.1.1) and split each target out. Then for each target, main procedures of data reduction and the details of each step are listed as follows...

    work page

  4. [4]

    Then channels with beam size variations<0.01” are grouped into subsets

    Aperture flux measurement: 4.1 [CII] line flux: Considering the possibly various beam sizes across line channels introduced by different projects for some targets, we first convert flux densities in each channel map of 11 the line cube from Jy beam−1 to Jy pixel−1 through dividing by the beam area in pixels. Then channels with beam size variations<0.01” a...

    work page

  5. [5]

    5.2Spergel fitting in GILDAS:Note that the deconvolved size provided by theimfitis the FWHM of the major axis of a 2D Gaussian profile

    Size measurement: 5.12D-Gaussian fitting in CASA:We quickly measure the deconvolved size of the [C II] emission by fitting a 2D Gaussian to the source in its [CII] line map using the CASA task imfit. 5.2Spergel fitting in GILDAS:Note that the deconvolved size provided by theimfitis the FWHM of the major axis of a 2D Gaussian profile. However, the general ...

    work page

  6. [6]

    Caveats of the assumptions used during the derivation are briefly illustrated within each sub-section

    Derivation of basic properties:We collect BH mass measurements and absolute magnitude 𝑀1450 of our quasar host galaxies from Ref 2, 4, 38–48, 48, 49, 49–51, 51, 52. Caveats of the assumptions used during the derivation are briefly illustrated within each sub-section. See Methods 7 for a more comprehensive and detailed discussion regarding their potential ...

    work page

  7. [7]

    7.1 Expanding the primary sample with a less strict requirement on S/N𝐹[CII] : The quasar sample, though clean, is limited in size due to our strict S/N𝐹[CII] threshold

    Robustness of our main conclusions to variations in primary sample selection, size mea- surement methods and uncertainties in𝑀 dyn and SFR:We discuss the effects of relaxing our sample selection criteria (S/N𝐹[CII] threshold), changing the size fitting profile, and uncertainties in 𝑀dyn ane SFR estimations on our main conclusions. 7.1 Expanding the primar...

    work page

  8. [8]

    Connection between some local compact quiescent galaxies hosting overmassive BHs and these high-z overmassive BH hosts:Over the past decade, several local galaxies such as NGC 1277, NGC 4486B, NGC 1332 and NGC 1271 have been found to host overmassive BHs (𝑀BH/𝑀bulge >5%, while the expected one is 0.3% 7), posing a question on how to explain the formation ...

    work page 2018

Show all 72 references
  1. [9]

    Fan, X.et al.A Survey of z>5.7 Quasars in the Sloan Digital Sky Survey. IV. Discovery of Seven Additional Quasars.The Astronomical Journal131, 1203–1209 (2006)

    2006

  2. [10]

    Wang, R.et al.Star Formation and Gas Kinematics of Quasar Host Galaxies at z∼6: New Insights from ALMA.The Astrophysical Journal773, 44 (2013)

    2013

  3. [11]

    Jiang, L.et al.The Final SDSS High-redshift Quasar Sample of 52 Quasars at z>5.7.The Astrophysical Journal833, 222 (2016)

    2016

  4. [12]

    Decarli, R.et al.An ALMA [C II] Survey of 27 Quasars at z>5.94.The Astrophysical Journal 854, 97 (2018)

    2018

  5. [13]

    P.et al.Kiloparsec-scale ALMA Imaging of [C II] and Dust Continuum Emission of 27 Quasar Host Galaxies at z∼6.The Astrophysical Journal904, 130 (2020)

    Venemans, B. P.et al.Kiloparsec-scale ALMA Imaging of [C II] and Dust Continuum Emission of 27 Quasar Host Galaxies at z∼6.The Astrophysical Journal904, 130 (2020). 24

    2020

  6. [14]

    Reines, A. E. & Volonteri, M. Relations between Central Black Hole Mass and Total Galaxy Stellar Mass in the Local Universe.The Astrophysical Journal813, 82 (2015)

    2015

  7. [15]

    Kormendy, J. & Ho, L. C. Coevolution (Or Not) of Supermassive Black Holes and Host Galaxies.Annual Review of Astronomy and Astrophysics51, 511–653 (2013)

    2013

  8. [16]

    Ding, X.et al.Detection of stellar light from quasar host galaxies at redshifts above 6.Nature 621, 51–55 (2023)

    2023

  9. [17]

    Ding, X.et al.SHELLQs-JWST Unveils the Host Galaxies of Twelve Quasars at𝑧>6.arXiv e-printsarXiv:2505.03876 (2025)

    2025

  10. [18]

    Leipski, C.et al.Spectral Energy Distributions of QSOs at z>5: Common Active Galactic Nucleus-heated Dust and Occasionally Strong Star-formation.The Astrophysical Journal785, 154 (2014)

    2014

  11. [19]

    L.et al.The wide-field infrared survey explorer (wise): mission description and initial on-orbit performance.The Astronomical Journal140, 1868 (2010)

    Wright, E. L.et al.The wide-field infrared survey explorer (wise): mission description and initial on-orbit performance.The Astronomical Journal140, 1868 (2010)

    2010

  12. [20]

    Tan, Q.-H.et al.Fitting pseudo-S ´ersic (Spergel) light profiles to galaxies in interferometric data: The excellence of the u𝜐-plane.Astronomy and Astrophysics684, A23 (2024)

    2024

  13. [21]

    Salvestrini, F.et al.Molecular gas and dust properties in z>7 quasar hosts.Astronomy and Astrophysics695, A23 (2025)

    2025

  14. [22]

    Fujimoto, S.et al.The ALPINE-ALMA [C II] Survey: Size of Individual Star-forming Galaxies at z = 4-6 and Their Extended Halo Structure.The Astrophysical Journal900, 1 (2020)

    2020

  15. [23]

    L.et al.The ALPINE-ALMA [C II] Survey: Multiwavelength Ancillary Data and Basic Physical Measurements.The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series247, 61 (2020)

    Faisst, A. L.et al.The ALPINE-ALMA [C II] Survey: Multiwavelength Ancillary Data and Basic Physical Measurements.The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series247, 61 (2020)

    2020

  16. [24]

    Ikeda, R.et al.The ALMA-CRISTAL Survey: Spatial extent of [CII] line emission in star- forming galaxies at z = 4-6.Astronomy and Astrophysics693, A237 (2025)

    2025

  17. [25]

    Zhuang, M.-Y. & Ho, L. C. Evolutionary paths of active galactic nuclei and their host galaxies. Nature Astronomy7, 1376–1389 (2023)

    2023

  18. [26]

    Xie, L.et al.The First Quenched Galaxies: When and How?The Astrophysical Journal Letters966, L2 (2024). 25

    2024

  19. [27]

    C.et al.A massive quiescent galaxy at redshift 4.658.Nature619, 716–719 (2023)

    Carnall, A. C.et al.A massive quiescent galaxy at redshift 4.658.Nature619, 716–719 (2023)

    2023

  20. [28]

    Ito, K.et al.Size–Stellar Mass Relation and Morphology of Quiescent Galaxies at z≥3 in Public JWST Fields.The Astrophysical Journal964, 192 (2024)

    2024

  21. [29]

    de Graaff, A.et al.Efficient formation of a massive quiescent galaxy at redshift 4.9.Nature Astronomy9, 280–292 (2025)

    2025

  22. [30]

    URLhttp://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41586-024-07821-2

    Wang, T.et al.Black holes regulate cool gas accretion in massive galaxies.Nature(2024). URLhttp://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41586-024-07821-2

    2024 doi

  23. [31]

    Onoue, M.et al.A Post-Starburst Pathway to Forming Massive Galaxies and Their Black Holes at z>6.arXiv e-printsarXiv:2409.07113 (2024)

    2024 arXiv

  24. [32]

    & Caradonna, M

    Di, Y., Li, Y., Yuan, F., Shi, F. & Caradonna, M. Black hole feeding and feedback in a compact galaxy.Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society(2023)

    2023

  25. [33]

    F., Wellons, S., Angl ´es-Alc´azar, D., Faucher-Gigu `ere, C.-A

    Hopkins, P. F., Wellons, S., Angl ´es-Alc´azar, D., Faucher-Gigu `ere, C.-A. & Grudi ´c, M. Y. Why do black holes trace bulges (& central surface densities), instead of galaxies as a whole? Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society510, 630–638 (2022)

    2022

  26. [34]

    Dekel, A.et al.Growth of massive black holes in FFB galaxies at cosmic dawn.Astronomy and Astrophysics695, A97 (2025)

    2025

  27. [35]

    Baggen, J. F. W.et al.Sizes and Mass Profiles of Candidate Massive Galaxies Discovered by JWST at 7<z<9: Evidence for Very Early Formation of the Central 100 pc of Present-day Ellipticals.The Astrophysical Journal Letters955, L12 (2023)

    2023

  28. [36]

    J.et al.JWST UNCOVER: Extremely Red and Compact Object at z 𝑝ℎ𝑜𝑡 ≈7.6 Triply Imaged by A2744.The Astrophysical Journal952, 142 (2023)

    Furtak, L. J.et al.JWST UNCOVER: Extremely Red and Compact Object at z 𝑝ℎ𝑜𝑡 ≈7.6 Triply Imaged by A2744.The Astrophysical Journal952, 142 (2023)

    2023

  29. [37]

    C., Li, R

    Chen, C.-H., Ho, L. C., Li, R. & Zhuang, M.-Y. The Host Galaxy (If Any) of the Little Red Dots.The Astrophysical Journal983, 60 (2025)

    2025

  30. [38]

    P., Romanowsky, A

    Mart ´ın-Navarro, I., Brodie, J. P., Romanowsky, A. J., Ruiz-Lara, T. & van de Ven, G. Black- hole-regulated star formation in massive galaxies.Nature553, 307–309 (2018)

    2018

  31. [39]

    van den Bosch, R. C. E. Unification of the fundamental plane and Super Massive Black Hole Masses.The Astrophysical Journal831, 134 (2016). 26

    2016

  32. [40]

    C., Birnboim, Y., Mandelker, N

    Dekel, A., Sarkar, K. C., Birnboim, Y., Mandelker, N. & Li, Z. Efficient formation of massive galaxies at cosmic dawn by feedback-free starbursts.Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society523, 3201–3218 (2023)

    2023

  33. [41]

    Y.et al.When feedback fails: the scaling and saturation of star formation efficiency

    Grudi ´c, M. Y.et al.When feedback fails: the scaling and saturation of star formation efficiency. Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society475, 3511–3528 (2018)

    2018

  34. [42]

    Tanaka, M.et al.A Protocluster of Massive Quiescent Galaxies at z = 4.The Astrophysical Journal970, 59 (2024)

    2024

  35. [43]

    Setton, D. J.et al.UNCOVER NIRSpec/PRISM Spectroscopy Unveils Evidence of Early Core Formation in a Massive, Centrally Dusty Quiescent Galaxy at𝑧 𝑠𝑝𝑒𝑐 =3.97.arXiv e-prints arXiv:2402.05664 (2024)

    2024 arXiv

  36. [44]

    On the variation of the initial mass function.Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society322, 231–246 (2001)

    Kroupa, P. On the variation of the initial mass function.Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society322, 231–246 (2001)

    2001

  37. [45]

    J.et al.The GOODS-N Jansky VLA 10 GHz Pilot Survey: Sizes of Star-forming 𝜇JY Radio Sources.The Astrophysical Journal839, 35 (2017)

    Murphy, E. J.et al.The GOODS-N Jansky VLA 10 GHz Pilot Survey: Sizes of Star-forming 𝜇JY Radio Sources.The Astrophysical Journal839, 35 (2017)

    2017

  38. [46]

    J., Omont, A

    Willott, C. J., Omont, A. & Bergeron, J. Redshift 6.4 Host Galaxies of 10 8 Solar Mass Black Holes: Low Star Formation Rate and Dynamical Mass.The Astrophysical Journal770, 13 (2013)

    2013

  39. [47]

    De Rosa, G.et al.Black Hole Mass Estimates and Emission-line Properties of a Sample of Redshift z>>6.5 Quasars.The Astrophysical Journal790, 145 (2014)

    2014

  40. [48]

    J., Bergeron, J

    Willott, C. J., Bergeron, J. & Omont, A. Star Formation Rate and Dynamical Mass of 108 Solar Mass Black Hole Host Galaxies At Redshift 6.The Astrophysical Journal801, 123 (2015)

    2015

  41. [49]

    Wu, X.-B.et al.An ultraluminous quasar with a twelve-billion-solar-mass black hole at redshift 6.30.Nature518, 512–515 (2015)

    2015

  42. [50]

    J., Bergeron, J

    Willott, C. J., Bergeron, J. & Omont, A. A Wide Dispersion in Star Formation Rate and Dynamical Mass of 108 Solar Mass Black Hole Host Galaxies at Redshift 6.The Astrophysical Journal850, 108 (2017)

    2017

  43. [51]

    Izumi, T.et al.Subaru High-z Exploration of Low-Luminosity Quasars (SHELLQs). III. Star formation properties of the host galaxies at z≳6 studied with ALMA.Publications of the Astronomical Society of Japan70, 36 (2018). 27

    2018

  44. [52]

    Izumi, T.et al.Subaru High-z Exploration of Low-Luminosity Quasars (SHELLQs). VIII. A less biased view of the early co-evolution of black holes and host galaxies.Publications of the Astronomical Society of Japan71, 111 (2019)

    2019

  45. [53]

    L.et al.Three new VHS-DES quasars at 6.7<z<6.9 and emission line properties at z>6.5.Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society487, 1874–1885 (2019)

    Reed, S. L.et al.Three new VHS-DES quasars at 6.7<z<6.9 and emission line properties at z>6.5.Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society487, 1874–1885 (2019)

    2019

  46. [54]

    Shen, Y.et al.Gemini GNIRS Near-infrared Spectroscopy of 50 Quasars at z≳5.7.The Astrophysical Journal873, 35 (2019)

    2019

  47. [55]

    T.et al.Probing the Nature of High-redshift Weak Emission Line Quasars: A Young Quasar with a Starburst Host Galaxy.The Astrophysical Journal903, 34 (2020)

    Andika, I. T.et al.Probing the Nature of High-redshift Weak Emission Line Quasars: A Young Quasar with a Starburst Host Galaxy.The Astrophysical Journal903, 34 (2020)

    2020

  48. [56]

    Eilers, A.-C.et al.Detecting and Characterizing Young Quasars. I. Systemic Redshifts and Proximity Zone Measurements.The Astrophysical Journal900, 37 (2020)

    2020

  49. [57]

    Izumi, T.et al.Subaru High-z Exploration of Low-luminosity Quasars (SHELLQs). XII. Extended [C II] Structure (Merger or Outflow) in a z = 6.72 Red Quasar.The Astrophysical Journal908, 235 (2021)

    2021

  50. [58]

    Neeleman, M.et al.The Kinematics of z≳6 Quasar Host Galaxies.The Astrophysical Journal 911, 141 (2021)

    2021

  51. [59]

    Izumi, T.et al.Subaru High-z Exploration of Low-luminosity Quasars (SHELLQs). XIII. Large-scale Feedback and Star Formation in a Low-luminosity Quasar at z = 7.07 on the Local Black Hole to Host Mass Relation.The Astrophysical Journal914, 36 (2021)

    2021

  52. [60]

    Yang, J.et al.Probing Early Supermassive Black Hole Growth and Quasar Evolution with Near-infrared Spectroscopy of 37 Reionization-era Quasars at 6.3<z≤7.64.The Astrophysical Journal923, 262 (2021)

    2021

  53. [61]

    P.et al.Dust Emission in an Accretion-rate-limited Sample of z≳6 Quasars

    Venemans, B. P.et al.Dust Emission in an Accretion-rate-limited Sample of z≳6 Quasars. The Astrophysical Journal866, 159 (2018)

    2018

  54. [62]

    P.et al.400 pc Imaging of a Massive Quasar Host Galaxy at a Redshift of 6.6

    Venemans, B. P.et al.400 pc Imaging of a Massive Quasar Host Galaxy at a Redshift of 6.6. The Astrophysical Journal Letters874, L30 (2019)

    2019

  55. [63]

    J.et al.Calibrating Extinction-free Star Formation Rate Diagnostics with 33 GHz Free-free Emission in NGC 6946.The Astrophysical Journal737, 67 (2011)

    Murphy, E. J.et al.Calibrating Extinction-free Star Formation Rate Diagnostics with 33 GHz Free-free Emission in NGC 6946.The Astrophysical Journal737, 67 (2011). 28

    2011

  56. [64]

    P.et al.Bright [C II] and Dust Emission in Three z>6.6 Quasar Host Galaxies Observed by ALMA.The Astrophysical Journal816, 37 (2016)

    Venemans, B. P.et al.Bright [C II] and Dust Emission in Three z>6.6 Quasar Host Galaxies Observed by ALMA.The Astrophysical Journal816, 37 (2016)

    2016

  57. [65]

    Decarli, R.et al.Molecular gas in z∼6 quasar host galaxies.Astronomy and Astrophysics 662, A60 (2022)

    2022

  58. [66]

    Kaasinen, M.et al.The cold molecular gas in z≳6 quasar host galaxies.Astronomy and Astrophysics684, A33 (2024)

    2024

  59. [67]

    E., Strauss, M

    Shen, Y., Greene, J. E., Strauss, M. A., Richards, G. T. & Schneider, D. P. Biases in Virial Black Hole Masses: An SDSS Perspective.The Astrophysical Journal680, 169–190 (2008)

    2008

  60. [68]

    Tan, Q.-H.et al.In-Situ Spheroid Formation in Distant Submillimeter-Bright Galaxies.Nature arXiv:2407.16578 (2024)

    2024 arXiv

  61. [69]

    Yue, M.et al.ALMA Observations of the Sub-kpc Structure of the Host Galaxy of a z = 6.5 Lensed Quasar: A Rotationally Supported Hyper-Starburst System at the Epoch of Reionization.The Astrophysical Journal917, 99 (2021)

    2021

  62. [70]

    Shangguan, J., Ho, L. C. & Xie, Y. On the Gas Content and Efficiency of AGN Feedback in Low-redshift Quasars.The Astrophysical Journal854, 158 (2018)

    2018

  63. [71]

    C.et al.A supermassive black hole in an ultra-compact dwarf galaxy.Nature513, 398–400 (2014)

    Seth, A. C.et al.A supermassive black hole in an ultra-compact dwarf galaxy.Nature513, 398–400 (2014)

    2014

  64. [72]

    & van den Bosch, R

    Ferr ´e-Mateu, A., Mezcua, M., Trujillo, I., Balcells, M. & van den Bosch, R. C. E. Massive Relic Galaxies Challenge the Co-evolution of Super-massive Black Holes and Their Host Galaxies. The Astrophysical Journal808, 79 (2015). 29 AcknowledgementsThis work was supported by Na...

    2015

Pith tools

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