pith. machine review for the scientific record. sign in

arxiv: 2604.09347 · v1 · submitted 2026-04-10 · 🌌 astro-ph.GA

Recognition: unknown

A first [CII] view of high-z quiescent galaxies

Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-10 17:11 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.GA
keywords quiescent galaxieshigh-redshift galaxies[CII] emissionALMAmergersdust heatingmolecular gaspost-starburst
0
0 comments X

The pith

High-redshift quiescent galaxies show merger signatures and dust heating beyond what stars can provide.

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

This paper presents ALMA observations of the [CII] 158 micron line and dust continuum in five massive quiescent galaxies at redshifts 2 to 4.7. The data reveal a wide spread in molecular gas content, dust temperatures reaching 40-50 K in some cases, and infrared luminosities too high to be powered by stellar radiation alone. Disturbed stellar, dust, and gas morphologies point to ongoing interactions. A sympathetic reader would care because the results suggest that even apparently dead galaxies at early times remain dynamically active through mergers that stir their gas.

Core claim

We present ALMA detections (or stringent upper limits) of the [CII] 158 μm emission line and underlying dust continuum from five massive quenched galaxies (QGs) at 2<z<4.7. We find extreme variations in the molecular gas fractions (f_g=M_mol/M_star), spanning 0.1%-25%, if a standard α_[CII] applies. Dust continuum measurements, coupled with JWST/MIRI fluxes, suggest higher dust temperatures compared to expectations from z<2 QGs, reaching T_d ~40-50 K in two galaxies. Coupled with remarkably high total infrared luminosities (LIR) not explained by observed JWST colors or by energy balance based on literature dust extinction measurements, and with [CII] deficits down to [CII]/LIR ~ 2×10^{-4}典型之

What carries the argument

The [CII] 158 μm line and dust continuum as tracers of molecular gas mass and ISM heating, combined with JWST imaging to detect morphological disturbances from interactions.

If this is right

  • Molecular gas fractions in these high-z quiescent galaxies span two orders of magnitude.
  • Dust temperatures reach 40-50 K, higher than seen in lower-redshift quiescent galaxies.
  • [CII] to total infrared luminosity ratios drop to values typical of luminous infrared galaxies.
  • Widespread disturbed morphologies and gas tails indicate ongoing interactions.
  • The overall phenomenology matches that seen in local post-starburst galaxies where shocks inject energy into the gas.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • If mergers prove common, quenching at high redshift may involve repeated dynamical events rather than a single permanent shutdown.
  • Higher-resolution imaging could map the locations of shock-heated gas directly.
  • Larger samples would test whether these features appear in most high-z quiescent galaxies or only a subset.
  • The results suggest that residual interstellar medium in quenched systems at early times can remain turbulent long after star formation ends.

Load-bearing premise

The assumption that the standard conversion from [CII] luminosity to molecular gas mass applies at these redshifts and that dust temperatures and luminosities can be correctly inferred from the photometry and extinction data.

What would settle it

An independent CO line measurement of molecular gas mass in any of these five galaxies that falls outside the reported 0.1%-25% range by more than a factor of a few would challenge the gas fraction results and the related heating claims.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2604.09347 by A. Zanella, B. Magnelli, C. D'Eugenio, D. Liu, E. Daddi, F. Bruckmann, F. Gentile, H. Sun, I. Delvecchio, L. Vallini, R. Gobat, S. Jin, Z. Liu.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Columns from left to right: [CII] line emission; dust continuum underneath [CII]; [CII] and dust continuum contours (pink [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Dust continuum emission from GS-9209 tapered with a [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Relation between the LCO(1−0) and L[CII]. Red stars mark the line luminosities (or upper limits) for QG1, QG2 and QG3. Fitted curves show the relation for all galaxies considered in Zhao et al. (2024) (dashed black), normal galaxies including ETGs (dotted green) and (U)LIRGS (solid blue). Blue and red empty markers highlight the position of ETGs and (U)LIRGS to ease the comparison with our sources. Plot ad… view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Dust temperature as a function of redshift. Red points [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Left: Comparison between the IR luminosity expected from reprocessed light from the UV and the observed IR luminosity. Middle: SFR of GS-9209 with respect to its coeval MS (Schreiber et al. 2015) according to different SFR constraints. Right: same as middle panel but for the quiescent galaxies in the AzTEC14 group. sent an upper limit due to AGN contamination (Carnall et al. 2023). This further supports th… view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: The ratio between the [CII] luminosity and its underlying [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Background image: F444W residuals. [CII] (red and blue) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_8.png] view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Molecular gas fraction evolution of quiescent galaxies with redshift. For each of our [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_9.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

We present ALMA detections (or stringent upper limits) of the [CII] 158 $\mu m$ emission line and underlying dust continuum from five massive quenched galaxies (QGs) at 2<z<4.7. We find extreme variations in the molecular gas fractions ($\rm{f_g=M_{mol}/M_{\star}}$), spanning 0.1%-25%, if a standard $\rm{\alpha_{[CII]}}$ applies. We attempt a first empirical calibration of $\rm{\alpha_{[CII]}}$ with respect to dust continuum in a $z=2$ lensed QG and with respect to CO(3-2) in a $z=3.1$ QG, finding no evidence of strong deviations from the standard value. Dust continuum measurements, coupled with JWST/MIRI fluxes, suggest higher dust temperatures compared to expectations from $z<2$ QGs, reaching $T_{d}\sim40-50 \,K$ in two galaxies. Coupled with remarkably high total infrared luminosities (LIR) not explained by observed JWST colors not by energy balance based on literature dust extinction measurements, and with [CII] deficits down to $\rm{[CII]/LIR\sim 2\times10^{-4}}$ typical of (Ultra)Luminous Infrared Galaxies, our findings point to additional dust-heating mechanisms other than dust-absorbed stellar radiation. Surprisingly, JWST/NIRCam and ALMA imaging reveal widespread disturbed stellar morphologies and offsets/tails in dust and gas, indicative of ongoing interactions. While larger samples are needed to assess how common these features are in high-z QGs, these findings support a merger-driven origin for the phenomenology observed in these systems, with key similarities with respect to local post-starburst galaxies where low-velocity shocks and turbulence also inject energy into the residual ISM.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

3 major / 2 minor

Summary. The paper reports ALMA [CII] 158 μm and dust continuum observations (detections or upper limits) for five massive quiescent galaxies at 2 < z < 4.7. It derives molecular gas fractions f_g = M_mol/M_star spanning 0.1%–25% assuming a standard α_[CII] conversion factor, with limited empirical checks against dust continuum in one lensed z=2 object and CO(3-2) in one z=3.1 object. From ALMA continuum plus JWST/MIRI fluxes, it infers elevated dust temperatures (T_d ~40–50 K in two galaxies), high L_IR values, and [CII]/L_IR deficits (~2×10^{-4}) typical of ULIRGs. These are interpreted as evidence for additional dust-heating mechanisms beyond stellar radiation (e.g., shocks/turbulence), supported by disturbed JWST/NIRCam and ALMA morphologies suggesting ongoing mergers, with analogies to local post-starburst galaxies.

Significance. If the interpretations hold, the work supplies the first [CII]-based constraints on the molecular ISM in high-redshift quiescent galaxies, documenting extreme gas-fraction variations, warm dust, and [CII] deficits that point to non-stellar heating and merger activity. The direct observational results (line detections, continuum fluxes, morphological offsets) are a clear strength, as is the attempt at empirical α_[CII] calibration on two objects rather than pure reliance on local standards. These findings would have substantial impact on models of quenching and residual ISM evolution at z>2 if the load-bearing assumptions can be placed on firmer footing.

major comments (3)
  1. [Energy balance and L_IR discussion (results and discussion sections)] The central claim of additional dust-heating mechanisms (shocks/turbulence from mergers) rests on L_IR exceeding the energy available from dust-absorbed stellar radiation. This comparison uses literature dust extinction values rather than extinctions or covering fractions derived from the JWST photometry/SEDs of these specific five galaxies. If the true absorbed fraction is higher (due to different dust geometry or attenuation law at z>2), the apparent L_IR excess disappears without invoking new heating sources. This assumption is load-bearing for the heating and merger interpretation.
  2. [α_[CII] calibration subsection] The reported molecular gas fractions (0.1%–25%) and their interpretation rely on a standard α_[CII] conversion. The empirical calibration is performed on only two galaxies (one lensed z=2 QG vs. dust continuum; one z=3.1 QG vs. CO(3-2)), with no strong deviations found. Given the small sample and the wide dynamic range claimed, this is insufficient to rule out systematic offsets in α_[CII] for the broader high-z QG population, directly affecting the gas-fraction results and downstream conclusions.
  3. [Morphological analysis and interpretation] The merger-driven origin is inferred from qualitative descriptions of disturbed stellar morphologies, dust/gas offsets, and tails in JWST/NIRCam and ALMA imaging. No quantitative merger diagnostics (e.g., CAS parameters, asymmetry indices, or comparison to a control sample of non-QGs) are provided, leaving open alternatives such as projection effects, minor interactions, or internal instabilities. This weakens the link between morphology and the proposed heating mechanism.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] The abstract contains a likely typographical error: 'not explained by observed JWST colors not by energy balance' should be rephrased for clarity (e.g., 'neither by observed JWST colors nor by energy balance').
  2. [Introduction or methods] Notation for gas fraction (f_g = M_mol/M_star) and [CII] deficit is introduced without an explicit equation; adding a short definitions subsection or table of adopted constants would improve readability.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

3 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the constructive feedback on our manuscript. We have carefully considered each major comment and provide point-by-point responses below. We believe these revisions will strengthen the paper.

read point-by-point responses
  1. Referee: [Energy balance and L_IR discussion (results and discussion sections)] The central claim of additional dust-heating mechanisms (shocks/turbulence from mergers) rests on L_IR exceeding the energy available from dust-absorbed stellar radiation. This comparison uses literature dust extinction values rather than extinctions or covering fractions derived from the JWST photometry/SEDs of these specific five galaxies. If the true absorbed fraction is higher (due to different dust geometry or attenuation law at z>2), the apparent L_IR excess disappears without invoking new heating sources. This assumption is load-bearing for the heating and merger interpretation.

    Authors: We agree that using literature extinction values introduces uncertainty, particularly given potential differences in dust geometry at high redshift. The JWST data provide constraints on the stellar emission and colors, but full SED modeling for individual extinctions is limited by the available photometry. In the revised manuscript, we will derive extinction estimates using the JWST photometry and SED fitting where feasible for these galaxies, and explicitly discuss the range of possible absorbed stellar radiation fractions. This will allow us to better quantify the potential L_IR excess and its implications for non-stellar heating. We will also tone down the strength of the claim to reflect these uncertainties. revision: partial

  2. Referee: [α_[CII] calibration subsection] The reported molecular gas fractions (0.1%–25%) and their interpretation rely on a standard α_[CII] conversion. The empirical calibration is performed on only two galaxies (one lensed z=2 QG vs. dust continuum; one z=3.1 QG vs. CO(3-2)), with no strong deviations found. Given the small sample and the wide dynamic range claimed, this is insufficient to rule out systematic offsets in α_[CII] for the broader high-z QG population, directly affecting the gas-fraction results and downstream conclusions.

    Authors: We concur that the empirical checks on α_[CII] are based on only two objects and cannot exclude systematic differences for the entire population. Our presentation already notes this as a first attempt at calibration. We will revise the relevant subsection to more prominently highlight the small sample size and the assumption of the standard conversion factor. The observed range in gas fractions remains striking, and even allowing for factor-of-a-few variations in α_[CII], the conclusions about extreme variations hold. We will add text recommending future multi-tracer observations to refine α_[CII] for high-z quiescent galaxies. revision: partial

  3. Referee: [Morphological analysis and interpretation] The merger-driven origin is inferred from qualitative descriptions of disturbed stellar morphologies, dust/gas offsets, and tails in JWST/NIRCam and ALMA imaging. No quantitative merger diagnostics (e.g., CAS parameters, asymmetry indices, or comparison to a control sample of non-QGs) are provided, leaving open alternatives such as projection effects, minor interactions, or internal instabilities. This weakens the link between morphology and the proposed heating mechanism.

    Authors: The morphological features are described qualitatively because this work focuses on the new [CII] and continuum detections. We will enhance the morphological analysis section by computing quantitative diagnostics such as asymmetry indices and CAS parameters for the available JWST and ALMA images, while carefully accounting for observational limitations at high redshift. We will also discuss alternative explanations for the observed disturbances, including projection effects and internal processes. A comprehensive comparison to a control sample of non-quiescent galaxies at similar redshifts would require a significantly larger dataset, which we note as a priority for future work. revision: partial

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: derivations use external standard conversions and literature values without reducing to self-fitted inputs

full rationale

The paper derives molecular gas fractions from observed [CII] luminosities via a standard α_[CII] conversion factor drawn from external literature, then performs an empirical check on two galaxies (one lensed, one with CO) that finds no strong deviations and thus retains the standard value. Dust temperatures and LIR are obtained directly from ALMA continuum plus JWST/MIRI photometry. The claim of excess LIR (implying additional heating) rests on a comparison against absorbed stellar energy inferred from separate literature extinction measurements, not from any equation fitted or derived within this work. Morphological evidence for mergers is a qualitative reading of imaging data. No equation, prediction, or central result is shown to equal its own input by construction, and no load-bearing step collapses to a self-citation chain or ansatz smuggled from the authors' prior work.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

1 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claims rest on the applicability of a standard [CII]-to-H2 conversion factor and on dust emission models calibrated at lower redshifts; no new entities are postulated.

free parameters (1)
  • standard α_[CII]
    Used to convert [CII] luminosity to molecular gas mass; value not re-derived for the full sample, only checked on two objects.
axioms (2)
  • domain assumption Standard α_[CII] conversion factor applies to high-z quiescent galaxies
    Invoked explicitly when reporting gas fractions spanning 0.1%-25%.
  • domain assumption Dust temperature and LIR can be derived from ALMA continuum plus JWST/MIRI fluxes using literature extinction curves
    Used to claim T_d ~40-50 K and excess LIR not explained by stellar radiation.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5696 in / 1596 out tokens · 54971 ms · 2026-05-10T17:11:34.755223+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

93 extracted references · 9 canonical work pages · 2 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    2025, A&A, 702, A186

    Adscheid, S., Magnelli, B., Ciesla, L., et al. 2025, A&A, 702, A186

  2. [2]

    2025, ApJ, 978, 90

    Antwi-Danso, J., Papovich, C., Esdaile, J., et al. 2025, ApJ, 978, 90

  3. [3]

    N., Guillard, P., Boulanger, F., et al

    Appleton, P. N., Guillard, P., Boulanger, F., et al. 2013, ApJ, 777, 66

  4. [4]

    N., Guillard, P., Togi, A., et al

    Appleton, P. N., Guillard, P., Togi, A., et al. 2017, ApJ, 836, 76

  5. [5]

    2021, ApJ, 909, L11

    Belli, S., Contursi, A., Genzel, R., et al. 2021, ApJ, 909, L11

  6. [6]

    L., et al

    Belli, S., Park, M., Davies, R. L., et al. 2024, Nature, 630, 54 Béthermin, M., Daddi, E., Magdis, G., et al. 2015, A&A, 573, A113 Blánquez-Sesé, D., Gómez-Guijarro, C., Magdis, G. E., et al. 2023, A&A, 674, A166 Article number, page 15 of 20 A&A proofs:manuscript no. main

  7. [7]

    P., Verstraete, L., et al

    Bocchio, M., Jones, A. P., Verstraete, L., et al. 2013, A&A, 556, A6

  8. [8]

    2022, A&A Rev., 30, 3

    Boselli, A., Fossati, M., & Sun, M. 2022, A&A Rev., 30, 3

  9. [9]

    & Charlot, S

    Bruzual, G. & Charlot, S. 2003, MNRAS, 344, 1000

  10. [10]

    2025, JWST Calibration Pipeline

    Bushouse, H., Eisenhamer, J., Dencheva, N., et al. 2025, JWST Calibration Pipeline

  11. [11]

    N., Whitaker, K

    Caliendo, J. N., Whitaker, K. E., Akhshik, M., et al. 2021, ApJ, 910, L7

  12. [12]

    2011, MNRAS, 413, 813

    Cappellari, M., Emsellem, E., Krajnovi´c, D., et al. 2011, MNRAS, 413, 813

  13. [13]

    C., McLure, R

    Carnall, A. C., McLure, R. J., Dunlop, J. S., et al. 2023, Nature, 619, 716

  14. [14]

    2003, PASP, 115, 763

    Chabrier, G. 2003, PASP, 115, 763

  15. [15]

    2007, A&A, 462, 81

    Chanial, P., Flores, H., Guiderdoni, B., et al. 2007, A&A, 462, 81

  16. [16]

    & Ostriker, J

    Ciotti, L. & Ostriker, J. P. 2007, ApJ, 665, 1038

  17. [17]

    P., & Proga, D

    Ciotti, L., Ostriker, J. P., & Proga, D. 2010, ApJ, 717, 708

  18. [18]

    2015, A&A, 577, A46 De Breuck, C., Lundgren, A., Emonts, B., et al

    Daddi, E., Dannerbauer, H., Liu, D., et al. 2015, A&A, 577, A46 De Breuck, C., Lundgren, A., Emonts, B., et al. 2022, A&A, 658, L2 de Graaff, A., Setton, D. J., Brammer, G., et al. 2025, Nature Astronomy, 9, 280

  19. [19]

    2009, ApJ, 703, 785

    Dekel, A., Sari, R., & Ceverino, D. 2009, ApJ, 703, 785

  20. [20]

    T., et al

    Delvecchio, I., Daddi, E., Sargent, M. T., et al. 2021, A&A, 647, A123 D’Eugenio, C., Daddi, E., Liu, D., & Gobat, R. 2023, A&A, 678, L9

  21. [21]

    2023, A&A, 678, A35 D’Onofrio, V

    Donevski, D., Damjanov, I., Nanni, A., et al. 2023, A&A, 678, A35 D’Onofrio, V . R., Spilker, J. S., Bezanson, R., et al. 2025, ApJ, 990, 166

  22. [22]

    Draine, B. T. & Li, A. 2007, ApJ, 657, 810

  23. [23]

    Drozdov, S. A. & Shchekinov, Y . A. 2019, Astrophysics, 62, 540

  24. [24]

    & Mayer, L

    Feldmann, R. & Mayer, L. 2015, MNRAS, 446, 1939

  25. [25]

    2018, Nature Astronomy, 2, 239

    Gobat, R., Daddi, E., Magdis, G., et al. 2018, Nature Astronomy, 2, 239

  26. [26]

    2022, A&A, 668, L4

    Gobat, R., D’Eugenio, C., Liu, D., et al. 2022, A&A, 668, L4

  27. [27]

    J., Alonso-Herrero, A., et al

    Haidar, H., Rosario, D. J., Alonso-Herrero, A., et al. 2024, MNRAS, 532, 4645

  28. [28]

    J., García-Bernete, I., et al

    Haidar, H., Rosario, D. J., García-Bernete, I., et al. 2026, MN- RAS[arXiv:2601.02865]

  29. [29]

    2018, ApJ, 856, 118

    Hayashi, M., Tadaki, K.-i., Kodama, T., et al. 2018, ApJ, 856, 118

  30. [30]

    B., Mobasher, B., et al

    Jafariyazani, M., Newman, A. B., Mobasher, B., et al. 2020, ApJ, 897, L42

  31. [31]

    C., Rieke, G

    Ji, Z., Williams, C. C., Rieke, G. H., et al. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2409.17233

  32. [32]

    E., et al

    Jin, S., Daddi, E., Magdis, G. E., et al. 2022, A&A, 665, A3

  33. [33]

    H., Belli, S., Nipoti, C., et al

    Khoram, A. H., Belli, S., Nipoti, C., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2509.12308

  34. [34]

    G., et al

    Kriek, M., Conroy, C., van Dokkum, P. G., et al. 2016, Nature, 540, 248

  35. [35]

    2021, ApJ, 919, 6

    Kubo, M., Umehata, H., Matsuda, Y ., et al. 2021, ApJ, 919, 6

  36. [36]

    2022, ApJ, 935, 89

    Kubo, M., Umehata, H., Matsuda, Y ., et al. 2022, ApJ, 935, 89

  37. [37]

    2016, MNRAS, 455, 3333

    Kubo, M., Yamada, T., Ichikawa, T., et al. 2016, MNRAS, 455, 3333

  38. [38]

    2017, MNRAS, 469, 2235

    Kubo, M., Yamada, T., Ichikawa, T., et al. 2017, MNRAS, 469, 2235

  39. [39]

    A., & Dougados, C

    Lagadec, E., Mékarnia, D., de Freitas Pacheco, J. A., & Dougados, C. 2005, A&A, 433, 553

  40. [40]

    C., Young, L

    Lapham, R. C., Young, L. M., & Crocker, A. 2017, ApJ, 840, 51

  41. [41]

    D., Alexander, D

    Lehmer, B. D., Alexander, D. M., Chapman, S. C., et al. 2009, MNRAS, 400, 299

  42. [42]

    2021, ApJ, 909, 56

    Liu, D., Daddi, E., Schinnerer, E., et al. 2021, ApJ, 909, 56

  43. [43]

    2019, ApJS, 244, 40

    Liu, D., Lang, P., Magnelli, B., et al. 2019, ApJS, 244, 40

  44. [44]

    2021, MNRAS, 501, 2659

    Lustig, P., Strazzullo, V ., D’Eugenio, C., et al. 2021, MNRAS, 501, 2659

  45. [45]

    E., Daddi, E., Béthermin, M., et al

    Magdis, G. E., Daddi, E., Béthermin, M., et al. 2012, ApJ, 760, 6

  46. [46]

    E., Gobat, R., Valentino, F., et al

    Magdis, G. E., Gobat, R., Valentino, F., et al. 2021, A&A, 647, A33

  47. [47]

    E., Rigopoulou, D., Daddi, E., et al

    Magdis, G. E., Rigopoulou, D., Daddi, E., et al. 2017, A&A, 603, A93

  48. [48]

    2009, ApJ, 707, 250 Michałowski, M

    Martig, M., Bournaud, F., Teyssier, R., & Dekel, A. 2009, ApJ, 707, 250 Michałowski, M. J., Gall, C., Hjorth, J., et al. 2024, ApJ, 964, 129

  49. [49]

    R., Alexander, D

    Mullaney, J. R., Alexander, D. M., Goulding, A. D., & Hickox, R. C. 2011, MNRAS, 414, 1082

  50. [50]

    B., Belli, S., Ellis, R

    Newman, A. B., Belli, S., Ellis, R. S., & Patel, S. G. 2018, ApJ, 862, 125

  51. [51]

    A stellar dynamical mass measure of an inactive black hole in the distant universe

    Newman, A. B., Gu, M., Belli, S., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2503.17478

  52. [52]

    L., et al

    Parente, M., Salvestrini, F., Granato, G. L., et al. 2026, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2603.04505

  53. [53]

    2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2512.03145

    Rhee, J., Pichon, C., Dubois, Y ., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2512.03145

  54. [54]

    2017, ApJ, 849, 27

    Rudnick, G., Hodge, J., Walter, F., et al. 2017, ApJ, 849, 27

  55. [55]

    T., Daddi, E., Bournaud, F., et al

    Sargent, M. T., Daddi, E., Bournaud, F., et al. 2015, ApJ, 806, L20

  56. [56]

    2020, A&A, 643, A3

    Schaerer, D., Ginolfi, M., Béthermin, M., et al. 2020, A&A, 643, A3

  57. [57]

    M., Simmons, B

    Schawinski, K., Urry, C. M., Simmons, B. D., et al. 2014, MNRAS, 440, 889

  58. [58]

    2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2405.19401

    Scholtz, J., D’Eugenio, F., Maiolino, R., et al. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2405.19401

  59. [59]

    2018, A&A, 618, A85

    Schreiber, C., Glazebrook, K., Nanayakkara, T., et al. 2018, A&A, 618, A85

  60. [60]

    2021, A&A, 646, A68

    Schreiber, C., Glazebrook, K., Papovich, C., et al. 2021, A&A, 646, A68

  61. [61]

    2015, A&A, 575, A74

    Schreiber, C., Pannella, M., Elbaz, D., et al. 2015, A&A, 575, A74

  62. [62]

    K., Walter, F., et al

    Schruba, A., Leroy, A. K., Walter, F., et al. 2012, AJ, 143, 138

  63. [63]

    Smercina, A., Smith, J. D. T., Dale, D. A., et al. 2018, ApJ, 855, 51

  64. [64]

    M., Downes, D., Radford, S

    Solomon, P. M., Downes, D., Radford, S. J. E., & Barrett, J. W. 1997, ApJ, 478, 144

  65. [65]

    2018, ApJ, 860, 103

    Spilker, J., Bezanson, R., Bariši´c, I., et al. 2018, ApJ, 860, 103

  66. [66]

    S., Whitaker, K

    Spilker, J. S., Whitaker, K. E., Narayanan, D., et al. 2025, ApJ, 993, L40

  67. [67]

    C., Adelberger, K

    Steidel, C. C., Adelberger, K. L., Dickinson, M., et al. 1998, ApJ, 492, 428

  68. [68]

    A., Beverage, A

    Suess, K. A., Beverage, A. G., Kriek, M., et al. 2025, ApJ, 993, 158

  69. [69]

    A., Bezanson, R., Spilker, J

    Suess, K. A., Bezanson, R., Spilker, J. S., et al. 2017, ApJ, 846, L14

  70. [70]
  71. [71]

    J., Neri, R., Chapman, S

    Tacconi, L. J., Neri, R., Chapman, S. C., et al. 2006, ApJ, 640, 228

  72. [72]

    2024, ApJ, 970, 59

    Tanaka, M., Onodera, M., Shimakawa, R., et al. 2024, ApJ, 970, 59

  73. [73]

    Temi, P., Brighenti, F., & Mathews, W. G. 2009, ApJ, 707, 890

  74. [74]

    H., Franx, M., Illingworth, G

    Tran, K.-V . H., Franx, M., Illingworth, G. D., et al. 2004, ApJ, 609, 683

  75. [75]

    2025, ApJ, 985, L8

    Umehata, H., Kubo, M., & Nakanishi, K. 2025, ApJ, 985, L8

  76. [76]

    2015, ApJ, 815, L8

    Umehata, H., Tamura, Y ., Kohno, K., et al. 2015, ApJ, 815, L8

  77. [77]

    E., Brammer, G., et al

    Valentino, F., Heintz, K. E., Brammer, G., et al. 2025, A&A, 699, A358

  78. [78]

    E., Daddi, E., et al

    Valentino, F., Magdis, G. E., Daddi, E., et al. 2018, ApJ, 869, 27

  79. [79]

    2020b, ApJ, 889, 93 van der Wel, A., Franx, M., van Dokkum, P

    Valentino, F., Tanaka, M., Davidzon, I., et al. 2020b, ApJ, 889, 93 van der Wel, A., Franx, M., van Dokkum, P. G., et al. 2014, ApJ, 788, 28

  80. [80]

    2025, ApJ, 988, L35

    Wang, T., Sun, H., Zhou, L., et al. 2025, ApJ, 988, L35

Showing first 80 references.