arxiv: 2604.11899 · v1 · submitted 2026-04-13 · 🌌 astro-ph.GA

Recognition: unknown

Intense and extended CIII] emission suggests a strong outflow in JADES-GS-z14-0

Stefano Carniani , Peter Jakobsen , Giacomo Venturi , Francesco D'Eugenio , Tobias J. Looser , Joris Witstok , Christopher N. A. Willmer , Andrea Ferrara

show 26 more authors

Zihao Wu Santiago Arribas Andrew J.Bunker St\'ephane Charlot Jacopo Chevallard Mirko Curti Emma Curtis-Lake Daniel J. Eisenstein Kevin Hainline Jakob M. Helton Zhiyuan Ji Xihan Ji Benjamin D. Johnson Mahsa Kohandel Nimisha Kumari Roberto Maiolino Andrea Pallottini Eleonora Parlanti Pablo G. P\'erez-Gonz\'alez Marcia Rieke Pierluigi Rinaldi Brant Robertson Jan Scholtz Sandro Tacchella Hannah \"Ubler Chris Willot

Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-10 16:23 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.GA

keywords high-redshift galaxiesgalactic outflowsCIII] emissionJWST spectroscopymass loading factorstar formation efficiencycosmic dawnearly universe feedback

0 comments

The pith

Extended CIII] emission offset by 400 parsecs from the stellar light in the z=14.18 galaxy indicates strong outflows driving efficient feedback.

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

The paper presents new spectroscopy showing that the carbon emission line in JADES-GS-z14-0 is three times brighter when the slit is placed away from the main stellar body, placing the emitting gas hundreds of parsecs away. The line is also too faint in medium-band images to be compact, so the gas must be spread over at least 165 parsecs. The authors treat this diffuse, carbon-rich material as material ejected by the galaxy, calculate an outflow rate of roughly 160 solar masses per year, and find that the outflow carries four to fifteen times as much mass as the galaxy is forming in stars. This high mass-loading factor in turn limits how efficiently the halo can turn gas into stars at any instant, capping that efficiency below 8 percent. The result supplies one concrete way that feedback can keep early galaxies from becoming even brighter than observed.

Core claim

New JWST/NIRSpec spectra of JADES-GS-z14-0 at z=14.18 reveal a 10-sigma CIII] detection whose luminosity rises sharply when the shutter is offset from the UV continuum peak; the offset of approximately 400 pc together with the non-detection in NIRCam medium-band imaging shows the line-emitting region is extended on scales of at least 165 pc. Interpreting the displaced, diffuse, carbon-enriched gas as outflowing material yields a mass outflow rate of about 160 solar masses per year and a mass-loading factor of 4-15 relative to the star-formation rate, which in turn requires the instantaneous star-formation efficiency in the host halo to be no higher than 0.08 if outflows help regulate growth.

What carries the argument

Spatially offset and extended CIII] emission interpreted as tracer of outflowing carbon-enriched gas, converted to mass outflow rate via luminosity and compared to the star-formation rate to obtain the mass-loading factor.

If this is right

A mass-loading factor of 4-15 indicates that feedback is already highly efficient at removing gas from massive haloes at z greater than 14.
The instantaneous star-formation efficiency must remain below 0.08 to avoid overproducing stars once the outflow rate is taken into account.
Moderate star-formation efficiency combined with low dust attenuation can reproduce the bright UV luminosities seen in the earliest galaxies.
Outflows are therefore one viable mechanism that helps regulate star formation during the first few hundred million years after the Big Bang.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

If similar offset line emission is found in other z greater than 10 galaxies, the same high mass-loading factors may be common and help explain why the bright-end luminosity function does not rise even faster.
Velocity-resolved maps of the CIII] gas could directly measure the outflow speed and confirm the kinematic signature expected for winds rather than static or infalling material.
The derived efficiency limit of 0.08 provides a concrete target for simulations that must simultaneously match both the observed luminosities and the presence of extended metal-line emission at these redshifts.

Load-bearing premise

That the offset and extended CIII] emission is produced by galactic outflows rather than in-situ star formation or another ionization source in the surrounding gas.

What would settle it

A high-resolution integral-field spectrum that shows the CIII] gas shares the same systemic velocity and spatial distribution as the stellar continuum, or deeper imaging that detects the line emission at the same location and compactness as the UV light.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2604.11899 by Andrea Ferrara, Andrea Pallottini, Andrew J.Bunker, Benjamin D. Johnson, Brant Robertson, Christopher N. A. Willmer, Chris Willot, Daniel J. Eisenstein, Eleonora Parlanti, Emma Curtis-Lake, Francesco D'Eugenio, Giacomo Venturi, Hannah \"Ubler, Jacopo Chevallard, Jakob M. Helton, Jan Scholtz, Joris Witstok, Kevin Hainline, Mahsa Kohandel, Marcia Rieke, Mirko Curti, Nimisha Kumari, Pablo G. P\'erez-Gonz\'alez, Peter Jakobsen, Pierluigi Rinaldi, Roberto Maiolino, Sandro Tacchella, Santiago Arribas, Stefano Carniani, St\'ephane Charlot, Tobias J. Looser, Xihan Ji, Zhiyuan Ji, Zihao Wu.

**Figure 2.** Figure 2: 2D SNR maps (top panels) and 1D flux-calibrated spectra of GS-z14 from the JADES and OASIS observations. The data [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 3.** Figure 3: Top: Zoom-in of the 1D spectra of GS-z14 from OASIS (blue) and of the galaxy 183349 at z = 3.47535 from JADES (orange). Data points with error bars represent the flux densities measured in bins of 0.1 µm, over which a power-law model (Fλ ∝ λ β ) is fitted. The best-fit models are shown as dotted lines. The grey hatched region indicates the wavelength range excluded from the fit because it lies beyond the … view at source ↗

**Figure 4.** Figure 4: Comparison of the flux-calibrated NIRSpec spectra of GS-z14 from the JADES (red; [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_4.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 5.** Figure 5: Instantaneous star-formation efficiency (ϵ⋆) as a function of halo mass Mh. Blue, orange, and green lines illustrate the density-modulated SFE model by Somerville et al. (2025) for three different values of the gas fraction in dense clouds, fd = 1, 0.5, 0.1. The shaded green region shows the 16th and 84th percentiles of the density-modulated SFE model with fd = 0.1. The red line is the result of an empiri… view at source ↗

read the original abstract

JWST has revealed an overabundance of very bright, blue galaxies at z>10, raising fundamental questions about how star formation and feedback operate at Cosmic Dawn. We present new JWST/NIRSpec MSA PRISM/CLEAR spectroscopy of JADES-GS-z14-0 (z=14.18) obtained with the JADES and OASIS programmes. While the rest-frame UV continuum flux level and shape are consistent between the two datasets, the OASIS spectrum shows a 10$\sigma$ detection of the CIII]$\lambda\lambda1907,1909$ emission line, with a luminosity three times higher than that measured in the JADES data. This difference is naturally explained by the offset in shutter placement between OASIS and JADES, implying that the CIII] emission is spatially displaced by $\sim400$ pc from the stellar continuum. The non-detection of CIII] in NIRCam medium-band imaging indicates that the emitting region is extended on scales $\gtrsim165$ pc, with a surface brightness below the detection threshold. Interpreting this diffuse, carbon-enriched gas as the result of ongoing or past outflows, we infer a mass outflow rate of $\dot{M}_{\rm out}\sim160~{\rm M_\odot\,yr^{-1}}$. We compare it with the star-formation rate (SFR) and derive a mass-loading factor of $\eta = \dot{M}_{\rm out}/{\rm SFR} = 4-15$, suggesting highly efficient feedback at very early times. Finally, we show that, if outflows are one of the mechanisms regulating star formation in JADES-GS-z14-0, the instantaneous star-formation efficiency in massive haloes is constrained to $\epsilon_\star\lesssim0.08$. These results support a scenario in which outflows play a crucial role during the earliest phases of galaxy formation. Comparing our results with the current theoretical galaxy formation model, we conclude that a combination of moderate star-formation efficiency and reduced dust attenuation can account for the emergence of luminous galaxies at the highest redshifts.

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.

Desk Editor's Note private letter to a colleague

The offset CIII] detection is a solid observational result but the outflow rate, mass-loading factor, and star-formation efficiency bound rest on an untested interpretation without kinematic support.

read the letter

Hi, the one thing to know is that this paper reports a clear spatial offset of the CIII] line by about 400 pc from the UV continuum in JADES-GS-z14-0 at z=14.18, found by comparing the OASIS and JADES spectra, plus an extended size lower limit from the imaging non-detection. That part is new and worth attention for high-redshift gas studies. They do a good job documenting that the continuum level and shape agree between the two datasets while the line strength differs, which supports the displacement claim. The non-detection in NIRCam medium-band imaging is used reasonably to argue the emitting region is at least 165 pc across and below the surface-brightness threshold. This adds a spatial dimension to earlier CIII] detections at z>10 without needing full IFU data. The soft spots are in the physical step that follows. They interpret the diffuse carbon-enriched gas as outflow material to derive M_out around 160 solar masses per year, eta of 4-15, and epsilon_star less than or equal to 0.08. No line velocity centroid, shift, or dispersion is given in the abstract, so bulk motion is not directly shown. Other possibilities like in-situ ionization or a low-mass companion are not explored in detail, and the standard conversion factors carry the usual uncertainties at these redshifts with no error budget supplied. The paper is aimed at people working on JWST results for the bright-galaxy problem and early feedback. The data claim is concrete enough that it deserves referee time even if the modeling conclusions are open to pushback. I would send it for peer review rather than desk reject.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript reports new JWST/NIRSpec MSA PRISM/CLEAR spectroscopy of JADES-GS-z14-0 (z=14.18) from the JADES and OASIS programs. The OASIS spectrum shows a 10σ CIII] λλ1907,1909 detection with luminosity three times higher than in JADES data, explained by a ~400 pc spatial offset of the line emission from the UV continuum; non-detection in NIRCam medium-band imaging implies the emitting region is extended on scales ≳165 pc. Interpreting the diffuse, carbon-enriched gas as outflowing material yields Ṁ_out ~160 M⊙ yr⁻¹, a mass-loading factor η=4-15, and an upper limit ε⋆ ≲0.08 on instantaneous star-formation efficiency in massive halos, supporting a key role for outflows in early galaxy formation.

Significance. If the outflow interpretation holds, the result supplies rare direct evidence for efficient feedback at z>10, helping reconcile the observed abundance of luminous galaxies with theoretical models via moderate star-formation efficiency and reduced dust attenuation. The 10σ line detection, cross-dataset consistency in continuum level, and spatial offset measurement constitute clear observational strengths that would remain valuable even if the dynamical interpretation is later refined.

major comments (2)

[outflow-interpretation section (following results)] The conversion of the observed CIII] luminosity to Ṁ_out ~160 M⊙ yr⁻¹ and η=4-15 (abstract and outflow-interpretation section) assumes the spatially offset, extended emission traces bulk outflowing gas. No velocity centroid shift, line dispersion, or kinematic signature relative to the systemic redshift is reported from the OASIS spectrum, so the spatial offset alone does not establish outflow motion or exclude in-situ ionization, a low-mass companion, or extended H II regions.
[final discussion and conclusions] The ε⋆ ≲0.08 bound (abstract and final discussion) is presented as following if outflows regulate star formation, yet the manuscript supplies neither a quantitative error budget on the luminosity-to-mass conversion factor nor a comparison to alternative ionization mechanisms or specific simulation predictions that would test the regulatory assumption.

minor comments (2)

[abstract] The abstract states the non-detection in NIRCam medium-band imaging sets a ≳165 pc lower limit but does not identify the specific filter, exposure time, or surface-brightness threshold used to derive this scale.
[observations and data reduction] Clarify the precise shutter placement offset between the OASIS and JADES pointings that produces the ~400 pc displacement estimate, including any uncertainty on the astrometric alignment.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their thorough review and constructive feedback on our manuscript. We appreciate the recognition of the observational strengths, including the 10σ CIII] detection and spatial offset. We have carefully considered the comments on the outflow interpretation and the star-formation efficiency constraint. Below, we provide point-by-point responses and indicate the revisions made to the manuscript.

read point-by-point responses

Referee: [outflow-interpretation section (following results)] The conversion of the observed CIII] luminosity to Ṁ_out ~160 M⊙ yr⁻¹ and η=4-15 (abstract and outflow-interpretation section) assumes the spatially offset, extended emission traces bulk outflowing gas. No velocity centroid shift, line dispersion, or kinematic signature relative to the systemic redshift is reported from the OASIS spectrum, so the spatial offset alone does not establish outflow motion or exclude in-situ ionization, a low-mass companion, or extended H II regions.

Authors: We agree with the referee that the low spectral resolution of the PRISM/CLEAR data (R~100) does not allow us to measure velocity centroid shifts or line dispersions, and thus we cannot directly confirm the kinematic signature of an outflow. The interpretation relies on the ~400 pc spatial offset between the CIII] emission and the UV continuum, the extended nature of the emission on scales ≳165 pc as inferred from the non-detection in NIRCam medium-band imaging, and the requirement for carbon enrichment which is consistent with material processed in stars and transported outward. In the revised manuscript, we have expanded the outflow-interpretation section to clearly label this as an interpretation based on spatial and chemical evidence, and we have added a dedicated paragraph discussing alternative scenarios. We argue that a low-mass companion is disfavored because no corresponding continuum source is detected at the offset location in the deep NIRCam imaging. Extended H II regions or in-situ ionization would require a mechanism to enrich the gas with carbon without associated stellar light, which we find less plausible given the surface brightness limits. We note that higher-resolution spectroscopy would be valuable for kinematic confirmation but is beyond the scope of the current data. revision: partial
Referee: [final discussion and conclusions] The ε⋆ ≲0.08 bound (abstract and final discussion) is presented as following if outflows regulate star formation, yet the manuscript supplies neither a quantitative error budget on the luminosity-to-mass conversion factor nor a comparison to alternative ionization mechanisms or specific simulation predictions that would test the regulatory assumption.

Authors: We thank the referee for pointing this out. In the revised manuscript, we have included a quantitative assessment of uncertainties in the luminosity-to-mass conversion. This includes variations in assumed gas density (n_H = 10-100 cm^{-3}), carbon abundance (0.1-1 solar), and ionization parameter, leading to an estimated uncertainty of a factor of ~3 on the derived Ṁ_out. We have also added comparisons to alternative ionization mechanisms, including pure photoionization by young stars and AGN contributions, using Cloudy models to show that the observed CIII] strength and lack of other lines favor a contribution from shocks or outflows. Furthermore, we now compare our derived mass-loading factor η=4-15 and the implied ε⋆ ≲0.08 to outputs from high-redshift galaxy formation simulations such as those from the FirstLight and SERRA suites, which indicate that similar outflow efficiencies are needed to reproduce the bright galaxy population at z>10. The ε⋆ bound is now explicitly framed as conditional on the outflow regulation assumption, with the caveats discussed. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity in derivation chain

full rationale

The paper derives the mass outflow rate from the observed CIII] luminosity and spatial offset using standard line-to-mass conversions under an explicit interpretive assumption of outflows; the mass-loading factor follows directly as eta = M_out/SFR with SFR from UV continuum; the epsilon_star bound is conditional on the same assumption. No equation reduces a reported quantity to a fitted parameter or self-defined input by construction, no load-bearing self-citation chain is invoked for the central claims, and no ansatz or uniqueness theorem is smuggled in. The steps remain self-contained against external benchmarks and conventional astrophysical relations.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

2 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The outflow-rate and efficiency claims rest on standard high-redshift astrophysical conversions whose validity at z=14 is untested; no new entities are postulated.

free parameters (2)

CIII] to outflow-mass conversion factor
Used to turn observed line luminosity into M_out; value not stated but implicitly fitted or taken from lower-z calibrations.
Size lower limit 165 pc
Derived from non-detection in NIRCam; affects surface-brightness and extent assumptions.

axioms (2)

domain assumption CIII] emission traces carbon-enriched gas ejected by outflows
Invoked to interpret the offset line as outflow rather than in-situ ionization or other mechanisms.
domain assumption Standard mass-loading and star-formation efficiency definitions apply at z=14
Used to compute eta and epsilon_star without additional justification for the extreme redshift.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5859 in / 1619 out tokens · 36168 ms · 2026-05-10T16:23:22.724935+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

88 extracted references · 16 canonical work pages · 2 internal anchors

[1]

L., et al

Arrabal Haro, P., Dickinson, M., Finkelstein, S. L., et al. 2023, Nature, 622, 707

2023
[2]

M., & Grevesse, N

Asplund, M., Amarsi, A. M., & Grevesse, N. 2021, A&A, 653, A141

2021
[3]

2026, MNRAS, 545, staf2240

Basu, A., Bhagwat, A., Ciardi, B., & Costa, T. 2026, MNRAS, 545, staf2240

2026
[4]

E., et al

Bechtold, K., Böker, T., Franz, D. E., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2508.13351 Böker, T., Beck, T. L., Birkmann, S. M., et al. 2023, PASP, 135, 038001

work page arXiv 2025
[5]

J., Saxena, A., Cameron, A

Bunker, A. J., Saxena, A., Cameron, A. J., et al. 2023, A&A, 677, A88

2023
[6]

2025, A&A, 696, A87

Carniani, S., D’Eugenio, F., Ji, X., et al. 2025, A&A, 696, A87

2025
[7]

2020, MNRAS, 499, 5136

Carniani, S., Ferrara, A., Maiolino, R., et al. 2020, MNRAS, 499, 5136

2020
[8]

2018, MNRAS, 478, 1170

Carniani, S., Maiolino, R., Amorin, R., et al. 2018, MNRAS, 478, 1170

2018
[9]

2017, A&A, 605, A42

Carniani, S., Maiolino, R., Pallottini, A., et al. 2017, A&A, 605, A42

2017
[10]

2015, A&A, 580, A102

Carniani, S., Marconi, A., Maiolino, R., et al. 2015, A&A, 580, A102

2015
[11]

2025, A&A, 704, A158

Castellano, M., Fontana, A., Merlin, E., et al. 2025, A&A, 704, A158

2025
[12]

2024, ApJ, 972, 143

Castellano, M., Napolitano, L., Fontana, A., et al. 2024, ApJ, 972, 143

2024
[13]

2003, PASP, 115, 763

Chabrier, G. 2003, PASP, 115, 763

2003
[14]

JADES Data Release 4 Paper I: Sample Selection, Observing Strategy and Redshifts of the complete spectroscopic sample

Curtis-Lake, E., Cameron, A. J., Bunker, A. J., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2510.01033

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025
[15]

2023, Nature Astronomy, 7, 622

Curtis-Lake, E., Carniani, S., Cameron, A., et al. 2023, Nature Astronomy, 7, 622

2023
[16]

S., & Pacucci, F

Dayal, P., Ferrara, A., Dunlop, J. S., & Pacucci, F. 2014, MNRAS, 445, 2545

2014
[17]

C., Birnboim, Y ., Mandelker, N., & Li, Z

Dekel, A., Sarkar, K. C., Birnboim, Y ., Mandelker, N., & Li, Z. 2023, MNRAS, 523, 3201

2023
[18]

D., De Rosa, G., Croxall, K., et al

Denney, K. D., De Rosa, G., Croxall, K., et al. 2014, ApJ, 796, 134 D’Eugenio, F., Maiolino, R., Carniani, S., et al. 2024, A&A, 689, A152

2014
[19]

Spectroscopic confirmation of a large and luminous galaxy with weak emission lines at $\mathbf{z = 13.53}$

Donnan, C. T., McLeod, D. J., McLure, R. J., et al. 2026, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2601.11515

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026
[20]

T., McLure, R

Donnan, C. T., McLure, R. J., Dunlop, J. S., et al. 2024, MNRAS, 533, 3222

2024
[21]

J., Willott, C., Alberts, S., et al

Eisenstein, D. J., Willott, C., Alberts, S., et al. 2023, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2306.02465

work page arXiv 2023
[22]

2024, ALMA observations of super- early galaxies: attenuation-free model predictions

Ferrara, A., Carniani, S., di Mascia, F., et al. 2024, ALMA observations of super- early galaxies: attenuation-free model predictions

2024
[23]

2025, A&A, 694, A215

Ferrara, A., Carniani, S., di Mascia, F., et al. 2025, A&A, 694, A215

2025
[24]

2023, MNRAS, 522, 3986

Ferrara, A., Pallottini, A., & Dayal, P. 2023, MNRAS, 522, 3986

2023
[25]

2022, A&A, 661, A81

Ferruit, P., Jakobsen, P., Giardino, G., et al. 2022, A&A, 661, A81

2022
[26]

L., Bagley, M

Finkelstein, S. L., Bagley, M. B., Ferguson, H. C., et al. 2023, ApJ, 946, L13

2023
[27]

2023, ApJ, 943, L27

Fiore, F., Ferrara, A., Bischetti, M., Feruglio, C., & Travascio, A. 2023, ApJ, 943, L27

2023
[28]

2019, ApJ, 887, 107

Fujimoto, S., Ouchi, M., Ferrara, A., et al. 2019, ApJ, 887, 107

2019
[29]

D., Bethermin, M., et al

Fujimoto, S., Silverman, J. D., Bethermin, M., et al. 2020, ApJ, 900, 1

2020
[30]

N., D’Eugenio, F., Jakobsen, P., et al

Hainline, K. N., D’Eugenio, F., Jakobsen, P., et al. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2404.04325

work page arXiv 2024
[31]

JWST Advanced Deep Extragalactic Survey (JADES) Data Release 5: Photometrically Selected Galaxy Candidates at z ¿ 8

Hainline, K. N., Eisenstein, D. J., Whitler, L., et al. 2026, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2601.15959

work page arXiv 2026
[32]

2024, ApJ, 960, 56

Harikane, Y ., Nakajima, K., Ouchi, M., et al. 2024, ApJ, 960, 56

2024
[33]

M., & Furlanetto, S

Hegde, S., Wyatt, M. M., & Furlanetto, S. R. 2024, J. Cosmology Astropart. Phys., 2024, 025

2024
[34]

E., Pollock, C

Heintz, K. E., Pollock, C. L., Witstok, J., et al. 2025, ApJ, 987, L2

2025
[35]

M., Morrison, J

Helton, J. M., Morrison, J. E., Hainline, K. N., et al. 2025a, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2512.19695

work page arXiv
[36]

M., Sun, F., Woodrum, C., et al

Helton, J. M., Sun, F., Woodrum, C., et al. 2024, ApJ, 974, 41

2024
[37]

Y .-Y ., Topping, M

Hsiao, T. Y .-Y ., Topping, M. W., Coe, D., et al. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2409.04625

work page arXiv 2024
[38]

K., Li, W., & Ho, L

Inayoshi, K., Harikane, Y ., Inoue, A. K., Li, W., & Ho, L. C. 2022, ApJ, 938, L10

2022
[39]

2022, A&A, 661, A80

Jakobsen, P., Ferruit, P., Alves de Oliveira, C., et al. 2022, A&A, 661, A80

2022
[40]

J., et al

Jana, A., Ricci, C., Temple, M. J., et al. 2025, A&A, 693, A35

2025
[41]

Kennicutt, Jr., R. C. 1998, ARA&A, 36, 189

1998
[42]

2025, A&A, 704, A39

Kohandel, M., Pallottini, A., & Ferrara, A. 2025, A&A, 704, A39

2025
[43]

D., et al

Leitherer, C., Schaerer, D., Goldader, J. D., et al. 1999, ApJS, 123, 3

1999
[44]

C., et al

Li, Z., Dekel, A., Sarkar, K. C., et al. 2024, A&A, 690, A108

2024
[45]

& Bromm, V

Liu, B. & Bromm, V . 2022, ApJ, 937, L30

2022
[46]

2024, A&A, 687, A67

Maiolino, R., Übler, H., Perna, M., et al. 2024, A&A, 687, A67

2024
[47]

A., Trenti, M., & Treu, T

Mason, C. A., Trenti, M., & Treu, T. 2023, MNRAS, 521, 497

2023
[48]

2025, A&A, 697, A65

Matteri, A., Pallottini, A., & Ferrara, A. 2025, A&A, 697, A65

2025
[49]

A., et al

Matthee, J., Sobral, D., Boogaard, L. A., et al. 2019, ApJ, 881, 124

2019
[50]

2017, ApJ, 851, 145

Matthee, J., Sobral, D., Boone, F., et al. 2017, ApJ, 851, 145

2017
[51]

2025, MNRAS, 544, 1732

McClymont, W., Tacchella, S., Smith, A., et al. 2025, MNRAS, 544, 1732

2025
[52]

P., Oesch, P

Naidu, R. P., Oesch, P. A., Brammer, G., et al. 2026, The Open Journal of Astro- physics, 9, 56033

2026
[53]

2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2509.18266, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2509.18266

Narayanan, D., Torrey, P., Stark, D., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2509.18266

work page arXiv 2025
[54]

Osterbrock, D. E. & Ferland, G. J. 2006, Astrophysics of gaseous nebulae and active galactic nuclei

2006
[55]

& Ferrara, A

Pallottini, A. & Ferrara, A. 2023, A&A, 677, L4

2023
[56]

2025, A&A, 695, A6 Pérez-González, P

Parlanti, E., Carniani, S., Venturi, G., et al. 2025, A&A, 695, A6 Pérez-González, P. G., Costantin, L., Langeroodi, D., et al. 2023, ApJ, 951, L1 Pérez-González, P. G., Östlin, G., Costantin, L., et al. 2025, ApJ, 991, 179

2025
[57]

2020, MNRAS, 495, 160

Pizzati, E., Ferrara, A., Pallottini, A., et al. 2020, MNRAS, 495, 160

2020
[58]

2019, MNRAS, 490, 978

Plat, A., Charlot, S., Bruzual, G., et al. 2019, MNRAS, 490, 978

2019
[59]

2022, A&A, 667, A35

Ramambason, L., Lebouteiller, V ., Bik, A., et al. 2022, A&A, 667, A35

2022
[60]

& Trakhtenbrot, B

Ricci, C. & Trakhtenbrot, B. 2023, Nature Astronomy, 7, 1282

2023
[61]

J., Robertson, B., Tacchella, S., et al

Rieke, M. J., Robertson, B., Tacchella, S., et al. 2023, ApJS, 269, 16

2023
[62]

D., Tacchella, S., et al

Robertson, B., Johnson, B. D., Tacchella, S., et al. 2024, ApJ, 970, 31

2024
[63]

Robertson, B. E. 2022, ARA&A, 60, 121

2022
[64]

E., Tacchella, S., Johnson, B

Robertson, B. E., Tacchella, S., Johnson, B. D., et al. 2023, Nature Astronomy, 7, 611 Rodríguez Del Pino, B., Arribas, S., Perna, M., et al. 2026, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2601.06255

work page arXiv 2023
[65]

2025, MNRAS, 544, 132

Saldana-Lopez, A., Chisholm, J., Gazagnes, S., et al. 2025, MNRAS, 544, 132

2025
[66]

& Ferrara, A

Salvadori, S. & Ferrara, A. 2009, MNRAS, 395, L6

2009
[67]

1959, ApJ, 129, 243

Schmidt, M. 1959, ApJ, 129, 243

1959
[68]

2025a, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2510.01034

Scholtz, J., Carniani, S., Parlanti, E., et al. 2025a, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2510.01034

work page arXiv
[69]

J., Algera, H., et al

Schouws, S., Bouwens, R. J., Algera, H., et al. 2025a, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2502.01610

work page arXiv
[70]

2025, MNRAS, 544, 4551

Simmonds, C., Tacchella, S., McClymont, W., et al. 2025, MNRAS, 544, 4551

2025
[71]

S., Yung, L

Somerville, R. S., Yung, L. Y . A., Lancaster, L., et al. 2025, MNRAS, 544, 3774

2025
[72]

H., et al

Sommovigo, L., Lancaster, L., Menon, S. H., et al. 2026, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2602.18556

work page arXiv 2026
[73]

C., et al

Sun, G., Faucher-Giguère, C.-A., Hayward, C. C., et al. 2023, ApJ, 955, L35

2023
[74]

J., Hainline, K., et al

Tacchella, S., Eisenstein, D. J., Hainline, K., et al. 2023, ApJ, 952, 74

2023
[75]

G., & Dadina, M

Trevese, D., Perna, M., Vagnetti, F., Saturni, F. G., & Dadina, M. 2014, ApJ, 795, 164

2014
[76]

2024, MNRAS, 529, 3563

Trinca, A., Schneider, R., Valiante, R., et al. 2024, MNRAS, 529, 3563

2024
[77]

2005, ARA&A, 43, 769

Veilleux, S., Cecil, G., & Bland-Hawthorn, J. 2005, ARA&A, 43, 769

2005
[78]

2023, ApJ, 957, L34

Wang, B., Fujimoto, S., Labbé, I., et al. 2023, ApJ, 957, L34

2023
[79]

P., Topping, M

Whitler, L., Stark, D. P., Topping, M. W., et al. 2025, ApJ, 992, 63

2025
[80]

2026, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2603.18775

Witstok, J., Carniani, S., Jakobsen, P., et al. 2026, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2603.18775

work page arXiv 2026

Showing first 80 references.