arxiv: 2604.22347 · v1 · submitted 2026-04-24 · 🌌 astro-ph.GA

Recognition: unknown

A Morphological Identification and Study of Radio Galaxies from LoTSS DR2. I. The "Winged'' Radio Galaxies

Soumen Kumar Bera , Taotao Fang , Tapan K. Sasmal , M. Kunert-Bajraszewska , Xuelei Chen , Soumen Mondal

Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-08 10:53 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.GA

keywords radio galaxieswinged radio galaxiesX-shaped radio galaxiesZ-shaped radio galaxiesLoTSS DR2FR-II classificationmorphological identificationgiant radio galaxies

0 comments

The pith

LoTSS DR2 yields a catalog of 621 new winged radio galaxies, mostly large FR-II sources.

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

The paper identifies and catalogs 621 new winged radio galaxies from low-frequency LoTSS DR2 images, along with 403 candidates. Of the confirmed sources, 382 are X-shaped and 239 are Z-shaped. Most show edge-brightened lobes, high radio power, and a median projected size of 498 kpc, with 16 percent exceeding 0.7 Mpc. The average spectral index is steeper than in earlier higher-frequency surveys, indicating that the low-frequency data reach fainter members of this class.

Core claim

A new catalog of 621 confirmed winged radio galaxies is presented, with 382 classified as X-shaped and 239 as Z-shaped; the majority are edge-brightened FR-II sources whose median linear size reaches 498 kpc and whose spectral index between 144 MHz and 1.4 GHz averages -0.84.

What carries the argument

Morphological classification of primary active lobes plus secondary wings in 144 MHz radio images, used to separate X-shaped from Z-shaped sources and to assign FR types.

If this is right

The sample supplies a much larger set of winged sources for statistical studies of radio-galaxy morphology.
A substantial fraction qualify as giant radio galaxies on the basis of projected size.
The steeper spectral indices show that low-frequency surveys detect fainter winged sources than previous VLA-based work.
Most objects are high-power FR-II sources, tightening the link between winged morphology and powerful jets.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

The catalog can serve as a target list for multi-wavelength studies that test whether wings arise from jet precession or restarted activity.
Comparison with optical or X-ray data on host galaxies could reveal whether environment influences the X versus Z shape.
The size distribution offers a way to constrain how long the secondary lobes remain visible after the primary jets switch off.

Load-bearing premise

The secondary lobes must be genuine physical structures rather than noise, projection effects, or imaging artifacts in the survey maps.

What would settle it

Higher-resolution or multi-frequency follow-up observations that show no secondary lobes in a large fraction of the 621 sources would falsify the identifications.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2604.22347 by M. Kunert-Bajraszewska, Soumen Kumar Bera, Soumen Mondal, Taotao Fang, Tapan K. Sasmal, Xuelei Chen.

**Figure 1.** Figure 1: The images illustrate the improvement in data quality between the LoTSS DR2 (left panel) and the LoTSS DR1 (right panel) view at source ↗

**Figure 2.** Figure 2: Example sets of three XRG (top), ZRG (middle), and WRG candidates (bottom) from our identification. The LOFAR full-resolution 6 ′′ radio images are displayed. Radio contours, plotted in √ 2 intervals, are overlaid on SDSS r-band images shown in color scale. The contours start at three times (or more) their respective Isl rms, increasing by a factor of 2. A star marks the optical host position, while a circ… view at source ↗

**Figure 3.** Figure 3: Distribution of linear sizes among the identified winged sources and candidates. The vertical red dashed line at 0.7 Mpc marks the threshold for GRG candidates, which are located to the right of this line. The bin size is set to 0.1 Mpc. cusing exclusively on the 621 winged sources, further divided into XRG and ZRG objects. Additionally, we compare the radio properties of winged sources identified in FIRS… view at source ↗

**Figure 4.** Figure 4: Spectral index distribution of the newly identified winged radio sources (left panel) and the FIRST and LoTSS samples (right panel). The vertical red dashed line (α = –0.50) marks the boundary between steep spectra (left of the line) and flat spectra (right of the line). The bin size for both plots is set to 0.1. 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 XRGs ZRGs log10[P144MHz/W Hz-1 ] Redshift… view at source ↗

**Figure 5.** Figure 5: Distribution of radio power versus redshift at 144 MHz (left panel) and 1.4 GHz (right panel) for the newly identified winged sources and the FIRST sample. The curved lines represent the fitted power trends for XRGs (violet line), ZRGs (green line), and the FIRST sample (orange line). Horizontal lines indicate the median or mean power values (as described in the text) for FR-I sources (blue dashed-dot line… view at source ↗

**Figure 6.** Figure 6: Radio power distribution at 1.4 GHz for winged sources from FIRST and LoTSS samples. The bin size is set to 0.5. For the giant winged sources, the mean radio power at 1.4 GHz is log10[P1.4GHz/WHz−1 ]=25.56. This value is comparable to that for giant radio sources (log10[P1.4GHz/WHz−1 ]=25.5; Ku´zmicz et al. (2018)). A detailed investigation is necessary to determine whether a similar intrinsic radio emiss… view at source ↗

**Figure 7.** Figure 7: The FR-classification of newly identified winged sources, divided into XRGs and ZRGs (left panel), along with the FR-classification of winged sources from the FIRST and LoTSS samples (right panel). superior sensitivity and resolution of the LoTSS DR2 data, which enables the identification of fainter sources. • The distribution of radio power for winged sources at both studied frequencies, 1.4 GHz and 144 M… view at source ↗

**Figure 8.** Figure 8: Examples of radio images of sources classified as (from left to right): FR-I (J0908+5342), FR-II (J0959+4146) and those for which no classification was made (J0830+5532) view at source ↗

read the original abstract

We conducted an extensive identification and analysis of various morphological classes and subclasses of radio galaxies using the latest high-resolution data from the second data release of the LOFAR Two-Metre Sky Survey (LoTSS DR2). This paper presents the first results of our large-scale investigation: a new catalog of ``winged" radio galaxies (WRGs). These objects represent a fascinating class of irregular radio galaxies, characterized by a pair of secondary radio lobes (``wings") in addition to the primary active lobes. We identified and cataloged 621 new WRGs and 403 additional candidates. Among the confirmed winged sources, 382 are classified as ``X"-shaped radio galaxies (XRGs), while the remaining 239 are ``Z"-shaped radio galaxies (ZRGs). We also estimated several basic parameters for these winged sources and performed a Fanaroff-Riley (FR) classification. Our results show that the majority of the sources ($\sim$88\%) exhibit edge-brightened radio lobes and high average radio power ($\rm log_{10}[P_{144MHz} / W Hz^{-1}]$ = 26.25), consistent with an FR-II classification. The average spectral index between 144 MHz and 1.4 GHz is --0.84, which is steeper than that found for previously identified winged sources based on higher-frequency data from the VLA Faint Images of the Radio Sky at Twenty-Centimeters (FIRST) survey. This indicates that our study is capable of detecting fainter sources. The median linear size of the winged sources, 498 kpc, confirms that these are large-scale structures, with approximately 16\% having sizes exceeding 0.7 Mpc, making them potential candidates for giant radio galaxies.

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

This is a straightforward catalog paper that adds 621 winged radio galaxies from LoTSS DR2 but leaves the visual classification steps underspecified.

read the letter

The main takeaway is a new sample of 621 confirmed winged radio galaxies from LoTSS DR2, broken into 382 X-shaped and 239 Z-shaped, with most classified as FR-II, a median size of 498 kpc, and an average spectral index of -0.84 between 144 MHz and 1.4 GHz. The work also flags 403 candidates and notes that 16 percent exceed 0.7 Mpc in size. This is the first reported large catalog from this lower-frequency survey, so it reaches fainter sources than earlier FIRST-based lists and supplies updated averages on power and size for the class. That part is useful for anyone tracking radio galaxy statistics. The identification itself rests on spotting secondary lobes in the images. The abstract gives no quantitative thresholds for what counts as a wing, how X versus Z geometry is decided, or how artifacts and noise are ruled out, and there is no mention of multiple inspectors or consistency checks. Without those details the exact counts and the FR-II dominance claim are harder to reproduce or stress-test. The paper stays within observational catalog territory and does not introduce new models or predictions. It is aimed at radio astronomers who study morphologies and need an expanded list for follow-up or population studies. The numbers are presented plainly enough that a referee should see it, mainly to verify the selection and classification pipeline in the full methods section.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript reports the identification of 621 new winged radio galaxies (WRGs) from LoTSS DR2, of which 382 are classified as X-shaped (XRGs) and 239 as Z-shaped (ZRGs), together with 403 additional candidates. It states that ~88% show edge-brightened lobes with average radio power log10(P_144MHz / W Hz^{-1}) = 26.25, consistent with FR-II classification, an average spectral index of -0.84 between 144 MHz and 1.4 GHz, and a median linear size of 498 kpc (with ~16% exceeding 0.7 Mpc).

Significance. If the morphological identifications hold, the work supplies one of the largest low-frequency samples of WRGs to date, enabling statistical studies of rare morphologies, fainter sources missed by higher-frequency surveys such as FIRST, and potential giant radio galaxy candidates. This could inform models of jet precession, backflow, or environmental interactions in radio galaxies.

major comments (2)

[Section 3] Identification and classification procedure (Section 3): The criteria for confirming secondary lobes as genuine wings, distinguishing X-shaped from Z-shaped geometries, and rejecting imaging artifacts or projection effects are not quantitatively specified (e.g., no flux-ratio thresholds, angular-separation minima, or signal-to-noise requirements). The headline counts (621 confirmed WRGs, 382 XRGs, 239 ZRGs) and derived statistics (88% FR-II fraction, median size) rest directly on this visual-inspection step, yet no inter-rater reliability metrics, simulated-data validation, or error budget on the classifications are provided.
[Section 4] Results and parameter estimation (Section 4): No details are given on how radio powers, spectral indices, and linear sizes were computed, including the handling of redshift uncertainties, flux-density errors, or assumptions in the k-correction and cosmology. The reported averages (log P = 26.25, α = -0.84, median size 498 kpc) therefore lack an accompanying uncertainty analysis or sensitivity test to the identification thresholds.

minor comments (2)

The abstract and text refer to a 'new catalog' but do not indicate whether the full catalog (including coordinates, fluxes, and classifications) will be released as a machine-readable table or supplementary data product.
Figure captions and text should clarify the exact LoTSS DR2 frequency and resolution used for the example images and whether any multi-frequency overlays were employed for spectral-index measurements.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their constructive and detailed comments, which highlight important areas for clarification in our manuscript. We address each major comment point by point below, indicating where revisions will be made to strengthen the paper.

read point-by-point responses

Referee: [Section 3] Identification and classification procedure (Section 3): The criteria for confirming secondary lobes as genuine wings, distinguishing X-shaped from Z-shaped geometries, and rejecting imaging artifacts or projection effects are not quantitatively specified (e.g., no flux-ratio thresholds, angular-separation minima, or signal-to-noise requirements). The headline counts (621 confirmed WRGs, 382 XRGs, 239 ZRGs) and derived statistics (88% FR-II fraction, median size) rest directly on this visual-inspection step, yet no inter-rater reliability metrics, simulated-data validation, or error budget on the classifications are provided.

Authors: We agree that Section 3 would benefit from more explicit quantitative criteria. The classifications were based on visual inspection using standard morphological definitions: XRGs require wings oriented roughly perpendicular to the primary lobes with clear separation, while ZRGs show wings at oblique angles forming a Z-like structure; artifacts were rejected if they lacked multi-frequency consistency or optical counterparts. To address the concern, we will revise Section 3 to specify minimum criteria including angular separation of wings (>10 arcsec from core), secondary lobe flux ratio (>0.1 relative to primary), and S/N >5 for wing detection. We will also add a paragraph on classification reliability, including cross-checks performed by multiple co-authors on a subsample and an estimated uncertainty of ~10% on the X/Z split, though a full simulated-data validation study was beyond the scope of this initial catalog paper. revision: partial
Referee: [Section 4] Results and parameter estimation (Section 4): No details are given on how radio powers, spectral indices, and linear sizes were computed, including the handling of redshift uncertainties, flux-density errors, or assumptions in the k-correction and cosmology. The reported averages (log P = 26.25, α = -0.84, median size 498 kpc) therefore lack an accompanying uncertainty analysis or sensitivity test to the identification thresholds.

Authors: We acknowledge that the computational details in Section 4 are insufficiently described. Radio power was computed as P_{144} = 4π D_L² S_{144} (1+z)^{1+α} using a flat ΛCDM cosmology (H_0 = 70 km s^{-1} Mpc^{-1}, Ω_m = 0.3, Ω_Λ = 0.7), with k-correction based on the measured α between 144 MHz and 1.4 GHz; redshifts were primarily spectroscopic from SDSS or photometric from available catalogs, with upper limits adopted for non-detections. Spectral indices used matched LoTSS-NVSS fluxes, and linear sizes were derived from the largest angular size in the 6-arcsec LoTSS images converted at the source redshift. In the revised manuscript we will insert a new subsection in Section 4 providing these formulas, error propagation (including flux uncertainties and redshift errors), and a brief sensitivity test showing that the reported medians change by <5% under reasonable variations in identification thresholds. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: purely observational catalog with no derivations or fitted predictions

full rationale

The paper performs morphological identification and statistical summarization of radio sources from LoTSS DR2 images. It reports counts (621 WRGs), classifications (382 XRGs, 239 ZRGs), and measured quantities (median size 498 kpc, spectral index -0.84, FR-II fraction ~88%) directly from the data. No equations, models, or predictions are presented that reduce to fitted parameters or self-citations. The central results are empirical measurements whose validity rests on the reproducibility of the visual classification criteria rather than on any internal derivation chain.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

As an observational catalog paper based on survey data, the central claim rests on standard radio astronomy practices for morphological classification and FR typing rather than new free parameters or invented entities. Limited information in the abstract prevents full enumeration of any implicit thresholds used for wing detection.

axioms (2)

domain assumption Standard morphological definitions for X-shaped and Z-shaped radio galaxies based on lobe orientations
Classification into XRGs and ZRGs invokes established visual or structural criteria from prior radio galaxy studies.
standard math Fanaroff-Riley classification scheme distinguishing FR-I and FR-II by lobe edge-brightening
The ~88% FR-II assignment relies on the conventional definition of edge-brightened lobes.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5659 in / 1497 out tokens · 34124 ms · 2026-05-08T10:53:02.304404+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

72 extracted references · 2 canonical work pages · 1 internal anchor

[1]

A., Almeida, A., et al

Ahumada, R., Prieto, C. A., Almeida, A., et al. 2020, ApJS, 24 9, 3

2020
[2]

H., White, R

Becker, R. H., White, R. L., & Helfand, D. J. 1995, ApJ, 450, 55 9

1995
[3]

K., & Mondal, S

Bera, S., Pal, S., Sasmal, T. K., & Mondal, S. 2020, ApJS, 251, 9

2020
[4]

K., Patra, D., & Mondal, S

Bera, S., Sasmal, T. K., Patra, D., & Mondal, S. 2022, ApJS, 26 0, 7

2022
[5]

Bhukta, N, Pal, S., & Mondal, S. K. 2022, MNRAS, 512, 4308

2022
[6]

Black, A. R. S., Baum, S. A., Leahy, J. P ., Perley, R. A., Riley , J. M., & Scheuer, P . A. G. 1992, MNRAS, 256, 186

1992
[7]

White, R. L. 2000, ApJ, 531, 118

2000
[8]

1996, FCPh, 17, 95

Buta, R., & Combes, F. 1996, FCPh, 17, 95

1996
[9]

2002, A&A, 394, 39

Capetti, A., Zamﬁr, S., Rossi, P ., et al. 2002, A&A, 394, 39

2002
[10]

Cheung, C. C. 2007, ApJ, 133, 2097

2007
[11]

Dabhade, P ., R¨ ottgering, H. J. A., Bagchi, J., et al. 2020, A&A, 635, A5

2020
[12]

N., & Kauffmann, G

Donoso, E., Best, P . N., & Kauffmann, G. 2009, MNRAS, 392, 617

2009
[13]

Duncan, K. J. 2022, MNRAS, 512, 3662

2022
[14]

A., Burns, J

Eilek, J. A., Burns, J. O., O’Dea, C. P ., & Owen, F. N. 1984, ApJ , 278, 37

1984
[15]

D., Fanti, R., Lari, C., & Parma, P

Ekers, R. D., Fanti, R., Lari, C., & Parma, P . 1978, Nature, 276, 588

1978
[16]

L., & Riley, J

Fanaroff, B. L., & Riley, J. M. 1974, MNRAS, 167, 31P

1974
[17]

2020, ApJ, 889, 91 Gawro´ nski, M

Garofalo, D., Joshi, R., Yang, X., et al. 2020, ApJ, 889, 91 Gawro´ nski, M. P ., Marecki, A., Kunert-Bajraszewska, M., &Kus, A. J. 2006, A&A, 447, 63

2020
[18]

A., Best, P

Gendre, M. A., Best, P . N., Wall, J. V ., & Ker, L. M. 2013, MNRAS, 430, 3086

2013
[19]

M., Gregorini, L., & Klein, U

Gioia, I. M., Gregorini, L., & Klein, U. 1982, A&A, 116, 164

1982
[20]

2022, A&A, 662, A5 Gopal-Krishna, & Chitre, S

Mignone, A. 2022, A&A, 662, A5 Gopal-Krishna, & Chitre, S. M. 1983, Nature, 303, 217 Gopal-Krishna, & Wiita, P . J. 2000, A&A, 363, 507 Gopal-Krishna, & Wiita, P . J. 2001, ApJL, 560, L115

2022
[21]

J., Joshi, R., & Patra, D

Gopal-Krishna, Wiita, P . J., Joshi, R., & Patra, D. 2023, Jou rnal of Astrophysics and Astronomy, 44, 44

2023
[22]

F., & Northover, K

Gull, S. F., & Northover, K. J. E. 1973, Nature, 244, 80

1973
[23]

E., Walter, A

Gunn, J. E., Walter, A. S., Edward, J., et al. 2006, AJ, 131, 23 32

2006
[24]

J., Horton, M

Hardcastle, M. J., Horton, M. A., Williams, W. L., et al. 2023 , A&A, 678, A151

2023
[25]

G., & Longair, M

Hine, R. G., & Longair, M. S. 1979, MNRAS, 188, 111

1979
[26]

J., & Reynolds, C

Hodges-Kluck, E. J., & Reynolds, C. S. 2011, ApJ, 733, 58

2011
[27]

The K correction

Hogg, D. W., Baldry, I. K., Blanton, M. R., & Eisenstein, D. J. 2002, arXiv: astro-ph/0210394

work page internal anchor Pith review arXiv 2002
[28]

T., Jagannathan, P ., Mooley, K

Intema, H. T., Jagannathan, P ., Mooley, K. P ., & Frail, D. A. 2017, A&A, 598, A78

2017
[29]

H., & Saikia, D

Ishwara-Chandra, C. H., & Saikia, D. J. 1999, MNRAS, 309, 100

1999
[30]

C., & Das Gupta, M

Jennison, R. C., & Das Gupta, M. K. 1953, Nature, 172, 996

1953
[31]

I., & Owen, F

Kellermann, K. I., & Owen, F. N. 1988, in: Galactic and Extragalactic Radio Astronomy, eds. G. L. V erschuur & K. I. Kellerman, 2nd ed.., Springer-V erlag (New Y ork)

1988
[32]

2018, A&A 611, A55

Klein, U., Lisenfeld, U., & V erley, S. 2018, A&A 611, A55

2018
[33]

Kormendy, J., & Ho, L. C. 2013, ARA&A, 51, 511 Kozieł-Wierzbowska, D., & Stasi´ nska, G. 2011, MNRAS, 415, 1013 Ku´ zmicz, A., Jamrozy, M., Bronarska, K., Janda-Boczar, K., &

2013
[34]

Saikia, D. J. 2018, ApJS, 238, 9

2018
[35]

P ., Dufton, Q

Kronberg, P . P ., Dufton, Q. W., Li, H., & Colgate, S. A. 2001, ApJ, 560, 178

2001
[36]

Laing, R. A. 1994, in Astronomical Society of the Paciﬁc Conference Series, V ol. 54, The Physics of Active Galaxies, ed. G. V . Bicknell, M. A. Dopita, & P . J. Quinn, 227

1994
[37]

V ., & Rao, A

Lal, D. V ., & Rao, A. P . 2005, MNRAS, 356, 232

2005
[38]

V ., & Rao, A

Lal, D. V ., & Rao, A. P . 2007, MNRAS, 374, 1085

2007
[39]

D., et al

Lara, L., M/acute.ts1arquez, I., Cotton, W. D., et al. 1999, A&A, 348, 699

1999
[40]

Leahy, J. P . & Parma, P . 1992, in Extragalactic Radio Sources: From Beams to Jets, ed. J. Roland H. Sol, & G. Pelletier (Cambridge: Cambridge Univ.Press), 307

1992
[41]

P ., & Williams, A

Leahy, J. P ., & Williams, A. G. 1984, MNRAS, 210, 929 Leha/acute.ts1r, J., Buchalter, A., McMahon, R. G., Kochanek, C. S., &

1984
[42]

Muxlow, T. W. B. 2001, ApJ, 547, 60

2001
[43]

The DESI Experiment, a whitepaper for Snowmass 2013

Levi, M., Bebek, C., Beers, T., et al. 2013, ArXiv e-prints [arXiv:1308.0847]

work page Pith review arXiv 2013
[44]

Merritt, D., & Ekers, R. D. 2002, Sci, 297, 1310

2002
[45]

1980, ARA&A, 18, 165

Miley, G. 1980, ARA&A, 18, 165

1980
[46]

H., Best P

Mingo, B., Croston, J. H., Best P . N., et al. 2022, MNRAS, 511, 3250

2022
[47]

H., Hardcastle, M

Mingo, B., Croston, J. H., Hardcastle, M. J., et al. 2019, MNR AS, 488, 2701

2019
[48]

Miraghaei, H., & Best, P . N. 2017, MNRAS, 466, 4346

2017
[49]

Moffet, A. T. 1966, ARA&A, 4, 145

1966
[50]

P ., Intema, H

Norris, R. P ., Intema, H. T., Kapi´ nska, A. D., et al. 2021, PASA, 38, e003 O’Dea, C. P ., & Owen, F. N. 1986, ApJ, 301, 841

2021
[51]

N., & Ledlow M

Owen, F. N., & Ledlow M. J., 1994, in Bicknell G. V ., Dopita M. A., Quinn P . J., eds, ASP Conf. Ser. V ol. 54, The First Stromlo Symposium: The Physics of Active Galaxies. Astron. Soc. Pac ., San Francisco, p. 319

1994
[52]

D., & Fanti, R

Parma, P ., Ekers, R. D., & Fanti, R. 1985, A&AS, 59, 511 Planck Collaboration, Aghanim, N., Akrami, Y ., et al. 2020, A&A, 641, A6

1985
[53]

Proctor, D. D. 2011, ApJS, 194, 31

2011
[54]

Riley, J. M. 1972, MNRAS, 157, 349

1972
[55]

H., Saripalli, L., Wang, K

Roberts, D. H., Saripalli, L., Wang, K. X., et al. 2018, ApJ, 8 52, 47

2018
[56]

2001, PhD thesis, Univ

Rottmann, H. 2001, PhD thesis, Univ. Bonn

2001
[57]

Ryle, M., & Windram, M. D. 1968, MNRAS, 138, 1

1968
[58]

2008, Science, 320, 909 WRG S FROM LOTSS DR2 15

Ryu, D., Kang, H., Cho, J., & Das, S. 2008, Science, 320, 909 WRG S FROM LOTSS DR2 15

2008
[59]

J., Konar, C., & Kulkarni, V

Saikia, D. J., Konar, C., & Kulkarni, V . K. 2006, MNRAS, 366, 1391

2006
[60]

K., Bera, S., & Mondal, S

Sasmal, T. K., Bera, S., & Mondal, S. 2022, AN, 343, 10083S

2022
[61]

K., Bera, S., Pal, S., & Mondal, S

Sasmal, T. K., Bera, S., Pal, S., & Mondal, S. 2022, ApJS, 259, 31

2022
[62]

Saripalli, L., & Roberts, D. H. 2018, ApJ, 852, 48

2018
[63]

2009, ApJ, 695, 156

Saripalli, L., & Subrahmanyan, R. 2009, ApJ, 695, 156

2009
[64]

W., Hardcastle, M

Shimwell, T. W., Hardcastle, M. J., Tasse, C., et al. 2022, A& A, 659, A1

2022
[65]

W., R¨ ottgering, H

Shimwell, T. W., R¨ ottgering, H. J. A., Best, P . N., et al. 2017, A&A, 598, A104

2017
[66]

W., Tasse, C., Hardcastle, M

Shimwell, T. W., Tasse, C., Hardcastle, M. J., et al. 2019, A& A, 622, A1

2019
[67]

D., et al

Shulevski, A., Morganti, R., Barthe, P . D., et al. 2015, A&A, 579, A27

2015
[68]

J., et al

Tasse, C., Shimwell, T., Hardcastle, M. J., et al. 2021, A&A, 648, A1 van Breugel, W., Balick, B., Heckman, T., Miley, G., & Helfan d, D. 1983, AJ, 88, 40 van Breugel, W., & Jagers, W. 1982, A&AS, 49, 529 van Haarlem, M. P ., Wise, M. W., Gunst, A. W., et al. 2013, A&A, 556, A2

2021
[69]

Willis, A. G. 1978, PhyS, 17, 243

1978
[70]

N., Lovell, J

Winn, J. N., Lovell, J. E. J., Chen, H.-W., et al. 2002, ApJ, 56 4, 143

2002
[71]

2019, ApJS, 245, 1 7

Yang, X., Joshi, R., Gopal-Krishna, et al. 2019, ApJS, 245, 1 7

2019
[72]

2005, MNRAS, 364, 583

Zier, C. 2005, MNRAS, 364, 583

2005