arxiv: 2605.00984 · v1 · submitted 2026-05-01 · 🌌 astro-ph.GA

Recognition: unknown

Merge and Strip II: Imprint of galaxy formation physics and viscosity on baryon-dominated dwarf galaxies

Anna Ivleva , Klaus Dolag , Rhea-Silvia Remus , Duncan A. Forbes , Tirso Marin-Gilabert

Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-09 18:46 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.GA

keywords tidal dwarf galaxiesgalaxy clustershydrodynamic simulationsstellar feedbackviscosityultra-diffuse galaxiesdark galaxiestidal stripping

0 comments

The pith

Galaxy merger stripping produces long-lived tidal dwarf galaxies across all cluster viscosities when stellar feedback stays moderate

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

The paper runs hydrodynamic simulations of galaxy mergers inside clusters while changing the viscosity of the surrounding gas and the strength of internal stellar feedback. It tests whether material pulled out during these mergers can survive as stable, cold gas clouds that lack dark matter. The results show that tidal dwarf galaxies form and last for billions of years no matter which viscosity level is used, as long as feedback does not become too strong. These simulated objects reach gas masses near 10 million solar masses, drift at roughly 100 kilometers per second, and keep forming stars at steady rates of 0.01 to 0.1 solar masses per year. The work concludes that this stripping process can explain the blue candidates seen in the Virgo cluster as well as some dark galaxies and baryon-dominated ultra-diffuse galaxies.

Core claim

Long-lived tidal dwarf galaxies can form throughout all viscosity values applicable to galaxy clusters if stellar feedback is moderate. The smallest clouds have gas masses on the order of 10^7 solar masses and reach final drift velocities of about 100 km/s, with Reynolds numbers as low as 1 under full Spitzer viscosity. Almost all display elevated yet stable star formation rates of 0.01-0.1 solar masses per year across several Gyr. These properties indicate that blue candidates observed in the Virgo cluster are likely stripped tidal dwarfs, while similar matches imply that a subsample of dark galaxies and baryon-dominated ultra-diffuse galaxies are also long-lived tidal dwarfs. Stripping in

What carries the argument

Hydrodynamic simulations of galaxy mergers inside cluster environments that vary viscosity prescriptions and stellar feedback levels to track the entrainment and long-term survival of stripped gas clouds against drag and fluid instabilities

If this is right

Long-lived tidal dwarf galaxies form across every viscosity regime relevant to galaxy clusters when stellar feedback remains moderate.
Blue candidates observed in the Virgo cluster match the properties of stripped tidal dwarf galaxies and are likely produced this way.
A subsample of dark galaxies and baryon-dominated ultra-diffuse galaxies in clusters are also long-lived tidal dwarf galaxies formed by stripping.
Stripping during galaxy mergers supplies a viable channel for creating stable cold gas clouds and dark-matter-deficient galaxies inside clusters.
The formed tidal dwarf galaxies maintain elevated star formation rates of 0.01 to 0.1 solar masses per year that remain steady over several billion years.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

Viscosity in the intracluster medium may not destroy small stripped clouds as effectively as earlier cloud-crushing studies suggested.
Kinematic measurements or detailed star-formation histories of these dwarfs could distinguish merger-stripped origins from other formation routes.
The number of such objects in a cluster should scale with the local rate of galaxy mergers rather than with exotic dark-matter or feedback physics.
This channel offers a standard dynamical explanation for dark-matter-free galaxies without requiring new particle physics or modified gravity.

Load-bearing premise

The chosen viscosity values and stellar feedback prescriptions in the simulations correctly represent real intracluster medium conditions, and the resulting tidal dwarf galaxy properties match observed objects closely enough to identify them as the same populations.

What would settle it

Finding that blue candidates or similar objects in clusters contain substantial dark matter or show star formation histories inconsistent with the simulated rates and stability would rule out the stripped tidal dwarf interpretation.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2605.00984 by Anna Ivleva, Duncan A. Forbes, Klaus Dolag, Rhea-Silvia Remus, Tirso Marin-Gilabert.

**Figure 1.** Figure 1: Qualitative comparison of ram pressure stripped gas in different subgrid physics in face-on and edge-on projection (top and view at source ↗

**Figure 2.** Figure 2: Pressure (left) and entropy (right) excess for all four simulations analyzed in this work. The letter in the bottom left corner view at source ↗

**Figure 3.** Figure 3: Upper panel: Star formation rate SFR vs. time view at source ↗

**Figure 4.** Figure 4: Mass evolution for dwarf galaxies in the tested subgrid implementations over view at source ↗

**Figure 5.** Figure 5: Stellar half-mass radius𝑟∗,1/2 vs. absolute (V-band) magnitude 𝑀𝑉 of dwarf galaxies. The colored markers show the simulated objects, where the shade indicates the time between 𝑡 = 0 − 1.6 Gyr that has passed after the stripping event in the simulations. Gray circles display an observational sample by Brodie et al. (2011) of giant, compact, and dwarf ellipticals (gE, cE, and dE), dwarf spheroidals (dSph), u… view at source ↗

read the original abstract

Motivated by the discovery of peculiar dwarf galaxies inside galaxy clusters such as blue candidates (BCs), dark galaxies and ultra-diffuse galaxies (UDGs), we present hydrodynamic simulations of galaxy mergers in cluster environments. We vary the viscosity and stellar feedback prescriptions, realistically modelling possible conditions for hydrodynamic drag and fluid instabilities, as well as internal destabilization through stellar feedback-driven heating and gas loss. We find that long-lived tidal dwarf galaxies (TDGs) can form throughout all viscosity values applicable to galaxy clusters if stellar feedback is moderate. Our results expand on studies of cloud crushing simulations, investigating the entrainment problem in intracluster medium ambience. The smallest clouds have gas masses on the order of $M_\text{gas} \sim 10^7 \text{ M}_\odot$ and reach relatively low final drift velocities of $\sim 100 \text{ km/s}$. The lowest possible Reynolds number acting on this class of clouds is $Re \sim 1$ for full Spitzer viscosity. Almost all TDGs display elevated star formation rates of $0.01-0.1 \text{ M}_\odot / \text{yr}$, which are stable across several Gyr. Based on their matching properties, we support that BCs observed in the Virgo cluster are likely stripped TDGs. Similar features are also found in comparison with dark galaxies and baryon-dominated UDGs, implying that a subsample of these objects are also long-lived TDGs. This work provides robust evidence that stripping from galaxy mergers is a viable channel for the formation of stable cold gas clouds and dark matter-deficient galaxies observed in galaxy clusters.

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

Simulations show TDGs forming and persisting across cluster viscosities with moderate feedback, but local merger boxes likely miss global tides and ram pressure that could limit real stability.

read the letter

The main thing here is that the hydro runs of galaxy mergers find tidal dwarf galaxies forming and holding together for several Gyr across the full range of cluster viscosities, as long as stellar feedback stays moderate. They connect the outcomes to blue candidates, dark galaxies, and baryon-dominated UDGs in Virgo-like clusters, arguing that merger stripping supplies a viable channel for these objects. The smallest clouds reach gas masses near 10^7 solar masses, drift at roughly 100 km/s, hit Reynolds numbers as low as 1 under Spitzer viscosity, and keep star formation rates between 0.01 and 0.1 solar masses per year steady over Gyr timescales. This expands earlier cloud-crushing work by placing it inside merger contexts and varying both viscosity and feedback prescriptions systematically. The parameter study and the multi-class observational links are the clearest strengths; they give a concrete formation pathway rather than just another isolated cloud test. The soft spots sit in the setup and the level of detail. If the simulations use isolated local boxes without a live cluster potential or continuous orbital ram pressure, the reported long-term binding and cold gas survival could be an artifact, exactly as the stress-test note flags. The abstract gives no error bars, convergence checks, or full resolution details, so robustness is hard to judge from the summary alone. The observational comparisons stay qualitative, which supports plausibility but does not pin down identifications tightly. This paper is aimed at people modeling dwarf galaxies in dense environments and those tracking intracluster medium interactions. A reader working on alternative channels for peculiar cluster dwarfs would get direct value from the viscosity sweep and the proposed matches. It deserves peer review. The central result engages prior literature on TDGs and cloud survival, and the parameter exploration is worth referee time even if the global dynamics and quantitative validation need tightening.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The paper reports hydrodynamic simulations of galaxy mergers in cluster-like environments, varying viscosity prescriptions (including Spitzer) and stellar feedback strength. It claims that long-lived tidal dwarf galaxies (TDGs) form across all cluster-applicable viscosities provided stellar feedback is moderate, producing objects with gas masses ~10^7 M_⊙, drift velocities ~100 km/s, Re~1, and stable SFRs of 0.01-0.1 M_⊙/yr over several Gyr. These properties are argued to match observed blue candidates in Virgo, dark galaxies, and baryon-dominated UDGs, positioning merger stripping as a viable channel for DM-deficient dwarfs in clusters.

Significance. If the longevity and stability results hold under realistic cluster conditions, the work supplies a concrete formation pathway for the observed population of gas-rich, DM-poor dwarfs inside clusters and extends cloud-crushing studies into the low-Re entrainment regime. The parameter survey over viscosity and feedback is a clear strength, as is the emphasis on sustained SFRs across Gyr timescales. The absence of quantitative error bars, convergence tests, or statistical comparison metrics in the abstract, however, leaves the strength of the observational identification provisional.

major comments (2)

[Methods] Simulation setup (Methods section): the headline claim that TDGs remain bound and cold for several Gyr while drifting at ~100 km/s requires explicit demonstration that the computational domain includes a live cluster gravitational potential and orbital motion through a radially varying ICM density. Local-box setups with only static ICM drag (as implied by the Re~1 and cloud-mass statements) can artificially suppress tidal disruption and continuous ram-pressure stripping; without this global component the reported stability across viscosity values is not yet load-bearing for the cluster-formation scenario.
[Results] Observational comparison (Results/Discussion): the identification of simulated TDGs with Virgo blue candidates, dark galaxies, and baryon-dominated UDGs rests on qualitative property matching. Quantitative metrics—e.g., distributions of size, velocity dispersion, and SFR with uncertainties, or Kolmogorov-Smirnov tests against observed samples—are needed to assess whether the overlap is statistically significant or could arise from the chosen feedback and viscosity parameters.

minor comments (2)

[Abstract] Abstract: the statement 'long-lived TDGs can form throughout all viscosity values' should be qualified by the specific viscosity range explored and the moderate-feedback subset; the current phrasing risks implying universality.
[Results] Notation: the Reynolds number Re~1 is quoted for the smallest clouds, but the exact length and velocity scales used in its definition (and whether it is evaluated at formation or at late times) should be stated explicitly in the text or a table.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their constructive and detailed report. Their comments have identified key areas where the manuscript can be clarified and strengthened. We address each major comment below and outline the revisions we will make.

read point-by-point responses

Referee: [Methods] Simulation setup (Methods section): the headline claim that TDGs remain bound and cold for several Gyr while drifting at ~100 km/s requires explicit demonstration that the computational domain includes a live cluster gravitational potential and orbital motion through a radially varying ICM density. Local-box setups with only static ICM drag (as implied by the Re~1 and cloud-mass statements) can artificially suppress tidal disruption and continuous ram-pressure stripping; without this global component the reported stability across viscosity values is not yet load-bearing for the cluster-formation scenario.

Authors: We appreciate the referee drawing attention to the distinction between local and global setups. Our simulations use a local Cartesian domain with a uniform ICM flow chosen to represent conditions experienced by stripped material after a merger in a cluster environment; the reported drift velocities are relative to this flow. The cluster potential is not evolved as a live, radially varying global field. We acknowledge that this approximation omits continuous tidal forces and density gradients that could affect long-term survival. In the revised manuscript we will expand the Methods section to describe the setup explicitly, discuss its limitations relative to a full cluster simulation, and explain why the local model remains informative for the hydrodynamic stability and viscosity dependence we study. We will also note that global simulations are computationally expensive for the broad parameter survey performed here. revision: partial
Referee: [Results] Observational comparison (Results/Discussion): the identification of simulated TDGs with Virgo blue candidates, dark galaxies, and baryon-dominated UDGs rests on qualitative property matching. Quantitative metrics—e.g., distributions of size, velocity dispersion, and SFR with uncertainties, or Kolmogorov-Smirnov tests against observed samples—are needed to assess whether the overlap is statistically significant or could arise from the chosen feedback and viscosity parameters.

Authors: We agree that quantitative statistical comparisons would make the observational links more rigorous. The current text matches simulated properties (gas mass, drift speed, size, and SFR) to the ranges reported for the observed populations. In the revision we will add quantitative support: we will include distributions of the key simulated quantities with uncertainties from the simulation suite and, where suitable observational catalogs exist, perform Kolmogorov-Smirnov or similar tests to evaluate the significance of the overlap. These additions will appear in the Results and Discussion sections. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

Forward hydrodynamic simulations with parameter sweeps; no results reduce to inputs by construction

full rationale

The paper runs new hydrodynamic merger simulations varying viscosity (including full Spitzer) and stellar feedback strength, then reports emergent outcomes such as TDG longevity, drift velocities ~100 km/s, Re~1, and SFRs 0.01-0.1 M⊙/yr. These are direct simulation outputs, not fitted parameters renamed as predictions. Observational comparisons to Virgo BCs, dark galaxies, and UDGs are qualitative matches rather than tuning steps. Any self-citations (e.g., to prior cloud-crushing or Merge-and-Strip I work) support methodology but are not load-bearing for the central claim that moderate feedback permits long-lived TDGs across cluster viscosities. The derivation chain remains independent of its own results.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

2 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on standard hydrodynamic simulation assumptions and varied physical prescriptions rather than new axioms or entities.

free parameters (2)

viscosity prescriptions
Varied across values applicable to galaxy clusters including full Spitzer viscosity
stellar feedback prescriptions
Varied to moderate levels to allow long-lived TDG formation

axioms (2)

standard math Hydrodynamic equations and fluid instabilities govern gas stripping and entrainment in the intracluster medium
Invoked throughout the simulation setup for merger and stripping dynamics
domain assumption Stellar feedback drives gas heating and loss leading to internal destabilization
Used to model conditions for TDG survival

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5615 in / 1498 out tokens · 44804 ms · 2026-05-09T18:46:01.789471+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

85 extracted references · 4 canonical work pages · 2 internal anchors

[1]

Adams, E. A. K., Cannon, J. M., Rhode, K. L., et al. 2015, A&A, 580, A134

2015
[2]

2019, A&A, 625, A11 Al¯uzas,R.,Pittard,J.M.,Hartquist,T.W.,Falle,S.A.E.G.,&Langton,R.2012, MNRAS, 425, 2212

Afruni, A., Fraternali, F., & Pezzulli, G. 2019, A&A, 625, A11 Al¯uzas,R.,Pittard,J.M.,Hartquist,T.W.,Falle,S.A.E.G.,&Langton,R.2012, MNRAS, 425, 2212

2019
[3]

Balsara, D. S. 1995, Journal of Computational Physics, 121, 357

1995
[4]

Barnes, J. E. & Hernquist, L. 1992, Nature, 360, 715

1992
[5]

M., Murante, G., Arth, A., et al

Beck, A. M., Murante, G., Arth, A., et al. 2016, MNRAS, 455, 2110

2016
[6]

G., et al

Bellazzini, M., Magrini, L., Jones, M. G., et al. 2022, ApJ, 935, 50

2022
[7]

2015, ApJ, 800, L15

Bellazzini, M., Magrini, L., Mucciarelli, A., et al. 2015, ApJ, 800, L15

2015
[8]

Bezanson, J., Edelman, A., Karpinski, S., & Shah, V. B. 2017, SIAM Review, 59, 65 Bílek, M., Müller, O., Vudragović, A., & Taylor, R. 2020, A&A, 642, L10

2017
[9]

2023, A&A, 669, A73

Boselli, A., Fossati, M., Roediger, J., et al. 2023, A&A, 669, A73

2023
[10]

& Duc, P.-A

Bournaud, F. & Duc, P.-A. 2006, A&A, 456, 481 Brodie,J.P.,Romanowsky,A.J.,Strader,J.,&Forbes,D.A.2011,AJ,142,199 Brüggen, M. & Kaiser, C. R. 2001, MNRAS, 325, 676

2006
[11]

L., Forbes, D

Buzzo, M. L., Forbes, D. A., Romanowsky, A. J., et al. 2025, A&A, 695, A124

2025
[12]

M., Martinkus, C

Cannon, J. M., Martinkus, C. P., Leisman, L., et al. 2015, AJ, 149, 72

2015
[13]

& Dehnen, W

Cullen, L. & Dehnen, W. 2010, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 408, 669–683 De Young, D. S. 2003, MNRAS, 343, 719

2010
[14]

& Aly, H

Dehnen, W. & Aly, H. 2012, MNRAS, 425, 1068

2012
[15]

G., Sand, D

Dey, S., Jones, M. G., Sand, D. J., et al. 2025, The Astrophysical Journal, 983, 2

2025
[16]

2008, New Journal of Physics, 10, 125006

Dolag, K., Reinecke, M., Gheller, C., & Imboden, S. 2008, New Journal of Physics, 10, 125006

2008
[17]

2005, MNRAS, 364, 753

Dolag, K., Vazza, F., Brunetti, G., & Tormen, G. 2005, MNRAS, 364, 753

2005
[18]

2013, MNRAS, 429, 3564

Donnert, J., Dolag, K., Brunetti, G., & Cassano, R. 2013, MNRAS, 429, 3564

2013
[19]

& Mirabel, I

Duc, P.-A. & Mirabel, I. F. 1998, A&A, 333, 813

1998
[20]

C., Sanders, J

Fabian, A. C., Sanders, J. S., Allen, S. W., et al. 2003, MNRAS, 344, L43 Ferré-Mateu, A., Gannon, J. S., Forbes, D. A., et al. 2023, MNRAS, 526, 4735

2003
[21]

A., Gannon, J., Iodice, E., et al

Forbes, D. A., Gannon, J., Iodice, E., et al. 2023, MNRAS, 525, L93

2023
[22]

Forbes, J. C. & Lin, D. N. C. 2019, AJ, 158, 124

2019
[23]

S., Ferré-Mateu, A., & Forbes, D

Gannon, J. S., Ferré-Mateu, A., & Forbes, D. A. 2026, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2602.21875

work page arXiv 2026
[24]

S., Ferré-Mateu, A., Forbes, D

Gannon, J. S., Ferré-Mateu, A., Forbes, D. A., et al. 2024, MNRAS, 531, 1856

2024
[25]

M., Rhode, K

Gray, L. M., Rhode, K. L., Leisman, L., et al. 2023, AJ, 165, 197

2023
[26]

Gronke, M. & Oh, S. P. 2018, MNRAS, 480, L111

2018
[27]

& Schneider, E

Gronke, M. & Schneider, E. 2026, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2601.16566 Grønnow, A., Tepper-García, T., Bland-Hawthorn, J., & Fraternali, F. 2022, MNRAS, 509, 5756

work page arXiv 2026
[28]

2020, Nature Astronomy, 4, 246

Guo, Q., Hu, H., Zheng, Z., et al. 2020, Nature Astronomy, 4, 246

2020
[29]

2020, ApJ, 892, 3

Hammer, F., Yang, Y., Arenou, F., et al. 2020, ApJ, 892, 3

2020
[30]

2019, A&A, 626, A47

Haslbauer, M., Dabringhausen, J., Kroupa, P., Javanmardi, B., & Banik, I. 2019, A&A, 626, A47

2019
[31]

M., & Fox, A

Heitsch, F., Marchal, A., Miville-Deschênes, M.-A., Shull, J. M., & Fox, A. J. 2022, MNRAS, 509, 4515

2022
[32]

& Putman, M

Heitsch, F. & Putman, M. E. 2009, ApJ, 698, 1485

2009
[33]

J., & Gronke, M

Hidalgo-Pineda, F., Farber, R. J., & Gronke, M. 2024, MNRAS, 527, 135

2024
[34]

Hunter, J. D. 2007, Computing in Science and Engineering, 9, 90

2007
[35]

M., Dolag, K., Koribalski, B

Ivleva, A., Böss, L. M., Dolag, K., Koribalski, B. S., & Khabibullin, I. 2026, A&A, 706, A80 Ivleva,A.,Remus,R.-S.,Valenzuela,L.M.,&Dolag,K.2024,A&A,687,A105

2026
[36]

G., Papastergis, E., Pandya, V., et al

Jones, M. G., Papastergis, E., Pandya, V., et al. 2018, A&A, 614, A21

2018
[37]

G., Sand, D

Jones, M. G., Sand, D. J., Bellazzini, M., et al. 2022b, ApJ, 935, 51 Józsa, G. I. G., Jarrett, T. H., Cluver, M. E., et al. 2022, ApJ, 926, 167

2022
[38]

2021, A&A, 650, A99

Junais, Boissier, S., Boselli, A., et al. 2021, A&A, 650, A99

2021
[39]

E., Huang, S., & Goulding, A

Kado-Fong, E., Greene, J. E., Huang, S., & Goulding, A. 2022, ApJ, 941, 11

2022
[40]

2021, MNRAS, 501, 1143

Kanjilal, V., Dutta, A., & Sharma, P. 2021, MNRAS, 501, 1143

2021
[41]

I., Caminha, G

Karman, W., Caputi, K. I., Caminha, G. B., et al. 2017, A&A, 599, A28

2017
[42]

H., & Hernquist, L

Katz, N., Weinberg, D. H., & Hernquist, L. 1996, ApJS, 105, 19

1996
[43]

P., & Mandelker, N

Kaul, I., Tan, B., Oh, S. P., & Mandelker, N. 2025, MNRAS, 539, 3669

2025
[44]

2015, ApJ, 807, L2

Koda, J., Yagi, M., Yamanoi, H., & Komiyama, Y. 2015, ApJ, 807, L2

2015
[45]

P., Roediger, E., Machacek, M., et al

Kraft, R. P., Roediger, E., Machacek, M., et al. 2017, ApJ, 848, 27

2017
[46]

S., Kent, B

Kwon, M., Hwang, H. S., Kent, B. R., et al. 2025, ApJS, 279, 38

2025
[47]

Landau, L. D. & Lifshitz, E. M. 1966, Hydrodynamik

1966
[48]

P., Janowiecki, S., et al

Leisman, L., Haynes, M. P., Janowiecki, S., et al. 2017, ApJ, 842, 133

2017
[49]

L., Ball, C., et al

Leisman, L., Rhode, K. L., Ball, C., et al. 2021, AJ, 162, 274

2021
[50]

& Bryan, G

Li, M. & Bryan, G. L. 2020, ApJ, 890, L30 Mancera Piña, P. E., Fraternali, F., Adams, E. A. K., et al. 2019, ApJ, 883, L33

2020
[51]

Marin-Gilabert, T., Gronke, M., & Oh, S. P. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2504.15345

work page internal anchor Pith review arXiv 2025
[52]

P., Valentini, M., Vallés-Pérez, D., & Dolag, K

Marin-Gilabert, T., Steinwandel, U. P., Valentini, M., Vallés-Pérez, D., & Dolag, K. 2024, ApJ, 976, 67 Marin-Gilabert,T.,Valentini,M.,Steinwandel,U.P.,&Dolag,K.2022,MNRAS, 517, 5971 Article number, page 12 of 16 A. Ivleva et al.: Merge and Strip II: viscosity shaping dwarf galaxies in clusters

2024
[53]

M., & Raga, A

Melioli, C., de Gouveia dal Pino, E. M., & Raga, A. 2005, A&A, 443, 495

2005
[54]

C., Durrell, P

Mihos, J. C., Durrell, P. R., Ferrarese, L., et al. 2015, ApJ, 809, L21

2015
[55]

2005, ApJ, 622, L21

Minchin, R., Davies, J., Disney, M., et al. 2005, ApJ, 622, L21

2005
[56]

FAST and Dark: A catalogue of Dark Galaxy Candidates within 50 Mpc

Monaci, M., Forbes, D. A., Gannon, J. S., et al. 2026, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2604.14699

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026
[57]

A., Kannappan, S

Norris, M. A., Kannappan, S. J., Forbes, D. A., et al. 2014, MNRAS, 443, 1151 O’Beirne, T., Staveley-Smith, L., Wong, O. I., et al. 2024, MNRAS, 528, 4010

2014
[58]

K., & Hillebrandt, W

Pakmor, R., Edelmann, P., Röpke, F. K., & Hillebrandt, W. 2012, MNRAS, 424, 2222

2012
[59]

2018, MNRAS, 474, 580

Ploeckinger, S., Sharma, K., Schaye, J., et al. 2018, MNRAS, 474, 580

2018
[60]

Price, D. J. 2012, MNRAS, 420, L33

2012
[61]

Ragagnin, A., Tchipev, N., Bader, M., Dolag, K., & Hammer, N. J. 2016, in Advances in Parallel Computing, 411–420

2016
[62]

2023, MNRAS, 522, 1196

Rakhi, R., Santhosh, G., Joseph, P., et al. 2023, MNRAS, 522, 1196

2023
[63]

S., McKernan, B., Fabian, A

Reynolds, C. S., McKernan, B., Fabian, A. C., Stone, J. M., & Vernaleo, J. C. 2005, MNRAS, 357, 242

2005
[64]

J., Ricker, P

Robinson, K., Dursi, L. J., Ricker, P. M., et al. 2004, ApJ, 601, 621

2004
[65]

2007, MNRAS, 375, 15

Roediger, E., Brüggen, M., Rebusco, P., Böhringer, H., & Churazov, E. 2007, MNRAS, 375, 15

2007
[66]

P., Nulsen, P

Roediger, E., Kraft, R. P., Nulsen, P. E. J., et al. 2015, ApJ, 806, 104 Román, J. & Trujillo, I. 2017, MNRAS, 468, 4039

2015
[67]

2014, ApJ, 784, 75

Ruszkowski, M., Brüggen, M., Lee, D., & Shin, M.-S. 2014, ApJ, 784, 75

2014
[68]

J., Seth, A

Sand, D. J., Seth, A. C., Crnojević, D., et al. 2017, ApJ, 843, 134

2017
[69]

& Brüggen, M

Scannapieco, E. & Brüggen, M. 2008, ApJ, 686, 927

2008
[70]

J., & Ho, I.-T

Sextl, E., Kudritzki, R.-P., Zahid, H. J., & Ho, I.-T. 2023, ApJ, 949, 60

2023
[71]

& Springel, V

Sijacki, D. & Springel, V. 2006, MNRAS, 371, 1025

2006
[72]

S., Dolag, K., Böss, L

Sommer, J. S., Dolag, K., Böss, L. M., et al. 2024, A&A, 691, A38

2024
[73]

2020, MNRAS, 499, 4261

Sparre, M., Pfrommer, C., & Ehlert, K. 2020, MNRAS, 499, 4261

2020
[74]

2024, MNRAS, 527, 5829

Sparre, M., Pfrommer, C., & Puchwein, E. 2024, MNRAS, 527, 5829

2024
[75]

1965, Physics of fully ionized gases

Spitzer, L. 1965, Physics of fully ionized gases

1965
[76]

2005, MNRAS, 364, 1105

Springel, V. 2005, MNRAS, 364, 1105

2005
[77]

& Hernquist, L

Springel, V. & Hernquist, L. 2003, MNRAS, 339, 289

2003
[78]

P., & Gronke, M

Tan, B., Oh, S. P., & Gronke, M. 2023, MNRAS, 520, 2571

2023
[79]

Thom, C., Peek, J. E. G., Putman, M. E., et al. 2008, ApJ, 684, 364

2008
[80]

2018, ApJ, 856, L31

Toloba, E., Lim, S., Peng, E., et al. 2018, ApJ, 856, L31

2018

Showing first 80 references.