pith. sign in

arxiv: 2606.11036 · v1 · pith:MDNZ4RFOnew · submitted 2026-06-09 · 🌌 astro-ph.GA

The Small-scale Structures in the Wind of Messier 82

Yucheng Guo , Timothy Heckman , Sanchayeeta Borthakur , Peixin Zhu , Rosalia O'Brien , Ralph S. Sutherland , Lisa J. Kewley , Lee Armus
show 5 more authors
D. B. Fisher Sebastian Lopez Brant E. Robertson Evan E. Schneider Patrick L. Shopbell
This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-06-27 12:44 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.GA
keywords galactic windsM82filamentsHST imagingionized gasline ratiosstarburst galaxiesmultiphase outflows
0
0 comments X

The pith

Separating filamentary from diffuse gas in M82's wind shows shocks gaining importance at larger heights.

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

The paper uses deep HST narrow-band images to resolve the warm ionized gas in the southern wind of M82 on parsec scales. It builds a catalogue of filamentary structures and shows that their covering fraction and flux contribution drop with distance above the disk while the diffuse component grows. Line-ratio maps place the gas in an intermediate excitation state where the central starburst can supply the total Hα power, yet the separation between components and the radial trend in ratios indicate rising shock or similar heating in the outer diffuse wind. This approach directly ties visible morphology to the energy sources and multiphase makeup of the outflow.

Core claim

The Hα emission forms a highly connected network of compact filaments with typical projected widths of 5.3 pc and lengths of 9.5 pc. Both the projected covering fraction and the line-flux contribution of this filamentary component decline with height, leaving the outer wind increasingly dominated by diffuse emission. Optical line-ratio diagnostics show the warm ionized gas occupies an intermediate excitation regime in which photoionization by the central starburst can energetically power the observed Hα luminosity, while the systematic separation between filamentary and diffuse emission plus the evolution of the ratios with vertical distance point to an increasing contribution from shocks or

What carries the argument

A filament-finding pipeline applied to the Hα image that isolates compact strands and knots from the diffuse background, paired with spatially resolved maps of optical line ratios.

If this is right

  • The filamentary covering fraction and flux contribution both decline with vertical distance from the disk.
  • Line ratios evolve with height such that shocks or analogous heating become more important in the diffuse outer wind.
  • Photoionization from the central starburst remains energetically sufficient for the total observed Hα luminosity.
  • High-resolution separation of filamentary and diffuse components directly links morphology to excitation state and multiphase structure.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • Comparable filament networks are likely present in other starburst winds but will remain undetected without similar parsec-scale resolution.
  • Wind models should treat filamentary and diffuse phases as distinct with height-dependent excitation mechanisms.
  • Integral-field spectroscopy could check whether the observed line-ratio trends persist when line-of-sight confusion is reduced.
  • Multi-wavelength data on the same filaments could test how the hot wind phase interacts with the warm strands.

Load-bearing premise

Optical line-ratio diagnostics can cleanly distinguish photoionization from shock excitation without major contamination from density variations, metallicity gradients, or projection effects.

What would settle it

If new spectroscopy at the same locations shows that filament and diffuse line ratios are statistically identical at every height, or if the apparent decline in filament fraction disappears when projection is modeled explicitly.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2606.11036 by Brant E. Robertson, D. B. Fisher, Evan E. Schneider, Lee Armus, Lisa J. Kewley, Patrick L. Shopbell, Peixin Zhu, Ralph S. Sutherland, Rosalia O'Brien, Sanchayeeta Borthakur, Sebastian Lopez, Timothy Heckman, Yucheng Guo.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Footprint of the HST WFC3/UVIS observations (yellow) overlaid on the archival HST ACS F555W mosaic of M82 (M. Mutchler et al. 2007). The regions covered by the CWI observations are also indicated [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Median CWI spectra extracted from the region overlapping with the WFC3 field of view. The spectra are not flux calibrated; therefore, the ordinate is shown in arbitrary units. The transmission curves of the WFC3 narrow-band filters, together with the F658N filter used by M. Mutchler et al. (2007), are overplotted [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: All HST broad- and narrow-band images used in this work. The left four panels show our WFC3 imaging in F606W, F656N, F502N, F673N. The right-hand panel shows the archival ACS F658N image from M. Mutchler et al. (2007), whose bandpass includes both Hα and [N ii] emission lines. DrizzlePac package (A. S. Fruchter & et al. 2010; S. L. Hoffmann et al. 2021). Given the low surface-brightness nature of the wind … view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Multi-line view of the M82 outflow and its substructures. From top to bottom, the rows show the continuum-sub￾tracted Hα, [N ii], [S ii], and [O iii] emission-line maps. For each tracer, the first two columns show the same cropped field, displayed with different stretches to better visualise the outer and inner parts of the wind, respectively. Four representative regions are marked by coloured boxes: Regio… view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: The filament-detection procedure described in Section 3.1. (a) The continuum-subtracted Hα image. (b) The structure-enhanced detection image after removal of the large-scale diffuse component. (c) The preliminary filament mask obtained by applying a local S/N threshold and Gaus￾sian smoothing to improve connectivity. (d) The final fil￾ament map after linking contiguous pixels, rejecting small spurious regi… view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: The final reconstructed filament skeleton map. For visualisation, each skeleton is rendered with a thickness equal to the measured characteristic filament width (Sec￾tion 3.2). plane with the vertical distance from the base of the outflow, z. We find no clear evidence that the fila￾ment length, width, or inclination angle evolves system￾atically with z. We also find no significant correlation between filam… view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Filament width as a function of length. Indi￾vidual filaments are shown as points, while the solid curve indicates the binned median width; the shaded region illus￾trates the scatter range within each length bin. The filament width increases mildly with length [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_8.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Distributions of (a) measured filament widths and (b) projected lengths. Vertical solid lines mark the me￾dian values, and dashed lines indicate the 16th and 84th percentiles. The spatial resolution of WFC3/UVIS imaging is about 0.07” (1.3 pc). Although the diffuse component occupies most of the projected area ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Covering fraction as a function of height above the disk for the filamentary component (red) and the com￾plementary diffuse emission (blue). The filamentary covering fraction declines rapidly with height, showing that the fila￾ment network is concentrated in the inner wind, while the outer wind is increasingly dominated in projected area by diffuse emission. Taken together, Figures 10 and 11 imply that, wh… view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Vertical surface-brightness profiles measured within the outflow cone for Hα, [O iii], [S ii], and [N ii], shown for the total emission as well as the filamentary and diffuse components. Only bins with S/N > 2 are plotted. Shaded bands indicate the 1σ uncertainties. Note that the contrast between the surface-brighness of the filaments compared to the diffuse emission increases with distance. interfaces as… view at source ↗
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: Optical diagnostic line-ratio diagrams for the M82 outflow cone, showing [O iii]/Hα versus [S ii]/Hα (left) and [N ii]/Hα (right). Points show measurements in vertical bins and are colour-coded by component (filamentary, diffuse, and total); labels indicate the representative height of each bin. Despite the uncertainties, the filamentary and diffuse components occupy distinct regions of line-ratio space. … view at source ↗
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: Comparison of observed line ratios with theoretical excitation models in the [O iii]/Hα versus [S ii]/Hα (left) and [N ii]/Hα (right) diagnostic diagrams. Theoretical model grids are shown for the H ii-region photoionisation (red), slow shocks (purple), and fast shocks plus precursor (blue). Data points and colour coding follow [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_13.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Small-scale multiphase structure plays a central role in galactic-wind evolution, yet the parsec-scale morphology and excitation of the warm ionised gas remain poorly constrained. We present deep HST narrow-band imaging of the southern wind of Messier 82 (M82) in H$\alpha$, [OIII], [SII], and [NII], designed to resolve the warm ionised phase on parsec scales. The H$\alpha$ emission is detected to $\approx$2.1 kpc above the disk, while the fainter emission lines are detected over smaller radial extents, with [OIII] reaching $\approx$ 1.5 kpc. We develop a filament-finding pipeline for the H$\alpha$ image and construct a quantitative catalogue of the filamentary structures. The wind forms a highly connected network of strands and knots, dominated by compact filaments with typical projected widths of $\approx$5.3 pc and lengths of $\approx$ 9.5 pc. Both the projected covering fraction and the line-flux contribution of the filamentary component decline with height, showing that the outer wind becomes increasingly dominated by diffuse emission. Optical line-ratio diagnostics indicate that the warm ionised gas occupies an intermediate excitation regime: photoionisation by the central starburst can energetically power the observed H$\alpha$ luminosity, while the systematic separation between filamentary and diffuse emission, together with the evolution of the line ratios with vertical distance, suggests an increasing contribution from shocks or other similar heating in the diffuse outer wind. These results show that separating filamentary and diffuse emission in high-resolution imaging provides a powerful way to connect the morphology, excitation, and multiphase structure of galactic winds.

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 presents deep HST narrow-band imaging of the southern wind of M82 in Hα, [OIII], [SII], and [NII] to resolve parsec-scale structure in the warm ionized gas. It develops a filament-finding pipeline on the Hα image to produce a quantitative catalogue, reports that filaments have typical projected widths of ~5.3 pc and lengths of ~9.5 pc, shows that both covering fraction and flux contribution of the filamentary component decline with height (so the outer wind is increasingly diffuse), and uses optical line-ratio diagnostics to place the gas in an intermediate excitation regime where photoionization by the starburst can power the observed Hα luminosity while the filament/diffuse separation and vertical trends suggest increasing shock or similar heating contributions in the diffuse outer wind.

Significance. If the central claim holds, the work supplies a new quantitative catalogue of wind filaments together with a demonstration that filament/diffuse separation in high-resolution imaging can connect morphology to excitation and multiphase structure. The deep HST dataset and the explicit pipeline for filament detection are concrete strengths that could serve as a template for other wind studies.

major comments (3)
  1. [line-ratio diagnostics and interpretation section] The claim that the systematic offset in line ratios between filamentary and diffuse components plus the vertical evolution indicates an increasing shock contribution rests on an untested interpretation. No quantitative grids of photoionization or shock models are presented that vary density (expected to span orders of magnitude), metallicity gradients, or line-of-sight integration through a filamentary medium; standard optical diagnostics are known to be degenerate under these conditions.
  2. [filament-finding pipeline and catalogue section] The filament-finding pipeline and resulting statistics (widths, lengths, covering fractions, flux contributions) lack reported validation, error analysis, or robustness tests against detection thresholds and background subtraction; without these the decline of the filamentary component with height cannot be verified as load-bearing for the morphology-excitation connection.
  3. [observations and data reduction section] Details on data reduction, continuum subtraction, flux calibration, and how the differing radial extents of the lines ([OIII] to 1.5 kpc vs. Hα to 2.1 kpc) affect the line-ratio maps are not supplied, undermining the reliability of the excitation trends used to support the central claim.
minor comments (2)
  1. [abstract] The abstract states that photoionization 'can energetically power' the Hα luminosity; a brief quantitative comparison (e.g., required ionizing photon rate vs. starburst output) would strengthen this statement.
  2. [figures and line-ratio plots] Notation for the line ratios (e.g., [OIII]/Hα, [SII]/Hα) should be defined consistently in the text and figures to avoid ambiguity when comparing filament vs. diffuse components.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

3 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the thorough and constructive report. The comments highlight important areas for clarification and strengthening of the analysis. We address each major comment point-by-point below and outline the revisions we will make.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: The claim that the systematic offset in line ratios between filamentary and diffuse components plus the vertical evolution indicates an increasing shock contribution rests on an untested interpretation. No quantitative grids of photoionization or shock models are presented that vary density (expected to span orders of magnitude), metallicity gradients, or line-of-sight integration through a filamentary medium; standard optical diagnostics are known to be degenerate under these conditions.

    Authors: We agree that the interpretation is qualitative and that full quantitative modeling grids would strengthen the case. Our analysis uses standard optical diagnostics applied to the observed trends in line ratios between filamentary and diffuse gas and their evolution with height. These trends are consistent with increasing shock heating in the outer diffuse wind, while photoionization remains energetically viable near the disk. We will revise the relevant section to explicitly discuss the known degeneracies (density, metallicity, LOS effects) and the suggestive rather than definitive nature of the conclusion. Adding new model grids is beyond the scope of the current dataset but we will note this limitation clearly. revision: partial

  2. Referee: The filament-finding pipeline and resulting statistics (widths, lengths, covering fractions, flux contributions) lack reported validation, error analysis, or robustness tests against detection thresholds and background subtraction; without these the decline of the filamentary component with height cannot be verified as load-bearing for the morphology-excitation connection.

    Authors: We will add a new subsection (or appendix) detailing validation of the filament-finding pipeline. This will include robustness tests varying detection thresholds, background subtraction methods, and comparisons to alternative approaches, along with error estimates on the derived widths, lengths, covering fractions, and flux contributions. These tests will confirm that the reported decline with height is robust. revision: yes

  3. Referee: Details on data reduction, continuum subtraction, flux calibration, and how the differing radial extents of the lines ([OIII] to 1.5 kpc vs. Hα to 2.1 kpc) affect the line-ratio maps are not supplied, undermining the reliability of the excitation trends used to support the central claim.

    Authors: We will expand the observations and data reduction section with the requested details on the HST pipeline, continuum subtraction, and flux calibration. For the line-ratio maps, we will clarify that ratios are computed only in regions where all lines exceed the adopted S/N threshold; the differing radial extents mean outer wind ratios rely primarily on Hα and [SII], and we will discuss how this is accounted for in the vertical trends. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: direct observational measurements and standard diagnostics

full rationale

The paper reports new HST narrow-band imaging, applies a filament-finding pipeline to produce a catalog of measured widths/lengths/covering fractions/line fluxes, and applies standard optical line-ratio diagnostics to the observed emission. All reported trends (decline of filamentary contribution with height, systematic line-ratio offsets, intermediate excitation regime) are direct outputs of these measurements on the data. No equations, fitted parameters, or predictions reduce to the inputs by construction; no self-citations are invoked as load-bearing uniqueness theorems or ansatzes; the central claim follows from the imaging and spectroscopy without self-referential loops.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

1 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The analysis rests on standard nebular astrophysics assumptions for emission-line interpretation and physical scale conversion; no new entities are introduced.

free parameters (1)
  • filament detection thresholds
    The pipeline for identifying filaments from the H-alpha image likely requires tunable parameters (e.g., minimum contrast, length, or connectivity) that are not specified in the abstract.
axioms (2)
  • domain assumption Standard optical line-ratio diagnostics distinguish photoionization from shock heating in the warm ionized medium
    Invoked to interpret the systematic separation between filamentary and diffuse components and the evolution of ratios with height.
  • domain assumption Angular sizes can be converted to physical parsec scales using the known distance to M82
    Required to report filament widths and lengths in physical units.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 5896 in / 1530 out tokens · 32176 ms · 2026-06-27T12:44:40.966861+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

55 extracted references · 51 canonical work pages · 2 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    W., Bryan, G

    Abruzzo, M. W., Bryan, G. L., & Fielding, D. B. 2022, ApJ, 925, 199, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac3c48

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac3c48 2022

  2. [2]

    , archivePrefix = "arXiv", eprint =

    Allen, M. G., Groves, B. A., Dopita, M. A., Sutherland, R. S., & Kewley, L. J. 2008, ApJS, 178, 20, doi: 10.1086/589652

    work page doi:10.1086/589652 2008

  3. [3]

    , keywords =

    Armus, L., Heckman, T. M., & Miley, G. K. 1989, ApJ, 347, 727, doi: 10.1086/168164

    work page doi:10.1086/168164 1989

  4. [4]

    2016, ApJ, 830, 72, doi: 10.3847/0004-637X/830/2/72

    Chisholm, J., & Matsushita, S. 2016, ApJ, 830, 72, doi: 10.3847/0004-637X/830/2/72

    work page doi:10.3847/0004-637x/830/2/72 2016

  5. [5]

    Conroy, C., & Gunn, J. E. 2010, FSPS: Flexible Stellar Population Synthesis,, Astrophysics Source Code Library, record ascl:1010.043 http://ascl.net/1010.043

    2010

  6. [6]

    E., & White, M

    Conroy, C., Gunn, J. E., & White, M. 2009, ApJ, 699, 486, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/699/1/486

    work page internal anchor Pith review doi:10.1088/0004-637x/699/1/486 2009

  7. [7]

    JWST Observations of Starbursts: Dust Processing in the M82 Superwind

    Cronin, S. A., Bolatto, A. D., Richie, H. M., et al. 2026, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2604.11873, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2604.11873 de Blok, W. J. G., Walter, F., Ferguson, A. M. N., et al. 2018, ApJ, 865, 26, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aad557

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2604.11873 2026

  8. [8]

    1999, ApJ, 510, 197, doi: 10.1086/306582

    Devine, D., & Bally, J. 1999, ApJ, 510, 197, doi: 10.1086/306582

    work page doi:10.1086/306582 1999

  9. [9]

    B., Ostriker, E

    Fielding, D. B., Ostriker, E. C., Bryan, G. L., & Jermyn, A. S. 2020, ApJL, 894, L24, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ab8d2c

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ab8d2c 2020

  10. [10]

    B., Bolatto, A

    Fisher, D. B., Bolatto, A. D., Chisholm, J., et al. 2025, MNRAS, 538, 3068, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staf363

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/staf363 2025

  11. [11]

    S., & et al

    Fruchter, A. S., & et al. 2010, in 2010 Space Telescope Science Institute Calibration Workshop, 382–387

    2010

  12. [12]

    2019, MNRAS, 485, 3409, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stz564

    Gallagher, R., Maiolino, R., Belfiore, F., et al. 2019, MNRAS, 485, 3409, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stz564

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stz564 2019

  13. [13]

    S., & Kewley, L

    Grasha, K., Roy, A., Sutherland, R. S., & Kewley, L. J. 2021, ApJ, 908, 241, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/abd6bf

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/abd6bf 2021

  14. [14]

    Gronke, M., & Oh, S. P. 2018, MNRAS, 480, L111, doi: 10.1093/mnrasl/sly131

    work page doi:10.1093/mnrasl/sly131 2018

  15. [15]

    Gronke, M., & Oh, S. P. 2020, MNRAS, 492, 1970, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stz3332

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stz3332 2020

  16. [16]

    2026, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2601.16566, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2601.16566

    Gronke, M., & Schneider, E. 2026, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2601.16566, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2601.16566

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2601.16566 2026

  17. [17]

    , keywords =

    Guo, Y., Bacon, R., Bouch´ e, N. F., et al. 2023, Nature, 624, 53, doi: 10.1038/s41586-023-06718-w

    work page doi:10.1038/s41586-023-06718-w 2023

  18. [18]

    , keywords =

    Heckman, T. M., Armus, L., & Miley, G. K. 1990, ApJS, 74, 833, doi: 10.1086/191522

    work page doi:10.1086/191522 1990

  19. [19]

    L., Mack, J., Avila, R., et al

    Hoffmann, S. L., Mack, J., Avila, R., et al. 2021, in American Astronomical Society Meeting Abstracts, Vol. 53, American Astronomical Society Meeting Abstracts, 216.02

    2021

  20. [20]

    , keywords =

    Hopkins, P. F., Quataert, E., & Murray, N. 2011, MNRAS, 417, 950, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2011.19306.x

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2011.19306.x 2011

  21. [21]

    Jenkins, E. B. 2009, ApJ, 700, 1299, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/700/2/1299

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/700/2/1299 2009

  22. [22]

    J., Nicholls, D

    Kewley, L. J., Nicholls, D. C., & Sutherland, R. S. 2019, ARA&A, 57, 511, doi: 10.1146/annurev-astro-081817-051832

    work page doi:10.1146/annurev-astro-081817-051832 2019

  23. [23]

    I., McKee, C

    Klein, R. I., McKee, C. F., & Colella, P. 1994, ApJ, 420, 213, doi: 10.1086/173554

    work page doi:10.1086/173554 1994

  24. [24]

    W., & Rosolowsky, E

    Koch, E. W., & Rosolowsky, E. W. 2015, MNRAS, 452, 3435, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stv1521

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stv1521 2015

  25. [25]

    D., et al

    Krieger, N., Walter, F., Bolatto, A. D., et al. 2021, ApJL, 915, L3, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ac01e9

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ac01e9 2021

  26. [26]

    D., Heckman, T

    Lehnert, M. D., Heckman, T. M., & Weaver, K. A. 1999, ApJ, 523, 575, doi: 10.1086/307762

    work page doi:10.1086/307762 1999

  27. [27]

    K., Walter, F., Martini, P., et al

    Leroy, A. K., Walter, F., Martini, P., et al. 2015, ApJ, 814, 83, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/814/2/83

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/814/2/83 2015

  28. [28]

    C., Bolatto, A

    Levy, R. C., Bolatto, A. D., Tarantino, E., et al. 2023, ApJ, 958, 109, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/acff6e 18

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/acff6e 2023

  29. [29]

    R., et al

    Li, S.-L., Grasha, K., Krumholz, M. R., et al. 2024, MNRAS, 529, 4993, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stae869

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stae869 2024

  30. [30]

    2022, ApJ, 927, 136, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac50b6

    Lokhorst, D., Abraham, R., Pasha, I., et al. 2022, ApJ, 927, 136, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac50b6

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac50b6 2022

  31. [31]

    A., Mathur, S., Nguyen, D

    Lopez, L. A., Mathur, S., Nguyen, D. D., Thompson, T. A., & Olivier, G. M. 2020, ApJ, 904, 152, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/abc010

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/abc010 2020

  32. [32]

    Bolatto, A. D. 2025, ApJ, 989, 100, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/adec75

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/adec75 2025

  33. [33]

    K., et al

    Lopez, S., Ring, C., Leroy, A. K., et al. 2026, ApJL, 999, L7, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ae4508

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ae4508 2026

  34. [34]

    R., & Sandage, A

    Lynds, C. R., & Sandage, A. R. 1963, ApJ, 137, 1005, doi: 10.1086/147579

    work page doi:10.1086/147579 1963

  35. [35]

    K., Mangum, J

    Martini, P., Leroy, A. K., Mangum, J. G., et al. 2018, ApJ, 856, 61, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aab08e

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aab08e 2018

  36. [36]

    E., Christian, C

    Mutchler, M., Bond, H. E., Christian, C. A., et al. 2007, PASP, 119, 1, doi: 10.1086/511160

    work page doi:10.1086/511160 2007

  37. [37]

    C., Sutherland, R

    Nicholls, D. C., Sutherland, R. S., Dopita, M. A., Kewley, L. J., & Groves, B. A. 2017, MNRAS, 466, 4403, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stw3235

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stw3235 2017

  38. [38]

    Ong, D. D. Y., D’Eugenio, F., Maiolino, R., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2512.10924, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2512.10924

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2512.10924 2025

  39. [39]

    2015, ApJ, 805, 158, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/805/2/158

    Scannapieco, E., & Br¨ uggen, M. 2015, ApJ, 805, 158, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/805/2/158

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/805/2/158 2015

  40. [40]

    A., Bower, R

    Schaye, J., Crain, R. A., Bower, R. G., et al. 2015, MNRAS, 446, 521, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stu2058

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stu2058 2015

  41. [41]

    Thompson, T. A. 2020, ApJ, 895, 43, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab8ae8

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ab8ae8 2020

  42. [42]

    E., & Robertson, B

    Schneider, E. E., & Robertson, B. E. 2017, ApJ, 834, 144, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/834/2/144

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/834/2/144 2017

  43. [43]

    L., & Bland-Hawthorn, J

    Shopbell, P. L., & Bland-Hawthorn, J. 1998, ApJ, 493, 129, doi: 10.1086/305108

    work page doi:10.1086/305108 1998

  44. [44]

    2020, MNRAS, 499, 4261, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staa3177

    Sparre, M., Pfrommer, C., & Ehlert, K. 2020, MNRAS, 499, 4261, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staa3177

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/staa3177 2020

  45. [45]

    2019, MNRAS, 482, 5401, doi: 10.1093/mnras/sty3063

    Sparre, M., Pfrommer, C., & Vogelsberger, M. 2019, MNRAS, 482, 5401, doi: 10.1093/mnras/sty3063

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/sty3063 2019

  46. [46]

    K., & Heckman, T

    Strickland, D. K., & Heckman, T. M. 2007, ApJ, 658, 258, doi: 10.1086/511174

    work page doi:10.1086/511174 2007

  47. [47]

    2018, MAPPINGS V: Astrophysical plasma modeling code,, Astrophysics Source Code Library, record ascl:1807.005 http://ascl.net/1807.005

    Sutherland, R., Dopita, M., Binette, L., & Groves, B. 2018, MAPPINGS V: Astrophysical plasma modeling code,, Astrophysics Source Code Library, record ascl:1807.005 http://ascl.net/1807.005

    2018

  48. [48]

    S., & Dopita, M

    Sutherland, R. S., & Dopita, M. A. 2017, ApJS, 229, 34, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/aa6541

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4365/aa6541 2017

  49. [49]

    Tan, B., & Fielding, D. B. 2024, MNRAS, 527, 9683, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad3793

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stad3793 2024

  50. [50]

    L., Walter, F., & Yun, M

    Taylor, C. L., Walter, F., & Yun, M. S. 2001, ApJL, 562, L43, doi: 10.1086/338048

    work page doi:10.1086/338048 2001

  51. [51]

    A., & Heckman, T

    Thompson, T. A., & Heckman, T. M. 2024, ARA&A, 62, 529, doi: 10.1146/annurev-astro-041224-011924

    work page doi:10.1146/annurev-astro-041224-011924 2024

  52. [52]

    D., & Aalto, S

    Veilleux, S., Maiolino, R., Bolatto, A. D., & Aalto, S. 2020, A&A Rv, 28, 2, doi: 10.1007/s00159-019-0121-9

    work page doi:10.1007/s00159-019-0121-9 2020

  53. [53]

    2002, ApJL, 580, L21, doi: 10.1086/345287

    Walter, F., Weiss, A., & Scoville, N. 2002, ApJL, 580, L21, doi: 10.1086/345287

    work page doi:10.1086/345287 2002

  54. [54]

    2023, ApJ, 956, 142, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/acfa71

    Xu, X., Heckman, T., Yoshida, M., Henry, A., & Ohyama, Y. 2023, ApJ, 956, 142, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/acfa71

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/acfa71 2023

  55. [55]

    2019, PASJ, 71, 87, doi: 10.1093/pasj/psz069

    Hattori, T. 2019, PASJ, 71, 87, doi: 10.1093/pasj/psz069

    work page doi:10.1093/pasj/psz069 2019