Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 6 minor 100 references

Spatially resolved H$\alpha$ emission in B14-65666: compact starbursts, ionizing efficiency and gas kinematics in an advanced merger at the Epoch of Reionization

T0 review · 3 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-06 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

Pith's one-line read B14-65666 is an advanced major merger of two starbursting galaxies at z=7.15, resolved in Hα into an ultra-compact component and a tidal-tail component.

desk verdict First spatially resolved H-alpha in a z~7 merger: the merger/starburst story holds, but the dust corrections need work before the quantitative numbers are trusted. read the letter →

arxiv 2507.06793 v2 pith:7JYMSSUN submitted 2025-07-09 astro-ph.GA

C. Prieto-Jiménez , J. Álvarez-Márquez , L. Colina , A. Crespo Gómez , A. Bik , G. Östlin , A. Alonso-Herrero , L. Boogaard
show 23 more authors
K. I. Caputi L. Costantin A. Eckart M. García-Marín S. Gillman J. Hjorth E. Iani I. Jermann A. Labiano D. Langeroodi J. Melinder T. Moutard F. Pei{ss}ker P.G. Pérez-González J.P. Pye P.Rinaldi T.V. Tikkanen P. van der Werf F. Walter T. Hashimoto Y. Sugahara M. Güdel T. Henning
This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.GA
keywords high-redshiftgalaxiesstarburstgalaxymergersH-alphaemissionMIRImedium-resolutionspectroscopyEpochofReionizationionizingphotonproductionefficiencycompact
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

Using MIRI medium-resolution spectroscopy and F560W imaging on JWST, this paper detects and spatially resolves the Hα emission of B14-65666 at z=7.15, a Lyman-break galaxy already known to have a double UV structure. The emission splits into two galaxies, E and W, separated by 0.4 arcsec (2.2 kpc) with a line-of-sight velocity offset of 175±28 km s$^{-1}$, and the paper argues these are the two components of an advanced major merger at the Epoch of Reionization. Galaxy E is very compact, with an effective radius upper limit of 63 pc, while galaxy W is extended (348 pc) and clumpy, reminiscent of a tidal tail. The extinction-corrected Hα luminosities give star formation rates of 76±8 and 30±4 $M_\odot$ yr$^{-1}$ for E and W (solar metallicity), and the high Hα equivalent widths (832±100 and 536±78 Å) plus the location of both components in the $\log\zeta_{\mathrm{ion}}$–EW plane imply a young (<10 Myr) stellar population. If correct, this is one of the earliest resolved examples of merger-induced starbursts and compact nucleus formation, just 700–800 Myr after the Big Bang.

What carries the argument

The key machinery is the spatially resolved Hα line map and velocity field built from MIRI MRS Channel 1 (4.9–5.74 µm), which traces the ionized gas and the recent star formation. The authors combine this with NIRCam rest-frame UV and optical imaging to measure sizes and spectral energy distributions, with the NIRSpec Hβ narrow-component fluxes to form the Balmer decrement (the Hα/Hβ ratio used to derive the nebular extinction $A_V$), and with ALMA [O III] 88 µm and [C II] 158 µm data to cross-check the kinematics. Single-Gaussian fits to each Hα component give the flux, FWHM, and velocity offset; the rest-frame Hα equivalent width and the ionizing photon production efficiency $\log\zeta_{\mathrm{ion}}$ are derived from the extinction-corrected Hα and the 1500 Å luminosity. The merger interpretation is carried by the spatial separation, the velocity offset, the tidal-tail morphology of W, and the extreme compactness of E.

What would settle it

A matched-aperture, matched-resolution measurement of the Hα/Hβ ratio using only the narrow components of both lines would test the derived $A_V$ values (1.5 mag for E and 0.1 mag for W); if the true $A_V$ for W is closer to the SED-based value (about 1.6 mag), the star formation rates and $\log\zeta_{\mathrm{ion}}$ values would shift by amounts exceeding the quoted uncertainties and the $\zeta_{\mathrm{ion}}$–EW interpretation would need revision.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central discovery is that the Hα-emitting gas in B14-65666 is dominated by two spatially resolved sources, E and W, at a projected separation of 0.4 arcsec (2.2 kpc) and a relative velocity of 175±28 km s$^{-1}$, establishing the system as an advanced major merger of two starbursting galaxies at z=7.15. Galaxy E is unresolved in the rest-frame UV, with an effective radius upper limit of 63 pc and a stellar mass surface density of about $6\times10^{4}\,M_\odot$ pc$^{-2}$, close to the values in the nuclei of low-redshift galaxies; galaxy W is extended with an effective radius of 348 pc and shows a clumpy elongated structure consistent with a tidal tail. The extinction-corrected Hα fluxes yield star formation rates of 76±8 $M_\odot$ yr$^{-1}$ (E) and 30±4 $M_\odot$ yr$^{-1}$ (W) at solar metallicity, with specific star formation rates of 40–50 Gyr$^{-1}$, placing both components in a starburst phase. The system is dominated by a stellar population younger than 10 Myr, and the ionizing photon production efficiencies ($\log\zeta_{\mathrm{ion}} = 25.1\pm0.1$ and $25.5\pm0.1$ Hz erg$^{-1}$) are within the range of normal star-forming galaxies at similar redshifts.

Load-bearing premise

The dust correction assumes that the narrow-component Hβ brightness measured by NIRSpec, after matching the apertures, comes from exactly the same gas as the MIRI Hα measurement; if the apertures do not line up, or if the broad Hβ component should not have been left out, the derived dust, star formation rates, and ionizing efficiencies all shift, and the paper's own mismatch between the UV and Balmer dust values for galaxy W shows this assumption is fragile.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the merger interpretation holds, B14-65666 becomes a benchmark for how mergers concentrate gas and trigger starbursts in the Epoch of Reionization, with the ultra-compact galaxy E possibly an early protobulge.
  • The measured ionizing photon production efficiencies ($\log\zeta_{\mathrm{ion}} = 25.1$ and $25.5$ Hz erg$^{-1}$) confirm that a major merger does not produce anomalously high ionizing efficiency, so such systems contribute to reionization roughly like normal star-forming galaxies at the same epoch.
  • The specific star formation rates of 40–50 Gyr$^{-1}$ put both components well above the z=7 main sequence, implying short gas-depletion times and a possible rapid quenching for the compact component E.
  • The 175 km s$^{-1}$ velocity offset and the different line widths seen in Hα, [C II], and [O III] indicate that the merger shapes the ionized, neutral, and highly ionized gas phases differently on kiloparsec scales.
  • If the clumpy phase is short-lived (~50 Myr), as simulations suggest, the system should merge into a single more massive galaxy, showing that massive galaxies can assemble through starbursty mergers already at z>7.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • If the upper limit of 63 pc for galaxy E holds under higher-resolution imaging, the true effective radius may be smaller still, making E a candidate for the densest star-forming system at z>7 and strengthening the case that bulges form through clump coalescence.
  • The paper's normal $\zeta_{\mathrm{ion}}$ values despite extreme sSFR suggest that merger-boosted star formation does not itself raise ionizing efficiency; comparing resolved mergers with isolated galaxies of the same mass in the $\zeta_{\mathrm{ion}}$–EW plane would separate age and metallicity effects from burstiness.
  • If the inferred short (≈50 Myr) clumpy phase is correct, catching B14-65666 in this state implies either a high merger rate at z>7 or a longer-lived clumpy phase than simulations predict; a statistical census of resolved Hα mergers in JWST fields would directly constrain the phase lifetime.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 6 minor

Summary. The paper presents MIRI/MRS and MIRIM observations of B14-65666 at z=7.15, reporting the first detection of spatially resolved Halpha emission in this system. The authors decompose the emission into two components, E and W, separated by 0.4 arcsec, and combine the MRS data with NIRCam photometry, ALMA line data, and literature Hbeta measurements to derive star formation rates (76±8 and 30±4 Msun/yr for E and W), rest-frame Halpha equivalent widths (832±100 and 536±78 Å), ionizing photon production efficiencies (log zeta_ion = 25.1±0.1 and 25.5±0.1 Hz/erg), dust attenuations, stellar masses, effective radii, and Halpha kinematics. The paper concludes that B14-65666 is an advanced major merger of two starbursting galaxies, with galaxy E extremely compact (re < 63 pc) and a relative velocity of 175±28 km/s between the components, consistent with ALMA measurements.

Significance. If the quantitative results hold, this is one of the first spatially resolved Halpha studies of a z>7 galaxy merger and provides direct measurements of current star formation, ionizing efficiency, and gas kinematics in the Epoch of Reionization. The data reduction is careful and detailed: pipeline versions and CRDS contexts are specified, PSF homogenization is described, Monte Carlo uncertainties are used, and the astrometric alignment is grounded in Gaia. The central merger interpretation is robust because it does not depend on the uncertain dust corrections: the two-component morphology, the 175 km/s velocity offset matching ALMA, the stellar masses near 1e9 Msun, and the morphological asymmetries all support the scenario. However, the quantitative SFR, EW0, and zeta_ion values are tied to a Balmer-decrement dust correction that is internally inconsistent with the SED attenuation, so these specific numbers should be treated as provisional until the systematic is addressed.

major comments (3)
  1. [Section 4.2, Table 2] The nebular A_V values derived from the Balmer decrement are not consistent with the SED attenuation under the adopted Calzetti law. For galaxy E, A_V(Halpha/Hbeta)=1.5±0.4, whereas the CIGALE A_FUV=1.5±0.2 implies A_V about 0.6 if A_FUV/A_V is about 2.5; for galaxy W, A_V=0.1(+0.5,-0.1) while A_FUV=1.6±0.2 implies A_V about 0.6. The two components therefore disagree in opposite directions: galaxy E is over-corrected and galaxy W is under-corrected. Because Sections 4.3 and 4.4 use these A_V values to correct SFR_Halpha, EW0(Halpha), and zeta_ion, the quoted quantitative results are not on a single consistent attenuation scale. I request that the authors recompute the extinction-corrected quantities using the SED-based A_V for both components and bracket the allowed differential nebular-to-stellar attenuation, reporting the resulting shifts in SFR and zeta_ion. This is a necessary step before the numerical values in the abstract and Table 2 can be taken at face value.
  2. [Section 4.2] The Halpha/Hbeta ratio combines MRS Halpha with narrow-component Hbeta fluxes from Jones et al. (2024) scaled to the MRS aperture with AC=1/0.79, while the Halpha flux is measured with a different PSF and a single-Gaussian fit. The broad Hbeta component is excluded because the broad Halpha component is not detected, but no upper limit on broad Halpha is provided. The paper should quantify the aperture-matching uncertainty and give a limit on the broad Halpha flux; without these, the Balmer-decrement A_V and all quantities derived from it carry an unquantified systematic floor from this cross-instrument combination.
  3. [Sections 3.4 and 4.7] The conclusion that galaxy E has an extreme stellar-mass surface density close to low-z galactic nuclei rests on an unresolved core with an upper-limit effective radius of 63 pc and on a CIGALE stellar mass of (15±9)x10^8 Msun. The surface density is therefore a lower limit, not a measured value, and the large mass uncertainty should be propagated into the mass-size and surface-density comparisons. The Conclusions bullet already uses the lower-limit wording ('>6x10^4 Msun/pc^2'), but the same caveat should also appear in Section 4.7 and in the abstract so that the compactness claim is not overstated.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Section 2.1.1] The text cites 'Álvarez-Márquez et al. 2023 and Álvarez-Márquez et al. 2023' for the customized MRS calibration; these should be distinguished as different works (e.g., 2023a and 2023b) or the duplicate citation should be removed.
  2. [Section 3.3] Section 3.4 establishes that the 63 pc size for galaxy E is an upper limit, but Section 3.3 refers to 'an estimated physical size of 63 pc'; the upper-limit nature should be stated consistently in both places.
  3. [Table 2] The A_V row is listed as a dash for the E+W column, while the text compares A_FUV with the total IRX-based value; adding the E+W A_FUV and clarifying which entries are nebular versus stellar attenuation would improve the table.
  4. [Footnote 3 and Section 4.5] The revised [C II] 158um FWHM for galaxy E is based on a private communication with the authors of Hashimoto et al. (2019); since this value enters the kinematic comparison, the basis for the revision should be documented in the main text rather than only in a footnote.
  5. [Section 4.5] The sentence 'These values agree within the uncertainties (from those measured) with the far-infrared emission lines' is syntactically unclear and should be rewritten for clarity.
  6. [References] The reference list contains two Hu et al. (2025) entries with different titles; these should be disambiguated with the appropriate arXiv identifiers or merged into a single entry if they refer to the same work.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 1.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the merger and starburst conclusions rest on new MRS observations and external datasets; self-citations are not load-bearing.

full rationale

The central claims—two resolved H-alpha components, a 175 km/s velocity offset, a young (<10 Myr) dominant stellar population, and starburst-level sSFRs—are derived from new MIRI/MRS measurements combined with external datasets, not from quantities defined in terms of the claims. SFR_Halpha uses the Balmer-decrement extinction correction in Sect. 4.2, where the H-beta narrow-component flux comes from Jones et al. (2024), an independent team and an independent NIRSpec dataset, with explicitly stated aperture corrections; no equation reduces a derived quantity to a fit of itself. EW0(Halpha) and log zeta_ion are measured ratios (H-alpha/continuum and H-alpha/UV luminosity) that are compared with, not derived from, BPASS models and literature samples. The CIGALE SED fits take observed photometry and line fluxes as inputs, and the 'predicted fluxes' in Fig. 4 are goodness-of-fit displays rather than independent predictions. The under-10-Myr age conclusion is supported by the BPASS comparison, not solely by the CIGALE age grid, which is bounded at 10 Myr by construction. Self-citations (Hashimoto et al. 2019; Sugahara et al. 2025; Alvarez-Marquez et al. 2023, 2024) supply archival ALMA/NIRCam observations or data-reduction recipes; they are not invoked as uniqueness theorems, and the merger interpretation is independently supported by the two-component H-alpha detection, the ALMA [O III]/[C II] kinematics, the morphology, the velocity offset, and the stellar masses ~1e9 Msun. The internal inconsistency between Balmer A_V and SED-derived A_FUV is a measurement-robustness caveat rather than a circularity, and it does not change the qualitative merger or starburst classification within the quoted uncertainties. The derivation chain is therefore self-contained.

Assumptions & free parameters 6 free parameters · 8 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The quantitative results depend on standard SED-fitting assumptions and on the Balmer-decrement dust correction. No new particles, forces, or physical entities are introduced. The dust attenuation for galaxy W is the least secure input because the SED and Balmer estimates disagree.

free parameters (6)
  • SED stellar mass = E: 1.5e9 Msun, W: 8e8 Msun
    CIGALE SED fit; needed for sSFR and mass-surface density claims.
  • SED young stellar population age = E: 6±3 Myr, W: 8±3 Myr
    CIGALE SED fit; underpins the 'young <10 Myr population' claim.
  • SED mature population age = E: 224±150 Myr, W: 158±155 Myr
    CIGALE SED fit; used to argue for a mature stellar component.
  • SED A_FUV = E: 1.5±0.2, W: 1.6±0.2 mag
    CIGALE SED fit with Calzetti law; used in UV corrections for zeta_ion.
  • Balmer A_V (nebular) = E: 1.5±0.4, W: 0.1+0.5-0.1 mag
    Derived from H-alpha/H-beta with assumed T_e=1.5e4 K and n_e=1e3 cm-3; used to correct H-alpha SFR and zeta_ion.
  • Metallicity = E: 0.24±0.12, W: 0.31±0.15 Zsun
    CIGALE SED fit; affects SFR conversion factors.
assumptions (8)
  • standard math Flat LCDM cosmology with Omega_m=0.310, H0=67.7 km/s/Mpc (Planck 2020)
    Adopted in Section 1 for distance and scale conversions.
  • domain assumption Bruzual & Charlot (2003) stellar population models and Chabrier (2003) IMF
    Used in CIGALE SED fitting (Section 4.1).
  • domain assumption Calzetti et al. (2000) dust attenuation law
    Used for SED fitting and attenuation corrections (Sections 4.1-4.2).
  • domain assumption Case B recombination with T_e=1.5e4 K and n_e=1e3 cm-3 (theoretical H-alpha/H-beta=2.8)
    Used to derive nebular A_V and ionizing photon counts (Sections 4.2, 4.4).
  • domain assumption Zero Lyman continuum escape fraction for zeta_ion
    Assumed in Section 4.4 when converting H-alpha to N_LyC.
  • domain assumption SFR conversion factors from Reddy et al. (2018) and Kennicutt & Evans (2012)
    Used in Section 4.3 to convert H-alpha, UV, TIR luminosities to SFR.
  • ad hoc to paper Aperture corrections assume E and W are unresolved sources for the MRS PSF
    Corrections 1/0.57 and 1/0.81 applied in Section 3.2; W is extended at NIRCam resolution but smaller than the MRS PSF.
  • domain assumption Single Gaussian represents the H-alpha line profile
    Used for all line fits (Section 3.2); tested against NIRSpec narrow+broad profile in Section 4.5.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Spatially resolved H$\alpha$ emission in B14-65666: compact starbursts, ionizing efficiency and gas kinematics in an advanced merger at the Epoch of Reionization." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/7JYMSSUN

@misc{pith2026250706793,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Spatially resolved H$\alpha$ emission in B14-65666: compact starbursts, ionizing efficiency and gas kinematics in an advanced merger at the Epoch of Reionization},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/7JYMSSUN}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2507.06793}
}
abstract

We present MIRI/JWST medium resolution spectroscopy (MRS) and imaging (MIRIM) of B14-65666, a Lyman-break and interacting galaxy at redshift $z$=7.15. We detect the H$\alpha$ line emission in this system, revealing a spatially-resolved structure of the H$\alpha$ emitting gas, which consists of two distinct galaxies, E and W, at a projected distance of 0.4". Galaxy E is very compact in the rest-frame UV, while W galaxy is more extended, showing a clumpy structure reminiscent of a tidal tail. The total H$\alpha$ luminosity implies that the system is forming stars at a Star Formation Rate (SFR) of 76$\pm$8 M$_{\odot}$ yr$^{-1}$ and 30$\pm$4 M$_{\odot}$ yr$^{-1}$ for E and W, respectively. The ionizing photon production efficiency is within the range measured in galaxies at similar redshifts. The high values derived for the H$\alpha$ equivalent widths (EW) and the distinct locations of the E and W galaxies in the $\log(\zeta_\mathrm{ion}$) $-$ EW (H$\alpha$) plane, indicate that the system is dominated by a young (less than 10 Myr) stellar population. The overall spectral energy distribution suggests that in addition to a young stellar population, the two galaxies may have mature stellar population and very different dust attenuation. The derived SFR and stellar masses identify the two galaxies as going through a starburst phase. The kinematics of the ionized gas traced by the H$\alpha$ line show a velocity difference of 175 $\pm$ 28 km s$^{-1}$ between the two components of B14-65666. The in-depth study of systems like B14-65666 reveal how galaxy mergers in the early Universe drive intense star formation, shape the interstellar medium, and influence the buildup of stellar mass, just 700 $-$ 800 Myr after the Big Bang.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2507.06793 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Top left: MIRI Image F560W. The white circumference represents a 0.9 " radius aperture. The solid black elliptical line represents the E+W galaxies’ apertures for the Hα emission of the whole galaxy; the dashed black lines represent the apertures for galaxies E and W. The white filled circle area in the bottom left represents the spatial resolution (PSF FWHM) of the MIRI image F560W. Top right: Hα line map. The Hα l… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. MIRI MRS 1 SHORT spectra for Hα observed at z = 7.1513. Top left: Hα spectra shown in velocity space for two spatially separated galaxies, E and W (red line and green line, respectively), identified in the Hα line map. The black line shows the integrated MRS spectrum of B14- 65666 extracted using the galaxies E+W aperture. Top right: E+W galaxies’ integrated Hα spectrum. A vertical dashed line shows the wavelength o… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. NIRCam F150W images and encircled light profiles for B14-65666. Top panels: Galaxy E and residuals of the GALFIT model (modeled as one point source and one extended source). The white circular aperture represents 0.2 arcsec. Bottom panels: Galaxy W and residuals of the GALFIT model (modeled with three point sources and one extended one, marked with white crosses). The white circular aperture represents 0.28 arcsec. … view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (5 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Observed near-infrared-to-millimeter SEDs and best-fit models derived from CIGALE SED fitting analysis of galaxies E+W, E, and W. Gray line: Best-fit model for the galaxies E+W. Red line: Best-fit model for galaxy E. Green line: Best-fit model for galaxy W. The circles…
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: log(ζion) as function of Hα equivalent width, both of them corrected from dust attenuation. The red star represents galaxy E of B14-65666 and the green star galaxy W of B14-65666. The blue line represents the relation for galaxies at redshifts 3 to 7 (Prieto-Lyon et al…
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Comparison of integrated Hα emission-line profile, with the ALMA spectrum of the [O III] 88 µm line and [C II] 158 µm line (Hashimoto et al. 2019) for galaxies E+W, for galaxy E, and for galaxy W, respectively, from top to bottom. The systemic velocity corresponds to r…
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Direct comparison of MRS-observed Hα emission-line profile for galaxies E (top) and W (bottom), with the rescaled Hβ narrow- and broad-line components identified in lower spectral resolution NIRSpec IFS (Jones et al. 2024). The presence of the narrow plus broad compo￾n…
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Stellar-mass recent SFR diagram. The large red star represents galaxy E, and the large green star represents galaxy W. We use the SFR traced by Hα for solar metallicities. The orange line delimits the star￾burst area (Caputi et al. 2017). The blue line represents the M…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

100 extracted references · 45 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    D., Vanzella, E., et al

    Adamo, A., Bradley, L. D., Vanzella, E., et al. 2024, Nature, 632, 513

    2024

  2. [2]

    A., Toft, S., et al

    Allen, N., Oesch, P. A., Toft, S., et al. 2025, A&A, 698, A30 Álvarez-Márquez, J., Colina, L., Crespo Gómez, A., et al. 2024, A&A, 686, A85 Álvarez-Márquez, J., Crespo Gómez, A., Colina, L., et al. 2025, A&A, 695, A250 Álvarez-Márquez, J., Crespo Gómez, A., Colina, L., et al. 2023, A&A, 671, A105

    2025

  3. [3]

    R., et al

    Argyriou, I., Glasse, A., Law, D. R., et al. 2023, A&A, 675, A111

    2023

  4. [4]

    2024, A&A, 688, A146

    Arribas, S., Perna, M., Rodríguez Del Pino, B., et al. 2024, A&A, 688, A146

    2024

  5. [5]

    J., et al

    Atek, H., Labbé, I., Furtak, L. J., et al. 2024, Nature, 626, 975

    2024

  6. [6]

    Baggen, J. F. W., van Dokkum, P., Labbé, I., et al. 2023, ApJ, 955, L12

    2023

  7. [7]

    J., Geller, M

    Barton, E. J., Geller, M. J., & Kenyon, S. J. 2000, ApJ, 530, 660

    2000

  8. [8]

    2013, A&A, 557, A59

    Bellocchi, E., Arribas, S., Colina, L., & Miralles-Caballero, D. 2013, A&A, 557, A59

    2013

Show all 100 references
  1. [9]

    2022, A&A, 664, A60

    Bellocchi, E., Pereira-Santaella, M., Colina, L., et al. 2022, A&A, 664, A60

    2022

  2. [10]

    2019, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 622, A103

    Boquien, M., Burgarella, D., Roehlly, Y ., et al. 2019, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 622, A103

    2019

  3. [11]

    O., et al

    Bouchet, P., García-Marín, M., Lagage, P. O., et al. 2015, PASP, 127, 612

    2015

  4. [12]

    2014, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 440, 2810

    Bowler, A., Dunlop, J., McLure, R., et al. 2014, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 440, 2810

    2014

  5. [13]

    Bowler, R. A. A., Bourne, N., Dunlop, J. S., McLure, R. J., & McLeod, D. J. 2018, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 481, 1631

    2018

  6. [14]

    Bowler, R. A. A., Dunlop, J. S., McLure, R. J., et al. 2012, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 426, 2772

    2012

  7. [15]

    Bowler, R. A. A., Dunlop, J. S., McLure, R. J., & McLeod, D. J. 2017, MNRAS, 466, 3612

    2017

  8. [16]

    J., Curtis-Lake, E., et al

    Boyett, K., Bunker, A. J., Curtis-Lake, E., et al. 2024, MNRAS, 535, 1796

    2024

  9. [17]

    2022, astropy/photutils: 1.5.0

    Bradley, L., Sip˝ocz, B., Robitaille, T., et al. 2022, astropy/photutils: 1.5.0

    2022

  10. [18]

    & Charlot, S

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

    2003

  11. [19]

    2024, JWST Calibration Pipeline

    Bushouse, H., Eisenhamer, J., Dencheva, N., et al. 2024, JWST Calibration Pipeline

    2024

  12. [20]

    A., Borne, K

    Bushouse, H. A., Borne, K. D., Colina, L., et al. 2002, The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series, 138, 1

    2002

  13. [21]

    1997, in American Institute of Physics Conference Series, V ol

    Calzetti, D. 1997, in American Institute of Physics Conference Series, V ol. 408, The ultraviolet universe at low and High redshift, ed. W. H. Waller (AIP), 403–412

    1997

  14. [22]

    2013, in Secular Evolution of Galaxies, ed

    Calzetti, D. 2013, in Secular Evolution of Galaxies, ed. J. Falcón-Barroso & J. H. Knapen, 419

    2013

  15. [23]

    C., et al

    Calzetti, D., Armus, L., Bohlin, R. C., et al. 2000, ApJ, 533, 682

    2000

  16. [24]

    I., Deshmukh, S., Ashby, M

    Caputi, K. I., Deshmukh, S., Ashby, M. L. N., et al. 2017, ApJ, 849, 45

    2017

  17. [25]

    A., Clayton, G

    Cardelli, J. A., Clayton, G. C., & Mathis, J. S. 1989, ApJ, 345, 245

    1989

  18. [26]

    2020, MNRAS, 499, 5136 Catalán-Torrecilla, C., Gil de Paz, A., Castillo-Morales, A., et al

    Carniani, S., Ferrara, A., Maiolino, R., et al. 2020, MNRAS, 499, 5136 Catalán-Torrecilla, C., Gil de Paz, A., Castillo-Morales, A., et al. 2015, A&A, 584, A87

    2020

  19. [27]

    Ceverino, D., Glover, S. C. O., & Klessen, R. S. 2017, MNRAS, 470, 2791

    2017

  20. [28]

    2003, PASP, 115, 763

    Chabrier, G. 2003, PASP, 115, 763

    2003

  21. [29]

    2023, MNRAS, 520, 2180

    Claeyssens, A., Adamo, A., Richard, J., et al. 2023, MNRAS, 520, 2180

    2023

  22. [30]

    J., Bershady, M

    Conselice, C. J., Bershady, M. A., Dickinson, M., & Papovich, C. 2003, AJ, 126, 1183 De Looze, I., Cormier, D., Lebouteiller, V ., et al. 2014, A&A, 568, A62

    2003

  23. [31]

    G., Shivaei, I., et al

    Dicken, D., Marín, M. G., Shivaei, I., et al. 2024, A&A, 689, A5

    2024

  24. [32]

    T., Aniano, G., Krause, O., et al

    Draine, B. T., Aniano, G., Krause, O., et al. 2014, ApJ, 780, 172

    2014

  25. [33]

    J., Li, Q., et al

    Duan, Q., Conselice, C. J., Li, Q., et al. 2025, MNRAS

    2025

  26. [34]

    J., et al

    Duan, Q., Li, Q., Conselice, C. J., et al. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2411.04944

    2024

  27. [35]

    S., et al

    Elbaz, D., Dickinson, M., Hwang, H. S., et al. 2011, A&A, 533, A119

    2011

  28. [36]

    Eldridge, J. J. & Stanway, E. R. 2020, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2005.11883

    2020 arXiv

  29. [37]

    P., Whitler, L., et al

    Endsley, R., Stark, D. P., Whitler, L., et al. 2023, MNRAS, 524, 2312

    2023

  30. [38]

    L., Schaerer, D., Lemaux, B

    Faisst, A. L., Schaerer, D., Lemaux, B. C., et al. 2020, ApJS, 247, 61

    2020

  31. [39]

    2020, A&A, 643, A30

    Franco, M., Elbaz, D., Zhou, L., et al. 2020, A&A, 643, A30

    2020

  32. [40]

    E., Izbicki, R., Lee, A

    Freeman, P. E., Izbicki, R., Lee, A. B., et al. 2013, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 434, 282

    2013

  33. [41]

    Furusawa, H., Kashikawa, N., Kobayashi, M. A. R., et al. 2016, The Astrophys- ical Journal, 822, 46 Gaia Collaboration, Vallenari, A., Brown, A. G. A., et al. 2023, A&A, 674, A1

    2016

  34. [42]

    P., Mather, J

    Gardner, J. P., Mather, J. C., Abbott, R., et al. 2023, PASP, 135, 068001 Giménez-Arteaga, C., Fujimoto, S., Valentino, F., et al. 2024, A&A, 686, A63 Grudi´c, M. Y ., Hopkins, P. F., Quataert, E., & Murray, N. 2019, MNRAS, 483, 5548

    2023

  35. [43]

    2018, ApJ, 859, 84

    Harikane, Y ., Ouchi, M., Shibuya, T., et al. 2018, ApJ, 859, 84

    2018

  36. [44]

    S., et al

    Harshan, A., Tripodi, R., Martis, N. S., et al. 2024, ApJ, 977, L36

    2024

  37. [45]

    2023, ApJ, 955, L2

    Hashimoto, T., Álvarez-Márquez, J., Fudamoto, Y ., et al. 2023, ApJ, 955, L2

    2023

  38. [46]

    K., Mawatari, K., et al

    Hashimoto, T., Inoue, A. K., Mawatari, K., et al. 2019, Publications of the As- tronomical Society of Japan, 71

    2019

  39. [47]

    K., Sugahara, Y ., et al

    Hashimoto, T., Inoue, A. K., Sugahara, Y ., et al. 2023, The Astrophysical Journal, 952, 48

    2023

  40. [48]

    2018, Nature, 557, 392

    Hashimoto, T., Laporte, N., Mawatari, K., et al. 2018, Nature, 557, 392

    2018

  41. [49]

    E., Brammer, G

    Heintz, K. E., Brammer, G. B., Giménez-Arteaga, C., et al. 2023, Nature Astron- omy, 7, 1517

    2023

  42. [50]

    2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2503.04032

    Hu, W., Papovich, C., Shen, L., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2503.04032

    2025 arXiv

  43. [51]

    2025, Circumgalactic Enrichment by a Multi-Galaxy Merger at Redshift 6.7

    Hu, W., Papovich, C., Shen, L., et al. 2025, Circumgalactic Enrichment by a Multi-Galaxy Merger at Redshift 6.7

    2025

  44. [52]

    C., Bowler, R., Bunker, A

    Jones, G. C., Bowler, R., Bunker, A. J., et al. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2412.15027

    2024

  45. [53]

    C., Álvarez-Márquez, J., Sloan, G

    Jones, O. C., Álvarez-Márquez, J., Sloan, G. C., et al. 2023, MNRAS, 523, 2519

    2023

  46. [54]

    J., Saxena, A., et al

    Katz, H., Cameron, A. J., Saxena, A., et al. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2408.03189

    2024 arXiv

  47. [55]

    Kennicutt, R. C. & Evans, N. J. 2012, ARA&A, 50, 531

    2012

  48. [56]

    C., Hao, C.-N., Calzetti, D., et al

    Kennicutt, R. C., Hao, C.-N., Calzetti, D., et al. 2009, The Astrophysical Journal, 703, 1672

    2009

  49. [57]

    2024, A&A, 685, A72

    Kohandel, M., Pallottini, A., Ferrara, A., et al. 2024, A&A, 685, A72

    2024

  50. [58]

    I., Greene, J

    Kokorev, V ., Caputi, K. I., Greene, J. E., et al. 2024, ApJ, 968, 38

    2024

  51. [59]

    2021, A&A, 656, A57 Article number, page 15 of 16 A&A proofs:manuscript no

    Labiano, A., Argyriou, I., Álvarez-Márquez, J., et al. 2021, A&A, 656, A57 Article number, page 15 of 16 A&A proofs:manuscript no. aa55057-25

    2021

  52. [60]

    J., Labbé, I., et al

    Lam, D., Bouwens, R. J., Labbé, I., et al. 2019, A&A, 627, A164

    2019

  53. [61]

    & Hjorth, J

    Langeroodi, D. & Hjorth, J. 2023, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2307.06336

    2023 arXiv

  54. [62]

    & Hjorth, J

    Langeroodi, D. & Hjorth, J. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2404.13045

    2024 arXiv

  55. [63]

    D., Morrison, J

    Law, D. D., Morrison, J. E., Argyriou, I., et al. 2023, AJ, 166, 45 Le Fèvre, O., Béthermin, M., Faisst, A., et al. 2020, A&A, 643, A1

    2023

  56. [64]

    K., Schinnerer, E., Hughes, A., et al

    Leroy, A. K., Schinnerer, E., Hughes, A., et al. 2021, ApJS, 257, 43

    2021

  57. [65]

    2024, Publications of the Astro- nomical Society of the Pacific, 136, 034502

    Libralato, M., Argyriou, I., Dicken, D., et al. 2024, Publications of the Astro- nomical Society of the Pacific, 136, 034502

    2024

  58. [66]

    V ., Bacon, R., Lam, D., et al

    Maseda, M. V ., Bacon, R., Lam, D., et al. 2020, MNRAS, 493, 5120

    2020

  59. [67]

    2017, MNRAS, 465, 3637

    Matthee, J., Sobral, D., Best, P., et al. 2017, MNRAS, 465, 3637

    2017

  60. [68]

    R., Heckman, T

    Meurer, G. R., Heckman, T. M., & Calzetti, D. 1999, ApJ, 521, 64

    1999

  61. [69]

    Mihos, J. C. & Hernquist, L. 1996, ApJ, 464, 641

    1996

  62. [70]

    2024, Nature, 636, 332

    Mowla, L., Iyer, K., Asada, Y ., et al. 2024, Nature, 636, 332

    2024

  63. [71]

    P., Oesch, P

    Naidu, R. P., Oesch, P. A., Brammer, G., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2505.11263

    2025

  64. [72]

    2024, ApJ, 975, 238

    Nakazato, Y ., Ceverino, D., & Yoshida, N. 2024, ApJ, 975, 238

    2024

  65. [73]

    R., Burgasser, A., et al

    Nardiello, D., Bedin, L. R., Burgasser, A., et al. 2022, MNRAS, 517, 484

    2022

  66. [74]

    I., et al

    Navarro-Carrera, R., Rinaldi, P., Caputi, K. I., et al. 2024, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2410.23249

    2024 arXiv

  67. [75]

    2023, ApJ, 944, L1

    Ning, Y ., Cai, Z., Jiang, L., et al. 2023, ApJ, 944, L1

    2023

  68. [76]

    2009, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 507, 1793 Östlin, G., Pérez-González, P

    Noll, S., Burgarella, D., Giovannoli, E., et al. 2009, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 507, 1793 Östlin, G., Pérez-González, P. G., Melinder, J., et al. 2025, A&A, 696, A57

    2009

  69. [77]

    Y ., Ho, L

    Peng, C. Y ., Ho, L. C., Impey, C. D., & Rix, H.-W. 2002, AJ, 124, 266 Pérez-González, P. G., Barro, G., Rieke, G. H., et al. 2024a, ApJ, 968, 4 Pérez-González, P. G., Barro, G., Rieke, G. H., et al. 2024b, ApJ, 968, 4 Pérez-González, P. G., D‘Eugenio, F., Rodríguez del Pino, ...

    2002 arXiv

  70. [78]

    A., et al

    Prieto-Lyon, G., Strait, V ., Mason, C. A., et al. 2023, A&A, 672, A186 Puskás, D., Tacchella, S., Simmonds, C., et al. 2025, MNRAS, 540, 2146

    2023

  71. [79]

    A., Shapley, A

    Reddy, N. A., Shapley, A. E., Sanders, R. L., et al. 2018, ApJ, 869, 92

    2018

  72. [80]

    H., Wright, G

    Rieke, G. H., Wright, G. S., Böker, T., et al. 2015, PASP, 127, 584

    2015

  73. [81]

    J., Kelly, D

    Rieke, M. J., Kelly, D. M., Misselt, K., et al. 2023, Publications of the Astro- nomical Society of the Pacific, 135, 028001

    2023

  74. [82]

    H., et al

    Rinaldi, P., Bonaventura, N., Rieke, G. H., et al. 2024a, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2411.14383

  75. [83]

    I., Costantin, L., et al

    Rinaldi, P., Caputi, K. I., Costantin, L., et al. 2023, ApJ, 952, 143

    2023

  76. [84]

    I., et al

    Rinaldi, P., Navarro-Carrera, R., Caputi, K. I., et al. 2025, ApJ, 981, 161

    2025

  77. [85]

    F., Lotz, J

    Rodriguez-Gomez, V ., Snyder, G. F., Lotz, J. M., et al. 2019, MNRAS, 483, 4140

    2019

  78. [86]

    E., Hodge, J., Bouwens, R., et al

    Rowland, L. E., Hodge, J., Bouwens, R., et al. 2024, MNRAS, 535, 2068

    2024

  79. [87]

    2020, A&A, 643, A3

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

    2020

  80. [88]

    S., Steinhardt, C

    Speagle, J. S., Steinhardt, C. L., Capak, P. L., & Silverman, J. D. 2014, ApJS, 214, 15

    2014

  81. [89]

    S., Hayward, C

    Spilker, J. S., Hayward, C. C., Marrone, D. P., et al. 2022, ApJ, 929, L3

    2022

  82. [90]

    S., Phadke, K

    Spilker, J. S., Phadke, K. A., Aravena, M., et al. 2023, Nature, 618, 708

    2023

  83. [91]

    Stanway, E. R. & Eldridge, J. J. 2023, MNRAS, 522, 4430

    2023

  84. [92]

    R., Eldridge, J

    Stanway, E. R., Eldridge, J. J., & Becker, G. D. 2016, MNRAS, 456, 485

    2016

  85. [93]

    J., Illingworth, G

    Stefanon, M., Bouwens, R. J., Illingworth, G. D., et al. 2022, ApJ, 935, 94

    2022

  86. [94]

    2025, ApJ, 981, 135

    Sugahara, Y ., Álvarez-Márquez, J., Hashimoto, T., et al. 2025, ApJ, 981, 135

    2025

  87. [95]

    K., Hashimoto, T., et al

    Sugahara, Y ., Inoue, A. K., Hashimoto, T., et al. 2021, The Astrophysical Journal, 923, 5

    2021

  88. [96]

    2023, ApJ, 953, 53

    Sun, F., Egami, E., Pirzkal, N., et al. 2023, ApJ, 953, 53

    2023

  89. [97]

    & Toomre, J

    Toomre, A. & Toomre, J. 1972, ApJ, 178, 623

    1972

  90. [98]

    W., Glasse, A., et al

    Wells, M., Pel, J. W., Glasse, A., et al. 2015, PASP, 127, 646

    2015

  91. [99]

    S., Rieke, G

    Wright, G. S., Rieke, G. H., Glasse, A., et al. 2023, PASP, 135, 048003

    2023

  92. [100]

    S., Wright, D., Goodson, G

    Wright, G. S., Wright, D., Goodson, G. B., et al. 2015, PASP, 127, 595 1 Centro de Astrobiología (CAB), CSIC-INTA, Ctra. de Ajalvir km 4, Torrejón de Ardoz, E-28850, Madrid, Spain e-mail:cprieto@cab.inta-csic.es 2 Departamento de Física de la Tierra y Astrofísica, Facultad de ...

    2015

Pith tools

Reviewed August 6, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.