Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 3 minor 81 references

MeerKAT-derived HI kinematics and the Baryonic Tully-Fisher Relation in the X-ray luminous cluster Abell 3408

T0 review · 4 major / 3 minor · reviewed 2026-08-15 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read This paper claims the baryonic Tully-Fisher relation holds with field-like slope inside an X-ray luminous cluster, with cluster galaxies extending it to lower masses and velocities.

desk verdict Useful new MeerKAT HI data in Abell 3408; bTFr slope consistent with MIGHTEE, but selection effects in the 16/64 modelled galaxies are the key risk—worth refereeing rather than rejecting. read the letter →

arxiv 2508.13312 v1 pith:D7LUBPU3 submitted 2025-08-18 astro-ph.GA

Xola Ndaliso , Tariq Blecher , Roger Deane , Ed Elson This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.GA
keywords MeerKATHIspectrallineobservationsAbell3408galaxyclusterenvironmentBaryonicTully-FisherRelationkinematicsCANNUBIpyBBarolo
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 MeerKAT HI observations of the z ≈ 0.042 cluster Abell 3408, this paper tries to show that the baryonic Tully-Fisher relation (bTFr) keeps the same slope in a dense, X-ray-luminous environment as it has in the field. Of 64 HI-detected cluster galaxies, 16 could be kinematically modelled; combining these with 67 MeerKAT field galaxies yields a bTFr slope of α = 3.$66^{{+0.32}}$_{-0.28}, consistent with the MIGHTEE bTFr derived from the same definition. The paper further claims that cluster detections extend the MIGHTEE relation toward lower baryonic masses and rotation velocities, implying that the cluster environment has not visibly altered the link between baryonic mass and rotation speed for galaxies that retain detectable HI.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the Baryonic Tully-Fisher Relation, the observed correlation between a galaxy's baryonic mass (stars plus cold gas) and its flat rotation velocity. The argument runs through a semi-automated HI-modelling pipeline built on CANNUBI and pyBBarolo, which turns MeerKAT HI datacubes into morphological and kinematic fits; the 16 converged fits supply circular velocities, and the combination with 67 field galaxies supplies the baseline needed for a bTFr fit using the same definition as MIGHTEE. The bTFr is what carries the environmental claim: because its slope is unchanged and the cluster points extend it, the relation is asserted to be robust to the dense cluster environment for the galaxies that could be modelled.

What would settle it

Re-observe the 48 excluded galaxies at higher angular and velocity resolution, model them with the same pipeline, and refit the bTFr including them; if the slope moves significantly away from $\alpha \approx 3.66$ or the low-mass extension disappears, the selection of converged fits is what produced the reported result.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On the paper's own terms, the central discovery is that HI-detected galaxies in the X-ray luminous cluster Abell 3408 follow the same baryonic Tully-Fisher relation as field galaxies, while populating a previously sparsely sampled low-mass, low-velocity regime. The measured slope, $\alpha = 3.66^{+0.32}_{-0.28}$, comes from a fit that combines 16 cluster galaxies with converged kinematic models and 67 field galaxies from MeerKAT early science data, using a semi-automated CANNUBI and pyBBarolo pipeline for HI morphology and kinematics. The consistency of this slope with the MIGHTEE bTFr, together with the extension of the relation to lower masses and velocities, is presented as evidence that the baryonic scaling relation survives in a cluster environment despite the presence of disturbed HI morphologies in many cluster members.

Load-bearing premise

The result rests on the assumption that the 16 cluster galaxies with converged kinematic fits are representative of the HI-detected population, so excluding 48 galaxies with disturbed morphology or poor resolution does not bias the fitted slope or the claimed low-mass, low-velocity extension.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the slope is environment-independent, the bTFr can be applied to cluster galaxies as a distance and mass indicator without a cluster-specific correction.
  • The cluster points extend the relation to lower baryonic masses and rotation velocities, tightening empirical constraints at the low-mass end of the bTFr.
  • The converged subset implies that at least some cluster galaxies retain ordered HI kinematics consistent with their baryonic content, despite the cluster's high X-ray luminosity.
  • The semi-automated CANNUBI and pyBBarolo pipeline offers a repeatable route to kinematic modelling for larger HI surveys.

Reading between the lines

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

  • A testable consequence the paper leaves implicit: if ram-pressure stripping removes HI preferentially from low-mass cluster members, the modelled sample may be biased toward settled, relatively HI-rich systems; stacking non-detections or obtaining deeper HI data would reveal whether the low-mass extension survives inclusion of the 48 excluded galaxies.
  • An environment-independent bTFr would strengthen cluster distance estimates via Tully-Fisher, and the reported low-mass extension suggests the cluster sample could improve the low-velocity end of such calibrations.
  • One could extend the same analysis to other X-ray-luminous clusters to see whether the slope consistency holds generally or is particular to Abell 3408.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

4 major / 3 minor

Summary. The paper claims to present MeerKAT HI spectral line observations of the X-ray luminous cluster Abell 3408 at z ~ 0.042, detecting 64 galaxies in HI. Of these, 16 are modeled with a semi-automated pipeline based on CANNUBI and pyBBarolo; the remaining 48 are excluded due to disturbed HI morphology or insufficient angular/velocity resolution. These 16 cluster galaxies are combined with 67 field galaxies from MeerKAT early science data (mean redshift 0.0435) to fit the Baryonic Tully-Fisher Relation, yielding a slope alpha = 3.66^{+0.32}_{-0.28} that is reported to be consistent with the MIGHTEE bTFr derived from the same definition. The abstract further states that the cluster detections extend the MIGHTEE bTFr in both mass and velocity. The supplied full text, however, is a different manuscript on flow matching for data assimilation (arXiv:2508.13313v5), so only the abstract of the claimed astro-ph.GA paper was reviewable.

Significance. If the result holds, the paper would provide an interesting environmental test of the baryonic Tully-Fisher relation, suggesting that the relation's slope is unchanged in a dense, X-ray luminous cluster and that HI-detected cluster galaxies populate the relation at lower masses and velocities. The use of a pipeline developed for this study, quoted asymmetric uncertainties on the slope, and comparison with MIGHTEE using the same bTFr definition are strengths. The significance is conditional, however, on the representativeness of the 16 modeled galaxies and on the independence and matching of the field comparison sample, neither of which can be checked from the abstract alone.

major comments (4)
  1. [Manuscript (supplied full text)] The full text supplied for review is not the manuscript described in the abstract: it is arXiv:2508.13313v5, 'Flow Matching for Efficient and Scalable Data Assimilation', a stat.ML paper with no discussion of Abell 3408, MeerKAT, or the baryonic Tully-Fisher relation. None of the methods, sample definitions, fits, or figures relevant to the claimed result are present. This is load-bearing because the central claims cannot be checked in any way; the report is therefore based only on the abstract.
  2. [Abstract (HI modelling yield)] The abstract states that only 16 of 64 HI detections were successfully modeled, with 48 excluded for disturbed morphology or insufficient resolution, but it does not state whether the excluded galaxies are representative of the full detection sample. If the excluded objects are preferentially low-mass, high-velocity-offset, or interacting systems, the fitted slope and the claimed mass/velocity extension could be biased. The abstract provides no selection-function analysis, no comparison of modeled versus excluded subsamples in baryonic mass or velocity width, and no completeness estimate; without these, the fitted slope is not yet established.
  3. [Abstract (field comparison sample)] The 67 field galaxies from MeerKAT early science data are used both to anchor the bTFr fit and to compare with the MIGHTEE bTFr. The abstract does not state whether the field sample is independent of the MIGHTEE sample, whether it is selected with a known completeness function, or whether its noise and resolution characteristics match the cluster data. If the field sample is drawn from the same early science data that underlies the MIGHTEE comparison, part of the consistency check is self-referential; if it is unmatched in mass or velocity range, the combined fit could be artificially steepened or flattened. These points need to be addressed in the full manuscript.
  4. [Abstract (extension claim)] The claim that Abell 3408 galaxies 'extend the bTFr of the MIGHTEE sample, both in mass and velocity' rests on the 16 modeled galaxies. The abstract does not report the baryonic mass and velocity ranges spanned by these galaxies, the uncertainties in those quantities, or the number of galaxies driving the extension. A small number of low-mass or low-velocity objects at the edge of the fitted range would not by itself establish an extension; the paper should demonstrate that the extension is significant relative to the fit uncertainties and selection limits.
minor comments (3)
  1. [Abstract] The abstract reports only the slope and its asymmetric uncertainties; reporting the intercept, intrinsic scatter, and the number of degrees of freedom of the fit would help readers assess the consistency with MIGHTEE.
  2. [Abstract] The abstract should state how stellar masses and baryonic masses are derived, since the bTFr definition depends on the mass estimator and the assumed initial mass function; this information is absent from the abstract.
  3. [Abstract] The phrase 'MeerKAT spectral line survey early science data' would benefit from a specific survey name or reference, as it is not clear whether this refers to MIGHTEE or another early-science program.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circular step is exhibited; the only analysable text is the abstract, and the supplied full text is a different manuscript.

full rationale

The claimed derivation chain in the abstract is an empirical baryonic Tully-Fisher relation fit: 16 cluster galaxies with converged kinematic fits are combined with 67 field galaxies from MeerKAT early science data, and the resulting slope (alpha = 3.66) is compared with the MIGHTEE bTFr using the same definition. For a circularity finding, the hard rules require quoting a specific reduction, such as a fitted parameter renamed as a prediction or Eq. X equal to Eq. Y by construction. No such reduction can be exhibited from the abstract alone: the paper does not state that the 67 field galaxies are the same objects used to derive the MIGHTEE bTFr, nor does it show that the shared definition forces the fitted slope to match. The extension claim (cluster detections extending the relation in mass and velocity) is an empirical statement about where the cluster points lie relative to the MIGHTEE relation, not an identity. The abstract's statement that only 16 of 64 detections were modelled, with the rest excluded for disturbed HI morphology or insufficient angular or velocity resolution, is a selection-effect caveat; selection bias is a correctness and robustness concern, not circularity under rules 5 and 6. The supplied full text is arXiv:2508.13313v5, an unrelated flow-matching and data-assimilation manuscript, so no internal equations, sample-selection details, or fitting procedure from the astro-ph.GA paper can be checked. The potential overlap between the 67 field galaxies and the MIGHTEE sample is a real concern for independence, but without the paper's own statement of overlap it remains speculation, which the hard rules exclude. Accordingly, the honest finding is no significant circularity (score 0).

Assumptions & free parameters 2 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central result is an empirical fit of a known scaling relation, so the ledger is dominated by domain assumptions rather than invented entities. The fitted slope and zero-point are the only genuine free parameters visible from the abstract. The main assumptions are: HI kinematics trace dynamical mass in this cluster environment (unproven for galaxies with tidal perturbations), the 67 field galaxies are a matched comparison sample, and the exclusion of 48 of 64 detections does not bias the fit. No new particles, forces, or conserved quantities are introduced.

free parameters (2)
  • bTFr slope (alpha) = 3.66 (+0.32/-0.28)
    Fitted to the combined sample of 16 cluster galaxies and 67 field galaxies; this is the central reported result and the quantity compared to MIGHTEE.
  • bTFr zero-point (intercept)
    A second fitted parameter of the linear relation, not quoted in the abstract, but required to specify the relation fully.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption Modeled HI rotation velocities trace the circular velocity used in the baryonic Tully-Fisher relation for cluster galaxies.
    Standard tracer assumption of the bTFr method; the abstract provides no independent dynamical check (e.g., stellar kinematics) for the 16 modeled galaxies in a tidal cluster environment. Enters via the kinematic modeling step described in the abstract.
  • domain assumption The 67 MeerKAT early science field galaxies at mean redshift 0.0435 are an appropriate, matched field comparison for the cluster sample.
    The cluster-versus-field comparison depends on the two samples being comparable in mass selection, distance, and baryonic-mass recipe; the abstract does not describe how matching was done. Enters in the sample-combination sentence of the abstract.
  • ad hoc to paper Excluding galaxies with disturbed HI morphology or insufficient resolution does not bias the fitted bTFr slope or the claimed extension.
    48 of 64 detections are excluded; if exclusion correlates with mass, rotation speed, or environmental state, the fit is biased. This selection rule is introduced by the paper's modeling yield and is an ad hoc assumption for the central claim.
  • standard math The regression used to fit the bTFr correctly handles measurement errors and intrinsic scatter.
    Standard statistical machinery for bTFr fits; assumed present but not visible in the abstract.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of MeerKAT-derived HI kinematics and the Baryonic Tully-Fisher Relation in the X-ray luminous cluster Abell 3408." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/D7LUBPU3

@misc{pith2026250813312,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: MeerKAT-derived HI kinematics and the Baryonic Tully-Fisher Relation in the X-ray luminous cluster Abell 3408},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/D7LUBPU3}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2508.13312}
}
abstract

Significant advances in observational capabilities are continuously transforming our understanding of the dense environment of galaxy clusters and its impact on individual galaxies. Discerning between intrinsic and externally-induced properties of galaxies, including their gas kinematics, is a key diagnostic in the field of galaxy evolution. In this work, we present MeerKAT HI spectral line observations of the redshift z $\sim$ 0.042 galaxy cluster Abell 3408. A total of 64 galaxies are detected in HI in this X-ray-luminous galaxy cluster (L$_{X}$ $\sim$ 3 $\times$ 10$^{43}$ ergs s$^{-1}$). We model the HI morphology and gas kinematics of the individual galaxies, using a semi-automated pipeline based on CANNUBI and pyBBarolo. The pipeline was developed and tested as part of this study. Of the 64 galaxies detected in the cluster, we successfully modelled 16, while the remaining galaxies exhibit disturbed HI morphologies, insufficient angular or velocity resolution. We combine the galaxies with converged kinematic fits with 67 field galaxies from the MeerKAT spectral line survey early science data ($\langle$z$\rangle$ = 0.0435) to produce a measurement of the Baryonic Tully-Fisher Relation (bTFr) that encompasses a broader range of environment and provides a useful comparison. We find a slope ($\alpha$ = 3.66$^{+0.32}_{-0.28}$) for this relation, which is consistent with that found from the MIGHTEE bTFr derived from the same definition. Interestingly, HI detections of the Abell 3408 galaxy cluster galaxies are seen to extend the bTFr of the MIGHTEE sample, both in mass and velocity, despite their cluster environment.

Review history (2 revisions) →

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

81 extracted references · 15 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Abril-Melgarejo V., et al., 2021, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/202038818 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2021A&A...647A.152A 647, A152

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202038818 2021

  2. [2]

    Asad K. M. B., et al., 2021, @doi [Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society] 10.1093/mnras/stab104 , 502, 2970

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stab104 2021

  3. [3]

    Biviano A., et al., 2013, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201321955 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2013A&A...558A...1B 558, A1

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201321955 2013

  4. [4]

    Boselli A., Cortese L., Boquien M., Boissier S., Catinella B., Gavazzi G., Lagos C., Saintonge A., 2014, @doi [Astronomy & Astrophysics] 10.1051/0004-6361/201322313 , 564, A67

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201322313 2014

  5. [5]

    Boselli A., Fossati M., Sun M., 2022, @doi [The Astronomy and Astrophysics Review] 10.1007/s00159-022-00140-3 , 30

    doi:10.1007/s00159-022-00140-3 2022

  6. [6]

    Bosma A., 1981, @doi [ ] 10.1086/113063 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1981AJ.....86.1825B 86, 1825

    doi:10.1086/113063 1981

  7. [7]

    Brown T., et al., 2021, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4365/ac28f5 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2021ApJS..257...21B 257, 21

    doi:10.3847/1538-4365/ac28f5 2021

  8. [8]

    B., Suyu S

    Caminha G. B., Suyu S. H., Grillo C., Rosati P., 2022, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/202141994 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022A&A...657A..83C 657, A83

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202141994 2022

Show all 81 references
  1. [9]

    Catinella B., et al., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/sty089 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018MNRAS.476..875C 476, 875

    2018 doi

  2. [10]

    H., O’Neil K., Bothun G

    Chung A., van Gorkom J. H., O’Neil K., Bothun G. D., 2002, @doi [The Astronomical Journal] 10.1086/339979 , 123, 2387

    2002 doi

  3. [11]

    H., Kenney J

    Chung A., van Gorkom J. H., Kenney J. D. P., Vollmer B., 2007, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal] 10.1086/518034 , 659, L115–L119

    2007 doi

  4. [12]

    E., et al., 2014, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal] 10.1088/0004-637x/782/2/90 , 782, 90

    Cluver M. E., et al., 2014, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal] 10.1088/0004-637x/782/2/90 , 782, 90

    2014 doi

  5. [13]

    Comrie A., et al., 2021, CARTA: Cube Analysis and Rendering Tool for Astronomy , Astrophysics Source Code Library, record ascl:2103.031

    2021

  6. [14]

    Cortese L., Catinella B., Smith R., 2021, @doi [ ] 10.1017/pasa.2021.18 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2021PASA...38...35C 38, e035

    2021 doi

  7. [15]

    R., Bershady M

    Courteau S., Andersen D. R., Bershady M. A., MacArthur L. A., Rix H.-W., 2003, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal] 10.1086/376754 , 594, 208

    2003 doi

  8. [16]

    H., Appleby S., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stz937 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019MNRAS.486.2827D 486, 2827

    Dav \'e R., Angl \'e s-Alc \'a zar D., Narayanan D., Li Q., Rafieferantsoa M. H., Appleby S., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stz937 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019MNRAS.486.2827D 486, 2827

    2019 doi

  9. [17]

    A., Koribalski B

    D \'e nes H., Kilborn V. A., Koribalski B. S., 2014, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stu1337 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014MNRAS.444..667D 444, 667

    2014 doi

  10. [18]

    M., Peek J

    Di Teodoro E. M., Peek J. E. G., 2021, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal] 10.3847/1538-4357/ac2cbd , 923, 220

    2021 doi

  11. [19]

    W., Lang D., Goodman J., 2013, @doi [Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific] 10.1086/670067 , 125, 306–312

    Foreman-Mackey D., Hogg D. W., Lang D., Goodman J., 2013, @doi [Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific] 10.1086/670067 , 125, 306–312

    2013 doi

  12. [20]

    Glowacki M., Elson E., Davé R., 2020, @doi [Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society] 10.1093/mnras/staa2616 , 498, 3687–3702

    2020 doi

  13. [21]

    E., Gott J

    Gunn J. E., Gott J. Richard I., 1972, @doi [ ] 10.1086/151605 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1972ApJ...176....1G 176, 1

    1972 doi

  14. [22]

    P., Giovanelli R., Chincarini G

    Haynes M. P., Giovanelli R., Chincarini G. L., 1984, @doi [ ] 10.1146/annurev.aa.22.090184.002305 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1984ARA&A..22..445H 22, 445

    1984

  15. [23]

    L., Jarvis M

    Heywood I., Hale C. L., Jarvis M. J., Makhathini S., Peters J. A., Sebokolodi M. L. L., Smirnov O. M., 2020, @doi [Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society] 10.1093/mnras/staa1770 , 496, 3469

    2020 doi

  16. [24]

    A., et al., 2012, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-6256/144/5/134 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2012AJ....144..134H 144, 134

    Hunter D. A., et al., 2012, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-6256/144/5/134 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2012AJ....144..134H 144, 134

    2012 doi

  17. [25]

    I., Battaglia G., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stw3285 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017MNRAS.466.4159I 466, 4159

    Iorio G., Fraternali F., Nipoti C., Di Teodoro E., Read J. I., Battaglia G., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stw3285 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017MNRAS.466.4159I 466, 4159

    2017 doi

  18. [26]

    H., Cluver M

    Jarrett T. H., Cluver M. E., Taylor E. N., Bellstedt S., Robotham A. S. G., Yao H. F. M., 2023, A New WISE Calibration of Stellar Mass ( @eprint arXiv 2301.05952 ), https://arxiv.org/abs/2301.05952

    2023 arXiv

  19. [27]

    J., et al., 2017, The MeerKAT International GHz Tiered Extragalactic Exploration (MIGHTEE) Survey ( @eprint arXiv 1709.01901 ), https://arxiv.org/abs/1709.01901

    Jarvis M. J., et al., 2017, The MeerKAT International GHz Tiered Extragalactic Exploration (MIGHTEE) Survey ( @eprint arXiv 1709.01901 ), https://arxiv.org/abs/1709.01901

    2017 arXiv

  20. [28]

    A., Kenney J

    Koopmann R. A., Kenney J. D. P., 2004, @doi [ ] 10.1086/423191 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2004ApJ...613..866K 613, 866

    2004 doi

  21. [29]

    S., et al., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/sty479 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018MNRAS.478.1611K 478, 1611

    Koribalski B. S., et al., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/sty479 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018MNRAS.478.1611K 478, 1611

    2018 doi

  22. [30]

    V., Borgani S., 2012, @doi [ ] 10.1146/annurev-astro-081811-125502 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2012ARA&A..50..353K 50, 353

    Kravtsov A. V., Borgani S., 2012, @doi [ ] 10.1146/annurev-astro-081811-125502 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2012ARA&A..50..353K 50, 353

    2012 doi

  23. [31]

    Laudage S., et al., 2024, Neutral atomic and molecular gas dynamics in the nearby spiral galaxies NGC 1512, NGC 4535, and NGC 7496 ( @eprint arXiv 2407.04531 ), https://arxiv.org/abs/2407.04531

    2024 arXiv

  24. [32]

    Lee B., et al., 2016, @doi [Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society] 10.1093/mnras/stw3162 , 466, 1382–1398

    2016 doi

  25. [33]

    Lelli F., Verheijen M., Fraternali F., 2014, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201322657 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014A&A...566A..71L 566, A71

    2014 doi

  26. [34]

    S., Schombert J

    Lelli F., McGaugh S. S., Schombert J. M., 2016, @doi [ ] 10.3847/2041-8205/816/1/L14 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016ApJ...816L..14L 816, L14

    2016 doi

  27. [35]

    S., Schombert J

    Lelli F., McGaugh S. S., Schombert J. M., Desmond H., Katz H., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stz205 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019MNRAS.484.3267L 484, 3267

    2019 doi

  28. [36]

    A., Cava A., Biviano A., Moretti A., Poggianti B., Bettoni D., 2019, @doi [Astronomy & Astrophysics] 10.1051/0004-6361/201935081 , 631, A131

    Mamon G. A., Cava A., Biviano A., Moretti A., Poggianti B., Bettoni D., 2019, @doi [Astronomy & Astrophysics] 10.1051/0004-6361/201935081 , 631, A131

    2019 doi

  29. [37]

    E., Fraternali F., Oosterloo T., Adams E

    Mancera Piña P. E., Fraternali F., Oosterloo T., Adams E. A. K., Oman K. A., Leisman L., 2021, @doi [Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society] 10.1093/mnras/stab3491 , 512, 3230–3242

    2021 doi

  30. [38]

    E., Fraternali F., Oosterloo T., Adams E

    Mancera Piña P. E., Fraternali F., Oosterloo T., Adams E. A. K., Teodoro E. d., Bacchini C., Iorio G., 2022, @doi [Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society] 10.1093/mnras/stac1508 , 514, 3329–3348

    2022 doi

  31. [40]

    Marasco A., Poggianti B. M., Fritz J., Werle A., Vulcani B., Moretti A., Gullieuszik M., Kulier A., 2023, The morphological transformation of ram pressure stripped galaxies: a pathway from late to early galaxy types ( @eprint arXiv 2308.14791 ), https://arxiv.org/abs/2308.14791

    2023 arXiv

  32. [41]

    S., Schombert J

    McGaugh S. S., Schombert J. M., 2015, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/802/1/18 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015ApJ...802...18M 802, 18

    2015 doi

  33. [42]

    S., Schombert J

    McGaugh S. S., Schombert J. M., Bothun G. D., de Blok W. J. G., 2000, @doi [ ] 10.1086/312628 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2000ApJ...533L..99M 533, L99

    2000 doi

  34. [43]

    Moretti A., et al., 2023, The evolution of the cold gas fraction in nearby clusters ram-pressure stripped galaxies ( @eprint arXiv 2309.00449 ), https://arxiv.org/abs/2309.00449

    2023 arXiv

  35. [44]

    A., 2014, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201322450 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014A&A...566A..68M 566, A68

    Munari E., Biviano A., Mamon G. A., 2014, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201322450 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014A&A...566A..68M 566, A68

    2014 doi

  36. [45]

    S., Ribeiro A

    Nascimento R. S., Ribeiro A. L. B., Trevisan M., Carrasco E. R., Plana H., Dupke R., 2016, @doi [Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society] 10.1093/mnras/stw1114 , 460, 2193

    2016 doi

  37. [46]

    Cambridge University Press, p

    Nipoti C., 2010, Cusp–core dichotomy of elliptical galaxies: the role of thermal evaporation. Cambridge University Press, p. 194–199, @doi 10.1017/cbo9780511761386.019 , http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511761386.019

    2010 doi

  38. [47]

    O'Beirne T., et al., 2024, WALLABY Pilot Survey: An 'Almost' Dark Cloud near the Hydra Cluster ( @eprint arXiv 2401.09738 )

    2024 arXiv

  39. [48]

    R., 2010, AOFlagger: RFI Software , Astrophysics Source Code Library, record ascl:1010.017 ( @eprint ascl 1010.017 )

    Offringa A. R., 2010, AOFlagger: RFI Software , Astrophysics Source Code Library, record ascl:1010.017 ( @eprint ascl 1010.017 )

    2010

  40. [49]

    Ott J., et al., 2012, @doi [The Astronomical Journal] 10.1088/0004-6256/144/4/123 , 144, 123

    2012 doi

  41. [50]

    Parkash V., Brown M. J. I., Jarrett T. H., Bonne N. J., 2018, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal] 10.3847/1538-4357/aad3b9 , 864, 40

    2018 doi

  42. [51]

    Piraino-Cerda F., et al., 2023, @doi [Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society] 10.1093/mnras/stad3957 , 528, 919–936

    2023 doi

  43. [52]

    Planck Collaboration et al., 2016, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201525830 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016A&A...594A..13P 594, A13

    2016 doi

  44. [53]

    Planck Collaboration Aghanim N., et al., 2018, @doi [Astronomy & Astrophysics] 10.1051/0004-6361/201833910 , 641, A6

    2018 doi

  45. [54]

    M., et al., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.1038/nature23462 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017Natur.548..304P 548, 304

    Poggianti B. M., et al., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.1038/nature23462 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017Natur.548..304P 548, 304

    2017 doi

  46. [55]

    A., Verheijen M

    Ponomareva A. A., Verheijen M. A. W., Papastergis E., Bosma A., Peletier R. F., 2017, @doi [Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society] 10.1093/mnras/stx3066 , 474, 4366–4384

    2017 doi

  47. [56]

    A., et al., 2021, @doi [Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society] 10.1093/mnras/stab2654 , 508, 1195–1205

    Ponomareva A. A., et al., 2021, @doi [Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society] 10.1093/mnras/stab2654 , 508, 1195–1205

    2021 doi

  48. [57]

    N., Westmeier T., Staveley-Smith L., Chauhan G., Lagos C

    Reynolds T. N., Westmeier T., Staveley-Smith L., Chauhan G., Lagos C. D. P., 2020, @doi [Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society] 10.1093/mnras/staa597 , 493, 5089

    2020 doi

  49. [58]

    H., Lockhart I

    Rogstad D. H., Lockhart I. A., Wright M. C. H., 1974, @doi [ ] 10.1086/153164 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1974ApJ...193..309R 193, 309

    1974 doi

  50. [59]

    Roman-Oliveira F., Fraternali F., Rizzo F., 2023, @doi [Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society] 10.1093/mnras/stad530 , 521, 1045–1065

    2023 doi

  51. [60]

    C., Ford W

    Rubin V. C., Ford W. K. J., Thonnard N., 1978, @doi [ ] 10.1086/182804 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1978ApJ...225L.107R 225, L107

    1978 doi

  52. [61]

    Serra P., et al., 2015, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stv079 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015MNRAS.448.1922S 448, 1922

    2015 doi

  53. [62]

    Serra P., et al., 2017, The MeerKAT Fornax Survey ( @eprint arXiv 1709.01289 ), https://arxiv.org/abs/1709.01289

    2017 arXiv

  54. [63]

    A., Sancisi R., van der Hulst J

    Swaters R. A., Sancisi R., van der Hulst J. M., van Albada T. S., 2012, @doi [Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society] 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2012.21599.x , 425, 2299–2308

    2012

  55. [64]

    Tasse C., et al., 2018, @doi [Astronomy & Astrophysics] 10.1051/0004-6361/201731474 , 611, A87

    2018 doi

  56. [65]

    L., et al., 2011, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal] 10.1088/0004-637x/745/1/16 , 745, 16

    Tinker J. L., et al., 2011, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal] 10.1088/0004-637x/745/1/16 , 745, 16

    2011 doi

  57. [66]

    B., Fisher J

    Tully R. B., Fisher J. R., 1977, , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1977A&A....54..661T 54, 661

    1977

  58. [67]

    Verheijen M. A. W., 2001, @doi [ ] 10.1086/323887 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2001ApJ...563..694V 563, 694

    2001 doi

  59. [68]

    Verheijen M. A. W., Sancisi R., 2001, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361:20010090 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2001A&A...370..765V 370, 765

    2001 doi

  60. [69]

    Vollmer B., Balkowski C., Cayatte V., van Driel W., Huchtmeier W., 2004, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361:20034552 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2004A&A...419...35V 419, 35

    2004 doi

  61. [70]

    Vulcani B., et al., 2023, Evidence for enhanced star formation rates in z 0.35 cluster galaxies undergoing ram pressure stripping ( @eprint arXiv 2311.13486 )

    2023 arXiv

  62. [71]

    Walter F., Brinks E., de Blok W. J. G., Bigiel F., Kennicutt R. C., Thornley M. D., Leroy A., 2008, @doi [The Astronomical Journal] 10.1088/0004-6256/136/6/2563 , 136, 2563–2647

    2008 doi

  63. [72]

    J., 2016, Acta Astronomica Sinica, https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016AcASn..57..504W 57, 504

    Wei J. J., 2016, Acta Astronomica Sinica, https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016AcASn..57..504W 57, 504

    2016

  64. [73]

    D., Smit R., 2010, @doi [Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society] 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2010.17248.x , 408, 1818

    White M., Cohn J. D., Smit R., 2010, @doi [Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society] 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2010.17248.x , 408, 1818

    2010

  65. [74]

    L., et al., 2010, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-6256/140/6/1868 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2010AJ....140.1868W 140, 1868

    Wright E. L., et al., 2010, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-6256/140/6/1868 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2010AJ....140.1868W 140, 1868

    2010 doi

  66. [75]

    H., 2010, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/713/2/1207 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2010ApJ...713.1207W 713, 1207

    Wu H.-Y., Rozo E., Wechsler R. H., 2010, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-637X/713/2/1207 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2010ApJ...713.1207W 713, 1207

    2010 doi

  67. [76]

    C., Wang J., 2020, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/ab9ac5 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020ApJ...898..102Y 898, 102

    Yu N., Ho L. C., Wang J., 2020, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/ab9ac5 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020ApJ...898..102Y 898, 102

    2020 doi

  68. [77]

    Zabel N., et al., 2022, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal] 10.3847/1538-4357/ac6e68 , 933, 10

    2022 doi

  69. [78]

    de Blok W. J. G., Bosma A., 2002, @doi [Astronomy & Astrophysics] 10.1051/0004-6361:20020080 , 385, 816–846

    2002 doi

  70. [79]

    de Blok W. J. G., Walter F., Brinks E., Trachternach C., Oh S. H., Kennicutt R. C., 2008, @doi [Astronomical Journal] 10.1088/0004-6256/136/6/2648 , 136, 2648

    2008 doi

  71. [80]

    M., Fraternali F., 2015, @doi [Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society] 10.1093/mnras/stv1213 , 451, 3021

    di Teodoro E. M., Fraternali F., 2015, @doi [Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society] 10.1093/mnras/stv1213 , 451, 3021

    2015 doi

  72. [81]

    S., Bahcall J

    van Albada T. S., Bahcall J. N., Begeman K., Sancisi R., 1985, @doi [ ] 10.1086/163375 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1985ApJ...295..305V 295, 305

    1985 doi

  73. [82]

    write newline

    " write newline "" before.all 'output.state := FUNCTION fin.entry write newline FUNCTION new.block output.state before.all = 'skip after.block 'output.state := if FUNCTION new.sentence output.state after.block = 'skip output.state before.all = 'skip after.sentence 'output.stat...

Pith tools

Reviewed August 15, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.