Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 90 references

A jet-driven bipolar outflow in NGC 1125

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-07 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read High-resolution near-infrared spectroscopy of the Seyfert 2 galaxy NGC 1125 reveals a bipolar ionized-gas outflow whose alignment with the 8.4 GHz radio structure indicates it is driven by a low-luminosity radio jet.

desk verdict A well-observed case study of a likely jet-driven bipolar ionized outflow, but the quoted outflow energetics hang on an unmeasured electron density that could shift the headline numbers by an order of magnitude. read the letter →

arxiv 2502.09315 v1 pith:DT5XB7U4 submitted 2025-02-13 astro-ph.GA

Astor João Schönell Júnior , Rogemar A. Riffel , Rogério Riffel , Thaisa Storchi-bergmann This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.GA
keywords AGNfeedbackionizedgasoutflowSeyfert2galaxynear-infraredintegralfieldspectroscopyradiojetemission-linekinematicsNGC1125bipolar
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

This paper aims to establish that the Seyfert 2 galaxy NGC 1125 hosts a bipolar outflow of ionized gas on ~100–300 parsec scales, and that this outflow is driven by its low-luminosity radio jet rather than by radiation pressure alone. Using near-infrared integral-field spectroscopy at ~100 pc resolution, the authors separate the [Fe II] and Pa$\beta$ emission lines into a narrow component that rotates with the galactic disk and a broad component with high velocity dispersion ($\approx 250\,\mathrm{km\,s^{-1}}$) and disturbed kinematics. The broad component is elongated perpendicular to the disk and is co-spatial with the 8.4 GHz radio emission, and its line ratios are consistent with shock excitation. The authors derive a mass outflow rate of $0.6$–$1.1\,M_\odot\,\mathrm{yr}^{-1}$ and a kinetic power of $3.9\times10^{40}$–$1.1\times10^{41}\,\mathrm{erg\,s^{-1}}$, about 0.07%–0.2% of the AGN bolometric luminosity. If correct, this is direct evidence that even low-power radio jets can be a meaningful feedback mechanism in nearby galaxies.

What carries the argument

The central object is the broad kinematic component of the [Fe II] $\lambda 1.2570\,\mu$m and Pa$\beta$ emission lines, interpreted as the outflowing gas. The analysis machinery has three parts: (1) a two-Gaussian decomposition of each line profile into a narrow and a broad component; (2) a rotating-disc model fitted to the stellar, H$_2$, and narrow Pa$\beta$ velocity fields to define the galaxy plane and isolate non-circular motions; and (3) the bipolar mass-outflow-rate formula, which combines the broad Pa$\beta$ flux, distance, and an assumed electron density to give the ionized gas mass, together with flux-weighted velocities and radii to yield the outflow rate and power. The spatial coincidence of the broad component with the 8.4 GHz radio structure is the geometric link that turns the outflow into a jet-driven one.

What would settle it

Measure the electron density of the broad component from a density-sensitive line ratio (e.g., [Fe II] $\lambda 1.2570/\lambda 1.3209$); if the density is an order of magnitude above the assumed $500\,\mathrm{cm^{-3}}$, the derived mass outflow rate and kinetic power fall by the same factor, undercutting the feedback claim.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On the paper's own terms, the discovery is that the inner $\sim 300$ pc of NGC 1125 contains two distinct gas phases with different kinematics. The narrow component of [Fe II] $\lambda 1.2570\,\mu$m and Pa$\beta$ follows the galactic rotation, and the rotation-model residuals reveal only small red- and blueshifted excesses along the north-west/south-east axis. The broad component, with velocity dispersion $\approx 250\,\mathrm{km\,s^{-1}}$, is distributed perpendicular to the disk, with a redshifted spot to the north-west and a blueshifted spot to the south-east; it is co-spatial with the 8.4 GHz radio source, which is elongated at PA $\approx 130^\circ$. The authors interpret this broad component as a bipolar outflow in a bicone with an opening angle of $40^\circ$ and inclination to the line of sight between $20^\circ$ and $40^\circ$. Using the Pa$\beta$ broad flux, an adopted electron density of $500\,\mathrm{cm^{-3}}$, and the bipolar outflow formula, they obtain a mass outflow rate of $0.6$–$1.1\,M_\odot\,\mathrm{yr}^{-1}$ and a kinetic power of $3.9\times10^{40}$–$1.1\times10^{41}\,\mathrm{erg\,s^{-1}}$, or 0.07%–0.2% of the bolometric luminosity. The combination of spatial alignment, shock-dominated excitation (high line-ratio values in the diagnostic diagram), and elevated velocity dispersion at the interaction region is the basis for attributing the outflow to the jet.

Load-bearing premise

The outflow claim rests on assuming that the broad emission-line component is a distinct outflowing gas phase—rather than unresolved turbulence or a second disk component—and on adopted bicone inclinations of 20–40 degrees and an electron density of 500 cm$^{-3}$, none of which is measured directly from the data.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • This object becomes a clear example of jet-driven feedback at low AGN luminosity, where outflow geometry, excitation, and radio structure are all self-consistent.
  • The measured kinetic power (0.07%–0.2% of $L_\mathrm{bol}$) is well below the 0.5%–20% coupling efficiencies that simulations often associate with quenching star formation, so this outflow by itself is unlikely to shut down star formation in NGC 1125.
  • The residual velocity excesses in the narrow component along the radio axis show that the outflow is currently pushing into the circumnuclear disk, providing a spatially resolved snapshot of jet–ISM interaction.
  • The broad component's location in the high line-ratio region of the [Fe II]/Pa$\beta$ versus H$_2$/Br$\gamma$ diagnostic supports shocks as the excitation mechanism, implying that near-IR [Fe II] emission in Seyferts can trace jet-driven shocks rather than pure AGN photoionization.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the jet-driven interpretation holds, one would predict that very-long-baseline radio observations resolve a jet base at the outflow apex with the same position angle, a testable prediction beyond the ~0.44 arcsec resolution of the current data.
  • Because the mass outflow rate scales inversely with the electron density, applying the higher densities ($10^3$–$10^4\,\mathrm{cm^{-3}}$) suggested by some alternative diagnostics would lower the derived outflow rate and power by roughly an order of magnitude, making the feedback energetically even weaker.
  • The same two-component decomposition and residual-velocity analysis could be applied to the other galaxies in the volume-limited Seyfert sample to ask whether the jet–outflow co-spatiality seen in NGC 1125 is common among low-luminosity AGN or peculiar to this system.
  • A search for molecular gas in the outflow (the H$_2$ broad component is very faint here) would help distinguish jet-driven from radiation-driven scenarios: a bright molecular outflow would imply a more massive, multiphase wind than the ionized gas alone suggests.
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 / 5 minor

Summary. The paper presents Gemini NIFS J- and K-band integral field observations of the Seyfert 2 galaxy NGC1125 at roughly 100 pc resolution. The emission lines Paβ and [Fe II] are decomposed into narrow and broad Gaussian components. The narrow component is interpreted as gas rotating in the galaxy disk, fitted with rotating-disc models; the broad component is perpendicular to the disk major axis, has high velocity dispersion (~250 km/s) and disturbed kinematics, and is spatially aligned with the 8.4 GHz radio structure. The authors interpret the broad component as a jet-driven bipolar ionized-gas outflow and derive a mass outflow rate of 0.6-1.1 Msun/yr and a kinetic power of 3.9e40-1.1e41 erg/s (0.07%-0.2% of the AGN bolometric luminosity), adopting an electron density of 500 cm^-3 and outflow inclination angles between 20 and 40 degrees.

Significance. If the result holds, the paper provides a valuable, well-resolved case study of AGN feedback by a low-luminosity radio jet on ~100 pc scales. The qualitative outflow detection is supported by several independent lines of evidence: the perpendicular orientation of the broad component, its high velocity dispersion, the residual velocity pattern after subtracting a rotating-disc model, the high-excitation (HLR) line ratios along the outflow axis, and the spatial alignment with the 8.4 GHz radio emission. The paper is a standard observational case study with careful data reduction and modelling, and it fits the scope of MNRAS. The quantitative outflow rates and powers are within the range commonly reported for AGNs, but they depend sensitively on unmeasured parameters, particularly the electron density, as detailed below.

major comments (3)
  1. [§5.2, Eq. (4)] The quoted central values Mdot=0.6-1.1 Msun/yr and Ekin=3.9e40-1.1e41 erg/s (0.07%-0.2% Lbol) are computed with an adopted electron density Ne=500 cm^-3, while the same section states that alternative diagnostics can give densities an order of magnitude higher and that the ionized gas mass is inversely proportional to Ne. Since the spectra contain both [Fe II] λ1.2570 and λ1.3209, whose ratio is the standard near-IR density diagnostic, the authors should measure Ne from their own data or at least propagate the systematic density range into the final numbers. With Ne=5000 cm^-3, the values would become roughly 0.06-0.11 Msun/yr and 0.007%-0.02% Lbol, which would materially change the interpretation and the comparison with earlier work.
  2. [§5.2, Table 1] The adopted outflow inclination range γ=20-40 deg is not directly measured, and its connection to the disc inclination is unclear. Table 1 gives disc inclinations θ≈46-56 deg relative to the sky plane; if the bicone is perpendicular to the disc, the cone axis should be near the disc polar axis and make an angle of order θ with the line of sight. The text says γ=40 deg is 'the angle between the galaxy disk and the line of sight', which needs a precise geometric definition, because vout enters linearly in Mdot and quadratically in Ekin (Eqs. 3, 5, 7). Please justify the adopted γ interval and show explicitly how the 40 deg opening angle is measured from the broad-component velocity field.
  3. [§4.3, §5.1] The jet-driven conclusion rests substantially on the co-spatiality of the broad component with the 8.4 GHz radio structure from Thean et al. (2000), but the radio beam size and the uncertainty on the positional alignment are not given. Without stating the radio resolution and quantifying the PA difference between the radio structure and the broad-component emission, the 'explicit relation' claimed in the abstract is not quantitatively supported. Please provide the radio beam parameters and a measure of the alignment uncertainty.
minor comments (5)
  1. [§5.2, Fig. 10] The text states the bipolar outflow opening angle is 40 deg, but the Fig. 10 caption says 'an ≈20° aperture'; please reconcile these values.
  2. [§6] The Conclusions bullet for the [Fe II] broad component says it is 'dominated by rotation', which contradicts the disturbed velocity field and outflow interpretation in §4.3 and Fig. 5; this appears to be a copy-paste error.
  3. [§2] The K-band velocity resolution is given as '45 ±km s−1', with the uncertainty value missing; please provide the full value.
  4. [§3] There are several typographical errors, including 'the theIFSCUBE package' and 'Fe,ii' in the Fig. 5 caption; a careful copyedit is needed.
  5. [§4.3, §5.2] The broad-component velocity dispersion is quoted as ≈250 km/s in §4.3 and the abstract but 240 km/s in the Ekin calculation of §5.2; please harmonize the value.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the outflow properties are measured from the independently fitted broad component and standard formulas, with geometry and density assumptions openly stated rather than fitted inputs recycled as predictions.

full rationale

The paper's central claims—a bipolar ionized-gas outflow, mass outflow rate 0.6–1.1 Msun/yr, kinetic power 3.9e40–1.1e41 erg/s, and a connection to the radio jet—are derived from observed broad-component flux and kinematics. The broad component is identified through a two-Gaussian decomposition, but its interpretation as an outflow is anchored by independent observables: its spatial distribution is perpendicular to the narrow disk component, its velocity field is disturbed, high sigma values reach ~250 km/s, residual velocity maps after rotating-disk subtraction show red/blue excesses, and the emission is co-spatial with the external 8.4 GHz radio structure of Thean et al. (2000). The mass outflow rate is computed from standard formulas (Eqs. 3 and 4, following Lutz et al. 2020 and Osterbrock & Ferland 2006) using the broad Pa-beta flux, an adopted electron density Ne = 500 cm^-3, and assumed inclination angles 20–40 deg. These adopted values are explicitly stated uncertainties, not parameters fitted to the target outflow rate, and the paper openly discusses that alternative density diagnostics can change Ne by an order of magnitude. The self-citations (e.g., Riffel et al. 2023 for the flux-weighted estimators, Schönell et al. 2019 for the power formula) supply standard estimators, not a uniqueness argument or a forbidden alternative. No equation in the paper reduces to its own input by construction, and no load-bearing conclusion depends solely on a self-citation chain. The main fragility of the quantitative claims is the unmeasured density assumption, which is a correctness/robustness concern, not circularity.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 8 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The paper's outflow measurements depend on standard astrophysical conversion formulas plus several quantities that are assumed rather than measured: the electron density (500 cm^-3), the outflow inclination (20-40 deg), and the bicone opening angle (40 deg). The two-component Gaussian decomposition is the load-bearing modelling choice, and the jet-driven interpretation depends on the spatial alignment with the archival 8.4 GHz radio map. No new physical entities are introduced.

free parameters (3)
  • Electron density N_e = 500 cm^-3
    Adopted in Eq. (4) to convert the broad Pa beta flux into ionized gas mass. The authors note that [S ii]-based densities from the literature can be an order of magnitude higher, and M_out is inversely proportional to N_e. The quoted mass outflow rate does not propagate this uncertainty.
  • Outflow inclination gamma = 20 deg to 40 deg
    Used to deproject the measured line-of-sight velocity v=125 km/s into v_out = v / sin(gamma). The lower limit is inferred from the Seyfert 2 obscuration and the upper limit from the disk inclination; neither is a direct measurement of the bicone orientation.
  • Bicone opening angle = 40 deg
    Assumed in Eq. (3) for the bipolar geometry. The paper states it is 'estimated directly from the velocity field of the broad component,' but no independent geometric constraint is available.
assumptions (8)
  • domain assumption Case B recombination at T_e = 10^4 K gives intrinsic Pa beta / Br gamma = 5.88
    Used in Eq. (1) to derive the extinction map. Deviations from this ratio change the extinction correction applied to the broad Pa beta flux.
  • domain assumption The Cardelli et al. (1989) Galactic extinction curve is applicable to the circumnuclear gas of NGC 1125
    Used for the extinction correction of the broad Pa beta flux; different extinction curves would change the outflow mass estimate.
  • domain assumption The Bertola et al. (1991) rotating-disc model describes gas on circular orbits in a plane
    Fitted to stellar, H2, and Pa beta velocity fields in Section 5.1; the residual maps that reveal the outflow are defined relative to this model.
  • domain assumption The broad Gaussian component of the emission lines traces outflowing ionized gas
    Central to the outflow interpretation. The choice of two Gaussians is justified by visual inspection of line profiles and Gauss-Hermite moments, not by an independent physical measurement.
  • domain assumption The Lutz et al. (2020) formula Mdot_out = 3 M_out v_out / R_out describes a bipolar outflow
    Used in Eq. (3) to convert outflow mass, velocity, and radius into a mass outflow rate.
  • domain assumption The Osterbrock & Ferland (2006) relation converts Pa beta flux and electron density into ionized gas mass
    Used in Eq. (4) with N_e = 500 cm^-3 and the extinction-corrected broad Pa beta flux.
  • domain assumption The 8.4 GHz radio structure (Thean et al. 2000) is a jet whose orientation is meaningful for the outflow
    The spatial and kinematic alignment of the broad component with the radio structure is the main evidence for jet-driven feedback.
  • domain assumption The Ichikawa et al. (2017) hard X-ray to bolometric luminosity relation is applicable
    Used to convert L_X = 10^42.64 erg/s to L_bol = 5.9 x 10^43 erg/s for the coupling-efficiency comparison.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of A jet-driven bipolar outflow in NGC 1125." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/DT5XB7U4

@misc{pith2026250209315,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: A jet-driven bipolar outflow in NGC 1125},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/DT5XB7U4}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2502.09315}
}
abstract

To study the role of the feedback from the Active Galactic Nuclei (AGNs) in the evolution of its host galaxy, we need observational constraints on 100 pc scales. We used the Gemini Near Infrared Integral Field Spectrograph in the J and K bands at a spatial resolution of 100 pc and spectral resolution of 45 km\,s$^{-1}$ to observe the central region of the Seyfert galaxy NGC1125. Emission-line flux distributions in ionized and molecular gas extends up to $\approx$ 300\,pc from the nucleus, where they are found to peak. The Pa$\beta$ and [Fe\,{\sc ii}]$\lambda$1.2570$\mu$m emission-lines show two components: a narrow and a broad. The narrow component is preferably extended from the north-east to the south-west, while the broad component is perpendicular to it. Their kinematics are also different, with the narrow component showing a rotation pattern, with low velocity dispersion values ($\sigma$ $\approx$ 140 km s$^{-1}$) and the broad component a disturbed velocity field and high values of $\sigma$ ($\approx$ 250 km s$^{-1}$). We interpreted the narrow component velocity fields as due to gas rotating in the galaxy plane and fitted rotation velocity models to it, plus an outflow component in the ionized gas. The broad component is interpreted as an outflow, with mass outflow rate in the range of 0.6 to 1.1 M$_{\sun}$ yr$^{-1}$, with an outflow power ranging from 3.9$\times$10$^{40}$ to 1.1$\times$10$^{41}$ erg\,s$^{-1}$, which represents 0.07\% and 0.2\% of the bolometric luminosity of the AGN. There is an explicit relation between the shock ionized outflow and the low-luminosity radio source.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2502.09315 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Top-left panel: i image of NGC 1125 from Pan-STARRS data archive (Chambers et al. 2016; Flewelling 2016). Top-right: NIFS K-band continuum image. The color bar shows the fluxes in logarithmic units of erg s−1 cm−2 Å −1 spaxel−1 . Bottom panels: J- and K-band spectra of NGC 1125 centered at the peak of the continuum and extracted within apertures of 0.18x0.18 arcsec (40 pc x 40 pc at the galaxy). nents. We used the C… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Examples of the fits of [Fe ii]𝜆1.2570 𝜇m (first row), Pa𝛽 𝜆1.2822 𝜇m (second row), and H2 𝜆2.1218 𝜇m (third row) emission-line profiles. The position of the top panels are centered at the continuum peak and those of the bottom panels at 0.5′′ south-west of the continuum peak. The continuum-subtracted observed profiles are shown as dashed black lines, the fits are in red, and the individual Gaussian components are s… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Stellar velocity (V∗) field (left) and corresponding velocity dispersion (𝜎∗) map (right). The central cross marks the position of the nucleus, the color bars show V∗ and 𝜎∗ values in units of km s−1 and the grey regions represent the locations where we could not get good fits of the galaxy spectra. In the third column of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (7 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: First column, from top to bottom : flux distribution for the [Fe ii]𝜆1.2570𝜇m, Pa𝛽 and H2𝜆2.1218𝜇m narrow component, respectively. The color bar shows the fluxes in logarithmic scale in units of erg s−1 spaxel−1 . Second column: velocity maps for the same lines of the …
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: First column: flux distribution for the [Fe ii]𝜆1.2570𝜇m, Pa𝛽 and H2𝜆2.1218𝜇m outflow (broad) component, respectively. The color bar shows the fluxes in logarithmic scale in units of erg s−1 spaxel−1 . Second column: velocity maps for the same emission-lines of the fir…
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Top panel: Extinction E(B - V) obtained from the ratios of Pa𝛽/Br𝛾 narrow components. Bottom panel: Extinction E(B - V) obtained from the ratios of Pa𝛽/Br𝛾 broad components. Parameter Stars H2 Pa𝛽 c0 (arcsec) 6.1±1.1 14.7±2.2 8.7±1.3 𝑝 1.45±0.3 1.3±0.2 1.3±0.2 Ψ0 51.1±…
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: First row: [Fe ii]𝜆1.2570𝜇m/Pa𝛽 vs. H2𝜆2.1218𝜇m/Br𝛾 diagnostic diagram (left) and corresponding excitation map (right) for the narrow component. Second row: the same for the broad component. The lines delineating the SF, AGN, and high line ratio (HLR) regions are from …
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Rotating disc model fitted to the stars in the top left panel and its residuals in the right. The same for the H2𝜆2.1218𝜇m velocity field in the bottom panels [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_8.png]
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Rotating disc model fitted to the Pa𝛽 velocity field, together with the residuals of its subtraction from the observed velocity fields of the narrow components of [Fe ii]𝜆1.2570𝜇m and Pa𝛽. The green contours on panel two are 8.4-Ghz radio observations by Thean et al. (…
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: A scenario for the [Fe ii]𝜆1.2570𝜇m outflow, in which we can see blueshifts to the south-east (near-side) and redshifts to the north-west (far-side of the galaxy). The bicone outflow has an ≈ 20◦ aperture, making an angle of ≈ 130◦ with the north-south orientation. Th…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

90 extracted references · 8 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    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.state := if if FUNCTION not #0 #1 if FUNCTION and 'skip pop #0 if FUNCTION or pop #1...

  2. [2]

    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.state := if if FUNCTION not #0 #1 if FUNCTION and 'skip pop #0 if FUNCTION or pop #1...

  3. [3]

    Barbosa F. K. B., Storchi-Bergmann T., McGregor P., Vale T. B., Rogemar Riffel A., 2014, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stu1637 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014MNRAS.445.2353B 445, 2353

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stu1637 2014

  4. [4]

    Baron D., Netzer H., 2019, @doi [Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society] 10.1093/mnras/stz1070 , 486, 4290

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stz1070 2019

  5. [5]

    Bertola F., Bettoni D., Danziger J., Sadler E., Sparke L., de Zeeuw T., 1991, @doi [ ] 10.1086/170058 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1991ApJ...373..369B 373, 369

    doi:10.1086/170058 1991

  6. [6]

    H., van Dishoeck E

    Black J. H., van Dishoeck E. F., 1987, @doi [ ] 10.1086/165740 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1987ApJ...322..412B 322, 412

    doi:10.1086/165740 1987

  7. [7]

    Cano-D \' az M., Maiolino R., Marconi A., Netzer H., Shemmer O., Cresci G., 2012, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201118358 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2012A&A...537L...8C 537, L8

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201118358 2012

  8. [8]

    Cappellari M., Emsellem E., 2004, @doi [ ] 10.1086/381875 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2004PASP..116..138C 116, 138

    doi:10.1086/381875 2004

Show all 90 references
  1. [9]

    A., Clayton G

    Cardelli J. A., Clayton G. C., Mathis J. S., 1989, @doi [ ] 10.1086/167900 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1989ApJ...345..245C 345, 245

    1989 doi

  2. [10]

    C., et al., 2016, @doi [arXiv e-prints] 10.48550/arXiv.1612.05560 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016arXiv161205560C p

    Chambers K. C., et al., 2016, @doi [arXiv e-prints] 10.48550/arXiv.1612.05560 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016arXiv161205560C p. arXiv:1612.05560

    2016 doi arXiv

  3. [11]

    Cicone C., et al., 2014, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201322464 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014A&A...562A..21C 562, A21

    2014 doi

  4. [12]

    Colina L., et al., 2015, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201425567 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015A&A...578A..48C 578, A48

    2015 doi

  5. [13]

    G., et al., 2019, @doi [Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society] 10.1093/mnras/stz2453 , 489, 5653

    Dahmer-Hahn L. G., et al., 2019, @doi [Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society] 10.1093/mnras/stz2453 , 489, 5653

    2019 doi

  6. [14]

    I., Sternberg A., Lehnert M., Tacconi-Garman L

    Davies R. I., Sternberg A., Lehnert M., Tacconi-Garman L. E., 2003, @doi [ ] 10.1086/378634 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2003ApJ...597..907D 597, 907

    2003 doi

  7. [15]

    Davies R., et al., 2020, @doi [Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society] 10.1093/mnras/staa2413 , 498, 4150

    2020 doi

  8. [16]

    Di Matteo T., Springel V., Hernquist L., 2005, @doi [ ] 10.1038/nature03335 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2005Natur.433..604D 433, 604

    2005 doi

  9. [17]

    R., Riffel R

    Diniz M. R., Riffel R. A., Storchi-Bergmann T., Winge C., 2015, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stv1694 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015MNRAS.453.1727D 453, 1727

    2015 doi

  10. [18]

    R., Riffel R

    Diniz M. R., Riffel R. A., Storchi-Bergmann T., Riffel R., 2019, @doi [Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society] 10.1093/mnras/stz1329 , 487, 3958

    2019 doi

  11. [19]

    L., Cardaci M

    Dors O. L., Cardaci M. V., H \"a gele G. F., Krabbe \^A . C., 2014, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stu1218 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014MNRAS.443.1291D 443, 1291

    2014 doi

  12. [20]

    L., Maiolino R., Cardaci M

    Dors O. L., Maiolino R., Cardaci M. V., H \"a gele G. F., Krabbe A. C., P \'e rez-Montero E., Armah M., 2020, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/staa1781 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020MNRAS.tmp.1925D

    2020 doi

  13. [21]

    T., Woods D

    Draine B. T., Woods D. T., 1990, @doi [ ] 10.1086/169358 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1990ApJ...363..464D 363, 464

    1990 doi

  14. [22]

    Dubois Y., et al., 2014, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stu1227 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014MNRAS.444.1453D 444, 1453

    2014 doi

  15. [23]

    C., 2012, @doi [ ] 10.1146/annurev-astro-081811-125521 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2012ARA&A..50..455F 50, 455

    Fabian A. C., 2012, @doi [ ] 10.1146/annurev-astro-081811-125521 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2012ARA&A..50..455F 50, 455

    2012 doi

  16. [24]

    Ferrarese L., Ford H., 2005, @doi [ ] 10.1007/s11214-005-3947-6 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2005SSRv..116..523F 116, 523

    2005 doi

  17. [25]

    Flewelling H., 2016, in American Astronomical Society Meeting Abstracts \#227. p. 144.25

    2016

  18. [26]

    A., Ward M

    Forbes D. A., Ward M. J., 1993, @doi [ ] 10.1086/173221 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1993ApJ...416..150F 416, 150

    1993 doi

  19. [27]

    C., et al., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/sty303 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018MNRAS.476.2760F 476, 2760

    Freitas I. C., et al., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/sty303 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018MNRAS.476.2760F 476, 2760

    2018 doi

  20. [28]

    Gallagher R., Maiolino R., Belfiore F., Drory N., Riffel R., Riffel R., 2019, @doi [Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society] 10.1093/mnras/stz564 , 485, 3409

    2019 doi

  21. [30]

    Girdhar A., et al., 2024b, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stad3453 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024MNRAS.527.9322G 527, 9322

    doi

  22. [31]

    M., 2017, @doi [Nature Astronomy] 10.1038/s41550-017-0165 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017NatAs...1E.165H 1, 0165

    Harrison C. M., 2017, @doi [Nature Astronomy] 10.1038/s41550-017-0165 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017NatAs...1E.165H 1, 0165

    2017 doi

  23. [32]

    M., Ramos Almeida C., 2024, @doi [Galaxies] 10.3390/galaxies12020017 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024Galax..12...17H 12, 17

    Harrison C. M., Ramos Almeida C., 2024, @doi [Galaxies] 10.3390/galaxies12020017 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024Galax..12...17H 12, 17

    2024 doi

  24. [33]

    R., Tadhunter C

    Holden L. R., Tadhunter C. N., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stad1677 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023MNRAS.524..886H 524, 886

    2023 doi

  25. [34]

    R., Tadhunter C

    Holden L. R., Tadhunter C. N., Morganti R., Oosterloo T., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stad123 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023MNRAS.520.1848H 520, 1848

    2023 doi

  26. [35]

    F., 1989, @doi [ ] 10.1086/167595 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1989ApJ...342..306H 342, 306

    Hollenbach D., McKee C. F., 1989, @doi [ ] 10.1086/167595 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1989ApJ...342..306H 342, 306

    1989 doi

  27. [37]

    J., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/835/1/74 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017ApJ...835...74I 835, 74

    Ichikawa K., Ricci C., Ueda Y., Matsuoka K., Toba Y., Kawamuro T., Trakhtenbrot B., Koss M. J., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/835/1/74 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017ApJ...835...74I 835, 74

    2017 doi

  28. [38]

    H., Chester T., Cutri R., Schneider S

    Jarrett T. H., Chester T., Cutri R., Schneider S. E., Huchra J. P., 2003, @doi [ ] 10.1086/345794 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2003AJ....125..525J 125, 525

    2003 doi

  29. [39]

    Kakkad D., et al., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201832790 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018A&A...618A...6K 618, A6

    2018 doi

  30. [40]

    Kakkad D., et al., 2020, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/202038551 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020A&A...642A.147K 642, A147

    2020 doi

  31. [41]

    C., 2013, @doi [ ] 10.1146/annurev-astro-082708-101811 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2013ARA&A..51..511K 51, 511

    Kormendy J., Ho L. C., 2013, @doi [ ] 10.1146/annurev-astro-082708-101811 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2013ARA&A..51..511K 51, 511

    2013 doi

  32. [42]

    E., Armus L., Knop R

    Larkin J. E., Armus L., Knop R. A., Soifer B. T., Matthews K., 1998, @doi [ ] 10.1086/313063 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1998ApJS..114...59L 114, 59

    1998 doi

  33. [43]

    L., Greene J

    Liu G., Zakamska N. L., Greene J. E., Nesvadba N. P. H., Liu X., 2013, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stt1755 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2013MNRAS.436.2576L 436, 2576

    2013 doi

  34. [44]

    Lutz D., et al., 2020, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201936803 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020A&A...633A.134L 633, A134

    2020 doi

  35. [45]

    Maiolino R., et al., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.1038/nature21677 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017Natur.544..202M 544, 202

    2017 doi

  36. [46]

    R., Hollenbach D

    Maloney P. R., Hollenbach D. J., Tielens A. G. G. M., 1996, @doi [ ] 10.1086/177532 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1996ApJ...466..561M 466, 561

    1996 doi

  37. [47]

    Mazzalay X., et al., 2014, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stt2319 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014MNRAS.438.2036M 438, 2036

    2014 doi

  38. [48]

    J., et al., 2003, in Iye M., Moorwood A

    McGregor P. J., et al., 2003, in Iye M., Moorwood A. F. M., eds, Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series Vol. 4841, Instrument Design and Performance for Optical/Infrared Ground-based Telescopes. pp 1581--1591, @doi 10.1117/12.459448

    2003 doi

  39. [49]

    Mouri H., Nishida M., Taniguchi Y., Kawara K., 1990, @doi [ ] 10.1086/169095 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1990ApJ...360...55M 360, 55

    1990 doi

  40. [50]

    Mouri H., Kawara K., Taniguchi Y., 1993, @doi [ ] 10.1086/172419 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1993ApJ...406...52M 406, 52

    1993 doi

  41. [51]

    S., Wilson A

    Mulchaey J. S., Wilson A. S., Tsvetanov Z., 1996, @doi [ ] 10.1086/192261 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1996ApJS..102..309M 102, 309

    1996 doi

  42. [53]

    Nandi P., et al., 2023b, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4357/ad0c57 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023ApJ...959..116N 959, 116

    doi

  43. [54]

    Oh K., et al., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-4365/aaa7fd , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018ApJS..235....4O 235, 4

    2018 doi

  44. [55]

    E., Ferland G

    Osterbrock D. E., Ferland G. J., 2006, Astrophysics of gaseous nebulae and active galactic nuclei

    2006

  45. [56]

    K., Prieto M

    Reunanen J., Kotilainen J. K., Prieto M. A., 2002, @doi [ ] 10.1046/j.1365-8711.2002.05181.x , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2002MNRAS.331..154R 331, 154

    2002

  46. [57]

    Revalski M., et al., 2022, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal] 10.3847/1538-4357/ac5f3d , 930, 14

    2022 doi

  47. [58]

    J., Faucher-Gigu \`e re C.-A., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/sty1285 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018MNRAS.478.3100R 478, 3100

    Richings A. J., Faucher-Gigu \`e re C.-A., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/sty1285 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018MNRAS.478.3100R 478, 3100

    2018 doi

  48. [60]

    Rodríguez-Ardila, A

    Riffel, R. Rodríguez-Ardila, A. Pastoriza, M. G. 2006, @doi [A&A] 10.1051/0004-6361:20065291 , 457, 61

    2006 doi

  49. [61]

    A., Storchi-Bergmann T., Winge C., Barbosa F

    Riffel R. A., Storchi-Bergmann T., Winge C., Barbosa F. K. B., 2006, @doi [ ] 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2006.11050.x , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2006MNRAS.373....2R 373, 2

    2006

  50. [63]

    A., Storchi-Bergmann T., Nagar N

    Riffel R. A., Storchi-Bergmann T., Nagar N. M., 2010, @doi [ ] 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2010.16308.x , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2010MNRAS.404..166R 404, 166

    2010

  51. [65]

    S., Pastoriza M

    Riffel R., Rodríguez-Ardila A., Aleman I., Brotherton M. S., Pastoriza M. G., Bonatto C., Dors O. L. J., 2013a, @doi [Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society] 10.1093/mnras/stt026 , 430, 2002

    2002 doi

  52. [66]

    A., Storchi-Bergmann T., Winge C., 2013c, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stt045 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2013MNRAS.430.2249R 430, 2249

    Riffel R. A., Storchi-Bergmann T., Winge C., 2013c, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stt045 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2013MNRAS.430.2249R 430, 2249

    doi

  53. [67]

    A., Vale T

    Riffel R. A., Vale T. B., Storchi-Bergmann T., McGregor P. J., 2014, @doi [Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society] 10.1093/mnras/stu843 , 442, 656

    2014 doi

  54. [68]

    A., Storchi-Bergmann T., Riffel R., Dahmer-Hahn L

    Riffel R. A., Storchi-Bergmann T., Riffel R., Dahmer-Hahn L. G., Diniz M. R., Schönell A. J., Dametto N. Z., 2017, @doi [Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society] 10.1093/mnras/stx1308 , 470, 992

    2017 doi

  55. [69]

    A., et al., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stx2857 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018MNRAS.474.1373R 474, 1373

    Riffel R. A., et al., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stx2857 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018MNRAS.474.1373R 474, 1373

    2018 doi

  56. [70]

    A., Storchi-Bergmann T., Zakamska N

    Riffel R. A., Storchi-Bergmann T., Zakamska N. L., Riffel R., 2020, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/staa1922 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020MNRAS.496.4857R 496, 4857

    2020 doi

  57. [72]

    A., Bianchin M., Riffel R., Storchi-Bergmann T., Schönell A

    Riffel R. A., Bianchin M., Riffel R., Storchi-Bergmann T., Schönell A. J., Dahmer-Hahn L. G., Dametto N. Z., Diniz M. R., 2021a, @doi [Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society] 10.1093/mnras/stab788 , 503, 5161

    doi

  58. [73]

    A., et al., 2021c, @doi [Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society] 10.1093/mnras/stab998 , 504, 3265

    Riffel R. A., et al., 2021c, @doi [Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society] 10.1093/mnras/stab998 , 504, 3265

    doi

  59. [74]

    Riffel R., et al., 2022, @doi [Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society] 10.1093/mnras/stac740 , 512, 3906

    2022 doi

  60. [75]

    A., et al., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stad599 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023MNRAS.521.1832R 521, 1832

    Riffel R. A., et al., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stad599 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023MNRAS.521.1832R 521, 1832

    2023 doi

  61. [76]

    G., Viegas S., Sigut T

    Rodr \' guez-Ardila A., Pastoriza M. G., Viegas S., Sigut T. A. A., Pradhan A. K., 2004, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361:20034285 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2004A&A...425..457R 425, 457

    2004 doi

  62. [77]

    G., 2005, @doi [ ] 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2005.09638.x , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2005MNRAS.364.1041R 364, 1041

    Rodr \' guez-Ardila A., Riffel R., Pastoriza M. G., 2005, @doi [ ] 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2005.09638.x , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2005MNRAS.364.1041R 364, 1041

    2005

  63. [78]

    Rodríguez-Ardila A., et al., 2016, @doi [Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society] 10.1093/mnras/stw2642 , 465, 906

    2016 doi

  64. [79]

    Rose M., Tadhunter C., Ramos Almeida C., Rodr \' guez Zaur \' n J., Santoro F., Spence R., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stx2590 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018MNRAS.474..128R 474, 128

    2018 doi

  65. [80]

    Ruschel-Dutra D., et al., 2021, @doi [Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society] 10.1093/mnras/stab2058 , 507, 74

    2021 doi

  66. [81]

    Santoro F., Tadhunter C., Baron D., Morganti R., Holt J., 2020, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/202039077 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020A&A...644A..54S 644, A54

    2020 doi

  67. [82]

    Schaye J., et al., 2015, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stu2058 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015MNRAS.446..521S 446, 521

    2015 doi

  68. [83]

    J., Riffel R

    Sch \"o nell A. J., Riffel R. A., Storchi-Bergmann T., Winge C., 2014, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stu1685 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014MNRAS.445..414S 445, 414

    2014 doi

  69. [84]

    J., Storchi-Bergmann T., Riffel R

    Sch \"o nell A. J., Storchi-Bergmann T., Riffel R. A., Riffel R., Bianchin M., Dahmer-Hahn L. G., Diniz M. R., Dametto N. Z., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stz523 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019MNRAS.485.2054S 485, 2054

    2019 doi

  70. [85]

    J., Storchi-Bergmann T., Riffel R

    Schönell Astor J. J., Storchi-Bergmann T., Riffel R. A., Riffel R., 2016, @doi [Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society] 10.1093/mnras/stw2263 , 464, 1771

    2016 doi

  71. [86]

    A., 2012, @doi [Research in Astronomy and Astrophysics] 10.1088/1674-4527/12/8/004 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2012RAA....12..917S 12, 917

    Silk J., Mamon G. A., 2012, @doi [Research in Astronomy and Astrophysics] 10.1088/1674-4527/12/8/004 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2012RAA....12..917S 12, 917

    2012 doi

  72. [87]

    A., Baker A

    Simpson C., Forbes D. A., Baker A. C., Ward M. J., 1996, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/283.3.777 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1996MNRAS.283..777S 283, 777

    1996 doi

  73. [88]

    S., Hopkins P

    Somerville R. S., Hopkins P. F., Cox T. J., Robertson B. E., Hernquist L., 2008, @doi [ ] 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2008.13805.x , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2008MNRAS.391..481S 391, 481

    2008

  74. [89]

    Sternberg A., Dalgarno A., 1989, @doi [ ] 10.1086/167193 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1989ApJ...338..197S 338, 197

    1989 doi

  75. [92]

    Storchi-Bergmann T., Lopes R. D. S., McGregor P. J., Riffel R. A., Beck T., Martini P., 2010, @doi [ ] 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2009.15962.x , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2010MNRAS.402..819S 402, 819

    2010

  76. [93]

    J., Baum S

    Thean A., Pedlar A., Kukula M. J., Baum S. A., O'Dea C. P., 2000, @doi [ ] 10.1046/j.1365-8711.2000.03401.x , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2000MNRAS.314..573T 314, 573

    2000

  77. [94]

    Theureau G., Bottinelli L., Coudreau-Durand N., Gouguenheim L., Hallet N., Loulergue M., Paturel G., Teerikorpi P., 1998, @doi [ ] 10.1051/aas:1998416 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1998A&AS..130..333T 130, 333

    1998 doi

  78. [95]

    L., ed., Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series Vol

    Tody D., 1986, in Crawford D. L., ed., Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series Vol. 627, Instrumentation in astronomy VI. p. 733, @doi 10.1117/12.968154

    1986 doi

  79. [96]

    J., Brissenden R

    Tody D., 1993, in Hanisch R. J., Brissenden R. J. V., Barnes J., eds, Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series Vol. 52, Astronomical Data Analysis Software and Systems II. p. 173

    1993

  80. [97]

    Weinberger R., et al., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stw2944 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017MNRAS.465.3291W 465, 3291

    2017 doi

  81. [98]

    A., Storchi-Bergmann T., 2009, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0067-0049/185/1/186 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009ApJS..185..186W 185, 186

    Winge C., Riffel R. A., Storchi-Bergmann T., 2009, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0067-0049/185/1/186 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009ApJS..185..186W 185, 186

    2009 doi

  82. [99]

    C., Allen R

    van der Kruit P. C., Allen R. J., 1978, @doi [ ] 10.1146/annurev.aa.16.090178.000535 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1978ARA&A..16..103V 16, 103

    1978

Pith tools

Reviewed August 7, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.