Star-Forming vs. Quenched Galaxies in Voids: Insights into the Role of Mergers

Mohammad Reza Shojaei; Parsa Ghafour; Saeed Tavasoli

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 162 references

Star-Forming vs. Quenched Galaxies in Voids: Insights into the Role of Mergers

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-10 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Quenched void galaxies assembled their mass earlier, live in heavier dark-matter halos, and lost their gas because recent mergers became rare.

desk verdict Useful descriptive study of void galaxy merger histories, but the abstract's claim that quenched galaxies had more early major mergers is directly contradicted by the paper's own §3.4.1 and figures. read the letter →

arxiv 2501.16545 v1 pith:KJLDEUCU submitted 2025-01-27 astro-ph.GA

Mohammad Reza Shojaei , Saeed Tavasoli , Parsa Ghafour This is my paper · ORCID

classification astro-ph.GA

keywords galaxyevolutioncosmicvoidsquenchingmergersstarformationratesIllustrisTNGvoidgalaxiesmerger

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 the TNG300 cosmological simulation, this paper argues that the divide between star-forming and quenched galaxies inside cosmic voids is set by formation time and merger timing, not by the void environment acting directly. Quenched void galaxies assemble half their stellar mass earlier, reside in more massive dark-matter halos, and burn through their gas, while star-forming void galaxies form later and keep receiving fresh fuel. The merger histories differ accordingly: quenched galaxies experienced more major mergers at early epochs but far fewer recent ones, while star-forming galaxies had more mergers in the last few billion years. The paper presents this as the first statistical separation of major and minor merger rates for void galaxies across cosmic time, and the result matters because voids are the cleanest places to isolate internal drivers of galaxy evolution.

What carries the argument

The analysis runs on four linked tools: the TNG300 cosmological magnetohydrodynamical simulation provides galaxies and their gas, stars, black holes, and dark matter; the AM void finder, a three-dimensional algorithm for locating underdense regions, selects central galaxies inside voids; a double classification by UVJ color-color cuts and specific star-formation rate, with ambiguous overlap cases removed, assigns galaxies to star-forming or quenched samples; and the merger history catalogs supply major (stellar mass ratio greater than 1/4), minor (between 1/10 and 1/4), and all mergers with cleaned assembly histories. The load-bearing quantity is $t_{\rm form}$, the lookback time when a galaxy's main progenitor has assembled 50 percent of its $z=0$ stellar mass, because it converts the simulation output into the causal claim: earlier assembly plus higher halo mass plus fewer recent mergers equals gas exhaustion and quenching.

What would settle it

Measure the lookback time of the last major merger from tidal features or close-pair counts in a volume-limited sample of void galaxies at $z=0$: the paper predicts that at fixed stellar mass, quenched void galaxies had their last major merger roughly 2 to 3 Gyr ago while star-forming void galaxies had one within the last 1 to 2 Gyr.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On the paper's own terms, the discovery is that quenched void galaxies are not passive because voids are empty; they are passive because they formed early and exhausted their gas. Across stellar masses from $10^8$ to $10^{10.5}\,M_\odot$, the quenched population reaches its 50-percent stellar-mass assembly lookback time earlier than the star-forming population, sits in higher dark-matter halos at every redshift, and shows a steep star-formation decline below $z \approx 0.5$ after having SFRs comparable to or even above star-forming galaxies at $z > 1$. Their merger histories split cleanly: more major mergers in early epochs, last major merger typically 2 to 3 Gyr ago, and fewer multiple mergers in the recent 2 to 8 Gyr, so no gas inflow arrives to restart star formation. Star-forming void galaxies, by contrast, have more recent and repeated mergers, and their SFR stays roughly flat. Among quenched systems, mergers do little at low masses, while high-mass quenched galaxies with a merger show marginally higher SFR and star-formation efficiency.

Load-bearing premise

The conclusions rest on how 'quenched' galaxies are selected at the present day; if that selection misses or mislabels a large share of passive void galaxies, the inferred formation times and merger histories may only apply to a subset.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

Observations should find older stellar populations and lower cold-gas fractions in quenched void galaxies than in star-forming void galaxies at fixed stellar mass.
Recent and repeated minor and major mergers should be rare among quenched void galaxies, with the last major merger typically more than 2 Gyr in the past.
Star-forming void galaxies should show merger-triggered enhancements in SFR and star-formation efficiency, especially at high stellar mass, with the enhancement fading after roughly 500 Myr.
Quenched void galaxies should have formed in slightly overdense subregions within voids, consistent with their higher dark-matter halo masses at all redshifts.
Merger rates of all mass ratios in voids should decline from high redshift to the present, matching the picture of voids becoming more isolated with cosmic expansion.

Reading between the lines

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

A natural test the paper does not run is to apply the same formation-time and merger-rate analysis to non-void field galaxies matched in stellar mass and halo mass; if the differences vanish, environment matters, and if they persist, assembly history is the driver.
The quenched sample is small (249 galaxies) and defined at $z=0$; reclassifying galaxies with a redshift-dependent quenching definition could reveal whether today's quenched void galaxies were already quenched at their last major merger or quenched only afterward.
The gas-depletion story could be sharpened by directly tracking gas accretion versus merger-driven inflows in the simulation, separating 'ran out of gas' from 'gas was heated and could not cool.'
Integral-field spectroscopy of void galaxies with tidal features could look for the predicted absence of recent merger signatures in quenched systems and their presence in star-forming ones.

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.

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

First, what you should know: this is a careful descriptive study of star-forming vs quenched void galaxies in TNG300, but it carries a load-bearing internal contradiction. The genuinely new piece is the breakdown of major and minor merger fractions across lookback time for these two populations, which I haven't seen in earlier void work. The authors do the technical groundwork well: TNG300-1, public merger catalogs, dual UVJ/sSFR classification, and clean figures reporting tform, halo mass, gas content, and SFR evolution. The non-controversial findings—quenched galaxies formed earlier, reside in more massive halos, and have experienced fewer recent mergers—are consistent with prior results from Domínguez-Gómez et al. and others, and they are convincingly presented.

The problem is the headline. The abstract and conclusions say quenched galaxies "experienced more major mergers in earlier epochs." But §3.4.1 says the opposite: star-forming void galaxies have higher merger activity (major, minor, and any mass ratio) over the given lookback time. Figures 8 and 9 back this up, showing star-forming galaxies with higher major-merger fractions in most mass bins and epochs, including since z=2. Table 2 only shows that quenched galaxies had their last major merger earlier—earlier timing is not more mergers. So the paper's causal narrative, which links early major mergers to rapid gas consumption and eventual quenching, is not supported by its own data. This is a factual contradiction, not a sample-size issue.

Other soft spots are minor in comparison. The quenched sample is small (249 galaxies), the overlap region removed between the two classification thresholds introduces some selection arbitrariness, and the K-S tests report p-values without bootstrap or jackknife uncertainties. Also, part of the tform result is selected into existence: galaxies quenched by z=0 must have formed their stars earlier, so the interpretative spin there needs tempering.

Who gets value from this? Someone working on void galaxy evolution who wants a catalog-level description of merger histories in TNG300. Once the contradiction is resolved, the major/minor merger breakdown would make a useful reference. As written, I would not cite it. It still deserves a serious referee, but with a clear instruction: reconcile the abstract with §3.4.1 and revise the conclusions accordingly. This is a revise-and-resubmit candidate, not a desk reject, because the underlying data work is honest and reusable.

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The manuscript uses the TNG300-1 cosmological simulation to study the evolutionary histories and merger statistics of star-forming versus quenched central galaxies in cosmic voids. The sample comprises about 48,500 central void galaxies, of which 9,137 are classified as star-forming and 249 as quenched, using a combination of UVJ color-color cuts and specific star formation rate thresholds at z=0. The authors track stellar mass assembly, dark matter halo mass, gas content, black hole accretion, and merger histories (major, minor, and all mass ratios) over z≤2. The main claims are that quenched void galaxies formed earlier, reside in more massive dark matter halos, and experienced fewer recent mergers than star-forming void galaxies; the abstract additionally claims that quenched galaxies experienced more major mergers at early epochs and that this drove early rapid star formation and subsequent quenching. The paper concludes that mergers, formation time, and halo mass jointly shape the divergent star formation histories of star-forming and quenched void galaxies.

Significance. If the results are correct, the paper would be among the first systematic statistical studies of merger-rate differences between star-forming and quenched central void galaxies in a large-volume cosmological simulation, with the potential to clarify how underdense environments modulate galaxy quenching. The study draws on publicly available, well-calibrated simulation data (IllustrisTNG) and public merger catalogs, which is a strength for reproducibility. The quantitative trends that are consistent with the figures — earlier formation times, higher dark matter halo masses, and more recent merger activity in star-forming galaxies — are physically plausible and potentially useful. However, the paper's central causal narrative about early major mergers in quenched galaxies is directly contradicted by its own reported merger statistics, and part of the earlier-formation result is a selection effect of defining the sample by z=0 quiescence. Those issues must be resolved before the significance claimed in the abstract can be accepted.

major comments (3)

[§3.2, §3.3, §3.4.1, §4] The abstract's claim that quenched void galaxies 'experienced more major mergers in earlier epochs but fewer recent mergers' is directly contradicted by the paper's own presentation of the data. Section 3.4.1 states that 'star-forming void galaxies have a higher merger activity (major, minor, and mergers in any mass ratio) than quenched galaxies over the given lookback time' and the accompanying Figure 7 shows the star-forming fraction higher across all lookback times. Figures 8 and 9 also show that star-forming galaxies have higher or comparable major-merger fractions in virtually every mass bin and epoch, including early epochs. Table 2 supports only the 'fewer recent mergers' part of the statement for quenched galaxies; the 'more major mergers at earlier epochs' is never shown. Since the title and abstract foreground mergers as the key physical driver, this internal inconsistency is load-bearing and must be corrected, either by removing the unsupported claim or by redefining the comparison in a way that is consistent with the plotted data.
[§2.3.4; §3.2; §3.3] Part of the headline 'earlier formation and higher early SFR' result is selected into existence by the sample definition. The quenched sample is defined at z=0 by low sSFR and UVJ colors, so by construction these galaxies must have assembled their stellar mass earlier than star-forming galaxies of the same final stellar mass; the tform differences in Table 1 and Figure 5 therefore largely reflect the definition of quiescence, not an independent physical discovery. The paper nonetheless interprets these differences as evidence that quenched galaxies 'consume their gas more rapidly' and that this is caused by earlier formation. To make the claim non-circular, the authors should compare the evolutionary tracks to a control sample matched in z=0 stellar mass (and possibly halo mass) or explicitly quantify how much of the tform offset remains after removing the selection effect. The same concern applies to the high-redshift SFR excess in Figure 3, which is expected for objects that will become passive by z=0 in a downsizing scenario.
[Figures 7-10; Table 2] The statistical robustness of the central merger comparison is not established. The quenched sample contains only 249 galaxies, and the merger fractions in Figures 7–10 are shown without error bars or confidence intervals. Many mass bins (especially high-mass quenched bins) likely contain very few objects, and the apparent differences between star-forming and quenched fractions — e.g., the 'more than one merger' percentages in Figures 9 and 10 — may be dominated by Poisson noise. The authors should provide bootstrap or binomial confidence intervals for all reported merger fractions, and state the number of galaxies in each mass bin for both populations. Without this, the claimed statistical significance of the merger-rate differences is not verifiable.

minor comments (5)

[Abstract; §1; Figure 2 caption] The phrase 'higher dark matter halos' should be 'more massive dark matter halos'; 'dark matter halo mass' is the standard term. Also, Figure 4 and the related text report MDM within twice the half-mass radius, which is not the total halo mass; this distinction should be made explicit in the abstract and throughout.
[§2.3.2] The void finder (AM algorithm) is described only by reference; please state the key parameters used (density threshold, smoothing scale, minimum void size) so that the void-galaxy sample can be reproduced.
[Figure 1 caption] The caption says 'stellar half-mass radius ≥ 108 M⊙', which appears to be a typo for 'stellar mass ≥ 10^8 M⊙'.
[§3.2, Figure 3 caption] There is a color inconsistency: §3.2 says 'a blue line representing star-forming galaxies and a red line for quenched', while the Figure 3 caption says 'star-forming (red) and quenched (blue)'. Figure 2 and other figures use blue for star-forming and red for quenched; please harmonize all figures and text.
[Throughout] Several typographical and reference issues should be cleaned up: 'Donnari2019' appears without a space in the Figure 1 caption; 'V ogelsberger' has a spurious space; 'e ffect' and 'di fferent' appear with stray spaces; and some citations such as '(Donnari et al. 2019, 2021)' and '(Behroozi et al. 2019)' appear in the text but are not formatted consistently with the reference list.

Circularity Check

2 steps flagged · score 6.0 of 10

Partial circularity: the 'earlier formation / high early SFR' narrative is selected into existence by the sSFR-based definition of quenching, while the merger statistics are independent but internally inconsistent.

self definitional [Sec. 2.3.4 (sample definition) -> Sec. 3.3 / Fig. 5 and Abstract (formation-time result)]
"In the literature, we commonly define "quenched" galaxies as those whose logarithmic Specific Star Formation Rate (sSFR) falls below a certain fixed threshold at any redshift, namely sSFR≤ 10−11 yr−1. Star-forming galaxies are thus those with sSFR larger than this threshold. ... quenched void galaxies form 50% of their mass in all stellar mass bins earlier than star-forming void galaxies."

The quenched sample is selected at z=0 by sSFR ≤ 10^-11 yr^-1 and then compared with star-forming galaxies in fixed z=0 stellar-mass bins. A population with SFR(z=0) ≈ 0 and a population with SFR(z=0) > 0 that have the same final stellar mass cannot have the same past average SFR; the quenched population's mass growth must be front-loaded. Reporting that quenched galaxies 'formed earlier' and 'exhibit high SFRs at high redshifts, significantly decreasing at lower redshifts' is therefore the sSFR cut rewritten as an evolutionary history, not an independent discovery. The causal language added in the Abstract ('rapid gas consumption due to earlier formation') is built on this selection effect.
self definitional [Sec. 3.1, Fig. 2(d)]
"Star-forming galaxies consistently have higher specific star formation rates (sSFR) than quenched galaxies across all mass bins, demonstrating our thresholds for classifying star-forming and quenched void galaxies."

This is a sanity check rather than an empirical result: the two samples were constructed by exactly this sSFR cut in Sec. 2.3.4, so the statement is true by construction. The same applies to the higher z=0 SFR of star-forming galaxies in Fig. 2(a), since SFR = sSFR × Mstar and the samples are matched in stellar-mass bins. The paper lists this tautological check among its results, but it is not load-bearing for the main physical conclusions.

full rationale

The paper is not globally circular: the merger-rate comparisons are taken from the public IllustrisTNG merger-tree catalogs (Rodriguez-Gomez et al. 2017; Eisert et al. 2023) and are not defined by the UVJ/sSFR classification, and the dark-matter-halo and gas-content comparisons are direct simulation measurements. The Tavasoli et al. (2013) void-finder citation is a method citation rather than a self-citation carrying the argument. However, a substantial part of the headline narrative is selected into existence. Section 2.3.4 defines quenched galaxies by sSFR ≤ 10^-11 yr^-1 at z=0; Section 3.3 then reports that these galaxies assembled 50% of their stellar mass earlier than star-forming galaxies, and the Abstract concludes that they 'formed earlier and experienced more major mergers in earlier epochs but fewer recent mergers.' For matched final stellar masses, a population with negligible current SFR must have had a higher past average SFR and an earlier 50%-mass time than a population that is still forming stars at z=0, especially since the paper itself finds ex-situ fractions below 0.1 (Sec. 3.4). The 'high early SFR / earlier formation' claim is thus largely a restatement of the sSFR selection. The merger part is independent but is not circular; rather, it is internally inconsistent, since Sec. 3.4.1 and Fig. 7 state that star-forming void galaxies have higher major, minor, and total merger activity over the full lookback time shown, while the Abstract claims more early major mergers for quenched galaxies. That contradiction is a correctness problem, not a circularity. Overall, the central formation-time/SFR narrative partially reduces to its own sample definition, while the halo and merger-tree analyses retain independent content, giving a score of 6.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The paper introduces no new model parameters or entities. It relies on the existing simulation and catalogs. The main choices are the classification thresholds and the removal of ambiguous galaxies, which should be treated as assumptions.

assumptions (5)

domain assumption IllustrisTNG300 subgrid physics (star formation, feedback, black hole growth) adequately represents galaxy formation and quenching.
All results are derived from this simulation; if TNG's subgrid recipes are wrong, the trends may not match the real universe. Invoked throughout Section 2.1.
domain assumption The AM void finder identifies true void galaxies.
Section 2.3.2 uses the Aikio and Mähönen (1998) algorithm as implemented by Tavasoli et al. (2013). Different void finders can give different galaxy samples.
domain assumption The merger history catalogs of Rodriguez-Gomez et al. (2017) and Eisert et al. (2023) correctly trace mergers and ex-situ mass.
Section 2.2 and Section 3.4 rely on these public catalogs for all merger statistics.
domain assumption The UVJ and sSFR classification thresholds from Whitaker et al. (2011), Donnari et al. (2019), and the fixed sSFR = 10^-11 yr^-1 correctly separate star-forming and quenched galaxies.
Section 2.3.3 and 2.3.4; the classification is the foundation for all comparisons.
ad hoc to paper The removal of the UVJ/sSFR overlap region does not bias the quenched sample.
Section 2.3.4: the authors exclude ambiguous galaxies between the two classification criteria, a choice specific to this paper that affects the sample.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Star-Forming vs. Quenched Galaxies in Voids: Insights into the Role of Mergers." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/KJLDEUCU

@misc{pith2026250116545,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Star-Forming vs. Quenched Galaxies in Voids: Insights into the Role of Mergers},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/KJLDEUCU}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2501.16545}
}

read the original abstract

Cosmic voids, the largest under-dense structures in the Universe, are crucial for exploring galaxy evolution. These vast, sparsely populated regions are home to void galaxies -- predominantly gas-rich, star-forming, and blue -- that evolve more slowly than those in denser environments. Additionally, the correlation between galaxy mergers and specific properties of galaxies, such as the star formation rate (SFR), is not fully understood, particularly in these under-dense environments. Quenched void galaxies exhibit high SFRs at high redshifts, significantly decreasing at lower redshifts (z < 0.5). These galaxies have higher dark matter halos than star-forming galaxies across all redshifts, leading to rapid gas consumption. They formed earlier and experienced more major mergers in earlier epochs but fewer recent mergers, resulting in a lack of fresh gas for sustained star formation. Also, star-forming and high-mass quenched void galaxies show higher SFRs in mergers compared to non-merger galaxies. This study highlights that formation time, merger rates, and dark matter halos play a crucial role in the star formation history of void galaxies. Rapid and earlier gas consumption due to earlier formation time and the absence of recent mergers could lead to quenched void galaxies at lower redshifts, providing valuable insights into galaxy evolution in low-density environments.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2501.16545 by the authors.

**Figure 2.** Comparative analysis of six key parameters: star formation rate(SFR), the mass of dark matter (MDM), the mass of gas (Mgas,) specific star formation rate (sSFR), the average number density of gas (n) within twice the half-mass stellar radius and supermassive black hole mass( MBH) for star-forming (blue lines) and quenched (red lines) galaxies as a function of stellar mass in void environments at z = 0. Lines indicat… view at source ↗

**Figure 3.** Evolution of specific star formation rate (sSFR), star formation rate (SFR), gas mass (Mgas), and gas fraction as a function of redshift (z ≤ 2) for star-forming (red) and quenched (blue) galaxies in the IllustrisTNG 300 simulation. Lines in each panel represent the median of each parameter within redshift bins, while the shaded regions indicate the absolute error in the median, reflecting uncertainties in the measu… view at source ↗

Figures from the paper (9 more)

**Figure 4.** Figure 4: Evolution of black hole mass (log MBH), black hole accretion rate (log M˙ BH), and dark matter halo mass (log MDM) as a function of redshift (z ≤ 2) for star-forming (blue) and quenched (red) galaxies in the IllustrisTNG 300 simulation. Lines in each panel represent th…

**Figure 5.** Figure 5: Stellar mass assembly histories of star-forming (blue) and quenched (red) galaxies across five stellar mass bins as a function of lookback time(Gyr). The normalized stellar mass fraction is shown with solid lines representing medians and shaded regions indicating the m…

**Figure 6.** Figure 6: The median ex-situ stellar mass fraction facc as a function of stellar mass M∗ is shown for void galaxies since z = 5 (≈ 12.6 Gyr). Star-forming and quenched void galaxies are shown in blue and red colors. The shaded region represents the standard deviation around the …

**Figure 7.** Figure 7: fraction of galaxies that have undergone at least one merger in different periods (lookback time measured from z = 0) and different stellar mass ratios: major minor, and total mergers for star-forming and quenched galaxies in the void that blue lines and red lines indi…

**Figure 8.** Figure 8: Fraction of galaxies undergoing different types of mergers for three defined time periods. Left: Last 5 Gyr (z ≈ 0.5). Middle: Since z = 1 (Lookback time ≈ 7.92 Gyr). Right: Since z = 2 (Lookback time ≈ 10.51 Gyr). The color denotes the fraction of galaxies undergoing …

**Figure 9.** Figure 9: Percentage of minor (columns 1 and 2) and major mergers (columns 3 and 4) for total mergers the last 12.5 Gyr, 10.5 Gyr, 8 Gyr, 5 Gyr, and the last 2Gyr, for star-forming and quenched void galaxies in TNG300. The five mass bins in log10 M⊙ are indicated along the x-axi…

**Figure 10.** Figure 10: Percentage of all mergers (any stellar mass ratio) for the last 8 Gyr, 5 Gyr, and 2 Gyr, for star-forming and quenched void galaxies in TNG300. The five mass bins in log10 M⊙ are indicated along the x-axis, and the color represents the percentage of galaxies that unde…

**Figure 11.** Figure 11: Histograms comparing the distributions of star formation rate (SFR), specific star formation rate (sSFR), star formation efficiency (SFE), and gas fraction (fgas) for mergers (blue) and non-mergers (red) in void environments across different galaxy types and stellar m…

**Figure 12.** Figure 12: Percentage of major mergers for star-forming and quenched void galaxies across time scales: present to 2 Gyr, 5–2 Gyr, 8–5 Gyr, 10.5–8 Gyr, and before 10.5 Gyr. Stellar mass bins (log10 M⊙) are on the x-axis, and colors indicate the percentage of galaxies with at leas…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

162 extracted references · 20 canonical work pages

[1]

Morphologies of galaxies within voids

Aikio, J. & Mähönen, P. 1998, The Astrophysical Journal, 497, 534 Argudo-Fernández, M., Hernández, C. G., Verley, S., et al. 2024, arXiv preprint arXiv:2411.02129

work page Pith review arXiv 1998
[2]

2016, The Astro- physical Journal, 821, 90

Athanassoula, E., Rodionov, S., Peschken, N., & Lambert, J. 2016, The Astro- physical Journal, 821, 90

2016
[3]

Bagla, J. S. 2002, Journal of Astrophysics and Astronomy, 23, 185

2002
[4]

Barnes, J. E. & Hernquist, L. 1992, In: Annual review of astronomy and astro- physics. V ol. 30 (A93-25826 09-90), p. 705-742., 30, 705

1992
[5]

J., Arnold, J

Barton, E. J., Arnold, J. A., Zentner, A. R., Bullock, J. S., & Wechsler, R. H. 2007, The Astrophysical Journal, 671, 1538

2007
[6]

H., Hearin, A

Behroozi, P., Wechsler, R. H., Hearin, A. P., & Conroy, C. 2019, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 488, 3143

2019
[7]

2009, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 399, 2221

Bekki, K. 2009, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 399, 2221

2009
[8]

F., Naab, T., McIntosh, D

Bell, E. F., Naab, T., McIntosh, D. H., et al. 2006, The Astrophysical Journal, 640, 241

2006

Show all 162 references

[9]

Benson, A., Hoyle, F., Torres, F., & V ogeley, M. S. 2003, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 340, 160

2003
[10]

2017, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 464, 666

Beygu, B., Peletier, R., Van der Hulst, J., et al. 2017, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 464, 666

2017
[11]

F., Conselice, C

Bluck, A. F., Conselice, C. J., Bouwens, R. J., et al. 2009, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society: Letters, 394, L51

2009
[12]

R., Faber, S., Primack, J

Blumenthal, G. R., Faber, S., Primack, J. R., & Rees, M. J. 1984, Nature, 311, 517

1984
[13]

Blumenthal, K. A. & Barnes, J. E. 2018, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astro- nomical Society, 479, 3952

2018
[14]

P., & Xu, G

Bode, P., Ostriker, J. P., & Xu, G. 2000, The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series, 128, 561

2000
[15]

G., Benson, A., Malbon, R., et al

Bower, R. G., Benson, A., Malbon, R., et al. 2006, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 370, 645

2006
[16]

2024, arXiv preprint arXiv:2407.10900

Boylan-Kolchin, M. 2024, arXiv preprint arXiv:2407.10900

2024 arXiv
[17]

Bustamante, S., Sparre, M., Springel, V ., & Grand, R. J. 2018, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 479, 3381

2018
[18]

H., Ellison, S

Byrne-Mamahit, S., Hani, M. H., Ellison, S. L., Quai, S., & Patton, D. R. 2023, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 519, 4966

2023
[19]

R., V olonteri, M., Dotti, M., et al

Capelo, P. R., V olonteri, M., Dotti, M., et al. 2015, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 447, 2123

2015
[20]

G., Patton, D., et al

Carlberg, R., Cohen, J. G., Patton, D., et al. 2000, The Astrophysical Journal, 532, L1

2000
[21]

2009, Nature, 460, 213

Cattaneo, A., Faber, S., Binney, J., et al. 2009, Nature, 460, 213

2009
[22]

A., Warnick, K., & Knebe, A

Cattaneo, A., Mamon, G. A., Warnick, K., & Knebe, A. 2011, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 533, A5

2011
[23]

L., Alonso, S., & Lambas, D

Ceccarelli, M. L., Alonso, S., & Lambas, D. G. 2024, arXiv preprint arXiv:2412.01697

2024 arXiv
[24]

2003, Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific, 115, 763

Chabrier, G. 2003, Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific, 115, 763

2003
[25]

Conselice, C. J. 2014, Annual Review of Astronomy and Astrophysics, 52, 291

2014
[26]

J., Chapman, S

Conselice, C. J., Chapman, S. C., & Windhorst, R. A. 2003, The Astrophysical Journal, 596, L5

2003
[27]

J., Yang, C., & Bluck, A

Conselice, C. J., Yang, C., & Bluck, A. F. 2009, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 394, 1956

2009
[28]

S., Primack, J

Cox, T., Jonsson, P., Somerville, R. S., Primack, J. R., & Dekel, A. 2008, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 384, 386

2008
[29]

A., Schaye, J., Bower, R

Crain, R. A., Schaye, J., Bower, R. G., et al. 2015, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 450, 1937

2015
[30]

J., Springel, V ., White, S

Croton, D. J., Springel, V ., White, S. D., et al. 2006, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 365, 11

2006
[31]

W., Kaviraj, S., Lintott, C

Darg, D. W., Kaviraj, S., Lintott, C. J., et al. 2010, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 401, 1043

2010
[32]

2021, arXiv preprint arXiv:2108.05874 Davé, R., Anglés-Alcázar, D., Narayanan, D., et al

Das, A., Pandey, B., Sarkar, S., & Dutta, A. 2021, arXiv preprint arXiv:2108.05874 Davé, R., Anglés-Alcázar, D., Narayanan, D., et al. 2019, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 486, 2827

2021 arXiv
[33]

J., Robotham, A

Davies, L. J., Robotham, A. S. G., Driver, S. P., et al. 2015, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 452, 616

2015
[34]

S., & White, S

Davis, M., Efstathiou, G., Frenk, C. S., & White, S. D. 1985, Astrophysical Jour- nal, Part 1 (ISSN 0004-637X), vol. 292, May 15, 1985, p. 371-394. Research supported by the Science and Engineering Research Council of England and NASA., 292, 371 De Lucia, G., Springel, V ., Wh...

1985
[35]

& Birnboim, Y

Dekel, A. & Birnboim, Y . 2008, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 383, 119

2008
[36]

& Woo, J

Dekel, A. & Woo, J. 2003, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 344, 1131 Di Matteo, P., Bournaud, F., Martig, M., et al. 2008, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 492, 31 Di Matteo, P., Combes, F., Melchior, A.-L., & Semelin, B. 2007, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 468, 61 Di M...

2003
[37]

2009, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 399, 497

Dolag, K., Borgani, S., Murante, G., & Springel, V . 2009, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 399, 497

2009
[38]

L., Cao, C., Xu, C

Domingue, D. L., Cao, C., Xu, C. K., et al. 2016, The Astrophysical Journal, 829, 78 Domínguez-Gómez, J., Pérez, I., Ruiz-Lara, T., et al. 2023, Nature, 619, 269

2016
[39]

2021, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 506, 4760

Donnari, M., Pillepich, A., Nelson, D., et al. 2021, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 506, 4760

2021
[40]

2019, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 485, 4817

Donnari, M., Pillepich, A., Nelson, D., et al. 2019, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 485, 4817

2019
[41]

2023, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 519, 2199

Eisert, L., Pillepich, A., Nelson, D., et al. 2023, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 519, 2199

2023
[42]

L., Mendel, J

Ellison, S. L., Mendel, J. T., Patton, D. R., & Scudder, J. M. 2013, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 435, 3627

2013
[43]

L., Patton, D

Ellison, S. L., Patton, D. R., Simard, L., & McConnachie, A. W. 2008, The As- tronomical Journal, 135, 1877

2008
[44]

L., Viswanathan, A., Patton, D

Ellison, S. L., Viswanathan, A., Patton, D. R., et al. 2019, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 487, 2491

2019
[45]

Fabian, A. C. 2012, Annual Review of Astronomy and Astrophysics, 50, 455

2012
[46]

A., Kannappan, S

Florez, J., Berlind, A. A., Kannappan, S. J., et al. 2021, The Astrophysical Jour- nal, 906, 97

2021
[47]

2015, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 450, 4486 Garduño, L., Lara-López, M., López-Cruz, O., et al

Furlong, M., Bower, R., Theuns, T., et al. 2015, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 450, 4486 Garduño, L., Lara-López, M., López-Cruz, O., et al. 2021, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 501, 2969

2015
[48]

2014, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 445, 175

Genel, S., V ogelsberger, M., Springel, V ., et al. 2014, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 445, 175

2014
[49]

D., & Keller, B

Gensior, J., Kruijssen, J. D., & Keller, B. W. 2020, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 495, 199

2020
[50]

Gunn, J. E. & Gott III, J. R. 1972, Astrophysical Journal, vol. 176, p. 1, 176, 1

1972
[51]

K., Brook, C., et al

Hambleton, K., Gibson, B. K., Brook, C., et al. 2011, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 418, 801

2011
[52]

H., Gosain, H., Ellison, S

Hani, M. H., Gosain, H., Ellison, S. L., Patton, D. R., & Torrey, P. 2020, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 493, 3716

2020
[53]

1989, Nature, 340, 687

Hernquist, L. 1989, Nature, 340, 687

1989
[54]

F., Croton, D., Bundy, K., et al

Hopkins, P. F., Croton, D., Bundy, K., et al. 2010, The Astrophysical Journal, 724, 915

2010
[55]

F., Hernquist, L., Cox, T

Hopkins, P. F., Hernquist, L., Cox, T. J., et al. 2006, The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series, 163, 1

2006
[56]

F., Hernquist, L., Cox, T

Hopkins, P. F., Hernquist, L., Cox, T. J., & Kereš, D. 2008, The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series, 175, 356

2008
[57]

R., V ogeley, M

Hoyle, F., Rojas, R. R., V ogeley, M. S., & Brinkmann, J. 2005, The Astrophysical Journal, 620, 618

2005
[58]

2012, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astro- nomical Society, 426, 3041

Hoyle, F., V ogeley, M., & Pan, D. 2012, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astro- nomical Society, 426, 3041

2012
[59]

& Yan-chun, S

Jia-jie, Q. & Yan-chun, S. 2021, Chinese Astronomy and Astrophysics, 45, 31

2021
[60]

2022, The Astrophysical Journal, 926, 115

Jian, H.-Y ., Lin, L., Hsieh, B.-C., et al. 2022, The Astrophysical Journal, 926, 115

2022
[61]

2018, Publications of the Astronomical Society of Japan, 70, S23

Jian, H.-Y ., Lin, L., Oguri, M., et al. 2018, Publications of the Astronomical Society of Japan, 70, S23

2018
[62]

H., & Hernquist, L

Katz, N., Weinberg, D. H., & Hernquist, L. 1995, arXiv preprint astro- ph/9509107

1995
[63]

& Fairall, A

Kauffmann, G. & Fairall, A. 1991, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 248, 313 Article number, page 17 of 18 A&A proofs: manuscript no. main

1991
[64]

D., & Guiderdoni, B

Kauffmann, G., White, S. D., & Guiderdoni, B. 1993, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 264, 201 Kennicutt Jr, R. C. 1989, Astrophysical Journal, Part 1 (ISSN 0004-637X), vol. 344, Sept. 15, 1989, p. 685-703., 344, 685

1993
[65]

P., Oemler Jr, A., Schechter, P

Kirshner, R. P., Oemler Jr, A., Schechter, P. L., & Shectman, S. A. 1981, As- trophysical Journal, Part 2-Letters to the Editor, vol. 248, Sept. 1, 1981, p. L57-L60., 248, L57

1981
[66]

H., Cisternas, M., & Querejeta, M

Knapen, J. H., Cisternas, M., & Querejeta, M. 2015, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 454, 1742

2015
[67]

G., Tissera, P

Lambas, D. G., Tissera, P. B., Alonso, M. S., & Coldwell, G. 2003, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 346, 1189

2003
[68]

B., Tinsley, B

Larson, R. B., Tinsley, B. M., & Caldwell, C. N. 1980, Astrophysical Journal, Part 1, vol. 237, May 1, 1980, p. 692-707. Research supported by the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation, 237, 692

1980
[69]

& Wandelt, B

Lavaux, G. & Wandelt, B. D. 2010, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 403, 1392

2010
[70]

2020, The Astrophysical Journal, 895, 102

Li, Y ., Habouzit, M., Genel, S., et al. 2020, The Astrophysical Journal, 895, 102

2020
[71]

C., Jian, H.-Y ., et al

Lin, L., Cooper, M. C., Jian, H.-Y ., et al. 2010, The Astrophysical Journal, 718, 1158

2010
[72]

C., Weiner, B

Lin, L., Koo, D. C., Weiner, B. J., et al. 2007, The Astrophysical Journal, 660, L51

2007
[73]

C., Willmer, C

Lin, L., Koo, D. C., Willmer, C. N., et al. 2004, The Astrophysical Journal, 617, L9

2004
[74]

R., Koo, D

Lin, L., Patton, D. R., Koo, D. C., et al. 2008, The Astrophysical Journal, 681, 232

2008
[75]

C., Li, C., Wang, L., & Wang, E

Lin, Y ., Sodi, B. C., Li, C., Wang, L., & Wang, E. 2014, The Astrophysical Journal, 796, 98

2014
[76]

M., Davis, M., Faber, S., et al

Lotz, J. M., Davis, M., Faber, S., et al. 2008, The Astrophysical Journal, 672, 177

2008
[77]

M., Jonsson, P., Cox, T., et al

Lotz, J. M., Jonsson, P., Cox, T., et al. 2011, The Astrophysical Journal, 742, 103

2011
[78]

M., Jonsson, P., Cox, T., & Primack, J

Lotz, J. M., Jonsson, P., Cox, T., & Primack, J. R. 2010, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 404, 575

2010
[79]

& Belli, S

Man, A. & Belli, S. 2018, Nature Astronomy, 2, 695

2018
[80]

2018, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 480, 5113

Marinacci, F., V ogelsberger, M., Pakmor, R., et al. 2018, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 480, 5113

2018
[81]

2009, The Astrophysical Journal, 707, 250

Martig, M., Bournaud, F., Teyssier, R., & Dekel, A. 2009, The Astrophysical Journal, 707, 250

2009
[82]

L., Balogh, M

McGee, S. L., Balogh, M. L., Wilman, D. J., et al. 2011, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 413, 996

2011
[83]

& Hernquist, L

Mihos, C. & Hernquist, L. 1995, arXiv preprint astro-ph/9512099

1995 arXiv
[84]

1998, The Astrophysical Journal, 495, 139

Moore, B., Lake, G., & Katz, N. 1998, The Astrophysical Journal, 495, 139

1998
[85]

M., Moreno, J., White, A., et al

Moorman, C. M., Moreno, J., White, A., et al. 2016, The Astrophysical Journal, 831, 118

2016
[86]

L., et al

Moreno, J., Torrey, P., Ellison, S. L., et al. 2015, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 448, 1107

2015
[87]

L., et al

Moreno, J., Torrey, P., Ellison, S. L., et al. 2021, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 503, 3113

2021
[88]

L., et al

Moreno, J., Torrey, P., Ellison, S. L., et al. 2019, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 485, 1320

2019
[89]

2006, The Astrophysical Journal, 636, L81

Naab, T., Khochfar, S., & Burkert, A. 2006, The Astrophysical Journal, 636, L81

2006
[90]

P., Pillepich, A., Springel, V ., et al

Naiman, J. P., Pillepich, A., Springel, V ., et al. 2018, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 477, 1206

2018
[91]

Navarro, J. F. 1996, in Symposium-international astronomical union, V ol. 171, Cambridge University Press, 255–258

1996
[92]

Navarro, J. F. & White, S. D. 1993, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 265, 271

1993
[93]

C., & Dekel, A

Neistein, E., Van Den Bosch, F. C., & Dekel, A. 2006, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 372, 933

2006
[94]

2015, Astronomy and Computing, 13, 12

Nelson, D., Pillepich, A., Genel, S., et al. 2015, Astronomy and Computing, 13, 12

2015
[95]

2018, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 475, 624

Nelson, D., Pillepich, A., Springel, V ., et al. 2018, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 475, 624

2018
[96]

2019, Computational Astrophysics and Cosmology, 6, 1

Nelson, D., Springel, V ., Pillepich, A., et al. 2019, Computational Astrophysics and Cosmology, 6, 1

2019
[97]

Neyrinck, M. C. 2008, Monthly notices of the royal astronomical society, 386, 2101

2008
[98]

2004, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 355, 874

Nikolic, B., Cullen, H., & Alexander, P. 2004, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 355, 874

2004
[99]

P., Naab, T., Johansson, P

Oser, L., Ostriker, J. P., Naab, T., Johansson, P. H., & Burkert, A. 2010, The Astrophysical Journal, 725, 2312

2010
[100]

D., Ceccarelli, L., & Lambas, D

Padilla, N. D., Ceccarelli, L., & Lambas, D. 2005, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 363, 977

2005
[101]

2018, The Astrophysical Journal, 868, 132

Pan, H.-A., Lin, L., Hsieh, B.-C., et al. 2018, The Astrophysical Journal, 868, 132

2018
[102]

G., van Dokkum, P

Patel, S. G., van Dokkum, P. G., Franx, M., et al. 2013, The Astrophysical Jour- nal, 766, 15

2013
[103]

2002, The Astrophysical Journal, 565, 208

Patton, D., Pritchet, C., Carlberg, R., et al. 2002, The Astrophysical Journal, 565, 208

2002
[104]

R., Qamar, F

Patton, D. R., Qamar, F. D., Ellison, S. L., et al. 2016, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 461, 2589

2016
[105]

J., Kovaˇc, K., et al

Peng, Y .-j., Lilly, S. J., Kovaˇc, K., et al. 2010, The Astrophysical Journal, 721, 193

2010
[106]

J., Renzini, A., & Carollo, M

Peng, Y .-j., Lilly, S. J., Renzini, A., & Carollo, M. 2012, The Astrophysical Jour- nal, 757, 4

2012
[107]

Perez, J., Michel-Dansac, L., & Tissera, P. B. 2011, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 417, 580

2011
[108]

2014, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 562, A1

Perret, V ., Renaud, F., Epinat, B., et al. 2014, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 562, A1

2014
[109]

Platen, E., Van De Weygaert, R., & Jones, B. J. 2007, Monthly notices of the royal astronomical society, 380, 551

2007
[110]

F., Williams, R

Quadri, R. F., Williams, R. J., Franx, M., & Hildebrandt, H. 2011, The Astro- physical Journal, 744, 88

2011
[111]

W., Markevitch, M., Clowe, D., Gonzalez, A

Randall, S. W., Markevitch, M., Clowe, D., Gonzalez, A. H., & Bradaˇc, M. 2008, The Astrophysical Journal, 679, 1173

2008
[112]

2014, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 445, 4045

Ricciardelli, E., Cava, A., Varela, J., & Quilis, V . 2014, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 445, 4045

2014
[113]

P., Davies, L

Robotham, A., Driver, S. P., Davies, L. J., et al. 2014, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 444, 3986

2014
[114]

P., et al

Robotham, A., Liske, J., Driver, S. P., et al. 2013, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 431, 167

2013
[115]

2015, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 449, 49

Rodriguez-Gomez, V ., Genel, S., V ogelsberger, M., et al. 2015, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 449, 49

2015
[116]

V ., et al

Rodriguez-Gomez, V ., Pillepich, A., Sales, L. V ., et al. 2016, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 458, 2371

2016
[117]

V ., Genel, S., et al

Rodriguez-Gomez, V ., Sales, L. V ., Genel, S., et al. 2017, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 467, 3083 Rodríguez-Medrano, A. M., Springel, V ., Stasyszyn, F. A., & Paz, D. J. 2024, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 528, 2822

2017
[118]

R., V ogeley, M

Rojas, R. R., V ogeley, M. S., Hoyle, F., & Brinkmann, J. 2004, The Astrophysical Journal, 617, 50

2004
[119]

R., V ogeley, M

Rojas, R. R., V ogeley, M. S., Hoyle, F., & Brinkmann, J. 2005, The Astrophysical Journal, 624, 571

2005
[120]

Rosas-Guevara, Y ., Tissera, P., Lagos, C. d. P., Paillas, E., & Padilla, N. 2022, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 517, 712

2022
[121]

S., Kewley, L

Rupke, D. S., Kewley, L. J., & Barnes, J. E. 2010, The Astrophysical Journal Letters, 710, L156

2010
[122]

Sahni, V ., Sathyaprakash, B., & Shandarin, S. F. 1994, arXiv preprint astro- ph/9403044

1994
[123]

& Mirabel, I

Sanders, D. & Mirabel, I. 1996, Annual Review of Astronomy and Astrophysics, 34, 749

1996
[124]

A., Graham, A

Savorgnan, G. A., Graham, A. W., Marconi, A., & Sani, E. 2016, The Astrophys- ical Journal, 817, 21

2016
[125]

A., Bower, R

Schaye, J., Crain, R. A., Bower, R. G., et al. 2015, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 446, 521

2015
[126]

M., Ellison, S

Scudder, J. M., Ellison, S. L., Torrey, P., Patton, D. R., & Mendel, J. T. 2012, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 426, 549

2012
[127]

2007, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 380, 877

Sijacki, D., Springel, V ., Di Matteo, T., & Hernquist, L. 2007, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 380, 877

2007
[128]

2015, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 452, 575

Sijacki, D., V ogelsberger, M., Genel, S., et al. 2015, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 452, 575

2015
[129]

D., et al

Silva, A., Marchesini, D., Silverman, J. D., et al. 2018, The Astrophysical Jour- nal, 868, 46

2018
[130]

& Holley-Bockelmann, K

Sinha, M. & Holley-Bockelmann, K. 2009, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astro- nomical Society, 397, 190 Sol Alonso, M., Lambas, D. G., Tissera, P., & Coldwell, G. 2006, Monthly No- tices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 367, 1029

2009
[131]

Somerville, R. S. & Davé, R. 2015, Annual Review of Astronomy and Astro- physics, 53, 51

2015
[132]

S., Hopkins, P

Somerville, R. S., Hopkins, P. F., Cox, T. J., Robertson, B. E., & Hernquist, L. 2008, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 391, 481

2008
[133]

C., Feldmann, R., et al

Sparre, M., Hayward, C. C., Feldmann, R., et al. 2017, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 466, 88

2017
[134]

2022, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 509, 2720

Sparre, M., Whittingham, J., Damle, M., et al. 2022, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 509, 2720

2022
[135]

S., Steinhardt, C

Speagle, J. S., Steinhardt, C. L., Capak, P. L., & Silverman, J. D. 2014, The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series, 214, 15

2014
[136]

2010, Proceedings of the International Astronomical Union, 6, 203

Springel, V . 2010, Proceedings of the International Astronomical Union, 6, 203

2010
[137]

2005, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 361, 776

Springel, V ., Di Matteo, T., & Hernquist, L. 2005, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 361, 776

2005
[138]

& Hernquist, L

Springel, V . & Hernquist, L. 2003, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 339, 289

2003
[139]

2018, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 475, 676 Article number, page 18 of 18 Mohammad Reza Shojaei et al.: Starforming VS Quenched Galaxies in V oid

Springel, V ., Pakmor, R., Pillepich, A., et al. 2018, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 475, 676 Article number, page 18 of 18 Mohammad Reza Shojaei et al.: Starforming VS Quenched Galaxies in V oid

2018
[140]

D., Tormen, G., & Kauffmann, G

Springel, V ., White, S. D., Tormen, G., & Kauffmann, G. 2001, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 328, 726

2001
[141]

R., Bullock, J

Stewart, K. R., Bullock, J. S., Wechsler, R. H., & Maller, A. H. 2009, The Astro- physical Journal, 702, 307

2009
[142]

2024, Astronomy & Astro- physics, 686, A40

Sureshkumar, U., Durkalec, A., Pollo, A., et al. 2024, Astronomy & Astro- physics, 686, A40

2024
[143]

M., Lavaux, G., Hamaus, N., et al

Sutter, P. M., Lavaux, G., Hamaus, N., et al. 2015, Astronomy and Computing, 9, 1

2015
[144]

J., Genzel, R., & Sternberg, A

Tacconi, L. J., Genzel, R., & Sternberg, A. 2020, Annual Review of Astronomy and Astrophysics, 58, 157

2020
[145]

G., Vasei, K., & Lehnert, M

Tavasoli, S., Rahmani, H., Khosroshahi, H. G., Vasei, K., & Lehnert, M. D. 2015, The Astrophysical Journal Letters, 803, L13

2015
[146]

2013, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 553, A15

Tavasoli, S., Vasei, K., & Mohayaee, R. 2013, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 553, A15

2013
[147]

& Toomre, J

Toomre, A. & Toomre, J. 1972, Astrophysical Journal, V ol. 178, pp. 623-666 (1972), 178, 623

1972
[148]

J., Kewley, L., & Hernquist, L

Torrey, P., Cox, T. J., Kewley, L., & Hernquist, L. 2012, The Astrophysical Jour- nal, 746, 108

2012
[149]

F., V ogelsberger, M., et al

Torrey, P., Snyder, G. F., V ogelsberger, M., et al. 2015, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 447, 2753 Van de Weygaert, R. & Platen, E. 2011, in International Journal of Modern Physics: Conference Series, V ol. 1, World Scientific, 41–66 V ogelsberger, M., Gen...

2015
[150]

K., Schawinski, K., Treister, E., Trakhtenbrot, B., & Sanders, D

Weigel, A. K., Schawinski, K., Treister, E., Trakhtenbrot, B., & Sanders, D. B. 2018, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 476, 2308

2018
[151]

2016, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 465, 3291

Weinberger, R., Springel, V ., Hernquist, L., et al. 2016, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 465, 3291

2016
[152]

2018, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 479, 4056

Weinberger, R., Springel, V ., Pakmor, R., et al. 2018, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 479, 4056

2018
[153]

R., Tinker, J

Wetzel, A. R., Tinker, J. L., Conroy, C., & Van Den Bosch, F. C. 2013, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 432, 336

2013
[154]

E., Labbé, I., van Dokkum, P

Whitaker, K. E., Labbé, I., van Dokkum, P. G., et al. 2011, The Astrophysical Journal, 735, 86

2011
[155]

E., Van Dokkum, P

Whitaker, K. E., Van Dokkum, P. G., Brammer, G., et al. 2010, The Astrophysical Journal, 719, 1715

2010
[156]

2010, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astro- nomical Society, 405, 933

Wild, V ., Heckman, T., & Charlot, S. 2010, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astro- nomical Society, 405, 933

2010
[157]

J., Quadri, R

Williams, R. J., Quadri, R. F., Franx, M., Van Dokkum, P., & Labbé, I. 2009, The Astrophysical Journal, 691, 1879

2009
[158]

J., Quadri, R

Williams, R. J., Quadri, R. F., Franx, M., et al. 2010, The Astrophysical Journal, 713, 738

2010
[159]

Woods, D. F. & Geller, M. J. 2007, The Astronomical Journal, 134, 527

2007
[160]

Wuyts, S., Schreiber, N. M. F., Lutz, D., et al. 2011, The Astrophysical Journal, 738, 106

2011
[161]

1994, arXiv preprint astro-ph/9409021

Xu, G. 1994, arXiv preprint astro-ph/9409021

1994 arXiv
[162]

2020, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 499, 768 Article number, page 19 of 18

Zinger, E., Pillepich, A., Nelson, D., et al. 2020, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 499, 768 Article number, page 19 of 18

2020

Pith tools

Reviewed August 10, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [1]

Morphologies of galaxies within voids

Aikio, J. & Mähönen, P. 1998, The Astrophysical Journal, 497, 534 Argudo-Fernández, M., Hernández, C. G., Verley, S., et al. 2024, arXiv preprint arXiv:2411.02129

work page Pith review arXiv 1998

[2] [2]

2016, The Astro- physical Journal, 821, 90

Athanassoula, E., Rodionov, S., Peschken, N., & Lambert, J. 2016, The Astro- physical Journal, 821, 90

2016

[3] [3]

Bagla, J. S. 2002, Journal of Astrophysics and Astronomy, 23, 185

2002

[4] [4]

Barnes, J. E. & Hernquist, L. 1992, In: Annual review of astronomy and astro- physics. V ol. 30 (A93-25826 09-90), p. 705-742., 30, 705

1992

[5] [5]

J., Arnold, J

Barton, E. J., Arnold, J. A., Zentner, A. R., Bullock, J. S., & Wechsler, R. H. 2007, The Astrophysical Journal, 671, 1538

2007

[6] [6]

H., Hearin, A

Behroozi, P., Wechsler, R. H., Hearin, A. P., & Conroy, C. 2019, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 488, 3143

2019

[7] [7]

2009, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 399, 2221

Bekki, K. 2009, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 399, 2221

2009

[8] [8]

F., Naab, T., McIntosh, D

Bell, E. F., Naab, T., McIntosh, D. H., et al. 2006, The Astrophysical Journal, 640, 241

2006