pith. sign in

arxiv: 2607.01886 · v1 · pith:OT2UIZSVnew · submitted 2026-07-02 · 🌌 astro-ph.GA

Distance Determination of Southern Galactic Plane Supernova Remnants with the Mopra CO Survey and DECaPS 3D Dust Map

Fupeng Liu , He Zhao , Biwei Jiang , Jun Li , Zhe Zhang This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-07-03 09:59 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.GA
keywords supernova remnantsdistance determinationmolecular cloudsCO survey3D extinction mapgalactic planeMopraDECaPS
0
0 comments X

The pith

Precise distances are measured for nine southern Galactic plane supernova remnants by linking them to molecular clouds via CO emission and 3D dust extinction.

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

The paper applies a distance method to southern supernova remnants for the first time. It identifies molecular clouds interacting with the remnants using CO survey data. Then it uses a three-dimensional dust map to find the distances to those clouds. This yields accurate distances for nine specific remnants and a lower limit for one more. Accurate distances matter because they determine the physical scale, age, and energy of each remnant and its impact on the surrounding gas.

Core claim

By identifying molecular clouds that interact with supernova remnants through their CO emission and then reading the distance to each cloud from the DECaPS three-dimensional extinction map, the authors obtain distances for nine remnants: G290.1-0.8 at 7.32 kpc, G292.2-0.5 at 10.85 kpc, G296.1-0.5 at 4.59 kpc, G296.8-0.3 at 8.74 kpc, G298.6-0.0 at 6.50 kpc, G312.4-0.4 at 3.60 kpc, G332.4-0.4 at 2.66 kpc, G335.2+0.1 at 2.76 kpc, and G353.6-0.7 at 1.81 kpc, plus a lower limit of 1.34 kpc for G351.7+0.8.

What carries the argument

Association of CO-emitting molecular clouds with supernova remnants, combined with extinction-distance profiles from the DECaPS 3D map to assign distances to the clouds.

If this is right

  • Physical sizes, expansion velocities, and ages of the remnants become calculable from observed angular sizes and velocities.
  • Energy released by each supernova and the mass of swept-up material can be estimated more reliably.
  • The contribution of these remnants to the galactic interstellar medium cycle can be quantified.
  • Comparison with models of supernova remnant evolution becomes possible at known distances.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • Similar distance measurements could be made for other supernova remnants where CO and dust maps exist.
  • If the interaction assumption holds for additional remnants, the method provides a scalable way to build a more complete catalog of galactic SNR distances.
  • Independent verification with parallax or other methods on these same objects would strengthen the results.

Load-bearing premise

The molecular clouds detected in CO are physically interacting with the supernova remnants rather than merely lying along the same line of sight.

What would settle it

A direct measurement showing that one of the listed remnants lies at a distance inconsistent with its assigned molecular cloud distance, such as through proper motion or X-ray absorption column density that does not match.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.01886 by Biwei Jiang, Fupeng Liu, He Zhao, Jun Li, Zhe Zhang.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Spatially averaged CO (J = 1 − 0) spectra extracted from the rectangular regions encompassing 10 SNRs: (a) G290.1−0.8, (b) G292.2−0.5, (c) G296.1−0.5, (d) G296.8−0.3, (e) G298.6−0.0, (f) G312.4−0.4, (g) G332.4−0.4, (h) G335.2+0.1, (i) G351.7+0.8, and (j) G353.6−0.7. In each panel, the gray curve represents the original spectrum, while the blue curve shows the smoothed profile. The purple dashed line indica… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Uniform differential extinction maps for G290.1−0.8 at 1-kpc intervals within 10 kpc. Blue contours overlaid on the respective panels represent the CO emission from the velocity components associated with each distance interval. The dark green ellipse denotes the approximate boundary of the SNR. The red-labeled velocity and distance ranges indicate the molecular components and their corresponding distance … view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Cumulative color excess E(B − V ) (solid lines) and extinction gradient (dashed lines) as a function of distance toward representative sightlines of different MC components for G290.1−0.8. The selected Galactic coordinates (l, b) and the derived distances for each component are labeled in the respective panels, with their corresponding positions marked by red triangles in Figure A1. For each MC component, … view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Differential extinction maps (∆E(B − V )) toward G290.1−0.8 for distance bins corresponding to the 10% intensity threshold of the extinction gradient peaks, along with the 2D extinction map from CSFD for comparison. Blue contours overlaid on the respective panels represent the CO emission from the velocity components associated with each distance interval. The dark green ellipse denotes the approximate bou… view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Same as [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p022_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Same as [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p023_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Same as [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p023_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Same as [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p024_8.png] view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Same as [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p024_9.png] view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Same as [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p025_10.png] view at source ↗
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Same as [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p025_11.png] view at source ↗
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: Same as [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p026_12.png] view at source ↗
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: Same as [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p026_13.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Accurate distance measurements to supernova remnants (SNRs) are crucial for understanding their physical properties, evolutionary processes, and role in the Galactic interstellar medium (ISM) cycle. In this study, we apply for the first time to the southern Galactic plane a distance determination method that utilizes CO emission data from the Mopra survey to identify molecular clouds (MCs) interacting with SNRs. By combining this with extinction-distance profiles from the DECaPS three-dimensional (3D) extinction map, we directly measure the distances to the associated MCs, thereby obtaining precise distances to the remnants. To overcome the extinction-missing bias in extremely dense regions where the 3D map suffers from a deficit of background stars, we supplement our analysis with two-dimensional (2D) extinction maps as cross-validation. Applying this method, we have derived precise distances for nine SNRs: G290.1-0.8 (7.32+0.60/-0.47 kpc), G292.2-0.5 (10.85+0.43/-0.68 kpc), G296.1-0.5 (4.59+0.18/-0.19 kpc), G296.8-0.3 (8.74+0.40/-0.29 kpc), G298.6-0.0 (6.50 +/- 0.21 kpc), G312.4-0.4 (3.60+0.19/-0.23 kpc), G332.4-0.4 (2.66+0.23/-0.15 kpc), G335.2+0.1 (2.76+0.37/-0.31 kpc), and G353.6-0.7 (1.81+0.18/-0.14 kpc). Additionally, we established a robust lower distance limit of 1.34 kpc for G351.7+0.8.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

3 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript applies a distance-determination technique to nine southern Galactic-plane supernova remnants (SNRs) by first identifying candidate molecular clouds (MCs) via CO emission in the Mopra survey and then assigning distances to those MCs from extinction-distance profiles extracted from the DECaPS 3D dust map (with 2D extinction maps used for cross-validation in dense regions). Precise distances with asymmetric uncertainties are reported for G290.1-0.8, G292.2-0.5, G296.1-0.5, G296.8-0.3, G298.6-0.0, G312.4-0.4, G332.4-0.4, G335.2+0.1 and G353.6-0.7, together with a firm lower limit for G351.7+0.8.

Significance. If the MC-SNR associations are shown to be physical rather than line-of-sight projections, the work supplies a set of observationally anchored distances that can be used to calibrate SNR physical parameters, ages and energetics in the southern plane, where such measurements have historically been sparse. The combination of Mopra CO data with DECaPS extinction profiles is a straightforward and potentially reproducible approach.

major comments (3)
  1. [Methods] Methods (association criteria): The central claim that each reported distance can be assigned to the SNR rests on the assertion that the identified CO cloud is physically interacting with the remnant. The manuscript must explicitly state, for each of the nine objects, which interaction diagnostics (shock-broadened CO lines, OH masers, morphological correspondence, gamma-ray coincidence, or other indicators) were applied in addition to positional and velocity overlap; without this information the possibility of chance alignment cannot be quantified.
  2. [Results] Results (extinction-profile fitting): The procedure used to extract a cloud distance from each DECaPS extinction-distance profile (e.g., identification of the step or break corresponding to the MC, handling of multiple breaks, and propagation of profile uncertainties into the final distance error) is not described in sufficient detail to allow independent reproduction or assessment of systematic bias.
  3. [Discussion] Discussion (validation against independent indicators): No comparison is presented between the new distances and any previously published distance estimates (kinematic, HI absorption, or X-ray) for the same remnants; such a table would directly test whether the MC-association assumption produces consistent results.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Introduction] The abstract states that the method is applied 'for the first time to the southern Galactic plane'; a brief sentence in the introduction citing any prior northern-plane applications of the same CO+extinction technique would clarify the novelty claim.
  2. [Results] Table 1 (or equivalent) listing the nine SNRs should include the adopted interaction indicators and the velocity range of the CO feature used for each object.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

3 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the constructive comments, which highlight areas where additional clarity will improve the manuscript. We address each major point below and commit to revisions where appropriate.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Methods] Methods (association criteria): The central claim that each reported distance can be assigned to the SNR rests on the assertion that the identified CO cloud is physically interacting with the remnant. The manuscript must explicitly state, for each of the nine objects, which interaction diagnostics (shock-broadened CO lines, OH masers, morphological correspondence, gamma-ray coincidence, or other indicators) were applied in addition to positional and velocity overlap; without this information the possibility of chance alignment cannot be quantified.

    Authors: We agree that explicit per-object documentation of interaction diagnostics is required to allow readers to assess the robustness of each MC-SNR association. The current manuscript identifies candidate MCs via positional and velocity overlap with Mopra CO emission but does not tabulate additional indicators. In the revised manuscript we will add a dedicated table (or expanded Methods subsection) that, for each of the nine SNRs, lists the specific diagnostics applied (morphological correspondence from radio images, presence/absence of shock-broadened lines, OH masers, gamma-ray coincidence, etc.) and notes cases where only positional/velocity criteria were available. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Results] Results (extinction-profile fitting): The procedure used to extract a cloud distance from each DECaPS extinction-distance profile (e.g., identification of the step or break corresponding to the MC, handling of multiple breaks, and propagation of profile uncertainties into the final distance error) is not described in sufficient detail to allow independent reproduction or assessment of systematic bias.

    Authors: We acknowledge that the current description of the extinction-profile analysis is insufficient for independent reproduction. We will expand the Methods section with a step-by-step account of the fitting procedure, including: (i) the algorithm or visual criteria used to identify the extinction step/break linked to the MC, (ii) the protocol for selecting among multiple breaks, (iii) how the DECaPS profile uncertainties are propagated into the reported asymmetric distance errors, and (iv) the cross-validation approach with 2D extinction maps in dense regions. revision: yes

  3. Referee: [Discussion] Discussion (validation against independent indicators): No comparison is presented between the new distances and any previously published distance estimates (kinematic, HI absorption, or X-ray) for the same remnants; such a table would directly test whether the MC-association assumption produces consistent results.

    Authors: We agree that a systematic comparison with literature distances would strengthen the validation of the method. We will add a new table (or subsection) in the Discussion that compiles previously published distance estimates (kinematic, HI absorption, X-ray) for the nine SNRs where such measurements exist, and we will discuss the level of agreement or any discrepancies with our new values. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; distances derived from independent datasets

full rationale

The paper's method identifies MC-SNR associations via Mopra CO data and assigns distances from the independent DECaPS 3D extinction map. No equations or steps reduce the final distances to fitted inputs or self-citations by construction. The core assumption of physical interaction is an observational criterion, not a definitional loop. The derivation chain remains self-contained against external benchmarks with no load-bearing self-citation or ansatz smuggling.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on the domain assumption that CO clouds are physically associated with the SNRs and that the DECaPS 3D map supplies reliable distances to those clouds in the southern plane.

axioms (1)
  • domain assumption CO-emitting molecular clouds identified via Mopra survey are physically interacting with the target SNRs
    This association is required to transfer the extinction-derived distance to the remnant itself.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 5926 in / 1358 out tokens · 46700 ms · 2026-07-03T09:59:03.310312+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

78 extracted references · 73 canonical work pages · 3 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    P., Tollerud, E

    Astropy Collaboration, Robitaille, T. P., Tollerud, E. J., et al. 2013, A&A, 558, A33, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201322068

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201322068 2013

  2. [2]

    2016, PASJ, 68, S5, doi: 10.1093/pasj/psv096

    Bamba, A., Sawada, M., Nakano, Y., et al. 2016, PASJ, 68, S5, doi: 10.1093/pasj/psv096

    work page doi:10.1093/pasj/psv096 2016

  3. [3]

    C., Savage, B

    Bohlin, R. C., Savage, B. D., & Drake, J. F. 1978, ApJ, 224, 132, doi: 10.1086/156357

    work page doi:10.1086/156357 1978

  4. [4]

    2023, The Mopra Southern Galactic Plane Carbon Monoxide (CO) Survey, 3 CSIRO, doi: 10.25919/9z4p-mj92

    Burton, M., Cubuk, K., Braiding, C., et al. 2023, The Mopra Southern Galactic Plane Carbon Monoxide (CO) Survey, 3 CSIRO, doi: 10.25919/9z4p-mj92

    work page doi:10.25919/9z4p-mj92 2023

  5. [5]

    L., & Bhattacharya, D

    Case, G. L., & Bhattacharya, D. 1998, ApJ, 504, 761, doi: 10.1086/306089

    work page doi:10.1086/306089 1998

  6. [6]

    L., & Barnes, P

    Caswell, J. L., & Barnes, P. J. 1985, MNRAS, 216, 753, doi: 10.1093/mnras/216.3.753

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/216.3.753 1985

  7. [7]

    L., & Barnes, P

    Caswell, J. L., & Barnes, P. L. 1983, ApJL, 271, L55, doi: 10.1086/184094

    work page doi:10.1086/184094 1983

  8. [8]

    L., McClure-Griffiths, N

    Caswell, J. L., McClure-Griffiths, N. M., & Cheung, M. C. M. 2004, MNRAS, 352, 1405, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2004.08030.x

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2004.08030.x 2004

  9. [9]

    Cooke, D. J. 1975, A&A, 45, 239

    1975

  10. [10]

    2023, ApJ, 959, 97, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad09b9

    Sinha, A., & Eagle, J. 2023, ApJ, 959, 97, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad09b9

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad09b9 2023

  11. [11]

    2017, MNRAS, 472, 3924, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stx2287

    Chen, B.-Q., Liu, X.-W., Ren, J.-J., et al. 2017, MNRAS, 472, 3924, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stx2287

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stx2287 2017

  12. [12]

    2025, ApJ, 988, 176, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ade688

    Chen, X., Wang, S., & Chen, X. 2025, ApJ, 988, 176, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ade688

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ade688 2025

  13. [13]

    2017, A&A, 604, A13, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201630003

    Chen, X., Xiong, F., & Yang, J. 2017, A&A, 604, A13, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201630003

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201630003 2017

  14. [14]

    2023, ApJ, 958, 118, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/acf4a1

    Chiang, Y.-K. 2023, ApJ, 958, 118, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/acf4a1

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/acf4a1 2023

  15. [15]

    H., Caswell, J

    Clark, D. H., Caswell, J. L., & Green, A. J. 1973, Nature, 246, 28, doi: 10.1038/246028a0

    work page doi:10.1038/246028a0 1973

  16. [16]

    O., Burton, M

    Cubuk, K. O., Burton, M. G., Braiding, C., et al. 2023, PASA, 40, e047, doi: 10.1017/pasa.2023.44

    work page doi:10.1017/pasa.2023.44 2023

  17. [17]

    M., Hartmann, D., & Thaddeus, P

    Dame, T. M., Hartmann, D., & Thaddeus, P. 2001, ApJ, 547, 792, doi: 10.1086/318388

    work page internal anchor Pith review doi:10.1086/318388 2001

  18. [18]

    Dickel, J. R. 1973, Astrophys. Lett., 15, 61

    1973

  19. [19]

    J., et al

    Doherty, M., Johnston, S., Green, A. J., et al. 2003, MNRAS, 339, 1048, doi: 10.1046/j.1365-8711.2003.06265.x

    work page doi:10.1046/j.1365-8711.2003.06265.x 2003

  20. [20]

    2017, A&A, 608, A23, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201730983

    Doroshenko, V., P¨ uhlhofer, G., Bamba, A., et al. 2017, A&A, 608, A23, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201730983

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201730983 2017

  21. [21]

    2011, A&A, 526, A82, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201015727

    Eger, P., Rowell, G., Kawamura, A., et al. 2011, A&A, 526, A82, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201015727

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201015727 2011

  22. [22]

    G., & Lada, C

    Elmegreen, B. G., & Lada, C. J. 1977, ApJ, 214, 725, doi: 10.1086/155302

    work page doi:10.1086/155302 1977

  23. [23]

    2012, Advances in Space Research, 49, 1313, doi: 10.1016/j.asr.2012.02.004

    Ferrand, G., & Safi-Harb, S. 2012, Advances in Space Research, 49, 1313, doi: 10.1016/j.asr.2012.02.004

    work page doi:10.1016/j.asr.2012.02.004 2012

  24. [24]

    D., Payne, J

    Filipovic, M. D., Payne, J. L., & Jones, P. A. 2005, Serbian Astronomical Journal, 170, 47, doi: 10.2298/SAJ0570047F

    work page doi:10.2298/saj0570047f 2005

  25. [25]

    A., Goss, W

    Frail, D. A., Goss, W. M., Reynoso, E. M., et al. 1996, AJ, 111, 1651, doi: 10.1086/117904

    work page doi:10.1086/117904 1996

  26. [26]

    A., Langer, W

    Frerking, M. A., Langer, W. D., & Wilson, R. W. 1982, ApJ, 262, 590, doi: 10.1086/160451

    work page doi:10.1086/160451 1982

  27. [27]

    2014, ApJ, 788, 94, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/788/1/94

    Fukuda, T., Yoshiike, S., Sano, H., et al. 2014, ApJ, 788, 94, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/788/1/94

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/788/1/94 2014

  28. [28]

    M., Manchester, R

    Gaensler, B. M., Manchester, R. N., & Green, A. J. 1998, MNRAS, 296, 813, doi: 10.1046/j.1365-8711.1998.01387.x Gaia Collaboration, Vallenari, A., Brown, A. G. A., et al. 2023, A&A, 674, A1, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202243940

    work page doi:10.1046/j.1365-8711.1998.01387.x 1998

  29. [29]

    2015, in Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series, Vol

    Ginsburg, A., Robitaille, T., Beaumont, C., et al. 2015, in Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series, Vol. 499, Revolution in Astronomy with ALMA: The Third Year, ed. D. Iono, K. Tatematsu, A. Wootten, & L. Testi, 363–364

    2015

  30. [30]

    2005, ApJ, 619, 856, doi: 10.1086/426576

    Gonzalez, M., & Safi-Harb, S. 2005, ApJ, 619, 856, doi: 10.1086/426576

    work page doi:10.1086/426576 2005

  31. [31]

    V., & Kaspi, V

    Gotthelf, E. V., & Kaspi, V. M. 1998, ApJL, 497, L29, doi: 10.1086/311266 15

    work page doi:10.1086/311266 1998

  32. [32]

    Green, D. A. 2005, Mem. Soc. Astron. Italiana, 76, 534, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.astro-ph/0505428

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.astro-ph/0505428 2005

  33. [33]

    Green, D. A. 2024, A Catalogue of Galactic Supernova Remnants (2024 October version) (Cavendish

    2024

  34. [34]

    Green, D. A. 2025, Journal of Astrophysics and Astronomy, 46, 14, doi: 10.1007/s12036-024-10038-4

    work page doi:10.1007/s12036-024-10038-4 2025

  35. [35]

    Green, G. M. 2018, The Journal of Open Source Software, 3, 695, doi: 10.21105/joss.00695

    work page doi:10.21105/joss.00695 2018

  36. [36]

    2019, ApJ, 887, 93, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab5362

    Finkbeiner, D. 2019, ApJ, 887, 93, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab5362

    work page internal anchor Pith review doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ab5362 2019

  37. [37]

    P., Tomsick, J

    Halpern, J. P., Tomsick, J. A., Gotthelf, E. V., et al. 2014, ApJL, 795, L27, doi: 10.1088/2041-8205/795/2/L27

    work page doi:10.1088/2041-8205/795/2/l27 2014

  38. [38]

    2025, PASA, 42, e071, doi: 10.1017/pasa.2025.10042

    Hopkins, A., Kapinska, A., Marvil, J., et al. 2025, PASA, 42, e071, doi: 10.1017/pasa.2025.10042

    work page doi:10.1017/pasa.2025.10042 2025

  39. [39]

    2025, ApJ, 990, 213, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/adf4d8

    Huang, C., Zhang, X., Chen, Y., et al. 2025, ApJ, 990, 213, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/adf4d8

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/adf4d8 2025

  40. [40]

    2023, ApJ, 950, 177, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/accd60

    Tomsick, J. 2023, ApJ, 950, 177, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/accd60

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/accd60 2023

  41. [41]

    2004, ApJL, 605, L113, doi: 10.1086/420869

    Lee, J.-J., Koo, B.-C., & Tatematsu, K. 2004, ApJL, 605, L113, doi: 10.1086/420869

    work page doi:10.1086/420869 2004

  42. [42]

    Lombardi, M., Alves, J., & Lada, C. J. 2006, A&A, 454, 781, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20042474

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20042474 2006

  43. [43]

    J., Clark, D

    Longmore, A. J., Clark, D. H., & Murdin, P. 1977, MNRAS, 181, 541, doi: 10.1093/mnras/181.3.541

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/181.3.541 1977

  44. [44]

    J., et al

    Mauch, T., Murphy, T., Buttery, H. J., et al. 2003, MNRAS, 342, 1117, doi: 10.1046/j.1365-8711.2003.06605.x

    work page doi:10.1046/j.1365-8711.2003.06605.x 2003

  45. [45]

    2018, MNRAS, 474, 662, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stx2727

    Maxted, N., Burton, M., Braiding, C., et al. 2018, MNRAS, 474, 662, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stx2727

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stx2727 2018

  46. [46]

    W., Emerson, J

    Minniti, D., Lucas, P. W., Emerson, J. P., et al. 2010, NewA, 15, 433, doi: 10.1016/j.newast.2009.12.002

    work page doi:10.1016/j.newast.2009.12.002 2010

  47. [47]

    A., Reynoso, E

    Paron, S. A., Reynoso, E. M., Purcell, C., Dubner, G. M., & Green, A. 2006, PASA, 23, 69, doi: 10.1071/AS06003

    work page doi:10.1071/as06003 2006

  48. [48]

    2014, A&A, 562, A122, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201322588 Pavlovi´ c, M

    Pavan, L., Bordas, P., P¨ uhlhofer, G., et al. 2014, A&A, 562, A122, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201322588 Pavlovi´ c, M. Z., Uroˇ sevi´ c, D., Vukoti´ c, B., Arbutina, B., & G¨ oker,¨U. D. 2013, ApJS, 204, 4, doi: 10.1088/0067-0049/204/1/4

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201322588 2014

  49. [49]

    2022, ApJ, 940, 63, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac940a

    Ranasinghe, S., & Leahy, D. 2022, ApJ, 940, 63, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac940a

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac940a 2022

  50. [50]

    Ranasinghe, S., & Leahy, D. A. 2018a, MNRAS, 477, 2243, doi: 10.1093/mnras/sty817

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/sty817

  51. [51]

    Ranasinghe, S., & Leahy, D. A. 2018b, AJ, 155, 204, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/aab9be

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/aab9be

  52. [52]

    M., Green, A

    Reynoso, E. M., Green, A. J., Johnston, S., et al. 2004, PASA, 21, 82, doi: 10.1071/AS03053

    work page doi:10.1071/as03053 2004

  53. [53]

    M., Johnston, S., Green, A

    Reynoso, E. M., Johnston, S., Green, A. J., & Koribalski, B. S. 2006, MNRAS, 369, 416, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2006.10325.x

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2006.10325.x 2006

  54. [54]

    S., Goodman, A

    Rice, T. S., Goodman, A. A., Bergin, E. A., Beaumont, C., & Dame, T. M. 2016, ApJ, 822, 52, doi: 10.3847/0004-637X/822/1/52

    work page doi:10.3847/0004-637x/822/1/52 2016

  55. [55]

    2012, APLpy: Astronomical Plotting Library in Python,, Astrophysics Source Code Library, record ascl:1208.017

    Robitaille, T., & Bressert, E. 2012, APLpy: Astronomical Plotting Library in Python,, Astrophysics Source Code Library, record ascl:1208.017

    2012

  56. [56]

    M., Heyer, M., et al

    Roman-Duval, J., Jackson, J. M., Heyer, M., et al. 2009, ApJ, 699, 1153, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/699/2/1153

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/699/2/1153 2009

  57. [57]

    1996, A&A, 315, 243 S´ anchez-Ayaso, E., Combi, J

    Rosado, M., Ambrocio-Cruz, P., Le Coarer, E., & Marcelin, M. 1996, A&A, 315, 243 S´ anchez-Ayaso, E., Combi, J. A., Albacete Colombo, J. F., et al. 2012, Ap&SS, 337, 573, doi: 10.1007/s10509-011-0886-4

    work page doi:10.1007/s10509-011-0886-4 1996

  58. [58]

    D., Bohlin, R

    Savage, B. D., Bohlin, R. C., Drake, J. F., & Budich, W. 1977, ApJ, 216, 291, doi: 10.1086/155471

    work page doi:10.1086/155471 1977

  59. [59]

    K., Schlafly, E

    Saydjari, A. K., Schlafly, E. F., Lang, D., et al. 2023, ApJS, 264, 28, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/aca594

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4365/aca594 2023

  60. [60]

    F., Meisner, A

    Schlafly, E. F., Meisner, A. M., & Green, G. M. 2019, ApJS, 240, 30, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/aafbea

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4365/aafbea 2019

  61. [61]

    2019, Research in Astronomy and Astrophysics, 19, 092, doi: 10.1088/1674-4527/19/7/92

    Shan, S.-S., Zhu, H., Tian, W.-W., et al. 2019, Research in Astronomy and Astrophysics, 19, 092, doi: 10.1088/1674-4527/19/7/92

    work page doi:10.1088/1674-4527/19/7/92 2019

  62. [62]

    F., Cutri, R

    Skrutskie, M. F., Cutri, R. M., Stiening, R., et al. 2006, AJ, 131, 1163, doi: 10.1086/498708

    work page doi:10.1086/498708 2006

  63. [63]

    2022, ApJ, 933, 101, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac738f

    Tanaka, Y., Uchida, H., Tanaka, T., et al. 2022, ApJ, 933, 101, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac738f

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac738f 2022

  64. [64]

    H., & Cordes, J

    Taylor, J. H., & Cordes, J. M. 1993, ApJ, 411, 674, doi: 10.1086/172870

    work page doi:10.1086/172870 1993

  65. [65]

    W., Haverkorn, M., & Zhang, H

    Tian, W. W., Haverkorn, M., & Zhang, H. Y. 2007, MNRAS, 378, 1283, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2007.11613.x

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2007.11613.x 2007

  66. [66]

    W., Leahy, D

    Tian, W. W., Leahy, D. A., Haverkorn, M., & Jiang, B. 2008, ApJL, 679, L85, doi: 10.1086/589506

    work page doi:10.1086/589506 2008

  67. [67]

    J., Rowell, G

    Voisin, F. J., Rowell, G. P., Burton, M. G., et al. 2019, PASA, 36, e014, doi: 10.1017/pasa.2019.7

    work page doi:10.1017/pasa.2019.7 2019

  68. [68]

    2020, A&A, 639, A72, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201936868

    Wang, S., Zhang, C., Jiang, B., et al. 2020, A&A, 639, A72, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201936868

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201936868 2020

  69. [69]

    E., & Weaver, T

    Woosley, S. E., & Weaver, T. A. 1995, ApJS, 101, 181, doi: 10.1086/192237

    work page doi:10.1086/192237 1995

  70. [70]

    Yeung, P. K. H., Bamba, A., & Sano, H. 2023, PASJ, 75, 384, doi: 10.1093/pasj/psad006

    work page doi:10.1093/pasj/psad006 2023

  71. [71]

    Q., Jiang, B

    Yu, B., Chen, B. Q., Jiang, B. W., & Zijlstra, A. 2019, MNRAS, 488, 3129, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stz1940

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stz1940 2019

  72. [72]

    2022, MNRAS, 517, 5180, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac3012 16

    Zhang, M., & Kainulainen, J. 2022, MNRAS, 517, 5180, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac3012 16

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stac3012 2022

  73. [73]

    2026, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2603.20881

    Zhang, Z., Li, J., Jiang, B., Zhao, H., & Liu, F. 2026, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2603.20881. https://arxiv.org/abs/2603.20881

    work page arXiv 2026

  74. [74]

    2018, ApJ, 855, 12, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aaacd0

    Zhao, H., Jiang, B., Gao, S., Li, J., & Sun, M. 2018, ApJ, 855, 12, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aaacd0

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aaacd0 2018

  75. [75]

    2020, ApJ, 891, 137, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab75ef

    Zhao, H., Jiang, B., Li, J., et al. 2020, ApJ, 891, 137, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab75ef

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ab75ef 2020

  76. [76]

    2016, ApJ, 833, 4, doi: 10.3847/0004-637X/833/1/4

    Zhou, X., Yang, J., Fang, M., et al. 2016, ApJ, 833, 4, doi: 10.3847/0004-637X/833/1/4

    work page doi:10.3847/0004-637x/833/1/4 2016

  77. [77]

    2023, ApJS, 268, 61, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/acee7f

    Zhou, X., Su, Y., Yang, J., et al. 2023, ApJS, 268, 61, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/acee7f

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4365/acee7f 2023

  78. [78]

    K., Speagle, J

    Zucker, C., Saydjari, A. K., Speagle, J. S., et al. 2025, ApJ, 992, 39, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/adfbe6 17 T able 1.SNR information and proposed velocity ranges for the associations Name SizeV LSR(literature)V LSR(this work) References (arcmin) (km s −1) (km s −1) G290.1−0.8 19×14 12 (Hα), [7, 23] (CO), 7 (HI) [8, 26] 1, 2, 3 G292.2−0.5 20×15 [16, 28] (HI),...

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/adfbe6 2025