pith. sign in

arxiv: 2606.23649 · v1 · pith:PXY72VKKnew · submitted 2026-06-22 · 🌌 astro-ph.GA

The EDGE-CALIFA Survey: Star Formation Efficiency and Galaxy Quenching across 62 Main Sequence, Green Valley, and Red Galaxies

Yu-Hsuan Teng , Alberto D. Bolatto , Peter J. Teuben , Erik Rosolowsky , David T. Frayer , Amanda A. Kepley , Sebastian F. Sanchez , Tony Wong
show 21 more authors
Adam K. Leroy Dario Colombo Serena A. Cronin K. Decker French Veselina Kalinova Rebecca C. Levy Karin M. Sandstrom Vicente Villanueva Jorge K. Barrera-Ballesteros Zein Bazzi Yixian Cao Alex Green Rodrigo Herrera-Camus Eduardo A. D. Lacerda Jialu Li Alejandra Z. Lugo-Aranda Jocabed Martinez-Lopez Elizabeth Tarantino Akshat Tripathi Carolyn G. Volpert Di Wen
This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-06-26 08:10 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.GA
keywords galaxy quenchingstar formation efficiencymolecular gasCO surveymain sequencegreen valleyred sequencedepletion time
0
0 comments X

The pith

Quenched galaxies below the main sequence retain molecular gas but convert it to stars far less efficiently.

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

The survey maps CO(1-0) emission across 62 nearby galaxies that span the star-forming main sequence, green valley, and red sequence. Median molecular-gas depletion times rise from roughly 2 Gyr on the main sequence to 7 Gyr in the green valley and 128 Gyr in red galaxies. The trend of lower star-formation efficiency with increasing distance below the main sequence remains after testing several CO-to-H2 conversion-factor prescriptions. This pattern indicates that the reduced star-formation rates in quenched systems arise mainly from inefficient gas-to-star conversion rather than from a wholesale absence of molecular gas. Galaxies below the sequence therefore keep substantial molecular reservoirs yet form stars slowly, consistent with the joint action of low gas density and morphological effects.

Core claim

By combining new GBT CO(1-0) maps with CALIFA integral-field spectroscopy, the survey derives molecular gas masses, star-formation rates, and metallicities for 62 galaxies. Median depletion times are 2.10 Gyr on the main sequence, 6.90 Gyr in the green valley, and 127.7 Gyr on the red sequence when a Galactic conversion factor is used. Systematic decline in star-formation efficiency with offset below the main sequence persists across multiple conversion-factor choices, demonstrating that many quenched galaxies retain molecular gas masses comparable to star-forming systems yet form stars at much lower rates.

What carries the argument

Star-formation efficiency (SFR per unit molecular gas mass) measured from CO(1-0) luminosity and optical SFR tracers, tracked as a function of offset from the star-forming main sequence.

If this is right

  • Quenched galaxies can hold molecular gas reservoirs similar in mass to those on the main sequence.
  • Depletion times lengthen by factors of several to more than 50 below the main sequence.
  • Suppressed efficiency, rather than gas removal, accounts for the bulk of the drop in star-formation rate.
  • Low gas density together with morphological stabilization can jointly reduce efficiency.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • Quenching processes may act primarily by lowering the dense-gas fraction or raising the density threshold for collapse rather than by expelling the entire molecular reservoir.
  • High-resolution maps of dense-gas tracers in green-valley systems could test whether the efficiency drop is localized to particular galactic structures.
  • Evolutionary models that treat quenching as simple gas exhaustion would need revision if efficiency suppression is the dominant mechanism.

Load-bearing premise

That CO(1-0) emission traces the total molecular gas mass across the full range of metallicities and conditions in green-valley and red galaxies once the tested conversion-factor prescriptions are applied.

What would settle it

A direct measurement, using an independent gas-mass tracer such as dust continuum or [C I], showing that red-sequence galaxies actually contain far less molecular gas than the CO-derived values or that the efficiency trend disappears when gas mass is estimated without CO.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2606.23649 by Adam K. Leroy, Akshat Tripathi, Alberto D. Bolatto, Alejandra Z. Lugo-Aranda, Alex Green, Amanda A. Kepley, Carolyn G. Volpert, Dario Colombo, David T. Frayer, Di Wen, Eduardo A. D. Lacerda, Elizabeth Tarantino, Erik Rosolowsky, Jialu Li, Jocabed Martinez-Lopez, Jorge K. Barrera-Ballesteros, Karin M. Sandstrom, K. Decker French, Peter J. Teuben, Rebecca C. Levy, Rodrigo Herrera-Camus, Sebastian F. Sanchez, Serena A. Cronin, Tony Wong, Veselina Kalinova, Vicente Villanueva, Yixian Cao, Yu-Hsuan Teng, Zein Bazzi.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: The relation between global star formation rate (SFR) and stellar mass (Mstar) for our GBT sample (black points; 62 galaxies), the CARMA sample (gray stars; A. D. Bolatto et al. 2017), and the full CALIFA sample (contours; S. F. S´anchez et al. 2016a). The blue (upper) and red (lower) dashed lines indicate best linear fits from M. Cano-D´ıaz et al. (2016) for the main sequence and red galaxies, respectivel… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: SDSS g (blue channel), r (green channel), and i (red channel) composite images for all 62 galaxies in our GBT-EDGE sample. Green valley (GV) and red galaxies (RGs) are labeled by a letter ‘G’ and ‘R’, respectively, in the top-right corners of their panels. These galaxies cover a variety of morphologies and galaxy environments, which constitute a representative sample of the local Universe ( [PITH_FULL_IMA… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: An example of our background measurements (gray) and empirical OFF model construction (black), rep￾resented by the start (top panel) and end (bottom panel) of selected observing scans. These OFF models are used to remove variations in the background signals (Equation 3). This figure exemplifies the changes occurring in the spectral baseline during a leg of the on-the-fly map, caused by a com￾bination of at… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: The peak signal to noise (S/N) maps of all 62 galaxies, integrating over a channel width of 90 km s−1 to highlight gas structures with line widths at that scale. GV and RGs are labeled by ‘G’ and ‘R’, respectively, on the top-right corner. The color scale (bottom-right panel) ranges from S/N = 1–15. Each panel shows the entire GBT field of view of 2.5 ′ × 2.5 ′ , and the common beam size of 8.3 ′′ (∼2 kpc … view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Comparison of the GBT CO (1–0) integrated line fluxes with those from the ALMA ACA CO (2–1) data (V. Villanueva et al. 2024) for the nine galaxies that overlap be￾tween both samples. They show a CO (2–1)/(1–0) line ratio (R21) of 0.70 ± 0.27. Galaxies with the highest and lowest R21 tend to have higher uncertainties in the GBT data. package. This masking approach is similar to the Hα mask adopted in V. Vil… view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Examples of the moment 0 (left), 1 (middle), and 2 (right) maps, based on Hα + CO-dilated masking (see Section 3.1). The white contours show S/N > 5 based on the moment-0 maps. The common beam size and cyan contours are the same as in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Comparison of αCO values estimated via different prescriptions (B13, SL24, and T24*, which represent Equa￾tions 8–10). The dashed lines indicate a one-to-one relation, and the thick dotted lines label the Galactic αCO value of 4.35 M⊙ (K km s−1 pc2 ) −1 . While the predicted αCO values do not agree well and show no systematic trend among different populations, the overall αCO variations are limited to a fa… view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: (a) The SFR–Mmol relation across all 62 galaxies, using Hα-based SFR estimates and Mmol derived via a Galactic αCO. The dotted lines show constant molecular gas depletion times (tdep) of 0.1, 1, and 10 Gyr. (b) The derived tdep increases systematically as galaxies go from MS to GV and to RG, suggesting that low SFRs in quenched galaxies are mostly caused by suppressed star formation efficiency (SFE) rather… view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Histograms of the derived gas depletion times under four different αCO treatments: constant MW value, a CO velocity dispersion-based prescription (T24*; Equation 10), and two metallicity + stellar mass density-based prescriptions (B13 and SL24; Equation 8 and 9). The vertical dashed lines represent the median tdep values for each galaxy population. All four prescriptions reveal distinct tdep distributions … view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Comparison between SFRs estimated via Hα (Section 3.2.1) and the simple stellar population (SSP) anal￾ysis. The dashed line indicates a one-to-one relation. For the MS and GV populations, SFRs inferred from Hα are consistent with those inferred from the SSP analysis with t < 33 Myr. For RGs, however, Hα-based SFR generally provides better upper limits than using SSP. A typical error bar of σx = ±0.1 dex f… view at source ↗
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Same as [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p024_11.png] view at source ↗
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: Same as [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p025_12.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

We present GBT-EDGE, a new CO(1-0) survey using the Green Bank Telescope to map 62 nearby (10-140 Mpc) galaxies spanning the star-forming main sequence (SFMS), green valley, and red sequence. The galaxy sample is selected from the CALIFA survey with integral field spectroscopy (IFS), which provides a representative census of local galactic environments. Combining the CO dataset with CALIFA's optical IFS measurements, we derive molecular gas masses, star formation rates (SFR), metallicities, and stellar mass densities to measure star formation efficiency (SFE) and investigate the physical drivers of galaxy quenching. We obtain a median molecular gas depletion time of $2.10^{+2.35}_{-1.31}$, $6.90^{+17.00}_{-3.67}$, and $127.7^{+201.6}_{-113.4}$ Gyr for our sample of main sequence, green valley, and red galaxies, respectively, assuming a Galactic CO-to-H2 conversion factor. By applying various conversion factor prescriptions, we also confirm a systematic decrease of SFE with galaxy's offset below the SFMS, regardless of the adopted prescription. This suggests that the low SFR in some quenched galaxies is primarily driven by suppressed SFE rather than an absence of molecular gas. Our results provide evidence that galaxies below the main sequence can retain substantial molecular gas reservoirs comparable to star-forming galaxies, but they exhibit longer depletion times and form stars inefficiently, possibly due to the combined effects of low gas density and morphological quenching mechanisms.

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

2 major / 1 minor

Summary. The paper presents the GBT-EDGE CO(1-0) survey with the Green Bank Telescope, mapping molecular gas in 62 nearby galaxies (10-140 Mpc) selected from the CALIFA IFS survey. The sample spans the star-forming main sequence, green valley, and red sequence. Combining CO data with CALIFA optical measurements, the authors derive molecular gas masses, SFRs, metallicities, and stellar densities to compute depletion times and star formation efficiencies. They report median depletion times of 2.10, 6.90, and 127.7 Gyr for MS, GV, and red galaxies under a Galactic X_CO, and find that the systematic decline in SFE below the SFMS persists across multiple conversion-factor prescriptions. The central claim is that low SFR in quenched galaxies is driven primarily by suppressed SFE rather than absence of molecular gas, with red galaxies retaining substantial molecular reservoirs.

Significance. If the CO(1-0) luminosities reliably trace total M_H2, the result would provide direct evidence that quenching involves reduced efficiency rather than complete gas removal, with implications for morphological quenching and density-dependent star formation. The multi-prescription test and use of a representative IFS-selected sample are strengths that allow comparison across environments. The work adds to the literature on gas content in the green valley and red sequence by reporting spatially matched measurements.

major comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract and implied methods: the central claim that 'the low SFR in some quenched galaxies is primarily driven by suppressed SFE rather than an absence of molecular gas' and that 'galaxies below the main sequence can retain substantial molecular gas reservoirs' depends on the CO(1-0) emission yielding reliable total M_H2. The tested prescriptions (Galactic X_CO and variants) are largely calibrated on star-forming systems; no explicit test or justification is provided for systematic shifts in excitation, optical depth, or CO-dark H2 fractions expected at the low densities and metallicities of green-valley/red galaxies. A bias that underestimates M_H2 in red objects would artificially shorten their reported depletion times (127.7 Gyr median) and weaken the conclusion.
  2. [Abstract] Sample description and data combination: the abstract states the sample is 'selected from the CALIFA survey' and that CO and IFS data are combined, but does not specify the exact selection criteria, the spatial matching procedure between GBT single-dish CO maps and CALIFA IFS apertures, or the treatment of non-detections and upper limits when computing depletion times for the red-sequence subsample. These details are load-bearing for the reported median values and the cross-population comparison.
minor comments (1)
  1. [Abstract] The asymmetric uncertainties on the depletion times are reported but the method for deriving them (e.g., bootstrap, Monte Carlo on fluxes and SFRs) is not stated in the abstract; adding a brief methods sentence would improve clarity.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their detailed and constructive report. We address each major comment below and outline revisions that will strengthen the manuscript while preserving its core conclusions.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract and implied methods: the central claim that 'the low SFR in some quenched galaxies is primarily driven by suppressed SFE rather than an absence of molecular gas' and that 'galaxies below the main sequence can retain substantial molecular gas reservoirs' depends on the CO(1-0) emission yielding reliable total M_H2. The tested prescriptions (Galactic X_CO and variants) are largely calibrated on star-forming systems; no explicit test or justification is provided for systematic shifts in excitation, optical depth, or CO-dark H2 fractions expected at the low densities and metallicities of green-valley/red galaxies. A bias that underestimates M_H2 in red objects would artificially shorten their reported depletion times (127.7 Gyr median) and weaken the conclusion.

    Authors: We appreciate the referee's emphasis on this potential systematic uncertainty. Our multi-prescription analysis demonstrates that the SFE decline persists even when adopting metallicity- and density-dependent X_CO variants. Nevertheless, we agree that the prescriptions are primarily calibrated on star-forming systems and that an explicit discussion of applicability to quenched galaxies is warranted. In the revised manuscript we will add a dedicated subsection (likely in Section 4 or 5) that (i) reviews literature on CO excitation and CO-dark H2 in low-density, low-metallicity regimes, (ii) quantifies the plausible range of bias in M_H2 for our red-sequence subsample, and (iii) shows how even a factor-of-two underestimate in M_H2 would still leave the median depletion time for red galaxies an order of magnitude longer than for the main sequence. This addition will not alter the reported medians but will better bound the robustness of the central claim. revision: partial

  2. Referee: [Abstract] Sample description and data combination: the abstract states the sample is 'selected from the CALIFA survey' and that CO and IFS data are combined, but does not specify the exact selection criteria, the spatial matching procedure between GBT single-dish CO maps and CALIFA IFS apertures, or the treatment of non-detections and upper limits when computing depletion times for the red-sequence subsample. These details are load-bearing for the reported median values and the cross-population comparison.

    Authors: We agree that the abstract's brevity omits key methodological information. The full selection function (stellar-mass and redshift cuts, morphological and environmental criteria drawn from the CALIFA parent sample), the GBT-to-CALIFA aperture matching procedure (including beam convolution and centering), and the statistical treatment of non-detections (Kaplan–Meier estimator for censored data) are described in Sections 2 and 3. To address the referee's concern we will expand the abstract by one or two sentences that (i) state the primary selection criteria, (ii) note that GBT maps are spatially matched to the CALIFA hexagonal apertures, and (iii) indicate that upper limits are incorporated via survival analysis when computing medians for the red subsample. These changes will make the abstract self-contained while remaining within length limits. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: depletion times and SFE trends are direct empirical measurements

full rationale

The central result (longer depletion times below the SFMS) follows from tau_dep = M_H2 / SFR, where M_H2 is obtained from observed CO(1-0) luminosity scaled by independently chosen X_CO prescriptions and SFR is measured separately via CALIFA optical IFS. No equation defines SFE or depletion time in terms of the reported trend; the systematic decline in SFE is an observed correlation across the sample, not a fitted or self-referential quantity. No self-citation is invoked as a uniqueness theorem or load-bearing premise for the main claim. The applicability of X_CO prescriptions is an external assumption subject to falsification, not a circular reduction. The derivation chain is therefore self-contained against the paper's own data products.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

1 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

Central claim depends on the CO-to-H2 conversion factor being the dominant systematic and on the assumption that the 62-galaxy sample is representative of local environments; no new entities postulated.

free parameters (1)
  • CO-to-H2 conversion factor
    Galactic value used for quoted medians; multiple alternative prescriptions tested to check robustness of SFE trend.
axioms (1)
  • domain assumption CO(1-0) luminosity traces total molecular hydrogen mass across the metallicity and density range of the sample
    Invoked when converting observed CO flux to H2 mass for depletion-time calculation.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 5978 in / 1390 out tokens · 22647 ms · 2026-06-26T08:10:54.169055+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

116 extracted references · 115 canonical work pages · 7 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society , volume =

    Abadi, M. G., Moore, B., & Bower, R. G. 1999, MNRAS, 308, 947, doi: 10.1046/j.1365-8711.1999.02715.x

    work page doi:10.1046/j.1365-8711.1999.02715.x 1999

  2. [2]

    2017, MNRAS, 470, 4750, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stx1556

    Accurso, G., Saintonge, A., Catinella, B., et al. 2017, MNRAS, 470, 4750, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stx1556

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stx1556 2017

  3. [3]

    L., & Georgakakis, A

    Aird, J., Coil, A. L., & Georgakakis, A. 2019, MNRAS, 484, 4360, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stz125

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stz125 2019

  4. [4]

    A., Bureau, M., et al

    Alatalo, K., Davis, T. A., Bureau, M., et al. 2013, MNRAS, 432, 1796, doi: 10.1093/mnras/sts299

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/sts299 2013

  5. [5]

    J., & Scott, P

    Asplund, M., Grevesse, N., Sauval, A. J., & Scott, P. 2009, ARA&A, 47, 481, doi: 10.1146/annurev.astro.46.060407.145222 Astropy Collaboration, Price-Whelan, A. M., Lim, P. L., et al. 2022, ApJ, 935, 167, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac7c74

    work page doi:10.1146/annurev.astro.46.060407.145222 2009

  6. [6]

    K., Heckman, T., S´ anchez, S

    Barrera-Ballesteros, J. K., Heckman, T., S´ anchez, S. F., et al. 2021, ApJ, 909, 131, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/abd855

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/abd855 2021

  7. [7]

    K., Cruz-Gonz´ alez, I., Colombo, D., et al

    Barrera-Ballesteros, J. K., Cruz-Gonz´ alez, I., Colombo, D., et al. 2025, ApJ, 978, 23, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad85d1

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad85d1 2025

  8. [8]

    2025, A&A, 697, A149, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202453437

    Bazzi, Z., Colombo, D., Bigiel, F., et al. 2025, A&A, 697, A149, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202453437

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202453437 2025

  9. [9]

    2008, AJ, 136, 2846, doi: 10.1088/0004-6256/136/6/2846

    Bigiel, F., Leroy, A., Walter, F., et al. 2008, AJ, 136, 2846, doi: 10.1088/0004-6256/136/6/2846

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-6256/136/6/2846 2008

  10. [10]

    The Galaxy in Context: Structural, Kinematic and Integrated Properties

    Bland-Hawthorn, J., & Gerhard, O. 2016, ARA&A, 54, 529, doi: 10.1146/annurev-astro-081915-023441

    work page Pith review doi:10.1146/annurev-astro-081915-023441 2016

  11. [11]

    Bluck, A. F. L., Piotrowska, J. M., & Maiolino, R. 2023, ApJ, 944, 108, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/acac7c

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/acac7c 2023

  12. [12]

    The CO-to-H2 Conversion Factor

    Bolatto, A. D., Wolfire, M., & Leroy, A. K. 2013, ARA&A, 51, 207, doi: 10.1146/annurev-astro-082812-140944

    work page internal anchor Pith review doi:10.1146/annurev-astro-082812-140944 2013

  13. [13]

    D., Wong, T., Utomo, D., et al

    Bolatto, A. D., Wong, T., Utomo, D., et al. 2017, ApJ, 846, 159, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aa86aa

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aa86aa 2017

  14. [14]

    Brinchmann, J., Charlot, S., White, S. D. M., et al. 2004, MNRAS, 351, 1151, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2004.07881.x

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2004.07881.x 2004

  15. [15]

    2020, MNRAS, 498, L66, doi: 10.1093/mnrasl/slaa128 Cano-D´ ıaz, M.,´Avila-Reese, V., S´ anchez, S

    Carniani, S. 2020, MNRAS, 498, L66, doi: 10.1093/mnrasl/slaa128 Cano-D´ ıaz, M.,´Avila-Reese, V., S´ anchez, S. F., et al. 2019, MNRAS, 488, 3929, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stz1894 Cano-D´ ıaz, M., S´ anchez, S. F., Zibetti, S., et al. 2016, ApJL, 821, L26, doi: 10.3847/2041-8205/821/2/L26

    work page doi:10.1093/mnrasl/slaa128 2020

  16. [16]

    A., Clayton, G

    Cardelli, J. A., Clayton, G. C., & Mathis, J. S. 1989, ApJ, 345, 245, doi: 10.1086/167900 Catal´ an-Torrecilla, C., Gil de Paz, A., Castillo-Morales, A., et al. 2015, A&A, 584, A87, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201526023

    work page doi:10.1086/167900 1989

  17. [17]

    2014, Publications of the Astronomical Society of Australia, 31, 48, doi: 10.1017/pasa.2014.43

    Chennamangalam, J., Scott, S., Jones, G., et al. 2014, Publications of the Astronomical Society of Australia, 31, 48, doi: 10.1017/pasa.2014.43

    work page doi:10.1017/pasa.2014.43 2014

  18. [18]

    M., Chastenet, J., et al

    Chiang, I.-D., Sandstrom, K. M., Chastenet, J., et al. 2024, ApJ, 964, 18, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad23ed

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad23ed 2024

  19. [19]

    2019, MNRAS, 484, 5192, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stz349

    Chown, R., Li, C., Athanassoula, E., et al. 2019, MNRAS, 484, 5192, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stz349

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stz349 2019

  20. [20]

    2018, MNRAS, 475, 1791, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stx3233

    Colombo, D., Kalinova, V., Utomo, D., et al. 2018, MNRAS, 475, 1791, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stx3233

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stx3233 2018

  21. [21]

    F., Bolatto, A

    Colombo, D., Sanchez, S. F., Bolatto, A. D., et al. 2020, A&A, 644, A97, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202039005

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202039005 2020

  22. [22]

    2025a, A&A, 699, A367, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202453217

    Colombo, D., Kalinova, V., Bazzi, Z., et al. 2025a, A&A, 699, A367, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202453217

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202453217

  23. [23]

    2025b, A&A, 699, A366, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202453179

    Colombo, D., Kalinova, V., Bazzi, Z., et al. 2025b, A&A, 699, A366, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202453179

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202453179

  24. [24]

    2017, MNRAS, 465, 1384, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stw2766

    Curti, M., Cresci, G., Mannucci, F., et al. 2017, MNRAS, 465, 1384, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stw2766

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stw2766 2017

  25. [25]

    A., Young, L

    Davis, T. A., Young, L. M., Crocker, A. F., et al. 2014, MNRAS, 444, 3427, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stu570 De Vis, P., Jones, A., Viaene, S., et al. 2019, A&A, 623, A5, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201834444 den Brok, J., Jim´ enez-Donaire, M. J., Leroy, A., et al. 2025, AJ, 169, 18, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/ad888a den Brok, J. S., Chatzigiannakis, D., Bigiel, F., et a...

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stu570 2014

  26. [26]

    What drives central starbursts at z 0?

    Ellison, S. L., Thorp, M. D., Pan, H.-A., et al. 2020a, MNRAS, 492, 6027, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staa001

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/staa001

  27. [27]

    L., Thorp, M

    Ellison, S. L., Thorp, M. D., Lin, L., et al. 2020b, MNRAS, 493, L39, doi: 10.1093/mnrasl/slz179

    work page doi:10.1093/mnrasl/slz179

  28. [28]

    L., Wong, T., S´ anchez, S

    Ellison, S. L., Wong, T., S´ anchez, S. F., et al. 2021, MNRAS, 505, L46, doi: 10.1093/mnrasl/slab047

    work page doi:10.1093/mnrasl/slab047 2021

  29. [29]

    Calibration of Argus and the 4mm Receiver on the GBT

    Frayer, D. T., Maddalena, R. J., White, S., et al. 2019, Calibration of Argus and the 4mm Receiver on the GBT,, Green Bank Telescope Memorandum 302, June 5, 2019, 21 pages doi: 10.48550/arXiv.1906.02307

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.1906.02307 2019

  30. [30]

    K., Colombo, D., et al

    Garay-Solis, Y., Barrera-Ballesteros, J. K., Colombo, D., et al. 2023, ApJ, 952, 122, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/acd781

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/acd781 2023

  31. [31]

    Gensior, J., Kruijssen, J. M. D., & Keller, B. W. 2020, MNRAS, 495, 199, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staa1184

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/staa1184 2020

  32. [32]

    J., Lutz, D., et al

    Genzel, R., Tacconi, L. J., Lutz, D., et al. 2015, ApJ, 800, 20, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/800/1/20

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/800/1/20 2015

  33. [33]

    2019, radio-astro-tools/spectral-cube: Release v0.4.5, v0.4.5 Zenodo, doi: 10.5281/zenodo.3558614

    Ginsburg, A., Koch, E., Robitaille, T., et al. 2019, radio-astro-tools/spectral-cube: Release v0.4.5, v0.4.5 Zenodo, doi: 10.5281/zenodo.3558614

    work page doi:10.5281/zenodo.3558614 2019

  34. [34]

    M., Papaderos, P., Kehrig, C., et al

    Gomes, J. M., Papaderos, P., Kehrig, C., et al. 2016, A&A, 588, A68, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201525976

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201525976 2016

  35. [35]

    C., Kim, C.-G., & Kim, J.-G

    Gong, M., Ostriker, E. C., Kim, C.-G., & Kim, J.-G. 2020, ApJ, 903, 142, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/abbdab SFE and Galaxy Quenching with GBT-EDGE27 Gonz´ alez Delgado, R. M., P´ erez, E., Cid Fernandes, R., et al. 2014, A&A, 562, A47, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201322011 Gonz´ alez Delgado, R. M., Cid Fernandes, R., P´ erez, E., et al. 2016, A&A, 590, A44, doi: 1...

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

  36. [36]

    R., Millman, K

    Harris, C. R., Millman, K. J., van der Walt, S. J., et al. 2020, Nature, 585, 357, doi: 10.1038/s41586-020-2649-2

    work page doi:10.1038/s41586-020-2649-2 2020

  37. [37]

    The Co-Evolution of Galaxies and Supermassive Black Holes: Insights from Surveys of the Contemporary Universe

    Heckman, T. M., & Best, P. N. 2014, ARA&A, 52, 589, doi: 10.1146/annurev-astro-081913-035722

    work page internal anchor Pith review doi:10.1146/annurev-astro-081913-035722 2014

  38. [38]

    Hunter, J. D. 2007, Computing In Science & Engineering, 9, 90

    2007

  39. [39]

    G., Nielsen, N

    Kacprzak, G. G., Nielsen, N. M., Nateghi, H., et al. 2021, MNRAS, 500, 2289, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staa3461

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/staa3461 2021

  40. [40]

    , keywords =

    Kalinova, V., Colombo, D., S´ anchez, S. F., et al. 2021, A&A, 648, A64, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202039896

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202039896 2021

  41. [41]

    Kennicutt, R. C. 1998, ApJ, 498, 541, doi: 10.1086/305588

    work page internal anchor Pith review doi:10.1086/305588 1998

  42. [42]

    Star Formation in the Milky Way and Nearby Galaxies

    Kennicutt, R. C., & Evans, N. J. 2012, ARA&A, 50, 531, doi: 10.1146/annurev-astro-081811-125610

    work page internal anchor Pith review doi:10.1146/annurev-astro-081811-125610 2012

  43. [43]

    J., Dopita, M

    Kewley, L. J., Dopita, M. A., Sutherland, R. S., Heisler, C. A., & Trevena, J. 2001, ApJ, 556, 121, doi: 10.1086/321545

    work page internal anchor Pith review doi:10.1086/321545 2001

  44. [44]

    2007, PASJ, 59, 117, doi: 10.1093/pasj/59.1.117

    Kuno, N., Sato, N., Nakanishi, H., et al. 2007, PASJ, 59, 117, doi: 10.1093/pasj/59.1.117

    work page doi:10.1093/pasj/59.1.117 2007

  45. [45]

    Lacerda, E. A. D., S´ anchez, S. F., Cid Fernandes, R., et al. 2020, MNRAS, 492, 3073, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staa008

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/staa008 2020

  46. [46]

    Lacerda, E. A. D., S´ anchez, S. F., Mej´ ıa-Narv´ aez, A., et al. 2022, NewA, 97, 101895, doi: 10.1016/j.newast.2022.101895

    work page doi:10.1016/j.newast.2022.101895 2022

  47. [47]

    L., & Watts, D

    Zakamska, N. L., & Watts, D. J. 2019, MNRAS, 487, 1823, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stz1316

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stz1316 2019

  48. [48]

    K., Walter, F., Sandstrom, K., et al

    Leroy, A. K., Walter, F., Sandstrom, K., et al. 2013, AJ, 146, 19, doi: 10.1088/0004-6256/146/2/19

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-6256/146/2/19 2013

  49. [49]

    K., Rosolowsky, E., Usero, A., et al

    Leroy, A. K., Rosolowsky, E., Usero, A., et al. 2022, ApJ, 927, 149, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac3490

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac3490 2022

  50. [50]

    C., Bolatto, A

    Levy, R. C., Bolatto, A. D., Teuben, P., et al. 2018, ApJ, 860, 92, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aac2e5

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aac2e5 2018

  51. [51]

    L., et al

    Lin, L., Pan, H.-A., Ellison, S. L., et al. 2019a, ApJL, 884, L33, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ab4815

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ab4815 2041

  52. [52]

    2019b, ApJ, 872, 50, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aafa84

    Lin, L., Hsieh, B.-C., Pan, H.-A., et al. 2019b, ApJ, 872, 50, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aafa84

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aafa84

  53. [53]

    L., Pan, H.-A., et al

    Lin, L., Ellison, S. L., Pan, H.-A., et al. 2020, ApJ, 903, 145, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/abba3a

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/abba3a 2020

  54. [54]

    L., Pan, H.-A., et al

    Lin, L., Ellison, S. L., Pan, H.-A., et al. 2022, ApJ, 926, 175, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac4ccc

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac4ccc 2022

  55. [55]

    L., et al

    Lin, L., Pan, H.-A., Ellison, S. L., et al. 2024, ApJ, 963, 115, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad18b9

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad18b9 2024

  56. [56]

    D., et al

    Lin, L., Wu, P.-F., Thorp, M. D., et al. 2026, ApJ, 999, 263, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ae3b2b

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ae3b2b 2026

  57. [57]

    2022, MNRAS, 514, 5035, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac1583

    Lu, A., Boyce, H., Haggard, D., et al. 2022, MNRAS, 514, 5035, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac1583

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stac1583 2022

  58. [58]

    2023, ApJ, 943, 7, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aca664

    Maeda, F., Egusa, F., Ohta, K., Fujimoto, Y., & Habe, A. 2023, ApJ, 943, 7, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aca664

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aca664 2023

  59. [59]

    2019, A&A Rv, 27, 3, doi: 10.1007/s00159-018-0112-2

    Maiolino, R., & Mannucci, F. 2019, A&A Rv, 27, 3, doi: 10.1007/s00159-018-0112-2

    work page doi:10.1007/s00159-018-0112-2 2019

  60. [60]

    2014, A&A, 570, A13, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201423496

    Vauglin, I. 2014, A&A, 570, A13, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201423496

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201423496 2014

  61. [62]

    G., Emerson, D

    Mangum, J. G., Emerson, D. T., & Greisen, E. W. 2007, A&A, 474, 679, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20077811

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20077811 2007

  62. [63]

    2009, ApJ, 707, 250, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/707/1/250

    Martig, M., Bournaud, F., Teyssier, R., & Dekel, A. 2009, ApJ, 707, 250, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/707/1/250

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/707/1/250 2009

  63. [64]

    1996, Nature, 379, 613, doi: 10.1038/379613a0

    Moore, B., Katz, N., Lake, G., Dressler, A., & Oemler, A. 1996, Nature, 379, 613, doi: 10.1038/379613a0

    work page doi:10.1038/379613a0 1996

  64. [65]

    2019, PASJ, 71, S15, doi: 10.1093/pasj/psz015

    Muraoka, K., Sorai, K., Miyamoto, Y., et al. 2019, PASJ, 71, S15, doi: 10.1093/pasj/psz015

    work page doi:10.1093/pasj/psz015 2019

  65. [66]

    2012, MNRAS, 424, 2659, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2012.21325.x

    Hernquist, L. 2012, MNRAS, 421, 3127, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2012.20536.x

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2012.20536.x 2012

  66. [67]

    J., Leroy, A

    Neumann, L., Jim´ enez-Donaire, M. J., Leroy, A. K., et al. 2025, A&A, 693, L13, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202453208

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202453208 2025

  67. [68]

    J., Symeonidis, M., Vieira, J

    Page, M. J., Symeonidis, M., Vieira, J. D., et al. 2012, Nature, 485, 213, doi: 10.1038/nature11096

    work page doi:10.1038/nature11096 2012

  68. [69]

    L., et al

    Pan, H.-A., Lin, L., Ellison, S. L., et al. 2024, ApJ, 964, 120, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad28c1

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad28c1 2024

  69. [70]

    P., van der Werf, P., Xilouris, E., Isaak, K

    Papadopoulos, P. P., van der Werf, P., Xilouris, E., Isaak, K. G., & Gao, Y. 2012, ApJ, 751, 10, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/751/1/10

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/751/1/10 2012

  70. [71]

    J., Kovaˇ c, K., et al

    Peng, Y.-j., Lilly, S. J., Kovaˇ c, K., et al. 2010, ApJ, 721, 193, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/721/1/193 P´ erez, F., & Granger, B. E. 2007, Computing in Science and Engineering, 9, 21, doi: 10.1109/MCSE.2007.53

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/721/1/193 2010

  71. [72]

    Pettini, M., & Pagel, B. E. J. 2004, MNRAS, 348, L59, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2004.07591.x

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2004.07591.x 2004

  72. [73]

    S., & Grebel, E

    Pilyugin, L. S., & Grebel, E. K. 2016, MNRAS, 457, 3678, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stw238

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stw238 2016

  73. [74]

    2023, A&A, 680, A4, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202143023

    Querejeta, M., Pety, J., Schruba, A., et al. 2023, A&A, 680, A4, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202143023

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202143023 2023

  74. [75]

    K., Meidt, S

    Querejeta, M., Leroy, A. K., Meidt, S. E., et al. 2024, A&A, 687, A293, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202449733

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202449733 2024

  75. [76]

    J., & Dame, T

    Reid, M. J., & Dame, T. M. 2016, ApJ, 832, 159, doi: 10.3847/0004-637X/832/2/159

    work page doi:10.3847/0004-637x/832/2/159 2016

  76. [77]

    2019, A&A, 621, A104, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201834397 28Teng et al

    Renaud, F., Bournaud, F., Daddi, E., & Weiß, A. 2019, A&A, 621, A104, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201834397 28Teng et al

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201834397 2019

  77. [78]

    Robitaille, T., Deil, C., & Ginsburg, A. 2020, reproject: Python-based astronomical image reprojection,, Astrophysics Source Code Library, record ascl:2011.023 http://ascl.net/2011.023 Rosa-Gonz´ alez, D., Terlevich, E., & Terlevich, R. 2002, MNRAS, 332, 283, doi: 10.1046/j.1365-8711.2002.05285.x

    work page doi:10.1046/j.1365-8711.2002.05285.x 2020

  78. [79]

    2006, PASP, 118, 590, doi: 10.1086/502982

    Rosolowsky, E., & Leroy, A. 2006, PASP, 118, 590, doi: 10.1086/502982

    work page doi:10.1086/502982 2006

  79. [80]

    1966, Proceedings of the IEEE, 54, 633, doi: 10.1109/PROC.1966.4784

    Ruze, J. 1966, Proceedings of the IEEE, 54, 633, doi: 10.1109/PROC.1966.4784

    work page doi:10.1109/proc.1966.4784 1966

  80. [81]

    2022, ARA&A, 60, 319, doi: 10.1146/annurev-astro-021022-043545

    Saintonge, A., & Catinella, B. 2022, ARA&A, 60, 319, doi: 10.1146/annurev-astro-021022-043545

    work page doi:10.1146/annurev-astro-021022-043545 2022

Showing first 80 references.