pith. sign in

arxiv: 2606.25723 · v1 · pith:Y5AZNQ5Wnew · submitted 2026-06-24 · 🌌 astro-ph.GA

Lyrm α halos and UV continuum morphologies of Tadpole Galaxies at z> 3

Manish Kataria , Kanak Saha This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-06-25 20:22 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.GA
keywords Lyα halostadpole galaxieshigh-redshift galaxiesMUSE observationscircumgalactic mediumUV continuumLyα emission
0
0 comments X

The pith

Extended Lyα halos surround 10 of 12 tadpole galaxies at z>3.

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

The paper studies 12 tadpole galaxies at redshifts 3 to 5.5 in the Hubble Ultra Deep Field using MUSE data to map their Lyα and UV light. It shows that 10 of these galaxies produce extended Lyα halos whose sizes often exceed or offset from the stellar light, even after the galaxies' stretched shapes are taken into account in the profiles. Roughly 40 percent also show double-peaked line profiles, and some display asymmetric structures that look like outflows. The authors argue that the galaxies' disturbed forms affect how Lyα photons travel outward and build up emission in the surrounding gas. This result matters because it links a specific high-redshift morphology to the common presence of large Lyα halos.

Core claim

Extended Lyα halos are detected in 10 of the 12 tadpole galaxies, with the halos generally following the spatial extent of the UV continuum yet appearing more symmetric and frequently offset from the stellar component; some systems also show asymmetric outflow-like Lyα structures, indicating that the elongated morphologies influence Lyα photon transport and contribute to halo formation in the circumgalactic medium.

What carries the argument

Surface brightness profiles of Lyα and UV continuum emission, built while explicitly accounting for the elongated morphologies of the tadpole galaxies to measure spatial extents and symmetries.

If this is right

  • Diffuse Lyα emission is common among tadpole systems at these redshifts.
  • Lyα halos are typically more symmetric than the UV continuum light and can be spatially offset from the stars.
  • About 40 percent of the sample shows double-peaked Lyα line profiles.
  • Some tadpole galaxies exhibit asymmetric, outflow-like Lyα structures consistent with anisotropic escape.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • Tadpole morphologies may be one pathway by which high-redshift galaxies build the large Lyα halos seen in many surveys.
  • The observed offsets between Lyα and UV peaks could mark sites where star formation occurs away from the center of the gaseous halo.
  • Higher-resolution data on the same objects could test whether double-peaked profiles align with particular clump or tail features in the galaxies.

Load-bearing premise

The 12 tadpole galaxies found in the HUDF represent the broader population and their stretched shapes do not systematically affect the detection or measurement of the halos.

What would settle it

A survey of a larger set of similarly selected tadpole galaxies that finds extended Lyα halos in far fewer than 10 out of 12 cases would show the result does not hold generally.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2606.25723 by Kanak Saha, Manish Kataria.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Sample of high-z Lyα emitting Tadpole/chain galaxies. The left panel shows the JWST/NIRCAM band image (filter is mentioned in the top left corner of each image with red color) of the galaxy within a dashed red circle, with scale in kpc (at the redshift of the galaxy) and arcsec shown in blue. The right panels show the corresponding MUSE spectra in black and the error in gray, with the Lyα emission line mar… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Comparison of the galaxy sample with Leclercq et al. (2017). The left panel shows the distribution of stellar mass for the GOODS-South galaxies in our sample. The middle and right panels show the cumulative distributions for all galaxies in the Lyα halo scale length and the red peak of the emission. #ID RA (Deg.) Dec (Deg.) z Reff,UVC (kpc) Reff,Lyα,1c (kpc) Reff,halo (kpc) FLyα log(LLyα) 1 s 53.12548823 -… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Left: The panel shows the JWST RGB image of the Tadpole/Chain galaxy analyzed in this work. The white contours show the Lyα emission from MUSE, overlaid on the galaxy, with the contour levels specified inline in the contours themselves. At the top-left, the IDs of each galaxy are mentioned with the redshift mentioned in the top-right, and at the bottom-left of each image, we show the 1′′ scale as a white l… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: continuation of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: continuation of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Plot shows the radial profile of the empty back￾ground patches taken from the narrow band imaging in the case of the top panel (Lyα) and the UV continuum band im￾age using the same elliptical annulus as used for the galaxy. The black points show the median of all 100 points at a given radius, and the error bars are taken as the standard devia￾tion of the points. EW0 = 1 (1 + z) FLyα fλ,UV (1) To calculate … view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Two-component decomposition of the Lyα surface brightness profiles (black points). The red curve corresponds to the compact Lyα component, whose scale length is fixed to that measured from the HST UV continuum (UVC) image, while the shaded red region denotes the associated 1σ MCMC uncertainty. The blue curve represents the extended Lyα halo component. The yellow curve shows the combined best-fitting model,… view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Correlation of Lyα halo scale length with different parameters. The top-left plot shows the UV continuum scale length relative to the Lyα halo scale length; the black circles show the measurements, while the green squares represent the measurements from the sample in this work. The dashed line shows the relation with the UV scale length equal to the Lyα halo scale length; the other line shows 10× the UV sc… view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Posterior distribution of parameters used for fit￾ting the datapoints in the top left plot of the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_7.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Tadpole and clump-chain galaxies are a morphologically distinct population among high-redshift star-forming galaxies whose disturbed structures may influence the escape and propagation of Ly$\alpha$ photons. We investigate the Ly$\alpha$ and UV continuum properties of 12 tadpole galaxies in the redshift range of z $\sim$ 3 -- 5.5 identified in the Hubble Ultra Deep Field (HUDF) using deep MUSE observations. Accounting for their elongated morphologies, we construct surface brightness profiles and characterize the spatial extent of their Ly$\alpha$ emission. Extended Ly$\alpha$ halos are detected in 10 of the 12 galaxies, demonstrating that diffuse Ly$\alpha$ emission is common among tadpole systems. Approximately 40\% of the sample exhibits double-peaked Ly$\alpha$ profiles. While the effective radii ($\rm R_{e}$) of the Ly$\rm \alpha$ emission generally follow the spatial extent of the UV continuum, the Ly$ \rm \alpha$ halos are typically more symmetric and often exhibit spatial offsets from the stellar component. Some galaxies also display asymmetric and outflow-like Ly$\rm \alpha$ structures suggestive of anisotropic escape and complex radiative transfer effects. Together, these results suggest that the disturbed morphologies of tadpole galaxies may influence the transport of Ly$\rm \alpha$ photons and contribute to the formation of extended Ly$\rm \alpha$ halos in the circumgalactic medium.

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 reports MUSE observations of 12 tadpole galaxies at z ≈ 3–5.5 identified in the HUDF. After constructing surface brightness profiles while accounting for elongated morphologies, extended Lyα halos are detected in 10 of the 12 systems. The authors conclude that diffuse Lyα emission is common among tadpole galaxies, note that ~40% show double-peaked profiles, and describe Lyα halos as typically more symmetric with possible spatial offsets from the UV continuum, suggesting that disturbed morphologies influence Lyα transport and CGM halo formation.

Significance. If the sample is representative and the profile analysis free of systematic bias from elongation or PSF effects, the high detection fraction would provide useful observational evidence that morphological disturbances at high redshift affect Lyα photon propagation and contribute to extended halos. The work is primarily descriptive and adds to the literature on Lyα in morphologically complex star-forming galaxies, though the small sample inherently limits broad generalization.

major comments (3)
  1. [Results section on surface brightness profiles and halo detection] The central claim that diffuse Lyα is common among tadpoles rests on the 10/12 detection rate, yet the manuscript supplies no quantitative validation (mock recovery tests, comparison to rounder control galaxies, or sensitivity to aperture/axis-ratio choices) that the elongated-morphology corrections eliminate residual projection or PSF-mixing biases in the surface-brightness profiles. This directly affects the reliability of the reported halo sizes and detection fraction.
  2. [Sample selection (Introduction/Methods)] No details are provided on the parent catalog size, completeness of the tadpole selection, or tests for correlation between morphological selection and Lyα strength. Without these, it is unclear whether the 12-object HUDF sample is an unbiased draw from the tadpole population, undermining generalization of the 83% detection rate.
  3. [Abstract and quantitative results paragraphs] The abstract and results state detection rates and qualitative trends (e.g., Re(Lyα) following UV extent, offsets, asymmetry) but report neither error bars on the 10/12 fraction, statistical significance of the trends, nor explicit PSF corrections or profile-fitting parameters for the elongated sources. This limits independent verification of the headline result.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] The redshift range is stated as z ~ 3 -- 5.5; providing the exact minimum/maximum or median redshift of the sample would improve precision.
  2. [Discussion] Consider adding a brief comparison table or text referencing prior Lyα halo studies of more symmetric high-z galaxies to contextualize the tadpole-specific findings.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

3 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their constructive comments, which highlight important aspects of our analysis and presentation. We address each major comment point by point below.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: The central claim that diffuse Lyα is common among tadpoles rests on the 10/12 detection rate, yet the manuscript supplies no quantitative validation (mock recovery tests, comparison to rounder control galaxies, or sensitivity to aperture/axis-ratio choices) that the elongated-morphology corrections eliminate residual projection or PSF-mixing biases in the surface-brightness profiles. This directly affects the reliability of the reported halo sizes and detection fraction.

    Authors: We agree that quantitative validation such as mock tests would strengthen the claims. Our profiles use elliptical apertures aligned to the UV major axis to mitigate elongation effects, as noted in the Methods. We will expand this description in revision and add a sensitivity discussion to aperture and axis-ratio choices along with explicit notes on potential PSF and projection biases. Full mock recovery tests and control-sample comparisons are not included, as they exceed the scope of this small-sample descriptive study; we will state this limitation clearly. revision: partial

  2. Referee: No details are provided on the parent catalog size, completeness of the tadpole selection, or tests for correlation between morphological selection and Lyα strength. Without these, it is unclear whether the 12-object HUDF sample is an unbiased draw from the tadpole population, undermining generalization of the 83% detection rate.

    Authors: The 12 objects were selected via visual classification from HST imaging of the HUDF high-redshift galaxy population. We will add the approximate parent catalog size and selection criteria to the Methods section. Formal completeness calculations and Lyα-morphology correlation tests were not performed, as the work is focused on observed Lyα properties rather than selection-function characterization. We will explicitly note that the sample is not presented as statistically complete or unbiased. revision: yes

  3. Referee: The abstract and results state detection rates and qualitative trends (e.g., Re(Lyα) following UV extent, offsets, asymmetry) but report neither error bars on the 10/12 fraction, statistical significance of the trends, nor explicit PSF corrections or profile-fitting parameters for the elongated sources. This limits independent verification of the headline result.

    Authors: We will revise the abstract and results to report binomial uncertainties on the 10/12 fraction and to list the specific profile-fitting parameters and PSF-handling steps used. Given the sample size of 12, trends are discussed qualitatively; we will avoid implying statistical significance. These additions will allow independent verification. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: purely observational analysis with direct data-driven claims

full rationale

The manuscript reports MUSE observations of 12 tadpole galaxies selected from the HUDF, constructs surface-brightness profiles while accounting for elongated morphologies, and states the empirical detection rate of extended Lyα halos (10/12). No equations, fitted parameters, predictions, or self-citations appear in the provided text; the central result is a direct count from the observed profiles rather than any quantity defined in terms of itself or reduced by construction to prior author work. The sample-representativeness assumption is stated but is not part of a derivation chain that loops back to the same data. This is a standard observational report whose claims remain independent of the enumerated circularity patterns.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

Relies on standard assumptions in observational astronomy for redshift determination, morphological classification, and surface brightness profile extraction; no free parameters or invented entities are introduced in the abstract.

axioms (2)
  • standard math Standard flat Lambda-CDM cosmology for converting observed redshifts to physical scales
    Implicit in reporting z ~ 3-5.5 and spatial extents
  • domain assumption MUSE point-spread function and sensitivity allow reliable detection of extended emission around elongated sources
    Required for constructing surface brightness profiles and claiming halo detections

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 5795 in / 1251 out tokens · 23326 ms · 2026-06-25T20:22:50.875334+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

65 extracted references · 62 canonical work pages · 4 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    G., van den Bergh, S., Glazebrook, K., et al

    Abraham, R. G., van den Bergh, S., Glazebrook, K., et al. 1996, ApJS, 107, 1, doi: 10.1086/192352

    work page doi:10.1086/192352 1996

  2. [2]

    Adams, T. F. 1972, ApJ, 174, 439, doi: 10.1086/151503

    work page doi:10.1086/151503 1972

  3. [3]

    Ahn, S.-H., Lee, H.-W., & Lee, H. M. 2001, ApJ, 554, 604, doi: 10.1086/321374 Astropy Collaboration, Price-Whelan, A. M., Lim, P. L., et al. 2022, ApJ, 935, 167, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac7c74

    work page doi:10.1086/321374 2001

  4. [4]

    2016, MPDAF: MUSE Python Data Analysis Framework, Astrophysics Source Code Library, record ascl:1611.003

    Shepherd, M. 2016, MPDAF: MUSE Python Data Analysis Framework, Astrophysics Source Code Library, record ascl:1611.003. http://ascl.net/1611.003

    2016

  5. [5]

    2015, A&A, 575, A75, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201425419

    Bacon, R., Brinchmann, J., Richard, J., et al. 2015, A&A, 575, A75, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201425419

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201425419 2015

  6. [6]

    2017, A&A, 608, A1, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201730833

    Bacon, R., Conseil, S., Mary, D., et al. 2017, A&A, 608, A1, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201730833

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201730833 2017

  7. [7]

    2023, A&A, 670, A4, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202244187

    Bacon, R., Brinchmann, J., Conseil, S., et al. 2023, A&A, 670, A4, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202244187

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202244187 2023

  8. [8]

    2014, A&A, 572, A74, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201424755

    Behrens, C., & Braun, H. 2014, A&A, 572, A74, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201424755

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201424755 2014

  9. [9]

    , keywords =

    Blumenthal, G. R., Faber, S. M., Primack, J. R., & Rees, M. J. 1984, Nature, 311, 517, doi: 10.1038/311517a0

    work page doi:10.1038/311517a0 1984

  10. [10]

    Star Formation Rate Indicators

    Calzetti, D. 2013, in Secular Evolution of Galaxies, ed. J. Falc´ on-Barroso & J. H. Knapen, 419, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.1208.2997

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.1208.2997 2013

  11. [11]

    J., & Miniati, F

    Cantalupo, S., Porciani, C., Lilly, S. J., & Miniati, F. 2005, ApJ, 628, 61, doi: 10.1086/430758

    work page doi:10.1086/430758 2005

  12. [12]

    , keywords =

    Cappellari, M. 2002, MNRAS, 333, 400, doi: 10.1046/j.1365-8711.2002.05412.x

    work page doi:10.1046/j.1365-8711.2002.05412.x 2002

  13. [13]

    P., Endsley, R., et al

    Chen, Z., Stark, D. P., Endsley, R., et al. 2023, MNRAS, 518, 5607, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac3476

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stac3476 2023

  14. [14]

    L., Hu, E

    Cowie, L. L., Hu, E. M., & Songaila, A. 1995, AJ, 110, 1576, doi: 10.1086/117631

    work page doi:10.1086/117631 1995

  15. [15]

    2014, PASA, 31, e040, doi: 10.1017/pasa.2014.33

    Dijkstra, M. 2014, PASA, 31, e040, doi: 10.1017/pasa.2014.33

    work page doi:10.1017/pasa.2014.33 2014

  16. [16]

    2006, ApJ, 649, 14, doi: 10.1086/506243

    Dijkstra, M., Haiman, Z., & Spaans, M. 2006, ApJ, 649, 14, doi: 10.1086/506243

    work page doi:10.1086/506243 2006

  17. [17]

    , keywords =

    Dijkstra, M., & Loeb, A. 2009, MNRAS, 400, 1109, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2009.15533.x

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2009.15533.x 2009

  18. [18]

    B., Guiderdoni, B., Blaizot, J., et al

    Drake, A. B., Guiderdoni, B., Blaizot, J., et al. 2017, MNRAS, 471, 267, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stx1515

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stx1515 2017

  19. [19]

    J., Willott, C., Alberts, S., et al

    Eisenstein, D. J., Willott, C., Alberts, S., et al. 2026, ApJS, 283, 6, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ae3163

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4365/ae3163 2026

  20. [20]

    G., & Elmegreen, D

    Elmegreen, B. G., & Elmegreen, D. M. 2010, ApJ, 722, 1895, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/722/2/1895

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/722/2/1895 2010

  21. [21]

    Coe, D. A. 2007, ApJ, 658, 763, doi: 10.1086/511667

    work page doi:10.1086/511667 2007

  22. [22]

    Schaffer, M. A. 2005, ApJ, 631, 85, doi: 10.1086/432502

    work page doi:10.1086/432502 2005

  23. [23]

    M., Elmegreen, B

    Elmegreen, D. M., Elmegreen, B. G., S´ anchez Almeida, J., et al. 2012, ApJ, 750, 95, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/750/2/95

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/750/2/95 2012

  24. [24]

    C., Dickinson, M., Giavalisco, M., et al

    Ferguson, H. C., Dickinson, M., Giavalisco, M., et al. 2004, ApJL, 600, L107, doi: 10.1086/378578

    work page doi:10.1086/378578 2004

  25. [25]

    J., et al

    Ferreira, L., Adams, N., Conselice, C. J., et al. 2022, ApJL, 938, L2, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ac947c

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ac947c 2022

  26. [26]

    E., Winkel, B., S´ anchez Almeida, J., et al

    Filho, M. E., Winkel, B., S´ anchez Almeida, J., et al. 2013, A&A, 558, A18, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201322098

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201322098 2013

  27. [27]

    Foreman-Mackey, D

    Foreman-Mackey, D., Hogg, D. W., Lang, D., & Goodman, J. 2013, PASP, 125, 306, doi: 10.1086/670067

    work page doi:10.1086/670067 2013

  28. [28]

    The Journal of Open Source Software , keywords =

    Foreman-Mackey, D., Farr, W., Sinha, M., et al. 2019, The Journal of Open Source Software, 4, 1864, doi: 10.21105/joss.01864 F¨ orster Schreiber, N. M., & Wuyts, S. 2020, ARA&A, 58, 661, doi: 10.1146/annurev-astro-032620-021910

    work page doi:10.21105/joss.01864 2019

  29. [29]

    Harrington, J. P. 1973, MNRAS, 162, 43, doi: 10.1093/mnras/162.1.43

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/162.1.43 1973

  30. [30]

    2017, A&A, 608, A10, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201731579

    Hashimoto, T., Garel, T., Guiderdoni, B., et al. 2017, A&A, 608, A10, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201731579

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201731579 2017

  31. [31]

    2015, PASA, 32, e027, doi: 10.1017/pasa.2015.25

    Hayes, M. 2015, PASA, 32, e027, doi: 10.1017/pasa.2015.25

    work page doi:10.1017/pasa.2015.25 2015

  32. [32]

    2013, ApJL, 765, L27, doi: 10.1088/2041-8205/765/2/L27

    Hayes, M., ¨Ostlin, G., Schaerer, D., et al. 2013, ApJL, 765, L27, doi: 10.1088/2041-8205/765/2/L27

    work page doi:10.1088/2041-8205/765/2/l27 2013

  33. [33]

    C., & Wisotzki, L

    Herenz, E. C., & Wisotzki, L. 2017, A&A, 602, A111, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201629507

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201629507 2017

  34. [34]

    D., Magee, D., Oesch, P

    Illingworth, G. D., Magee, D., Oesch, P. A., et al. 2013, ApJS, 209, 6, doi: 10.1088/0067-0049/209/1/6

    work page doi:10.1088/0067-0049/209/1/6 2013

  35. [35]

    K., Shimizu, I., Iwata, I., & Tanaka, M

    Inoue, A. K., Shimizu, I., Iwata, I., & Tanaka, M. 2014, MNRAS, 442, 1805, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stu936

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stu936 2014

  36. [36]

    2025, ApJ, 989, 220, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/adcebc

    Kataria, M., Saha, K., & Elmegreen, B. 2025, ApJ, 989, 220, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/adcebc

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

  37. [37]

    Kennicutt, Jr., R. C. 1998, ARA&A, 36, 189, doi: 10.1146/annurev.astro.36.1.189

    work page internal anchor Pith review doi:10.1146/annurev.astro.36.1.189 1998

  38. [38]

    2000, A&A Rv, 10, 1, doi: 10.1007/s001590000005

    Kunth, D., & ¨Ostlin, G. 2000, A&A Rv, 10, 1, doi: 10.1007/s001590000005

    work page doi:10.1007/s001590000005 2000

  39. [39]

    2017, A&A, 608, A8, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201731480

    Leclercq, F., Bacon, R., Wisotzki, L., et al. 2017, A&A, 608, A8, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201731480

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201731480 2017

  40. [40]

    1995, ApJ, 441, 18, doi: 10.1086/175332

    Madau, P. 1995, ApJ, 441, 18, doi: 10.1086/175332

    work page doi:10.1086/175332 1995

  41. [41]

    2014, title Cosmic Star-Formation History , , 52, 415, 10.1146/annurev-astro-081811-125615

    Madau, P., & Dickinson, M. 2014, ARA&A, 52, 415, doi: 10.1146/annurev-astro-081811-125615

    work page internal anchor Pith review doi:10.1146/annurev-astro-081811-125615 2014

  42. [42]

    P., Brammer, G., et al

    Matthee, J., Naidu, R. P., Brammer, G., et al. 2024, ApJ, 963, 129, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad2345

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad2345 2024

  43. [43]

    2010, Publications of the National Astronomical Observatory of Japan, 13, 9

    Miyauchi-Isobe, N., Maehara, H., & Nakajima, K. 2010, Publications of the National Astronomical Observatory of Japan, 13, 9

    2010

  44. [44]

    2014, MNRAS, 442, 110, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stu825 16

    Momose, R., Ouchi, M., Nakajima, K., et al. 2014, MNRAS, 442, 110, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stu825 16

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stu825 2014

  45. [45]

    B., S´ anchez Almeida, J., Aguerri, J

    Morales-Luis, A. B., S´ anchez Almeida, J., Aguerri, J. A. L., & Mu˜ noz-Tu˜ n´ on, C. 2011, ApJ, 743, 77, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/743/1/77

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/743/1/77 2011

  46. [46]

    2024, title Enhanced Subkiloparsec-scale Star Formation: Results from a JWST Size Analysis of 341 Galaxies at 5 < z < 14 , , 963, 9, 10.3847/1538-4357/ad1404

    Morishita, T., Stiavelli, M., Chary, R.-R., et al. 2024, ApJ, 963, 9, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad1404

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad1404 2024

  47. [47]

    , archivePrefix = "arXiv", eprint =

    Mosleh, M., Williams, R. J., Franx, M., et al. 2012, ApJL, 756, L12, doi: 10.1088/2041-8205/756/1/L12

    work page doi:10.1088/2041-8205/756/1/l12 2012

  48. [48]

    Neufeld, D. A. 1990, ApJ, 350, 216, doi: 10.1086/168375

    work page doi:10.1086/168375 1990

  49. [49]

    A., Bouwens, R

    Oesch, P. A., Bouwens, R. J., Carollo, C. M., et al. 2010, ApJL, 709, L21, doi: 10.1088/2041-8205/709/1/L21

    work page doi:10.1088/2041-8205/709/1/l21 2010

  50. [50]

    B., & Gunn , J

    Oke, J. B., & Gunn, J. E. 1983, ApJ, 266, 713, doi: 10.1086/160817

    work page doi:10.1086/160817 1983

  51. [51]

    J., Adams, N

    Ormerod, K., Conselice, C. J., Adams, N. J., et al. 2024, MNRAS, 527, 6110, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad3597

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stad3597 2024

  52. [52]

    G., Izotov, Y

    Papaderos, P., Guseva, N. G., Izotov, Y. I., & Fricke, K. J. 2008, A&A, 491, 113, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:200810028

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361:200810028 2008

  53. [53]

    MPDAF - A Python package for the analysis of VLT/MUSE data

    Piqueras, L., Conseil, S., Shepherd, M., et al. 2017, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:1710.03554, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.1710.03554 S´ anchez Almeida, J., Morales-Luis, A. B., Mu˜ noz-Tu˜ n´ on, C., et al. 2014, ApJ, 783, 45, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/783/1/45 S´ anchez Almeida, J., Mu˜ noz-Tu˜ n´ on, C., Elmegreen, D. M.,

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.1710.03554 2017

  54. [54]

    G., & M´ endez-Abreu, J

    Elmegreen, B. G., & M´ endez-Abreu, J. 2013, ApJ, 767, 74, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/767/1/74 S´ anchez Almeida, J., Elmegreen, B. G., Mu˜ noz-Tu˜ n´ on, C., et al. 2015, ApJL, 810, L15, doi: 10.1088/2041-8205/810/2/L15

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/767/1/74 2013

  55. [55]

    C., Fontana, A., et al

    Santini, P., Ferguson, H. C., Fontana, A., et al. 2015, ApJ, 801, 97, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/801/2/97 S´ ersic, J. L. 1963, Boletin de la Asociacion Argentina de Astronomia La Plata Argentina, 6, 41

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/801/2/97 2015

  56. [56]

    Sersic, J. L. 1968, Atlas de Galaxias Australes

    1968

  57. [57]

    2019, ApJ, 871, 164, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aaf64b

    Shibuya, T., Ouchi, M., Harikane, Y., & Nakajima, K. 2019, ApJ, 871, 164, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aaf64b

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aaf64b 2019

  58. [58]

    C., Bogosavljevi´ c, M., Shapley, A

    Steidel, C. C., Bogosavljevi´ c, M., Shapley, A. E., et al. 2011, ApJ, 736, 160, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/736/2/160

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/736/2/160 2011

  59. [59]

    N., Cohen, S

    Straughn, A. N., Cohen, S. H., Ryan, R. E., et al. 2006, ApJ, 639, 724, doi: 10.1086/499576

    work page doi:10.1086/499576 2006

  60. [60]

    , keywords =

    Tacconi, L. J., Genzel, R., & Sternberg, A. 2020, ARA&A, 58, 157, doi: 10.1146/annurev-astro-082812-141034 van der Wel, A., Franx, M., van Dokkum, P. G., et al. 2014, ApJ, 788, 28, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/788/1/28

    work page doi:10.1146/annurev-astro-082812-141034 2020

  61. [61]

    2006, A&A, 460, 397, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20065554

    Verhamme, A., Schaerer, D., & Maselli, A. 2006, A&A, 460, 397, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20065554

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20065554 2006

  62. [62]

    E., Ashas, M., Illingworth, G., et al

    Whitaker, K. E., Ashas, M., Illingworth, G., et al. 2019, ApJS, 244, 16, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ab3853

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4365/ab3853 2019

  63. [63]

    White, S. D. M., & Rees, M. J. 1978, MNRAS, 183, 341, doi: 10.1093/mnras/183.3.341

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/183.3.341 1978

  64. [64]

    AAP , archivePrefix = "arXiv", eprint =

    Wisotzki, L., Bacon, R., Blaizot, J., et al. 2016, A&A, 587, A98, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201527384

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201527384 2016

  65. [65]

    2011, ApJ, 739, 62, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/739/2/62

    Zheng, Z., Cen, R., Weinberg, D., Trac, H., & Miralda-Escud´ e, J. 2011, ApJ, 739, 62, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/739/2/62

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/739/2/62 2011