Neutral Hydrogen Clouds near Early-Type Dwarf Galaxies of the Local Group

A. Bouchard; C. Carignan; L. Staveley-Smith

REVIEW

Neutral Hydrogen Clouds near Early-Type Dwarf Galaxies of the Local Group

A. Bouchard, C. Carignan, L. Staveley-Smith

Astrophysics · Submitted 27 Feb 2006 · 42 references

Pith's verdict: Solid new Parkes HI observations around early-type dwarfs, but the association probabilities lean on an HVC null that is known to be clumpy.

T0 · AI review

How this review was made: An AI referee (deepseek-v4-flash) read the paper on August 28, 2026 and answered a fixed list of questions about it. T0 is the starting level every paper gets. The levels describe how deeply Pith has checked the paper, never the authors.

T0 AI review An AI read the paper and answered a fixed list of questions.
T1 Audit Automatic checks that the references and files the paper relies on exist and match.
T2 Compute The paper's code or calculations re-run with the same results.
T3 Formal statement The claims written out in a formal math language a computer can read.
T4 Proof Those claims proved, and the proof checked by computer.

How Pith checks papers →

· 3 major objections · 5 minor · Ask about this paper · The compiled record · Read the full review →

Challenge this review Comment (0) Read on arXiv ↗

Cite ▾

arXiv IDastro-ph/0602571 (version 1)

Pith IDM4CJSYN5, Pith's permanent record of this paper and its review

CitationA. Bouchard, C. Carignan, L. Staveley-Smith. "Neutral Hydrogen Clouds near Early-Type Dwarf Galaxies of the Local Group." arXiv:astro-ph/0602571 (2006). https://pith.science/paper/M4CJSYN5

Cite this reviewBibTeX for Pith's review of this paper

Claim paper

Why Pith says this

Highlight any text to comment on it.

Editor's note

read the letter

Antoine Bouchard and collaborators have done the Local Group community a genuine service. The Parkes/HIPASS data are new, the reduction is careful, and the paper gives us something we did not have before: a coherent look at the HI environment of nine early-type dwarfs, including a clean non-detection of the Blitz & Robishaw Sextans and Leo I clouds. The claim that several dSph galaxies retain neutral hydrogen at projected offsets is a real observational result, and the discussion of why ram pressure struggles to explain the largest offsets is honest and worth engaging.

The soft spot is exactly where the reader put a finger: Eq. (1). The probability of association treats HVCs as independent uniform points inside a 10-degree cylinder, and the paper itself knows HVCs are not distributed that way—Figure 4 shows phase-space structure, and the 19% sky covering fraction points to a clumpy population. If HVCs come in complexes, the effective number of independent trials is smaller than N, and the 85–99% probabilities are optimistic. The hand-picked cloud selection also means no multiple-testing correction, and the missing optical velocities for Cetus, Tucana, and Fornax leave those associations on statistical grounds alone. These are real limitations, not manufactured ones.

That said, the limitations do not sink the paper. Even if the individual probabilities are overestimated, the qualitative pattern—clouds near most dwarfs, closer than a random draw would typically produce—is based on offsets that are measured, not fitted. The authors flag most of their own caveats. The non-reproduction of the BR detections is a clean, falsifying result that should be cited. For a 2006 paper, the statistical tool is simple but not reckless; the discussion is appropriately cautious.

Who should read this? Anyone working on dwarf galaxy gas content or the HVC population. It is a useful observational anchor, and the table of clouds with masses and velocities will be mined. A serious referee should spend time on Eq. (1) and ask for a robustness test under a clustered null, but this is not a desk-reject. I would send it to review, and I would cite it for the Parkes measurements and the Sextans/Leo I non-detections.

Referee report

Significance

If the associations are real, the result is astrophysically important: it would imply that several dSph galaxies in the Local Group retain substantial HI reservoirs despite the gas being displaced from the stellar body, challenging simple ram-pressure or tidal-stripping narratives. The observational material is standard but carefully reduced, and the paper honestly describes cases where the case for association is weak (e.g., Carina, Fornax). A useful falsifiable prediction is made for Cetus: its optical velocity should lie near -280 ± 40 km/s if the clouds are associated. The main weakness is that the central statistical claim rests on Eq. (1), whose assumptions are not robustly tested; the paper itself notes that HVCs are not uniformly distributed, yet does not quantify how clustering or catalog incompleteness affects the quoted probabilities. Nevertheless, the data and the qualitative offset arguments are likely to be of lasting value.

Major objections (3)

[§4.3, Eq. (1) and Table 2] The probability calculation treats the N local HVCs as independent, uniformly distributed points within the cylinder R0 < 10 deg, |ΔV| < 100 km/s. This assumption is load-bearing for the central claim that the clouds are associated, but the paper itself states that HVCs are not uniformly distributed (see §4.3 and Figure 4, which show strong phase-space structure). HVCs are known to occur in complexes with correlated positions and velocities, so N is not the number of independent trials. With clumping, an unrelated cloud can appear near a galaxy much more often than the independent-point model predicts, so the quoted probabilities (e.g., 87.7% for Fornax, 91% for Cetus b) could be substantially overestimated. The paper does not provide any robustness test, such as bootstrap resampling of HVC positions while preserving the two-point correlation, or a comparison of the observed offsets with the distribution of nearest-HVC distances in the same search cylinder. Without such a test, the statistical basis for conclusion point 2 in §5 is not established.
[§4.3 and Table 2] The inputs to Eq. (1) — N, R1, ΔV1, R0, ΔV0 — are not listed for any cloud. Table 2 gives only the resulting probability P and the local HVC density. Since P is the quantitative support for the main association claims, the reader cannot check the calculation, assess the sensitivity to R0 and ΔV0, or identify cases where the search volume is dominated by catalog boundaries or the V_LSR ≈ 0 gap. A table or appendix with these per-cloud inputs should be added. This is not a cosmetic issue: without the inputs, the central probabilities are not reproducible.
[§3 and §4.3] The candidate clouds were selected by visual inspection of maps around each optical center (see §3 and Figure 1), and Eq. (1) is evaluated for the selected cloud(s), not for the nearest cloud in a blind search. This introduces a selection bias because the chosen cloud is by construction among the closest features to the galaxy. No multiple-testing correction is applied for the fact that several clouds are examined per galaxy (e.g., Cetus a, b, c; Carina a, b, c; LGS3 a, b, c). The statistical test should either adopt a blind nearest-cloud statistic or explicitly account for the number of independent trials. As written, the per-cloud probabilities in Table 2 are not independent evidence for the global claim that early-type dwarfs retain HI.

Minor objections (5)

[Abstract and throughout] The name 'Tucana' is misspelled as 'Tucanna' in the abstract; please correct.
[§3.5] There is a typo: 'One one hand' should read 'On the one hand'.
[Table 2] The column header 'L' is not defined in the table caption or in the text; please specify its meaning (presumably luminosity) and units.
[§4.3, first paragraph] The sentence 'the gap near V_LSR = 0 km/s comes from the limits imposed on the catalog' would benefit from a brief explanation of why the catalog has that gap, since it is relevant to the discussion of Fornax and the velocity window ΔV0.
[§3.3] The reasoning for excluding the Magellanic Stream interpretation for the Tucana cloud is stated too briefly; please explain more concretely why the detected feature is unlikely to be part of the Stream (e.g., its compactness or velocity structure).

How Pith checks papers → · Full audit of this paper →

The paper

The paper claims

Most Local Group dwarf spheroids still hold neutral hydrogen, just pushed aside from their stars.

The reading

This paper reports a systematic 21-centimetre search for neutral hydrogen around nine early-type dwarf galaxies of the Local Group and argues that most of them are not gas-free. The central claim is that the H I clouds seen in projection near Sculptor, Cetus, Tucana, LGS3, Fornax and others are physically associated with those dwarfs, even though the gas is often displaced from the optical body. If true, gas removal from dwarf spheroidals is less complete than standard stripping pictures imply, and the clouds could supply the fuel that later star-formation episodes require. The paper also overturns two claimed detections, Sextans and Leo I, narrowing the list of genuinely gas-free dwarfs.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the Parkes 21-cm data cube and the statistical test built on it: equation (1), $P = [1 - (R_1/R_0)^2 (2\Delta V_1/\Delta V_0)]^N$, computes the chance that $N$ uniformly distributed HVCs within $R_0 < 10^\circ$ and $\Delta V_0 = 100$ km s$^{-1}$ would fall as close to a dwarf as the observed cloud. The same radio data define each cloud's position, velocity, flux, and hence H I mass. What the machinery does is convert a cloud's apparent proximity to a galaxy into a numerical association probability that can be compared across all targets, and that probability is the paper's main quantitative claim.

Extended reading notes

Core claim

Using Parkes/HIPASS and narrowband follow-up observations, the paper finds H I clouds close in projection to most of its target dwarfs and computes a local probability that each cloud is an unrelated high-velocity cloud (HVC, an isolated hydrogen cloud not following galactic rotation). For 11 of 16 clouds the probability of physical association exceeds 85%, with Sculptor at 99.7% and most Carina clouds below chance. The inferred H I masses are small, roughly $10^5$ to $2\times10^6\,M_\odot$. The paper argues that the measured offsets are smaller than a random HVC distribution would produce, and that neither ram pressure nor tidal stripping easily accounts for the displaced gas, especially in isolated systems such as Cetus, Tucana, and LGS3.

Load-bearing premise

Everything rests on equation (1)'s premise that HVCs are uniformly and independently scattered within a 10-degree, 100 km s$^{-1}$ search box; if HVCs are clumped on those scales or the catalog is incomplete, the quoted 85--99% association probabilities could be optimistic.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

The list of Local Group dwarfs with no detected H I shrinks to nine, and classical gas-free dSphs such as Sculptor and Fornax would need to be seen as systems that retain displaced gas.
Star-formation histories with late episodes become easier to understand: the displaced clouds provide a reservoir that can fall back and ignite new star formation.
If ram pressure and tides fail to explain the offsets, internal feedback such as winds and supernovae, or a different gas-removal history, must be doing the work.
Projection studies alone cannot settle association; each claimed cloud needs a stellar radial velocity or a proper-motion measurement to confirm that it moves with the dwarf.
The paper's local-HVC-density analysis implies that the region around Antlia is unusually clean, making that dwarf a control case for testing stripping models.

Reading between the lines

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

A testable extension follows: high-resolution synthesis observations of the Sculptor or Fornax clouds should show cometary or clumpy structure aligned with the dwarf's motion if the clouds are bound, and no such alignment if they are unrelated HVCs.
The same association logic could be applied to the Magellanic Stream neighbourhood, where HVC counts are high and chance projection is the main source of confusion.
If the clouds are truly attached to the dwarfs, their small masses imply the dwarfs' dark-matter halos are doing the binding; measuring the clouds' internal velocity widths would then put a lower bound on halo mass.
The paper leaves open whether the displaced gas is on its way out forever or on a long orbit back to the galaxy; spectroscopic abundance measurements of the clouds could distinguish recycled gas from pristine infall.

Original abstract

Parkes neutral hydrogen 21 cm line (HI) observations of the surroundings of 9 early-type Local Group dwarfs are presented. We detected numerous HI clouds in the general direction of those dwarfs and these clouds are often offset from the optical center of the galaxies. Although all the observed dwarfs, except Antlia, occupy phase-space regions where the High-Velocity Cloud (HVC) density is well above average, the measured offsets are smaller than one would expect from a fully random cloud distribution. Possible association is detected for 11 of the 16 investigated clouds, while, for two galaxies, Sextans and Leo I, no HI was detected. The galaxies where HI clouds were found not to coincide with the optical, yet have a significant probability of being associated are: Sculptor dSph, Tucanna, LGS3, Cetus, and Fornax. If the clouds are indeed associated, these galaxies have HI masses of $M_{HI} = 2\times10^5 M_{\odot}$, $M_{HI} = 2\times10^6 M_{\odot}$, $M_{HI} = 7\times10^5 M_{\odot}$, $M_{HI} = 7\times10^5 M_{\odot}$, and $M_{HI} = 1\times10^5 M_{\odot}$, respectively. However, neither ram pressure nor tidal stripping can easily explain the offsets. In some cases, large offsets are found where ram pressure should be the least effective.

The compiled record

The paper's own sentences, arranged, kept beside the review and separate from it. Each label is drawn from a closed vocabulary; the number beside it is the probability the classifier gave that label. Numbers in the tables are the authors', checked by code. No sentence in this record was written by a model.

Compiled by classifier-1.13.0 via TypeSafe API, question bank abstract-p1-20260923, 2026-09-23: 1 request, 6,526 input tokens.

What the abstract itself states, as probabilities: claims first 0.03 · states limitation 0.87 · human participants 0.01 · controlled comparison 0.35 · randomized assignment 0.03 · states quantitative result 0.98 · compares with prior results 0.67 · mentions code or data availability 0.02.

The abstract, sentence by sentence

arXiv listing abstract v1. Results and the main claim are underlined; show every role.

Parkes neutral hydrogen 21 cm line (HI) observations of the surroundings of 9 early-type Local Group dwarfs are presented. We detected numerous HI clouds in the general direction of those dwarfs and these clouds are often offset from the optical center of the galaxies. Although all the observed dwarfs, except Antlia, occupy phase-space regions where the High-Velocity Cloud (HVC) density is well above average, the measured offsets are smaller than one would expect from a fully random cloud distribution. Possible association is detected for 11 of the 16 investigated clouds, while, for two galaxies, Sextans and Leo I, no HI was detected. The galaxies where HI clouds were found not to coincide with the optical, yet have a significant probability of being associated are: Sculptor dSph, Tucanna, LGS3, Cetus, and Fornax. If the clouds are indeed associated, these galaxies have HI masses of $M_{HI} = 2\times10^5 M_{\odot}$, $M_{HI} = 2\times10^6 M_{\odot}$, $M_{HI} = 7\times10^5 M_{\odot}$, $M_{HI} = 7\times10^5 M_{\odot}$, and $M_{HI} = 1\times10^5 M_{\odot}$, respectively. However, neither ram pressure nor tidal stripping can easily explain the offsets. In some cases, large offsets are found where ram pressure should be the least effective.

background contribution method result interpretation main claim

What the classifier reports for each sentence. The number is the probability it gave the label.
#	sentence	role	the authors' own work	states the main conclusion	strength
s0	Parkes neutral hydrogen 21 cm line (HI) observations of the surroundings of 9 early-type Local Group dwarfs are presented.	contribution 0.59	0.95	0.03	asserted 0.99
s1	We detected numerous HI clouds in the general direction of those dwarfs and these clouds are often offset from the optical center of the galaxies.	result 1.00	0.96	0.12	asserted 1.00
s2	Although all the observed dwarfs, except Antlia, occupy phase-space regions where the High-Velocity Cloud (HVC) density is well above average, the measured offsets are smaller than one would expect from a fully random cloud distribution.	result 0.89	0.87	0.20	asserted 0.99
s3	Possible association is detected for 11 of the 16 investigated clouds, while, for two galaxies, Sextans and Leo I, no HI was detected.	result 1.00	0.94	0.09	hedged possibility 0.79
s4	The galaxies where HI clouds were found not to coincide with the optical, yet have a significant probability of being associated are: Sculptor dSph, Tucanna, LGS3, Cetus, and Fornax.	result 1.00	0.93	0.15	hedged possibility 0.58
s5	If the clouds are indeed associated, these galaxies have HI masses of $M_{HI} = 2\times10^5 M_{\odot}$, $M_{HI} = 2\times10^6 M_{\odot}$, $M_{HI} = 7\times10^5 M_{\odot}$, $M_{HI} = 7\times10^5 M_{\odot}$, and $M_{HI} = 1\times10^5 M_{\odot}$, respectively.	result 1.00	0.88	0.09	hedged possibility 0.73
s6	However, neither ram pressure nor tidal stripping can easily explain the offsets.	interpretation 0.92	0.63	0.22	asserted 0.69
s7	In some cases, large offsets are found where ram pressure should be the least effective.	result 0.68	0.92	0.10	asserted 0.93

What kind of paper the classifier reports this is: empirical study 1.00 · evidence from observation or experiment 0.99.

What was examined, and what was not

sources read

arXiv listing abstract v1

not examined

full text
figures and tables
references and citing sentences
relations to other papers

levels run

P abstract

not run

S sections
T body sentences
C citations
R cross-paper relations

Every quoted sentence on this record is the authors'. Every label is from Pith's closed vocabulary, with the probability shown beside it. Every number in the measurements table is the authors', checked by code. Record as JSON

Figures

**Figure 1.** — Velocity integrated maps for a large region surrounding dSph

**Figure 2.** — Velocity-integrated Hi line emission map of the Fornax dwarf region after subtraction of the MW emission. The cross marks the position of the optical center of the dwarf. badly determined. The best example of this is the negative feature seen between -30 and 10 km s−1 . This is the result of a very large Hi filament covering the whole south west quadrant of the cube that our subtraction technique does not adequately remove. Nevertheless, this technique enables us to highlight this kinematically and structurally distinct cloud projected well inside the 71′ tidal radius (Irwin &…

**Figure 3.** — The Hi spectra of the feature highlighted in

**Figure 4.** — The distribution of velocities of LG objects as a function of Milk

Figures reproduced from arXiv:astro-ph/0602571 by the authors.

References

Works cited (42)

[1]

Barnes, D. G. & de Blok, W. J. G. 2001, AJ, 122, 825

View on Pith 2001
[2]

Barnes, D. G. et al. 2001, MNRAS, 322, 486

View on Pith 2001
[3]

Blitz, L. & Robishaw, T. 2000, ApJ, 541, 675

View on Pith 2000
[4]

Bouchard, A., Carignan, C., & Mashchenko, S. 2003, AJ, 126, 1295

View on Pith 2003
[5]

Bouchard, A., Jerjen, H., Da Costa, G. S., & Ott, J. 2005, AJ, 130, 2058 Br¨ uns, et al. 2005, A&A, 432, 45 Cˆ ot´ e, P., Mateo, M., Sargent, W. L. W., & Olszewski, E. W. 2000, Ap J, 537, L91

View on Pith 2005
[6]

Carignan, C., Beaulieu, S., Cˆ ot´ e, S. ., Demers, S., & Mateo, M. 1998 , AJ, 116, 1690

View on Pith 1998
[7]

Carignan, C., Demers, S., & Cote, S. 1991, ApJ, 381, L13

View on Pith 1991
[8]

Coleman, M. G., Da Costa, G. S., Bland-Hawthorn, J., & Freeman, K. C . 2005, AJ, 129, 1443

View on Pith 2005
[9]

Coleman, M. G., Da Costa, G. S., & Bland-Hawthorn, J. 2005, AJ, 130 , 1065 D’Ercole, A. & Brighenti, F. 1999, MNRAS, 309, 941

View on Pith 2005
[10]

Gallart, C., Mart ´ ınez-Delgado, D., G´ omez-Flechoso, M. A., & Mateo , M. 2001, AJ, 121, 2572

View on Pith 2001
[11]

Grebel, E. K. 1998, Highlights in Astronomy, 11, 125 —. 2001, Astrophysics and Space Science Supplement, 277, 231

View on Pith 1998
[12]

Harbeck, D., Gallagher, J. S., & Grebel, E. K. 2004, AJ, 127, 2711

View on Pith 2004
[13]

Hensler, G., Theis, C., & Gallagher, J. S. 2004, A&A, 426, 25

View on Pith 2004
[14]

Hulsbosch, A. N. M. & Wakker, B. P. 1988, A&AS, 75, 191

View on Pith 1988
[15]

Hurley-Keller, D., Mateo, M., & Grebel, E. K. 1999, ApJ, 523, L25

View on Pith 1999
[16]

Hurley-Keller, D., Mateo, M., & Nemec, J. 1998, AJ, 115, 1840

View on Pith 1998
[17]

Irwin, M. & Hatzidimitriou, D. 1995, MNRAS, 277, 1354

View on Pith 1995
[18]

Johnston, K. V., Sigurdsson, S., & Hernquist, L. 1999, MNRAS, 302 , 771 – 20 –

View on Pith 1999
[19]

Larson, R. B. 1974, MNRAS, 169, 229

View on Pith 1974
[20]

Lo, K. Y., Sargent, W. L. W., & Young, K. 1993, AJ, 106, 507

View on Pith 1993
[21]

Geisler, D. 2000, AJ, 119, 760 Mart ´ ınez-Delgado, D., Gallart, C., & Aparicio, A. 1999, AJ, 118, 862 Mart ´ ınez-Delgado, D., Alonso-Garc ´ ıa, J., Aparicio, A., & G´ omez-Flechoso, M. A. 2001, ApJ, 549, L63

View on Pith 2000
[22]

Mateo, M., Olszewski, E. W., & Morrison, H. L. 1998, ApJ, 508, L55

View on Pith 1998
[23]

Mateo, M. L. 1998, ARA&A, 36, 435

View on Pith 1998
[24]

Matzner, C. D. & McKee, C. F. 2000, ApJ, 545, 364

View on Pith 2000
[25]

Moore, B., Ghigna, S., Governato, F., Lake, G., Quinn, T., Stadel, J., & Tozzi, P. 1999, ApJ, 524, L19

View on Pith 1999
[26]

Mould, J. R., Bothun, G. D., Hall, P. J., Staveley-Smith, L., & Wright, A. E. 1990, ApJ, 362, L55

View on Pith 1990
[27]

Murali, C. 2000, ApJ, 529, L81

View on Pith 2000
[28]

Navarro, J. F., Frenk, C. S., & White, S. D. M. 1996, ApJ, 462, 563+

View on Pith 1996
[29]

Oosterloo, T., Da Costa, G. S., & Staveley-Smith, L. 1996, AJ, 112, 1969

View on Pith 1996
[30]

Palma, C., Majewski, S. R., Siegel, M. H., Patterson, R. J., Ostheimer, J. C., & Link, R. 2003, AJ, 125, 1352

View on Pith 2003
[31]

Putman, M. E. et al. 2002, AJ, 123, 873

View on Pith 2002
[32]

Sarajedini, A., et al. 2002, ApJ, 567, 915

View on Pith 2002
[33]

Schweitzer, A. E. & Cudworth, K. M. 1996, in American Astronomica l Society Meeting, Vol. 188, 0901

View on Pith 1996
[34]

Schweitzer, A. E., Cudworth, K. M., & Majewski, S. R. 1997, in ASP Co nf. Ser. 127: Proper Motions and Galactic Astronomy, 103

View on Pith 1997
[35]

Schweitzer, A. E., Cudworth, K. M., Majewski, S. R., & Suntzeﬀ, N. B . 1995, AJ, 110, 2747 – 21 –

View on Pith 1995
[36]

St-Germain, J., Carignan, C., Cˆ ote, S. ., & Oosterloo, T. 1999, AJ, 118, 1235

View on Pith 1999
[37]

Staveley-Smith, L. & et al. 2000, in ASP Conf. Ser. 217: Imaging at R adio through Submil- limeter Wavelengths, 50

View on Pith 2000
[38]

Stetson, P. B. 1980, AJ, 85, 387

View on Pith 1980
[39]

Tolstoy, E. & Irwin, M. 2000, MNRAS, 318, 1241

View on Pith 2000
[40]

Whiting, A. B., Hau, G. K. T., & Irwin, M. 1999, AJ, 118, 2767

View on Pith 1999
[41]

Young, L. M. & Lo, K. Y. 1997, ApJ, 476, 127

View on Pith 1997
[42]

Zaritsky, D. 1999, in ASP Conf. Ser. 165: The Third Stromlo Sympos ium: The Galactic Halo, 34 This preprint was prepared with the AAS L ATEX macros v5.2. – 22 – Table 2: Properties of Local Group H i clouds Cloud L V Distance MHI V HI ⊙ P a HVC density (×106 L⊙) (kpc) ( ×106 M⊙) (km s −1) % (deg 2 km s −1)−1 Sculptor a 2.15 79 ±4 0.041 ±0.002 100 ±1 99.7 ...

View on Pith 1999

How the literature uses it

2 arXiv papers cite this in 4 sentences

Each citing sentence is taken from the citing paper's LaTeX source and typed by Pith's classifier. A label appears at probability 0.8 or more (0.95 for support), a contest at 0.7 or more; the quoted words are the citing authors'. How each label was checked · JSON

Discussion

Disagree with the review, or know something it missed? Leave a comment, highlight any passage above to comment on it, or challenge this review formally.

[1] [1]

Barnes, D. G. & de Blok, W. J. G. 2001, AJ, 122, 825

View on Pith 2001

[2] [2]

Barnes, D. G. et al. 2001, MNRAS, 322, 486

View on Pith 2001

[3] [3]

Blitz, L. & Robishaw, T. 2000, ApJ, 541, 675

View on Pith 2000

[4] [4]

Bouchard, A., Carignan, C., & Mashchenko, S. 2003, AJ, 126, 1295

View on Pith 2003

[5] [5]

Bouchard, A., Jerjen, H., Da Costa, G. S., & Ott, J. 2005, AJ, 130, 2058 Br¨ uns, et al. 2005, A&A, 432, 45 Cˆ ot´ e, P., Mateo, M., Sargent, W. L. W., & Olszewski, E. W. 2000, Ap J, 537, L91

View on Pith 2005

[6] [6]

Carignan, C., Beaulieu, S., Cˆ ot´ e, S. ., Demers, S., & Mateo, M. 1998 , AJ, 116, 1690

View on Pith 1998

[7] [7]

Carignan, C., Demers, S., & Cote, S. 1991, ApJ, 381, L13

View on Pith 1991

[8] [8]

Coleman, M. G., Da Costa, G. S., Bland-Hawthorn, J., & Freeman, K. C . 2005, AJ, 129, 1443

View on Pith 2005

[9] [9]

Coleman, M. G., Da Costa, G. S., & Bland-Hawthorn, J. 2005, AJ, 130 , 1065 D’Ercole, A. & Brighenti, F. 1999, MNRAS, 309, 941

View on Pith 2005

[10] [10]

Gallart, C., Mart ´ ınez-Delgado, D., G´ omez-Flechoso, M. A., & Mateo , M. 2001, AJ, 121, 2572

View on Pith 2001

[11] [11]

Grebel, E. K. 1998, Highlights in Astronomy, 11, 125 —. 2001, Astrophysics and Space Science Supplement, 277, 231

View on Pith 1998

[12] [12]

Harbeck, D., Gallagher, J. S., & Grebel, E. K. 2004, AJ, 127, 2711

View on Pith 2004

[13] [13]

Hensler, G., Theis, C., & Gallagher, J. S. 2004, A&A, 426, 25

View on Pith 2004

[14] [14]

Hulsbosch, A. N. M. & Wakker, B. P. 1988, A&AS, 75, 191

View on Pith 1988

[15] [15]

Hurley-Keller, D., Mateo, M., & Grebel, E. K. 1999, ApJ, 523, L25

View on Pith 1999

[16] [16]

Hurley-Keller, D., Mateo, M., & Nemec, J. 1998, AJ, 115, 1840

View on Pith 1998

[17] [17]

Irwin, M. & Hatzidimitriou, D. 1995, MNRAS, 277, 1354

View on Pith 1995

[18] [18]

Johnston, K. V., Sigurdsson, S., & Hernquist, L. 1999, MNRAS, 302 , 771 – 20 –

View on Pith 1999

[19] [19]

Larson, R. B. 1974, MNRAS, 169, 229

View on Pith 1974

[20] [20]

Lo, K. Y., Sargent, W. L. W., & Young, K. 1993, AJ, 106, 507

View on Pith 1993

[21] [21]

Geisler, D. 2000, AJ, 119, 760 Mart ´ ınez-Delgado, D., Gallart, C., & Aparicio, A. 1999, AJ, 118, 862 Mart ´ ınez-Delgado, D., Alonso-Garc ´ ıa, J., Aparicio, A., & G´ omez-Flechoso, M. A. 2001, ApJ, 549, L63

View on Pith 2000

[22] [22]

Mateo, M., Olszewski, E. W., & Morrison, H. L. 1998, ApJ, 508, L55

View on Pith 1998

[23] [23]

Mateo, M. L. 1998, ARA&A, 36, 435

View on Pith 1998

[24] [24]

Matzner, C. D. & McKee, C. F. 2000, ApJ, 545, 364

View on Pith 2000

[25] [25]

Moore, B., Ghigna, S., Governato, F., Lake, G., Quinn, T., Stadel, J., & Tozzi, P. 1999, ApJ, 524, L19

View on Pith 1999

[26] [26]

Mould, J. R., Bothun, G. D., Hall, P. J., Staveley-Smith, L., & Wright, A. E. 1990, ApJ, 362, L55

View on Pith 1990

[27] [27]

Murali, C. 2000, ApJ, 529, L81

View on Pith 2000

[28] [28]

Navarro, J. F., Frenk, C. S., & White, S. D. M. 1996, ApJ, 462, 563+

View on Pith 1996

[29] [29]

Oosterloo, T., Da Costa, G. S., & Staveley-Smith, L. 1996, AJ, 112, 1969

View on Pith 1996

[30] [30]

Palma, C., Majewski, S. R., Siegel, M. H., Patterson, R. J., Ostheimer, J. C., & Link, R. 2003, AJ, 125, 1352

View on Pith 2003

[31] [31]

Putman, M. E. et al. 2002, AJ, 123, 873

View on Pith 2002

[32] [32]

Sarajedini, A., et al. 2002, ApJ, 567, 915

View on Pith 2002

[33] [33]

Schweitzer, A. E. & Cudworth, K. M. 1996, in American Astronomica l Society Meeting, Vol. 188, 0901

View on Pith 1996

[34] [34]

Schweitzer, A. E., Cudworth, K. M., & Majewski, S. R. 1997, in ASP Co nf. Ser. 127: Proper Motions and Galactic Astronomy, 103

View on Pith 1997

[35] [35]

Schweitzer, A. E., Cudworth, K. M., Majewski, S. R., & Suntzeﬀ, N. B . 1995, AJ, 110, 2747 – 21 –

View on Pith 1995

[36] [36]

St-Germain, J., Carignan, C., Cˆ ote, S. ., & Oosterloo, T. 1999, AJ, 118, 1235

View on Pith 1999

[37] [37]

Staveley-Smith, L. & et al. 2000, in ASP Conf. Ser. 217: Imaging at R adio through Submil- limeter Wavelengths, 50

View on Pith 2000

[38] [38]

Stetson, P. B. 1980, AJ, 85, 387

View on Pith 1980

[39] [39]

Tolstoy, E. & Irwin, M. 2000, MNRAS, 318, 1241

View on Pith 2000

[40] [40]

Whiting, A. B., Hau, G. K. T., & Irwin, M. 1999, AJ, 118, 2767

View on Pith 1999

[41] [41]

Young, L. M. & Lo, K. Y. 1997, ApJ, 476, 127

View on Pith 1997

[42] [42]

Zaritsky, D. 1999, in ASP Conf. Ser. 165: The Third Stromlo Sympos ium: The Galactic Halo, 34 This preprint was prepared with the AAS L ATEX macros v5.2. – 22 – Table 2: Properties of Local Group H i clouds Cloud L V Distance MHI V HI ⊙ P a HVC density (×106 L⊙) (kpc) ( ×106 M⊙) (km s −1) % (deg 2 km s −1)−1 Sculptor a 2.15 79 ±4 0.041 ±0.002 100 ±1 99.7 ...

View on Pith 1999