4.7 Article

High-redshift quasars host galaxies: is there a stellar mass crisis?

Journal

MONTHLY NOTICES OF THE ROYAL ASTRONOMICAL SOCIETY
Volume 444, Issue 3, Pages 2442-2455

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/mnras/stu1613

Keywords

dust, extinction; galaxies: evolution; galaxies: high-redshift; galaxies: ISM-quasars: general; submillimetre: galaxies

Funding

  1. Netherlands Organization for Scientific Research (NWO), VENI [639.041.233]
  2. European Research Council under the European Unionas Seventh Framework Programme (FP)/ERC [306476]
  3. National Science Foundation [NSF PHY11-25915]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

We investigate the evolutionary properties of a sample of quasars (QSOs) at 5 < z < 6.4 using the semi-analytical hierarchical model GAMETE/QSODUST. We find that the observed properties of these QSOs are well reproduced by a common formation scenario in which stars form according to a standard initial mass function, via quiescent star formation and efficient merger-driven bursts, while the central black hole (BH) grows via gas accretion and BH-BH mergers. Eventually, a strong active galactic nuclei-drivenwind starts to clear up the interstellar medium of dust and gas, damping the star formation and un-obscuring the line of sight towards the QSO. In this scenario, all the QSOs hosts have final stellar masses in the range (4-6) x 10(11) M-circle dot, a factor of 3-30 larger than the upper limits allowed by the observations. We discuss alternative scenarios to alleviate this apparent tension: the most likely explanation resides in the large uncertainties that still affect dynamical mass measurements in these high-z galaxies. In addition, during the transition between the starburst-dominated and the active QSO phase, we predict that similar to 40 per cent of the progenitor galaxies can be classified as Submillimetre Galaxies, although their number rapidly decreases with redshift.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available