4.7 Article

OBSERVATIONAL LIMITS ON TYPE 1 ACTIVE GALACTIC NUCLEUS ACCRETION RATE IN COSMOS

Journal

ASTROPHYSICAL JOURNAL
Volume 700, Issue 1, Pages 49-55

Publisher

IOP PUBLISHING LTD
DOI: 10.1088/0004-637X/700/1/49

Keywords

galaxies: active; quasars: emission lines; quasars: general

Funding

  1. NSF ADP [NNX08AJ28G]
  2. ARCS
  3. NASA through Hubble Fellowship [HF-01220.01]
  4. Space Telescope Science Institute
  5. Association of Universities for Research in Astronomy, Inc., for NASA [NAS 5-26555]
  6. Division Of Astronomical Sciences
  7. Direct For Mathematical & Physical Scien [0908044] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

We present black hole masses and accretion rates for 182 Type 1 active galactic nuclei (AGNs) in COSMOS. We estimate masses using the scaling relations for the broad H beta, Mg II, and C IV emission lines in the redshift ranges 0.16 < z < 0.88, 1 < z < 2.4, and 2.7 < z < 4.9. We estimate the accretion rate using an Eddington ratio L-I/L-Edd estimated from optical and X-ray data. We find that very few Type 1 AGNs accrete below L-I/L-Edd similar to 0.01, despite simulations of synthetic spectra which show that the survey is sensitive to such Type 1 AGNs. At lower accretion rates the broad-line region may become obscured, diluted, or nonexistent. We find evidence that Type 1 AGNs at higher accretion rates have higher optical luminosities, as more of their emission comes from the cool (optical) accretion disk with respect to shorter wavelengths. We measure a larger range in accretion rate than previous works, suggesting that COSMOS is more efficient at finding low accretion rate Type 1 AGNs. However, the measured range in accretion rate is still comparable to the intrinsic scatter from the scaling relations, suggesting that Type 1 AGNs accrete at a narrow range of Eddington ratio, with L-I/L-Edd similar to 0.1.

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