4.7 Article

EVIDENCE FOR WIDE-SPREAD ACTIVE GALACTIC NUCLEUS- DRIVEN OUTFLOWS IN THE MOST MASSIVE z ∼ 1-2 STAR-FORMING GALAXIES

期刊

ASTROPHYSICAL JOURNAL
卷 796, 期 1, 页码 -

出版社

IOP PUBLISHING LTD
DOI: 10.1088/0004-637X/796/1/7

关键词

galaxies: evolution; galaxies: high-redshift; galaxies: kinematics and dynamics; infrared: galaxies

资金

  1. Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft [387/1-1]
  2. Science and Technology Facilities Council [ST/I001573/1, ST/F007051/1, ST/L00075X/1] Funding Source: researchfish
  3. STFC [ST/L00075X/1, ST/I001573/1, ST/F007051/1] Funding Source: UKRI

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In this paper, we follow up on our previous detection of nuclear ionized outflows in the most massive (log(M-*/M-circle dot) >= 10.9) z similar to 1-3 star-forming galaxies by increasing the sample size by a factor of six (to 44 galaxies above log(M-*/M-circle dot) >= 10.9) from a combination of the SINS/zC-SINF, LUCI, GNIRS, and KMOS(3D)spectroscopic surveys. We find a fairly sharp onset of the incidence of broad nuclear emission (FWHM in the H alpha, [NII], and [SII] lines similar to 450-5300 km s(-1)), with large [NII]/H alpha ratios, above log(M-*/M-circle dot) similar to 10.9, with about two-thirds of the galaxies in this mass range exhibiting this component. Broad nuclear components near and above the Schechter mass are similarly prevalent above and below the main sequence of star-forming galaxies, and at z similar to 1 and similar to 2. The line ratios of the nuclear component are fit by excitation from active galactic nuclei (AGNs), or by a combination of shocks and photoionization. The incidence of the most massive galaxies with broad nuclear components is at least as large as that of AGNs identified by X-ray, optical, infrared, or radio indicators. The mass loading of the nuclear outflows is near unity. Our findings provide compelling evidence for powerful, high-duty cycle, AGN-driven outflows near the Schechter mass, and acting across the peak of cosmic galaxy formation.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据