Paper detail

Evidence for the connection between star formation rate and evolutionary phases of quasars

Both theory and observations suggest that outflows driven by an active central supermassive black hole (SMBH) has a feedback effect on shaping the global properties of the host galaxy. However, whether feedback from the outflow is effective, and if so, whether it is positive or negative, has long been controversial. Here, using the latest catalog from the Sloan Digital Sky Survey (SDSS), we use the flux ratio of the [O II] to [Ne V] emission lines as a proxy to compare the star formation rate (SFR) in the hosts of quasars with different types of broad absorption lines (BALs): low-ionization (Lo)BAL, high-ionization (Hi)BAL, and non-BAL. We find that SFR decreases from LoBAL to HiBAL quasars, and then increases from HiBAL to non-BAL quasars. Assuming that the sequence of LoBAL to HiBAL to non-BAL represents evolution, our results are consistent with a quenching and subsequent rebound of star formation in quasar host galaxies. This phenomenon can be explained that the SFR is suppressed by the outflow, which then rebounds once the outflow disappears as the quasars evolve from HiBALs to non-BALs. Our result suggests that the quasar outflow has a negative global feedback on galaxy evolution.

preprint2021arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.