Paper detail

Investigating evidence for different black hole accretion modes since redshift z~1

Chandra data in the COSMOS, AEGIS-XD and 4Ms CDFS are combined with optical/near-IR photometry to determine the rest-frame U-V vs V-J colours of X-ray AGN hosts at mean redshifts 0.40 and 0.85. This combination of colours (UVJ) provides an efficient means of separating quiescent from star-forming, including dust reddened, galaxies. Morphological information emphasises differences between AGN split by their UVJ colours. AGN in quiescent galaxies are dominated by spheroids, while star-forming hosts are split between bulges and disks. The UVJ diagram of AGN hosts is then used to set limits on the accretion density associated with evolved and star-forming systems. Most of the black hole growth since z~1 is associated with star-forming hosts. Nevertheless, ~15-20% of the X-ray luminosity density since z~1, is taking place in the quiescent region of the UVJ diagram. For the z~0.40 subsample, there is tentative evidence (2sigma significance), that AGN split by their UVJ colours differ in Eddington ratio. AGN in star-forming hosts dominate at high Eddington ratios, while AGN in quiescent hosts become increasingly important as a fraction of the total population toward low Eddington ratios. At higher redshift, z~0.8, such differences are significant at the 2sigma level only at Eddington ratios >1e-3. These findings are consistent with scenarios in which diverse accretion modes are responsible for the build-up of SMBHs at the centres of galaxies. We compare our results with the GALFORM semi-analytic model, which postulates two black hole fuelling modes, the first linked to star-formation and the second occuring in passive galaxies. GALFORM predicts a larger fraction of black hole growth in quiescent galaxies at z<1, compared to the data. Relaxing the strong assumption of the model that passive AGN hosts have zero star-formation rate could reconcile this disagreement.

preprint2014arXivOpen 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.

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.