Paper detail

No significant evolution of relations between Black hole mass and Galaxy total stellar mass up to z~2.5

We investigate the cosmic evolution of the ratio between black hole mass (MBH) and host galaxy total stellar mass (Mstellar) out to z~2.5 for a sample of 100 X-ray-selected moderate-luminosity, broad-line active galactic nuclei (AGNs) in the Chandra-COSMOS Legacy Survey. By taking advantage of the deep multi-wavelength photometry and spectroscopy in the COSMOS field, we measure in a uniform way the galaxy total stellar mass using a SED decomposition technique and the black hole mass based on broad emission line measurements and single-epoch virial estimates. Our sample of AGN host galaxies has total stellar masses of 10^10-12Msun, and black hole masses of 10^7.0-9.5Msun. Combining our sample with the relatively bright AGN samples from the literature, we find no significant evolution of the MBH-Mstellar relation with black hole-to-host total stellar mass ratio of MBH/Mstellar~0.3% at all redshifts probed. We conclude that the average black hole-to-host stellar mass ratio appears to be consistent with the local value within the uncertainties, suggesting a lack of evolution of the MBH-Mstellar relation up to z~2.5.

preprint2019arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access7 authors1 topic

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 map preview

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.