Paper detail

No strong dependence of Lyman continuum leakage on physical properties of star-forming galaxies at $\mathbf{3.1 \lesssim z \lesssim 3.5}$

We present Lyman continuum (LyC) radiation escape fraction $f_{\rm{esc}}$ measurements for 183 spectroscopically confirmed star-forming galaxies in the redshift range $3.11 < z < 3.53$ in the \textit{Chandra} Deep Field South. We use ground-based imaging to measure $f_{\rm{esc}}$, and use ground- and space-based photometry to derive galaxy physical properties using spectral energy distribution (SED) fitting. We additionally derive [O III]+H$β$ equivalent widths (that fall in the observed K band) by including nebular emission in the SED fitting. After removing foreground contaminants, we report the discovery of 11 new candidate LyC leakers, with absolute LyC escape fractions, $f_{\rm{esc}}$ in the range $0.14-0.85$. From non-detections, we place $1σ$ upper limits of $f_{\rm{esc}}<0.12$, where the Lyman-break selected galaxies have $f_{\rm{esc}} < 0.11$ and `blindly' discovered galaxies with no prior photometric selection have $f_{\rm{esc}}<0.13$. We find a slightly higher $1σ$ limit of $f_{\rm{esc}}<0.20$ for extreme emission line galaxies with rest-frame [O III]+H$β$ equivalent widths $>300$A. For candidate LyC leakers, we find a weak negative correlation between $f_{\rm{esc}}$ and galaxy stellar masses, no correlation between $f_{\rm{esc}}$ specific star-formation rates (sSFRs) and a positive correlation between $f_{\rm{esc}}$ and EW$_0$([O III]+H$β$). The weak/no correlations between stellar mass and sSFRs may be explained by misaligned viewing angles and/or non-coincident timescales of starburst activity and periods of high $f_{\rm{esc}}$. Alternatively, escaping radiation may predominantly occur in highly localised star-forming regions, or $f_{\rm{esc}}$ measurements may be impacted by stochasticity of the intervening neutral medium, obscuring any global trends with galaxy properties. These hypotheses have important consequences for models of reionisation.

preprint2022arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access18 authors2 topics

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 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.