Paper detail

The distribution of atomic hydrogen in EAGLE galaxies: morphologies, profiles, and HI holes

We compare the mass and internal distribution of atomic hydrogen (HI) in 2200 present-day central galaxies with M_star > 10^10 M_Sun from the 100 Mpc EAGLE Reference simulation to observational data. Atomic hydrogen fractions are corrected for self-shielding using a fitting formula from radiative transfer simulations and for the presence of molecular hydrogen using an empirical or a theoretical prescription from the literature. The resulting neutral hydrogen fractions, M_(HI+H2)/M_star, agree with observations to better than 0.1 dex for galaxies with M_star between 10^10 and 10^11 M_Sun. Our fiducial, empirical H2 model based on gas pressure results in galactic HI mass fractions, M_HI/M_star, that agree with observations from the GASS survey to better than 0.3 dex, but the alternative theoretical H2 formula leads to a negative offset in M_HI/M_star of up to 0.5 dex. Visual inspection reveals that most HI disks in simulated HI-rich galaxies are vertically disturbed, plausibly due to recent accretion events. Many galaxies (up to 80 per cent) contain spuriously large HI holes, which are likely formed as a consequence of the feedback implementation in EAGLE. The HI mass-size relation of all simulated galaxies is close to (but 16 per cent steeper than) observed, and when only galaxies without large holes in the HI disc are considered, the agreement becomes excellent (better than 0.1 dex). The presence of large HI holes also makes the radial HI surface density profiles somewhat too low in the centre, at Σ_HI > 1 M_Sun pc^-2 (by a factor of <~ 2 compared to data from the Bluedisk survey). In the outer region (Σ_HI < 1 M_Sun pc^-2), the simulated profiles agree quantitatively with observations. Scaled by HI size, the simulated profiles of HI-rich (M_HI > 10^9.8 M_Sun) and control galaxies (10^9.1 M_Sun > M_HI > 10^9.8 M_Sun) follow each other closely, as observed. (Abridged)

preprint2015arXivOpen 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.