Paper detail

The Noctua Suite of Simulations -- The Difficulty of Growing Massive Black Holes in Low-Mass Dwarf Galaxies

Aims. We study the individual and cumulative impact of stellar feedback processes on massive black hole (MBH) growth in a simulated low-mass dwarf galaxy. Methods. A suite of high-resolution radiation-hydrodynamic simulations called Noctua is performed, using the ArepoNoctua numerical framework for BHs in galaxy simulations. The chemical evolution of the gas is explicitly modelled in a time-dependent non-equilibrium way. Two types of stellar feedback are considered: individually-traced type II supernova (SNII) explosions, and radiatively transferred (on-the-fly) ionising stellar radiation (ISR) from OB stars. As part of the numerical framework, we develop and apply a novel physically-motivated model for MBH gas accretion, taking into account the angular momentum of the gas in the radiatively efficient regime, to estimate the gas accretion rate from the sub-grid accretion disc. Results. Without any stellar feedback, an initial $10^4~\mathrm{M}_\odot$ MBH is able to steadily grow over time, roughly doubling its mass after 800 Myr. Surprisingly, the growth of the MBH is more than doubled when only ISR feedback is considered, compared to the no stellar feedback run. This is due to the star formation rate (SFR) being highly suppressed (to a similar level or slightly above that when SNII feedback is considered), enabling a higher cumulative net gas inflow onto the MBH from not only the cold neutral- and molecular medium phases, but also the unstable- and warm neutral medium phases. With SNII feedback included, the gas accretion onto the MBH is episodic over time, and is suppressed by more than an order of magnitude already during the first 150 Myr. When combining SNII with ISR feedback, the growth of the MBH remains suppressed due to SNII feedback, but to a lesser extent compared to the SNII-only feedback run, due to a slightly lower SFR, and hence a reduced number of SNII events.

preprint2025arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access9 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.

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.