Paper detail

The Sloan Digital Sky Survey Reverberation Mapping Project: The Black Hole Mass$-$Stellar Mass Relations at $0.2\lesssim z\lesssim 0.8$

We measure the correlation between black-hole mass $M_{\rm BH}$ and host stellar mass $M_*$ for a sample of 38 broad-line quasars at $0.2\lesssim z\lesssim 0.8$ (median redshift $z_{\rm med}=0.5$). The black-hole masses are derived from a dedicated reverberation mapping program for distant quasars, and the stellar masses are estimated from two-band optical+IR HST imaging. Most of these quasars are well centered within $\lesssim 1$kpc from the host galaxy centroid, with only a few cases in merging/disturbed systems showing larger spatial offsets. Our sample spans two orders of magnitude in stellar mass ($\sim 10^9-10^{11}\,M_\odot$) and black-hole mass ($\sim 10^7-10^9\,M_\odot$), and reveals a significant correlation between the two quantities. We find a best-fit intrinsic (i.e., selection effects corrected) $M_{\rm BH}-M_{\rm *,host}$ relation of $\log (M_{\rm BH}/M_{\rm \odot})=7.01_{-0.33}^{+0.23} + 1.74_{-0.64}^{+0.64}\log (M_{\rm *,host}/10^{10}M_{\rm \odot})$, with an intrinsic scatter of $0.47_{-0.17}^{+0.24}$dex. Decomposing our quasar hosts into bulges and disks, there is a similar $M_{\rm BH}-M_{\rm *,bulge}$ relation with a slightly larger scatter, likely caused by systematic uncertainties in the bulge-disk decomposition. The $M_{\rm BH}-M_{\rm *,host}$ relation at $z_{\rm med}=0.5$ is similar to that in local quiescent galaxies, with negligible evolution over the redshift range probed by our sample. With direct black-hole masses from reverberation mapping and a large dynamical range of the sample, selection biases do not appear to affect our conclusions significantly. Our results, along with other samples in the literature, suggest that the locally-measured black-hole mass$-$host stellar mass relation is already in place at $z\sim 1$.

preprint2023arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access10 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.