Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rdxmf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-05T02:30:28.530Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Accretion rate in AGN and X-ray-to-optical flux ratio at z ≤ 0.2

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 January 2021

Asrate Gaulle
Affiliation:
Dilla University, Department of Physics, Dilla, Ethiopia email: [email protected] Astronomy and Astrophysics Research and Development Division, Ethiopian Space Science and Technology Institute, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia
Mirjana Pović
Affiliation:
Astronomy and Astrophysics Research and Development Division, Ethiopian Space Science and Technology Institute, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia Institute of Astrophysics of Andalucía (IAA-CISC), Department of Extragalactic Astronomy, Granada, Spain
Dejene Zewdie
Affiliation:
Núcleo de Astronomía, Universidad Diego Portales, Santiago, Chile Department of Physics, Debre Berhan University, Debre Berhan, Ethiopia
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

We explored a sample of 545 local galaxies using data from the 3XMM-DR7 and SDSS-DR8 surveys. We carried out all analyses up to z ˜ 0.2, and we studied the relation between X/O flux ratio and accretion rate for different classes of active galaxies such as LINERs and Seyfert 2. We obtained a slight correlation between the two parameters if the whole sample of AGN is used. However, LINERs and Sy2 galaxies show different properties, slight correlation and slight anti-correlation, respectively. This could confirm that LINERs and Sy2 galaxies have different accretion efficiencies and maybe different accretion disc properties, as has been suggested previously.

Type
Contributed Papers
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of International Astronomical Union

References

Baldwin, J. A., Phillips, M. M. & Terlevich, R. 1981, PASP, 93, 5 10.1086/130766CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brandt, W. N., & Hasinger, G. 2005, ARA&A, 43, 827 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brinchmann, J., Charlot, S., White, S. D. M., et al. 2004, MNRAS, 351, 1151 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lintott, C., et al. 2011, MNRAS, 410, 166 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Netzer, H. 2013, Cambridge University PressGoogle Scholar
Netzer, H. 2015, ARA&A, 53, 365 10.1146/annurev-astro-082214-122302CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pović, M., et al. 2009a, ApJ, 702, 51 Google Scholar
Pović, M., et al. 2009b, ApJ, 706, 810 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Povíc, M., Sánchez-Portal, M., and Perez-Garca, A., et al. 2012, A&A, 541, 118 Google Scholar
Rosen, S. R., et al. 2016, A&A, 590, 1 Google Scholar
Tremaine, S., et al. 2002, ApJ, 574, 740 Google Scholar
Woo, J.-H., & Urry, C. M., 2002, ApJ, 579, 530 CrossRefGoogle Scholar