Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gvvz8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T18:42:48.783Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Do AGN really suppress star formation?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 January 2021

Chris M. Harrison ,
David M. Alexander ,
Dalton J. Rosario ,
Jan Scholtz  and
Flora Stanley
Chris M. Harrison
Affiliation:
School of Mathematics, Statistics and Physics, Newcastle University, Newcastle Upon Tyne, NE1 7RU, United Kindgom email: [email protected]
David M. Alexander
Affiliation:
Centre for Extragalactic Astronomy, Durham University, Department of Physics, South Road, Durham, DH1 3LE, United Kindgom
Dalton J. Rosario
Affiliation:
Centre for Extragalactic Astronomy, Durham University, Department of Physics, South Road, Durham, DH1 3LE, United Kindgom
Jan Scholtz
Affiliation:
Centre for Extragalactic Astronomy, Durham University, Department of Physics, South Road, Durham, DH1 3LE, United Kindgom Department of Space, Earth and Environment, Chalmers University of Technology,1 Onsala Space Observatory, SE-43992 Onsala, Sweden
Flora Stanley
Affiliation:
Department of Space, Earth and Environment, Chalmers University of Technology,1 Onsala Space Observatory, SE-43992 Onsala, Sweden
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.

Active galactic nuclei (AGN) are believed to regulate star formation inside their host galaxies through “AGN feedback”. We summarise our on-going study of luminous AGN (z ∼ 0.2−3; LAGN,bol 1043 erg s−1), which is designed to search for observational signatures of feedback by combining observed star-formation rate (SFR) measurements from statistical samples with cosmological model predictions. Using the EAGLE hydrodynamical cosmological simulations, in combination with our Herschel + ALMA surveys, we show that – even in the presence of AGN feedback – we do not necessarily expect to see any relationships between average galaxy-wide SFRs and instantaneous AGN luminosities. We caution that the correlation with stellar mass for both SFR and AGN luminosity can contribute to apparent observed positive trends between these two quantities. On the other hand, the EAGLE simulations, which reproduce our observations, predict that a signature of AGN feedback can be seen in the wide specific SFR distributions of all massive galaxies (not just AGN hosts). Overall, whilst we can not rule out that AGN have an immediate small-scale impact on in-situ star-formation, all of our results are consistent with a feedback model where galaxy-wide in-situ star formation is not rapidly suppressed by AGN, but where the feedback likely acts over a longer timescale than a single AGN episode.

Keywords

galaxies: activegalaxies: evolution
Type
Contributed Papers
Information
Proceedings of the International Astronomical Union , Volume 15 , Symposium S356: Nuclear Activity in Galaxies Across Cosmic Time , October 2019 , pp. 199 - 203
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of International Astronomical Union

References

Bernhard, E., Grimmett, L. P. Mullaney, J. R., et al. 2019, MNRAS, 483L, 5210.1093/mnrasl/sly217CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gabor, J. M. & Bournaud, F. 2014, MNRAS, 441, 161510.1093/mnras/stu677CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harrison, C. M. 2017, Nature Astronomy, 1, 16510.1038/s41550-017-0165CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McAlpine, S., Bower, R. G., Harrison, C. M., et al. 2017, MNRAS, 468, 339510.1093/mnras/stx658CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mullaney, J. R., Alexander, D. M., Aird, J., et al. 2015, MNRAS, 453, L8310.1093/mnrasl/slv110CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rosario, D. J., Trakhtenbrot, B., Lutz, D., et al. 2013, A&A, 560, 72Google Scholar
Schaye, J., Crain, R., Bower, R. G., et al. 2015, MNRAS, 446, 52110.1093/mnras/stu2058CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scholtz, J., Alexander, D. M., Harrison, C. M., et al. 2018, MNRAS, 475, 128810.1093/mnras/stx3177CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scholtz, J., Harrison, C. M., Rosario, D. J., et al. 2020, MNRAS, 492, 319410.1093/mnras/staa030CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schreiber, C., Pannella, M., Elbaz, D., et al. 2015, A&A, 575, A74Google Scholar
Schulze, A., Silverman, J. D., Daddi, E., et al. 2019, MNRAS, 488, 118010.1093/mnras/stz1746CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shangguan, J., Ho, L. C., Xie, Y. 2018, ApJ, 854, 15810.3847/1538-4357/aaa9beCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stanley, F., Harrison, C. M., Alexander, D. M., et al. 2015, MNRAS, 453, 59110.1093/mnras/stv1678CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stanley, F., Alexander, D. M., Harrison, C. M., et al. 2017, MNRAS, 472, 222110.1093/mnras/stx2121CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stanley, F., Harrison, C. M., Alexander, D. M., et al. 2018, MNRAS, 478, 372110.1093/mnras/sty1044CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Whitaker, K. E., Franx, M., Leja, J., et al. 2014, ApJ, 795, 10410.1088/0004-637X/795/2/104CrossRefGoogle Scholar