What drives the growth of black holes: A decade of progress
Open accessAbstract
The last decade has witnessed significant progress in our understanding of the growth of super-massive black holes (SMBHs). It is now clear that an Active Galactic Nucleus (AGN: the observed manifestation of a growing SMBH) is an “event” within the broader lifecycle of a galaxy, which can significantly influence the shape and evolution of the galaxy itself. Our view of the obscuring medium that affects the observed properties of an AGN has also undergone a revolution, and we now have a more physical understanding of the connection between the fuelling of (and feedback from) the SMBH and the broader host-galaxy and larger-scale environment. We have a greater understanding of the physics of SMBH accretion, can identify AGNs out to z = 8–10 witnessing the very earliest phases of SMBH growth, and have a more complete census of AGN activity than ever before. This great progress has been enabled by new innovative facilities, an ever-increasing quantity of multi-wavelength data, the exploitation and development of new techniques, and greater community-wide engagement. In this article we review our understanding of AGNs and the growth of SMBHs, providing an update of the earlier Alexander and Hickox (2012) review. Using citation-network analyses we also show where this review fits within the broader black-hole research literature and, adopting the previous article as a snapshot of the field over a decade ago, identify the drivers that have enabled the greatest scientific progress.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
Lintott, C. J., Schawinski, K., Slosar, A., Land, K., Bamford, S., Thomas, D., Raddick, M. J., Nichol, R. C., Szalay, A., Andreescu, D., et al. (2008) · Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society · doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2008.13689.x · Cited by 1,488 · see citing works
Detection of large-scale X-ray bubbles in the Milky Way halo
Predehl, P., Sunyaev, R. A., Becker, W., Brunner, H., Burenin, R., Bykov, A., Cherepashchuk, A., Chugai, N., Churazov, E., Doroshenko, V., et al. (2020) · Nature · doi:10.1038/s41586-020-2979-0 · Cited by 234 · see citing works
Davies, J. J., Crain, R. A., Oppenheimer, B. D., & Schaye, J. (2020) · Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society · doi:10.1093/mnras/stz3201 · Cited by 167 · see citing works
Giustini, M., & Proga, D. (2019) · Astronomy & Astrophysics · doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201833810 · Cited by 166 · see citing works
Identifying galaxy mergers in observations and simulations with deep learning
Pearson, W. J., Wang, L., Trayford, J. W., Petrillo, C. E., & van der Tak, F. F. S. (2019) · Astronomy & Astrophysics · doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201935355 · Cited by 90 · see citing works
The Fermi/eROSITA bubbles: a look into the nuclear outflow from the Milky Way
Sarkar, K. C. (2024) · The Astronomy and Astrophysics Review · doi:10.1007/s00159-024-00152-1 · Cited by 34 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Wainer, T. M., Williams, B. F., Chen, Z., Lazzarini, M., Dalcanton, J. J., Bell, E. F., Goold, K., Dolphin, A., Durbin, M. J., Dubón, S. L. F., et al. (2026) · The Astrophysical Journal · doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ae6db9
“However, establishing a direct causal link between AGN activity and a galaxy’s star-formation history is intrinsically difficult due to spatial and timescale mismatches (e.g., Alexander et al. 2025; Leung et al. 2026).”
- Authors
- Alexander, D. M., Hickox, R. C., Aird, J., Combes, F., Costa, T., Habouzit, M., Harrison, C. M., Leng, R. I., Morabito, L. K., Uckelman, S. L., & Vickers, P.
- Affiliations
- Durham University (GB)
- Dartmouth College (US)
- Royal Observatory (GB)
- Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (FR)
- Newcastle University (GB)
- University of Geneva (CH)
- University of Edinburgh (GB)
- Corresponding author
- Alexander, D.M.
- ORCID
- Venue
- New Astronomy Reviews
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2025-12
- Volume
- 101
- Pages
- 101733
- ISSN
- 1387-6473 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W4412763989
- Cited by
- 18
- References
- 6
- Citations by year
- 2026: 14 · 2025: 4
- FWCI
- 7.99
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- New Astronomy Reviews (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
- HAL (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- Durham Research Online (Durham University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- arXiv (Cornell University) (cc-by)
- Funders
- UK Research and Innovation (MR/T020989/1, MR/Y020405/1, MR/V022830/1)
- Science and Technology Facilities Council (ST/T000244/1)
- NASA (80NSSC22K0862, 80NSSC23K0485)
- Schweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen Forschung (218032)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Astronomy and Astrophysics › Galaxies: Formation, Evolution, Phenomena
- Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Astronomy and Astrophysics › Astrophysical Phenomena and Observations
- Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Astronomy and Astrophysics › Astrophysics and Star Formation Studies
- Keywords
- black hole growth, black hole accretion, supermassive black holes, active galactic nuclei, black hole feedback
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
