Cited by 167Galaxies: Formation, Evolution, PhenomenaAstrophysical Phenomena and ObservationsAstrophysics and Star Formation Studies

The quenching and morphological evolution of central galaxies is facilitated by the feedback-driven expulsion of circumgalactic gas

Open access
Davies, Jonathan J, Crain, Robert A, Oppenheimer, Benjamin D, Schaye, Joop·2020·Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society

Abstract

We examine the connection between the properties of the circumgalactic medium (CGM) and the quenching and morphological evolution of central galaxies in the EAGLE and IllustrisTNG simulations. The simulations yield very different median CGM mass fractions, fCGM, as a function of halo mass, M200, with low-mass haloes being significantly more gas-rich in IllustrisTNG than in EAGLE. Nonetheless, in both cases scatter in fCGM at fixed M200 is strongly correlated with the specific star formation rate and the kinematic morphology of central galaxies. The correlations are strongest for ∼L⋆ galaxies, corresponding to the mass scale at which AGN feedback becomes efficient. This feedback elevates the CGM cooling time, preventing gas from accreting on to the galaxy to fuel star formation, and thus establishing a preference for quenched, spheroidal galaxies to be hosted by haloes with low fCGM for their mass. In both simulations, fCGM correlates negatively with the host halo’s intrinsic concentration, and hence with its binding energy and formation redshift, primarily because early halo formation fosters the rapid early growth of the central black hole (BH). This leads to a lower fCGM at fixed M200 in EAGLE because the BH reaches high accretion rates sooner, whilst in IllustrisTNG it occurs because the central BH reaches the mass threshold at which AGN feedback is assumed to switch from thermal to kinetic injection earlier. Despite these differences, there is consensus from these state-of-the-art simulations that the expulsion of efficiently cooling gas from the CGM is a crucial step in the quenching and morphological evolution of central galaxies.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/mnras/stz3201

Cites

151 of 151 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • There is significant halo-to-halo scatter in the CGM distributions around MW-mass galaxies, but the median distribution shows good agreement between the three simulations.

    “We find significant haloto-halo scatter, which is indicative of the diversity of CGM distributions around MW-mass galaxies (Hani et al. 2019; Davies et al. 2020), but the median distribution shows good agreement between the three simulations.”

    From The milky way total mass profile as inferred from Gaia DR2 (2020) · cites this paper as Davies et al. 2020

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

Flagged first, then by citations

4 of the 155 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Oppenheimer B. D., et al., 2019, arXiv e-prints,
  2. Terrazas B. A., et al., 2019, arXiv e-prints, p. arXiv:1906.02747 · arXiv

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Davies, J. J., Crain, R. A., Oppenheimer, B. D., & Schaye, J.
Affiliations
  • Liverpool John Moores University (GB)
  • Harvard University (US)
  • Leiden University (NL)
Corresponding author
Davies, Jonathan J
Venue
Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society
Published
2019-11-18
Volume
491
Issue
3
Pages
4462-4480
ISSN
  • 0035-8711 (ISSN-L)
  • 1365-2966
OpenAlex
W2970374146
Cited by
167
References
155
Citations by year
2026: 15 · 2025: 34 · 2024: 19 · 2023: 22 · 2022: 28 · 2021: 20 · 2020: 29
FWCI
10.28
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society (publishedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • Leiden Repository (Leiden University) (submittedVersion)
  • Liverpool John Moores University (submittedVersion)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Funders
  • STFC (ST/K00042X/1, ST/H008519/1, ST/K00087X/1, ST/K003267/1)
  • Royal Society University Research Fellow
  • NASA (NNX16AB31G, HST-AR-14308)
  • Liverpool John Moores University
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
circumgalactic medium, galaxy quenching, galaxy morphology, AGN feedback, gas expulsion, central galaxies, halo mass, specific star formation rate, halo concentration, black hole accretion, galaxy formation, eagle, IllustrisTNG

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