The GlimmIr: Spectroscopic Variability in a z~7 LRD Indicates Rapid Changes in Both the Narrow and Broad Line Regions

Erini Lambrides; Taylor A. Hutchison; Rebecca L. Larson; Pablo Arrabal Haro; Casey Papovich; Weida Hu; Nikko J. Cleri; Steven L. Finkelstein; Jonathan R. Trump; Pablo G. Perez-Gonzalez; Bingjie Wang; Dale D. Kocevski; John Chisholm; Amy Secunda; Sarah E. I. Bosman; Hollis Akins; Mitchell Karmen; Mark Dickinson; Volker Bromm; Bren E. Backhaus; Marco Chiaberge; Olivia R. Cooper; Yukta Ajay; Guillermo Barro; Danielle A. Berg; Jenna Cann; M. C. Cooper; Norman A. Grogin; Michaela Hirschmann; Marc Huertas-Company; Jeyhan S. Kartaltepe; Anton M. Koekemoer; Ray A. Lucas; Arianna S. Long; Roberto Gilli; Colin Norman; Andrew F. Ptak; Chris T. Richardson; Jane R. Rigby; Brittany N. Vanderhoof; L. Y. Aaron Yung; Jorge A. Zavala

doi:10.48550/arXiv.2604.25991

← Recent

AG-2026.04-1832·astro-ph.GA

The GlimmIr: Spectroscopic Variability in a z~7 LRD Indicates Rapid Changes in Both the Narrow and Broad Line Regions

Authors

Erini Lambrides
Taylor A. Hutchison
Rebecca L. Larson
Pablo Arrabal Haro
Casey Papovich
Weida Hu
Nikko J. Cleri
Steven L. Finkelstein
Jonathan R. Trump
Pablo G. Perez-Gonzalez
Bingjie Wang
Dale D. Kocevski
John Chisholm
Amy Secunda
Sarah E. I. Bosman
Hollis Akins
Mitchell Karmen
Mark Dickinson
Volker Bromm
Bren E. Backhaus
Marco Chiaberge
Olivia R. Cooper
Yukta Ajay
Guillermo Barro
Danielle A. Berg

Jenna Cann

M. C. Cooper

Norman A. Grogin

Michaela Hirschmann

Marc Huertas-Company

Jeyhan S. Kartaltepe

Anton M. Koekemoer

Ray A. Lucas

Arianna S. Long

Roberto Gilli

Colin Norman

Andrew F. Ptak

Chris T. Richardson

Jane R. Rigby

Brittany N. Vanderhoof

L. Y. Aaron Yung

Jorge A. Zavala

Abstract

The enigmatic population of ``Little Red Dots'' (LRDs) sit at the center of some of the largest debates in extragalactic astronomy today. The source(s) of ionizing emission and the physical scale over which it governs is still largely unknown. We show for the first time spectroscopic variability in a z ~ 7 LRD. Comparing a recently obtained 10.2 hr JWST/NIRSpec F290LP/G395M spectrum via the C3PO survey to an 8.4 hr F290LP/G395M spectrum taken 99 days earlier (~13 rest-days) via the THRILS survey, we find a ~30% $ difference in the continuum and broad-line flux, and a 42% difference between [OIII]5008 flux in the two epochs. Through rigorous testing, we confirm that such differences are not the result of differing MSA slit placements on source nor merely flux calibration offsets. These results are further corroborated by both a similar continuum and [OIII]5008 flux differences found in NIRSpec prism/clear observations of the source at an epoch taken approximately a year earlier than the THRILS observations via RUBIES and an additional observation fortuitously taken during the THRILS epoch (within a rest-day) via the CAPERS survey. Assuming LRDs are a type of accreting black hole system, this implies direct sight-lines must exist from the accretion disk to the surrounding nebular gas on scales beyond the broad-line region, and thus any high-density gas interpretations must allow for covering fractions < 100%. Furthermore, these results show the [OIII] line emission is likely not galaxy process-dominated, with a significant population of the narrow-line emitting gas closest to the broad-line region being directly ionized by the LRD. Finally, these results highlight the need for new approaches in inferring black hole properties of these systems, accounting for the lack of significant ionization via star formation, and/or exploring more exotic host-galaxy conditions at these early epochs.

Submitted

28 April 2026yesterday

Version

v1

License

CC-BY-4.0

DOI

10.48550/arXiv.2604.25991

Cite this preprint

BibTeX RIS

Imports into BibLaTeX, Zotero, Mendeley, EndNote.

PDF

Open PDF

Opens in a new tab · v1.

Chat with this PDF

Ask questions, probe assumptions, request a plain-English summary. Answers cite sections from the preprint itself.

Community

Questions and answers about this paper from other readers. No formal peer review — just a place to think out loud.