AG-2026.04-2030·astro-ph.GA
Chaotic Molecular Gas in Five Dusty Star-forming Galaxies in the Spiderweb Protocluster at $z = 2.16$
Authors
- Jaclyn B. Champagne
- Helmut Dannerbauer
- Jose Manuel Perez-Martinez
- Caitlin M. Casey
- Shuowen Jin
- Matthew Lehnert
- Jorge A. Zavala
Abstract
Measuring the properties of cold molecular gas available for intense star formation in galaxy protoclusters at $z>2$ is a crucial step in understanding large scale structure formation. We present ALMA observations of CO(3$-$2) in five dusty star-forming galaxies within $\sim0.5-4$ cMpc of the core of the Spiderweb protocluster at $z=2.16$ to measure the molecular gas mass and kinematics in the most starbursting members of the protocluster. All five galaxies exhibit evidence for disturbed kinematics including non-Gaussian CO line profiles, irregular spatial morphology, and strong residuals when fitting the galaxies with a classical disk model. This could be indicative of an elevated merger rate in the outskirts of the mature Spiderweb protocluster, as all of the galaxies in our sample have multiple companions detected in H$α$. Both the gas fractions and the gas depletion timescales of the galaxies are similar to field relations at cosmic noon, indicative of the fact that their prodigious star formation rates are compensated by similarly high gas masses. The most massive galaxies, as well as all of the galaxies identified as X-ray AGN in previous works, have gas fractions $<30$%, compared to the sample average of 49%, indicating declining availability of gas for star formation. Finally, we find that the gas fractions and specific star formation rates decline with distance from the Spiderweb Galaxy, supporting the reversal of the SFR density--radius relation in high-redshift protoclusters.
Submitted
29 April 2026yesterday
Version
v1
License
CC-BY-4.0
DOI
10.48550/arXiv.2604.27071
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.