Abstract
The majority of quasars detected at high redshifts (
1 Introduction
In recent years, many supermassive black holes (SMBHs) have been discovered at redshifts
Extremely high UV luminosity may be explained by the fact that the observed emission is from either an almost naked active galactic nucleus (AGN), i.e. the emission inherent to an accreting SMBH, or a very massive stellar population, or both of them. Usually, the masses of SMBH and stellar population follow each other (Heckman and Best 2014). The high mass of stars corresponded to such high-redshift SMBH is believed to be associated with an enormous quantity of dust produced during stellar evolution and cold gas (Kennicutt and Evans 2012). Then, the SMBH radiation is supposed to be attenuated significantly by a massive cold dusty torus, especially, its UV part (e.g. Hickox and Alexander 2018). In light of this it is interesting to search high-redshift galaxies with SMBH in the far-infrared (FIR) range.
Using the Atacama Large Millimeter Array, Decarli et al. (2018) have studied UV bright quasars at
Further insight into the relationship between stellar population and SMBH in these galaxies has been made by Venemans et al. (2020). This set of quasars has been observed in the FIR with higher spatial (about 1 kpc) resolution. They have found that the [CII] emission in the quasar hosts is located within the central region of several (1–4.8) kpc, so that high infrared (IR) emission could be associated with star-forming bursts. This may also argue in favour of the similarity to local ULIRGs. However, local ULIRGs are significantly dust-obscured systems, and their UV luminosities are quite low (Goldader et al. 2002) in comparison with the values of the quasars studied by Decarli et al. (2018).
Motivated by these results, we are interested in whether the [CII]-FIR ratio could be explained by the SMBH emission being slightly absorbed by a lot of small dense clouds located in the ionization cone.
2 Model
According to the unified model for AGNs (Antonucci 1993, Hickox and Alexander 2018), we assume that the quasars selected by Decarli et al. (2018) are so bright in UV because almost naked nucleus is observed in these cases. Note that a significant part of local AGNs (Ricci et al. 2015) have low obscuration (Ramos Almeida and Ricci 2017) with a small covering factor of clouds. In the ionization cone, there are many clumps; they may be a result of jet-wind interaction and further cloud entrainment process (e.g. Murthy et al. 2022). We expect that the emission of these cloudlets exposed to a naked AGN will become a small supplement to that inherent to AGN emission except for the FIR range, where the cold/warm gas of clouds emits efficiently in both the FIR continuum and [CII] line.
Following Kubota and Done (2018), the SMBH radiation is supposed to be generated by a slim disc (Abramowicz et al. 1988) with the Novikov–Thorne spectrum (Novikov and Thorne 1973) modified by a comptonised extension up to the energy

Spectral energy distributions for the Kubota and Done (2018) model of an unabsorbed SMBH with
We assume that a part of the SMBH radiation is absorbed in the inner region of the dusty torus, i.e. in gaseous layers located on the border between the ionization cone and the torus, and that it is added to the radiation from the naked accreting SMBH. This relatively rarefied gas produces a low absorption of the UV photons emitted by SMBH and re-radiates them in the IR range to form the common dusty IR bump in the spectrum. Such gas is heated efficiently, and it cannot give any meaningful CII emissions. An example of the spectrum for such a slightly attenuated SMBH is depicted by green line in Figure 1. Then, we add the contribution to SED from many small dense clouds. They are dense enough to re-radiate SMBH emission in the CII line; moreover, they can be located at different distances from the central SMBH, so those placed closely may be ionized higher, whereas those located further are left cold and slightly ionized.
We use the CLOUDY code (Ferland et al. 2017) to calculate a library for SEDs of both AGN slightly obscured by a gaseous layer and clouds immersed in the ionization cone of an AGN. To model the SEDs for slightly obscured AGNs, we assume the gas layer thickness 10–100 pc with a relatively low density of 10–30
Figure 2 presents several spectra for the models of SMBH with absorption by small clouds. The unabsorbed spectrum of SMBH is presented in Figure 1 by red line. The SMBH mass is set to

Examples of spectra for the models of SMBH with absorption by small clouds. The unabsorbed spectrum of SMBH is presented in Figure 1 by red line. The SMBH mass is set to
3 Results
Using our statistical model, we calculate a set of different realizations, with a surface covering factor lower than 0.1, and then pick up those with the [CII]–FIR ratio close to the observed set (Decarli et al. 2018). Figure 3 presents the luminosity ratio of the [CII]
![Figure 3
The luminosity ratio of the [CII]
158
μ
m
158\hspace{0.33em}{\rm{\mu }}{\rm{m}}
line to the FIR continuum versus the FIR continuum. The filled grey circles show the ratio for our models. The open red circles depict the results from Decarli et al. (2018), and the data are taken from their Table 5. The FIR continuum is integrated over
λ
=
42.5
–
122.5
μ
m
\lambda =42.5\hspace{0.1em}\text{–}\hspace{0.1em}122.5\hspace{0.33em}{\rm{\mu }}{\rm{m}}
.](/document/doi/10.1515/astro-2022-0218/asset/graphic/j_astro-2022-0218_fig_003.jpg)
The luminosity ratio of the [CII]
Here, we would like to pay attention to two issues. First, it seems that there is lower limit of SMBH mass at which absolute magnitude at rest-frame remains higher for a given
4 Conclusion
We have studied the relation between luminosities in the [CII]
-
Funding information: The authors state that there is no funding involved.
-
Author contributions: All authors have accepted responsibility for the entire content of this manuscript and approved its submission.
-
Conflict of interest: The authors state that there is no conflict of interest.
References
Abramowicz MA, Czerny B, Lasota JP, Szuszkiewicz E. 1988. Slim accretion disks. Astrophys J. 332:646.10.1086/166683Search in Google Scholar
Antonucci R. 1993. Unified models for active galactic nuclei and quasars. Annual Rev Astron Astrophys. 31:473–521.10.1146/annurev.aa.31.090193.002353Search in Google Scholar
Bañados E, Venemans BP, Mazzucchelli C, Farina EP, Walter F, Wang F, et al. 2018. An 800-million-solar-mass black hole in a significantly neutral Universe at a redshift of 7.5. Nature. 553(7689):473–476.10.1038/nature25180Search in Google Scholar
Decarli R, Walter F, Venemans BP, Bannnados E, Bertoldi F, Carilli C, et al. 2018. An ALMA [C II] Survey of 27 Quasars at z>5.94. Astrophys J. 854(2):97.10.3847/1538-4357/aaa5aaSearch in Google Scholar
Ferland GJ, Chatzikos M, Guzmán F, Lykins ML, van Hoof PAM, Williams RJR, et al. 2017. The 2017 release cloudy. Revista Mexicana Astronom Astrofiiis. 53:385–438.Search in Google Scholar
Fischer TC, Crenshaw DM, Kraemer SB, Schmitt HR. 2013. Determining inclinations of active galactic nuclei via their narrow-line region kinematics. I. Observational Results. Astrophys J Suppl. 209(1):1.10.1088/0067-0049/209/1/1Search in Google Scholar
Goldader JD, Meurer G, Heckman TM, Seibert M, Sanders DB, Calzetti D, et al. 2002. Far-infrared galaxies in the far-ultraviolet. Astrophys J. 568(2):651–678.10.1086/339165Search in Google Scholar
Habouzit M, Li Y, Somerville RS, Genel S, Pillepich A, Volonteri M. et al. 2021. Supermassive black holes in cosmological simulations I: MBH – M⋆ relation and black hole mass function. Mon Not R Astron Soc. 503(2):1940–1975.10.1093/mnras/stab496Search in Google Scholar
Heckman TM, Best PN, 2014. The coevolution of galaxies and supermassive black holes: insights from surveys of the contemporary universe. Annu Rev Astron Astrophys. 52:589–660.10.1146/annurev-astro-081913-035722Search in Google Scholar
Hickox RC, Alexander DM. 2018. Obscured active galactic nuclei. Annu Rev Astron Astrophys. 56:625–671.10.1146/annurev-astro-081817-051803Search in Google Scholar
Ho LC. 2008. Nuclear activity in nearby galaxies. Annual Rev Astron Astrophys. 46:475–539.10.1146/annurev.astro.45.051806.110546Search in Google Scholar
Kennicutt RC, Evans NJ. 2012. Star formation in the Milky Way and nearby galaxies. Annu Rev Astron Astrophys. 50:531–608.10.1146/annurev-astro-081811-125610Search in Google Scholar
Kubota A, Done C. 2018. A physical model of the broad-band continuum of AGN and its implications for the UV/X relation and optical variability. Mon Not R Astron Soc. 480(1):1247–1262.10.1093/mnras/sty1890Search in Google Scholar
Latif MA, Volonteri M, Wise JH. 2018. Early growth of typical high-redshift black holes seeded by direct collapse. Mon Not R Astron Soc. 476(4):5016–5025.10.1093/mnras/sty622Search in Google Scholar
Murthy S, Morganti R, Wagner AY, Oosterloo T, Guillard P, Mukherjee D, et al. 2022. Cold gas removal from the centre of a galaxy by a low-luminosity jet. Nature Astron. 6:488–495.10.1038/s41550-021-01596-6Search in Google Scholar
Novikov ID, Thorne KS, 1973. Astrophysics of black holes. In: DeWitt C, DeWitt B, Editors. Black Holes (Les Astres Occulus). New York (NY): Gordon and Brench. p. 343–450.Search in Google Scholar
Pacucci F, Natarajan P, Volonteri M, Cappelluti N, Urry C. M. 2017. Conditions for Optimal Growth of Black Hole Seeds. Astrophys J (Letters). 850(2):L42.10.3847/2041-8213/aa9aeaSearch in Google Scholar
Ramos Almeida C, Alonso-Herrero A, Levenson NA, Asensio Ramos A, Rodríguez Espinosa JM, González-Martín O, et al. 2014. Investigating the sensitivity of observed spectral energy distributions to clumpy torus properties in Seyfert galaxies. Mon Not R Astron Soc. 439(4):3847–3859.10.1093/mnras/stu235Search in Google Scholar
Ramos Almeida C, Ricci C. 2017. Nuclear obscuration in active galactic nuclei. Nature Astron. 1:679–689.10.1038/s41550-017-0232-zSearch in Google Scholar
Ricci C, Ueda Y, Koss MJ, Trakhtenbrot B, Bauer FE, Gandhi P. 2015. Compton-thick accretion in the local universe. Astrophys J (Letters). 815(1):L13.10.1088/2041-8205/815/1/L13Search in Google Scholar
Venemans BP, Walter F, Neeleman M, Novak M, Otter J, Decarli R, et al. 2020. Kiloparsec-scale ALMA Imaging of [C II] and Dust Continuum Emission of 27 Quasar Host Galaxies at z∼6. Astrophys J. 904(2):130.10.3847/1538-4357/abc563Search in Google Scholar
Vito F, Brandt WN, Bauer FE, Gilli R, Luo B, Zamorani G, et al. 2019. Discovery of the first heavily obscured QSO candidate at z>6 in a close galaxy pair. Astron Astrophys. 628:L6.10.1051/0004-6361/201935924Search in Google Scholar
Volonteri M, Rees MJ. 2005. Rapid growth of high-redshift black holes. Astrophys. J. 633(2):624–629.10.1086/466521Search in Google Scholar
Wu X-B, Wang F, Fan X, Yi W, Zuo W, Bian F, et al. 2015. An ultraluminous quasar with a twelve-billion-solar-mass black hole at redshift 6.30. Nature. 518(7540):512–515.10.1038/nature14241Search in Google Scholar
Yang J, Wang F, Fan X, Hennawi JF, Davies FB, Yue M, et al. 2020. Pōniuā’ena: A luminous z=7.5 quasar hosting a 1.5 billion solar mass black hole. Astrophys J. (Letters) 897(1):L14.10.3847/2041-8213/ab9c26Search in Google Scholar
Zakamska NL, Strauss MA, Krolik JH, Ridgway SE, Schmidt GD, Smith PS, et al. 2006. Type II Quasars from the sloan digital sky survey. V. Imaging host galaxies with the hubble space telescope. Astron J. 132(4):1496–1516.10.1086/506986Search in Google Scholar
© 2023 the author(s), published by De Gruyter
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.