Skip to content
MRA
Research

Follow the baryons

Galaxies hold only part of their cosmic share of ordinary matter. I follow the rest: how black holes and stars push gas out, how environment strips it away, and how far it travels, from the hearts of galaxies to the cosmic web, and from the first two billion years to today.

The open baryon cycle around a halo Schematic of a galaxy at the center of its halo. Gas flows in along three cosmic filaments, feedback drives outflows above and below the galaxy, and a satellite galaxy orbits the halo trailing a tail of stripped gas. A dashed circle marks the virial radius and a larger white circle the closure radius. outflows accretion virial radius stripping closure radius
Gas flows in along cosmic filaments, feedback drives it out, and orbiting satellites lose theirs to ram pressure. The closure radius marks where a halo has recovered its cosmic share of baryons.

At a glance

Two axes: radius and cosmic time

My research follows the gas from galaxy centers to the cosmic web, and from the first two billion years to today. The colors match the four chapters below.

Radius: from galaxies to the cosmic web

  1. Galaxies

    star formation and quenching

  2. Halo atmospheres

    hot and cool gas in motion

  3. Virial radius

    satellites fall in and are stripped

  4. Closure radius

    where the baryon budget closes

  5. Cosmic web

    the IGM, and conformity over megaparsecs

Cosmic time: from the first galaxies to today

The first two billion years: JWST’s early massive and quenched galaxies · Chapter 4

From z ~ 10 to today: galaxy scaling relations across cosmic time · Chapter 4

13 billion years of the baryon budget, in halos and the IGM · Chapter 1

Today: the closure radius, gas motions in clusters, galactic conformity · Chapters 1 to 3

Big Bang 4 8 13.8

Feedback and the open baryon cycle

Where are the missing baryons?

Galaxies and their halos hold fewer baryons than their cosmic share. Energy from supermassive black holes and supernovae heats the gas and pushes it out, well beyond the traditional halo boundary. I measure how far it goes, in simulations and in X-ray observations, because the gas distribution today records the cumulative history of feedback.

  • I defined the closure radius: the distance from a halo’s center within which the enclosed baryon fraction reaches the cosmic value. Feedback pushes baryons well beyond the virial radius, out to this scale, from dwarfs to massive clusters (Ayromlou et al. 2023). In the TNG, EAGLE and SIMBA simulations, less than 30% of cosmic baryons sit inside galaxy-hosting halos today, against about 45% of the dark matter: over 70% of all baryons are in the intergalactic medium. The reach of this redistribution matches the scale on which the clustering of matter returns to its gravity-only form (Ayromlou et al. 2026).

  • In cluster cores, gas inflows and outflows are largely balanced; in the outskirts, the velocity distribution turns asymmetric, with a second peak from cosmic accretion (Ayromlou et al. 2024).

  • Every massive cluster today holds some cool gas, but most of it sits in the outskirts, carried in by infalling satellites (Staffehl et al. 2025).

Illustration of the open baryon cycle: cosmic accretion flows into a halo, strong and moderate outflows leave the central galaxy, a jellyfish galaxy is stripped, and the virial and closure radii are marked.
The open baryon cycle, out to the closure radius and beyond into the intergalactic medium (Ayromlou et al. 2026).
Map of the baryon fraction around a group-mass halo, normalized to the cosmic value: baryon-poor (blue) inside the virial radius, baryon-rich (red) beyond it.
Baryon fraction around a halo, relative to the cosmic value. The circle is the virial radius: the missing baryons sit beyond it, within the closure radius (Ayromlou et al. 2023b).
Map of the radial gas velocity in and around a massive TNG-Cluster halo, with inflowing and outflowing gas in different colors and the halo boundary dashed.
Radial gas velocity in and around a massive cluster in TNG-Cluster: inflows and outflows, from the core to the outskirts (Ayromlou et al. 2024).

Environment, stripping and conformity

How does the neighborhood switch galaxies off?

Galaxies falling into groups and clusters lose their gas and stop forming stars. I develop ways to measure the local environment of every galaxy and to model ram-pressure stripping in semi-analytical models, to find out when, where and how fast environment quenches galaxies, and how far its influence reaches.

  • The gas around satellites shows no abrupt change at the virial radius, so stripping should begin before galaxies cross the halo boundary (Ayromlou et al. 2019).

  • Modeling ram-pressure stripping for all galaxies improves how well L-Galaxies reproduces observed quenched fractions and star formation rates, across environment, stellar mass and redshift (Ayromlou et al. 2021).

  • Galactic conformity (neighbors sharing the star-forming state of their central galaxy) reaches at least 5 Mpc in models and in SDSS and DESI data. Much, but not all, of it comes from galaxies near massive systems (Ayromlou et al. 2023).

A galaxy cluster assembling in a simulation, from redshift 12.5 to today, with five galaxies marked as they are stripped by ram pressure.
A cluster forms over cosmic time, and five galaxies are stripped by ram pressure on their way in (L-Galaxies model, Ayromlou et al. 2021b).
Plot of the excess quenched fraction of neighboring galaxies around low-mass centrals versus projected distance, comparing L-Galaxies, IllustrisTNG and EAGLE with SDSS data.
Galactic conformity: neighbors of quenched centrals are more often quenched, out to several megaparsecs. The L-Galaxies model of Ayromlou et al. (2021) agrees well with SDSS (Ayromlou et al. 2023a).

Models across techniques

Do different models build the same galaxies?

Hydrodynamical simulations and semi-analytical models are the two workhorses of galaxy-formation theory, but they are rarely compared galaxy by galaxy. I ran L-Galaxies on the IllustrisTNG dark-matter merger trees to match the same galaxies in both, and to see where they agree and where they diverge. With the DECODE team, I also build semi-empirical models that reconstruct galaxy histories directly from data, and I run new cluster simulations (iCluster).

  • For the same galaxies, stellar masses agree to better than about 0.2 dex, but the transition from star-forming to quenched galaxies happens at a stellar mass about 0.5 dex lower in IllustrisTNG than in L-Galaxies (Ayromlou et al. 2021).

  • Semi-empirical models expose (in)consistencies among the stellar mass function, star-formation histories, satellite abundances and intracluster light (Fu et al. 2024).

Side-by-side maps of the same cosmic volume: galaxies from L-Galaxies run on TNG100 dark-matter merger trees (left) and from the TNG100 hydrodynamical simulation (right), colored by stellar mass.
The same cosmic volume twice: L-Galaxies run on the TNG100 dark-matter merger trees (left) and the TNG100 hydrodynamical simulation (right), colored by stellar mass (Ayromlou et al. 2021a).

The early Universe

Can our models make the galaxies JWST sees?

JWST has revealed galaxies that are massive, UV-bright, compact and, in some cases, already quenched within the first two billion years, and most galaxy-formation models struggle to make them. With my students and collaborators, I test which physics can: star formation and feedback in dense gas, mergers, and environmental quenching at the highest redshifts.

Spoiler: not yet, but star formation and feedback regulated by the local gas density close much of the gap.

  • Three versions of L-Galaxies broadly match observed scaling relations up to z ≈ 10, but they underpredict massive quenched galaxies, by up to a factor of 60 at z ≈ 3, and make them several times too large (Vani et al. 2025).

  • Making star formation efficient and stellar feedback ineffective in dense gas, with dissipative gas-rich mergers, makes massive UV-bright galaxies at z ≳ 9 and massive quenched galaxies at z ≈ 8 to 3 up to a hundred times more abundant than in the previous model, without changing the AGN physics or the initial mass function. Its compact galaxies follow the UV size-luminosity relation JWST observes at z ≈ 13 to 10 (Vani et al. 2026).

  • Among more than half a million simulated galaxies at z = 5, quenched galaxies are overwhelmingly satellites, although satellites are fewer than 10% of all galaxies. The low-mass quenched galaxies JWST finds may be quenched by their environment near massive halos, and often only temporarily (Döven et al. 2026).

  • A semi-empirical model built directly on observed UV luminosity functions predicts star formation efficiencies of 0.8 to 0.9 at z > 9, falling to 0.2 to 0.3 at later times; dust raises them further, while top-heavy initial mass functions lower them (Fu et al. 2026).

Star formation rate against stellar mass for simulated satellite and central galaxies at z = 5 and 5.5 in L-Galaxies, with observed quenched galaxies plotted below the quenching threshold among the satellites.
Star formation rate versus stellar mass in L-Galaxies at z = 5 to 5.5: satellites (pink) and centrals (teal), with the closest analogs to the observed systems enlarged. Stars mark the two spectroscopically confirmed "Double Trouble" quenched galaxies, squares three further quenched candidates. The simulated low-mass quenched galaxies resemble the observed ones, and most of them are satellites (Döven et al. 2026).

Looking back in time

  1. z ~ 13 to 10

    The first few hundred million years: JWST's bright, compact galaxies.

  2. z ~ 8 to 3

    Massive galaxies that have already stopped forming stars, and satellites quenched by their environment.

  3. z = 0

    Today: where we test the same models, from scaling relations to the gas around galaxies.

How I work

Theory, computation and observation

No single technique settles these questions, so I combine them: simulations to establish cause and effect, models to reach whole galaxy populations, and observations to test both.

Simulations

Cosmological hydrodynamical simulations, from large volumes to hundreds of massive clusters, including the new iCluster suite I ran with ~20 million CPU hours at LRZ.

  • IllustrisTNG
  • TNG-Cluster
  • EAGLE
  • SIMBA
  • iCluster

Models and tools

Galaxy-formation models, and measures and codes I developed to make theory directly comparable with data.

Observations

Surveys and X-ray data to test the models, and mock observations to design new tests.

  • SDSS
  • DESI
  • HSC
  • JWST
  • eROSITA

Research with students. Students I have (co-)supervised led four of the papers on this page.

For students

Curious about the details?

Every paper, data release and public catalog is on the Publications page. If you would like to use the code, simulations or data, get in touch.