1: % Version 8; preprint format; revised after referee's report; minor last
2: % revisions from Jenny
3: %\documentclass[12pt,preprint]{aastex}
4: \documentclass[preprint]{aastex}
5: \usepackage{emulateapj5}
6: \usepackage{apjfonts}
7: \usepackage{natbib}
8:
9: %\documentstyle[12pt,aasms4]{article}
10: %\documentstyle[11pt,aaspp4]{article}
11: %\documentstyle[11pt,/home/lho/tex/emulateapj]{article}
12: %\documentstyle[/home/java/lho/tex/aastex/aaspptwo]{article}
13: \input psfig.tex
14:
15: %Luis's definitions
16: \def\aa{{A\&A}}
17: \def\aas{{ A\&AS}}
18: \def\aj{{AJ}}
19: \def\al{$\alpha$}
20: \def\bet{$\beta$}
21: \def\amin{$^\prime$}
22: \def\annrev{{ARA\&A}}
23: \def\apj{{ApJ}}
24: \def\apjs{{ApJS}}
25: \def\asec{$^{\prime\prime}$}
26: \def\baas{{BAAS}}
27: \def\cc{cm$^{-3}$}
28: \def\deg{$^{\circ}$}
29: \def\ddeg{{\rlap.}$^{\circ}$}
30: \def\dsec{{\rlap.}$^{\prime\prime}$}
31: \def\cc{cm$^{-3}$}
32: \def\e#1{$\times$10$^{#1}$}
33: \def\etal{{et al. }}
34: \def\flamb{ergs s$^{-1}$ cm$^{-2}$ \AA$^{-1}$}
35: \def\flux{ergs s$^{-1}$ cm$^{-2}$}
36: \def\fnu{ergs s$^{-1}$ cm$^{-2}$ Hz$^{-1}$}
37: \def\hal{H$\alpha$}
38: \def\hst{{\it HST}}
39: \def\kms{km s$^{-1}$}
40: \def\lamb{$\lambda$}
41: \def\lax{{$\mathrel{\hbox{\rlap{\hbox{\lower4pt\hbox{$\sim$}}}\hbox{$<$}}}$}}
42: \def\gax{{$\mathrel{\hbox{\rlap{\hbox{\lower4pt\hbox{$\sim$}}}\hbox{$>$}}}$}}
43: \def\simlt{\lower.5ex\hbox{$\; \buildrel < \over \sim \;$}}
44: \def\simgt{\lower.5ex\hbox{$\; \buildrel > \over \sim \;$}}
45: \def\lum{ergs s$^{-1}$}
46: \def\mbh{{$M_{\rm BH}$}}
47: \def\mhi{$M_{{\rm H}~{\sc I}}$}
48: \def\micron{{$\mu$m}}
49: \def\mnras{{MNRAS}}
50: \def\nat{{Nature}}
51: \def\pasp{{PASP}}
52: \def\perang{\AA$^{-1}$}
53: \def\percm2{cm$^{-2}$}
54: \def\peryr{yr$^{-1}$}
55: \def\pp{\parshape 2 0truein 6.1truein .3truein 5.5truein}
56: \def\reference{\noindent\pp}
57: \def\refindent{\par\noindent\parskip=2pt\hangindent=3pc\hangafter=1 }
58: \def\solum{$L_\odot$}
59: \def\solmass{$M_\odot$}
60: %\def\ion#1#2{\setcounter{ctr}{#2}#1$\;${\small\rm\Roman{ctr}}\relax}
61: %\def\oii{[O~{\src II}]}
62: %\def\neii{[Ne~{\src II}]}
63: %\def\neiii{[Ne~{\src III}]}
64: \def\feii{\ion{Fe}{2}}
65: \def\heii{\ion{He}{2}}
66: \def\hi{\ion{H}{1}}
67: \def\hii{\ion{H}{2}}
68: \def\oii{[\ion{O}{2}]}
69: \def\oiii{[\ion{O}{3}]}
70: \def\ni{[\ion{N}{1}]}
71: \def\oi{[\ion{O}{1}]}
72: \def\nii{[\ion{N}{2}]}
73: \def\neii{[\ion{Ne}{2}]}
74: \def\neiii{[\ion{Ne}{3}]}
75: \def\hei{\ion{He}{1}}
76: \def\sii{[\ion{S}{2}]}
77: \def\siii{[\ion{S}{3}]}
78:
79: \def\lhal{$L_{{\rm H}\alpha}$}
80: \def\lbol{$L_{{\rm bol}}$}
81: \def\ledd{$L_{{\rm Edd}}$}
82:
83: \def\vmax{$V_{{\rm max}}$}
84: \def\sig{$\sigma_*$}
85: \def\mlbulge{$M_\bullet-L_{\rm bul}$}
86: \def\msigma{$M_\bullet-\sigma_*$}
87: \def\mhi{$M_{{\rm H~I}}$}
88: \def\lb{$L_B$}
89: \def\vc{${\upsilon_c}$}
90: \def\vm{${\upsilon_m}$}
91: \def\vrot{$\upsilon_{{\rm rot}}$}
92:
93:
94: \slugcomment{To appear in {\it The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series}.}
95: %\lefthead{Ho et al.}
96: %\righthead{\hi\ Survey of AGNs}
97: \shorttitle{H I SURVEY OF AGNS}
98: \shortauthors{HO, DARLING, \& GREENE}
99:
100: \begin{document}
101:
102: \title{A New H~{\sc I} Survey of Active Galaxies}
103:
104: \author{Luis C. Ho\altaffilmark{1}, Jeremy Darling\altaffilmark{2}, and
105: Jenny E. Greene\altaffilmark{3,4}}
106:
107: \altaffiltext{1}{The Observatories of the Carnegie Institution of Washington,
108: 813 Santa Barbara St., Pasadena, CA 91101.}
109: \altaffiltext{2}{Center for Astrophysics and Space Astronomy, Department of
110: Astrophysical and Planetary Sciences, University of Colorado, 389 UCB,
111: Boulder, CO 80309-0389.}
112: \altaffiltext{3}{Princeton Observatory, Peyton Hall, Princeton University,
113: Princeton, NJ 08544-1001.}
114: \altaffiltext{4}{Hubble Fellow and Carnegie-Princeton Fellow.}
115:
116: \begin{abstract}
117:
118: We have conducted a new Arecibo survey for \hi\ emission for 113 galaxies with
119: broad-line (type 1) active galactic nuclei (AGNs) out to recession velocities
120: as high as $\sim 35,000$ \kms. The primary aim of the study is to obtain
121: sensitive \hi\ spectra for a well-defined, uniformly selected sample of active
122: galaxies that have estimates of their black hole masses in order to
123: investigate correlations between \hi\ properties and the characteristics of the
124: AGNs. \hi\ emission was detected in 66 out of the 101 (65\%) objects with
125: spectra uncorrupted by radio frequency interference, among which 45 (68\%)
126: have line profiles with adequate signal-to-noise ratio and sufficiently
127: reliable inclination corrections to yield robust deprojected rotational
128: velocities. This paper presents the basic survey products, including an atlas
129: of \hi\ spectra, measurements of \hi\ flux, line width, profile asymmetry,
130: optical images, optical spectroscopic parameters, as well as a summary of a
131: number of derived properties pertaining to the host galaxies. To enlarge our
132: primary sample, we also assemble all previously published \hi\ measurements of
133: type 1 AGNs for which can can estimate black hole masses, which total an
134: additional 53 objects. The final comprehensive compilation of 154 broad-line
135: active galaxies, by far the largest sample ever studied, forms the basis of
136: our companion paper, which uses the \hi\ database to explore a number of
137: properties of the AGN host galaxies.
138: \end{abstract}
139: \keywords{galaxies: active --- galaxies: bulges --- galaxies: ISM ---
140: galaxies: kinematics and dynamics --- galaxies: nuclei --- galaxies: Seyfert}
141:
142:
143: \section{Introduction}
144:
145: Central black holes (BHs) with masses ranging from $\sim 10^6$ to a few $\times
146: 10^9$ \solmass\ are an integral component of most, perhaps all, galaxies with
147: a bulge component (Kormendy 2004), and although rarer, at least some late-type
148: galaxies host nuclear BHs with masses as low as $\sim 10^5$ \solmass\
149: (Filippenko \& Ho 2003; Barth et al. 2004; Greene \& Ho 2007a, 2007b). It is
150: now widely believed that BHs play an important role in the life cycle of
151: galaxies (see reviews in Ho 2004). To date, most of the observational effort
152: to investigate the relationship between BHs and their host galaxies have
153: focused on the stellar component of the hosts, especially the velocity
154: dispersion and luminosity of the bulge, which empirically seem most closely
155: coupled to the BH mass. Although the gas content of inactive galaxies has
156: been extensively studied (e.g., Haynes \& Giovanelli 1984; Knapp et al. 1985;
157: Roberts et al. 1991; Bregman et al. 1992; Morganti et al. 2006),
158: comparatively little attention has been devoted to characterizing the
159: interstellar medium of active galaxies or of systems with knowledge of their
160: BH mass or accretion rate.
161:
162: The gaseous medium of the host galaxy, especially the cold phase as traced
163: in neutral atomic or molecular hydrogen, offers a number of diagnostics
164: inaccessible by any other means. Since cold gas constitutes the very raw
165: material out of which both the stars form and the BH grows, the cold gas
166: content of the host galaxy is one of the most fundamental quantities that can
167: be measured in the effort to understand the coevolution of BHs and galaxies.
168: At the most rudimentary level, we might naively expect the gas content of the
169: host to be correlated with the BH accretion rate or the luminosity of its
170: active galactic nucleus (AGN). Likewise, the gas content should reflect
171: the particular evolutionary stage of the host galaxy. Many current models
172: (e.g., Granato et al. 2004; Springel et al. 2005) invoke AGN feedback as a
173: key ingredient for galaxy formation and for coupling the BH to its host.
174: Depending on the violence with which the accretion energy is injected into the
175: host and the evolutionary state of the system, AGN feedback can wreck havoc on
176: the interstellar medium of the host. For example, recent \hi\ absorption
177: observations of radio-loud AGNs detect substantial quantities of high-velocity
178: outflowing neutral gas, presumably in the midst of being expelled from the
179: host galaxy by the radio jet (Morganti et al. 2007). Performing a careful,
180: systematic census of the cold gas content of AGN hosts will provide much
181: needed empirical guidance for AGN feedback models. Apart from the sheer gas
182: mass, \hi\ and CO observations, even when conducted in spatially unresolved
183: mode, can provide other useful probes of the physical properties of the host,
184: and of its circumgalactic environment (e.g., Ho 2007a, 2007b). For example,
185: the width of the integrated line profile, if it is sufficiently regular, gives
186: an estimate of the rotation velocity of the disk, and hence an additional
187: handle on the gravitational potential of the system. Combining the line width
188: with the Tully-Fisher (1977) relation, we can infer immediately the total
189: luminosity of the host, independent of any contamination from the AGN. The
190: degree of symmetry of the line profile furnishes useful, if crude, information
191: on the spatial distribution of gas within and around the host, as well as an
192: effective probe of possible dynamic disturbances due to neighboring galaxies.
193:
194: The primary goal of this study is to quantify the \hi\ content of a large,
195: well-defined sample of active galaxies with uniformly measured BH masses and
196: optical properties, spanning a wide range in AGN properties. Despite the
197: obvious importance of
198:
199: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
200: \vskip 0.3cm
201: %%BoundingBox: 80 150 520 700
202: \figurenum{1}
203: \psfig{file=f1.eps,width=8.5cm,angle=0}
204: \figcaption[fig1.ps]{
205: The distribution of BH masses and Eddington ratios for the sample included
206: in this study. The 101 newly surveyed objects for which \hi\ observations
207: were successfully obtained are plotted as circles, while the sample of 53
208: sources taken from the literature are marked as triangles.
209: \label{fig1}}
210: \vskip 0.3cm
211: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
212:
213: \noindent
214: understanding the cold gas component of AGN host
215: galaxies, there has been relatively little modern work conducted with this
216: explicit goal in mind. Although there have been a number of \hi\ surveys of
217: AGNs, most of them have focused on relatively low-luminosity Seyfert nuclei
218: (Allen et al. 1971; Heckman et al. 1978; Bieging \& Biermann 1983; Mirabel \&
219: Wilson 1984; Hutchings 1989; Greene et al. 2004) and radio-emitting elliptical
220: galaxies (Dressel et al. 1982; Jenkins 1983), with only limited attention
221: devoted to higher luminosity quasars (Condon et al. 1985; Hutchings et al.
222: 1987; Lim \& Ho 1999). This is in part due to sensitivity limitations
223: (quasars are more distant), but also due to the poor baselines of pre-upgrade
224: Arecibo\footnote{The Arecibo Observatory is part of the National Astronomy and
225: Ionosphere Center, which is operated by Cornell University under a cooperative
226: agreement with the National Science Foundation.} spectra. With the new
227: Gregorian optics, $L$-band receiver, and modern
228: backend at Arecibo, the time is ripe to revisit the problem in a concerted
229: fashion. In light of the scientific issues outlined above, the motivation has
230: never been stronger. We are particularly keen to use the \hi\ line width as a
231: kinematic tracer of the host galaxy potential. Since the rotation velocity of
232: the disk is correlated with the stellar velocity dispersion of the bulge (see
233: Ho 2007a, and references therein), the \hi\ line width can be used as a new
234: variable to investigate the correlation between BH mass and galaxy potential.
235: We are additionally interested in using the \hi\ spectra to obtain dynamical
236: masses for the host galaxies, to use the line shape to probe the nearby
237: environment and dynamical state of the hosts, and to evaluate possible
238: correlations between \hi\ content and AGN properties. These issues are
239: investigated in a companion paper (Ho et al. 2008).
240:
241: \section{Observations and Data Reduction}
242:
243: \subsection{Sample}
244:
245: Our sample of AGNs was chosen with one overriding scientific motivation in
246: mind: the availability of a reliable BH mass estimate. As we rely on
247: the virial mass method to estimate BH masses (Kaspi et al. 2000;
248: Greene \& Ho 2005b; Peterson 2007), this limits our targets to type 1 AGNs.
249: Sensitivity considerations with the current Arecibo system imposes a practical
250: redshift limit of $z$\lax0.1. Apart from these two factors, and the visibility
251: restrictions of Arecibo (0\deg\ \lax\ $\delta$ \lax\ 37\deg), the targets were
252: selected largely randomly to fill the available schedule blocks of the
253: telescope. The 113 newly observed objects, whose basic properties are
254: summarized in Table~1, contains two subsamples. The first comprises 98 type 1
255: AGNs from the Fourth Data Release of the Sloan Digital Sky Survey (SDSS;
256: Adelman-McCarthy et al. 2006), which form part of an on-going study of
257: low-redshift AGNs by Greene (2006; see also Greene \& Ho 2004, 2005b, 2006a,
258: 2006b, 2007a, 2007b). Although the SDSS objects strictly do not form a
259: complete or unbiased sample, they are representative of low-redshift
260: broad-line AGNs of moderate to high luminosities. With $M_g \approx -18.8$
261: to $-23.1$ mag, only $\sim 3-4$ objects satisfy the conventional luminosity
262: threshold of quasars\footnote{The canonical luminosity threshold of quasars,
263: $M_B = -23.0$ mag (Schmidt \& Green 1983), translates to $M_B = -22.1$ mag in
264: our distance scale, which assumes $H_0$ = 70 \kms~Mpc$^{-1}$, $\Omega_m
265: = 0.3$, and $\Omega_{\Lambda} = 0.7$. For a power-law AGN spectrum of the
266: form $f_\lambda \propto \lambda^{-1.56}$ (Vanden~Berk et al. 2001), this
267: threshold is $M_g \approx -22.3$ mag.}, but most are very prominent Seyfert 1
268: nuclei. Twenty-eight of the objects have broad H\al\ profiles with full-width
269: at half maximum (FWHM) less than 2000 \kms, and thus meet the formal line width
270: criterion of narrow-line Seyfert 1 galaxies (e.g., Osterbrock \& Pogge 1985).
271: The second subsample, in total 15 objects, were primarily chosen because they
272: have been studied with reverberation mapping (Kaspi et al. 2000; Peterson et
273: al. 2004); we deem these to be high-priority objects because they have
274: better-determined BH masses. This subsample includes seven Palomar-Green (PG)
275: sources (Schmidt \& Green 1983), among them five luminous enough to qualify as
276: bona fide quasars, and two satisfying the line width criterion of narrow-line
277: Seyfert 1 galaxies (PG~0003+199 and PG~1211+143).
278:
279: To augment the sample size and to increase its dynamic range in terms of BH
280: mass and AGN luminosity, we performed a comprehensive search of the literature
281: to compile all previously published \hi\ measurements of type~1 AGNs that
282: have sufficient optical data to allow estimation of BH masses. The results of
283: this exercise yielded a sizable number of additional objects (53), the
284: details of which are documented in the Appendix. Our final sample, now
285: totaling 166 and by far the largest ever studied, covers a wide range of BH
286: masses, from \mbh\ $\approx\,10^5$ to $10^9$ \solmass, and a significant
287: spread in Eddington ratios, from $\log L_{\rm bol}/L_{\rm Edd} \approx -2.7$
288: to 0.3 (Fig.~1), where $L_{\rm Edd} \equiv 1.26 \times 10^{38}
289: \left(M_{\rm BH}/M_{\odot}\right)$ \lum. Although the sample definitely
290: contains predominantly low-luminosity AGNs, it covers at least 4 orders of
291: magnitude in nuclear luminosity (Fig.~2{\it a}), from $L_{\rm H\alpha} \approx
292: 10^{40}$ to $10^{44}$ \lum\ (excluding the ultra-low-luminosity object
293: NGC~4395 at $L_{\rm H\alpha} \approx 10^{38}$ \lum), which in more familiar
294: units corresponds to $B$-band absolute magnitudes of $M_B \approx -15.5$ to
295: $-24.75$ mag (Fig.~2{\it b}).
296:
297:
298: \subsection{Arecibo Observations}
299:
300: We observed the 21~cm spin-flip transition of neutral hydrogen (\ion{H}{1})
301: in our sample at the Arecibo radio telescope from
302:
303: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
304: \vskip 0.3cm
305: %%BoundingBox: 100 50 400 750
306: \begin{figure*}[t]
307: \figurenum{2}
308: \centerline{\psfig{file=f2.eps,width=19.5cm,angle=-90}}
309: \figcaption[fig2.ps]{
310: The distribution of ({\it a}) H\al\ luminosity and ({\it b}) $B$-band absolute
311: magnitude of the AGN component for the sample objects with \hi\ data. The
312: H\bet\ luminosities of the literature sample (Table~6) were converted to
313: H\al\ assuming H\al/H\bet\ = 3.5, as empirically determined by Greene \& Ho
314: (2005b). To convert between H\al\ luminosity and $B$-band absolute magnitude,
315: we employ the correlation between H\al\ and 5100 \AA\ continuum luminosity of
316: Greene \& Ho (2005b), and then assume a continuum spectrum of the form
317: $f_\lambda \propto \lambda^{-1.56}$ (Vanden~Berk et al. 2001) to extrapolate
318: to 4400 \AA.
319: \label{fig2}}
320: \end{figure*}
321: \vskip 0.3cm
322: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
323:
324: \noindent
325: November 2005 through April 2007. The \hi\ observations were
326: conducted in four independently tracked 25~MHz bands centered on redshifted
327: \ion{H}{1} and OH (1420.405751786, 1612.2310, 1667.3590, and 1720.5300~MHz,
328: respectively). Observations consisted of 5-minute position-switched scans,
329: with a calibration diode fired after each position-switched pair and spectral
330: records recorded every 6~seconds. Typically sources were observed for
331: 1--2~hours. The autocorrelation spectrometer used 1024 channels and 9-level
332: sampling in two (subsequently averaged) polarizations. Rest-frame velocity
333: resolutions ranged from 5.15~km~s$^{-1}$ ($z=0$) to 5.72~km~s$^{-1}$
334: ($z=0.11$), but most spectra were Hanning smoothed, reducing the velocity
335: resolution roughly by a factor of 2.
336:
337: Records were individually calibrated and bandpasses flattened using the
338: calibration diode and the corresponding off-source records. Records and
339: polarizations were subsequently averaged, and a low-order polynomial baseline
340: was fit and subtracted. Systematic flux calibration errors in these data are
341: of order $10\%$. All data reduction was performed in AIPS++\footnote{The
342: AIPS++ (Astronomical Information Processing System) is freely available for
343: use under the Gnu Public License. Further information may be obtained from
344: {\tt http://aips2.nrao.edu}.}. Some spectra showed standing waves due to
345: resonances within the telescope superstructure or strong continuum sources
346: ($\gtrsim 300$~mJy) falling in the beam (either coincidentally or due to
347: strong radio emission from the target galaxy itself). The expected \hi\
348: line widths are similar to the size of the standing wave features
349: ($\sim1$~MHz), so the detectability of lines was severely impaired in a few
350: cases.
351:
352: The observed bands were generally interference-free in the vicinity of the
353: observed lines, requiring little or no flagging, but some redshift ranges,
354: most prominently $z\simeq 0.066$--0.069 and $z\simeq0.051$--0.054, were
355: unobservable due to radio frequency interference (RFI). Hence, the redshift
356: distribution of the sample has gaps. \ion{H}{1} lines were detected in 66
357: galaxies in the sample, 35 galaxies were significant nondetections, and 12
358: galaxies are indeterminate due to standing waves in the bandpass or RFI. The
359: spectra for the detected sources are plotted in Figure~3, accompanied by
360: their optical images. No 18 cm OH lines were detected
361: in the sample (many lines were unobservable due to RFI).
362:
363: The \hi\ properties of the sample are summarized in Table~2. For each
364: detected source, we list the systemic velocity of the line in the barycentric
365: frame ($\upsilon_{\rm sys}$), defined to be the midpoint (mean) of the
366: velocities corresponding to the 20\% point of the two peaks in the \hi\
367: profile, and the line width $W_{20}$, the difference between these two
368: velocities. The actual high and low velocities are obtained from an
369: interpolation between the two data points bracketing 20\% of peak flux. For a
370: typical root-mean-square noise level of $\sim 0.3$ mJy, we estimate that the
371: uncertainty in the systemic velocity is $\sigma(\upsilon_{\rm sys}) \approx
372: 3.4$ \kms; the uncertainty in the line width is $\sigma(W_{20}) = 2
373: \sigma(\upsilon_{\rm sys}) \approx 6.8$ \kms. In practice, these formal
374: values underestimate the true errors for spectra affected by RFI or poor
375: bandpasses, or in instances when the line profile is not clearly
376: double-peaked. Profiles that are single-peaked and/or highly
377: asymmetric are noted in Table~2.
378:
379: To convert the raw line widths to \vm, the maximum rotational velocity, four
380: corrections must be applied to $W_{20}$: (1) instrumental resolution, which we
381: assume to be $W_{\rm inst} = 10$ or 5 \kms, depending on whether the spectrum
382: was Hanning smoothed or not, and that it can be removed by linear subtraction;
383: (2) redshift, which stretches the line width by a factor $(1+z)$; (3)
384: turbulent broadening, which for simplicity we assume to be $W_{\rm turb} = 22$
385: \kms\ for $W_{20}$ and can be subtracted linearly (Verheijen \& Sancisi 2001);
386: and (4) inclination angle. We assume that the inclination of the \hi-emitting
387: disk to the line-of-sight can be approximated by the photometric inclination
388: angle of the optical disk, $i$ (see \S2.3). The final maximum rotational
389: velocity is then
390:
391: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
392: %BoundingBox: 10 10 610 790
393: \begin{figure*}[t]
394: %%\centerline{\psfig{file=table1_p1.ps,width=18.0cm,angle=180}}
395: \centerline{\psfig{file=table1_p1.ps,height=0.99\textheight,angle=180}}
396: \end{figure*}
397: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
398: \clearpage
399: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
400: %BoundingBox: 50 10 650 790
401: \begin{figure*}[t]
402: %%\centerline{\psfig{file=table1_p2.ps,width=18.0cm,angle=180}}
403: \centerline{\psfig{file=table1_p2.ps,height=0.99\textheight,angle=180}}
404: \end{figure*}
405: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
406: \clearpage
407: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
408: %%BoundingBox: -50 10 560 790
409: \begin{figure*}[t]
410: \hskip -0.4truein
411: %\centerline{\psfig{file=table1_p3.ps,width=17.5cm,angle=180}}
412: \centerline{\psfig{file=table1_p3.ps,height=0.99\textheight,angle=180}}
413: \end{figure*}
414: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
415: \clearpage
416: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
417: \vskip 0.3cm
418: %%BoundingBox: 22 75 593 706
419: \begin{figure*}[t]
420: \figurenum{3{\it a}}
421: \centerline{\psfig{file=f3a.eps,width=19.5cm,angle=0}}
422: \figcaption[fig3.ps]{
423: \hi\ spectra and optical $g$-band SDSS images of the \hi-detected objects.
424: The velocity scale is given in the barycentric frame, and the velocity
425: range is chosen such that the lines have roughly comparable widths on the
426: plots. Features suspected to be due to radio frequency interference are
427: labeled ``RFI.'' Each image subtends a physical scale of 50 kpc $\times$ 50
428: kpc, with north oriented up and east to the left.
429: \label{fig3}}
430: \end{figure*}
431: \vskip 0.3cm
432: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
433: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
434: \vskip 0.3cm
435: %%BoundingBox: 22 75 593 706
436: \begin{figure*}[t]
437: \figurenum{3{\it b}}
438: \centerline{\psfig{file=f3b.eps,width=19.5cm,angle=0}}
439: \figcaption[fig3.ps]{
440: Same as Fig.~3{\it a}.
441: \label{fig3}}
442: \end{figure*}
443: \vskip 0.3cm
444: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
445: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
446: \vskip 0.3cm
447: %%BoundingBox: 22 75 593 706
448: \begin{figure*}[t]
449: \figurenum{3{\it c}}
450: \centerline{\psfig{file=f3c.eps,width=19.5cm,angle=0}}
451: \figcaption[fig3.ps]{
452: Same as Fig.~3{\it a}.
453: \label{fig3}}
454: \end{figure*}
455: \vskip 0.3cm
456: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
457: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
458: \vskip 0.3cm
459: %%BoundingBox: 22 75 593 706
460: \begin{figure*}[t]
461: \figurenum{3{\it d}}
462: \centerline{\psfig{file=f3d.eps,width=19.5cm,angle=0}}
463: \figcaption[fig3.ps]{
464: Same as Fig.~3{\it a}.
465: \label{fig3}}
466: \end{figure*}
467: \vskip 0.3cm
468: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
469: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
470: \vskip 0.3cm
471: %%BoundingBox: 22 75 593 706
472: \begin{figure*}[t]
473: \figurenum{3{\it e}}
474: \centerline{\psfig{file=f3e.eps,width=19.5cm,angle=0}}
475: \figcaption[fig3.ps]{
476: Same as Fig.~3{\it a}.
477: \label{fig3}}
478: \end{figure*}
479: \vskip 0.3cm
480: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
481: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
482: \vskip 0.3cm
483: %%BoundingBox: 22 75 593 706
484: \begin{figure*}[t]
485: \figurenum{3{\it f}}
486: \centerline{\psfig{file=f3f.eps,width=19.5cm,angle=0}}
487: \figcaption[fig3.ps]{
488: Same as Fig.~3{\it a}.
489: \label{fig3}}
490: \end{figure*}
491: \vskip 0.3cm
492: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
493: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
494: \vskip 0.3cm
495: %%BoundingBox: 22 75 593 706
496: \begin{figure*}[t]
497: \figurenum{3{\it g}}
498: \centerline{\psfig{file=f3g.eps,width=19.5cm,angle=0}}
499: \figcaption[fig3.ps]{
500: Same as Fig.~3{\it a}. The image for Akn 120 comes from \hst/PC2 (filter
501: F750LP) and subtends 22.4 kpc $\times$ 22.4 kpc.
502: \label{fig3}}
503: \end{figure*}
504: \vskip 0.3cm
505: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
506: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
507: \vskip 0.3cm
508: %BoundingBox: 22 75 593 706
509: \begin{figure*}[t]
510: \figurenum{3{\it h}}
511: \centerline{\psfig{file=f3h.eps,width=19.5cm,angle=0}}
512: \figcaption[fig3.ps]{
513: Same as Fig.~3{\it a}, except that for MCG~+01-13-012, NGC~3227,
514: NGC~5548, and NGC~7469 the images are in the $B$ band taken from the
515: Digital Sky Survey. The images for the four PG quasars come from \hst,
516: taken with the following detector and filter combinations and field sizes:
517: PG~0844+349 (ACS/F625W, 84.6 kpc $\times$ 84.6 kpc),
518: PG~1229+204 (PC2/F606W, 43.9 kpc $\times$ 43.9 kpc),
519: PG~1426+015 (PC2/F814W, 61.4 kpc $\times$ 61.4 kpc), and
520: PG~2130+099; (PC2/F450W, 43.9 kpc $\times$ 43.9 kpc).
521: \label{fig3}}
522: \end{figure*}
523: \vskip 0.3cm
524: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
525: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
526: \vskip 0.3cm
527: %%BoundingBox: 22 550 593 706
528: \begin{figure*}[t]
529: \figurenum{3{\it i}}
530: \centerline{\psfig{file=f3i.eps,width=19.5cm,angle=0}}
531: \figcaption[fig3.ps]{
532: Same as Fig.~3{\it a}, except that for RX~J0602.1+2828 and RX~J0608.0+3058
533: the images are in the $B$ band and were taken from the Digital Sky Survey.
534: \label{fig3}}
535: \end{figure*}
536: \vskip 0.3cm
537: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
538:
539: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
540: \vskip 0.3cm
541: %%BoundingBox: 32 78 594 716
542: \begin{figure*}[t]
543: \figurenum{4{\it a}}
544: \centerline{\psfig{file=f4a.eps,width=19.5cm,angle=0}}
545: \figcaption[fig4.ps]{
546: Optical $g$-band SDSS images of the \hi\ nondetections. Each image subtends a
547: physical scale of 50 kpc $\times$ 50 kpc, with north oriented up and east to
548: the left.
549: \label{fig4}}
550: \end{figure*}
551: \vskip 0.3cm
552: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
553: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
554: \vskip 0.3cm
555: %%BoundingBox: 32 78 594 716
556: \begin{figure*}[t]
557: \figurenum{4{\it b}}
558: \centerline{\psfig{file=f4b.eps,width=19.5cm,angle=0}}
559: \figcaption[fig4.ps]{
560: Same as Fig.~4{\it a}.
561: \label{fig4}}
562: \end{figure*}
563: \vskip 0.3cm
564: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
565: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
566: \vskip 0.3cm
567: %%BoundingBox: 32 570 594 716
568: \begin{figure*}[t]
569: \figurenum{4{\it c}}
570: \centerline{\psfig{file=f4c.eps,width=19.5cm,angle=0}}
571: \figcaption[fig4.ps]{
572: Same as Fig.~4{\it a}, except for PG~0003+199, which comes
573: from \hst/PC2 (filter F606W) and subtends 21.9 kpc $\times$ 21.9 kpc.
574: \label{fig4}}
575: \end{figure*}
576: \vskip 0.3cm
577: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
578: \clearpage
579:
580: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
581: %%BoundingBox: 30 60 620 720
582: \begin{figure*}[t]
583: \centerline{\psfig{file=table2_p1.ps,width=18.5cm,angle=0}}
584: \end{figure*}
585: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
586: \clearpage
587: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
588: %%BoundingBox: 30 60 620 720
589: \begin{figure*}[t]
590: \centerline{\psfig{file=table2_p2.ps,width=18.5cm,angle=0}}
591: \end{figure*}
592: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
593: \clearpage
594: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
595: %%BoundingBox: 30 170 620 630
596: \begin{figure*}[t]
597: \centerline{\psfig{file=table2_p3.ps,width=18.5cm,angle=0}}
598: \end{figure*}
599: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
600:
601: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
602: %%BoundingBox: 90 270 525 520
603: \begin{figure*}[t]
604: \centerline{\psfig{file=table3_v1.ps,width=16.5cm,angle=0}}
605: \end{figure*}
606: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
607:
608: \clearpage
609: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
610: %%BoundingBox: 30 60 620 720
611: \begin{figure*}[t]
612: \centerline{\psfig{file=table4_p1.ps,width=18.5cm,angle=0}}
613: \end{figure*}
614: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
615: \clearpage
616: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
617: %%BoundingBox: 30 60 620 720
618: \begin{figure*}[t]
619: \centerline{\psfig{file=table4_p2.ps,width=18.5cm,angle=0}}
620: \end{figure*}
621: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
622:
623: \clearpage
624:
625: \begin{equation}
626: \upsilon_m = {{(W_{20} - W_{\rm inst})/(1+z) - W_{\rm turb}}\over{2 \ {\rm sin}\ i}}.
627: \end{equation}
628:
629: In the optically thin limit, the integrated line flux,
630: $\int S_\nu\,d\upsilon$, in units of Jy~\kms, is related to the \hi\ mass as
631: (Roberts 1962)
632:
633: \begin{equation}
634: M_{{\rm H~{\tiny I}}} = 2.36\times10^5 \ D_{L}^2\ \int S_\nu\,d\upsilon
635: \, \, \, \, M_\odot,
636: \end{equation}
637:
638: \noindent
639: where $D_{L}$ is the luminosity distance expressed in Mpc and $d\upsilon$
640: is the line width in the observer's frame. We neglect any correction for
641: self-absorption, since this is controversial (see, e.g., Springob et al.
642: 2005), and, in any case, depends on Hubble type, which is not well-known for
643: many of our sources (see \S2.3). Upper limits for the integrated fluxes
644: and \hi\ masses are calculated using 3 times the root-mean-square noise level
645: and a rest-frame line width of 304 \kms, the median value for the 66 detected
646: objects.
647:
648: Single-dish \hi\ observations always run the risk of source confusion,
649: especially for relatively distant samples such as ours. At the median redshift
650: of $z = 0.05$ for our targets, Arecibo's telescope beam (FWHM $\approx$
651: 3\farcm5) subtends a linear diameter of $\sim 200$ kpc. We use the optical
652: images (from SDSS if available, or else from the Palomar Digital Sky Survey;
653: see \S2.3), in combination with the redshifts, to identify potential sources
654: of confusion within a search radius of 7\farcm5. The intensity of the first
655: sidelobes of the Arecibo beam drops to $\sim$10\% of the peak at a distance of
656: 5\farcm5 from the beam center, and by 7\amin--8\amin\ it becomes negligible
657: (Heiles et al. 2000). We consider an object as a candidate confusing source
658: if it lies within the search radius and has a cataloged radial velocity
659: within $\pm 500$ \kms\ of that of the science target. Only a few candidates
660: have been identified, and these are noted in Table~2. The vast majority of
661: the objects in our survey are unaffected by source confusion.
662:
663: Eight of the objects in our survey have published \hi\ data. A comparison
664: of our measurements with those in the literature (Table~3) shows that in
665: general there is fairly good agreement. The most noticeable exception is
666: PG~2130+099, for which both our line width and flux are lower than the
667: literature values by about a factor of 2.
668:
669:
670: \subsection{Optical Data}
671:
672: We use both optical spectroscopic and imaging data to ascertain a number of
673: parameters that are central to our analysis. For the SDSS objects, these
674: data were taken directly from the SDSS archives. The spectra were analyzed
675: following the procedures previously described in Greene \& Ho (2004, 2005b;
676: see also Kim et al. 2006). In brief, we obtain a pure emission-line spectrum
677: for each object by subtracting from the observed total spectrum a model
678: consisting of a stellar component, a featureless power-law component, and an
679: \feii\ ``pseudo-continuum.'' We then fit the resulting narrow and broad
680: emission lines using a combination of multi-component Gaussians. The optical
681: emission-line parameters are collected in Table~4. We also give (in Table~1),
682: where available, values of the central stellar velocity dispersion
683: and its associated uncertainty, derived using the technique of Greene \& Ho
684: (2006a). If the data do not permit the stellar velocity dispersion to be
685: measured, we list instead the velocity dispersion of the \oii\ \lamb 3727
686: line, which Greene \& Ho (2005a) have shown to be an effective substitute.
687: BH masses were estimated using the broad H\al\ method of Greene \& Ho
688: (2005b), using the FHWM and luminosities given in Table~1. We further convert
689: the broad H\al\ luminosity to the AGN continuum luminosity at 5100 \AA, using
690: Equation 1 of Greene \& Ho (2005b), from which we deduce the bolometric
691: luminosity assuming that $L_{\rm bol} = 9.8$ \ensuremath{L_{\rm{5100 \AA}}}
692: (McClure \& Dunlop 2004).
693:
694: The non-SDSS objects were treated differently. The majority of these, by
695: design, have BH masses directly measured from reverberation mapping, and we
696: simply adopt the values given in Peterson et al. (2004), from which continuum
697: luminosities at 5100 \AA\ were also taken. Three of the non-SDSS
698: objects (MCG~+01-13-012, RX~J0602.1+2828, and RX~J0608.0+3058) only have
699: measurements for the H\bet\ line, but BH masses based on this line alone can
700: also be estimated with reasonable accuracy (Greene \& Ho 2005b).
701:
702: The images provide five important pieces of information about the sources:
703: the total (AGN plus host galaxy) magnitude, morphological type, size,
704: inclination angle, and potential sources of confusion within the \hi\
705: beam. For the SDSS objects, we choose the $g$ band as our
706: fiducial reference point, since it is closest to the more traditional
707: $B$ band on which most of the literature references are based. In Figure~3,
708: we display the optical image of the sources detected in \hi; images of the
709: \hi\ nondetections are shown in Figure~4. In a few cases we were able to
710: locate high-resolution images in the {\it Hubble Space Telescope (HST)}\
711: archives. The size of each image has been scaled to a constant physical scale
712: of 50 kpc $\times$ 50 kpc to facilitate comparison of objects with very
713: different distances.
714:
715: Inspection of Figures~3 and 4 shows that obtaining reliable morphological
716: types of the host galaxies is challenging for most of the sources, because of
717: their small angular sizes and the coarse resolution and shallow depth of the
718: SDSS images. In assigning a morphological type, we must be
719: careful to give lower weight to the apparent prominence of the bulge,
720: since a substantial fraction of the central brightness enhancement presumably
721: comes from the AGN core itself. The SDSS database provides quantitative
722: measurements of the Petrosian radius containing 50\% and 90\% of the
723: light, from which one can calculate the (inverse) ``concentration index,''
724: defined to be $C \equiv r_{\rm P50}/r_{\rm P90}$. We use the correlation
725: between $C$ and morphological type index of Shimasaku et al. (2001) as an
726: additional guide to help us assign morphological types, again bearing in
727: mind that because of the AGN contamination the concentration index should be
728: viewed strictly as an upper limit to the true value. We generally give less
729: weight to the classifications based on $C$. (We have discovered a
730: few glaring examples where the SDSS-based concentration index gives an
731: egregiously erroneous morphological type.) The most difficult classifications
732: are those that lie on the boundary between ellipticals and S0s, which is
733: sometimes ambiguous even for nearby, bright galaxies. Unless the galaxy is
734: highly inclined, it is often just impossible to tell; we label these cases as
735: ``E/S0.'' Another difficult situation arises when trying to discern whether a
736: disk galaxy truly possesses spiral arms. Given the modest quality of the SDSS
737: images and the relatively large distances of the galaxies, again often no
738: clear-cut decision can be made, and we are forced to assign a classification
739: of ``S0/Sp.'' For a few of the objects, the image material is simply
740: inadequate to allow a classification to be made at all.
741:
742: The SDSS photometry additionally provides values for the major axis ($a$)
743: and minor axis ($b$) isophotal diameters measured at a surface brightness
744: level of $\mu = 25$ mag~arcsec$^{-2}$, from which we can deduce the
745: photometric inclination angle using Hubble's (1926) formula
746: %
747: \begin{equation}
748: {\rm cos}^2 i = {{q^2 - q_0^2}\over{1-q_0^2}},
749: \end{equation}
750: %
751:
752: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
753: \vskip 0.3cm
754: %%BoundingBox: 100 50 400 750
755: \figurenum{5}
756: \begin{figure*}[t]
757: \centerline{\psfig{file=f5.eps,width=19.0cm,angle=-90}}
758: \figcaption[fig5.ps]{
759: The distribution of ({\it a}) \hi\ masses and ({\it b}) \hi\
760: masses normalized to the $B$-band luminosity of the
761: host galaxy. Limits are plotted as open histograms.
762: \label{fig5}}
763: \end{figure*}
764: \vskip 0.3cm
765: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
766:
767: \noindent
768: where $q = b/a$. The intrinsic thickness of the disk, $q_0$, varies by about a
769: factor of 2 along the spiral sequence; we adopt $q_0 = 0.3$, a value
770: appropriate for early-type systems (Fouqu\'e et al. 1990). It is also
771: of interest to combine the galaxy's optical size ($D_{\rm 25}$, diameter
772: at $\mu = 25$ mag~arcsec$^{-2}$) with the \hi\ line width to compute a
773: characteristic dynamical mass. From Casertano \& Shostak (1980),
774: %
775: \begin{equation}
776: M_{\rm dyn} = 2\times 10^4
777: \left( {D_{L}}\over{{\rm Mpc}} \right)
778: \left( {D_{\rm 25}}\over{{\rm arcmin}} \right)
779: \left( {\upsilon_{m}}\over{{\rm km~s}^{-1}} \right)^2 \,\,\, \, M_\odot.
780: \end{equation}
781: %
782: \noindent
783: Because we have no actual measurement of the size of the \hi\ disk, this
784: formula yields only an approximate estimate of the true dynamical mass.
785: However, from spatially resolved observations we know that the sizes of \hi\
786: disks of spiral galaxies, over a wide range of Hubble types and luminosities,
787: scale remarkably well with their optical sizes. From the studies of Broeils \&
788: Rhee (1997) and Noordermeer et al. (2005), $D_{\rm H~{\tiny I}}/D_{\rm 25}
789: \approx 1.7$ within 30\%--40\%. Nevertheless, our values of $M_{\rm dyn}$
790: are probably much more accurate as a relative rather than an absolute
791: measure of the galaxy dynamical mass.
792:
793: The optical photometry, albeit of insufficient angular resolution to yield a
794: direct decomposition of the host galaxy from the AGN core, nevertheless can be
795: used to give a rough, yet still useful, estimate of the host galaxy's
796: luminosity. Following the strategy of Greene \& Ho (2004, 2007b), we obtain
797: the host galaxy luminosity by subtracting the AGN contribution, derived from
798: the spectral analysis, from the total Petrosian (galaxy plus AGN) luminosity
799: available from the photometry. In the current application, we use the broad
800: H\al\ luminosity as a surrogate for the 5100 \AA\ continuum luminosity to
801: minimize the uncertainty of measuring the latter, since in some of our objects
802: there may be significant starlight within the 3\asec\ aperture of the SDSS
803: spectra (see Greene \& Ho 2005b). We extrapolate the flux density at 5100
804: \AA\ to the central wavelength of the $g$ filter (5120 \AA) assuming that the
805: underlying power-law continuum has a shape $f_\lambda \propto \lambda^{-1.56}$
806: (Vanden~Berk et al. 2001), adding the small offset to the photometric
807: zeropoint of the $g$-band filter recommended in the SDSS
808: website\footnote{\tt http://photo.astro.princeton.edu/\#data\_model}. In a
809: few sources the host galaxy luminosity derived in this manner actually exceeds
810: the total luminosity. This may reflect the inherent scatter introduced by our
811: procedure, or perhaps variability in the AGN. For these cases, we adopt the
812: total luminosity as an upper limit on the host galaxy luminosity.
813:
814: \section{Discussion and Summary}
815:
816: We have used the Arecibo telescope to conduct the largest modern survey to
817: date for \hi\ emission in active galaxies. The sample consists of 113
818: $z$ \lax\ 0.11 galaxies with type~1 AGNs, selected from an extensive study
819: of SDSS sources for which BH masses can be reliably determined. The new
820: observations were supplemented with an additional 53 type 1 AGNs assembled
821: from the literature, forming a final, comprehensive sample of 154 sources with
822: \hi\ detections or useful upper limits.
823: Among the newly observed galaxies, we detected \hi\ in 66 out of the 101
824: objects that were not adversely affected by RFI, for an overall detection rate
825: of 65\%. The \hi\ masses for the detected sources range from \mhi\
826: $\approx\,10^9$ to $4\times10^{10}$ \solmass, with an average value of
827: $8.6\times 10^9$ \solmass, while upper limits for the undetected objects
828: generally hover around \mhi\ $\approx\,10^{10}$ \solmass\ (Fig.~5{\it a}).
829: Adding in the literature sample does not appreciably change these values. The
830: host galaxies of the current sample of type 1 AGNs are therefore quite rich in
831: neutral hydrogen. For reference, recall that our Galaxy has a total \hi\ mass
832: of $5.5 \times 10^9$ \solmass\ (Hartmann \& Burton 1997).
833: Since the \hi\ content of galaxies scales with the stellar luminosity in a
834: manner that depends on morphological type (e.g., Roberts \& Haynes 1994),
835: Figure~5{\it b}\ examines the \hi\ masses normalized to the $B$-band
836: luminosity of the host galaxy. In the case of the SDSS objects, we converted
837: the host galaxy luminosities in the $g$ band (\S 2.3) to the $B$ band assuming
838: an average color of $g-B = -0.45$ mag, appropriate for an Sab galaxy (Fukugita
839: et al. 1995), roughly the average morphological type of our sample. The
840: resulting distribution, ranging from \mhi/$L_B \approx 0.02$ to 4.5 with an
841: average value of 0.42, agrees well with the distribution of inactive spiral
842: galaxies of Hubble type Sa to Sb (e.g., Roberts \& Haynes
843:
844: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
845: \vskip 0.3cm
846: %%BoundingBox: 20 220 570 630
847: \figurenum{6}
848: \psfig{file=f6.eps,width=8.5cm,angle=0}
849: \figcaption[fig6.ps]{
850: Distribution of radial velocity difference as measured in the optical
851: and in \hi, $\Delta \upsilon = \upsilon_{\rm opt} - \upsilon_{\rm sys}$.
852: Note the excess of objects toward negative values of $\Delta \upsilon$.
853: \label{fig6}}
854: \vskip 0.3cm
855: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
856:
857: \noindent
858: 1994). This
859: reinforces the conclusion that the host galaxies of type 1 AGNs possess a
860: normal gas content, at least as far as neutral atomic hydrogen is concerned.
861:
862: The implications of these detection statistics, along with an extensive
863: analysis of the \hi\ and AGN properties assembled here, are presented in
864: our companion paper (Ho et al. 2008).
865:
866: Figure~6 compares the systemic radial velocity measured from \hi\ with the
867: published optical radial velocity, $\upsilon_{\rm opt} = cz$. The velocity
868: difference, $\Delta \upsilon = \upsilon_{\rm opt} - \upsilon_{\rm sys}$,
869: shows a large spread, from $\Delta \upsilon \approx -300$ to $+250$ \kms,
870: but there is a noticeable excess at negative velocities. On average,
871: $\langle \Delta \upsilon \rangle = -46 \pm 91$ \kms. A similar effect was
872: previously reported by Mirabel \& Wilson (1984) and Hutchings et al. (1987);
873: in their samples, the mean offset is $\langle \Delta \upsilon \rangle \approx
874: -50$ \kms, essentially identical to our result. Since our sources are
875: relatively bright, type~1 AGNs, the optical radial velocities are
876: predominantly derived from the narrow emission lines. The systemic velocity
877: of the galaxy, on the other hand, is well anchored by the \hi\ measurement.
878: The negative value of $\langle \Delta \upsilon \rangle$ therefore implies
879: that on average the ionized gas in the narrow-line region has a general
880: tendency to be mildly outflowing.
881:
882: \acknowledgements
883: The work of L.~C.~H. was supported by the Carnegie Institution of Washington
884: and by NASA grants HST-GO-10149.02 and HST-AR-10969 from the Space Telescope
885: Science Institute, which is operated by the Association of Universities for
886: Research in Astronomy, Inc., for NASA, under contract NAS5-26555. Support for
887: J.~D. and J.~E.~G. was provided by NASA through Hubble Fellowship grants
888: HF-01183.01-A and HF-01196, respectively, awarded by the Space Telescope
889: Science Institute. We made use of the databases in HyperLeda
890: ({\tt http://leda.univ-lyon1.fr/}), the Sloan Digital Sky Survey, and
891: the NASA/IPAC Extragalactic Database ({\tt http://nedwww.ipac.caltech.edu/}),
892: which is operated by the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute
893: of Technology, under contract with NASA. We thank Minjin Kim for help with
894: preparing the \hst\ images and for analyzing the SDSS spectra shown in
895: Table~7, Aaron Barth for sending the \hst\ image of PG~0844+349, and C. Motch
896: for making available his published spectra of RX~J0602.1+2828 and
897: RX~J0608.0+3058. We thank the anonymous referee for helpful suggestions.
898:
899: %\clearpage
900:
901: \appendix
902: \section{Literature Data}
903:
904: In an effort to assemble a large database of \hi\ parameters for nearby active
905: galaxies with BH mass estimates, we supplemented our new Arecibo observations
906: with a sample drawn from the published literature. While there is no perfect
907: way to accomplish this task, we began by assembling all the \hi\ measurements
908: listed in Hyperleda, which to date contains the most comprehensive and
909: systematic database for this purpose. One limitation of Hyperleda is that
910: it lists \hi\ detections but not upper limits. From this master list we
911: systematically cross-correlated the galaxy names with modern compilations of
912: AGN spectroscopic parameters (e.g., Whittle 1992; Marziani et al. 2003;
913: Boroson \& Green 1992), as well as whatever other AGN references known to us,
914: with the goal of finding a matching subset that has reliable measurements of
915: nuclear AGN luminosities and line widths for broad H\al\ or H\bet\ emission,
916: to be used to calculate BH masses. In total we were able to locate 61
917: objects, of which 53 are not included in our new survey (the eight
918: overlapping objects are given in Table~3).
919:
920: Table~5 summarizes the basic properties of the literature sample, as given in
921: Hyperleda. (Note that the isophotal diameters and absolute magnitudes of the
922: literature sample have been corrected for internal extinction, as described in
923: Hyperleda. Because of the generally larger distances and more uncertain
924: morphological types of our Arecibo sample, this correction has not been
925: applied to the latter.) Table~6 gathers all the key properties of the
926: sample, including AGN luminosities and line widths, BH masses, Eddington
927: ratios, \hi\ masses, rotation velocities, dynamical masses, and estimates of
928: host galaxy luminosities; these parameters were derived, to the extent
929: possible, following the same precepts used for the main Arecibo sample. Ho
930: (2007a; see Appendix) discusses some complications encountered in using the
931: inclination angles and rotation velocities given in Hyperleda; this study
932: follows the procedures outlined in that paper. Finally, three of the objects
933: do not have published optical spectroscopic parameters but were observed by
934: SDSS. We reanalyzed their optical spectra and present their emission-line
935: measurements in Table~7.
936:
937:
938: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
939: %%BoundingBox: 30 50 590 720
940: \begin{figure*}[t]
941: \centerline{\psfig{file=table5_p1.ps,width=18.5cm,angle=0}}
942: \end{figure*}
943: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
944:
945: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
946: %%BoundingBox: 30 200 590 600
947: \begin{figure*}[t]
948: \centerline{\psfig{file=table5_p2.ps,width=18.5cm,angle=0}}
949: \end{figure*}
950: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
951:
952: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
953: %BoundingBox: 20 50 600 720
954: \begin{figure*}[t]
955: \centerline{\psfig{file=table6_p1.ps,width=18.5cm,angle=0}}
956: \end{figure*}
957: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
958:
959: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
960: %%BoundingBox: 20 150 600 650
961: \begin{figure*}[t]
962: \centerline{\psfig{file=table6_p2.ps,width=18.5cm,angle=0}}
963: \end{figure*}
964: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
965:
966: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
967: %%BoundingBox: 130 60 330 730
968: \begin{figure*}[t]
969: \centerline{\psfig{file=table7_v1.ps,width=18.5cm,angle=90}}
970: \end{figure*}
971: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
972:
973: \clearpage
974:
975: \begin{thebibliography}{}
976:
977: \bibitem[]{}
978: Adelman-McCarthy, J. K., et al. 2006, \apjs, 162, 38
979:
980: \bibitem[]{}
981: Allen, R.~J., Darchy, B. F., \& Lauque, R. 1971, \aa, 10, 198
982:
983: \bibitem[]{}
984: Baes, M., Buyle, P., Hau, G.~K.~T., \& Dejonghe, H. 2003, \mnras, 341, L44
985:
986: \bibitem[]{}
987: Barth, A.~J., Greene, J. E., \& Ho, L.~C. 2005, \apj, 619, L151
988:
989: \bibitem[]{}
990: Barth, A.~J., Ho, L.~C., Rutledge, R. E., \& Sargent, W.~L.~W. 2004, \apj,
991: 607, 90
992:
993: \bibitem[]{}
994: Bentz, M. C., et al. 2006, \apj, 651, 775
995:
996: \bibitem[]{}
997: Bieging, J.~H., \& Biermann, P. 1983, AJ, 88, 161
998:
999: \bibitem[]{}
1000: Boroson, T.~A., \& Green, R.~F. 1992, \apjs, 80, 109
1001:
1002: \bibitem[]{}
1003: Bothun, G.~D., Heckman, T.~M., Schommer, R.~A., \& Balick, B. 1984, \aj,
1004: 89, 1293
1005:
1006: \bibitem[]{}
1007: Bothun, G.~D., Mould, J., Heckman, T., Balick, B., Schommer, R.~A., \&
1008: Kristian, J. 1982, \aj, 87, 1621
1009:
1010: \bibitem[]{}
1011: Botte, V., Ciroi, S., Rafanelli, P., \& Di Mille, F. 2004, \aj, 127, 3168
1012:
1013: \bibitem[]{}
1014: Bottinelli, L., Gouguenheim, L., Paturel, G., \& Teerikorpi, P. 1995, \aa, 296, 64
1015:
1016: \bibitem[]{}
1017: Bregman, J.~N., Hogg, D.~E., \& Roberts, M.~S. 1992, \apj, 387, 484
1018:
1019: \bibitem[]{}
1020: Broeils, A.~H., \& Rhee, M.-H. 1997, \aa, 324, 877
1021:
1022: \bibitem[]{}
1023: Casertano, S. P. R., \& Shostak, G. S. 1980, \aa, 81, 371
1024:
1025: \bibitem[]{}
1026: Condon, J.~J., Hutchings, J.~B., \& Gower, A.~C. 1985, \aj, 90, 1642
1027:
1028: \bibitem[]{}
1029: Dahari, O., \& De Robertis, M.~M. 1988, \apjs, 67, 249
1030:
1031: \bibitem[]{}
1032: Denney, K. D., et al. 2006, \apj, 653, 152
1033:
1034: \bibitem[]{}
1035: Dressel, L.~L., Bania, T.~M., \& O'Connell, R.~W. 1982, \apj, 259, 55
1036:
1037: \bibitem[]{}
1038: Ferrarese, L. 2002, \apj, 578, 90
1039:
1040: \bibitem[]{}
1041: Filippenko, A.~V., \& Ho, L.~C. 2003, \apj, 588, L13
1042:
1043: \bibitem[]{}
1044: Fouqu\'e, R., Bottinelli, L., Gouguenheim, L., \& Paturel, G. 1990, \apj,
1045: 349, 1
1046:
1047: \bibitem[]{}
1048: Fukugita, M., Shimasaku, K., \& Ichikawa, T. 1995, \pasp, 107, 945
1049:
1050: \bibitem[]{}
1051: Giovanelli, R., \& Haynes, M.~P. 1993, \aj, 105, 1271
1052:
1053: \bibitem[]{}
1054: Granato, G.~L., De Zotti, G., Silva, L., Bressan, A., \& Danese, L. 2004,
1055: \apj, 600, 580
1056:
1057: \bibitem[]{}
1058: Greene, J. E. 2006, Ph.D. Thesis, Harvard University
1059:
1060: \bibitem[]{}
1061: Greene, J. E., \& Ho, L. C. 2004, ApJ, 610, 722
1062:
1063: \bibitem[]{}
1064: ------. 2005a, ApJ, 627, 721
1065:
1066: \bibitem[]{}
1067: ------. 2005b, ApJ, 630, 122
1068:
1069: \bibitem[]{}
1070: ------. 2006a, ApJ, 641, 117
1071:
1072: \bibitem[]{}
1073: ------. 2006b, ApJ, 641, L21
1074:
1075: \bibitem[]{}
1076: ------. 2007a, ApJ, 667, 131
1077:
1078: \bibitem[]{}
1079: ------. 2007b, ApJ, 670, 92
1080:
1081: \bibitem[]{}
1082: Greene, J. E., Lim, J., \& Ho, P. T. P. 2004, ApJS, 153, 93
1083:
1084: \bibitem[]{}
1085: Hartmann, D., \& Burton, W. B. 1997, Atlas of Galactic Neutral Hydrogen
1086: (Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press)
1087:
1088: \bibitem[]{}
1089: Haynes, M. P. \& Giovanelli, R. 1984, \aj, 89, 758
1090:
1091: \bibitem[]{}
1092: Heckman, T.~M., \& Balick, B., \& Sullivan, W.~T. 1978, \apj, 224, 745
1093:
1094: \bibitem[]{}
1095: Heiles, C., et al. 2000, Arecibo Technical and Operations Memo 2000-04
1096:
1097: \bibitem[]{}
1098: Ho, L.~C. 2004, ed., Carnegie Observatories Astrophysics Series, Vol. 1:
1099: Coevolution of Black Holes and Galaxies (Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press)
1100:
1101: \bibitem[]{}
1102: ------. 2007a, \apj, 668, 94
1103:
1104: \bibitem[]{}
1105: ------. 2007b, \apj, 669, 821
1106:
1107: \bibitem[]{}
1108: Ho, L. C., Darling, J., \& Greene, J. E. 2008, \apj, in press
1109:
1110: \bibitem[]{}
1111: Ho, L.~C., Filippenko, A.~V., \& Sargent, W.~L.~W. 1997, \apjs, 112, 315
1112:
1113: \bibitem[]{}
1114: Hubble, E. 1926, ApJ, 64, 321
1115:
1116: \bibitem[]{}
1117: Hutchings, J.~B. 1989, \aj, 98, 524
1118:
1119: \bibitem[]{}
1120: Hutchings, J.~B., Gower, A.~C., Price, R. 1987, \aj, 93, 6
1121:
1122: \bibitem[]{}
1123: Jenkins, C.~R. 1983, \mnras, 205, 1321
1124:
1125: \bibitem[]{}
1126: Kaspi, S., Smith, P.~S., Netzer, H., Maoz, D., Jannuzi, B.~T., \&
1127: Giveon, U. 2000, \apj, 533, 631
1128:
1129: \bibitem[]{}
1130: Kim, M., Ho, L. C., \& Im, M. 2006, \apj, 642, 702
1131:
1132: \bibitem[]{}
1133: Knapp, G.~R., Turner, E.~L., \& Cunniffe, P.~E. 1985, \aj, 90, 454
1134:
1135: \bibitem[]{}
1136: Kriss, G.~A., Hartig, G.~F., Armus, L., Blair, W.~P., Caganoff, S., \&
1137: Dressel, L. 1991, \apj, 377, L13
1138:
1139: \bibitem[]{}
1140: Lim, J., \& Ho, P.~T.~P. 1999, \apj, 510, L7
1141:
1142: \bibitem[]{}
1143: Marziani, P., Sulentic, J.~W., Zamorani, R., Calvani, M., Dultzin-Hacyan, D.,
1144: Bachev, R., \& Zwitter, T. 2003, \apjs, 145, 199
1145:
1146: \bibitem[]{}
1147: McLure, R.~J., \& Dunlop, J.~S. 2004, \mnras, 352, 1390
1148:
1149: \bibitem[]{}
1150: Mirabel, I.~F., \& Wilson, A.~S. 1984, \apj, 277, 92
1151:
1152: \bibitem[]{}
1153: Morganti, R., et al. 2006, \mnras, 371, 157
1154:
1155: \bibitem[]{}
1156: Morganti, R., Tadhunter, C. N., Oosterloo, T.~A., Holt, J., \& Emonts, B.
1157: 2007, in The Central Engine of Active Galactic Nuclei, ed. L. C. Ho \& J.-M.
1158: Wang (San Francisco: ASP), 343
1159:
1160: \bibitem[]{}
1161: Motch, C., et al. 1998, \aas, 132, 341
1162:
1163: \bibitem[]{}
1164: Mulchaey, J.~S., Tsvetanov, Z., Wilson, A.~S., \& P/'erez-Fournon, I. 1992,
1165: \apj, 394, 91
1166:
1167: \bibitem[]{}
1168: Nelson, C.~H., Green, R. F., Bower, G., Gebhardt, K., \& Weistrop, D. 2004,
1169: \apj, 615, 652
1170:
1171: \bibitem[]{}
1172: Nelson, C.~H., \& Whittle, M. 1995, \apjs, 99, 67
1173:
1174: \bibitem[]{}
1175: Netzer, H., Kollatschny, W., \& Fricke, K.~J. 1987, \aa, 171, 41
1176:
1177: \bibitem[]{}
1178: Noordermeer, E., van der Hulst, J. M., Sancisi, R., Swaters, R. A., \& van
1179: Albada, T. S. 2005, \aa, 442, 137
1180:
1181: \bibitem[]{}
1182: Onken, C.~A., Ferrarese, L., Merritt, D., Peterson, B.~M., Pogge, R. W.,
1183: Vestergaard, M., \& Wandel, A. 2004, \apj, 615, 645
1184:
1185: \bibitem[]{}
1186: Osterbrock, D.~E. 1977, \apj, 215, 733
1187:
1188: \bibitem[]{}
1189: ------. 1981, \apj, 249, 462
1190:
1191: \bibitem[]{}
1192: Osterbrock, D.~E., \& Pogge, R.~W. 1985, \apj, 297, 166
1193:
1194: \bibitem[]{}
1195: Paturel, G., Petit, C., Prugniel, Ph., Theureau, G., Rousseau, J., Brouty, M.,
1196: Dubois, P., \& Cambr\'esy, L. 2003a, \aa, 412, 45
1197:
1198: \bibitem[]{}
1199: Paturel, G., Theureau, G., Bottinelli, L., Gouguenheim, L., Coudreau-Durand,
1200: N., Hallet, N., \& Petit, C. 2003b, \aa, 412, 57
1201:
1202: \bibitem[]{}
1203: Peterson, B.~M., et al. 2004, \apj, 613, 682
1204:
1205: \bibitem[]{}
1206: ------. 2005, \apj, 632, 799 (err: 641, 638)
1207:
1208: \bibitem[]{}
1209: Peterson, B.~M. 2007, in The Central Engine of Active Galactic Nuclei,
1210: ed. L. C. Ho \& J.-M. Wang (San Francisco: ASP), 3
1211:
1212: \bibitem[]{}
1213: Phillips, M.~M. 1978, \apjs, 38, 187
1214:
1215: \bibitem[]{}
1216: Pizzella, A., Corsini, E., Dalla Bont\'a, E., Sariz, M., Coccato, L., \&
1217: Bertola, F. 2005, \apj, 631, 785
1218:
1219: \bibitem[]{}
1220: Roberts, M.~S. 1962, AJ, 67, 437
1221:
1222: \bibitem[]{}
1223: Roberts, M.~S., \& Haynes, M.~P. 1994, \annrev, 32, 115
1224:
1225: \bibitem[]{}
1226: Roberts, M.~S., Hogg, D.~E., Bregman, J.~N., Forman, W.~R., \& Jones, C.
1227: 1991, \apjs, 75, 751
1228:
1229: \bibitem[]{}
1230: Rosenblatt, E.~I., Malkan, M.~A., Sargent, W.~L.~W., \& Readhead, A.~C.~S.
1231: 1994, \apjs, 93, 73
1232:
1233: \bibitem[]{}
1234: Schmidt, M., \& Green, R.~F. 1983, \apj, 269, 352
1235:
1236: \bibitem[]{}
1237: Schulz, H., Knake, A., \& Schmidt-Kaler, Th. 1994, \aa, 288, 425
1238:
1239: \bibitem[]{}
1240: Shimasaku, K., et al. 2001, \aj, 122, 1238
1241:
1242: \bibitem[]{}
1243: Springel, V., Di Matteo, T., \& Hernquist, L. 2005, \mnras, 361, 776
1244:
1245: \bibitem[]{}
1246: Springob, C. M., Haynes, M. P., Giovanelli, R., \& Kent, B. R. 2005, \apjs,
1247: 160, 149
1248:
1249: \bibitem[]{}
1250: Stirpe, G.~M. 1990, \aas, 85, 1049
1251:
1252: \bibitem[]{}
1253: Thim, F., Hoessel, J. G., Saha, A., Claver, J., Dolphin, A., \& Tammann,
1254: G. A. 2004, \aj, 127, 2322
1255:
1256: \bibitem[]{}
1257: Tully, R.~B., \& Fisher, J.~R. 1977, \aa, 54, 661
1258:
1259: \bibitem[]{}
1260: Vanden Berk, D.~E., et al. 2001, \aj, 122, 549
1261:
1262: \bibitem[]{}
1263: Verheijen, M.~A.~W., \& Sancisi, R. 2001, \aa, 370, 765
1264:
1265: \bibitem[]{}
1266: V\'eron-Cetty, M.-P., V\'eron, P., \& Gonc\c{a}lves, A.~C. 2001, \aa, 372, 730
1267:
1268: \bibitem[]{}
1269: Wang, J., Wei, J. Y., \& He, X. T. 2006, \apj, 638, 106
1270:
1271: \bibitem[]{}
1272: Whitmore, B.~C., \& Kirshner, R.~P. 1981, \apj, 250, 43
1273:
1274: \bibitem[]{}
1275: Whitmore, B.~C., Schechter, P. L., \& Kirshner, R. P. 1979, \apj, 234, 68
1276:
1277: \bibitem[]{}
1278: Whittle, M. 1992, \apjs, 79, 49
1279:
1280: \bibitem[]{}
1281: Winkler, H. 1992, \mnras, 257, 677
1282:
1283: \end{thebibliography}
1284:
1285: \end{document}
1286:
1287: \clearpage
1288: \figurenum{1}
1289: \begin{figure}
1290: \epsscale{0.9}
1291: \plotone{f1.eps}
1292: \caption{
1293: The distribution of BH masses and Eddington ratios for the sample included
1294: in this study. The 101 newly surveyed objects for which \hi\ observations
1295: were successfully obtained are plotted as circles, while the sample of 53
1296: sources taken from the literature are marked as triangles.
1297: }
1298: \end{figure}
1299:
1300: \clearpage
1301: \figurenum{2}
1302: \begin{figure}
1303: \epsscale{0.45}
1304: \plotone{f2.eps}
1305: \caption{
1306: The distribution of ({\it a}) H\al\ luminosity and ({\it b}) $B$-band absolute
1307: magnitude of the AGN component for the sample objects with \hi\ data. The
1308: H\bet\ luminosities of the literature sample (Table~6) were converted to
1309: H\al\ assuming H\al/H\bet\ = 3.5, as empirically determined by Greene \& Ho
1310: (2005b). To convert between H\al\ luminosity and $B$-band absolute magnitude,
1311: we employ the correlation between H\al\ and 5100 \AA\ continuum luminosity of
1312: Greene \& Ho (2005b), and then assume a continuum spectrum of the form
1313: $f_\lambda \propto \lambda^{-1.56}$ (Vanden~Berk et al. 2001) to extrapolate
1314: to 4400 \AA.
1315: }
1316: \end{figure}
1317:
1318: \clearpage
1319: \figurenum{3}
1320: \begin{figure}
1321: \epsscale{0.85}
1322: \plotone{f3a.eps}
1323: \caption{
1324: \hi\ spectra and optical $g$-band SDSS images of the \hi-detected objects.
1325: The velocity scale is given in the barycentric frame, and the velocity
1326: range is chosen such that the lines have roughly comparable widths on the
1327: plots. Features suspected to be due to radio frequency interference are
1328: labeled ``RFI.'' Each image subtends a physical scale of 50 kpc $\times$ 50
1329: kpc, with north oriented up and east to the left. The images for
1330: MCG~+01-13-012, NGC~3227, NGC~5548, NGC~7469, RX~J0602.1+2828, and
1331: RX~J0608.0+3058 are in the $B$ band taken from the Digital Sky Survey.
1332: The images for the five objects come from \hst,
1333: taken with the following detector and filter combinations and field sizes:
1334: Akn~120 (PC2/F750LP, 22.4 kpc $\times$ 22.4 kpc),
1335: PG~0844+349 (ACS/F625W, 84.6 kpc $\times$ 84.6 kpc),
1336: PG~1229+204 (PC2/F606W, 43.9 kpc $\times$ 43.9 kpc),
1337: PG~1426+015 (PC2/F814W, 61.4 kpc $\times$ 61.4 kpc), and
1338: PG~2130+099; (PC2/F450W, 43.9 kpc $\times$ 43.9 kpc).
1339: }
1340: \end{figure}
1341: \clearpage
1342: {\plotone{f3b.eps}\\
1343: \centerline{Fig. 3. --- Continued.}
1344: \clearpage
1345: {\plotone{f3c.eps}\\
1346: \centerline{Fig. 3. --- Continued.}
1347: \clearpage
1348: {\plotone{f3d.eps}\\
1349: \centerline{Fig. 3. --- Continued.}
1350: \clearpage
1351: {\plotone{f3e.eps}\\
1352: \centerline{Fig. 3. --- Continued.}
1353: \clearpage
1354: {\plotone{f3f.eps}\\
1355: \centerline{Fig. 3. --- Continued.}
1356: \clearpage
1357: {\plotone{f3g.eps}\\
1358: \centerline{Fig. 3. --- Continued.}
1359: \clearpage
1360: {\plotone{f3h.eps}\\
1361: \centerline{Fig. 3. --- Continued.}
1362: \clearpage
1363: {\plotone{f3i.eps}\\
1364: \centerline{Fig. 3. --- Continued.}
1365:
1366: \clearpage
1367: \figurenum{4}
1368: \begin{figure}
1369: \epsscale{0.95}
1370: \plotone{f4a.eps}
1371: \caption{
1372: Optical $g$-band SDSS images of the \hi\ nondetections. Each image subtends a
1373: physical scale of 50 kpc $\times$ 50 kpc, with north oriented up and east to
1374: the left. The image for PG~0003+199 comes from \hst/PC2 (filter F606W) and
1375: subtends 21.9 kpc $\times$ 21.9 kpc.
1376: }
1377: \end{figure}
1378: \clearpage
1379: {\plotone{f4b.eps}\\
1380: \centerline{Fig. 4. --- Continued.}
1381: \clearpage
1382: {\plotone{f4c.eps}\\
1383: \centerline{Fig. 4. --- Continued.}
1384: \clearpage
1385:
1386: \clearpage
1387: \figurenum{5}
1388: \begin{figure}
1389: \epsscale{0.53}
1390: \plotone{f5.eps}
1391: \caption{
1392: The distribution of ({\it a}) \hi\ masses and ({\it b}) \hi\
1393: masses normalized to the $B$-band luminosity of the
1394: host galaxy. Limits are plotted as open histograms.
1395: }
1396: \end{figure}
1397:
1398:
1399: \clearpage
1400: \figurenum{6}
1401: \begin{figure}
1402: \epsscale{0.9}
1403: \plotone{f6.eps}
1404: \caption{
1405: Distribution of radial velocity difference as measured in the optical
1406: and in \hi, $\Delta \upsilon = \upsilon_{\rm opt} - \upsilon_{\rm sys}$.
1407: Note the excess of objects toward negative values of $\Delta \upsilon$.
1408: }
1409: \end{figure}
1410:
1411: \clearpage
1412: \input{tab1.tex}
1413: \input{tab2.tex}
1414: \input{tab3.tex}
1415: \input{tab4.tex}
1416: \input{tab5.tex}
1417: \input{tab6.tex}
1418: \input{tab7.tex}
1419:
1420: \end{document}
1421: