The physics of star formation and the deposition of mass, momentum and energy into the interstellar medium by massive stars (‘feedback’) are the main uncertainties in modern cosmological simulations of galaxy formation and evolution1,2. These processes determine the properties of galaxies3,4 but are poorly understood on the scale of individual giant molecular clouds (less than 100 parsecs)5,6, which are resolved in modern galaxy formation simulations7,8. The key question is why the timescale for depleting molecular gas through star formation in galaxies (about 2 billion years)9,10 exceeds the cloud dynamical timescale by two orders of magnitude11. Either most of a cloud’s mass is converted into stars over many dynamical times12 or only a small fraction turns into stars before the cloud is dispersed on a dynamical timescale13,14. Here we report high-angular-resolution observations of the nearby flocculent spiral galaxy NGC 300. We find that the molecular gas and high-mass star formation on the scale of giant molecular clouds are spatially decorrelated, in contrast to their tight correlation on galactic scales5. We demonstrate that this decorrelation implies rapid evolutionary cycling between clouds, star formation and feedback. We apply a statistical method15,16 to quantify the evolutionary timeline and find that star formation is regulated by efficient stellar feedback, which drives cloud dispersal on short timescales (around 1.5 million years). The rapid feedback arises from radiation and stellar winds, before supernova explosions can occur. This feedback limits cloud lifetimes to about one dynamical timescale (about 10 million years), with integrated star formation efficiencies of only 2 to 3 per cent. Our findings reveal that galaxies consist of building blocks undergoing vigorous, feedback-driven life cycles that vary with the galactic environment and collectively define how galaxies form stars.
Subscribe to Journal
Get full journal access for 1 year
only $3.90 per issue
All prices are NET prices.
VAT will be added later in the checkout.
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.
Rent or Buy article
Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.
All prices are NET prices.
The ALMA CO(1–0) data used in this work are from projects 2013.1.00351.S and 2015.1.00258.S (PI A. Schruba) and are publicly available through the ALMA archive (https://almascience.eso.org/alma-data/archive). The MPG/ESO 2.2-m Hα data are publicly available as raw data from the ESO archive (http://archive.eso.org/) under programme ID 065.N-0076 (PI F. Bresolin). All other (for example, derived) data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.
A dedicated publication of the analysis software used in the current study is in preparation. The code is available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.
Somerville, R. S. & Davé, R. Physical models of galaxy formation in a cosmological framework. Annu. Rev. Astron. Astrophys. 53, 51–113 (2015).
Naab, T. & Ostriker, J. P. Theoretical challenges in galaxy formation. Annu. Rev. Astron. Astrophys. 55, 59–109 (2017).
Scannapieco, C. et al. The Aquila comparison project: the effects of feedback and numerical methods on simulations of galaxy formation. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 423, 1726–1749 (2012).
Hopkins, P. F., Narayanan, D. & Murray, N. The meaning and consequences of star formation criteria in galaxy models with resolved stellar feedback. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 432, 2647–2653 (2013).
Kennicutt, R. C. & Evans, N. J. Star formation in the Milky Way and nearby galaxies. Annu. Rev. Astron. Astrophys. 50, 531–608 (2012).
Krumholz, M. R. The big problems in star formation: the star formation rate, stellar clustering, and the initial mass function. Phys. Rep. 539, 49–134 (2014).
Grand, R. J. J. et al. The Auriga Project: the properties and formation mechanisms of disc galaxies across cosmic time. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 467, 179–207 (2017).
Hopkins, P. F. et al. FIRE-2 simulations: physics versus numerics in galaxy formation. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 480, 800–863 (2018).
Bigiel, F. et al. The star formation law in nearby galaxies on sub-kpc scales. Astron. J. 136, 2846–2871 (2008).
Calzetti, D., Liu, G. & Koda, J. Star formation laws: the effects of gas cloud sampling. Astrophys. J. 752, 98 (2012).
Zuckerman, B. & Palmer, P. Radio radiation from interstellar molecules. Annu. Rev. Astron. Astrophys. 12, 279–313 (1974).
Koda, J. et al. Dynamically driven evolution of the interstellar medium in M51. Astrophys. J. Lett. 700, L132–L136 (2009).
Leisawitz, D., Bash, F. N. & Thaddeus, P. A CO survey of regions around 34 open clusters. Astrophys. J. 70 (Suppl.), 731–812 (1989).
Elmegreen, B. G. Star formation in a crossing time. Astrophys. J. 530, 277–281 (2000).
Kruijssen, J. M. D. & Longmore, S. N. An uncertainty principle for star formation—I. Why galactic star formation relations break down below a certain spatial scale. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 439, 3239–3252 (2014).
Kruijssen, J. M. D. et al. An uncertainty principle for star formation—II. A new method for characterizing the cloud-scale physics of star formation and feedback across cosmic history. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 479, 1866–1952 (2018).
Schruba, A., Leroy, A. K., Walter, F., Sandstrom, K. & Rosolowsky, E. The scale dependence of the molecular gas depletion time in M33. Astrophys. J. 722, 1699–1706 (2010).
Dobbs, C. L. & Pringle, J. E. The exciting lives of giant molecular clouds. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 432, 653–667 (2013).
Jeffreson, S. M. R. & Kruijssen, J. M. D. A general theory for the lifetimes of giant molecular clouds under the influence of galactic dynamics. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 476, 3688–3715 (2018).
Tan, J. C. Star formation rates in disk galaxies and circumnuclear starbursts from cloud collisions. Astrophys. J. 536, 173–184 (2000).
Schaye, J. et al. The EAGLE project: simulating the evolution and assembly of galaxies and their environments. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 446, 521–554 (2015).
Pillepich, A. et al. Simulating galaxy formation with the IllustrisTNG model. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 473, 4077–4106 (2018).
McKee, C. F. & Ostriker, J. P. A theory of the interstellar medium—three components regulated by supernova explosions in an inhomogeneous substrate. Astrophys. J. 218, 148–169 (1977).
Hopkins, P. F., Quataert, E. & Murray, N. The structure of the interstellar medium of star-forming galaxies. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 421, 3488–3521 (2012).
Vutisalchavakul, N., Evans, N. J. II & Battersby, C. The star-formation relation for regions in the galactic plane: the effect of spatial resolution. Astrophys. J. 797, 77 (2014).
Bolatto, A. D. et al. Suppression of star formation in the galaxy NGC 253 by a starburst-driven molecular wind. Nature 499, 450–453 (2013).
Muratov, A. L. et al. Gusty, gaseous flows of FIRE: galactic winds in cosmological simulations with explicit stellar feedback. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 454, 2691–2713 (2015).
Westmeier, T., Braun, R. & Koribalski, B. S. Gas and dark matter in the Sculptor group: NGC 300. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 410, 2217–2236 (2011).
Agertz, O., Kravtsov, A. V., Leitner, S. N. & Gnedin, N. Y. Toward a complete accounting of energy and momentum from stellar feedback in galaxy formation simulations. Astrophys. J. 770, 25 (2013).
Genzel, R. et al. The SINS survey of z ~ 2 galaxy kinematics: properties of the giant star-forming clumps. Astrophys. J. 733, 101 (2011).
Bolatto, A. D., Wolfire, M. & Leroy, A. K. The CO-to-H2 conversion factor. Annu. Rev. Astron. Astrophys. 51, 207–268 (2013).
Wong, T. et al. The Magellanic Mopra Assessment (MAGMA). I. The molecular cloud population of the Large Magellanic Cloud. Astrophys. J. 197 (Suppl.), 16 (2011).
Druard, C. et al. The IRAM M 33 CO(2−1) survey. A complete census of molecular gas out to 7 kpc. Astron. Astrophys. 567, A118 (2014).
Faesi, C. M., Lada, C. J., Forbrich, J., Menten, K. M. & Bouy, H. Molecular cloud-scale star formation in NGC 300. Astrophys. J. 789, 81 (2014).
Roussel, H. et al. Extinction law variations and dust excitation in the spiral galaxy NGC 300. Astrophys. J. 632, 227–252 (2005).
Luridiana, V., Morisset, C. & Shaw, R. A. PyNeb: a new tool for analyzing emission lines. I. Code description and validation of results. Astron. Astrophys. 573, A42 (2015).
Leitherer, C. et al. Starburst99: synthesis models for galaxies with active star formation. Astrophys. J. 123 (Suppl.), 3–40 (1999).
Haydon, D. T. et al. An uncertainty principle for star formation — III. The characteristic time-scales of star formation rate tracers. Preprint at https://arxiv.org/abs/1810.10897 (2018).
Murphy, E. J. et al. Calibrating extinction-free star formation rate diagnostics with 33 GHz free–free emission in NGC 6946. Astrophys. J. 737, 67 (2011).
Kroupa, P. On the variation of the initial mass function. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 322, 231–246 (2001).
Kang, X., Zhang, F., Chang, R., Wang, L. & Cheng, L. The star formation history of low-mass disk galaxies: a case study of NGC 300. Astron. Astrophys. 585, A20 (2016).
Dalcanton, J. J. et al. The ACS Nearby Galaxy Survey Treasury. Astrophys. J. 183 (Suppl.), 67–108 (2009).
Koch, E. W. et al. Kinematics of the atomic ISM in M33 on 80 pc scales. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 479, 2505–2533 (2018).
Dale, D. A. et al. The Spitzer Local Volume Legacy: Survey Description and Infrared Photometry. Astrophys. J. 703, 517–556 (2009).
Querejeta, M. et al. The Spitzer Survey of Stellar Structure in Galaxies (S4G): precise stellar mass distributions from automated dust correction at 3.6 μm. Astrophys. J. 219 (Suppl.), 5 (2015).
Meidt, S. E. et al. Reconstructing the Stellar Mass Distributions of Galaxies Using S4G IRAC 3.6 and 4.5 μm images. I. Correcting for contamination by polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, hot dust, and intermediate-age stars. Astrophys. J. 744, 17 (2012).
Leroy, A. K. et al. The star formation efficiency in nearby galaxies: measuring where gas forms stars effectively. Astron. J. 136, 2782–2845 (2008).
Meidt, S. E. et al. Reconstructing the stellar mass distributions of galaxies using S4G IRAC 3.6 and 4.5 μm images. II. The conversion from light to mass. Astrophys. J. 788, 144 (2014).
Faesi, C. M., Lada, C. J. & Forbrich, J. The ALMA view of GMCs in NGC 300: physical properties and scaling relations at 10 pc resolution. Astrophys. J. 857, 19 (2018).
van der Kruit, P. C. & Freeman, K. C. Galaxy disks. Annu. Rev. Astron. Astrophys. 49, 301–371 (2011).
Gogarten, S. M. et al. The Advanced Camera for Surveys Nearby Galaxy Survey Treasury. V. Radial star formation history of NGC 300. Astrophys. J. 712, 858–874 (2010).
Bresolin, F. et al. Extragalactic chemical abundances: do H ii regions and young stars tell the same story? The case of the spiral galaxy NGC 300. Astrophys. J. 700, 309–330 (2009).
Saintonge, A. et al. xCOLD GASS: The complete IRAM 30 m legacy survey of molecular gas for galaxy evolution studies. Astrophys. J. 233 (Suppl.), 22 (2017).
Catinella, B. et al. xGASS: total cold gas scaling relations and molecular-to-atomic gas ratios of galaxies in the local Universe. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 476, 875–895 (2018).
Moster, B. P., Naab, T. & White, S. D. M. Galactic star formation and accretion histories from matching galaxies to dark matter haloes. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 428, 3121–3138 (2013).
Bland-Hawthorn, J. & Gerhard, O. The Galaxy in context: structural, kinematic, and integrated properties. Annu. Rev. Astron. Astrophys. 54, 529–596 (2016).
Rosolowsky, E. & Leroy, A. Bias-free measurement of giant molecular cloud properties. Publ. Astron. Soc. Pacif. 118, 590–610 (2006).
Leroy, A. K. et al. ALMA reveals the molecular medium fueling the nearest nuclear starburst. Astrophys. J. 801, 25 (2015).
Solomon, P. M., Rivolo, A. R., Barrett, J. & Yahil, A. Mass, luminosity, and line width relations of galactic molecular clouds. Astrophys. J. 319, 730–741 (1987).
Williams, J. P., de Geus, E. J. & Blitz, L. Determining structure in molecular clouds. Astrophys. J. 428, 693–712 (1994).
da Silva, R. L., Fumagalli, M. & Krumholz, M. SLUG—stochastically lighting up galaxies. I. Methods and validating tests. Astrophys. J. 745, 145 (2012).
Krumholz, M. R., Fumagalli, M., da Silva, R. L., Rendahl, T. & Parra, J. SLUG—stochastically lighting up galaxies. III. A suite of tools for simulated photometry, spectroscopy, and Bayesian inference with stochastic stellar populations. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 452, 1447–1467 (2015).
Hygate, A. P. S. et al. An uncertainty principle for star formation — IV. On the nature and filtering of diffuse emission. Preprint available at https://arxiv.org/abs/1810.11405 (2018).
Schruba, A. et al. A molecular star formation law in the atomic-gas-dominated regime in nearby galaxies. Astron. J. 142, 37 (2011).
Leroy, A. K. et al. Molecular gas and star formation in nearby disk galaxies. Astron. J. 146, 19 (2013).
Pety, J. et al. The Plateau de Bure + 30 m Arcsecond Whirlpool Survey reveals a thick disk of diffuse molecular gas in the M51 galaxy. Astrophys. J. 779, 43 (2013).
Schruba, A. et al. Physical properties of molecular clouds at 2 pc resolution in the low-metallicity dwarf galaxy NGC 6822 and the Milky Way. Astrophys. J. 835, 278 (2017).
Krumholz, M. R., Dekel, A. & McKee, C. F. A. Universal, local star formation law in galactic clouds, nearby galaxies, high-redshift disks, and starbursts. Astrophys. J. 745, 69 (2012).
Elmegreen, B. G. Supercloud formation by nonaxisymmetric gravitational instabilities in sheared magnetic galaxy disks. Astrophys. J. 312, 626–639 (1987).
Leitherer, C. et al. The effects of stellar rotation. II. A comprehensive set of Starburst99 models. Astrophys. J. 212 (Suppl.), 14 (2014).
Spitzer, L. Physical Processes in the Interstellar Medium (Wiley-Interscience, 1978).
Hosokawa, T. & Inutsuka, S.-i. Dynamical expansion of ionization and dissociation front around a massive star. II. On the generality of triggered star formation. Astrophys. J. 646, 240–257 (2006).
Tielens, A. G. G. M. The Physics and Chemistry of the Interstellar Medium (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2005).
Weaver, R., McCray, R., Castor, J., Shapiro, P. & Moore, R. Interstellar bubbles. II Structure and evolution. Astrophys. J. 218, 377–395 (1977).
Mac Low, M.-M. & McCray, R. Superbubbles in disk galaxies. Astrophys. J. 324, 776–785 (1988).
Thompson, T. A., Quataert, E. & Murray, N. Radiation pressure-supported starburst disks and active galactic nucleus fueling. Astrophys. J. 630, 167–185 (2005).
Krumholz, M. R. & Thompson, T. A. Direct numerical simulation of radiation pressure-driven turbulence and winds in star clusters and galactic disks. Astrophys. J. 760, 155 (2012).
Rosen, A. L., Lopez, L. A., Krumholz, M. R. & Ramirez-Ruiz, E. Gone with the wind: where is the missing stellar wind energy from massive star clusters? Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 442, 2701–2716 (2014).
Chevance, M. et al. A milestone toward understanding PDR properties in the extreme environment of LMC-30 Doradus. Astron. Astrophys. 590, A36 (2016).
Toomre, A. On the gravitational stability of a disk of stars. Astrophys. J. 139, 1217–1238 (1964).
Hughes, A. et al. A comparative study of giant molecular clouds in M51, M33, and the Large Magellanic Cloud. Astrophys. J. 779, 46 (2013).
Clark, P. C., Bonnell, I. A., Zinnecker, H. & Bate, M. R. Star formation in unbound giant molecular clouds: the origin of OB associations? Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 359, 809–818 (2005).
Padoan, P., Haugbølle, T. & Nordlund, Å. A simple law of star formation. Astrophys. J. Lett. 759, L27 (2012).
Dale, J. E., Ercolano, B. & Bonnell, I. A. Ionizing feedback from massive stars in massive clusters—III. Disruption of partially unbound clouds. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 430, 234–246 (2013).
Rathborne, J. M. et al. A cluster in the making: ALMA reveals the initial conditions for high-mass cluster formation. Astrophys. J. 802, 125 (2015).
Scoville, N. Z., Solomon, P. M. & Sanders, D. B. in The Large-Scale Characteristics of the Galaxy (ed. Burton, W. B.) 277–283 (IAU, 1979).
Sanders, D. B., Scoville, N. Z. & Solomon, P. M. Giant molecular clouds in the Galaxy. II—Characteristics of discrete features. Astrophys. J. 289, 373–387 (1985).
Hartmann, L., Ballesteros-Paredes, J. & Bergin, E. A. Rapid formation of molecular clouds and stars in the solar neighborhood. Astrophys. J. 562, 852–868 (2001).
Engargiola, G., Plambeck, R. L., Rosolowsky, E. & Blitz, L. Giant molecular clouds in M33. I. BIMA All-Disk Survey. Astrophys. J. 149 (Suppl.), 343–363 (2003).
Blitz, L. et al. in Protostars and Planets V (eds. Reipurth, B., Jewitt, D. & Keil, K.) 81–96 (Univ. Arizona Press, 2007).
Kawamura, A. et al. The second survey of the molecular clouds in the Large Magellanic Cloud by NANTEN. II. Star formation. Astrophys. J. 184 (Suppl.), 1–17 (2009).
Murray, N. Star formation efficiencies and lifetimes of giant molecular clouds in the Milky Way. Astrophys. J. 729, 133 (2011).
Dobbs, C. L. et al. in Protostars and Planets VI (eds. Beuther, H. et al.) 3–26 (Univ. Arizona Press, 2014).
Meidt, S. E. et al. Short GMC lifetimes: an observational estimate with the PdBI Arcsecond Whirlpool Survey (PAWS). Astrophys. J. 806, 72 (2015).
Kruijssen, J. M. D., Dale, J. E. & Longmore, S. N. The dynamical evolution of molecular clouds near the Galactic Centre—I. Orbital structure and evolutionary timeline. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 447, 1059–1079 (2015).
Corbelli, E. et al. From molecules to young stellar clusters: the star formation cycle across the disk of M 33. Astron. Astrophys. 601, A146 (2017).
Barnes, A. T. et al. Star formation rates and efficiencies in the Galactic Centre. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 469, 2263–2285 (2017).
Kreckel, K. et al. A 50 pc scale view of star formation efficiency across NGC 628. Astrophys. J. Lett. 863, L21 (2018).
Grasha, K. et al. Connecting young star clusters to CO molecular gas in NGC 7793 with ALMA-LEGUS. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 481, 1016–1027 (2018).
Efremov, Y. N. & Elmegreen, B. G. Hierarchical star formation from the time-space distribution of star clusters in the Large Magellanic Cloud. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 299, 588–594 (1998).
Elmegreen, B. G. & Falgarone, E. A fractal origin for the mass spectrum of interstellar clouds. Astrophys. J. 471, 816 (1996).
Hopkins, P. F. An excursion-set model for the structure of giant molecular clouds and the interstellar medium. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 423, 2016–2036 (2012).
Hopkins, P. F. A general theory of turbulent fragmentation. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 430, 1653–1693 (2013).
Mac Low, M.-M. & Klessen, R. S. Control of star formation by supersonic turbulence. Rev. Mod. Phys. 76, 125–194 (2004).
Henshaw, J. D., Longmore, S. N. & Kruijssen, J. M. D. Seeding the Galactic Centre gas stream: gravitational instabilities set the initial conditions for the formation of protocluster clouds. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 463, L122–L126 (2016).
Zamora-Avilés, M., Vázquez-Semadeni, E. & Colín, P. An evolutionary model for collapsing molecular clouds and their star formation activity. Astrophys. J. 751, 77 (2012).
Elmegreen, B. G. On the appearance of thresholds in the dynamical model of star formation. Astrophys. J. 854, 16 (2018).
Burkhart, B. The star formation rate in the gravoturbulent interstellar medium. Astrophys. J. 863, 118 (2018).
Vázquez-Semadeni, E., Zamora-Avilés, M., Galván-Madrid, R. & Forbrich, J. Molecular cloud evolution—VI. Measuring cloud ages. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 479, 3254–3263 (2018).
Feldmann, R., Gnedin, N. Y. & Kravtsov, A. V. How universal is the relation? Astrophys. J. 732, 115 (2011).
Semenov, V. A., Kravtsov, A. V. & Gnedin, N. Y. Nonuniversal star formation efficiency in turbulent ISM. Astrophys. J. 826, 200 (2016).
Semenov, V. A., Kravtsov, A. V. & Gnedin, N. Y. The physical origin of long gas depletion times in galaxies. Astrophys. J. 845, 133 (2017).
Semenov, V. A., Kravtsov, A. V. & Gnedin, N. Y. How galaxies form stars: the connection between local and global star formation in galaxy simulations. Astrophys. J. 861, 4 (2018).
Ochsendorf, B. B., Meixner, M., Roman-Duval, J., Rahman, M. & Evans, N. J. II. What sets the massive star formation rates and efficiencies of giant molecular clouds? Astrophys. J. 841, 109 (2017).
Silk, J. Feedback, disk self-regulation, and galaxy formation. Astrophys. J. 481, 703 (1997).
Elmegreen, B. G. & Efremov, Y. N. A universal formation mechanism for open and globular clusters in turbulent gas. Astrophys. J. 480, 235–245 (1997).
Kennicutt, R. C. Jr. Star formation in galaxies along the Hubble sequence. Annu. Rev. Astron. Astrophys. 36, 189–231 (1998).
Fujimoto, Y., Tasker, E. J., Wakayama, M. & Habe, A. Do giant molecular clouds care about the galactic structure? Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 439, 936–953 (2014).
Dobbs, C. L., Pringle, J. E. & Duarte-Cabral, A. The frequency and nature of ‘cloud–cloud collisions’ in galaxies. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 446, 3608–3620 (2015).
Tasker, E. J., Wadsley, J. & Pudritz, R. Star formation in disk galaxies. III. Does stellar feedback result in cloud death? Astrophys. J. 801, 33 (2015).
Meidt, S. E. et al. Gas kinematics on giant molecular cloud scales in M51 with PAWS: cloud stabilization through dynamical pressure. Astrophys. J. 779, 45 (2013).
Meidt, S. E. et al. A model for the onset of self-gravitation and star formation in molecular gas governed by galactic forces. I. Cloud-scale gas motions. Astrophys. J. 854, 100 (2018).
Ostriker, E. C., McKee, C. F. & Leroy, A. K. Regulation of star formation rates in multiphase galactic disks: a thermal/dynamical equilibrium model. Astrophys. J. 721, 975–994 (2010).
Ostriker, E. C. & Shetty, R. Maximally star-forming galactic disks. I. Starburst regulation via feedback-driven turbulence. Astrophys. J. 731, 41 (2011).
Kim, C.-G., Kim, W.-T. & Ostriker, E. C. Regulation of star formation rates in multiphase galactic disks: numerical tests of the thermal/dynamical equilibrium model. Astrophys. J. 743, 25 (2011).
Hopkins, P. F. et al. Galaxies on FIRE (Feedback In Realistic Environments): stellar feedback explains cosmologically inefficient star formation. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 445, 581–603 (2014).
Stinson, G. S. et al. Making galaxies in a cosmological context: the need for early stellar feedback. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 428, 129–140 (2013).
Dale, J. E. The modelling of feedback in star formation simulations. New Astron. Rev. 68, 1–33 (2015).
Gatto, A. et al. Modelling the supernova-driven ISM in different environments. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 449, 1057–1075 (2015).
Gatto, A. et al. The SILCC project—III. Regulation of star formation and outflows by stellar winds and supernovae. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 466, 1903–1924 (2017).
Hu, C.-Y., Naab, T., Glover, S. C. O., Walch, S. & Clark, P. C. Variable interstellar radiation fields in simulated dwarf galaxies: supernovae versus photoelectric heating. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 471, 2151–2173 (2017).
Matzner, C. D. On the role of massive stars in the support and destruction of giant molecular clouds. Astrophys. J. 566, 302–314 (2002).
Krumholz, M. R. & Matzner, C. D. The dynamics of radiation-pressure-dominated H ii regions. Astrophys. J. 703, 1352–1362 (2009).
Dale, J. E., Ngoumou, J., Ercolano, B. & Bonnell, I. A. Before the first supernova: combined effects of H ii regions and winds on molecular clouds. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 442, 694–712 (2014).
Matzner, C. D. & Jumper, P. H. Star cluster formation with stellar feedback and large-scale inflow. Astrophys. J. 815, 68 (2015).
Rahner, D., Pellegrini, E. W., Glover, S. C. O. & Klessen, R. S. Winds and radiation in unison: a new semi-analytic feedback model for cloud dissolution. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 470, 4453–4472 (2017).
Kim, J.-G., Kim, W.-T., Ostriker, E. C. & Modeling, U. V. Radiation feedback from massive stars. II. Dispersal of star-forming giant molecular clouds by photoionization and radiation pressure. Astrophys. J. 859, 68 (2018).
Lopez, L. A. et al. The role of stellar feedback in the dynamics of H ii regions. Astrophys. J. 795, 121 (2014).
Kennicutt, R. C. Jr et al. Star formation in NGC 5194 (M51a). II. The spatially resolved star formation law. Astrophys. J. 671, 333–348 (2007).
Tacconi, L. J. et al. PHIBSS: molecular gas content and scaling relations in z ~ 1–3 massive, main-sequence star-forming galaxies. Astrophys. J. 768, 74 (2013).
J.M.D.K. and M.C. acknowledge funding from the German Research Foundation (DFG) in the form of an Emmy Noether Research Group grant no. KR4801/1-1. J.M.D.K. acknowledges funding from the European Research Council (ERC) under the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme via the ERC Starting Grant MUSTANG (grant agreement no. 714907). A.P.S.H. and D.T.H. are fellows of the International Max Planck Research School for Astronomy and Cosmic Physics at the University of Heidelberg (IMPRS-HD). We thank C. Faesi for providing his version of the MPG/ESO 2.2-m Hα map of NGC 300. We thank B. W. Keller and M. R. Krumholz for discussions.
Nature thanks N. Evans and the other anonymous reviewer(s) for their contribution to the peer review of this work.
The authors declare no competing interests.
Publisher’s note: Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Extended data figures and tables
a–f, The surface densities of molecular gas, atomic gas, total gas and stars (a), the SFR surface density (b), the depletion times of molecular, atomic and total gas (c), the rotation curve (d), the Toomre Q stability parameter (e, where Q = 1 corresponds to equilibrium), and the metallicity (f).
Extended Data Fig. 2 Integrated properties of NGC 300 relative to other star-forming galaxies in the nearby Universe.
a–c, The SFR as a function of stellar mass (a), molecular gas mass (b) and atomic gas mass (c), both for NGC 300 and nearby galaxies from the xCOLDGASS53 and xGASS54 surveys. In b and c, the arrows indicate 3σ and 5σ upper limits of non-detections in xCOLDGASS and xGASS, respectively. The solid lines represent the star-forming galaxy main sequence54 (a), the mean molecular gas depletion time of the xCOLDGASS detections (b), and the mean atomic gas depletion time of the xGASS detections (c), with the 1σ scatter shown in grey.
a–f, The GMC radius (a), velocity dispersion (b), luminous and virial masses (c), surface density (d), molecular hydrogen number density (e) and virial parameter (f, where αvir = 1 corresponds to virial equilibrium).
This figure illustrates the image processing of this work. The panels show the Hα emission (left) and CO(1–0) emission (right) from NGC 300 convolved with top-hat apertures of diameters increasing from top to bottom from 20 pc to 2,560 pc (see the annotated circles). Each panel also shows the locations of the emission peaks identified in the images at 20-pc resolution (crosses), at which the flux density measurements are made when deriving the CO-to-Hα flux ratio as a function of size scale as in Fig. 1.
a–f, Normalized probability distributions of the six constrained quantities (solid lines), with best-fitting values (dashed lines) and 1σ uncertainties (dotted lines) indicated in the top-right corner of each panel.
Extended Data Fig. 6 Influence of the GMC life cycle on the decorrelation of molecular gas and young stellar emission.
Shown is the change of the CO-to-Hα flux ratio relative to the galactic average as a function of spatial scale, for apertures placed on CO emission peaks (top branch) and Hα emission peaks (bottom branch). The symbols and 1σ error bars show the CO-to-Hα flux ratios observed across the entire field of view of NGC 300 as in Fig. 1. The evolutionary timeline of the GMC life cycle is constrained by fitting the model indicated by the solid lines. Alternative models with long GMC lifetimes are shown by the dashed and dotted lines (see key). These alternatives are ruled out by the observations.
The black solid line shows the cumulative distribution of the distances to the nearest neighbours across the combined sample of emission peaks identified in the Hα and CO maps. The median and mean distance are indicated by the vertical dashed and dotted lines, respectively. The vertical grey lines indicate lower and upper limits derived in the Methods section, the first of which is implied by the measured region separation length. The location of the median and mean nearest-neighbour distances between these limits is consistent with the measured separation lengths.
Extended Data Fig. 8 Schematic illustration of cloud-scale evolutionary cycling in the Σ − ΣSFR plane.
The symbols show the observed relation between the total gas surface density (Σ, where the high-redshift sample is assumed to be fully molecular) and the SFR surface density (ΣSFR) for galaxies in the local Universe and at high redshift (see key)68,139,140. For NGC 300, the error bars show the 1σ uncertainties. Dotted lines represent constant gas depletion times as indicated by the labels. The results of this work show that GMCs and star-forming regions move through this diagram. As a function of time, they increase their gas density, increase their SFR, expel gas through feedback and eventually fade by stellar evolution, as schematically illustrated by the red arrows.
Spatial de-correlation between molecular gas and ionised emission from young stars towards small spatial scales in the nearby galaxy NGC300. The top panels show the ionised emission (Hα, left) and molecular gas (CO, right) maps of NGC300, with crosses indicating the emission peaks in each of the maps. The bottom-left panel shows the gas depletion time (the ratio between the top maps). The colour of this map changes from white on large spatial scales (strong CO-Hα correlation) to bright red and blue on small spatial scales (strong CO-Hα anti-correlation). The bottom-right panel quantifies this behaviour by showing how the change of the CO-to-Hα flux ratio relative to the galactic average increases towards small (<150 pc) aperture sizes. The circle and vertical line indicate the spatial scale (‘aperture size’) at which the galaxy is observed.
Relation between the change of the CO-to-Hα flux ratio relative to the galactic average and the physical quantities defining the cloud life cycle. The young stellar lifetime (tHα), the cloud lifetime (tCO), the feedback timescale (tfb), and the region separation length (λ) are initially set equal to values measured for NGC300, but are systematically varied to demonstrate their effect on the CO-to-Hα ratio. The top panels show mock ‘CO’ and ‘Hα’ maps from a numerical simulation of a disc galaxy, with an inclination and position angle mimicking NGC300. The images are generated using stellar particles in specific age intervals, yielding emission peak lifetimes as indicated in the timeline and annotation at the top of the video. The bottom-left panel shows the ‘gas depletion time’, i.e. the ratio between the top two maps. The bottom-right panel shows the change of this ratio relative to the galactic average, with λ indicated along the bottom axis. This diagram provides a non-degenerate measurement of the three measured quantities (tCO, tfb, and λ), because tHα is known (see Methods).
About this article
Cite this article
Kruijssen, J.M.D., Schruba, A., Chevance, M. et al. Fast and inefficient star formation due to short-lived molecular clouds and rapid feedback. Nature 569, 519–522 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-019-1194-3
Astronomy & Astrophysics (2021)
The ALMaQUEST Survey – V. The non-universality of kpc-scale star formation relations and the factors that drive them
Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society (2021)
ALMA CO observations of a giant molecular cloud in M 33: Evidence for high-mass star formation triggered by cloud–cloud collisions
Publications of the Astronomical Society of Japan (2021)
The EDGE–CALIFA survey: the local and global relations between Σ*, ΣSFR, and Σmol that regulate star formation
Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society (2021)
Star Formation Efficiency and Dispersal of Giant Molecular Clouds with UV Radiation Feedback: Dependence on Gravitational Boundedness and Magnetic Fields
The Astrophysical Journal (2021)