# MALS SALT-NOT survey of MIR-selected powerful radio-bright AGN at $0<z<3.5$

N. Gupta  Inter-University Centre for Astronomy and Astrophysics, Post Bag 4,
Ganeshkhind, Pune 411 007, India  G. Shukla  Inter-University Centre for
Astronomy and Astrophysics, Post Bag 4, Ganeshkhind, Pune 411 007, India  R.
Srianand  Inter-University Centre for Astronomy and Astrophysics, Post Bag 4,
Ganeshkhind, Pune 411 007, India  J.-K. Krogager  Institut d’Astrophysique de
Paris, UMR 7095, CNRS-SU, 98bis bd Arago, 75014 Paris, France  P. Noterdaeme
Institut d’Astrophysique de Paris, UMR 7095, CNRS-SU, 98bis bd Arago, 75014
Paris, France  A. J. Baker  Department of Physics and Astronomy, Rutgers, the
State University of New Jersey, 136 Frelinghuysen Road, Piscataway, NJ
08854-8019, USA  F. Combes  Observatoire de Paris, Collège de France, PSL
University, Sorbonne University, CNRS, LERMA, Paris, France  J. P. U. Fynbo
Cosmic Dawn Center (DAWN), University of Copenhagen, Jagtvej 128, DK-2200,
Copenhagen N, Denmark  Niels Bohr Institute, University of Copenhagen, Jagtvej
128, DK-2200, Copenhagen N, Denmark  E. Momjian  National Radio Astronomy
Observatory, P.O. Box O, Socorro, NM 87801, USA  M. Hilton  Astrophysics
Research Centre and School of Mathematics, Statistics and Computer Science,
University of KwaZulu-Natal, Durban 4041, South Africa  T. Hussain  Inter-
University Centre for Astronomy and Astrophysics, Post Bag 4, Ganeshkhind,
Pune 411 007, India  K. Moodley  Astrophysics Research Centre and School of
Mathematics, Statistics and Computer Science, University of KwaZulu-Natal,
Durban 4041, South Africa  P. Petitjean  Institut d’Astrophysique de Paris,
UMR 7095, CNRS-SU, 98bis bd Arago, 75014 Paris, France  H.-W. Chen  Department
of Astronomy & Astrophysics, The University of Chicago, 5640 S Ellis Ave.,
Chicago, IL 60637, USA  P. Deka  Inter-University Centre for Astronomy and
Astrophysics, Post Bag 4, Ganeshkhind, Pune 411 007, India  R. Dutta
Dipartimento di Fisica G. Occhialini, Università degli Studi di Milano
Bicocca, Piazza della Scienza 3, 20126 Milano, Italy  J. Jose  ThoughtWorks
Technologies India Private Limited, Yerawada, Pune 411 006, India  G. I. G.
Józsa  South African Radio Astronomy Observatory, 2 Fir Street, Black River
Park, Observatory 7925, South Africa  Department of Physics and Electronics,
Rhodes University, P.O. Box 94, Makhanda, 6140, South Africa  Argelander-
Institut für Astronomie, Auf dem Hügel 71, D-53121 Bonn, Germany  C. Kaski
ThoughtWorks Technologies India Private Limited, Yerawada, Pune 411 006, India
H.-R. Klöckner  Max-Planck-Institut für Radioastronomie, Auf dem Hügel 69,
D-53121 Bonn, Germany  K. Knowles  Astrophysics Research Centre and School of
Mathematics, Statistics and Computer Science, University of KwaZulu-Natal,
Durban 4041, South Africa  S. Sikhosana  Astrophysics Research Centre and
School of Mathematics, Statistics and Computer Science, University of KwaZulu-
Natal, Durban 4041, South Africa  J. Wagenveld  Max-Planck-Institut für
Radioastronomie, Auf dem Hügel 69, D-53121 Bonn, Germany

###### Abstract

We present results of an optical spectroscopic survey using SALT and NOT to
build a WISE mid-infrared color-based, dust-unbiased sample of powerful radio-
bright ($>$200 mJy at 1.4 GHz) AGN for the MeerKAT Absorption Line Survey
(MALS). Our sample has 250 AGN (median $z=1.8$) showing emission lines, 26
with no emission lines, and 27 without optical counterparts. Overall, our
sample is fainter ($\Delta i$=0.6 mag) and redder ($\Delta(g-i)$=0.2 mag) than
radio-selected quasars, and representative of fainter quasar population
detected in optical surveys. About 20% of the sources are narrow line AGN
(NLAGN) – $65\%$ of these, at $z<0.5$ are galaxies without strong nuclear
emission, and 10% at $z>1.9$, have emission line ratios similar to radio
galaxies. The farthest NLAGN in our sample is M1513$-$2524 ($z_{em}=3.132$),
and the largest radio source (size$\sim$330 kpc) is M0909$-$3133
($z_{em}=0.884$). We discuss in detail 110 AGN at $1.9<z<3.5$. Despite
representing the radio loudest quasars (median $R$=3685), their Eddington
ratios are similar to the SDSS quasars having lower $R$. We detect 4 C iv
BALQSOs, all among AGN with least $R$, and highest black hole masses and
Eddington ratios. The BAL detection rate ($4^{+3}_{-2}$%) is consistent with
that seen in extremely powerful ($L_{1.4GHz}>10^{25}$ W Hz-1) quasars. Using
optical light-curves, radio polarization and $\gamma$-ray detections, we
identify 7 high-probability BL Lacs. We also summarize the full MALS footprint
to search for H i 21-cm and OH 18-cm lines at $z<2$.

quasars: absorption lines — interstellar medium

††journal: ApJ

##  1 Introduction

Active Galactic Nuclei (AGN) radiate across the entire electromagnetic
spectrum but in their early phases of evolution the thermal emission from the
accretion disk especially at UV to optical wavelengths can be obscured by the
dusty material fueling the central engine. Subsequently, as the radiative and
mechanical feedback clears the obscuring material the central AGN can become
observable as optically selected AGN (e.g., Sanders & Mirabel, 1996). The
direct view of the accretion disk may also be blocked by a dusty ‘torus’ which
has been postulated to explain the appearances of different types of AGN
through orientation-based unification schemes (e.g., Urry & Padovani, 1995).
In this paradigm, type i and type ii AGN appear different merely due to
varying amounts of dust along the observer’s line of sight. The redder AGN are
then more obscured simply because they are being viewed at inclinations closer
to the equatorial plane of the torus.

In principle, AGN can also be obscured by dust from high-column density H i
absorbers such as damped ${\rm Ly}\alpha$ systems (DLAs), which are defined to
have $N$(H i)$>2\times 10^{20}$cm-2 (Wolfe & Prochaska, 2000) and associated
with intervening galaxies intercepting the line of sight. Despite the
availability of large samples of intervening DLAs (e.g., Noterdaeme et al.,
2009; Parks et al., 2018) and the fact that they trace the bulk of neutral
hydrogen in the Universe (Wolfe et al., 2005), the detected DLAs show little
dust (e.g. Murphy & Liske, 2004) and only a small fraction exhibit the
presence of molecular hydrogen (Petitjean et al., 2000; Ledoux et al., 2003;
Noterdaeme et al., 2008; Srianand et al., 2012; Noterdaeme et al., 2015;
Muzahid et al., 2015; Balashev & Noterdaeme, 2018; Zahedy et al., 2020;
Boettcher et al., 2021).

Interestingly, none of the DLAs detected to date have properties similar to
dense molecular clouds in the Galaxy. In fact, PKS 1830-211 which exhibits
extreme reddening (visual extinction, $A_{V}>5.8$; Mathur & Nair, 1997) due to
an intervening absorber at $z=0.89$ with properties similar to dense molecular
clouds, was identified on the basis of its peculiar radio spectrum and
morphology (Pramesh Rao & Subrahmanyan, 1988; Jauncey et al., 1991). The
redshift $z=0.89$ of the lensing galaxy responsible for the intervening
absorption was discovered through a spectroscopically blind search of
molecular absorption at millemeter wavelengths (Wiklind & Combes, 1996). A
dust-unbiased census of DLAs is required to correctly estimate the key
observables such as H i and metal mass densities of the Universe, and the
extent of dust-obscured AGN missed in UV-optical colour based surveys (e.g.,
Pei et al., 1991; Srianand & Kembhavi, 1997; Ellison et al., 2001; Pontzen &
Pettini, 2009; Frank & Péroux, 2010; Krogager et al., 2019).

Regardless of the origin of obscuration, it is desirable to build dust-
unbiased samples of AGN to distinguish between competing paradigms based on
evolution or orientation to understand the AGN population itself and its
impact on galaxy evolution via feedback (e.g., Fabian, 2012; Heckman & Best,
2014). The most effective techniques to achieve this are naturally based on
photometric selection at hard X-ray, mid-infrared (MIR) or radio wavelengths.
In recent years the AllWISE catalog from the Wide-field Infrared Survey
Explorer (WISE; Wright et al., 2010; Cutri & et al., 2014) in its four bands,
namely $W1$ (3.4 $\mu$m), $W2$ (4.6 $\mu$m), $W3$ (12 $\mu$m), and $W4$ (22
$\mu$m), has emerged as an excellent resource to identify obscured AGN across
the full sky. The 5$\sigma$ point-source sensitivities of the WISE All-Sky
release in the four bands in Vega-based magnitudes are 16.83, 15.60, 11.32 and
8.0, respectively.

The MIR selection of AGN works exactly in the same manner as the traditional
optical color selection except that it is less susceptible to dust extinction.
The near-IR spectrum of an AGN is simply an extension of the UV-optical power
law. The MIR and longer wavelength IR emission comes from the hot dust in the
‘torus’ which absorbs UV-optical emission and reprocesses it (Netzer et al.,
2007). All these give rise to a power law spectrum which dominates at
wavelengths longer than $\sim$1 $\mu m$ and is easily distinguishable from a
declining Rayleigh-Jeans spectrum of galaxies and stars in MIR color space up
to $z\sim 3$. Thus, the MIR color selection can potentially detect obscured
AGN missed in UV-optical and even X-ray selections over a wide redshift range
(e.g., Lacy et al., 2004; Stern et al., 2005; Mateos et al., 2012; Stern et
al., 2012).

Taking advantage of the segregation of various classes of objects i.e., stars,
early-type and spiral galaxies, brown dwarfs and AGN in the WISE color space
(see Fig. 12 of Wright et al., 2010), several AGN identification techniques
based on the ALLWISE data release have been proposed in the literature. The
majority of these are based on the $W1$ and $W2$ i.e., the two most sensitive
bands of WISE (see Assef et al., 2018, for a large all sky catalog of AGN),
and have been shown to yield AGN space density much higher than those from the
optical and X-ray surveys (Stern et al., 2005; Assef et al., 2010). The MIR
colors corresponding to Fermi detected AGN have been used to build large
samples ($\sim$15,000) of blazars (D’Abrusco et al., 2019). The MIR color
diagnostic has also been applied to identify dual AGN candidates which
represent a crucial and rare stage in the galaxy evolution (e.g., Satyapal et
al., 2017).

In this paper, we present a MIR-color scheme based on $W1$, $W2$ and $W3$ that
efficiently selects quasars at $z>1.4$. We have also carried out a large
spectroscopic campaign using the Nordic Optical Telescope (NOT) and the
Southern African Large Telescope (SALT) to measure the redshifts and confirm
the nature of a subset of AGN candidates identified using our MIR-color
scheme. The NOT component of the survey has already been presented by Krogager
et al. (2018). Here we present the complete SALT–NOT catalog of the 303 AGN at
$0<z<3.5$ that constitutes radio sources brighter than 200 mJy at $\sim$1.4
GHz in the NRAO VLA Sky Survey (NVSS; Condon et al., 1998) and at declination,
$\delta<+20^{\circ}$.

The SALT-NOT sample represents a small minority of AGN that are extremely
powerful in radio with 1.4 GHz spectral luminosity, $L_{1.4GHz}$ $>10^{24}$ W
Hz-1. In past many studies have attempted to isolate the physical mechanisms
responsible for the quasar radio-loudness dichotomy. The massive black holes
(BHs) in radio loud AGN are found to be systematically a few times heavier
than those in their radio quiet counterparts (e.g., Laor, 2000). A further
interesting trend that has emerged from these studies is the anti-correlation
between the Eddington ratio and radio loudness (e.g., Sikora et al., 2007).
The physical parameters such as BH mass, spin and accretion rate along with
the in situ magnetic field are believed to determine the extent of radio
loudness and overall appearance of the AGN (e.g., Sikora & Begelman, 2013).
The SALT-NOT sample offers an opportunity to revisit these issues for
extremely radio loud quasars selected through MIR colors.

This paper is organized as follows. In Section 2, we present details of radio-
infrared-optical cross-matching to select candidates for the SALT-NOT survey
and the sample selection criteria. The latter is based on the requirements of
the MeerKAT Absorption Line Survey (MALS; see Gupta et al., 2017, for key
science objectives), an ongoing large survey at the South African precursor
(Jonas & MeerKAT Team, 2016) of the upcoming Square Kilometer Array (SKA). In
Section 3, we present the details of SALT observations and data analysis.
These details for the NOT component of the survey are available in Krogager et
al. (2018). The details of emission line identification, redshift measurement
and AGN classifications based on the SALT-NOT spectra are provided in Section
4. Section 5 presents selected results based on radio continuum and optical
emission line properties. For AGN at $1.9<z<3.5$, we also estimate BH masses,
accretion rates and the occurrence of broad absorption lines, and revisit the
issue of their dependence on radio loudness. We also discuss emission line
less AGN with highest optical photometric variability and the targets with no
optical counterparts. Finally, in Section 6 we summarize the results and
complement the SALT-NOT catalog with AGN from the literature to assemble a
target list of $\sim$650 AGN defining the MALS footprint to search for cold
atomic and molecular gas at $z<2$.

Throughout this paper we use the $\Lambda$CDM cosmology with
$\Omega_{m}$=0.315, $\Omega_{\Lambda}$=0.685 and H0=67.4 km s-1 Mpc-1 (Planck
Collaboration et al., 2020).

##  2 Sample Selection

The SALT-NOT sample definition is based on the requirements of MALS. MALS is
using MeerKAT’s L and UHF bands covering 900–1670 and 580–1015 MHz to carry
out a sensitive search for H i 21-cm (OH 18-cm) absorbers at $0\leq z\lesssim
0.6$ ($0\leq z\lesssim 0.9$) and $0.4\lesssim z\lesssim 1.4$ ($0.6\lesssim
z\lesssim 1.9$), respectively (see Gupta et al., 2017, for key science
objectives). In order to ensure reasonable observability with the MeerKAT
telescope located in South Africa, the majority of MALS pointings will be at
$\delta<+20^{\circ}$. The survey is well underway and the first L- and UHF-
band spectra based on the science verification data are presented in Gupta et
al. (2021a) and Combes et al. (2021), respectively.

Each MALS pointing is centered at a radio source brighter than 200 mJy at
$\sim$1 GHz. For L-band we require these bright AGN to be at $z>0.6$ whereas
for the UHF-band all must be at $z>0.4$ and a significant fraction at $z>1.4$,
i.e., the H i 21-cm line redshift corresponding to the lower frequency edge of
the band.

Since dust bias can be very significant towards sight lines with cold atomic
and molecular gas, it is also desirable that the central targets for MALS are
selected without any bias towards dust extinction. Thus, to efficiently
identify quasars that can be used for both the L- and UHF-bands we have
developed a selection scheme optimized to identify $z>1.4$ quasars based
primarily on MIR colors from the AllWISE catalog. The WISE color space of
radio sources identified as quasars in the SDSS spectroscopic catalog is
presented in Fig. 2 of Krogager et al. (2018). This figure shows that low- and
high-$z$ quasars are separated in $W1$, $W2$ and $W3$ color space, and the
following color cuts:

$\begin{array}[]{c}W1-W2<1.3\times(W2-W3)-3.04;\\\ \\\ W1-W2>0.6,\\\
\end{array}$ (1)

can be used to efficiently select high-$z$ quasars.

To summarize, SALT–NOT sample is based on the following three criteria: (i)
flux density $>$ 200 mJy at $\sim$1 GHz, (ii) $\delta<+20^{\circ}$, and (iii)
MIR colors consistent with Equation 1. The last condition requires that the
object is detected in the first three WISE bands. Note that only $\sim$10% of
747 million objects are detected in all three bands. We revisit the efficacy
of the MIR-color selection scheme in subsequent sections.

###  2.1 Cross-matching and reference sample

Figure 1:  Schematic illustration of the selection process for the quasar
reference sample and SALT–NOT targets. The numbers refer to sources at each
step. The ‘$\star$’ indicates that a handful of targets with spectra in SDSS
were included in the SALT–NOT survey to verify our selection and observational
strategy. See Sect. 4 for more details.

Cross-matching multi-wavelength datasets poses multiple challenges. Firstly,
not all objects may be detected in all the datasets. Secondly, due to
different spatial resolutions of datasets, an object in one dataset may have
multiple counterparts in the other. This is particularly relevant for radio
sources which often display extended emission made up of components such as
core, jets and lobes. Depending on the frequency the strongest radio component
may be far away from the optical or IR counterpart. For reliable cross-
matching it is desirable to have radio data with a spatial resolution of few
arcseconds or better.

Figure 2:  Left: WISE color-color plot in Vega magnitudes for radio bright
sources in the quasar reference sample. Sources with known spectroscopic
redshifts are color-coded according to redshift. The AGN wedges of Mateos et
al. (2012), Chang et al. (2017) and our SALT–NOT criteria are shown using
dotted, dash-dotted and dashed lines, respectively. Right, top panel: Redshift
distributions of quasars, galaxies and WISE-selected quasars (i.e., quasars
satisfying SALT–NOT WISE color cuts). Right, bottom panel: Distributions of
SDSS $i$-band AB magnitude for all sources, quasars and WISE-selected quasars
are shown. The vertical dashed lines indicate the median for each
distribution. Note that SDSS 5$\sigma$ depth for the $i$-band is 22.2 mag.

Another major challenge is that each selection method has its own systematics.
For quasars, it is quite possible that selections using different methods may
lead to objects with different characteristics such as different Eddington
ratios, clustering properties and host galaxy masses. The selected quasars may
then be intrinsically different, therefore comparison with samples from other
selection approaches ought to be done with caution.

Concerning our sample definition, only111The Rapid ASKAP Continuum Survey
(McConnell et al., 2020) was unavailable at the time of planning this project.
the NRAO VLA Sky Survey (NVSS; Condon et al., 1998) and the Sydney University
Molonglo Sky Survey (SUMSS; Mauch et al., 2003) at 1.4 GHz and 0.843 GHz,
respectively, have the sensitivity, positional accuracy and the sky coverage
required to perform cross-matching with the AllWISE catalog (Cutri & et al.,
2014) at MIR wavelengths. But the spatial resolution offered by NVSS is
typically $45$″. In comparison, the angular resolutions in the four WISE bands
are $6.1$″, $6.4$″, $6.5$″, and $12.0$″, respectively. The coarse resolution
at radio wavelength might then lead to a bias against extended lobe-dominated
quasars: either they will be assigned a wrong WISE counterpart or completely
missed. To quantify the impact of this and the other above-mentioned
challenges in our selection process, we start with constructing a reference
sample.

The process of building the reference sample is shown in Fig. 1. We start with
NVSS which has 25,325 radio sources brighter than 200 mJy at 1.4 GHz and
$\delta>-40^{\circ}$. We use optical data from SDSS and higher spatial
resolution (i.e $\sim$5”) radio data from the Faint Images of the Radio Sky at
Twenty-Centimeters (FIRST; Becker et al., 1995) to examine our selection
process. The FIRST survey has observed $\sim$10,000 square degrees of the
North and South Galactic Caps at 1.4 GHz, which overlaps very well with the
SDSS sky coverage. These two surveys provide the best available radio-optical
data covering a large area of the sky. Since the bulk of FIRST-SDSS coverage
is at positive declination, we do not apply any declination cuts to the
reference sample.

We cross-match 10,279 NVSS sources which are within the SDSS footprint with
FIRST. We adopt a search radius of $30$″. Since FIRST has a spatial resolution
of $5$″ and positional accuracy of $0.1$″, it will allow us to identify the
resolved radio source components associated with the NVSS sources. Next, we
cross-match FIRST radio source components with SDSS (DR14 photometry) and
AllWISE catalogs to identify the closest match. Note that we require a valid
WISE match to have detections in all three bands, i.e., $W1$, $W2$ and $W3$.
For this we adopt a search radius of $2$″, which has been shown to provide a
good compromise between completeness and random association for FIRST–SDSS
quasars (e.g., Lu et al., 2007). We visually examined all 2327 FIRST–SDSS
associations using the FIRST and SDSS $i$-band images, and excluded: (i) 8
unreal radio source components: these are due to an artefact in the FIRST
image; and (ii) 12 radio sources with complex morphology: for these it is not
possible to reliably assign an optical–MIR counterpart to the radio source.
Spectra of 1164 sources are available in SDSS. We inspect these and reject 13
cases with false spectral line identifications. Finally, we have a reference
sample of 2294 sources from NVSS, with WISE detections in $W1$, $W2$ and $W3$
bands, and cross-matching further refined by FIRST and SDSS.

The WISE colors of the reference sample are shown in the left panel of Fig. 2.
Among 1151 reference sample sources with SDSS spectra, 834 are identified as
quasars and 317 as galaxies. Clearly, as expected the majority of radio bright
quasars have red $W1-W2$ colors. Only beyond $z\sim 3$, the rest frame
1$\,\mu$m minimum would shift into the $W2$ band causing the color to turn
blue (see Stern et al., 2012). But for high-$z$ quasars this can be
compensated by even small amounts of dust, allowing the method based only on
$W1-W2$ color to perform rather well even at high redshifts. However,
significant host galaxy contribution can also turn $W1-W2$ blue. In the
figure, we show the color wedge of Mateos et al. (2012) defined based on X-ray
selected AGN. The additional constraint based on $W2-W3$ allows the wedge of
Mateos et al. (2012, also see their Fig. 5) to efficiently identify AGN as
long as the host galaxy contribution is less than 20%. Indeed the wedge
efficiently identifies the bulk of powerful reference quasars.

In Fig. 2, we also demarcate the region corresponding to Equation 1. The
redshift and $i$-band magnitude distributions of the reference sample are
shown in the right panels of Fig. 2. The median redshift and $i$-band
magnitude are 0.9 and 18.6 mag, respectively. If we consider only quasars,
these values are 1.3 and 18.6 mag, respectively. For quasars within our MIR-
wedge these values are 2.0 and 19.1 mag, respectively (see vertical dashed
lines in Fig. 2). Also, within the wedge the fraction of AGN classified as
quasars increases to 94$\pm$6% (214/228) whereas for the full sample it is
73$\pm$3% (834/1151). The fraction of $z>1.4$ quasars also increases from 30%
(full sample) to 75% (within the wedge). Thus, our MIR-wedge preferentially
selects more powerful and higher redshift quasars.

###  2.2 SALT-NOT candidate sample

The process of identifying candidates for SALT–NOT survey is shown in Fig. 1.
We start with 25,325 sources brighter than 200 mJy in NVSS but first restrict
ourselves to 15,325 at $\delta<+20^{\circ}$ and then to 12,584 with WISE
matches within $10$″. Since we use NVSS all the candidates are at
$\delta>-40^{\circ}$. Next we consider only 2976 sources that satisfy our
WISE-color cuts. Of these, 597 sources ($\sim$340 at $z>1.4$) have
spectroscopic redshifts from the literature222Nasa/IPAC Extragalctic Database
(NED) and the Million Quasars (Milliquas) Catalog v4.0, and will be used later
for MALS target selection (see Section 6). For the SALT-NOT survey, we exclude
these and consider the remaining 2011 radio sources which have a high
probability of being a quasar at $z>1.4$.

Next, targets were drawn from the pool of 2011 candidates to fill the
allocated and observable local sidereal time (LST) ranges at the NOT and SALT
locations. The final sample of 303 candidates which could be observed in the
allocated time is presented in Table LABEL:tab:wisesamp. The sample has been
subjected to visual checks using the quick look radio images at 2–4 GHz from
the Very Large Array Sky Survey (VLASS; Lacy et al., 2020). These quick look
images have a spatial resolution of $\sim 2.5$″ but are not the final data
products meeting the overall survey requirements. The positional accuracy is
limited to $\sim 0.5$″. Therefore, we used these images only to verify the
coincidence between the MIR source and the radio peak. In the cases where a
VLASS image was unavailable or not of reasonable quality, the corresponding
candidate was assigned a lower priority. Following the process described in
Sect. 2.1, we have rejected dubious coincidences which primarily meant
rejecting sources with complex radio morphologies. It was straightforward to
verify and accept the compact radio sources (i.e., single component in VLASS),
and indeed our overall selection process preferentially picks quasars
associated with compact radio emission. But wherever possible we also included
targets with clear core-jet or compact symmetric object (CSO) type morphology.
In both these cases it is possible to identify the location of MIR/optical
AGN. The details of radio structure of AGN observed with SALT-NOT are
presented in Sect. 5.

Figure 3:  Distribution of flux density at 1.4 GHz, $W1$ and $i$-mag for our
MIR selected sample. The gray and blue-hashed distributions show objects with
no clear emission lines (emission line less, ELL) and objects with no detected
spectrum (dark field, DF), respectively. The vertical dashed lines mark the
median for all the sources in each panel. In the first panel, four targets
brighter than 1500 mJy are out of frame. Note that for DFs, the $i$-band
magnitudes are from the more sensitive PS1 stack catalog (Waters et al.,
2020).

For candidates at $\delta>-30^{\circ}$, we have also examined the $i$-band
images from the Panoramic Survey Telescope and Rapid Response System
(PanSTARRS; Chambers et al., 2016) by considering the nearest match within 2″.
Ideally, in the pursuit of dust-obscured quasars one does not include any
criteria based on optical wavelengths. Therefore, we limited the majority of
our targets to those that could be successfully observed with SALT and NOT in
a modest amount of observing time but included a small ($\sim 10$%) fraction
with very faint ($i>22$ mag) optical counterparts. Note that in Table
LABEL:tab:wisesamp we have excluded 7 targets (list provided in the notes to
Table LABEL:tab:wisesamp) from the NOT sample presented in table 1 of Krogager
et al. (2018). The VLASS–WISE–PS1 visual check revealed that the lack of
spectroscopic outcome in these cases is due to the misidentification of the
optical/IR source associated with the radio source. Such misidentifactions
have already been removed from the sample for the SALT component.

The sample presented in Table LABEL:tab:wisesamp is split into three
categories: (i) with emission lines in the optical spectrum (250 objects),
(ii) with no emission lines in the optical spectrum i.e., emission line less
(ELLs; 26), and (iii) dark fields (DFs; 27) i.e., neither emission line nor a
continuum source in optical spectra and images, respectively despite being
detected in WISE images. The distributions of 1.4 GHz flux density, $W1$ and
$i$-band magnitudes are shown in Fig. 3. Further details and comparison with
the reference sample are provided in subsequent sections.

###  2.3 Efficacy of selection process

Figure 4:  Comparison of the MALS SALT–NOT sample (blue, thick line) with the
full quasar reference sample (black, thin line), the quasar reference sample
that fulfils Eq. (1; red, dotted line), and the SDSS+WISE quasar comparison
sample (orange, dashed line).

As previously mentioned, our target selection process is optimized for
identifying powerful quasars at $z>1.4$. We have therefore included a set of
criteria on the WISE photometry (see Eq. 1). The mere fact that we require
detections in all three WISE bands might introduce a bias in the resulting
quasar sample, and the subsequent color criteria might further affect their
optical properties. In this section, we aim to quantify any such selection
effects.

For this purpose, we compile a highly complete spectroscopic sample of 10,498
quasars from the SDSS (DR16) in the so-called ‘Stripe 82’ region where the
spectroscopic completeness is the highest in SDSS. We then cross-match this
sample with the AllWISE catalog to produce our optical comparison sample. We
note that although no radio flux density limits have been applied here, only
347/10,498 are detected in FIRST, and only 7 of these are brighter than 200
mJy. We will ignore this distinction in our statistical analysis.

We first check the effect of requiring detections in all three WISE bands used
in our criteria. We find that out of the 10,498 quasars, only 56% have WISE
photometry in all three bands. Overall, the quasars with WISE detections are
brighter and have slightly redder colors compared to the quasars without WISE
detections in all three bands. The median $i$-band brightness is 19.9 and 20.4
mag for quasars with and without WISE detections, respectively, and the median
$g-i$ color differs by 0.034 mag (Fig. 4). When restricting the color
comparison to quasars with the same brightness ($i<20$ mag), the color
difference diminishes to 0.023 mag; i.e., at the order of the photometric
uncertainty.

The average redshift of quasars with WISE detections is lower ($<z>=1.48$)
than quasars without WISE detections ($<z>=1.86$), which is in line with the
brighter $i$-band magnitudes for quasars with WISE detections. Yet, there are
no significant color differences as a function of redshift.

The next step is to quantify the effect of our WISE color criteria. We use the
same optical comparison sample as defined above to check the optical
brightness and colors of those quasars that meet the criteria in Eq. (1) and
those that do not. Our WISE criteria have been designed to reduce the number
of $z<1.4$ quasars, and as shown in Fig. 2, our sample effectively reduces the
number of low-redshift quasars. Due to the largely different redshift-
distributions, it is not surprising to find that the quasars that follow Eq.
(1) are 0.4 mag fainter on average. Considering only quasars at $z>2$, the
quasars that follow our WISE criteria Eq. (1) are on average only 0.2 mag
fainter. We find no significant difference in optical color between quasars
that meet our criteria and those that do not.

Lastly, we compare the SALT–NOT sample with the reference sample of quasars as
well as the optically-selected SDSS quasar sample. In Fig. 4, we show the
cumulative distributions of $g-i$ color and $i$-band brightness. We find that
the SALT–NOT sample has on average redder colors than the other samples, with
the optically-selected sample showing the bluest colors. The median color
difference is 0.2 mag. On the other hand, the SALT–NOT sample is fainter than
the reference quasar sample and shows a distribution of optical brightness
similar to the SDSS quasar sample.

In conclusion, we find that our imposed WISE criteria result in a sample of
radio-bright quasars that is fainter and slightly redder than radio-selected
(reference) quasars. Part of this difference in color and brightness can be
attributed to the difference in the respective redshift distributions.
Nonetheless, our sample is representative in terms of redder optical colors
commonly observed in radio-selected samples while probing fainter quasars more
representative of deep, optically-selected samples.

##  3 Observations and data analysis

We observed 255 and 99 targets with SALT and NOT, respectively. Of these, 40
targets, labelled as SUGAR (NOT-SALT) in column 7 of Table LABEL:tab:wisesamp,
are common to both the sub-surveys. In this section, we present details of
SALT observations and data analysis. The corresponding details for NOT
observations carried out in 2016 August (P53-012) and 2017 February (P54-005;
PI: Krogager) are presented by Krogager et al. (2018).

We used the Robert Stobie Spectrograph (RSS; Burgh et al., 2003; Kobulnicky et
al., 2003) on SALT to obtain optical spectra of 255 targets. These service
mode observations were carried out between November 2014 and April 2017
through the programmes: 2014-2-SCI-027, 2015-1-SCI-012, 2015-2-SCI-030,
2016-1-SCI-022 and 2016-2-SCI-17 (PI: N. Gupta). Each observing block
typically contained two $\sim$10 minutes science exposures, in the long-slit
mode having a slit width of 2″. We note that the calibration lamp and the flat
field images required for the wavelength calibration and flat fielding were
obtained separately, as part of 2015-1-SCI-012. The detector in RSS consists
of a mosaic of three CCDs with a total size of 3171$\times$2052 pixels. The
pixel size is 15$\mu{\rm m}$ which corresponds to a spatial sampling of
$0.1267$″ per pixel. We opted for 2 $\mathrm{\times}$ 2 pixel binning to
improve the signal-to-noise ratio (SNR). We used RSS PG0900 grating with a
grating tilt angle of 15.875∘. This provides a wavelength coverage of
4486–7533 Å, but with gaps at 5497–5551 and 6542–6589 Å. The resulting
spectral resolution is $R=1064$ at 6041 Å. The observations were performed on
clear nights with a median seeing of $\sim 1.5$″. The fainter targets were
assigned higher priority for observations on dark and gray nights.

The preliminary data reduction, i.e., gain correction, overscan bias
subtraction, cross-talk correction and amplifier mosaicing were performed by
the SALT observatory staff using the semi-automated pipeline
PySALT333http://pysalt.salt.ac.za, the Python/PyRAF software package for SALT
data reduction (Crawford et al., 2010). Using IRAF444IRAF is distributed by
the National Optical Astronomy Observatories, which are operated by the
Association of Universities for Research in Astronomy, Inc., under cooperative
agreement with the NSF. packages, we further removed cosmic rays and applied
the flat-field correction. The wavelength calibration was performed using a
Xenon arc lamp and the spectrophotometric standard star L377 was used for flux
calibration. We extracted 1D spectra from individual exposures after
subtracting the background. We also corrected the 1D spectra for atmospheric
extinction and applied the air to vacuum correction to the wavelengths. The
final 1D spectra of the quasars used for analysis is the combination of all
the available exposures (typically $\sim$20 min on-source).

##  4 Spectral analysis

Figure 5:  Spectra of five representative AGN from our sample at increasing
redshifts from top to bottom. Different emission lines based on which the
redshift was determined are identified. All the spectra are smoothed by 3 to 7
pixels for visual clarity. The error spectra are shown in red in each panel.
The hashed regions mark the spectral range falling in the CCD gaps. Inset in
the top most panel shows the double peak [O iii]$\lambda$5007 profile. In the
bottom panel an example of AGN without detectable emission lines is shown. We
use photometric variability to identify such objects as BL Lacs (see Section
5.7).

We visually examined all the spectra for the presence of emission lines. In
Fig. 5, we show 5 representative SALT spectra. These represent: low-$z$
($z<1.0$; top two panels), intermediate-$z$ ($1.0<z<1.9$; middle panel),
high-$z$ ($z>1.9$; second panel from the bottom) and the emission line less
(ELL; bottom panel) AGN. Flux scale for each spectrum is corrected for slit
losses using the PS1 photometry. Here, we have ignored the possibility of
continuum variability between our spectra and the PS1 observations.

Figure 6:  Redshift distribution for all the SALT–NOT targets with
spectroscopic redshifts. The vertical dashed lines mark the median value. The
distribution of redshifts based on single emission line (blue-hashed
histogram) is also shown. The redshifts based on a single emission line should
be treated with caution. The correct redshift of AGN marked at $z\sim 5$ is
$z=0.977$ (see Section 5.6 for details).

For the spectra exhibiting two or more emission lines, the line
identifications are robust, and hence the redshifts estimated are also correct
within the wavelength uncertainty. However, the line identification is more
challenging in the cases with very faint trace/emission lines or with only
single emission line detection (see second panel from top in Fig 5 for
example). For such sources the identification is based on line widths,
expected relative strengths and the absence of other lines within the observed
wavelength range. We also used various AGN (QSO, Seyfert1 and Seyfert2)
templates from the literature555https://archive.stsci.edu/hlsps/reference-
atlases/cdbs/grid/agn to aid the process of line identification.

After line identification, we used peaks of prominent lines, i.e., ${\rm
Ly}\alpha$ for $z>2.66$, C iv for $1.87<z<3.86$, Mg ii for $0.58<z<1.69$, C
iii for $1.328<z<2.938$, [O ii] for $0.19<z<1.01$ and, [O iii] and H$\beta$
for $z<0.50$, to measure the redshifts. The rest wavelengths are taken from
the SDSS emission line
list666http://classic.sdss.org/dr6/algorithms/linestable.html. In the cases
where the peak of the prominent emission line is affected by absorption or it
falls in the CCD gap, we fit the emission line avoiding these regions and take
the centroid of the fit to estimate the redshift. The overall uncertainty in
redshift ($\Delta z$) that is introduced due to wavelength calibration issues
and uncertainty in measuring the peak is roughly $\Delta z$ $\approx 0.005$.

The redshift distribution of all the AGN (250) with emission line
identifications is shown in Fig. 6. In 32 cases the redshift is based on a
single emission line assumed to be C iv, C iii, Mg ii, [O ii] or ${\rm
Ly}\alpha$. In Table LABEL:tab:wisesamp, these are marked with *a, *b, *c, *d
and *f, respectively. In 26 cases, no emission lines (i.e., ELLs) are detected
in the spectra. In 27 cases, no continuum or emission lines are detected
(i.e., DFs).

##  5 Results

The properties of the SALT–NOT sample consisting of 250 quasars with emission
lines, 26 ELLs and 27 DFs are provided in Table LABEL:tab:wisesamp. In this
section, we present selected results based on continuum and emission lines
detected in our optical spectra. It is well beyond the scope of this paper to
discuss all the aspects in detail. Hence, we present overall properties of the
observed sample and comparison with the reference sample in Sect. 5.1. This is
followed by short overviews of AGN detected at $z<3.5$ split across Sections
5.2 to 5.5 on the basis of different groups of observable emission lines. For
AGN at $z<1.9$, we discuss only the fraction of narrow emission line objects
(type II quasars or radio galaxies) found in different redshift intervals and
the morphology of associated radio emission. For quasars at $1.9<z<3.5$, we
also present the distribution of BH masses and the fraction of broad
absorption line (BAL) quasars. The farthest narrow line AGN in our sample is
M1513$-$2524 ($z_{em}=3.132$), and the one with largest projected linear size
of radio emission (size$\sim$330 kpc) is M0909$-$3133 ($z_{em}=0.884$). For
some individual objects the details, such as the morphology of associated
radio emission, host galaxy and emission line properties, relevant to the
discussion presented in these sections are provided in Appendix B. The
properties of M1312-2026, the potential highest redshift AGN in the sample,
are discussed in Sect. 5.6. In Sections 5.7 and 5.8, we discuss AGN with no
optical emission lines and dark fields, respectively.

###  5.1 Overall properties

Figure 7:  Comparison of our SALT–NOT sample and the subset of the reference
sample satisfying our WISE criteria. The median values are also provided.

The basic properties, i.e., redshift, $W1$ and $i$-band magnitudes of the
SALT–NOT sample are summarized in Fig. 7. We have also used emission lines
detected in our spectra to classify objects as narrow-line (NL) or broad-line
(BL) AGN. In Table LABEL:tab:wisesamp, these are labeled as ‘G’ and ‘Q’,
respectively. In total, 51/250 objects are NLAGN and 33 of these are at
$z<0.5$. As expected the fraction of NLAGN in our sample falls off at higher
redshifts.

Fig. 7 also provides a comparison with the reference sample of quasars
satisfying our MIR cut (see Section 2.1). The median redshift of the SALT–NOT
sample is only slightly lower but a deficit of lower redshift AGN in the
reference sample is apparent. A two-sample Kolmogorov–Smirnoff (KS) test shows
that there is a less than 1 percent chance (p-value = 0.008) that the two
samples are different purely by chance. Related to this, we also note that in
the SALT–NOT sample, $20\pm 3$% objects are NLAGN whereas based on the
reference sample only $6^{+2.1}_{-1.6}$ % are expected.

In Fig. 7, we also compare $W1$ and $i$-band magnitudes of the two samples.
Clearly, the SALT–NOT sample corresponds to a population of fainter AGN. We
note that the probabilities of two samples being drawn from the sample
populations are $1.7\times 10^{-4}$ for $W1$ brightness and $1.6\times
10^{-8}$ for $i$-band brightness. This further confirms the assertion made in
Sect. 2.3 that the inclusion of $W3$, the less sensitive WISE band, in our
target selection has not biased our sample towards brighter objects. In
particular, the $i$-band magnitudes of AGN in our sample at $z<0.5$ and
$z>0.5$ are similar. Therefore, the excess of NLAGN at $z<0.5$ in our sample
is intriguing. It is likely a direct consequence of the selection of optically
fainter targets through MIR color selection. Excluding these $z<0.5$ NLAGN
renders the $z$-distributions of the SALT–NOT sample and the reference sample
statistically identical.

###  5.2 AGN at $z<0.5$

For $z<0.5$ AGN, our SALT spectra cover [O ii], [O iii] and H$\beta$ emission
lines. The NOT spectra additionally cover the Mg ii emission line as well.
Overall, the SALT–NOT sample has 33/303, i.e., 11% AGN in our sample are at
$z<0.5$. We find the spectra in all the 33 cases to be mostly dominated by
narrow permitted emission lines (with FWHM$<$2000 km s-1). The available
optical images are also consistent with their hosts being galaxies with weak
or no nuclear emission. Compared to this, in the reference sample (SDSS), only
$\sim$32% (6/19) of the $z<0.5$ AGN satisfying our MIR wedge are classified as
galaxies. As mentioned above, this difference with respect to the reference
sample is most likely due to the optical faintness of the SALT–NOT sample and
the specific goal to reject low-redshift AGN (Barrows et al., 2021).

The radio emission associated with these NLAGN is often extended, the largest
projected linear size being $\sim$250 kpc (details in Appendix B). An
examination of optical emission lines led to identification of 2 dual AGN
showing double peaked spectra (an example is shown in top panel of Fig. 5;
more details in Appendix B). Our detection rate of $6^{+8}_{-4}$% is
marginally higher, but only at 1$\sigma$, than the detection rate (1%) of dual
AGN in SDSS (Liu et al., 2010).

###  5.3 AGN at $0.5<z<1.0$

For AGN at $0.5\leq z\leq 1.0$ (35/303), the SALT–NOT spectra cover both Mg ii
and [O ii] emission lines. About $32^{+13}_{-10}$% (12/35) of these show
emission lines of [O ii], Ne iv and Ne v without (or narrow) Mg ii broad
emission lines. The fraction of NLAGN (8/28 i.e., $29^{+14}_{-9}$%) is
consistent with the reference sample.

In VLASS 3 GHz images, 8/12 ($75^{+25}_{-23}$%) of the NLAGN in the SALT–NOT
sample exhibit extended radio emission with lobes, the largest projected
linear size being 330 kpc. Among BLAGN, as expected, a much smaller fraction
($\sim$40%) is associated with extended radio emission (Padovani et al., 2017;
Hickox & Alexander, 2018). The largest extent is only 180 kpc (see Appendix B
for details). We also examined the radio morphology and optical emission line
profiles for evidences of interaction between radio jet and the host galaxy
emission (see e.g., Mullaney et al., 2013). In three cases, the radio
morphology is distorted. But only in one of these (details in Appendix B), the
[O ii] line is asymmetric, which may be an indication of radio jet-ISM
interaction (e.g., Gupta et al., 2005).

###  5.4 AGN at $1.0<z<1.9$

At $1.0\leq z\leq 1.9$, our sample has 71 AGN. Only two of these are possibly
NLAGN and the radio emission in both the cases has a double lobed morphology
(details in Appendix B). This low fraction (3%; 2/71) of NLAGN is consistent
with the reference sample, which has 0/53 such AGN in this redshift range.

###  5.5 AGN at $1.9<z<3.5$

As previously mentioned, for these redshifts the SALT-NOT spectra of 110 AGN
in our sample allow detection of C iv emission lines. Based on the width of C
iv emission line (i.e FWHM $<$ 2000 km s-1) we identify 4 of these objects to
be the NLAGN. In comparison, the reference sample has no NLAGN (0/128) at
$z>1.9$, which is consistent at 2$\sigma$ considering one-sided Poissonian
statistics. The details of NLAGN at $1.9<z<3.5$ in our sample are provided in
Appendix B). The emission line ratios are typical of what is observed in
high-$z$ radio galaxies. Two of these i.e., M1315$-$2745 and M1513$-$2524 are
among the largest radio galaxies at these redshifts (see figure 13 of Shukla
et al., 2021a, for the latest compilation). In the rest of this section, we
discuss BH masses, Eddington ratios and BALS associated with the BLAGN.

####  5.5.1 BH masses and Eddington ratios

Figure 8: Comparison of luminosity $\lambda L_{1350}$ vs. full C iv FWHM
(left), and $L_{Bol}$ vs. $M_{\rm BH}$ (right). In both the panels, the core-
dominated quasars from from (Shen et al., 2011) are shown as 2D histogram, and
SALT–NOT quasars are $\star$ and contours.

Under the assumption that broad line region (BLR) clouds are in virial
equilibrium, the mass of the black hole, $M_{\rm BH}$, is given by

$M_{\rm BH}=f\ \frac{R_{\rm BLR}\ {\rm FWHM}^{2}}{G}$ (2)

where $G$ is the gravitational constant and $f$ is the virial coffecient that
depends on the geometry and kinematics of the BLR. The radius of the BLR,
$R_{\rm BLR}$, is generally estimated using empirical relations between
continuum or line luminosity (e.g., Kaspi et al., 2000). The value of $f$ is
also empirically determined (e.g., Onken et al., 2004). Following Shen et al.
(2011), we estimate virial BH masses for quasars with the C iv emission line
using a relation of the form

$\log\left(\frac{M_{\rm BH}}{M_{\odot}}\right)=a+b\,{\rm log}(\lambda
L_{\lambda})+2\,\log({\rm FWHM})$ (3)

where $a$ and $b$ are calibrated from reverberation mapping for a particular
emission line (e.g., Denney et al., 2010). The broad line FWHM is in km s-1
and the continuum luminosity, $\lambda L_{\lambda}$, which is a proxy for
$R_{BLR},$ is in units of $10^{44}$ erg s-1. We adopt $a$ = 0.660 and $b$ =
0.53 for equation 3 based on the empirical relationship provided by
Vestergaard & Peterson (2006) to estimate BH mass for our sample.

Further, to place our SALT–NOT sample in the broader context of the overall
quasar population, we compare our measurements to the compilation of 105,783
SDSS DR7 quasars provided by Shen et al. (2011). For direct comparability of
the measurements, we largely follow the method of Shen et al. (2011) to
measure C iv FWHM and $\lambda L_{\lambda}$ at 1350Å. In short, we fit a power
law to the continuum in the rest wavelength ranges of 1445 – 1465 and 1700 –
1705 Å. Prior to continuum fitting we mask any unwanted spikes stronger than
5$\sigma$. Then, we fit the continuum subtracted emission line in the
wavelength range 1500 – 1600 Å using three Gaussians. The FWHM of the emission
line, referred to as the full line FWHM, is then estimated from the fit after
rejecting any individual components with strength $<$5%. The continuum
luminosity at 1350Å ($L_{1350}$) is estimated using the same power law used to
fit the continuum underlying the C iv emission line. We are able to reliably
estimate full C iv line FWHM, continuum luminosity at 1350Å and BH mass of
86/110 quasars ($z>1.9$) from our sample. We have excluded 24 AGN with low SNR
profiles or lines affected by the CCD edge. Similar to Shen et al. (2011), the
bolometric luminosity ($L_{\rm Bol}$) have been estimated by applying the
bolometric correction factor of 3.81 to $L_{1350}$ (Richards et al., 2006).
The Eddington ratio ($\lambda_{\rm Edd}$) is estimated as $L_{\rm
Bol}$/$L_{\rm Edd}$, where $L_{\rm Edd}$ is the Eddington luminosity.

The compilation of Shen et al. (2011) consists of 11,840 non-BAL quasars at
$1.9<z<3.5$ (median $z$ = 2.29), the redshift range covered by our sample
(median $z$ = 2.34). We have restricted the sample of Shen et al. (2011) to
the subset that has been identified by a uniform target selection algorithm
and flux limited to $i$ = 19.1 at $z<2.9$ or $i$ = 20.2 at $z>2.9$ (Richards
et al., 2002). A distinguishing feature of the SALT–NOT sample is the high
radio brightness of quasars. In particular, the $z>1.9$ quasars in SALT–NOT
sample have predominantly flat radio spectra. The median spectral
index777Spectral index $\alpha$ is defined by the power law,
$S_{\nu}\propto\nu^{\alpha}$, $\alpha^{1.4}_{0.4}$, derived using the NVSS
1420 MHz and the uGMRT 420 MHz total flux densities is $\sim-0.38$ (Gupta et
al., 2021b). In the uGMRT images, 79/88 of these are represented by a single
Gaussian component. Therefore, we further restrict the sample of Shen et al.
(2011) to 786 core-dominated quasars, hereafter Shen11-core in short, detected
in FIRST.

In left panel of Fig. 8, we show the distributions of _full_ C iv FWHM and
1350 Å luminosity for SALT–NOT and Shen11-core quasars. The SALT–NOT sample
extends about 0.5 dex fainter in 1350 Å luminosity. The two-sample KS test
probability of these two samples being drawn from the same parent sample is
extremely small (p-value = $4\times 10^{-13}$). The C iv FWHM of the SALT–NOT
sample (median FWHM = 4445 km s-1) is marginally smaller than the Shen11-core
sample (median FWHM = 4660 km s-1), and this difference is statistically
insignificant. We note that if the C iv profiles are affected by non-virial
motions such as outflows (Coatman et al., 2016), the influence ought to be
similar in both the samples. Due to the luminosity dependence of $\lambda
L_{\lambda}^{0.66}$ in the virial mass estimator, the overall BH masses
estimated using equation 3 are lower for the SALT–NOT sample (see right panel
of Fig. 8). The KS test probability of two $M_{BH}$ distributions being drawn
from the same parent sample is extremely small (p-value = $3\times 10^{-5}$;
see left panel of Fig. 9).

Figure 9:  Comparison of BH mass (left), Radio loudness (middle) and Eddington
ratios (right) for quasars from (Shen et al., 2011) and SALT-NOT sample. The
vertical lines represent median values.

In the middle panel of Fig. 9, we show the radio-loudness parameter ($R=f_{\rm
5GHz}/f_{2500}$), defined as the ratio of the rest-frame flux densities at 5
GHz ($f_{5GHz}$) and at 2500 Å ($f_{2500}$), for the two samples. For SALT-NOT
quasars, the values of $f_{5GHz}$ have been estimated using the flux density
at 1.4 GHz from NVSS using the spectral slopes $\alpha^{1.4}_{0.4}$ from Gupta
et al. (2021b). In cases where $\alpha^{1.4}_{0.4}$ is unavailable, we have
used the median $\alpha^{1.4}_{0.4}$ of $-0.38$ instead. The values of
$f_{2500}$ have been estimated by interpolating the PS1 photometry. Clearly,
the SALT–NOT sample represents extremely radio-loud quasars (median $R=3685$).
The corresponding Eddington ratio is only slight smaller (median log
$\lambda_{\rm Edd}$ = $-0.44$ vs. $-0.39$) as compared to the Shen11-core
sample and the difference is statistically insignificant ($p$-value = 0.02).
Thus, over four orders of magnitude covered by the radio-loudness in the
SALT–NOT and Shen11-core quasars, we see no dependence of radio-loudness on
the accretion rate. This confirms the saturation of radio-loudness observed at
low Eddington ratios (see Fig. 3 of Sikora et al., 2007).

####  5.5.2 BAL occurrence

Figure 10:  Spectra of four BAL QSOs found in our sample and associated error
spectra (in red) are shown. Different BAL absorption are marked in each panel.
Hashed regions are the CCD gaps in our SALT observations.

We focus now on the 105 SALT–NOT AGN showing C iv emission at $z_{e}\geq 1.9$
to search for broad absorption lines (BALs) representing outflowing gas. We
exclude 7 cases at $z\sim 2.6$ where the blue wing of C iv emission line falls
in the CCD gap. In the remaining, we detect 4 C iv BAL quasars (see Fig. 10),
i.e., an overall BAL detection rate of 4/98 = $4^{+3}_{-2}$%. We find a
consistent BAL fraction in our reference sample, without any MIR cut, where 9
out of 175 quasars at $z\geq 2.0$ show C iv BALs (5$\pm$2%).

Typically, 10-20% of radio sources are detected as BALQSOs. Becker et al.
(2000) studied the properties of radio selected BAL quasars from First Bright
Quasar Survey sample. They also noticed that while the BAL detection rate is
high among radio loud quasars their dependence on the radio luminosity is
complex. In particular, the authors find a deficiency of BALQSOs among very
radio bright quasars. Specifically, the BAL fraction drops from
$20.5^{+7.3}_{-5.9}$% at $L_{1.4\,GHz}$ $\sim 10^{25}$ W Hz-1 to $<8\%$ at
$L_{1.4\,GHz}$ $\sim 3\times 10^{26}$ W Hz-1 (Shankar et al., 2008). The low
BAL detection rate in the SALT–NOT sample which has $L_{1.4\,GHz}>$ $\sim
10^{27}$ W Hz-1 is consistent with this trend in luminosity.

The radio emission associated with M1453$-$1327 is extended (largest angular
size, LAS$\sim 17.1^{\prime\prime}$) with a projected linear size of 140 kpc.
In the other three cases, the radio emission is dominated by a compact
component (projected linear size $<$5 kpc). This is consistent with the
previous results that the radio emission associated with BALQSOs is compact
(Becker et al., 2000). Notably, the 4 BALQSOs have $R_{\rm 5GHz/2500\AA}$,
$\lambda_{\rm Edd}$ and $M_{\rm BH}$ in the range of $10^{2.9-3.2}$,
$10^{0.2-0.5}$ and $10^{9.1-9.8}$ M⊙, respectively, which correspond to
objects with least radio loudness, and highest BH mass and Eddington ratios.

###  5.6  M1312–2026: a powerful AGN at $z\sim 5$?

Figure 11:  The SALT spectrum of M1312-2026. The overall SALT spectrum and the
single emission line assumed to be Ly$\alpha$ at $z=5.068$ have been
consistently reproduced in four individual exposures, two of which were taken
using a different spectral set-up. The error spectrum is shown in red. The
shaded regions (cyan) mark the spectral gap and spectral range affected by sky
subtraction residuals. The VLT X-shooter spectrum shows that the actual
$z_{\rm em}$= 0.977 (see text for details).  Table 1: Flux densities of
M1312–2026.

Frequency | Flux | Deconvolved Size | Ref.
---|---|---|---
(GHz) | (mJy) |  |
0.23 | 2577 | 7.1″$\times$3.3″, 0.0∘ | (1)
1.39 | 677 | 0.8″$\times$0.2″, 5.0∘ | (2)
1.40 | 778 |  $<$17.9″ | (3)
4.86 | 233 |  $<$2″ | (4)

References: (1) Gupta et al. (2021b); (2) This work. Observed on 2018 July 14
for 10 mins (on-source time) using uGMRT with 200 MHz wideband covering
1260-1460 MHz.); (3) NVSS; (4) Kapahi et al. (1998).

The bright radio sources at high-$z$ are extremely rare. This is partly due to
the interaction between the emitting electrons and the cosmic microwave
background (CMB) which makes AGN less luminous in radio (Ghisellini et al.,
2014). In the SALT spectrum of M1312-2026 (Fig. 11), we identify only a single
narrow emission line over the wavelength range covered. If this emission line
is ${\rm Ly}\alpha$, then the corresponding redshift will be $z=5.068$. At
4.86 GHz, the radio source has a flux density of 233 mJy and a size of
$<2^{\prime\prime}$ (Table 1), and is unambiguously identified with a WISE and
PS1 object with colors that are consistent with it being a high-$z$ radio loud
quasar.

In order to confirm the redshift of M1312-2026, we reobserved the object with
X-shooter of the Very Large Telescope on 2022 February 01. In the X-shooter
spectrum, we do not detect expected Mg ii, C iii] and C iv lines corresponding
to the presumed ${\rm Ly}\alpha$ at z=5.068. Instead, the detection of [O
iii], H$\alpha$ and H$\beta$ emission lines confirm the above identified line
to be [O ii] and the systemic redshift of the quasar to be $z=0.977$. Further
details of the X-shooter spectrum of this highly reddened object will be
presented in a future paper.

###  5.7 Objects without emission lines

In recent times, the locus of MIR colors of known Fermi detected AGN have been
used to build large samples of blazars (e.g., Chang et al., 2017; D’Abrusco et
al., 2019). These MIR color-selection techniques use the first three or all
four bands of WISE, and typically extract $\sim$0.5% ($<0.001$%) of the
overall radio888Based on the NVSS sensitivity. (WISE) source population as
blazars. They include both classes of blazars: (i) BL Lacs with featureless
optical spectra, i.e., no emission lines (equivalent width $<$ 5 Å; Stickel et
al., 1991), and (ii) flat spectrum, radio-loud quasars (FSRQs) with quasar-
like emission lines. In the recent literature, these two classes are also
referred to as BZBs, i.e., blazars of BL Lac type and BZQs, i.e., blazars of
quasar type, respectively (Massaro et al., 2009).

In the following, we focus on the 26 objects without emission lines (emission
line less; ELL) in our sample that can be considered candidate BZBs. The
median $q_{12}$ parameter which is defined as the logarithm of the ratio of
flux densities measured in $W3$-band and at 20cm of ELL targets is $-2.8$.
This is well outside the range of (-1.85, -1) for BZB candidates based on the
locus of Fermi detected BL Lacs (D’Abrusco et al., 2019, see also Fig. 2). The
SALT–NOT ELLs thus represent a population of candidate BL Lacs that is under-
represented in the MIR selected population.

The most crucial and somewhat controversial aspect of establishing the BL Lac
nature of AGN is to confirm its featureless optical spectra. Our SALT/NOT
spectra are adequate to detect the broad emission lines from AGN but weak
lines may be missed due to the poor spectral resolution and noisy data. This
is illustrated by the case of two ELL candidates, M0051+1747 and M0105+1845,
for which no redshift determination could be established based on the NOT
spectra alone. However, these targets have later been observed as part of SDSS
and have been identified as $z_{\rm em}$= 1.536 and 1.074, respectively. We
note that these redshifts are consistent with weak and narrow emission lines
in the NOT spectra, which were originally marked tentative. Thus, the
objective of the analysis presented here is to identify BL Lac candidates
based on the general properties of blazars: large time variability at all
wavelengths and timescales, polarized emission, and a flat or inverted radio
spectrum (e.g., Rector & Stocke, 2001a).

We evaluate the variability of ELLs using the data from the Zwicky Transient
Facility (ZTF; Masci et al., 2019). The $r$-band light curves are available
for 15 AGN (median PS1 $r$ = 19.9 mag; see Fig. A.1 in the Appendix A). The
remaining targets are either not covered (only 3) in ZTF or are fainter
(median PS1 $r$ = 20.9 mag) and have time series with less than 10 data
points. From the light curves, we estimate the variability amplitude
($\sigma_{rms}^{2}$) and error ($S_{D}^{2}$) on it using the normalized excess
variance method described in Nandra et al. (1997) and Vaughan et al. (2003).
The variability amplitude strength, VAS = $\sigma_{rms}^{2}$/$S_{D}^{2}$, is
provided in Fig. A.1.

We also estimate the observed $\chi^{2}_{obs}$ using
$\chi^{2}_{obs}=\sum_{i=1}^{N}(m_{i}-\overline{m})^{2})/\sigma_{i}^{2}$, where
$m_{i}$ are $N$ measured fluxes with individual error $\sigma_{i}$ and mean
$\overline{m}$. The hypothesis of the AGN being intrinsically non-variable can
be rejected at 99% confidence level for 11/15 targets. The remaining 4 targets
are among the faintest (PS1 $r$-band: 20.3 – 21.7 mag) and the conclusion is
likely influenced by the low SNR of the light curve. Rejecting these and
considering objects with VAS$>$3.0, we obtain a sample of 4 promising
(M0022+0608, M0029$-$1740, M1245$-$1616 and M2142$-$2444) and two marginal
(M0010$-$2157 and M0824$-$1029) BL Lac candidates (see Fig. A.1). Optical
spectrum of M1245$-$1616 obtained with SALT is shown in Fig. 5.

Figure 12:  $W1-W2$ color distribution for SALT–NOT targets with and without
redshift determinations. The median values are marked using dashed and dotted
lines, respectively.

Interestingly, the candidate with the highest VAS (M0022+0608; see Fig. A.1)
is in fact a bonafide $\gamma$-ray emitting BL Lac (Massaro et al., 2009).
Further, the candidates M0010$-$2157, M0029$-$1740, M1245$-$1616 and
M2142$-$2444 are also identified in the blazar catalog of D’Abrusco et al.
(2019) but as BZQ candidates on the basis of their position in the three
dimensional ($W1$-$W2$-$W3$-$W4$) WISE color-space based on the locus of
confirmed Fermi blazars (Massaro et al., 2009; Acero et al., 2015). Further,
4/6 candidates are also polarized at 2-4% level in NVSS (Taylor et al., 2009),
and except one (M0029$-$1740) all are core-dominated in VLASS 3 GHz images.
Note that it is not unusual for BL Lacs to exhibit extended radio emission
(Rector & Stocke, 2001b).

If the BL Lacs are similarly represented in the 11 remaining ELLs not analysed
due to the lack of ZTF light curves, then we expect another 4 candidates. In
this context, it is also useful to cross-correlate all 26 ELLs with the latest
Fermi data release (4FGL DR2; Ballet et al., 2020). We recover previously
noted M0022+0608, and find two new matches corresponding to M0010$-$2157 and
M0553$-$0840.

In summary, we have 7 high-probability BL Lac candidates; 6 identified on the
basis of variability analysis and 1 through cross-matching with $\gamma$-ray
sources, i.e., a detection rate of 7/303 ($2\pm 1$%). Stickel et al. (1991)
used 1 Jy sample to estimate the surface density (0.005 for $>$1 Jy at 5 GHz)
of radio selected BL Lacs. The fraction of BL Lacs in the 1 Jy sample of radio
sources brighter than 20 mag ($r$-band) is 15%. Therefore, we expect that
better quality data through a targeted optical follow-up will confirm more of
these ELLs as BL Lacs.

###  5.8 Dark fields

The 27 targets for which there are no firm optical identifications, i.e., dark
fields (DFs), are also presented in Table LABEL:tab:wisesamp. For 14 of these,
the stacked PS1 catalog implies optical counterparts with a median $i$-band
magnitude of 22.5 mag (Waters et al., 2020). Clearly, these represent the
faintest targets in our sample (see last panel of Fig. 3). On average they are
also fainter in WISE (see last panel of Fig. 3). But the $W1$ magnitudes are
still well within the range over which we have successfully obtained optical
spectra (middle panel of Fig. 3). Thus, misidentifications due to errors in
radio–MIR cross-matching is unlikely to significantly contribute to DFs. This
is also confirmed by the VLASS–PS1 overlays of 24 DFs covered in PS1 (see Fig.
A.2). In 20/24 cases, the radio source is compact and coincides
($<1^{\prime\prime}$) with the MIR position marked by the cross. In the
remaining 4 cases, the radio emission is extended, exhibits a double-lobe
morphology and the MIR source is located between them, i.e., at the expected
location of the AGN.

The above implies that DFs are truly fainter than the implicit magnitude limit
of SALT–NOT observations and barely detectable in PS1999Note that the
5$\sigma$ depth of PS1 $i$-band stack images is 23.1 mag.. Thus, it is
reasonable to assume that these have the same redshift distribution (median
$z$ = 1.8) as the other SALT–NOT targets. The basic statistics of MIR-wedge
implies that 5% of these are low-redshift radio galaxies. Indeed, upon careful
inspection of the PS1 images, we identify diffuse, low-surface brightness
emission associated with two targets: M0959$-$0236 and M1144$-$1455\. These
two targets could plausibly be radio galaxies at $z<1$.

The optical faintness of the remaining DFs, presumably quasars, could be due
to (i) an intrinsically low luminosity; (ii) very large amounts of dust in the
foreground (intrinsic or intervening) or (iii) a very high redshift ($z>5$)
such that the detectable continuum and emission lines are redshifted into the
near-infrared; or (iv) a non-quasar origin of the radio/MIR emission. There is
already a tentative indication of a slight excess of intervening and
associated DLAs towards optically faint quasars (Ellison et al., 2008; Gupta
et al., 2021b). Thus, the identified DFs in our survey may be hiding a small
but important population of dusty H i absorbers. The MALS observations of
these central DF targets and the other optically faint AGN in the MeerKAT
field-of-view will reveal any such absorbers at $z<2$.

##  6 Summary and outlook

Figure 13:  Compilation of MALS pointings from the literature (black crosses)
and from our dedicated SALT and NOT observations (solid circles). Overlaid are
the footprints of a few upcoming spectroscopic surveys: DESI (red), 4MOST
Cosmology Redshift Survey (CRS; blue) and the 4MOST–Gaia Purely Astrometric
Quasar Survey (PAQS; black dashed line). Note that ESO’s 4MOST–Gaia PAQS
survey (PI: Krogager) will observe 120,000 targets over 5 years.  Table 2:
Summary of SALT-NOT and MALS (central AGN) sample.

| SALT-NOT | MALSa
---|---|---
Number of AGN | 303 | $650^{b}$
Median flux density (mJy) | 300 | $340^{c}$
Median $W1$ (mag) | 15.9 | 15.6
Median $i$ (mag) | 19.8 | 19.4d
Inside MIR wedge (equation 1) | 100% | 70%
With spectroscopic redshift | 83% | 79%
Median spectroscopic-$z$ | 1.8 | 1.7

Note. — $a$: Includes SALT-NOT sample. $b$: 70 at $\delta<-40^{\circ}$
selected using SUMSS. The remaining at $\delta>-40^{\circ}$ are based on NVSS.
$c$: Estimated at 1.4 GHz. SUMSS 0.850 MHz flux densities computed at 1.4 GHz
assuming $\alpha=-0.8$. $d$: Only $\sim 550$ targets overlapping with PS1
considered. Note slight increase in the $i$-band brightness due to the
inclusion of redshifts from the literature.

In this paper, we describe a large spectroscopic survey of radio bright AGN
selected based on the following criteria: (i) radio flux density at 1.4 GHz
$>$ 200 mJy; (ii) $\delta<+20^{\circ}$; and (iii) WISE MIR-colors: $W1-W2$
$<1.3\times(W2-W3)-3.04$ and $W1-W2>0.6$. These criteria are optimized to
select powerful quasars at $z>1.4$. Starting from 25,325 sources brighter than
200 mJy in NVSS we identify 2011 candidate quasars, of which 303 were observed
with SALT (180 hrs) and NOT (6 nights; Krogager et al., 2018).

The SALT–NOT sample of 303 objects presented in this paper consists of (i) AGN
with emission lines in the optical spectrum (250); (ii) objects with no
emission lines in the optical spectrum, i.e., emission line less (ELLs; 26);
and (iii) dark fields (DFs; 27), i.e., neither emission lines nor a continuum
source in the optical spectra or photometry (also see Table
LABEL:tab:malstarget).

We compare the SALT–NOT sample with the highly complete spectroscopic sample
of 10,498 quasars from the SDSS (DR16) in the so-called ‘Stripe 82’ region,
and with a reference sample of 2294 AGN from SDSS selected by applying the
same constraints on the radio flux density and MIR colors as the SALT–NOT
sample. We show that our imposed WISE criteria has lead to a sample of radio-
bright quasars which are fainter ($\Delta i=$0.6 mag) and redder
($\Delta(g-i)$ = 0.2 mag) than radio-selected quasars in the reference sample,
and representative of a fainter quasar population detected in optical surveys.

About 20% (51/303) of the AGN in our sample only have narrow emission lines.
The majority of these (33/51) at $z<0.5$, are galaxies without strong nuclear
emission. In two cases the emission line is double peaked and likely
corresponds to rare dual AGN. The highest redshift NLAGN (M1513$-$2524) is at
$z=3.132$. The details of this optically faint ($r>23$ mag) AGN associated
with a large ($\sim$90 kpc) and luminous ${\rm Ly}\alpha$ nebula are presented
by Shukla et al. (2021a). The double-lobed radio emission associated with
M1513$-$2524 has an extent of 184 kpc. In general, the NLAGN in our sample
exhibit extended radio emission with lobes and in some cases cores – the
largest being M0909-3133 ($z_{em}$= 0.884) with a projected linear size of 330
kpc.

Based on the reference sample, we expect only 5% of objects in the SALT–NOT
sample to be NLAGN. The discrepancy is primarily due to the $z<0.5$
contaminants. Excluding these would render the $z$-distribution and broad- vs.
narrow-line AGN composition of the SALT–NOT sample identical to the reference
sample. Overall, the application of our WISE-color criteria improves the
efficiency of identifying $z>1.4$ AGN by a factor of $\sim$1.7 (i.e., from
$\sim$30% to $\sim$50%).

We discuss in detail the properties of the 110 SALT–NOT AGN at $1.9<z<3.5$.
The four NLAGN in this sub-sample show emission line ratios similar to
high-$z$ radio galaxies. The radio emission associated with two of these
(M1315$-$2745 and M1513$-$2524) are among the largest at these redshifts (280
and 184 kpc, respectively). We estimate Bolometric luminosities, radio-
loudness parameters ($R=f_{\rm 5GHz}/f_{2500\AA}$), black hole masses ($M_{\rm
BH}$) and Eddington ratios of the remaining 106 AGN in this sub-sample. In
comparison to the optically selected core-dominated SDSS quasars from Shen et
al. (2011), the SALT–NOT quasars are fainter ($\sim$0.5 dex lower $L_{1350}$)
and, consequently, have lower ($\sim$0.4 dex) $M_{\rm BH}$. It is intriguing
to note that despite representing the most radio-loud quasars (median $R$ =
3685), the Eddington ratios of our objects are similar to the less radio-loud
(median $R$ = 100) SDSS quasars. In fact, we do not find any dependence
between radio loudness and Eddintgton ratio in the SALT–NOT and SDSS quasar
samples spanning four orders of magnitude in $R$. This confirms the saturation
of radio loudness observed at low Eddington ratios (Sikora et al., 2007), and
the significance of physical parameters such as black hole spin and the in-
situ magnetic field in influencing the overall appearance of AGN.

Among $1.9<z<3.5$ AGN, we also detect 4 C iv BAL quasars. All are associated
with objects of least radio loudness, and highest BH masses and Eddington
ratios. The low BAL quasar detection rate ($4^{+3}_{-2}$%) is consistent with
that seen in extremely powerful ($L_{1.4GHz}>10^{25}$ W Hz-1) radio loud
quasars (Shankar et al., 2008). The systematic H i 21-cm absorption line
search in these quasars suggests deficiency of cold atomic gas at host galaxy
scales (Gupta et al., 2021b). In this context, it will be interesting to
confirm the slight excess of proximate DLAs observed in our sample (Gupta et
al., 2021b). The details of gaseous environment of these quasars at larger
($>10$ kpc) scales are presented in a separate paper (Shukla et al., 2021b).

Based on detailed optical variability analysis, radio polarization and
$\gamma$-ray properties we identify 7 high-probability BL Lacs among 26 ELLs
in our sample. Better quality optical spectra will likely confirm a larger
fraction of these ELLs as bonafide BL Lacs. Finally, we discuss 27 DFs in our
sample which could be due to (i) an intrinsically low luminosity; (ii) very
large amounts of dust in the foreground (intrinsic or intervening) or (iii) a
very high redshift ($z>5$) such that the continuum is strongly absorbed by the
intervening ${\rm Ly}\alpha$ forest and emission lines are redshifted into the
near-infrared; or (iv) a non-quasar origin of the radio/MIR emission.

The selection criteria of SALT-NOT sample are based on the requirements of
MALS. The entire MALS footprint of $\sim$500 pointings each at L and UHF bands
is based on the SALT-NOT sample presented here and additional $\sim$350 bright
radio sources selected from the literature. The overall properties of this
larger pool of 650 AGN are presented in Table LABEL:tab:malstarget (see also
Fig. 13 for the survey footprint and overlap with various optical surveys).

The complete details of the MALS sample will be provided in future papers.
But, in short, these additional sources are AGN: (i) with known spectroscopic
redshift and $\delta>-40^{\circ}$ from the literature (see Fig. 1 i.e., the
green box with 597 AGN), and (ii) brighter than 200 mJy at 843 MHz and
$\delta<-40^{\circ}$ in the SUMSS (Mauch et al., 2003). Further, priority has
been given to AGN having excellent multi-wavelength data or close to nearby
($z<0.1$) galaxies. This extended sky coverage through a larger pool of 650
sources offers flexibility in selecting pointings for the observations, and
maximising the scientific output corresponding to various galaxies and AGN
detected within the MALS field-of-view (see Gupta et al., 2017, for some of
the science cases).

Currently, $\sim$400 pointings mostly at L band have already been observed
(Fig. 13). Looking forward, MALS will continue to observe with the MeerKAT
through 2021-22 and afterwards primarily in the UHF band. We plan to release
all radio continuum images and spectra along with the catalogs of detected
sources and spectral lines through our survey website: https://mals.iucaa.in.
This will include multi-wavelength data such as the SALT-NOT spectra presented
here. We expect all these to be an excellent resource for the astronomical
community for a broad range of galactic and extragalactic applications.

We thank the anonymous referee for useful comments and suggestions. PPJ was
supported in part by the French National Research Agency (ANR) under contracts
ANR-16-CE31–0021. PPJ thanks Camille Nóus (Laboratoire Cogitamus) for
inappreciable and often unnoticed discussions, advice, and support. This work
is based on observations made with SALT and NOT. We thank NOT and SALT staff
for their support during the observations. The National Radio Astronomy
Observatory is a facility of the National Science Foundation operated under
cooperative agreement by Associated Universities, Inc. Based on observations
obtained with the Samuel Oschin Telescope 48-inch and the 60-inch Telescope at
the Palomar Observatory as part of the Zwicky Transient Facility project. ZTF
is supported by the National Science Foundation under Grant No. AST-2034437
and a collaboration including Caltech, IPAC, the Weizmann Institute for
Science, the Oskar Klein Center at Stockholm University, the University of
Maryland, Deutsches Elektronen-Synchrotron and Humboldt University, the TANGO
Consortium of Taiwan, the University of Wisconsin at Milwaukee, Trinity
College Dublin, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratories, and IN2P3, France.
Operations are conducted by COO, IPAC, and UW.

##  Appendix A Properties of MALS SALT-NOT sample

The properties of AGNs in the SALT-NOT sample are provided here. The ZTF light
curves and radio-optical overlays for ELLs and DFs, respectively, are also
provided.

Figure A.1:  ZTF light curves ($r$-band) and the variability amplitude
strength (VAS) for targets with no emission lines. The horizontal dashed line
represents the median value.

Figure A.1 continued.

Figure A.2:  VLASS (3 GHz) contours overlaid on PS1 $yig$ color composite
images. The contour levels are shown at 1.5$\times$(-1, 1, 2, 4, 8, …) mJy
beam-1. The synthesized beam is shown at the bottom left corner. The position
of WISE source is marked with a cross.

Figure A.2 continued.

Table 3: Sample of radio sources for the uGMRT survey.

NVSS-ID | Flux | Bmaj | Bmin | Bpa | Redshift | Telescope | AGN-type |  |  |  |  |  |  |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---
| WISE-ID | $RA_{\rm W}$ | $Dec_{\rm W}$ | W$1$ | $\delta W1$ | $W2$ | $\delta W2$ | W$3$ | $\delta W3$ |  |  |  |  |
| PS1-ID | nStackDets | nDetections | g | $\delta g$ | r | $\delta r$ | i | $\delta i$ | $z$ | $\delta z$ | $y$ | $\delta y$ |
(1) | (2) | (3) | (4) | (5) | (6) | (7) | (8) |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| (9) | (10) | (11) | (12) | (13) | (14) | (15) | (16) | (17) |  |  |  |  |
| (18) | (19) | (20) | (21) | (22) | (23) | (24) | (25) | (26) | (27) | (28) | (29) | (30) |
Spectra with emission lines (250)
M000234.52-052324.5 | 235.4 |  $<$16.7 |  $<$15.9 | - | 0.306 | SALT | G |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J000234.55-052324.0 | 0.6439997 | -5.3900227 | 15 | 0.04 | 14.18 | 0.05 | 10.96 | 0.14 |  |  |  |  |
| PSO J000.6440-05.3900 | 5 | 77 | 21.26 | 0.08 | 20.31 | 0.02 | 19.95 | 0.02 | 19.18 | 0.03 | 19.23 | 0.05 |
M000920.42-074057.5 | 269.9 |  $<$18.8 |  $<$16.7 | - | 1.672 | SALT | Q |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J000920.43-074057.3 | 2.3351346 | -7.6826025 | 16.26 | 0.07 | 15.07 | 0.09 | 11.65 | 0.25 |  |  |  |  |
| PSO J002.3351-07.6826 | 5 | 76 | 20.16 | 0.02 | 19.97 | 0.02 | 19.47 | 0.03 | 19.6 | 0.02 | 19.43 | 0.03 |
M000923.07-282153.9 | 205.8 |  $<$19.0 |  $<$18.0 | - | 1.796 | SALT | Q |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J000923.18-282152.0 | 2.3466024 | -28.3644449 | 15.77 | 0.05 | 14.51 | 0.06 | 11.19 | 0.15 |  |  |  |  |
| PSO J002.3465-28.3645 | 10 | 65 | 20.02 | 0.02 | 19.34 | 0.02 | 18.92 | 0.01 | 19.19 | 0.04 | 19.23 | 0.05 |
M001508.49+082803.8∗b | 384 |  $<$18.6 |  $<$17.4 | - | 1.710 | SALT | Q |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J001508.62+082802.2 | 3.7859185 | 8.4672841 | 15.06 | 0.04 | 14.26 | 0.05 | 10.95 | 0.14 |  |  |  |  |
| PSO J003.7858+08.4674 | 5 | 49 | 19.46 | 0.02 | 19.02 | 0.04 | 18.67 | 0.02 | 18.71 | 0.01 | 18.42 | 0.02 |
M001708.03-125624.9 | 929.7 |  $<$17.1 |  $<$16.1 | - | 0.883 | SUGAR | G |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J001708.22-125625.5 | 4.2842556 | -12.9404436 | 14.16 | 0.03 | 12.96 | 0.03 | 9.51 | 0.05 |  |  |  |  |
| PSO J004.2842-12.9405 | 5 | 74 | 20.46 | 0.04 | 19.68 | 0.02 | 19.25 | 0.02 | 18.87 | 0.02 | 18.1 | 0.03 |
M002355.84-235717.8∗b | 211 |  $<$17.6 |  $<$16.3 | - | 1.442 | SALT | Q |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J002355.79-235719.3 | 5.9824792 | -23.9553806 | 16.32 | 0.07 | 15.41 | 0.10 | 12.04 | 0.31 |  |  |  |  |
| PSO J005.9820-23.9555 | 5 | 44 | 21.82 | 0.1 | 21.13 | 0.05 | 20.79 | 0.04 | 20.91 | 0.15 | 20.17 | 0.18 |
M002546.66-124725.2 | 394.4 |  $<$17.2 |  $<$15.3 | - | 0.770 | SALT | Q |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J002546.68-124724.9 | 6.444512 | -12.7902504 | 15.85 | 0.05 | 15.21 | 0.10 | 11.77 | - |  |  |  |  |
| PSO J006.4444-12.7904 | 8 | 22 | -999 | -999 | 21.64 | 0.09 | 21.25 | 0.07 | 20.72 | 0.08 | -999 | -999 |
M004243.06+124657.6 | 635 |  $<$18.3 |  $<$16.2 | - | 2.150 | NOT | Q |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J004243.02+124657.2 | 10.6792742 | 12.7825612 | 15.78 | 0.05 | 14.54 | 0.07 | 11.13 | 0.17 |  |  |  |  |
| PSO J010.6793+12.7826 | 10 | 68 | 20.12 | 0.03 | 19.95 | 0.04 | 19.54 | 0.02 | 19.41 | 0.04 | 19.28 | 0.06 |
M005315.65-070233.4 | 248.2 |  $<$17.7 |  $<$14.8 | - | 2.130 | NOT | Q |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J005315.67-070232.5 | 13.3153062 | -7.0423807 | 16.31 | 0.07 | 15.25 | 0.10 | 11.95 | 0.3 |  |  |  |  |
| PSO J013.3154-07.0424 | 5 | 65 | 20.83 | 0.03 | 20.28 | 0.02 | 20.01 | 0.01 | 19.71 | 0.04 | 19.53 | 0.09 |
M010329.05+052131.2 | 589.1 |  $<$16.0 |  $<$15.6 | - | 1.421 | SALT | Q |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J010329.05+052132.4 | 15.871081 | 5.3590232 | 16.7 | 0.09 | 15.57 | 0.12 | 11.79 | - |  |  |  |  |
| PSO J015.8710+05.3588 | 5 | 74 | 20.87 | 0.04 | 20.68 | 0.06 | 20.14 | 0.02 | 19.99 | 0.03 | 19.89 | 0.12 |
M010628.74-343409.0 | 259.8 |  $<$18.2 |  $<$16.0 | - | 0.116 | SALT | G |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J010628.71-343410.5 | 16.6196616 | -34.5695834 | 13.66 | 0.03 | 12.96 | 0.03 | 9.07 | 0.03 |  |  |  |  |
| - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - |
M011727.84-042511.5 | 421.4 |  $<$19.2 |  $<$16.8 | - | 1.720 | NOT | Q |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J011727.86-042510.4 | 19.3661239 | -4.4195713 | 16.05 | 0.06 | 15 | 0.08 | 11.71 | 0.24 |  |  |  |  |
| PSO J019.3661-04.4196 | 5 | 66 | 20.3 | 0.04 | 20.67 | 0.05 | 19.27 | 0.03 | 19.9 | 0.05 | 19.64 | 0.18 |
M013047.38-172505.6 | 250.3 |  $<$17.5 |  $<$16.1 | - | 2.528 | SALT | Q |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J013047.31-172506.2 | 22.697147 | -17.4183991 | 16.71 | 0.1 | 16.01 | 0.18 | 12.09 | - |  |  |  |  |
| PSO J022.6972-17.418 | 5 | 42 | 20.49 | 0.04 | 20.35 | 0.03 | 20.36 | 0.03 | 20.24 | 0.05 | 20.24 | 0.15 |
M013212.20-065236.8∗c | 1258.9 |  $<$18.3 |  $<$16.2 | - | 1.511 | SALT | Q |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J013212.24-065236.0 | 23.0510009 | -6.8766872 | 15.95 | 0.05 | 14.73 | 0.06 | 11.32 | 0.16 |  |  |  |  |
| - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - |
M013355.99-025635.2 | 270.2 |  $<$19.2 |  $<$16.9 | - | 0.261 | SALT | G |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J013355.91-025633.3 | 23.4829682 | -2.9426108 | 13.58 | 0.03 | 12.67 | 0.03 | 9.56 | 0.04 |  |  |  |  |
| PSO J023.4830-02.9426 | 5 | 73 | 18.96 | 0.03 | 18.28 | 0.02 | 18.26 | 0.01 | 17.9 | 0.02 | 17.9 | 0.02 |
M013721.79+072059.0 | 314.8 | 44.7 |  $<$18.4 | 3.3 | 0.255 | SALT | G |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J013721.81+072058.0 | 24.3408858 | 7.3494561 | 14.35 | 0.03 | 13.29 | 0.03 | 10.03 | 0.05 |  |  |  |  |
| PSO J024.3406+07.3495 | 0 | 7 | -999 | -999 | -999 | -999 | 19.87 | 0.14 | 19.36 | 0.07 | -999 | -999 |
M015647.53-361608.3 | 1296.9 |  $<$16.6 |  $<$16.4 | - | 0.354 | SALT | G |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J015647.59-361610.1 | 29.1983255 | -36.2694836 | 14.76 | 0.03 | 13.49 | 0.03 | 10.14 | 0.06 |  |  |  |  |
| - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - |
J021148.77+170723.2 | 539.8 |  $<$19.3 |  $<$17.9 | - | 1.980 | NOT | Q |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J021148.78+170722.6 | 32.9532841 | 17.1229521 | 16.22 | 0.06 | 15.42 | 0.10 | 11.82 | 0.24 |  |  |  |  |
| PSO J032.9532+17.1230 | 5 | 45 | 20.24 | 0.07 | 20.12 | 0.03 | 19.88 | 0.02 | 19.64 | 0.03 | 19.61 | 0.04 |
M021231.86-382256.6 | 244.5 |  $<$18.6 |  $<$16.4 | - | 2.260 | SALT | Q |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J021231.72-382256.9 | 33.1321971 | -38.382499 | 17.16 | 0.09 | 16.33 | 0.15 | 12.32 | - |  |  |  |  |
| - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - |
M021650.70+172404.9 | 395.2 |  $<$17.5 |  $<$17.2 | - | 1.530 | NOT | Q |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J021650.74+172405.7 | 34.2114448 | 17.4016026 | 15.99 | 0.06 | 15.09 | 0.10 | 11.91 | 0.36 |  |  |  |  |
| PSO J034.2114+17.401 | 5 | 54 | 20.73 | 0.05 | 20.16 | 0.04 | 19.8 | 0.04 | 19.89 | 0.03 | 19.64 | 0.09 |
M021715.31-271555.4 | 265.1 |  $<$18.7 |  $<$15.3 | - | 1.950 | SALT | Q |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J021715.33-271555.4 | 34.3138823 | -27.265405 | 16.7 | 0.07 | 15.54 | 0.09 | 12.09 | 0.24 |  |  |  |  |
| PSO J034.3138-27.2654 | 5 | 62 | 19.91 | 0.01 | 19.84 | 0.02 | 19.61 | 0.01 | 19.44 | 0.02 | 19.41 | 0.05 |
M022128.93-335827.0 | 219.8 |  $<$17.9 |  $<$16.0 | - | 0.524 | SALT | Q |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J022128.90-335826.8 | 35.3704341 | -33.9741367 | 15.67 | 0.04 | 14.29 | 0.05 | 10.33 | 0.07 |  |  |  |  |
| - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - |
M022613.72+093726.3 | 374.6 |  $<$17.1 |  $<$16.4 | - | 2.605 | SUGAR | Q |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J022613.71+093726.7 | 36.5571491 | 9.6240874 | 15.03 | 0.04 | 14.11 | 0.05 | 10.74 | 0.1 |  |  |  |  |
| PSO J036.5571+09.6241 | 5 | 55 | 18.33 | 0.01 | 18.01 | 0.01 | 17.89 | 0.02 | 17.8 | 0.01 | 17.69 | 0.02 |
M022639.92+194110.1 | 209.8 |  $<$15.9 |  $<$14.0 | - | 2.190 | NOT | Q |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J022639.93+194110.5 | 36.6663794 | 19.686268 | 16.52 | 0.09 | 15.46 | 0.12 | 11.9 | - |  |  |  |  |
| PSO J036.6665+19.6862 | 5 | 69 | 20.46 | 0.02 | 20.36 | 0.02 | 20.06 | 0.02 | 19.74 | 0.02 | 19.74 | 0.03 |
M022924.85-243600.9∗b | 276.7 | 14.1 |  $<$17.6 | 68.1 | 2.003 | SALT | Q |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J022924.93-243600.9 | 37.3538803 | -24.6002552 | 16.04 | 0.05 | 15.28 | 0.07 | 12.21 | 0.24 |  |  |  |  |
| PSO J037.3539-24.6003 | 5 | 11 | -999 | -999 | -999 | -999 | 21.61 | 0.04 | -999 | -999 | 20.24 | 0.18 |
M023939.11-135409.4 | 214 |  $<$18.3 |  $<$16.6 | - | 1.947 | SALT | Q |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J023939.14-135409.5 | 39.9131075 | -13.9026396 | 16.04 | 0.05 | 14.95 | 0.06 | 11.66 | 0.17 |  |  |  |  |
| PSO J039.9130-13.9026 | 5 | 44 | 19.66 | 0.02 | 19.55 | 0.02 | 19.38 | 0.02 | 19.27 | 0.03 | 19.25 | 0.09 |
M024027.19+095713.0 | 521.2 | 14.7 |  $<$19.0 | -50.1 | 1.874 | SALT | Q |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J024027.16+095713.4 | 40.113197 | 9.9537378 | 16.36 | 0.07 | 15.49 | 0.12 | 12.43 | 0.45 |  |  |  |  |
| PSO J040.1135+09.9537 | 5 | 44 | 21.01 | 0.05 | 20.98 | 0.04 | 20.48 | 0.05 | 20.27 | 0.05 | -999 | -999 |
M024046.80+083258.3 | 305.4 |  $<$19.6 |  $<$16.4 | - | 1.100 | NOT | Q |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J024046.81+083259.9 | 40.1950492 | 8.5499839 | 15.57 | 0.04 | 14.59 | 0.06 | 11.49 | 0.21 |  |  |  |  |
| PSO J040.1951+08.5500 | 5 | 61 | 19.74 | 0.02 | 19.41 | 0.01 | 19.2 | 0.01 | 19.11 | 0.01 | 18.9 | 0.03 |
M024106.56-171640.3 | 453.9 |  $<$17.7 |  $<$16.6 | - | 0.365 | SALT | G |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J024106.57-171641.5 | 40.2774033 | -17.2782204 | 15.26 | 0.04 | 14.64 | 0.05 | 11.81 | 0.25 |  |  |  |  |
| PSO J040.2774-17.2782 | 5 | 81 | 21.03 | 0.07 | 19.88 | 0.02 | 19.62 | 0.02 | 19.15 | 0.03 | 19.18 | 0.04 |
M024939.93+044028.9 | 420.5 |  $<$17.0 |  $<$16.2 | - | 2.008 | SUGAR | Q |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J024939.97+044028.3 | 42.4165498 | 4.6745332 | 16.15 | 0.06 | 15.10 | 0.07 | 11.68 | 0.19 |  |  |  |  |
| PSO J042.4165+04.6745 | 5 | 60 | 20.61 | 0.03 | 20.32 | 0.06 | 19.88 | 0.01 | 19.61 | 0.02 | 19.48 | 0.09 |
M025035.54-262743.1 | 389.2 |  $<$16.6 |  $<$15.3 | - | 2.918 | SALT | Q |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J025035.56-262742.4 | 42.6481981 | -26.4617931 | 16.08 | 0.05 | 15.06 | 0.07 | 11.63 | 0.16 |  |  |  |  |
| PSO J042.6482-26.4618 | 5 | 78 | 19.1 | 0.01 | 18.97 | 0.02 | 18.9 | 0.02 | 18.98 | 0.01 | 18.89 | 0.03 |
M025630.36-021844.5 | 260.3 |  $<$17.3 |  $<$15.6 | - | 1.970 | NOT | Q |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J025630.37-021844.2 | 44.1265641 | -2.312278 | 15.21 | 0.03 | 13.88 | 0.04 | 10.27 | 0.06 |  |  |  |  |
| PSO J044.1266-02.3123 | 5 | 72 | 18.85 | 0.03 | 18.63 | 0.01 | 18.46 | 0.01 | 18.25 | 0.01 | 18.32 | 0.01 |
M030032.15-302243.8 | 371.4 |  $<$16.6 |  $<$15.4 | - | 0.310 | SALT | G |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J030032.19-302242.4 | 45.1341357 | -30.37846 | 14.66 | 0.03 | 13.8 | 0.03 | 10.26 | 0.05 |  |  |  |  |
| - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | -
M030413.80-112653.5 | 335 |  $<$16.6 |  $<$15.3 | - | 1.552 | SUGAR | Q |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J030413.74-112653.3 | 46.0572895 | -11.4481531 | 16.98 | 0.09 | 15.84 | 0.12 | 12.34 | - |  |  |  |  |
| PSO J046.0574-11.4480 | 5 | 82 | 20.33 | 0.02 | 20.02 | 0.03 | 19.76 | 0.04 | 19.93 | 0.03 | 19.74 | 0.11 |
M031022.90+055552.6 | 200.5 | 21.2 |  $<$17.8 | 52.5 | 0.399 | SALT | G |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J031023.01+055552.4 | 47.5958935 | 5.9312433 | 15.12 | 0.03 | 13.89 | 0.04 | 10.27 | 0.08 |  |  |  |  |
| PSO J047.5959+05.9313 | 5 | 49 | -999 | -999 | 21.17 | 0.07 | 20.35 | 0.03 | 20.12 | 0.04 | 19.63 | 0.06 |
M031407.94-090946.9 | 226.8 | 44.5 |  $<$18.7 | 84.1 | 0.312 | NOT | G |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J031407.90-090948.5 | 48.532931 | -9.1634772 | 15.25 | 0.04 | 14.61 | 0.05 | 11.72 | 0.24 |  |  |  |  |
| PSO J048.5329-09.1635 | 10 | 64 | 21.38 | 0.07 | 20.1 | 0.02 | 19.67 | 0.04 | 19.51 | 0.03 | 19.16 | 0.04 |
M031551.28-364450.8 | 462.4 |  $<$19.6 |  $<$15.6 | - | 1.348 | SALT | Q |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J031551.34-364448.9 | 48.9639505 | -36.7469393 | 15.8 | 0.04 | 14.84 | 0.05 | 11.74 | 0.17 |  |  |  |  |
| - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - |
M031706.76+065550.3 | 247.9 | 23.9 |  $<$17.2 | 70.8 | 0.275 | NOT | G |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J031706.74+065549.6 | 49.2781024 | 6.9304589 | 14.78 | 0.03 | 14.12 | 0.05 | 11.13 | 0.16 |  |  |  |  |
| PSO J049.2781+06.9305 | 5 | 61 | 21.41 | 0.08 | 20 | 0.04 | 19.46 | 0.02 | 18.95 | 0.04 | 18.83 | 0.04 |
M032128.78-294047.4∗d | 2061.7 |  $<$16.5 |  $<$15.6 | - | 0.583 | SALT | Q |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J032128.80-294046.3 | 50.3700396 | -29.6795529 | 13.97 | 0.03 | 12.85 | 0.03 | 9.57 | 0.03 |  |  |  |  |
| PSO J050.3701-29.6796 | 5 | 50 | 20.68 | 0.02 | 19.96 | 0.03 | 18.98 | 0.02 | 19.32 | 0.02 | 18.83 | 0.03 |
M032808.59-015220.2 | 221.9 |  $<$18.3 |  $<$15.9 | - | 2.679 | SUGAR | Q |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J032808.68-015221.0 | 52.0361812 | -1.8725096 | 15.46 | 0.04 | 14.55 | 0.06 | 11.31 | 0.17 |  |  |  |  |
| PSO J052.0363-01.8726 | 5 | 76 | 18.7 | 0.01 | 18.53 | 0.02 | 18.48 | 0.02 | 18.36 | 0.01 | 18.33 | 0.03 |
M034157.75+151925.5 | 200.4 |  $<$17.5 |  $<$15.1 | - | 1.699 | NOT | Q |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J034157.69+151925.0 | 55.4903908 | 15.3236243 | 16.32 | 0.08 | 15.22 | 0.09 | 11.77 | - |  |  |  |  |
| PSO J055.4904+15.3235 | 5 | 60 | 20.87 | 0.05 | 20.58 | 0.04 | 20.18 | 0.05 | 20.04 | 0.03 | 19.85 | 0.09 |
M035016.86-035111.3 | 230.5 |  $<$17.5 |  $<$15.3 | - | 0.611 | SUGAR | Q |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J035016.85-035111.3 | 57.5702271 | -3.8531559 | 15.21 | 0.04 | 14 | 0.04 | 10.65 | 0.1 |  |  |  |  |
| PSO J057.5702-03.8532 | 5 | 75 | 19.25 | 0.02 | 19.06 | 0.02 | 18.81 | 0.01 | 18.86 | 0.02 | 18.79 | 0.05 |
M035211.06-251449.8 | 269.3 |  $<$17.0 |  $<$16.4 | - | 1.675 | SALT | Q |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J035211.06-251450.2 | 58.0460983 | -25.2473 | 14.77 | 0.03 | 13.68 | 0.03 | 10.12 | 0.06 |  |  |  |  |
| PSO J058.0461-25.2473 | 5 | 73 | 19.52 | 0.02 | 19.32 | 0.03 | 19.04 | 0.01 | 18.97 | 0.02 | 18.79 | 0.05 |
M035414.70-030804.3 | 725.6 |  $<$18.7 |  $<$18.1 | - | 0.442 | SALT | G |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J035414.72-030804.8 | 58.5613708 | -3.1346696 | 14.79 | 0.03 | 13.98 | 0.04 | 10.82 | 0.13 |  |  |  |  |
| PSO J058.5614-03.1348 | 5 | 58 | 20.58 | 0.03 | 19.87 | 0.02 | 19.18 | 0.01 | 19.17 | 0.03 | 18.54 | 0.02 |
M035633.46+190034.6 | 1051.3 |  $<$17.7 |  $<$17.0 | - | 1.480 | NOT | Q |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J035633.48+190034.3 | 59.1395029 | 19.0095492 | 15.76 | 0.05 | 14.95 | 0.08 | 11.73 | 0.32 |  |  |  |  |
| PSO J059.1394+19.0090 | 3 | 31 | -999 | -999 | -999 | -999 | 20.64 | 0.02 | 19.9 | 0.03 | 19.42 | 0.05 |
M035634.55-083121.3 | 239.7 |  $<$18.3 |  $<$16.8 | - | 1.447 | NOT | Q |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J035634.52-083122.3 | 59.1438555 | -8.522875 | 16.52 | 0.08 | 15.34 | 0.10 | 11.84 | - |  |  |  |  |
| PSO J059.1439-08.5229 | 5 | 60 | 21.15 | 0.04 | 20.47 | 0.03 | 20.23 | 0.02 | 20.24 | 0.05 | 20.22 | 0.05 |
M040015.06-142328.0∗c | 409.7 |  $<$19.1 |  $<$15.8 | - | 1.136 | SALT | Q |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J040015.04-142328.2 | 60.0626992 | -14.391167 | 15.81 | 0.05 | 15.16 | 0.08 | 12.11 | 0.33 |  |  |  |  |
| PSO J060.0627-14.3911 | 10 | 73 | 19.38 | 0.01 | 19.14 | 0.01 | 19.22 | 0.01 | 19.07 | 0.02 | 18.96 | 0.04 |
M041530.42-234750.2 | 262 |  $<$17.4 |  $<$16.0 | - | 0.366 | SALT | G |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J041530.38-234751.3 | 63.8765933 | -23.7975834 | 15.59 | 0.04 | 14.8 | 0.06 | 11.61 | 0.19 |  |  |  |  |
| PSO J063.8767-23.7975 | 5 | 65 | 20.74 | 0.02 | 19.63 | 0.01 | 19.53 | 0.02 | 19.11 | 0.02 | 19.15 | 0.1 |
M041620.54-333931.3 | 264.1 |  $<$20.0 |  $<$15.8 | - | 3.045 | SALT | Q |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J041620.47-333931.6 | 64.0853255 | -33.6587934 | 16.08 | 0.05 | 15.19 | 0.08 | 11.66 | 0.19 |  |  |  |  |
| - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - |
M042248.53-203456.6 | 224.3 |  $<$17.2 |  $<$16.7 | - | 2.582 | SALT | Q |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J042248.43-203455.8 | 65.7017923 | -20.5821781 | 16.73 | 0.08 | 15.96 | 0.14 | 12.09 | - |  |  |  |  |
| PSO J065.7019-20.5822 | 5 | 60 | 20.84 | 0.04 | 20.46 | 0.05 | 20.52 | 0.03 | 20.45 | 0.09 | 19.42 | 0.16 |
M042725.05+085330.3∗c | 937.7 |  $<$13.9 |  $<$13.9 | - | 1.215 | SALT | Q |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J042725.11+085329.9 | 66.8546587 | 8.8916425 | 15.91 | 0.06 | 14.9 | 0.08 | 11.64 | 0.27 |  |  |  |  |
| PSO J066.8546+08.8916 | 5 | 52 | 20.79 | 0.08 | 20.13 | 0.04 | 19.75 | 0.03 | 19.5 | 0.08 | 19.46 | 0.05 |
M044604.72-114813.4 | 273.8 |  $<$17.7 |  $<$15.8 | - | 1.668 | SALT | Q |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J044604.67-114812.8 | 71.5194971 | -11.8035664 | 15.12 | 0.03 | 14.28 | 0.04 | 11.08 | 0.12 |  |  |  |  |
| PSO J071.5196-11.8035 | 5 | 82 | 18.78 | 0.01 | 18.52 | 0.01 | 18.22 | 0.01 | 18.16 | 0.01 | 18.16 | 0.02 |
M044849.48-093531.3 | 240.9 |  $<$17.9 |  $<$15.5 | - | 2.079 | SALT | Q |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J044849.47-093531.4 | 72.2061409 | -9.5920798 | 14.57 | 0.03 | 13.64 | 0.03 | 10.27 | 0.08 |  |  |  |  |
| PSO J072.2061-09.5921 | 10 | 76 | 18.3 | 0 | 17.88 | 0.01 | 17.59 | 0 | 17.43 | 0.01 | 17.41 | 0.02 |
M045541.91+185010.9 | 328.1 |  $<$16.3 |  $<$14.5 | - | 0.548 | NOT | Q |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J045541.81+185009.1 | 73.9242412 | 18.8358874 | 14.61 | 0.04 | 13.86 | 0.04 | 10.79 | 0.11 |  |  |  |  |
| PSO J073.9245+18.8359 | 5 | 92 | 20.21 | 0.04 | 19.69 | 0.01 | 19.06 | 0.01 | 18.93 | 0.02 | 18.32 | 0.02 |
M050725.04-362442.9 | 212.4 |  $<$17.1 |  $<$14.7 | - | 2.930 | SALT | Q |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J050725.06-362443.1 | 76.8544416 | -36.4119939 | 15.66 | 0.04 | 14.63 | 0.04 | 11.14 | 0.09 |  |  |  |  |
| - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - |
M051024.23-195950.3 | 336.2 | 15.2 |  $<$16.6 | 89.5 | 0.472 | NOT | G |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J051024.07-195949.9 | 77.6003298 | -19.9971964 | 14.95 | 0.03 | 14.15 | 0.04 | 11.16 | 0.12 |  |  |  |  |
| PSO J077.6003-19.9972 | 10 | 65 | 20.61 | 0.12 | 20.31 | 0.03 | 19.76 | 0.04 | 19.69 | 0.04 | 19.22 | 0.04 |
M051134.05+024416.0 | 351.4 |  $<$18.3 |  $<$17.1 | - | 1.366 | SALT | Q |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J051134.13+024416.5 | 77.8922114 | 2.7379244 | 16.3 | 0.07 | 15.31 | 0.09 | 12.16 | 0.37 |  |  |  |  |
| PSO J077.8921+02.7377 | 5 | 33 | 21.74 | 0.15 | 21.17 | 0.03 | 21.23 | 0.04 | 20.9 | 0 | -999 | -999 |
M051240.99+151723.8 | 966.5 |  $<$17.1 |  $<$15.3 | - | 2.568 | NOT | Q |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J051241.02+151723.4 | 78.1709541 | 15.289858 | 15.53 | 0.05 | 14.45 | 0.06 | 10.99 | 0.19 |  |  |  |  |
| PSO J078.1709+15.2899 | 5 | 78 | 20.3 | 0.06 | 19.75 | 0.06 | 19.62 | 0.05 | 19.11 | 0.02 | 18.86 | 0.05 |
M051340.03+010023.6 | 447 |  $<$19.0 |  $<$17.0 | - | 2.673 | SALT | Q |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J051340.03+010021.7 | 78.4168243 | 1.0060487 | 15.73 | 0.05 | 14.88 | 0.07 | 11.56 | 0.27 |  |  |  |  |
| PSO J078.4168+01.0060 | 10 | 87 | 19.14 | 0.01 | 18.83 | 0.01 | 18.8 | 0.02 | 18.71 | 0.01 | 18.54 | 0.02 |
M051511.18-012002.4 | 288.8 |  $<$17.5 |  $<$15.7 | - | 2.287 | SALT | Q |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J051511.18-012001.9 | 78.7965932 | -1.3338644 | 15.79 | 0.05 | 14.81 | 0.07 | 11.35 | 0.17 |  |  |  |  |
| PSO J078.7965-01.3339 | 10 | 62 | 18.81 | 0.01 | 18.66 | 0 | 18.6 | 0.02 | 18.59 | 0.04 | 18.4 | 0.02 |
M051656.35+073252.7 | 231.7 |  $<$17.7 |  $<$16.4 | - | 2.594 | SUGAR | G |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J051656.28+073251.6 | 79.2345275 | 7.5476931 | 14.18 | 0.03 | 13.53 | 0.03 | 10.65 | 0.15 |  |  |  |  |
| PSO J079.2343+07.5473 | 5 | 30 | 21.14 | 0.09 | 20.29 | 0.03 | 19.7 | 0.03 | 19.27 | 0.05 | 19.13 | 0.02 |
M052318.55-261409.6 | 1354.9 |  $<$18.9 |  $<$15.7 | - | 3.110 | SALT | Q |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J052318.50-261409.2 | 80.8270963 | -26.2359125 | 14.65 | 0.03 | 13.91 | 0.04 | 10.79 | 0.09 |  |  |  |  |
| PSO J080.8270-26.2360 | 10 | 90 | 18.83 | 0.01 | 18.71 | 0.01 | 18.63 | 0.01 | 18.46 | 0.01 | 18.14 | 0.02 |
M052744.71-121153.7 | 335.6 |  $<$17.7 |  $<$16.2 | - | 0.316 | SALT | G |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J052744.69-121153.9 | 81.936226 | -12.1983095 | 15.4 | 0.04 | 14.66 | 0.06 | 11.72 | 0.24 |  |  |  |  |
| PSO J081.9362-12.1983 | 5 | 64 | 21.24 | 0.04 | 20.12 | 0.03 | 19.75 | 0.02 | 19.29 | 0.03 | 19.24 | 0.04 |
M052905.55-112607.5 | 455.8 |  $<$17.8 |  $<$16.0 | - | 1.007 | SUGAR | Q |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J052905.51-112607.8 | 82.2729967 | -11.4355102 | 14.99 | 0.04 | 14.3 | 0.05 | 11.3 | 0.14 |  |  |  |  |
| PSO J082.2730-11.4355 | 5 | 61 | 20.3 | 0.07 | 19.71 | 0.06 | 19.52 | 0.02 | 19.33 | 0.02 | 19.06 | 0.04 |
M054518.09-261857.3 | 236.9 |  $<$19.3 |  $<$16.3 | - | 0.800 | SALT | Q |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J054518.01-261856.3 | 86.3250527 | -26.3156623 | 15.71 | 0.04 | 14.81 | 0.06 | 11.73 | 0.23 |  |  |  |  |
| PSO J086.3251-26.3156 | 5 | 53 | 19.69 | 0.06 | 19.52 | 0.04 | 19.6 | 0.03 | 19.51 | 0.06 | 19.47 | 0.08 |
M055007.33+002731.5 | 208.7 |  $<$17.6 |  $<$17.0 | - | 0.279 | SALT | G |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J055007.28+002731.6 | 87.5303628 | 0.4587796 | 14.06 | 0.03 | 13.13 | 0.03 | 9.98 | 0.06 |  |  |  |  |
| PSO J087.5304+00.4588 | 5 | 64 | 20.91 | 0.03 | 19.88 | 0.03 | 19.33 | 0.01 | 18.67 | 0.03 | 18.51 | 0.04 |
M055205.32-345956.6 | 280 |  $<$17.8 |  $<$15.4 | - | 1.777 | SALT | G |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J055205.47-345958.1 | 88.0227953 | -34.9994984 | 17.78 | 0.18 | 16.28 | 0.16 | 12.62 | 0.47 |  |  |  |  |
| - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - |
M060248.09-254602.2∗d | 555.3 |  $<$17.8 |  $<$15.0 | - | 0.602 | SALT | Q |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J060248.05-254602.6 | 90.7002434 | -25.7673954 | 15.5 | 0.04 | 14.87 | 0.06 | 11.69 | 0.2 |  |  |  |  |
| PSO J090.7002-25.7674 | 5 | 66 | 21.5 | 0.04 | 21.4 | 0.4 | 20.23 | 0.02 | 20.07 | 0.05 | 19.4 | 0.06 |
M060958.94+021727.1 | 201.5 |  $<$17.7 |  $<$17.0 | - | 0.174 | SALT | G |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J060958.97+021726.5 | 92.4957371 | 2.2907017 | 13.38 | 0.03 | 12.22 | 0.02 | 8.29 | 0.02 |  |  |  |  |
| PSO J092.4957+02.2907 | 5 | 69 | 21.31 | 0.06 | 19.85 | 0.03 | 18.6 | 0.02 | 18.86 | 0.03 | 18.58 | 0.04 |
M061038.80-230145.6 | 360.2 |  $<$16.5 |  $<$16.0 | - | 2.829 | SALT | Q |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J061038.78-230145.7 | 92.6615979 | -23.0293781 | 15.33 | 0.04 | 14.36 | 0.05 | 10.74 | 0.1 |  |  |  |  |
| PSO J092.6616-23.0294 | 5 | 67 | 18.62 | 0.01 | 18.47 | 0 | 18.35 | 0 | 18.27 | 0.01 | 18.14 | 0.01 |
M061856.02-315835.2 | 346.1 |  $<$16.5 |  $<$15.7 | - | 2.134 | SALT | Q |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J061856.00-315835.0 | 94.7333346 | -31.97639 | 15.76 | 0.04 | 14.75 | 0.05 | 11.25 | 0.1 |  |  |  |  |
| - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - |
M063602.28-311312.5 | 262.1 |  $<$16.6 |  $<$14.3 | - | 2.654 | SALT | Q |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J063602.35-311311.8 | 99.0098305 | -31.2199453 | 13.88 | 0.03 | 12.77 | 0.03 | 9.39 | 0.03 |  |  |  |  |
| - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - |
M063613.53-310646.3 | 208 |  $<$17.7 |  $<$15.4 | - | 2.757 | SALT | Q |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J063613.49-310644.1 | 99.0562279 | -31.1122649 | 16.73 | 0.08 | 15.74 | 0.12 | 12.37 | - |  |  |  |  |
| - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - |
M065254.73-323022.6 | 322.1 | 25.4 |  $<$17.7 | -34.8 | 2.239 | SALT | Q |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J065254.55-323020.7 | 103.2273249 | -32.5057682 | 14.86 | 0.03 | 14.08 | 0.04 | 10.9 | 0.1 |  |  |  |  |
| - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - |
M070249.30-330205.0 | 314.6 |  $<$16.9 |  $<$15.8 | - | 2.410 | SALT | Q |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J070249.28-330204.2 | 105.7053378 | -33.0345087 | 16.36 | 0.06 | 15.57 | 0.10 | 11.91 | - |  |  |  |  |
| - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - |
M073159.01+143336.3 | 316.5 |  $<$17.9 |  $<$15.8 | - | 2.632 | NOT | Q |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J073158.97+143335.8 | 112.9957193 | 14.5599667 | 15.49 | 0.05 | 14.76 | 0.07 | 11.01 | 0.14 |  |  |  |  |
| PSO J112.9958+14.5601 | 5 | 58 | 18.54 | 0.02 | 18.43 | 0.01 | 18.28 | 0.01 | 18.26 | 0.03 | 18.14 | 0.01 |
M073714.60-382841.9 | 219.3 | 14.2 |  $<$16.7 | -17 | 2.107 | SALT | Q |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J073714.61-382839.3 | 114.3108811 | -38.4776064 | 15.41 | 0.04 | 14.19 | 0.04 | 10.88 | 0.08 |  |  |  |  |
| - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - |
M073748.06-381259.0 | 2436.5 | 18.2 |  $<$18.9 | 35.4 | 0.318 | SALT | G |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J073748.12-381257.6 | 114.4505408 | -38.2160133 | 14.25 | 0.03 | 13.14 | 0.03 | 9.9 | 0.05 |  |  |  |  |
| - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - |
M080217.91+080525.4 | 210.5 |  $<$18.3 |  $<$15.9 | - | 0.995 | SALT | Q |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J080217.84+080524.7 | 120.5743551 | 8.0902184 | 16.24 | 0.07 | 15.44 | 0.11 | 12.45 | 0.51 |  |  |  |  |
| PSO J120.5743+08.0903 | 5 | 63 | 20.99 | 0.12 | 20.86 | 0.05 | 20.73 | 0.05 | 20.48 | 0.04 | 19.96 | 0.12 |
M080356.46+042102.8∗c | 318.1 |  $<$17.0 |  $<$16.4 | - | 1.252 | SALT | Q |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J080356.43+042102.6 | 120.9851521 | 4.3507431 | 15.27 | 0.04 | 14.14 | 0.04 | 10.86 | 0.11 |  |  |  |  |
| PSO J120.9852+04.3508 | 5 | 76 | 19.22 | 0.02 | 18.94 | 0.02 | 18.87 | 0.01 | 18.88 | 0.02 | 18.9 | 0.03 |
M080804.34+005708.2 | 317 |  $<$17.2 |  $<$16.5 | - | 3.133 | SALT | Q |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J080804.34+005707.6 | 122.0181055 | 0.9521212 | 15.31 | 0.04 | 14.38 | 0.05 | 10.58 | 0.1 |  |  |  |  |
| PSO J122.0181+00.9521 | 5 | 72 | 18.47 | 0.01 | 18.27 | 0.01 | 18.07 | 0 | 18.12 | 0.01 | 18.04 | 0.03 |
M081727.59-030737.7 | 502.7 |  $<$16.6 |  $<$15.4 | - | 1.785 | SALT | Q |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J081727.45-030737.2 | 124.3644078 | -3.1270117 | 14.9 | 0.03 | 14.21 | 0.04 | 10.95 | 0.13 |  |  |  |  |
| PSO J124.3645-03.1270 | 5 | 42 | 18.61 | 0.08 | 18.69 | 0.01 | 18.25 | 0.01 | 18.25 | 0.05 | 18.02 | 0.04 |
M081936.62-063047.9∗a | 280 |  $<$18.1 |  $<$16.3 | - | 2.507 | SALT | Q |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J081936.63-063048.4 | 124.9026465 | -6.5134706 | 15.56 | 0.04 | 14.66 | 0.06 | 11.11 | 0.15 |  |  |  |  |
| PSO J124.9027-06.5134 | 5 | 65 | 19.79 | 0.06 | 19.88 | 0.03 | 19.38 | 0.03 | 19.33 | 0.03 | 19.2 | 0.04 |
M082638.44-032426.4 | 221.9 |  $<$18.3 |  $<$16.9 | - | 0.437 | SALT | G |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J082638.42-032427.2 | 126.6601067 | -3.407575 | 15.49 | 0.04 | 14.77 | 0.07 | 11.63 | 0.28 |  |  |  |  |
| PSO J126.6601-03.4076 | 0 | 79 | 20.29 | 0.05 | 20.36 | 0.03 | 19.57 | 0.02 | 19.61 | 0.04 | 19.26 | 0.05 |
M083601.35+040636.0 | 435.3 |  $<$18.2 |  $<$15.7 | - | 0.743 | SUGAR | G |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J083601.33+040637.4 | 129.005552 | 4.1104025 | 15.52 | 0.05 | 14.91 | 0.07 | 11.86 | - |  |  |  |  |
| PSO J129.0057+04.1100 | 5 | 28 | -999 | -999 | 21.52 | 0.07 | 21.31 | 0.08 | 20.47 | 0.1 | 20.4 | 0.18 |
M083608.59-133635.1 | 919.2 | 48 |  $<$18.2 | -63 | 0.160 | SALT | G |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J083608.56-133634.3 | 129.0356672 | -13.6095406 | 14.01 | 0.03 | 13.18 | 0.03 | 9.82 | 0.06 |  |  |  |  |
| PSO J129.0356-13.6095 | 5 | 78 | 19.56 | 0.03 | 18.65 | 0.03 | 18.23 | 0.02 | 18.04 | 0.04 | 17.81 | 0.03 |
M085826.92-260721.0 | 404.5 |  $<$18.6 |  $<$17.2 | - | 2.036 | SALT | Q |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J085826.85-260720.9 | 134.6118804 | -26.12249 | 15.47 | 0.04 | 14.33 | 0.04 | 11.04 | 0.12 |  |  |  |  |
| PSO J134.6118-26.1225 | 5 | 67 | 19.27 | 0.02 | 19.09 | 0.02 | 18.72 | 0.01 | 18.44 | 0.02 | 18.51 | 0.02 |
M090337.99-311739.0 | 209.5 |  $<$16.6 |  $<$15.7 | - | 1.670 | SALT | Q |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J090337.92-311739.0 | 135.9080123 | -31.2941691 | 16.68 | 0.08 | 15.76 | 0.12 | 12.12 | 0.32 |  |  |  |  |
| - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | -
M090910.66-163753.8 | 340.1 |  $<$15.7 |  $<$13.9 | - | 2.475 | SUGAR | Q |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J090910.56-163756.3 | 137.2940394 | -16.6323287 | 15.87 | 0.06 | 15.2 | 0.09 | 11.84 | - |  |  |  |  |
| PSO J137.2937-16.6327 | 6 | 2 | -999 | -999 | -999 | -999 | 21.67 | 0.16 | -999 | -999 | -999 | -999 |
M090911.33-313334.1 | 610.1 | 50 |  $<$16.7 | -65.4 | 0.884 | SALT | G |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J090911.50-313335.3 | 137.2979271 | -31.5598218 | 16.98 | 0.1 | 16.27 | 0.19 | 12.63 | - |  |  |  |  |
| - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | -
M090916.99-050053.2 | 457.2 |  $<$16.7 |  $<$15.4 | - | 0.404 | SUGAR | G |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J090917.01-050052.5 | 137.3208807 | -5.0146108 | 15.68 | 0.05 | 15 | 0.08 | 11.75 | 0.26 |  |  |  |  |
| PSO J137.3209-05.0147 | 5 | 41 | 22.05 | 0.06 | 20.77 | 0.1 | 20.21 | 0.07 | 19.9 | 0.04 | 19.8 | 0.06 |
M091051.01-052626.8 | 337.9 | 15.8 |  $<$15.5 | 2.8 | 2.395 | SUGAR | Q |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J091050.99-052629.1 | 137.7124859 | -5.4414291 | 14.57 | 0.03 | 13.61 | 0.04 | 10.46 | 0.08 |  |  |  |  |
| PSO J137.7125-05.4414 | 5 | 83 | 18.24 | 0.01 | 18.03 | 0.02 | 17.86 | 0.01 | 17.73 | 0.01 | 17.48 | 0.02 |
M091253.34-135241.9∗c | 255.7 |  $<$16.5 |  $<$16.3 | - | 1.088 | SALT | Q |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J091253.36-135242.1 | 138.2223389 | -13.8783827 | 15.62 | 0.04 | 14.98 | 0.07 | 11.9 | 0.24 |  |  |  |  |
| PSO J138.2222-13.8785 | 5 | 38 | 21.29 | 0.07 | 20.83 | 0.09 | 20.62 | 0.13 | 20.56 | 0.1 | 19.99 | 0.09 |
M092902.69-293020.8 | 899.6 |  $<$18.8 |  $<$17.4 | - | 0.749 | SALT | G |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J092902.70-293019.9 | 142.2612874 | -29.5055398 | 15.52 | 0.04 | 14.48 | 0.05 | 9.44 | 0.04 |  |  |  |  |
| PSO J142.2613-29.5055 | 5 | 27 | 21.67 | 0.08 | 20.75 | 0.05 | 20.78 | 0.07 | 19.03 | 0.01 | 20.17 | 0.07 |
M092956.48+014843.8 | 248.7 |  $<$18.2 |  $<$17.2 | - | 2.331 | SALT | Q |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J092956.47+014844.2 | 142.485295 | 1.8123026 | 15.19 | 0.04 | 14.34 | 0.05 | 11.18 | 0.14 |  |  |  |  |
| PSO J142.4852+01.8123 | 5 | 59 | 20.2 | 0.05 | 19.9 | 0.03 | 19.23 | 0.03 | 18.9 | 0.02 | 18.64 | 0.02 |
M093919.21-173135.4 | 263.3 |  $<$16.1 |  $<$15.3 | - | 1.831 | SUGAR | Q |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J093919.19-173135.6 | 144.8299719 | -17.5265832 | 15.19 | 0.04 | 14.07 | 0.04 | 10.67 | 0.08 |  |  |  |  |
| PSO J144.8300-17.5266 | 10 | 48 | 21.63 | 0.1 | 19.88 | 0.14 | 21 | 0.05 | 20.7 | 0.12 | 18.93 | 0.02 |
M094040.47-002800.1 | 359.3 |  $<$17.1 |  $<$16.1 | - | 2.383 | SALT | Q |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J094040.47-002801.4 | 145.1686386 | -0.4670779 | 16.51 | 0.09 | 15.88 | 0.16 | 12 | - |  |  |  |  |
| PSO J145.1686-00.4670 | 5 | 56 | 19.45 | 0.02 | 20 | 0.07 | 19.89 | 0.05 | 19.54 | 0.05 | 19.26 | 0.08 |
M094146.01-032121.7 | 346.2 |  $<$18.5 |  $<$17.5 | - | 1.848 | SUGAR | Q |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J094145.98-032121.7 | 145.4415998 | -3.3560372 | 16.59 | 0.09 | 15.77 | 0.14 | 11.94 | - |  |  |  |  |
| PSO J145.4417-03.3561 | 4 | 17 | 21.22 | 0.09 | 21.01 | 0.01 | 20.6 | 0.02 | 20.53 | 0.04 | -999 | -999 |
M095138.34-060138.0 | 378.8 |  $<$18.4 |  $<$16.1 | - | 1.844 | SUGAR | Q |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J095138.35-060137.5 | 147.9098297 | -6.0270882 | 16.27 | 0.07 | 15.46 | 0.13 | 11.95 | - |  |  |  |  |
| PSO J147.9098-06.0271 | 5 | 51 | 20.38 | 0.02 | 20.18 | 0.06 | 19.6 | 0.02 | 19.75 | 0.03 | 19.44 | 0.09 |
M095231.66-245349.1 | 209.5 |  $<$15.0 |  $<$14.0 | - | 2.626 | SALT | Q |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J095231.67-245351.0 | 148.1319654 | -24.8975143 | 15.98 | 0.05 | 15.13 | 0.08 | 12.01 | 0.27 |  |  |  |  |
| PSO J148.1319-24.8975 | 5 | 62 | 19.18 | 0.02 | 19.01 | 0.01 | 19.06 | 0.01 | 18.84 | 0.02 | 18.67 | 0.06 |
M095423.67+004350.5∗b | 291.6 |  $<$19.8 |  $<$17.6 | - | 1.712 | SALT | Q |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J095423.72+004351.3 | 148.5988716 | 0.7309207 | 15.93 | 0.06 | 14.88 | 0.08 | 11.71 | 0.26 |  |  |  |  |
| PSO J148.5989+00.7310 | 5 | 62 | 20.67 | 0.04 | 20 | 0.06 | 19.74 | 0.04 | 19.63 | 0.05 | 19.52 | 0.14 |
M095654.60-131718.1∗c | 216 | 26 |  $<$16.6 | -86.4 | 1.198 | SALT | Q |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J095654.65-131718.7 | 149.2277088 | -13.2885524 | 16.19 | 0.05 | 15.24 | 0.08 | 12.04 | 0.48 |  |  |  |  |
| PSO J149.2276-13.2884 | 0 | 4 | -999 | -999 | 21.42 | 0.16 | 21.69 | 0.2 | -999 | -999 | -999 | -999 |
M100715.18-124746.7 | 381.1 |  $<$15.7 |  $<$15.4 | - | 2.113 | SALT | Q |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J100715.22-124745.9 | 151.8134506 | -12.7961 | 15.38 | 0.04 | 14.24 | 0.05 | 11.01 | 0.12 |  |  |  |  |
| PSO J151.8134-12.7961 | 10 | 74 | 18.4 | 0.01 | 18.28 | 0 | 18.18 | 0.01 | 18 | 0.01 | 18.07 | 0.02 |
M100743.51-181732.4 | 205.2 | 49.2 |  $<$19.5 | 84.6 | 0.493 | NOT | G |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J100743.58-181731.1 | 151.9316084 | -18.2919748 | 14.96 | 0.03 | 14.22 | 0.05 | 10.16 | 0.06 |  |  |  |  |
| PSO J151.9316-18.2919 | 5 | 60 | 21.56 | 0.06 | 20.37 | 0.05 | 19.63 | 0.03 | 19.54 | 0.04 | 19.29 | 0.03 |
M100802.27-095919.3 | 645.3 | 15.7 |  $<$18.6 | -82 | 1.688 | NOT | Q |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J100802.30-095919.8 | 152.0095896 | -9.9888589 | 15.7 | 0.05 | 14.55 | 0.06 | 11.24 | 0.19 |  |  |  |  |
| PSO J152.0098-09.9888 | 10 | 78 | 19.34 | 0.02 | 19.35 | 0.04 | 19.3 | 0.04 | 19.04 | 0.01 | 19.01 | 0.02 |
M100954.53+160203.8 | 201.9 |  $<$15.9 |  $<$15.2 | - | 1.770 | NOT | Q |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J100954.55+160203.4 | 152.4772922 | 16.0342888 | 16.09 | 0.06 | 15.18 | 0.10 | 11.57 | 0.25 |  |  |  |  |
| PSO J152.4773+16.0343 | 5 | 83 | 20.88 | 0.02 | 20.74 | 0.02 | 20.55 | 0.02 | 20.36 | 0.03 | 20 | 0.06 |
M101313.10-254654.7 | 248.8 |  $<$16.0 |  $<$14.0 | - | 2.965 | SALT | Q |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J101313.09-254654.7 | 153.3045753 | -25.7818673 | 17.14 | 0.12 | 15.98 | 0.15 | 12.12 | - |  |  |  |  |
| PSO J153.3046-25.7819 | 5 | 13 | 21.6 | 0.08 | 21.12 | 0.08 | 20.82 | 0.01 | 20.55 | 0.21 | 19.32 | 0.06 |
M101357.73-245933.6 | 255 |  $<$18.7 |  $<$15.6 | - | 1.814 | SALT | Q |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J101357.81-245932.9 | 153.4908974 | -24.9924937 | 16.67 | 0.09 | 15.53 | 0.10 | 12.07 | - |  |  |  |  |
| PSO J153.4909-24.9925 | 5 | 59 | 20.1 | 0.03 | 20.22 | 0.02 | 19.92 | 0.03 | 19.79 | 0.04 | 19.52 | 0.05 |
M101555.33-082245.7 | 250.5 |  $<$18.6 |  $<$16.4 | - | 1.430 | SALT | Q |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J101555.39-082245.5 | 153.9808222 | -8.3793266 | 17.95 | 0.27 | 16.04 | 0.19 | 11.74 | 0.27 |  |  |  |  |
| PSO J153.9809-08.3794 | 5 | 28 | 22.19 | 0.14 | 21.55 | 0.06 | 21.46 | 0.05 | 20.84 | 0.05 | -999 | -999 |
M102159.78-011002.4 | 500.6 |  $<$16.1 |  $<$14.0 | - | 1.493 | SALT | Q |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J102159.77-011002.5 | 155.4990517 | -1.1673705 | 15.72 | 0.05 | 15.01 | 0.09 | 11.92 | 0.33 |  |  |  |  |
| PSO J155.4990-01.1674 | 3 | 44 | 21.6 | 0.07 | 20.97 | 0.08 | 20.49 | 0.04 | 20.13 | 0.04 | 19.54 | 0.09 |
M102441.29-153025.2 | 226.3 |  $<$16.9 |  $<$16.7 | - | 0.792 | SALT | Q |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J102441.30-153026.3 | 156.1720931 | -15.5073221 | 15.39 | 0.04 | 14.44 | 0.05 | 11.25 | 0.17 |  |  |  |  |
| PSO J156.1721-15.5073 | 5 | 58 | 20.23 | 0.03 | 19.88 | 0.02 | 19.67 | 0.02 | 19.3 | 0.02 | 19.33 | 0.03 |
M102444.61-085206.4 | 463.8 | 39.3 |  $<$19.1 | -29.8 | 0.455 | SUGAR | G |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J102444.56-085205.9 | 156.1856868 | -8.8683093 | 16.36 | 0.07 | 15.58 | 0.12 | 12.51 | 0.49 |  |  |  |  |
| PSO J156.1857-08.8684 | 5 | 44 | -999 | -999 | 21.28 | 0.04 | 20.57 | 0.04 | 20.44 | 0.02 | 19.65 | 0.16 |
M102548.78-042933.7 | 363.5 |  $<$16.5 |  $<$15.9 | - | 2.292 | SALT | Q |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J102548.76-042933.0 | 156.4531736 | -4.4925229 | 16.25 | 0.07 | 15.47 | 0.11 | 12.11 | - |  |  |  |  |
| PSO J156.4532-04.4924 | 5 | 75 | 19.57 | 0.01 | 19.75 | 0.03 | 19.66 | 0.02 | 19.45 | 0.02 | 19.31 | 0.04 |
M103051.52-092525.0∗d | 890.9 |  $<$17.5 |  $<$15.5 | - | 0.413 | SALT | G |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J103051.50-092523.8 | 157.7146096 | -9.4232841 | 16.16 | 0.06 | 15.32 | 0.09 | 12.03 | - |  |  |  |  |
| - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - |
M103335.61-121032.1 | 2065.1 | 14.3 |  $<$17.3 | -46.2 | 1.328 | NOT | G |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J103335.62-121032.0 | 158.3984486 | -12.1755657 | 16.59 | 0.08 | 15.8 | 0.13 | 11.7 | 0.23 |  |  |  |  |
| PSO J158.3981-12.1757 | 5 | 47 | 21.1 | 0.03 | 21.01 | 0.03 | 20.97 | 0.03 | 20.74 | 0.04 | -999 | -999 |
M104051.07-144919.4 | 269.6 |  $<$17.4 |  $<$17.0 | - | 1.526 | SALT | Q |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J104051.04-144918.9 | 160.2126978 | -14.8219317 | 17.2 | 0.13 | 16.44 | 0.25 | 12.61 | - |  |  |  |  |
| PSO J160.2126-14.8219 | 5 | 54 | 21.41 | 0.05 | 20.95 | 0.05 | 20.72 | 0.08 | 20.68 | 0.05 | 20.28 | 0.08 |
M104314.53-232317.5 | 212.1 |  $<$19.7 |  $<$14.7 | - | 2.881 | SALT | Q |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J104314.52-232319.3 | 160.8105239 | -23.3886967 | 16.57 | 0.08 | 15.95 | 0.16 | 12.14 | - |  |  |  |  |
| PSO J160.8104-23.3886 | 5 | 54 | 19.9 | 0.05 | 19.72 | 0.03 | 19.72 | 0.02 | 19.62 | 0.08 | 19.35 | 0.06 |
M104347.34+164106.9 | 259.1 |  $<$16.4 |  $<$15.7 | - | 0.399 | NOT | G |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J104347.32+164107.4 | 160.9471896 | 16.6854078 | 15.82 | 0.05 | 15.19 | 0.12 | 11.74 | - |  |  |  |  |
| PSO J160.9472+16.6854 | 5 | 58 | 22.21 | 0.05 | 21.24 | 0.05 | 20.54 | 0.03 | 20.06 | 0.04 | 19.8 | 0.11 |
M105024.43-031808.8 | 243.5 |  $<$18.3 |  $<$16.3 | - | 1.813 | SUGAR | Q |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J105024.49-031808.4 | 162.6020829 | -3.302339 | 15.25 | 0.04 | 14.06 | 0.04 | 10.77 | 0.1 |  |  |  |  |
| PSO J162.6021-03.3023 | 5 | 59 | 19.07 | 0.01 | 18.85 | 0.01 | 18.54 | 0 | 18.59 | 0.02 | 18.5 | 0.04 |
M105955.36-111818.7 | 314.5 |  $<$16.5 |  $<$14.1 | - | 1.939 | SUGAR | Q |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J105955.37-111818.2 | 164.9807386 | -11.3050771 | 16.6 | 0.09 | 15.71 | 0.14 | 12.18 | - |  |  |  |  |
| PSO J164.9808-11.3051 | 5 | 62 | 20.43 | 0.05 | 20.61 | 0.06 | 20.2 | 0.02 | 19.83 | 0.03 | 19.6 | 0.12 |
M111820.61-305459.0 | 233.2 |  $<$16.9 |  $<$15.6 | - | 2.352 | SALT | Q |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J111820.61-305458.5 | 169.5859042 | -30.9162666 | 14.8 | 0.03 | 13.99 | 0.04 | 10.63 | 0.1 |  |  |  |  |
| - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - |
M111917.36-052707.9 | 1174.4 | 14.7 |  $<$18.6 | 38.7 | 2.651 | SUGAR | Q |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J111917.40-052707.5 | 169.8225305 | -5.4521081 | 16.58 | 0.09 | 15.94 | 0.17 | 11.65 | - |  |  |  |  |
| PSO J169.8226-05.4520 | 5 | 54 | 20.47 | 0.02 | 20.26 | 0.03 | 20.2 | 0.02 | 19.94 | 0.04 | 19.62 | 0.09 |
M112402.56-150159.1 | 261.9 |  $<$17.0 |  $<$16.4 | - | 2.551 | SUGAR | Q |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J112402.53-150158.7 | 171.0105586 | -15.0329758 | 16.65 | 0.09 | 15.77 | 0.15 | 11.87 | 0.3 |  |  |  |  |
| PSO J171.0107-15.0330 | 5 | 57 | 19.79 | 0.05 | 19.61 | 0.01 | 19.72 | 0.02 | 19.56 | 0.03 | 19.45 | 0.05 |
M113750.46-153458.7 | 241.1 |  $<$17.9 |  $<$14.0 | - | 1.496 | SALT | Q |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J113750.49-153457.8 | 174.4604049 | -15.5827307 | 16.46 | 0.08 | 15.15 | 0.09 | 11.78 | 0.26 |  |  |  |  |
| PSO J174.4603-15.5827 | 10 | 78 | 19.88 | 0.05 | 19.69 | 0.02 | 19.55 | 0.03 | 19.48 | 0.03 | 19.63 | 0.05 |
M114226.58-263313.7 | 294.7 |  $<$18.1 |  $<$15.9 | - | 3.237 | SALT | Q |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J114226.59-263313.0 | 175.6107945 | -26.5536221 | 15.6 | 0.04 | 14.86 | 0.07 | 11.54 | 0.21 |  |  |  |  |
| PSO J175.6107-26.5536 | 10 | 56 | 18.9 | 0.02 | 18.73 | 0.01 | 18.76 | 0.01 | 18.74 | 0.01 | 18.61 | 0.08 |
M114825.45+140449.7 | 322 |  $<$17.8 |  $<$17.1 | - | 0.727 | NOT | G |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J114825.54+140451.1 | 177.106422 | 14.0808677 | 16.27 | 0.07 | 15.61 | 0.14 | 11.79 | - |  |  |  |  |
| PSO J177.1060+14.0803 | 3 | 15 | -999 | -999 | 21.65 | 0.16 | 21.68 | 0.04 | 20.62 | 0.05 | -999 | -999 |
M115043.70+131736.1 | 254.4 |  $<$17.5 |  $<$16.5 | - | 1.530 | NOT | Q |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J115043.60+131735.3 | 177.6817055 | 13.2931528 | 16.31 | 0.07 | 15.24 | 0.10 | 12.02 | 0.36 |  |  |  |  |
| PSO J177.6817+13.2931 | 5 | 71 | 19.76 | 0.04 | 19.77 | 0.04 | 19.51 | 0.04 | 19.58 | 0.03 | 19.42 | 0.06 |
M115222.04-270126.3 | 238.2 |  $<$17.7 |  $<$15.4 | - | 2.703 | SALT | Q |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J115222.02-270126.1 | 178.0917554 | -27.0239355 | 16.93 | 0.1 | 16.16 | 0.18 | 12.4 | - |  |  |  |  |
| PSO J178.0919-27.0238 | 5 | 37 | 21.01 | 0.04 | 20.97 | 0.07 | 20.9 | 0.05 | 20.76 | 0.11 | -999 | -999 |
M115306.72-044254.5 | 684.8 |  $<$19.3 |  $<$17.9 | - | 2.591 | SALT | Q |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J115306.66-044255.8 | 178.2777737 | -4.7155199 | 14.96 | 0.04 | 14.04 | 0.04 | 10.41 | 0.08 |  |  |  |  |
| PSO J178.2777-04.7155 | 5 | 76 | 18.68 | 0.02 | 18.33 | 0.02 | 18.29 | 0.01 | 18.04 | 0.01 | 17.89 | 0.01 |
M115450.38-281249.7∗c | 444.5 |  $<$18.3 |  $<$17.2 | - | 0.897 | SALT | Q |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J115450.43-281251.0 | 178.7101313 | -28.2141796 | 16.47 | 0.08 | 15.54 | 0.11 | 12.08 | 0.41 |  |  |  |  |
| PSO J178.7101-28.2141 | 5 | 53 | 20.48 | 0.06 | 20.32 | 0.03 | 19.98 | 0.02 | 19.91 | 0.04 | 19.77 | 0.05 |
M120632.23-071452.6 | 698.8 |  $<$16.9 |  $<$15.6 | - | 2.263 | NOT | Q |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J120632.18-071453.1 | 181.634117 | -7.2480922 | 16.03 | 0.06 | 15.41 | 0.13 | 11.68 | 0.3 |  |  |  |  |
| PSO J181.6341-07.2481 | 5 | 68 | 19.69 | 0.01 | 19.67 | 0.03 | 19.57 | 0.04 | 19.38 | 0.03 | 19.31 | 0.04 |
M121059.72-162042.7 | 328.3 |  $<$19.2 |  $<$17.0 | - | 1.083 | SALT | Q |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J121059.64-162043.4 | 182.7485411 | -16.345399 | 16.83 | 0.11 | 15.99 | 0.17 | 12.43 | 0.51 |  |  |  |  |
| PSO J182.7487-16.3454 | 5 | 55 | 21.63 | 0.04 | 21.27 | 0.04 | 20.68 | 0.03 | 20.39 | 0.03 | 19.81 | 0.08 |
M121211.89-373826.9 | 343.4 |  $<$18.1 |  $<$16.4 | - | 1.9243 | SALT | Q |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J121211.96-373826.5 | -37.6407047 | 183.0498351 | 15.89 | 0.04 | 15.01 | 0.06 | 11.77 | 0.18 |  |  |  |  |
| - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - |
M121514.42-062803.5 | 360.4 |  $<$18.5 |  $<$13.9 | - | 3.218 | SUGAR | Q |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J121514.39-062803.7 | 183.8099607 | -6.4677219 | 15.78 | 0.06 | 15.01 | 0.11 | 11.76 | - |  |  |  |  |
| PSO J183.8100-06.4678 | 5 | 50 | 19.88 | 0.02 | 19.74 | 0.03 | 19.68 | 0.04 | 19.5 | 0.06 | 19.26 | 0.04 |
M121836.18-063115.8 | 409.1 |  $<$17.2 |  $<$16.6 | - | 0.658 | SUGAR | Q |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J121836.19-063116.9 | 184.6508305 | -6.5213777 | 14.35 | 0.03 | 13.5 | 0.04 | 10.41 | 0.08 |  |  |  |  |
| PSO J184.6508-06.5213 | 5 | 63 | 18.84 | 0.03 | 18.84 | 0.02 | 18.71 | 0.02 | 18.64 | 0.03 | 18.85 | 0.04 |
M121905.45-180911.2 | 300.3 |  $<$17.5 |  $<$15.6 | - | 0.189 | NOT | G |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J121905.43-180910.9 | 184.7726392 | -18.1530363 | 14.8 | 0.03 | 14.15 | 0.04 | 11.26 | 0.16 |  |  |  |  |
| PSO J184.7726-18.1531 | 5 | 76 | 20.16 | 0.02 | 19.19 | 0.02 | 18.73 | 0.01 | 18.44 | 0.02 | 18.32 | 0.02 |
M122123.49-123724.1 | 343.7 | 14.5 |  $<$15.7 | 85.1 | 1.882 | NOT | Q |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J122123.57-123723.0 | 185.3482462 | -12.6230677 | 15.67 | 0.05 | 14.79 | 0.07 | 11.77 | 0.25 |  |  |  |  |
| PSO J185.3482-12.6230 | 5 | 59 | 19.77 | 0.02 | 19.47 | 0.04 | 19.01 | 0.01 | 18.9 | 0.01 | 18.81 | 0.03 |
M123150.30-123637.5 | 276 |  $<$16.3 |  $<$15.6 | - | 2.106 | SUGAR | Q |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J123150.26-123636.8 | 187.9594437 | -12.6102438 | 15 | 0.04 | 13.86 | 0.04 | 10.42 | 0.1 |  |  |  |  |
| PSO J187.9594-12.6103 | 5 | 66 | 19.07 | 0.02 | 18.83 | 0.01 | 18.58 | 0.01 | 18.33 | 0.01 | 18.18 | 0.02 |
M123410.08-332638.5 | 297.9 |  $<$19.9 |  $<$16.1 | - | 2.820 | SALT | Q |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J123409.97-332638.7 | 188.5415468 | -33.4441047 | 17.59 | 0.15 | 16.75 | 0.29 | 12.83 | - |  |  |  |  |
| - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - |
M124448.99-044610.2 | 384.9 |  $<$16.8 |  $<$13.9 | - | 3.104 | SALT | Q |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J124449.01-044608.8 | 191.2042373 | -4.7691286 | 16.25 | 0.07 | 15.58 | 0.12 | 11.92 | 0.31 |  |  |  |  |
| PSO J191.2043-04.7692 | 5 | 55 | 20.84 | 0.02 | 20.58 | 0.02 | 20.46 | 0.03 | 20.43 | 0.04 | 19.9 | 0.1 |
M125215.28-310351.2 | 331.6 |  $<$17.9 |  $<$16.0 | - | 1.943 | SALT | Q |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J125215.17-310351.2 | 193.0632173 | -31.0642344 | 16.47 | 0.07 | 15.44 | 0.09 | 12.14 | 0.26 |  |  |  |  |
| - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - |
M125442.98-383356.4 | 219.2 |  $<$18.8 |  $<$17.6 | - | 2.776 | SALT | Q |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J125443.00-383357.3 | 193.6791669 | -38.5659343 | 17.07 | 0.1 | 16.07 | 0.15 | 12.52 | 0.42 |  |  |  |  |
| - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - |
M125611.49-214411.7 | 260.7 |  $<$15.2 |  $<$15.2 | - | 2.178 | SALT | Q |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J125611.41-214410.9 | 194.0475791 | -21.7363772 | 14.55 | 0.03 | 13.77 | 0.04 | 10.8 | 0.09 |  |  |  |  |
| PSO J194.0476-21.7363 | 5 | 73 | 18.8 | 0.01 | 18.32 | 0.01 | 17.96 | 0.01 | 17.69 | 0.01 | 17.68 | 0.02 |
M130457.29-015457.7 | 325.8 |  $<$17.0 |  $<$15.6 | - | 2.100 | SALT | Q |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J130457.38-015458.6 | 196.2391148 | -1.9162803 | 16.68 | 0.1 | 15.76 | 0.17 | 12.49 | 0.45 |  |  |  |  |
| PSO J196.2389-01.9163 | 5 | 46 | 20.6 | 0.02 | 20.67 | 0.02 | 20.54 | 0.05 | 20.07 | 0.03 | 20.13 | 0.04 |
M130958.32+073217.5 | 205 |  $<$16.8 |  $<$15.2 | - | 0.487 | SALT | G |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J130958.33+073217.3 | 197.4930738 | 7.5381498 | 16.2 | 0.06 | 15.21 | 0.09 | 11.38 | 0.18 |  |  |  |  |
| PSO J197.4931+07.5382 | 5 | 16 | -999 | -999 | 21.63 | 0.15 | 21.41 | 0.07 | 21.08 | 0.1 | 20.26 | -999 |
M131139.29-221641.2∗d | 4093 |  $<$17.7 |  $<$16.6 | - | 0.885 | SALT | Q |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J131139.34-221642.1 | 197.913957 | -22.2783632 | 15.63 | 0.04 | 14.97 | 0.07 | 11.94 | 0.27 |  |  |  |  |
| PSO J197.9139-22.2782 | 5 | 39 | 21.86 | 0.17 | 21.56 | 0.09 | 20.73 | 0.03 | 20.33 | 0.04 | 19.53 | 0.06 |
M131207.86-202652.4∗f | 778.1 |  $<$19.6 |  $<$16.5 | - | 0.977 | SALT | G |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J131207.85-202652.8 | 198.032746 | -20.448026 | 16.51 | 0.08 | 15.76 | 0.13 | 12.64 | 0.42 |  |  |  |  |
| PSO J198.0328-20.4480 | 3 | 4 | -999 | -999 | -999 | -999 | 21.58 | 0.19 | 20.88 | 0.34 | -999 | -999 |
M131301.41-272258.6 | 239.3 | 14.9 |  $<$16.3 | 41.8 | 1.567 | SALT | Q |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J131301.42-272258.7 | 198.2559293 | -27.3829913 | 15.54 | 0.05 | 14.47 | 0.05 | 11.16 | 0.13 |  |  |  |  |
| PSO J198.2559-27.3830 | 5 | 38 | 21.45 | 0.05 | 21.03 | 0.12 | 20.77 | 0.08 | 20.23 | 0.04 | 19.79 | 0.06 |
M131517.56-274504.0 | 468.4 | 40.1 |  $<$18.0 | 17 | 1.912 | SALT | G |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J131517.61-274505.1 | 198.823416 | -27.7514337 | 16.86 | 0.09 | 15.96 | 0.15 | 12.12 | 0.28 |  |  |  |  |
| - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | -
M131736.55-134532.8 | 244.5 |  $<$19.3 |  $<$16.3 | - | 1.407 | SALT | Q |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J131736.56-134532.6 | 199.4023338 | -13.7590663 | 15.64 | 0.04 | 14.47 | 0.05 | 11.1 | 0.12 |  |  |  |  |
| PSO J199.4022-13.7591 | 5 | 52 | 20.55 | 0.06 | 20.22 | 0.02 | 20.21 | 0.03 | 20.1 | 0.05 | 19.81 | 0.1 |
M131856.01-144155.0 | 283 | 20.1 |  $<$17.8 | 51.3 | 0.632 | NOT | Q |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J131856.07-144154.4 | 199.7336621 | -14.6984528 | 15.14 | 0.03 | 14.08 | 0.04 | 10.67 | 0.09 |  |  |  |  |
| PSO J199.7336-14.6985 | 5 | 68 | 19.73 | 0.07 | 19.63 | 0.02 | 19.28 | 0.02 | 19.51 | 0.04 | 19.43 | 0.04 |
M132333.24-223934.5 | 276.1 |  $<$19.7 |  $<$16.1 | - | 1.478 | SALT | Q |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J132333.24-223934.0 | 200.8885365 | -22.6594475 | 16.18 | 0.06 | 15.2 | 0.08 | 11.91 | 0.23 |  |  |  |  |
| PSO J200.8885-22.6595 | 5 | 63 | 20.73 | 0.06 | 20.24 | 0.05 | 20.01 | 0.03 | 20.11 | 0.04 | 19.82 | 0.07 |
M132657.20-280831.4 | 404.5 |  $<$18.9 |  $<$17.2 | - | 2.238 | SALT | Q |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J132657.18-280832.6 | 201.738268 | -28.1424123 | 16.35 | 0.06 | 15.53 | 0.11 | 12.45 | 0.52 |  |  |  |  |
| PSO J201.7379-28.1420 | 5 | 51 | 20.54 | 0.03 | 20.67 | 0.14 | 20.11 | 0.06 | 20.03 | 0.09 | 19.94 | 0.11 |
M133520.56-391144.6 | 306.2 |  $<$17.1 |  $<$15.5 | - | 2.055 | SALT | Q |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J133520.57-391146.0 | 203.835731 | -39.1961354 | 15.98 | 0.04 | 15.14 | 0.07 | 11.85 | 0.21 |  |  |  |  |
| - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - |
M134309.26-083457.5 | 241.5 |  $<$19.3 |  $<$16.5 | - | 1.076 | SUGAR | Q |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J134309.30-083456.6 | 205.7887762 | -8.5824088 | 15.93 | 0.05 | 15.09 | 0.08 | 11.88 | 0.24 |  |  |  |  |
| PSO J205.7887-08.5825 | 5 | 64 | 20.07 | 0.03 | 19.73 | 0.04 | 19.44 | 0.02 | 19.61 | 0.05 | 19.29 | 0.05 |
M135131.98-101932.9 | 726.1 |  $<$18.9 |  $<$17.4 | - | 2.999 | SUGAR | Q |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J135131.98-101932.1 | 207.8832846 | -10.3256104 | 15.02 | 0.03 | 14.12 | 0.04 | 10.74 | 0.09 |  |  |  |  |
| PSO J207.8833-10.3256 | 5 | 89 | 18.15 | 0.01 | 17.93 | 0.01 | 17.86 | 0.01 | 17.86 | 0.01 | 17.7 | 0.01 |
M135547.99-370955.5∗c | 248.8 |  $<$18.0 |  $<$17.0 | - | 1.323 | SALT | Q |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J135547.99-370956.3 | 208.9499945 | -37.1656536 | 16.4 | 0.06 | 15.4 | 0.09 | 11.88 | 0.21 |  |  |  |  |
| - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - |
M141327.20-342235.1 | 274.7 |  $<$17.1 |  $<$14.9 | - | 2.812 | SALT | Q |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J141327.16-342235.6 | 213.3631998 | -34.3765588 | 15.42 | 0.04 | 14.35 | 0.05 | 10.81 | 0.09 |  |  |  |  |
| - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - |
M141338.15-071625.3 | 232.7 | 17.2 |  $<$16.7 | -88.6 | 0.416 | SALT | G |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J141338.23-071624.5 | 213.4093225 | -7.2734885 | 17.16 | 0.12 | 16.29 | 0.21 | 12.37 | 0.38 |  |  |  |  |
| PSO J213.4090-07.2735 | 5 | 32 | 22.15 | 0.01 | 21.48 | 0.11 | 20.68 | 0.05 | 20.93 | 0.05 | 20.29 | 0.23 |
M142155.55-310427.9 | 732.6 |  $<$18.0 |  $<$17.7 | - | 1.568 | SALT | Q |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J142155.57-310425.1 | 215.48157 | -31.07366 | 16.96 | 0.12 | 16.06 | 0.20 | 12.3 | - |  |  |  |  |
| - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - |
M142213.87-091018.4 | 398.7 |  $<$18.8 |  $<$16.8 | - | 0.876 | SALT | G |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J142213.88-091018.2 | 215.5578602 | -9.1717354 | 15.82 | 0.05 | 15.14 | 0.09 | 11.09 | 0.13 |  |  |  |  |
| PSO J215.5579-09.1717 | 4 | 11 | -999 | -999 | -999 | -999 | 21.38 | 0.18 | 21.03 | 0.06 | 20.6 | 0.13 |
M143709.04-294718.5 | 273.8 |  $<$18.6 |  $<$17.3 | - | 2.331 | SALT | Q |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J143708.95-294718.7 | 219.2873327 | -29.7885418 | 16.23 | 0.08 | 15.36 | 0.14 | 12.17 | 0.32 |  |  |  |  |
| PSO J219.2874-29.7885 | 5 | 21 | 19.6 | 0.05 | 19.54 | 0.03 | 19.37 | 0.03 | 19.15 | 0.01 | 19.15 | 0.05 |
M144032.09+053120.7 | 214.9 |  $<$18.6 |  $<$18.1 | - | 0.754 | SALT | Q |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J144032.02+053122.4 | 220.1334503 | 5.5229058 | 15.39 | 0.04 | 14.52 | 0.05 | 11.44 | 0.16 |  |  |  |  |
| PSO J220.1335+05.5229 | 5 | 69 | 20.33 | 0.04 | 20.31 | 0.04 | 20.17 | 0.03 | 19.75 | 0.03 | 19.8 | 0.05 |
M144851.10-112215.6 | 455.5 |  $<$13.9 |  $<$13.9 | - | 2.630 | SALT | Q |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J144851.15-112215.6 | 222.2131474 | -11.3710267 | 14.95 | 0.04 | 14.18 | 0.05 | 10.87 | 0.1 |  |  |  |  |
| PSO J222.2132-11.3710 | 5 | 72 | 18.21 | 0.02 | 18.07 | 0.02 | 18.03 | 0.02 | 17.9 | 0.01 | 17.77 | 0.01 |
M145212.06-255639.8∗b | 229.9 |  $<$16.2 |  $<$15.8 | - | 1.693 | SALT | Q |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J145212.09-255639.5 | 223.050385 | -25.9443099 | 15.88 | 0.05 | 14.75 | 0.07 | 11.3 | 0.14 |  |  |  |  |
| PSO J223.0503-25.9444 | 5 | 64 | 20.11 | 0.01 | 19.82 | 0.01 | 19.45 | 0.01 | 19.49 | 0.02 | 19.4 | 0.07 |
M145342.95-132738.2 | 254.5 |  $<$19.6 |  $<$17.3 | - | 2.370 | SALT | Q |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J145342.94-132735.8 | 223.4289562 | -13.4599571 | 14.6 | 0.03 | 13.51 | 0.04 | 10.13 | 0.05 |  |  |  |  |
| PSO J223.4290-13.4600 | 5 | 59 | 18.4 | 0.01 | 17.98 | 0.02 | 17.86 | 0.01 | 17.67 | 0.01 | 17.47 | 0.01 |
M145502.84-170014.2∗a | 294.7 |  $<$17.1 |  $<$15.8 | - | 2.291 | SALT | Q |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| J145502.77-170012.5 | 223.7615501 | -17.0034926 | 16.41 | 0.08 | 15.7 | 0.18 | 11.85 | 0.28 |  |  |  |  |
| PSO J223.7617-17.0039 | 5 | 33 | 21.21 | 0.07 | 21.04 | 0.06 | 20.82 | 0.04 | 20.61 | 0.03 | 20.07 | 0.15 |