deletions | additions       diff --git a/summary_discussion.tex b/summary_discussion.tex  index 11b406a..6fad4ef 100644  --- a/summary_discussion.tex  +++ b/summary_discussion.tex 
...
Conversely, (non-satellite) galaxies at $\mstar\sim10^9\msun$ have $\mgas\approx\mstar$, with gas depletion timescales comparable to a Hubble time.  Thus, satellite quenching timescales at $\mstar\gtrsim10^9\msun$ do not necessarily \emph{require} strong environmental processes beyond truncated gas accretion \citep[see also discussions in][]{Wetzel2013, Wheeler2014, McGee2014}.  However, strangulation cannot explain the rollover in satellite quenching times at $\mstar\lesssim10^9\msun$, because the gas-rich dwarf galaxies of the LG also have $\mgas\gtrsim\mstar$ \citep{GrcevichPutman2009} and thus contain enough cold gas to fuel star formation for a Hubble time time,  even absent accretion. Thus, the rapid decline at lower $\mstar$ \emph{requires} an additional process(es) to remove gas from satellite dwarf galaxies after infall.  This likely arises from the increased efficiency of ram-pressure stripping in removing cold gas from such satellites with shallower potential wells.  Moreover, for dwarf galaxies, the same internal stellar feedback that regulates their low star-formation efficiency and heats/drives significant cold gas to large radii \citep[e.g.,][]{Muratov2015} would assist such environmental stripping to become even more efficient.