Table 1: Results of the line profile fitting analysis. Column 1 gives the name of the object, Col. 2 the adopted redshift, Cols. 3 and 6 the velocities for each set of components measured on the blue and red spectra, respectively, and de-redshifted using the redshift given in Col. 2; Cols. 4 and 7 the corresponding FWHM (uncorrected for the instrumental broadening), Cols. 5, 8 and 9 the intensity ratios O III $\lambda$ 5007/H $\beta$ , N II $\lambda$ 6584/H $\alpha$ and O I $\lambda$ 6300/H $\alpha$ , respectively; n.d. means we could not detect one of the lines (intensity $\sim$ 0). In Col. 10 we give the spectroscopic classification of the nuclear emission-line region resulting from the diagnostic diagrams.
Name z $V\; \; \; \; \; \;$ $FWHM\/$ O III $\;$ $V\; \; \; \; \; \;$ $FWHM\/$ N II O I $\;\;\;\;$ Class.

(km s^-1) (km s^-1) H $\beta$ $\;\;$ (km s^-1) (km s^-1) H $\alpha$ $\;$ H $\alpha$ $\;\;\;\;$

0035+227
0.097 -200 1078 6.09 -998 976 1.87 0.17 Seyf 2

0055+300
0.017 -111 908 1.53 24 1285 1.20 0.19 LINER

0116+319
0.060 -682 1506 8.22 -945 887 1.47 0.28 Seyf 2

0149+710
0.023 243 1463 0.85 786 1042 1.17 1.18 LINER

0651+410
0.022 408 1846 1.40 552 1290 1.36 0.59 LINER

0729+562
0.107 336 1728 2.60 663 782 1.31 0.20 LINER

0733+597
0.041 -101 2273 2.84 -519 1432 3.53 0.45 LINER

0848+686
0.041 -1004 1744 ${\ga}10.\;\;\;\;\:~$ -1242 1490 1.38 0.42 Seyf 2

0902+468
0.085 70 2327 1.19 225 1584 0.71 0.49 LINER

1144+352
0.064 -189 1588 7.06 -189 1200 1.81 0.36 Seyf 2

1146+596
0.011 -293 1476 2.03 -331 1731 0.84 0.36 LINER

1241+735
0.075 291 1455 1.01 1059 1192 1.13 0.41 LINER

1245+676
0.107 741 2000 3.51 462 1036 1.99 n.d. $\;\;$ LINER?

1558+595
0.060 -498 1606 2.40 -751 1496 1.18 0.53 LINER

1658+302
0.036 549 1664 0.42 1203 958 4.91 1.59 LINER

1703+223
0.050 -877 1875 0.88 -1418 915 1.27 0.48 LINER

1755+626
0.028 -153 1795 3.04 -386 1346 4.29 0.81 LINER

2202+363
0.075 795 3027 1.79 921 1913 1.33 1.35 LINER

2320+203
0.039 228 2017 1.86 678 1067 1.79 0.28 LINER

**Table 1:** Results of the line profile fitting analysis. Column 1 gives the name of the object, Col. 2 the adopted redshift, Cols. 3 and 6 the velocities for each set of components measured on the blue and red spectra, respectively, and de-redshifted using the redshift given in Col. 2; Cols. 4 and 7 the corresponding *FWHM* (uncorrected for the instrumental broadening), Cols. 5, 8 and 9 the intensity ratios O III $\lambda$ 5007/H $\beta$ , N II $\lambda$ 6584/H $\alpha$ and O I $\lambda$ 6300/H $\alpha$ , respectively; n.d. means we could not detect one of the lines (intensity $\sim$ 0). In Col. 10 we give the spectroscopic classification of the nuclear emission-line region resulting from the diagnostic diagrams.
Name	z	$V\; \; \; \; \; \;$	$FWHM\/$	O III $\;$	$V\; \; \; \; \; \;$	$FWHM\/$	N II	O I $\;\;\;\;$	Class.
		(km s^-1)	(km s^-1)	H $\beta$ $\;\;$	(km s^-1)	(km s^-1)	H $\alpha$ $\;$	H $\alpha$ $\;\;\;\;$
0035+227	0.097	-200	1078	6.09	-998	976	1.87	0.17	Seyf 2
0055+300	0.017	-111	908	1.53	24	1285	1.20	0.19	LINER
0116+319	0.060	-682	1506	8.22	-945	887	1.47	0.28	Seyf 2
0149+710	0.023	243	1463	0.85	786	1042	1.17	1.18	LINER
0651+410	0.022	408	1846	1.40	552	1290	1.36	0.59	LINER
0729+562	0.107	336	1728	2.60	663	782	1.31	0.20	LINER
0733+597	0.041	-101	2273	2.84	-519	1432	3.53	0.45	LINER
0848+686	0.041	-1004	1744	${\ga}10.\;\;\;\;\:~$	-1242	1490	1.38	0.42	Seyf 2
0902+468	0.085	70	2327	1.19	225	1584	0.71	0.49	LINER
1144+352	0.064	-189	1588	7.06	-189	1200	1.81	0.36	Seyf 2
1146+596	0.011	-293	1476	2.03	-331	1731	0.84	0.36	LINER
1241+735	0.075	291	1455	1.01	1059	1192	1.13	0.41	LINER
1245+676	0.107	741	2000	3.51	462	1036	1.99	n.d. $\;\;$	LINER?
1558+595	0.060	-498	1606	2.40	-751	1496	1.18	0.53	LINER
1658+302	0.036	549	1664	0.42	1203	958	4.91	1.59	LINER
1703+223	0.050	-877	1875	0.88	-1418	915	1.27	0.48	LINER
1755+626	0.028	-153	1795	3.04	-386	1346	4.29	0.81	LINER
2202+363	0.075	795	3027	1.79	921	1913	1.33	1.35	LINER
2320+203	0.039	228	2017	1.86	678	1067	1.79	0.28	LINER

Source LaTeX | All tables | In the text