首页> 外文期刊>HortScience >Physiological, Morphological, and Energy-use Efficiency Comparisons of LED and HPS Supplemental Lighting for Cucumber Transplant Production
【24h】

Physiological, Morphological, and Energy-use Efficiency Comparisons of LED and HPS Supplemental Lighting for Cucumber Transplant Production

机译:LED和HPS辅助照明在黄瓜移植生产中的生理,形态和能量利用效率比较

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

To increase the available photosynthetic photon flux (PPF) for plant growth, greenhouse growers sometimes use electric lighting to supplement solar light. The conventional lighting technology used to increase PPF in the greenhouse is high-pressure sodium lamps (HPS). A potential alternative to HPS is high-intensity light-emitting diodes (LEDs). The objective of this study is to compare supplemental LED lighting with supplemental HPS lighting in terms of plant growth and morphology as well as discuss the energy use efficiencies of the fixtures. There were three light treatments: 1) blue LED (peak wavelength 443 nm); 2) red LED (peak wavelength 633 nm); and 3) HPS, to provide 3.7 +/- 0.2 mol.m(-2).d(-1) (background solar radiation of 6.3 +/- 0.9 mol.m(-2.)d(-1)). Cucumber (Cucumis sativus) plants at the transplanting stage (26 to 37 days) under HPS had 28% greater dry mass than did plants under the LED treatments. This can be attributed to the higher leaf temperature under the HPS treatment. No differences were observed in growth parameters (dry mass, fresh weight, or number of leaves) between the blue and red LED treatments. Plants under the blue LED treatment had greater net photosynthetic rate and stomatal conductance (g(S)) than those under the red LED and HPS treatments. Plants under the blue LED and HPS treatments had 46% and 61% greater hypocotyl length than those under the red LED, respectively. The fixture PPF efficiencies used in the experiment were 1.9, 1.7, and 1.64 mu mol.J(-1) for the blue LED, red LED, and HPS treatments, respectively; however, the fixture growing efficiency (g.kWh(-1)) of HPS was 6% and 17% greater than the blue LED and red LED treatment, respectively. In summary, supplemental red LED produced desirable plant compactness and HPS had greater fixture growing efficiency than LEDs.
机译:为了增加植物生长可用的光合作用光子通量(PPF),温室种植者有时会使用电照明来补充太阳光。用于增加温室中PPF的常规照明技术是高压钠灯(HPS)。 HPS的潜在替代品是高强度发光二极管(LED)。这项研究的目的是就植物的生长和形态对辅助LED照明与辅助HPS照明进行比较,并讨论灯具的能源利用效率。共有三种光处理:1)蓝色LED(峰值波长443 nm); 2)红色LED(峰值波长633 nm); 3)HPS,以提供3.7 +/- 0.2 mol.m(-2).d(-1)(背景太阳辐射为6.3 +/- 0.9 mol.m(-2。)d(-1))。 HPS移植阶段(26至37天)的黄瓜(Cucumis sativus)植物的干重比LED处理的植物高28%。这可以归因于在HPS处理下较高的叶片温度。蓝色和红色LED处理之间的生长参数(干重,鲜重或叶数)没有观察到差异。与红色LED和HPS处理相比,蓝色LED处理的植物具有更高的净光合速率和气孔导度(g(S))。在蓝色LED和HPS处理下,植物的下胚轴长度分别比在红色LED下的植物长46%和61%。对于蓝色LED,红色LED和HPS处理,实验中使用的灯具PPF效率分别为1.9、1.7和1.64μmol.J(-1)。但是,HPS的灯具生长效率(g.kWh(-1))分别比蓝色LED和红色LED处理高6%和17%。总而言之,补充红色LED产生了理想的设备紧凑度,并且HPS的灯具生长效率高于LED。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号