Abstract
Light quality has a significant impact on growth and development and time to flower in many plant species. Recently, the percentages of blue and red in narrow-band wavelengths of light from light-emitting diodes (LEDs) have been shown to impact mineral uptake, pigment development and the rate of growth and development of several plant species. The objective of this research was to evaluate the effects of light quality on shoot growth, flower development, mineral uptake and pigment content of marigold (Tagetes patula 'Safari Orange'). Plants were grown in 10-cm square pots in a greenhouse ebb and flood system with a complete nutrient solution. Plants received average day temperatures of 25°C and night temperatures of 16°C. The following light treatments were utilized in this study: 1) natural sunlight; 2) high-pressure sodium (HPS) lighting at 100 µmols m-2 s-1 intensity in addition to natural sunlight intensity; 3) LED lighting with blue and red wavelengths at 50% each and intensity at 100 µmols m-2 s-1 in addition to natural sunlight intensity; and 4) LED lighting with blue at 25% and red at 75% and intensity at 100 µmols m-2 s-1 in addition to natural sunlight intensity. Total shoot growth was twice as high in all supplemental light treatments compared to the natural sunlight treatment. Shoot growth was greater in the 25% blue/75% red LED treatment than in the HPS light treatment. The 50% blue/50% red LED treatment was not significantly different from the HPS light treatment. Plants in the 25% blue/75% red LED treatment had 15% more blooms than plants in the 50% blue/50% red LED treatment or the HPS light treatment. All supplemental light treatments produced plants with significantly more blooms than plants in the natural sunlight treatment. Plants in the LED light treatments had greater petal pigment content than plants in the natural sunlight treatment.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record, shown for indexing and research. Copyright remains with the authors or the publisher. Read at the source ↗
The text the model read, with the source record’s inline markup (italics, sub- and superscripts) rendered and its character entities decoded; quote offsets refer to the raw text.
Claims 7
Claim · model-written summary
Supplemental lighting doubled shoot growth versus sunlight.
Verbatim
e0“Total shoot growth was twice as high in all supplemental light treatments compared to the natural sunlight treatment.”
t0“marigold”
Claim · model-written summary
25% blue/75% red LED increased shoot growth versus HPS.
Verbatim
e0“Shoot growth was greater in the 25% blue/75% red LED treatment than in the HPS light treatment.”
t0“marigold”
Claim · model-written summary
50% blue/50% red LED did not significantly differ from HPS light.
- Taxon
- marigoldt0
- Treatment
- 50% blue/50% red LED treatmente0
- Outcome
- not significantly differente0
- Comparator
- HPS light treatmente0
Not reportedDirection
Verbatim
e0“The 50% blue/50% red LED treatment was not significantly different from the HPS light treatment.”
t0“marigold”
Claim · model-written summary
25% blue/75% red LED produced 15% more blooms than 50% blue/50% red LED treatment.
Verbatim
e0“Plants in the 25% blue/75% red LED treatment had 15% more blooms than plants in the 50% blue/50% red LED treatment or the HPS light treatment.”
t0“marigold”
Claim · model-written summary
25% blue/75% red LED produced 15% more blooms than HPS light treatment.
Verbatim
e0“Plants in the 25% blue/75% red LED treatment had 15% more blooms than plants in the 50% blue/50% red LED treatment or the HPS light treatment.”
t0“marigold”
Claim · model-written summary
Supplemental lighting increased bloom number versus sunlight.
Verbatim
e0“All supplemental light treatments produced plants with significantly more blooms than plants in the natural sunlight treatment.”
t0“marigold”
Claim · model-written summary
LED lighting increased petal pigment content versus sunlight.
Verbatim
e0“Plants in the LED light treatments had greater petal pigment content than plants in the natural sunlight treatment.”
t0“marigold”
The same questions in other papers
light · growth · Tagetes (marigolds)Results agree
6 papers in the same direction as this paper
- positive
- positive
- positive
3 papers more in this group
See all 7 papers →Claims are grouped by organism, treatment and what was measured or targeted. A paper counts as positive when any of its claims in the group is positive.