Abstract
In controlled environments, supplementing a light spectrum with ultraviolet A (UVA; 315–399 nm) or blue (B; 400–499 nm) light increases the concentrations of phenolic compounds that can increase quality attributes, such as leaf pigmentation and nutritional quality of lettuce ( Lactuca sativa ). However, B light and sometimes UVA light can inhibit leaf expansion and biomass accumulation when continuously applied, whereas applying it only at the end of the production cycle can increase lettuce quality with little to no effect on crop yield. Our objective was to quantify the persistency of periodic supplemental UVA or B light and compare end-of-production with continuously applied supplemental light during indoor lettuce production on quality attributes and biomass accumulation. We hypothesized that supplemental UVA or B light would be more effective later, rather than earlier, during production with increasing lettuce quality attributes. We grew ‘Rouxai’ red-leaf lettuce hydroponically at an air temperature of 23 °C under 75 μmol⋅m −2 ⋅s −1 of red (peak = 664 nm) plus 75 μmol⋅m −2 ⋅s −1 of warm-white light provided by light-emitting diodes. The supplemental lighting treatments consisted of adding 30 μmol⋅m −2 ⋅s −1 of UVA (peak= 386 nm) or B (peak = 449 nm) light during the seedling phase (P1; days 4–12), growth phase (P2; days 12–20), finishing phase (P3; days 20–28), or the entire time (ET; days 4–28). Supplemental UVA or B light applied at any individual phase did not inhibit biomass accumulation, whereas enriched B light during the entire production period inhibited fresh mass compared with no supplemental light. Additionally, supplemental UVA or B light during P3 or ET similarly increased total phenolic and anthocyanin concentrations. Finally, applying UVA or B light during P1 or P2 had no residual effect on mature plant growth or quality at harvest. We concluded that the end of the production cycle is the optimal time to apply supplemental UVA or B light to improve lettuce coloration and phenolic content, that earlier application elicits transient responses, and that continuous application improves lettuce quality but inhibits biomass accumulation. Finally, there are potential energy savings by using end-of-production supplemental light compared with continuous application of the same spectrum.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by-nc-nd. 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 10
Claim · model-written summary
Single-phase UVA supplementation did not inhibit lettuce biomass accumulation.
- Taxon
- Lettuce
Lactuca sativat0 - Treatment
- UVAe0
- Outcome
- biomass accumulatione0
- Direction
- did not inhibite0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Supplemental UVA or B light applied at any individual phase did not inhibit biomass accumulation”
t0“Red-leaf Lettuce”
Claim · model-written summary
Single-phase blue light supplementation did not inhibit lettuce biomass accumulation.
- Taxon
- LettuceLactuca sativat0
- Treatment
- B lighte0
- Outcome
- biomass accumulatione0
- Direction
- did not inhibite0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Supplemental UVA or B light applied at any individual phase did not inhibit biomass accumulation”
t0“Red-leaf Lettuce”
Claim · model-written summary
Enriched blue light throughout production inhibited lettuce fresh mass relative to no supplemental light.
- Taxon
- LettuceLactuca sativat0
- Treatment
- enriched B lighte0
- Outcome
- fresh masse0
- Direction
- inhibitede0
- Comparator
- no supplemental lighte0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“enriched B light during the entire production period inhibited fresh mass compared with no supplemental light”
t0“Red-leaf Lettuce”
Claim · model-written summary
UVA light in finishing increased total phenolics and anthocyanins.
- Taxon
- LettuceLactuca sativat0
- Treatment
- UVAe0
- Outcome
- total phenolic and anthocyanin concentrationse0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Qualifier
- P3e0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“supplemental UVA or B light during P3 or ET similarly increased total phenolic and anthocyanin concentrations”
t0“Red-leaf Lettuce”
Claim · model-written summary
Blue light in finishing increased total phenolics and anthocyanins.
- Taxon
- LettuceLactuca sativat0
- Treatment
- B lighte0
- Outcome
- total phenolic and anthocyanin concentrationse0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Qualifier
- P3e0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“supplemental UVA or B light during P3 or ET similarly increased total phenolic and anthocyanin concentrations”
t0“Red-leaf Lettuce”
Claim · model-written summary
UVA throughout production increased total phenolics and anthocyanins.
- Taxon
- LettuceLactuca sativat0
- Treatment
- UVAe0
- Outcome
- total phenolic and anthocyanin concentrationse0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Qualifier
- ETe0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“supplemental UVA or B light during P3 or ET similarly increased total phenolic and anthocyanin concentrations”
t0“Red-leaf Lettuce”
Claim · model-written summary
Blue light throughout production increased total phenolics and anthocyanins.
- Taxon
- LettuceLactuca sativat0
- Treatment
- B lighte0
- Outcome
- total phenolic and anthocyanin concentrationse0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Qualifier
- ETe0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“supplemental UVA or B light during P3 or ET similarly increased total phenolic and anthocyanin concentrations”
t0“Red-leaf Lettuce”
Claim · model-written summary
Early UVA application had no residual effect on mature lettuce growth or quality.
- Taxon
- LettuceLactuca sativat0
- Treatment
- UVAe0
- Outcome
- mature plant growth or qualitye0
- Direction
- no residual effecte0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“applying UVA or B light during P1 or P2 had no residual effect on mature plant growth or quality at harvest”
t0“Red-leaf Lettuce”
Claim · model-written summary
Early blue light application had no residual effect on mature lettuce growth or quality.
- Taxon
- LettuceLactuca sativat0
- Treatment
- B lighte0
- Outcome
- mature plant growth or qualitye0
- Direction
- no residual effecte0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“applying UVA or B light during P1 or P2 had no residual effect on mature plant growth or quality at harvest”
t0“Red-leaf Lettuce”
Claim · model-written summary
The authors recommend end-of-production supplemental light to improve coloration and phenolic content.
- Taxon
- LettuceLactuca sativat0
- Outcome
- optimal time to apply supplemental UVA or B lighte0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the end of the production cycle is the optimal time to apply supplemental UVA or B light to improve lettuce coloration and phenolic content”
t0“Red-leaf Lettuce”
The same questions in other papers
uv · quality: phytochemicals · Lactuca sativa (garden lettuce)Results differ
23 papers in the same direction as this paper · 4 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
24 papers more in this group
See all 28 papers →uv · growth · Lactuca sativa (garden lettuce)Results differ
19 papers in the same direction as this paper · 15 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- no effect
31 papers more in this group
See all 35 papers →uv · quality: general · Lactuca sativa (garden lettuce)Positive and negative results
2 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
light · quality: general · Lactuca sativa (garden lettuce)Positive and negative results
2 papers in the same direction as this paper · 10 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
9 papers more in this group
See all 13 papers →light · quality: phytochemicals · Lactuca sativa (garden lettuce)Positive and negative results
42 papers in the same direction as this paper · 7 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- positive
- positive
47 papers more in this group
See all 51 papers →light · growth · Lactuca sativa (garden lettuce)Positive and negative results
56 papers in the same direction as this paper · 243 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
296 papers more in this group
See all 300 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.