Light spectral quality, phytochrome and plant competition

1993 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. 47-51 ◽  
Author(s):  
Johanna Schmitt ◽  
Renata D. Wulff
HortScience ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 53 (11) ◽  
pp. 1593-1599 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dave Hawley ◽  
Thomas Graham ◽  
Michael Stasiak ◽  
Mike Dixon

The influence of light spectral quality on cannabis (Cannabis sativa L.) development is not well defined. It stands to reason that tailoring light quality to the specific needs of cannabis may increase bud quality, consistency, and yield. In this study, C. sativa L. ‘WP:Med (Wappa)’ plants were grown with either no supplemental subcanopy lighting (SCL) (control), or with red/blue (“Red-Blue”) or red-green-blue (“RGB”) supplemental SCL. Both Red-Blue and RGB SCL significantly increased yield and concentration of total Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol (Δ9-THC) in bud tissue from the lower plant canopy. In the lower canopy, RGB SCL significantly increased concentrations of α-pinine and borneol, whereas both Red-Blue and RGB SCL increased concentrations of cis-nerolidol compared with the control treatment. In the upper canopy, concentrations of α-pinine, limonene, myrcene, and linalool were significantly greater with RGB SCL than the control, and cis-nerolidol concentration was significantly greater in both Red-Blue and RGB SCL treated plants relative to the control. Red-Blue SCL yielded a consistently more stable metabolome profile between the upper and lower canopy than RGB or control treated plants, which had significant variation in cannabigerolic acid (CBGA) concentrations between the upper and lower canopies. Overall, both Red-Blue and RGB SCL treatments significantly increased yield more than the control treatment, RGB SCL had the greatest impact on modifying terpene content, and Red-Blue produced a more homogenous bud cannabinoid and terpene profile throughout the canopy. These findings will help to inform growers in selecting a production light quality to best help them meet their specific production goals.


Crop Science ◽  
2002 ◽  
Vol 42 (6) ◽  
pp. 1930-1936 ◽  
Author(s):  
Irena Rajcan ◽  
Majid AghaAlikhani ◽  
Clarence J. Swanton ◽  
Matthijs Tollenaar

2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Arantxa Monteagudo ◽  
Tibor Kiss ◽  
Marianna Mayer ◽  
Ana M. Casas ◽  
Ernesto Igartua ◽  
...  

2004 ◽  
Vol 82 (9) ◽  
pp. 1371-1381 ◽  
Author(s):  
Humberto F Causin

To study the effect of the maternal environment and N sources in responses to shading in Chenopodium album L., seeds from plants grown at an ambient red/far red (R/FR) ratio (1.07) or a low R/FR ratio (0.39) were germinated in a greenhouse at ambient light. At 34 d after sowing (d.a.s.), they were exposed to either ambient R/FR (0.98) or low R/FR (0.21) progeny light treatments and fertilized with 2.7 mmol/L nitrogen supplied at 1:3 or 3:1 NO3– : NH4+ ratios. Two harvests were performed at 67 and 113 d.a.s. At each harvest, stem elongation traits and biomass of plant organs were recorded. In the first harvest, tissue N% and free NO3–-N concentrations were analyzed. In the first harvest, plants from the low R/FR maternal treatment were heavier and taller than the maternal controls when grown at an ambient R/FR and with a high NO3– supply. At the second harvest this difference persisted in most of the conditions tested. Stem elongation and relative biomass allocation to the stem increased in the low R/FR treated plants, although the effect varied during ontogeny and with the maternal and nutrient treatment considered. The studied factors also affected N acquisition and metabolism. It is concluded that responses to the light spectral quality as well as plant N economy are influenced by the R/FR ratio of the maternal environment and that their expression may be altered by the relative availability of NO3–-N and NH4+-N.Key words: ammonium, Chenopodium album, light spectral quality, maternal effects, nitrate, shade-avoidance responses.


PLoS ONE ◽  
2012 ◽  
Vol 7 (3) ◽  
pp. e34121 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eric J. B. von Wettberg ◽  
John R. Stinchcombe ◽  
Johanna Schmitt

Crop Science ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 53 (5) ◽  
pp. 2209-2217 ◽  
Author(s):  
William Casey Reynolds ◽  
Grady L. Miller ◽  
Thomas W. Rufty

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document