SUPPLEMENTAL HIGH PRESSURE SODIUM LIGHTING AND NIGHT TEMPERATURE EFFECTS ON SEED GERANIUMS

1982 ◽  
Vol 62 (1) ◽  
pp. 149-153
Author(s):  
M. J. TSUJITA
Keyword(s):  
High Pressure ◽  
Photosynthetically Active Radiation ◽  
Temperature Effects ◽  
Night Temperature ◽  
Active Radiation ◽  
Natural Lighting ◽  
Delayed Flowering

F1 seed-propagated geraniums (Pelargonium × hortorum Bailey) flowered earlier when plants received in excess of 400 E∙m−2 cumulative photosynthetically active radiation (PAR). Two out of three cultivars grown at 17 °C night temperature which received 443 E∙m−2 natural lighting or 341 E∙m−2 natural plus 102 E∙m−2 high pressure sodium lighting (HPS) over a 4-wk period following transplanting flowered earlier. Flowering was accelerated by 2 wks when a total of 920 E∙m−2 cumulative PAR (726 E∙m−2 natural plus 194 E∙m−2 HPS) was received by plants over an 8-wk period. Reducing night temperature from 17 to 13 °C delayed flowering by 2 wk. Supplementary HPS irradiation for 6–8 wk overcame the delay in flowering induced by low night temperature and produced compact plants with more shoots.

scholarly journals Photoperiod and Temperature Interact to Affect Gomphrena globosa L. and Salvia farinacea Benth. Development

HortScience ◽  
1997 ◽  
Vol 32 (3) ◽  
pp. 502B-502 ◽  
Author(s):  
R. Warner ◽  
J.E. Erwin ◽  
R. Wagner
Keyword(s):  
High Pressure ◽  
Air Temperature ◽  
Continuous Light ◽  
Leaf Number ◽  
Internode Elongation ◽  
Night Temperature ◽  
Gomphrena Globosa ◽  
Delayed Flowering ◽  
Incandescent Lamps

Gomphrena globosa L. `Gnome Pink' and Salvia farinacea Benth. `Victoria Blue' were grown under different photoperiod treatments with day and night temperatures ranging from 15 to 30°C ± 1°C air temperature for 14 weeks after germination or until anthesis. Days to anthesis and leaf number were lowest when plants were grown under 9 hr of daylight and daylight plus 4-hr day extension from 1700–2100 HR (100 μmol·m–2·s–1 from high-pressure sodium lamps) for Gomphrena and Salvia, respectively. Days to anthesis decreased as temperature increased from 15 to 25°C with Gomphrena. Further increasing night temperature from 25 to 30°C delayed flowering and increased leaf number below the first flower of Gomphrena, but hastened flowering of Salvia. Plant height and internode elongation were greatest and least in the night interruption (2 μmol·m–2·s–1 from incandescent lamps from 2200–0200 HR) and continuous light (daylight plus 100 μmol·m–2·s–1 from high-pressure sodium lamps) treatments, respectively. Implications of these data with respect to classification of Gomphrena and Salvia flower induction are discussed and revised production schedules are presented.

scholarly journals Photoperiod, Irradiance, and Cool Temperature Effects on Gymnocalycium, Rebutia, Lobivia, and Sulcorebutia sp. Growth and Flowering

HortScience ◽  
2006 ◽  
Vol 41 (4) ◽  
pp. 992B-992
Author(s):  
John Erwin ◽  
Esther Gesick ◽  
Ben Dill ◽  
Charles Rohwer
Keyword(s):  
High Pressure ◽  
Temperature Effects ◽  
Vernalization Requirement ◽  
Cool Temperature ◽  
Flower Longevity ◽  
Night Temperature ◽  
Flower Number ◽  
Response Groups

A study was conducted to determine if photoperiod, irradiance, and/or a cool temperatures impacted flowering of selected species in five cactus genera. Gymnocalycium, Rebutia, Lobivia, and Sulcorebutia plants were grown for 4 months under natural daylight conditions (August–November) in a greenhouse maintained at 26 ± 2 °C. Plants were then placed in either of two greenhouses: 1) a greenhouse maintained at 22 °C day/18 ± 1 °C night temperature with an 8-h daylength (SD) or natural daylight plus night interruption lighting (NI; 2200–0200 HR), or 2) a greenhouse maintained at 5 ± 2 °C under natural daylight conditions (8–10 h). After 12 weeks at 5 °C, plants were moved to the SD and NI lighting treatments in the before mentioned greenhouse and additional lighting treatment [natural daylight plus supplemental high-pressure sodium lighting (85–95 μmol·m-2·s-1; 0800–0200 HR)]. In all cases, plants were moved out of lighting treatments after 6 weeks and were then grown under natural daylight conditions in a greenhouse maintained at constant 22 ± 1 °C. Data were collected on the approximate date growth commenced, the date when each flower opened (five flowers only), flower number per plant, and individual flower longevity (five flowers only). Species were classified into photoperiodic and irradiance response groups where appropriate and whether species exhibited a vernalization requirement was reported. Lastly, whether dormancy occurred and what conditions overcame that dormancy was reported.

scholarly journals (76) Photoperiod, Irradiance, and/or Cool Temperature Effects on Mamillopsis senilis, Echinopsis Hybrid, and Trichocereus Hybrid Growth and Flowering

HortScience ◽  
2006 ◽  
Vol 41 (4) ◽  
pp. 1065D-1066
Author(s):  
John Erwin ◽  
Esther Gesick ◽  
Ben Dill ◽  
Charles Rohwer
Keyword(s):  
High Pressure ◽  
Temperature Effects ◽  
Cool Temperature ◽  
Vernalization Response ◽  
Night Temperature ◽  
Flower Number ◽  
Hybrid Growth ◽  
Response Groups ◽  
Incandescent Lamps ◽  
The Impact

The impact of photoperiod, irradiance, and/or cool temperature on flowering and/or dormancy in Mamillopsis senilis and Echinopsis and Trichocereus hybrids was studied. Two- to 3-year-old plants (180 plants of each type) were grown for 4 months under natural daylight (DL) conditions (August–November) in a greenhouse maintained at 26 ± 2 °C. Plants were then placed in either of two greenhouses: a cool temperature house (5 ± 2 °C; DL), or a lighting treatment house (22/18 ± 1 °C day/night temperature, respectively). The lighting treatment house had eight light environments: 1) short day (SD; 8 h; 0800–1600 hr); 2) SD+25–35 μmol·m-2·s-1; 3) SD+45–50 μmol·m-2·s-1; 4) SD+85–95 μmol·m-2·s-1; 5) DL plus night interruption lighting (NI; 2200–0200 hr; 2 μmol·m-2·s-1 from incandescent lamps); 6) DL+25–35 μmol·m-2·s-1 (lighted from 0800–0200 hr); 7) DL+45–50 μmol·m-2·s-1; and 8) DL+85–95 μmol·m-2·s-1. Supplemental lighting was provided using high-pressure sodium lamps. Plants were placed in the cool temperature house for 0, 4, 8 or 12 weeks before being placed under lighting treatments. All plants received lighting treatments for 6 weeks and were then placed in a finishing greenhouse (DL; 22 ± 2 °C). Data were collected on approximate day when growth resumed, the date when each flower opened (five only), total flower number per plant, and how long each flower stayed open (five only). Whether species exhibited dormancy and what conditions, if any, broke that dormancy was identified. Species were also classified into photoperiodic, irradiance, and vernalization response groups with respect to flowering.

scholarly journals Photoperiod, Irradiance, and/or Cool Temperature Effects on Lobivia × Chamaecereus Hybrid `Rose Quartz' Flowering

HortScience ◽  
2006 ◽  
Vol 41 (4) ◽  
pp. 992C-992
Author(s):  
John Erwin ◽  
Esther Gesick ◽  
Ben Dill ◽  
Charles Rohwer
Keyword(s):  
High Pressure ◽  
Temperature Effects ◽  
Cool Temperature ◽  
Flower Longevity ◽  
Night Temperature ◽  
Flower Number ◽  
Long Day ◽  
Temperature Environment ◽  
Incandescent Lamps ◽  
The Impact

Photoperiod, irradiance, and/or a cool temperature effects on Chamaelobivia hybrid `Rose Quartz' flowering was studied. Two- to 3-year-old plants were grown for 4 months under natural daylight (DL; August–November) in a greenhouse maintained at 26 ± 2 °C. Plants were then placed in either of two greenhouses: a cool temperature house (5 ± 2 °C; natural daylight), or a lighting treatment house (22 °C day/18 ± 1 °C night temperature, respectively). The lighting treatment house had eight light environments: 1) short day (SD; 8 h; 0800–1600 HR); 2) SD+25–35 μmol·m-2·s-1; 3) SD+45-50 μmol·m-2·s-1; 4) SD+85-95 μmol·m-2·s-1; 5) DL plus night interruption lighting (NI; 2200–0200 HR; 2 μmol·m-2·s-1 from incandescent lamps); 6) DL+25-35 μmol·m-2·s-1 (lighted from 0800–0200 HR); 7) DL+45-50 μmol·m-2·s-1; and 8) DL+85-95 μmol·m-2·s-1. Supplemental lighting was provided using high-pressure sodium lamps. Plants were placed in the cool temperature environment for 0, 4, 8, or 12 weeks before being placed under lighting treatments. All plants received a 6-week lighting treatment and were then placed in the finishing greenhouse (22 ± 2 °C). Data were collected on the date when each flower opened (five only), the flower number per plant, and flower longevity (five only). Vernalization interacted with photoperiod to affect flowering. Unvernalized plants exhibited an obligate long-day requirement for flowering. Vernalized plants exhibited a facultative long-day requirement for flowering. The impact of vernalization, photoperiod, and irradiance on flower number, time to flower, and longevity will also be discussed.

scholarly journals A microbiota–root–shoot circuit favours Arabidopsis growth over defence under suboptimal light

Nature Plants ◽  
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shiji Hou ◽  
Thorsten Thiergart ◽  
Nathan Vannier ◽  
Fantin Mesny ◽  
Jörg Ziegler ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Stress Responses ◽  
Photosynthetically Active Radiation ◽  
Bacterial Community Composition ◽  
Light Condition ◽  
Long Distance ◽  
Active Radiation ◽  
Light Manipulation ◽  
Growth Deficiency ◽  
Dependent Growth ◽  
Control Light

AbstractBidirectional root–shoot signalling is probably key in orchestrating stress responses and ensuring plant survival. Here, we show that Arabidopsis thaliana responses to microbial root commensals and light are interconnected along a microbiota–root–shoot axis. Microbiota and light manipulation experiments in a gnotobiotic plant system reveal that low photosynthetically active radiation perceived by leaves induces long-distance modulation of root bacterial communities but not fungal or oomycete communities. Reciprocally, microbial commensals alleviate plant growth deficiency under low photosynthetically active radiation. This growth rescue was associated with reduced microbiota-induced aboveground defence responses and altered resistance to foliar pathogens compared with the control light condition. Inspection of a set of A. thaliana mutants reveals that this microbiota- and light-dependent growth–defence trade-off is directly explained by belowground bacterial community composition and requires the host transcriptional regulator MYC2. Our work indicates that aboveground stress responses in plants can be modulated by signals from microbial root commensals.

scholarly journals Intercepted Photosynthetically Active Radiation (PAR) and Spatial and Temporal Distribution of Transmitted PAR under High-Density and Super High-Density Olive Orchards

Agriculture ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (4) ◽  
pp. 351
Author(s):  
Adolfo Rosati ◽  
Damiano Marchionni ◽  
Dario Mantovani ◽  
Luigi Ponti ◽  
Franco Famiani
Keyword(s):  
Spatial Variability ◽  
Photosynthetically Active Radiation ◽  
Temporal Distribution ◽  
High Density ◽  
Radiation Use Efficiency ◽  
Spatial And Temporal Distribution ◽  
Active Radiation ◽  
Use Efficiency ◽  
And Performance ◽  
Radiation Use

We quantified the photosynthetically active radiation (PAR) interception in a high-density (HD) and a super high-density (SHD) or hedgerow olive system, by measuring the PAR transmitted under the canopy along transects at increasing distance from the tree rows. Transmitted PAR was measured every minute, then cumulated over the day and the season. The frequencies of the different PAR levels occurring during the day were calculated. SHD intercepted significantly but slightly less overall PAR than HD (0.57 ± 0.002 vs. 0.62 ± 0.03 of the PAR incident above the canopy) but had a much greater spatial variability of transmitted PAR (0.21 under the tree row, up to 0.59 in the alley center), compared to HD (range: 0.34–0.43). This corresponded to greater variability in the frequencies of daily PAR values, with the more shaded positions receiving greater frequencies of low PAR values. The much lower PAR level under the tree row in SHD, compared to any position in HD, implies greater self-shading in lower-canopy layers, despite similar overall interception. Therefore, knowing overall PAR interception does not allow an understanding of differences in PAR distribution on the ground and within the canopy and their possible effects on canopy radiation use efficiency (RUE) and performance, between different architectural systems.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document