Limits...
Growth and stress response in Arabidopsis thaliana, Nicotiana benthamiana, Glycine max, Solanum tuberosum and Brassica napus cultivated under polychromatic LEDs.

Janda M, Navrátil O, Haisel D, Jindřichová B, Fousek J, Burketová L, Čeřovská N, Moravec T - Plant Methods (2015)

Bottom Line: Among these are that LEDs have predicted lifetimes from 50-100.000 hours without significant drops in efficiency and energy consumption is much lower compared to traditional fluorescent tubes.The LED system was characterized and compared with standard fluorescence tubes in the same cultivation room.Interestingly, individual plant species responded differently to the LED lights so it would be reasonable to test their utility to any particular application.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Laboratory of Pathological Plant Physiology, Institute of Experimental Botany AS CR, Rozvojová 313, 165 02 Prague 6, Czech Republic ; Department of Biochemistry and Microbiology, University of Chemistry and Technology Prague, Technická 5, 166 28 Prague 6, Czech Republic.

ABSTRACT

Background: The use of light emitting diodes (LEDs) brings several key advantages over existing illumination technologies for indoor plant cultivation. Among these are that LEDs have predicted lifetimes from 50-100.000 hours without significant drops in efficiency and energy consumption is much lower compared to traditional fluorescent tubes. Recent advances allow LEDs to be used with customized wavelengths for plant growth. However, most of these LED growth systems use mixtures of chips emitting in several narrow wavelengths and frequently they are not compatible with existing infrastructures. This study tested the growth of five different plant species under phosphor coated LED-chips fitted into a tube with a standard G13 base that provide continuous visible light illumination with enhanced blue and red light.

Results: The LED system was characterized and compared with standard fluorescence tubes in the same cultivation room. Significant differences in heat generation between LEDs and fluorescent tubes were clearly demonstrated. Also, LED lights allowed for better control and stability of preset conditions. Physiological properties such as growth characteristics, biomass, and chlorophyll content were measured and the responses to pathogen assessed for five plant species (both the model plants Arabidopsis thaliana, Nicotiana bentamiana and crop species potato, oilseed rape and soybean) under the different illumination sources.

Conclusions: We showed that polychromatic LEDs provide light of sufficient quality and intensity for plant growth using less than 40% of the electricity required by the standard fluorescent lighting under test. The tested type of LED installation provides a simple upgrade pathway for existing infrastructure for indoor plant growth. Interestingly, individual plant species responded differently to the LED lights so it would be reasonable to test their utility to any particular application.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus

Growth of B. napus plants under different illumination sources. A) Stem length (n = 24). B) Fresh weight of whole 24 and 41 days old plants; C) chlorophyl content of the same plants (n = 15). D) Relative transcription of PR1 gene (n = 3). The PR1 transcription was normalized to the reference gene for actin. In all cases error bars represent SD. Asterisks indicate statistically significant differences compared to plants grown under fluorescent lights (**P < 0.01, two tailed Student’s t-test).
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License 1 - License 2
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4940826&req=5

Fig6: Growth of B. napus plants under different illumination sources. A) Stem length (n = 24). B) Fresh weight of whole 24 and 41 days old plants; C) chlorophyl content of the same plants (n = 15). D) Relative transcription of PR1 gene (n = 3). The PR1 transcription was normalized to the reference gene for actin. In all cases error bars represent SD. Asterisks indicate statistically significant differences compared to plants grown under fluorescent lights (**P < 0.01, two tailed Student’s t-test).

Mentions: The growth of brassica seedlings was measured as stem length up to 11 days after germination (Figure 6A). Interestingly, the stem elongation of plants grown under LED lights was one day delayed compared with the plants under fluorescent light (Figure 6A and Additional file: 5 Figure S6A). After the seeds germinated the growth rate had similar dynamics in both groups and by the 11th day size was similar for both variants (Figure 6A). We have further measured the fresh weight of whole plants on the 24th and 41st day. The plants grown under LED lights had lower biomass weight than plants grown under fluorescent lights (Figure 6B), which correlates with the higher number of true leaves for plants under fluorescent light (Additional file: 5 Figure S6B). These experiments indicate that LED lights delayed the development and aging of Brassica napus plants. Chlorophyll content was measured using a leaf clip device and on the 24th day the LED grown plants showed statistically higher chlorophyll content but became insignificant on the 41st day (Figure 6C). Similarly to the experiments with Arabidopsis thaliana, we also wanted to test the impact of illumination source on the transcription of the defense gene PR1. In this case we treated the plants with BION® (contains BTH – benzothiadiazole as the active ingredient) which is a commercially-available inducer of plant disease resistance [24]. BTH is the functional analog of SA which induces the transcription of defense genes, among others also PR1. No significant differences between the plants grown under the tested light sources were observed (Figure 6D).Figure 6


Growth and stress response in Arabidopsis thaliana, Nicotiana benthamiana, Glycine max, Solanum tuberosum and Brassica napus cultivated under polychromatic LEDs.

Janda M, Navrátil O, Haisel D, Jindřichová B, Fousek J, Burketová L, Čeřovská N, Moravec T - Plant Methods (2015)

Growth of B. napus plants under different illumination sources. A) Stem length (n = 24). B) Fresh weight of whole 24 and 41 days old plants; C) chlorophyl content of the same plants (n = 15). D) Relative transcription of PR1 gene (n = 3). The PR1 transcription was normalized to the reference gene for actin. In all cases error bars represent SD. Asterisks indicate statistically significant differences compared to plants grown under fluorescent lights (**P < 0.01, two tailed Student’s t-test).
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License 1 - License 2
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4940826&req=5

Fig6: Growth of B. napus plants under different illumination sources. A) Stem length (n = 24). B) Fresh weight of whole 24 and 41 days old plants; C) chlorophyl content of the same plants (n = 15). D) Relative transcription of PR1 gene (n = 3). The PR1 transcription was normalized to the reference gene for actin. In all cases error bars represent SD. Asterisks indicate statistically significant differences compared to plants grown under fluorescent lights (**P < 0.01, two tailed Student’s t-test).
Mentions: The growth of brassica seedlings was measured as stem length up to 11 days after germination (Figure 6A). Interestingly, the stem elongation of plants grown under LED lights was one day delayed compared with the plants under fluorescent light (Figure 6A and Additional file: 5 Figure S6A). After the seeds germinated the growth rate had similar dynamics in both groups and by the 11th day size was similar for both variants (Figure 6A). We have further measured the fresh weight of whole plants on the 24th and 41st day. The plants grown under LED lights had lower biomass weight than plants grown under fluorescent lights (Figure 6B), which correlates with the higher number of true leaves for plants under fluorescent light (Additional file: 5 Figure S6B). These experiments indicate that LED lights delayed the development and aging of Brassica napus plants. Chlorophyll content was measured using a leaf clip device and on the 24th day the LED grown plants showed statistically higher chlorophyll content but became insignificant on the 41st day (Figure 6C). Similarly to the experiments with Arabidopsis thaliana, we also wanted to test the impact of illumination source on the transcription of the defense gene PR1. In this case we treated the plants with BION® (contains BTH – benzothiadiazole as the active ingredient) which is a commercially-available inducer of plant disease resistance [24]. BTH is the functional analog of SA which induces the transcription of defense genes, among others also PR1. No significant differences between the plants grown under the tested light sources were observed (Figure 6D).Figure 6

Bottom Line: Among these are that LEDs have predicted lifetimes from 50-100.000 hours without significant drops in efficiency and energy consumption is much lower compared to traditional fluorescent tubes.The LED system was characterized and compared with standard fluorescence tubes in the same cultivation room.Interestingly, individual plant species responded differently to the LED lights so it would be reasonable to test their utility to any particular application.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Laboratory of Pathological Plant Physiology, Institute of Experimental Botany AS CR, Rozvojová 313, 165 02 Prague 6, Czech Republic ; Department of Biochemistry and Microbiology, University of Chemistry and Technology Prague, Technická 5, 166 28 Prague 6, Czech Republic.

ABSTRACT

Background: The use of light emitting diodes (LEDs) brings several key advantages over existing illumination technologies for indoor plant cultivation. Among these are that LEDs have predicted lifetimes from 50-100.000 hours without significant drops in efficiency and energy consumption is much lower compared to traditional fluorescent tubes. Recent advances allow LEDs to be used with customized wavelengths for plant growth. However, most of these LED growth systems use mixtures of chips emitting in several narrow wavelengths and frequently they are not compatible with existing infrastructures. This study tested the growth of five different plant species under phosphor coated LED-chips fitted into a tube with a standard G13 base that provide continuous visible light illumination with enhanced blue and red light.

Results: The LED system was characterized and compared with standard fluorescence tubes in the same cultivation room. Significant differences in heat generation between LEDs and fluorescent tubes were clearly demonstrated. Also, LED lights allowed for better control and stability of preset conditions. Physiological properties such as growth characteristics, biomass, and chlorophyll content were measured and the responses to pathogen assessed for five plant species (both the model plants Arabidopsis thaliana, Nicotiana bentamiana and crop species potato, oilseed rape and soybean) under the different illumination sources.

Conclusions: We showed that polychromatic LEDs provide light of sufficient quality and intensity for plant growth using less than 40% of the electricity required by the standard fluorescent lighting under test. The tested type of LED installation provides a simple upgrade pathway for existing infrastructure for indoor plant growth. Interestingly, individual plant species responded differently to the LED lights so it would be reasonable to test their utility to any particular application.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus