Effects of light-diffusing plastic film on lettuce production and quality attributes

  1. Patrick Riga 1
  2. Leyre Benedicto 1
  1. 1 NEIKER, Basque Institute of Agricultural Research and Development, España
Revista:
Spanish journal of agricultural research

ISSN: 1695-971X,  2171-9292

Año de publicación: 2017

Volumen: 15

Número: 1

Tipo: Artículo

DOI: 10.5424/SJAR/2017151-10315 DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR lock_openDialnet editor

Otras publicaciones en: Spanish journal of agricultural research

Resumen

In general, plants grown under diffuse light yield higher biomass than those grown under direct light as a result of a more uniform distribution of the light across the plant canopy. We compared the effects of a light-diffusing plastic film and a clear plastic film on growth of Batavia lettuce (Lactuca sativa L.) in two greenhouses during five growth periods. Lettuce grown under the light-diffusing film were smaller (up to 36%) than control plants grown under the clear film, due to the fewer leaves per plant (up to 22%) and lower mean values of individual leaf area (up to 29%). The photosynthetically active radiations use efficiency was sometimes lower (up to 23%) in lettuces grown under the light-diffusing film. The pigment contents tended to be lower in plants grown under the light-diffusing plastic. The total macroelement contents of the lettuces grown under the light-diffusing plastic were up to 10% higher than in the lettuces grown under clear plastic, mainly as a result of higher leaf K contents (up to 19% higher). In addition, use of the light-diffusing plastic tended to increase leaf nitrate contents (by up to 23%). The leaf solid soluble content and acidity values were higher in the lettuces grown under the light-diffusing plastic, while leaf pH values were lower than in the control plants. The findings showed that the light-diffusing plastic was detrimental to production of compact heads of lettuce, and to some quality parameters such as nitrate and pigment contents. Nevertheless, open-leaf cultivars would likely show a different response to the diffuse light

Referencias bibliográficas

  • AOAC, 1999. Titratable acidity of fruit products. In: Official methods of analysis of AOAC Int; Cunniff P (ed), pp: 10-11. Gaithersburg, MD, USA.
  • Bates TE, 1971. Factors affecting critical nutrient concentrations in plants and their evaluation: A review. Soil Sci 112: 116-130. https://doi.org/10.1097/00010694-197108000-00005
  • Cheng SJ, Bohrer G, Steiner AL, Hollinger DY, Suyker A, Phillips RP, Nadelhoffer KJ, 2015. Variations in the influence of diffuse light on gross primary productivity in temperate ecosystems. Agr Forest Meteorol 201: 98-110. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agrformet.2014.11.002
  • Chun H, Yum S, Kang Y, Kim H, Lee S, 2005. Environments and canopy productivity of green pepper (Capsicum annuum L.) in a greenhouse using light-diffused woven film. Kor J Hort Sci Tech 23: 367-371.
  • Duek T, Janse J, Li T, Kempkes F, Eveleens B, 2012. Influence of diffuse glass on the growth and production of tomato. Acta Hort 956: 75-82. https://doi.org/10.17660/ActaHortic.2012.956.6
  • EC, 2011. European Commission Regulation No. 1258/2011 amending Regulation (EC) No. 1881/2006 as regards maximum levels for nitrates in foodstuffs. 2 December 2011. Of J Eur Union L320: 15-17.
  • FAOSTAT, 2016. Agricultural production database. http://www.fao.org/faostat/ [accessed May 16, 2016].
  • Fu W, Li P, Wu Y, Tang J, 2012. Effects of different light intensities on anti-oxidative enzyme activity, quality and biomass in lettuce. Hort Sci 39: 129-134.
  • Gu L, Baldocchi D, Verma SB, Black TA, Vesala T, Falge EM, Dowty PE, 2002. Advantages of diffuse radiation for terrestrial ecosystem productivity. J Geophys Res 107: 2156-2202. https://doi.org/10.1029/2001JD001242
  • Hollinger DY, Kelliher FM, Byers JN, Hunt JE, McSeveny TM, Weir PL, 1994. Carbon dioxide exchange between an undisturbed old-growth temperate forest and the atmosphere. Ecology 75: 134-150. https://doi.org/10.2307/1939390
  • Knight SL, Mitchell CA. 1983. Enhancement of lettuce yield by manipulation of light and nitrogen nutrition. J Amer Soc Hort 108: 750-754.
  • Knohl A, Baldocchi DD, 2008. Effects of diffuse radiation on canopy gas exchange processes in a forest ecosystem. J Geophys Res 113: G02023, 1-17. https://doi.org/10.1029/2007jg000663
  • Krouk G, Crawford NM, Coruzzi GM, Tsay TF, 2010. Nitrate signaling: Adaptation to fluctuating environments. Curr Opin Plant Biol 13: 266–273. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pbi.2009.12.003
  • Li T, Heuvelink E, Dueck TA, Janse J, Gort G, Marcelis LFM. 2014a. Enhancement of crop photosynthesis by diffuse light: quantifying the contributing factors. Ann Bot 114: 145-156. https://doi.org/10.1093/aob/mcu071
  • Li T, Heuvelink E, van Noort F, Kromdijk J, Marcelis LFM, 2014b. Responses of two Anthurium cultivars to high daily integrals of diffuse light. Sci Hort 179: 306-313. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scienta.2014.09.039
  • Li T, Yang Q, 2015. Advantages of diffuse light for horticultural production and perspectives for further research. Front Plant Sci 6: 704. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2015.00704
  • Lichtenthaler HK, Buschmann C, Döll M, Fietz HJ, Bach T, Kozel U, Meier D, Rahmsdorf U, 1981. Photosynthetic activity, chloroplast ultrastructure, and leaf characteristics of high-light and low-light plants and of sun and shade leaves. Photosynth Res 2: 115-141. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00028752
  • Markvart J, Rosenqvist E, Aaslyng JM, Ottosen C, 2010. How is canopy photosynthesis and growth of chrysanthemums affected by diffuse and direct light? Eur J Hort Sci 75: 253-258.
  • Masle J, Farquhar G, Wong S, 1992. Transpiration ratio and plant mineral content are related among genotypes of a range of species. Aust J Plant Physiol 19: 709-721. https://doi.org/10.1071/PP9920709
  • Oliphant AJ, Dragoni D, Deng B, Grimmond CSB, Schmid HP, Scott SL, 2011. The role of sky conditions on gross primary production in a mixed deciduous forest. Agr Forest Meteorol 151: 781-791. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agrformet.2011.01.005
  • Ort DR, 2001. When there is too much light? Plant Physiol 125: 29-32. https://doi.org/10.1104/pp.125.1.29
  • Poorter H, 1994. Construction costs and payback time of biomass: a whole plant perspective. In: A whole plant perspective on carbon-nitrogen interactions; Roy J & Garnier E (eds), pp: 111-127. SFB Acad Publ, The Hague, The Netherlands.
  • Steiner AL, Chameides WL, 2005. Aerosol-induced thermal effects increase modelled terrestrial photosynthesis and transpiration. Tellus B57: 404-411. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0889.2005.00158.x
  • Tani A, Shina S, Nakashima K, Hayashi M, 2014. Improvement in lettuce growth by light diffusion under solar panels. J Agr Meteorol 70: 139-149. https://doi.org/10.2480/agrmet.D-14-00005
  • Urban O, Klem K, Ač A, Havránková K, Holišová P, Navrátil M, Zitová M, Kozlová K, Pokorný R, Šprtová M, et al, 2012. Impact of clear and cloudy sky conditions on the vertical distribution of photosynthetic CO2 uptake within a spruce canopy. Funct Ecol 26: 46-55. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2435.2011.01934.x
  • Wellburn AR, 1994. The spectral determination of chlorophylls a and b, as well as total carotenoids, using various solvents with spectrophotometers of different resolution. J Plant Physiol 144: 307-313. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0176-1617(11)81192-2
  • Williams M, Rastetter ED, Van der Pol L, Shaver GR, 2014. Arctic canopy photosynthetic efficiency enhanced under diffuse light, linked to a reduction in the fraction of the canopy in deep shade. New Phytol 202: 1469-8137. https://doi.org/10.1111/nph.12750
Fuente de los datos: Dialnet