Articles
A comparison of photosynthetic light response curves of nine tomato cultivars
Article number
1423_1
Pages
1 – 8
Language
English
Abstract
Artificial lighting can be a considerable input cost in controlled environment production, depending on crop, geographic location, and time of year.
Cultivars frequently exhibit variations in their response to environmental factors, including differences in light intensity.
Assessing cultivar variability can help develop lighting recommendations, as well as identify potential traits that could be selected to improve light use efficiency.
The objective of this study was to develop photosynthetic light response curves for tomato (Solanum lycopersicum). Nine cultivars (‘BHN 589’, ‘Brandywine’, ‘Cobra’, ‘Frederik’, ‘Glacier’, ‘Martha Washington’, ‘Rebelski’, ‘Tasti-Lee’, and ‘Valley Girl’) were selected to encompass different recommended growing environments (e.g., controlled environment or field), leaf shape (simple or compound), growth habit (determinate or indeterminate), and fruit type (standard or heirloom). Plants were grown in 12.7 cm pots containing a peat-based soilless substrate.
Growth chamber conditions provided an average daily air temperature of 22.4±0.1°C, approximately 60% relative humidity, a 16-h photoperiod, and a daily light integral of 17.3 mol m‑2 d‑1. Once plants began to flower, photosynthetic light response curves were conducted on one recently mature, fully-expanded leaf from six plants per cultivar.
Cuvette conditions matched the growth chamber, except for light intensity, which varied from 0 to 2000 µmol m‑2 s‑1 photosynthetic photon flux density (PPFD). Maximum photosynthetic rate (Amax) ranged from 13.3±0.4 to 18.8±0.7 µmol m‑2 s‑1 CO2 (‘Rebelski’ and ‘BHN 589’, respectively). Quantum use efficiency (ϕ) ranged from 0.064±0.003 to 0.074±0.003 (‘Rebelski’ and ‘BHN 589’, respectively) and the light compensation point (LCP) ranged from 11±2 to 20±2 µmol m‑2 s‑1 PPFD (‘Valley Girl’ and ‘Frederik’, respectively), but neither differed significantly across the cultivars evaluated (P>0.05). Amax was greater in cultivars with simple vs. compound leaves and in cultivars with an heirloom vs. standard fruit type.
Cultivars frequently exhibit variations in their response to environmental factors, including differences in light intensity.
Assessing cultivar variability can help develop lighting recommendations, as well as identify potential traits that could be selected to improve light use efficiency.
The objective of this study was to develop photosynthetic light response curves for tomato (Solanum lycopersicum). Nine cultivars (‘BHN 589’, ‘Brandywine’, ‘Cobra’, ‘Frederik’, ‘Glacier’, ‘Martha Washington’, ‘Rebelski’, ‘Tasti-Lee’, and ‘Valley Girl’) were selected to encompass different recommended growing environments (e.g., controlled environment or field), leaf shape (simple or compound), growth habit (determinate or indeterminate), and fruit type (standard or heirloom). Plants were grown in 12.7 cm pots containing a peat-based soilless substrate.
Growth chamber conditions provided an average daily air temperature of 22.4±0.1°C, approximately 60% relative humidity, a 16-h photoperiod, and a daily light integral of 17.3 mol m‑2 d‑1. Once plants began to flower, photosynthetic light response curves were conducted on one recently mature, fully-expanded leaf from six plants per cultivar.
Cuvette conditions matched the growth chamber, except for light intensity, which varied from 0 to 2000 µmol m‑2 s‑1 photosynthetic photon flux density (PPFD). Maximum photosynthetic rate (Amax) ranged from 13.3±0.4 to 18.8±0.7 µmol m‑2 s‑1 CO2 (‘Rebelski’ and ‘BHN 589’, respectively). Quantum use efficiency (ϕ) ranged from 0.064±0.003 to 0.074±0.003 (‘Rebelski’ and ‘BHN 589’, respectively) and the light compensation point (LCP) ranged from 11±2 to 20±2 µmol m‑2 s‑1 PPFD (‘Valley Girl’ and ‘Frederik’, respectively), but neither differed significantly across the cultivars evaluated (P>0.05). Amax was greater in cultivars with simple vs. compound leaves and in cultivars with an heirloom vs. standard fruit type.
Authors
J.K. Boldt
Keywords
controlled environment, light compensation point, light use efficiency, photosynthesis, Solanum lycopersicum
Online Articles (43)