Advertisement

Plant Growth Regulation

, Volume 38, Issue 3, pp 225–230 | Cite as

Growth responses of marigold and salvia bedding plants as affected by monochromic or mixture radiation provided by a Light-Emitting Diode (LED)

  • Jeongwook Heo
  • Chunwoo Lee
  • Debasis Chakrabarty
  • Keeyoeup PaekEmail author
Article

Abstract

The effects of light generated by monochromic blue, red or mixed radiation from a fluorescent lamp (FL) with light emitting diodes (LEDs) (blue, red, or far-red) on growth and morphogenesis of marigold and salvia seedlings were investigated and the responses compared with those of plantlets grown under a broad spectrum conventional fluorescent lamp (a 16 h photoperiod per day). Dry weight of marigold seedlings was significantly increased in monochromic red light (R), fluorescent light plus red LED (FLR) or fluorescent light (FL) but reduced when monochromic blue light (B) was used, whereas in salvia dry weight was significantly greater under fluorescent light plus blue LED (FLB), fluorescent light plus red LED (FLR) and fluorescent light plus far-red LED (FLFr) as compared to other treatments. Stem length in marigold was greatest in monochromic blue light, being three times greater than in FLR or FL treatments. In salvia, FLFr increased stem length but this was significantly decreased by R as compared to other treatments. The number of visible flower buds in marigold was much higher in FLR as well as in the control (FL), and it was about five times greater than in B or R. However, the number of open flowers in salvia varied slightly in all the treatments. Different light qualities also influenced the duration of the blooming period in both the species. No flower buds were formed when monochromic B or R was used in salvia and FLFr inhibited flower bud formation in marigold. In comparison with monochromic blue or red light, the number of stomata was greater in mixed radiation of FL with LEDs in both the plants. Our study demonstrates the effectiveness of a LED system for plantlet growth and morphogenesis in space-based plant research chambers.

Flowering Photomorphogenesis Plant growth Salvia splendens Stomata Tagetes erecta 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Akoyunoglou G. and Anni H. 1984. Blue light effect on chloroplast development in higher plants. In: Senger H. (ed.), Blue Light Effects in Biological Systems. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, pp. 397–406.Google Scholar
  2. Ballare C.L., Scopel A.L. and Sanchez R.A. 1991. Photocontrol of stem elongation in plant neighborhoods: effects of photon fluence rate under natural conditions of radiation. Plant Cell Environ. 14: 57–65.Google Scholar
  3. Barreiro R., Guiamet J.J., Beltrano J. and Montaldi E.R. 1992. Regulation of the photosynthetic capacity of primary bean leaves by the red: far-red ratio and photosynthetic photon flux dencity of incident light. Physiol. Plant. 85: 97–101.Google Scholar
  4. Black M. and Shuttleworth J.E. 1974. The role of the cotyledons in the photocontrol of hypocotyl extension in Cucumis sativus. Planta. 117: 57–66.Google Scholar
  5. Boardman N.K. 1977. Comparative photosynthesis of sun and shade plants. Ann. Rev. Plant Physiol. 28: 355–377.Google Scholar
  6. Brown C.S., Schuerger A.C. and Sager J.C. 1995. Growth and photomorphogenesis of pepper plants under red light-emitting diodes with supplemental blue or far-red lighting. J. Amer. Soc. Horti. Sci. 120: 808–813.Google Scholar
  7. Bula R.J., Morrow R.C., Tibbitts T.W., Ignatius R.W., Martin T.S. and Barta D.J. 1991. Light emitting diodes as a radiation source for plants. HortScience 26: 203–205.Google Scholar
  8. Cosgrove D.J. 1981. Rapid suppression of growth by blue light. Plant Physiol. 67: 584–590.Google Scholar
  9. Deutch B. and Rasmussen O. 1974. Growth chamber illumination and photomorphogenetic efficacy I. Physiological action of infrared radiation beyond 750 mm. Physiol Plant. 30: 64–71.Google Scholar
  10. Guo H., Yang H., Mockler T. and Lin C. 1998. Regulation of flowering time by Arabidopsis photoreceptor. Science 279: 1360–1363.Google Scholar
  11. Hanson H.C. 1917. Leaf structure as related to environment. Am. J. Bot. 4: 533–560.Google Scholar
  12. Hoenecke M.E., Bula R.J. and Tibbitts T.W. 1992. Importance of 'Blue' Photon Levels for Lettuce Seedlings Grown under Redlight-emitting Diodes. HortScience 25: 427–430.Google Scholar
  13. Kawai S., Watanabe H., Yoshino T., Tanaka F. and Suzuki M. 1996. Light emitting diodes as the light source for plant growth regulators. Abs. J. Jap. Hort. Sci.: 454–455.Google Scholar
  14. Lian M.L., Murthy H.N. and Paek K.Y. 2002. Effects of light emitting diodes on the in vitro induction and growth of bulblets of Lilium oriental hybrid 'Pesaro'. Scientia. Hortic. 94: 365–370.Google Scholar
  15. Mockler T.C., Guo H., Yang H., Duong H. and Lin C. 1999. Antagonistic actions of Arabidopsis cryptochromes and phytochrome B in the regulation of floral induction. Development 126: 2073–2082.Google Scholar
  16. Moe R. and Kristofferson T. 1969. The effect of temperature and light on growth and flowering of Rosa 'Baccara' in greenhouses. Acta Hort. 14: 157–166.Google Scholar
  17. Reed J.W., Nagpal P., Poole D.S., Furuya M. and Chory J. 1993. Mutations in the gene for the red far-red light receptor phytochrome-b alter cell elongation and physiological responses throughout Arabidopsis development. Plant Cell 5: 147–157.Google Scholar
  18. Robin C., Hay M.J.M., Newton P.C.D. and Greer D. 1994. Effect of light quality (red: far-red ratio) at the apical bud of the main stolon on morphogenesis of Trifolium repens L. Ann Bot. 72: 119–123.Google Scholar
  19. Saebo A., Krekling T. and Appelgren M. 1995. Light quality affects photosynthesis and leaf anatomy of brich plantlets in vitro. Plant Cell, Tissue and Organ Culture 41: 177–185.Google Scholar
  20. Schuerger A.C., Brown C.S. and Stryjewski E.C. 1997. Anatomical features of Papper plants (Capsicum annuum L.) grown under Red Light-emitting Diodes Supplemented with Blue or Farred Light. Ann. Bot. 79: 273–282.Google Scholar
  21. Senger H. 1982. The effect of blue light on plants and microorganisms. Phytochem. Photobiol. 35: 911–920.Google Scholar
  22. Sims D.A. and Pearcy R.W. 1992. Response of leaf anatomy and photosynthetic capacity in Alocasia macrorrhiza (Araceae) to a transfer from low to high light. Am. J. Bot. 79: 449–455.Google Scholar
  23. Tanaka M., Takamura T., Watanabe H., Endo M., Yanagi T. and Okamoto K. 1998. In vitro growth of Cymbidium plantlets cultured under superbright red and blue light-emitting diodes (LEDs). J. Hort. Sci. Biotech. 73: 39–44.Google Scholar
  24. Tennessen D.J., Singsaas E.L. and Sharkey T.D. 1994. Light emitting diodes as a light source for photosynthesis research. Photosynthesis Research 39: 85–92.Google Scholar
  25. Thomas B. and Dickinson H.G. 1979. Evidence for two photoreceptors controlling growth in de-etiolated seedlings. Planta 146: 545–560.Google Scholar
  26. Tripathy B.C. and Brown C.S. 1995. Root-shoot interaction in greening of wheat seedlings grown under red light. Plant Physiol. 107: 407–411.Google Scholar
  27. Vince-Prue D. 1977. Photocontrol of stem elongation in lightgrown plants of Fuchsia hybrida. Planta 133: 141–156.Google Scholar
  28. Yanagi T. and Okamoto K. 1994. Super bright light emitting diodes as an artificial light source for plant growth. In: Abstract of 3rd International Symposium on Artificial.Google Scholar
  29. Zeiger E. 1983. The biology of stomatal guard cells. Ann. Rev. Plant Physiol. 34: 441–475.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2002

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jeongwook Heo
    • 1
  • Chunwoo Lee
    • 1
  • Debasis Chakrabarty
    • 1
  • Keeyoeup Paek
    • 1
    Email author
  1. 1.Research Center for the development of Advanced Horticultural TechnologyChungbuk National UniversityChungbukKorea

Personalised recommendations