Horticulture Industry Pursues LED Standards and Metrics

sanjuan

sanjuan

Well-Known Member
"The roundtable participants discussed three key topics. First, they addressed how to establish universal metrics for plant responses for radiations. Since such metrics don't exist, in many cases LED lighting fixtures used for horticulture applications are "qualified" for energy savings per human eye response, or luminous efficacy. However, in reality, luminous effective illumination for general lighting doesn't have much to do with how light effectively or efficiently affects plants. Therefore, correct and acceptable metrics must be established. Second, they discussed establishing standard methods for measuring and testing LEDs and LED light fixtures used for plant growth. The third topic was how to establish proper energy saving and performance measures for LED lighting in horticulture applications so that more correct specifications can be developed."

Jianzhong Jiao, Director of Regulations and Emerging Technologies, OSRAM Opto Semiconductors
 
Greengenes707

Greengenes707

Well-Known Member
I like the article a lot...yet hate it at the same time. Feels like being on RIU 2 years ago. Let me address their 3 points very simply...

1)"No metrics exist"...if that is what they think, then I have zero faith in this committee from the get go.
The McCree action spectrum is the one and only universal action spectrum for plant response. And to take it a step further is used for the METRIC known as YPF. Yield photon flux...and is exactly what they are trying to establish.

2) Use an integrated sphere and a spectrometer. Light is light...and the light coming from an LED is no different than the light originating from any other source type. A photon is a photon. Counting them is THE way to measure any light source going to be used for photosynthesis. Then you can apply the McCree curve to derive the YPF of the spectrum from those photons.

3) Simple...provide the PPF of a light.

I would like my nobel prize please...
Oh...you mean I don't get one for reading scientifically published work that has been out and accepted for 2-3 times longer than I have been alive...bummer
 
Last edited:
Greengenes707

Greengenes707

Well-Known Member
guod said:
one step beyond...for the greengenes

Light-regulated transcriptional
networks in higher plants

1)"No metrics exist"....
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Click to expand...
Nice guod. You're right, "responses" doesn't necessarily mean biomass production.
In the article, the part about plant responses outside of the par range was the part that interested me the most. Specially north of 700nm.I want to re-read it a few times to really understand the processes, but it is a great read. And definitely covers auxiliary functions of light and specific plant response.
Thanks, I guess that gives some faith.

With all that read/said...it's very interesting how many forms of "white" light can signal all those processes generally successful given adequate photon density. Even simple monochromatic combos can do very well considering the complexity of the relationships at hand. In the end all producing biomass of high quality, with the most direct correlation to light quantity.

I also find it curious that it is an led specific goal. For sure leds are the only/best present way to make it precise and have control of the most amount of variables...but the principal of the study is horticulture as a whole...not just leds. If/when created...philips, ushio, hortilux, or any lighting type should all have to be defined and scrutinized by how they fall within the proposed standards.
 
bicit

bicit

Well-Known Member
I'd rather see cree or bridgelux develop a 'horticulture' Les.

Also iirc beta test team on iC mag has been developing a cannabis specific ypf chart for at least a year now.

I'll have to check out the article later.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top