Sry, i guess its not what you expected from the title 
but maybe you find this intresting:
Sommer and Franke (2006) presented evidence that treatment of seeds with green lasers led to enhanced fresh weight of plants at the time of harvest. The authors are not plant biologists. Instead their previous publication stream addresses laser light effects in speeding wound healing (Sommer et al., 2001) and increasing cell vitality in animals (Sommer et al., 2002). Here they expand their examination of high-fluence rate light effects on biological systems to plants and identified that dry carrot, radish, and cress seeds treated with a green laser or intense green LEDs produced plants with significantly greater biomass than control plants (no light pretreatment). All plants shared equal conditions after the seeds were irradiated. All seedlings emerged at the same time, so the differences observed later could not be simply attributed to phytochrome-induced enhancement of germination in laser-treated seeds. Mature radishes and carrots from laser-treated seeds were twice as large as controls (Sommer and Franke, 2006). The authors were more intrigued with the outcomes than the causes and note that this may be a way to hasten the growing season.
While interesting, statistical rigour was thin and the authors also did not account for the possible explanation that phytochrome was activated and may have led to the advanced developmental state of the irradiated seedlings. With the head start, seedlings might establish faster and more completely than their non-irradiated siblings. However, follow-up experiments compared red to green laser treatment of Arabidopsis seeds. Green-treated seeds germinated and emerged later than red-treated seedlings, yet still exhibited a larger end-point root phenotype, suggesting that the pre-illumination did not drive a phy-induced enhancement of early development (A Sommer, personal communication).
These curious conclusions constitute a cause to question the potential link between early illumination and long-term phenotypes. These findings are completely contrary to the very nature of plant development, where ambient environmental cues generally supercede innate signals. However, it remains conceivable that some sensory input may hard-wire the young seedling to anticipate and prepare to exploit an ample light environment before emergence. Additional study of this phenomenon should be conducted, as the substantial changes in biomass may be of great benefit in increasing crop production, the generation of plant mass for biofuels, and/or the introduction of additional plant mass into planting fields as green fertilizer.
from:
Green light: a signal to slow down or stop
http://jxb.oxfordjournals.org/content/58/12/3099.full
also:
Recent findings of cry-dependent and cry-independent green photoresponses suggest that green, in addition to red, far-red, blue, and UV sensory mechanisms, monitor and adjust plant growth and development. For the most part, the recent findings mesh well with central themes from older studies performed before the advent of molecular-genetic tools and modern techniques. One theme presented throughout this review is that the effects of green light tend to reverse the processes established by red and/or blue light. In this way, green light may be functioning in a manner similar to far-red light, informing the plant of photosynthetically unfavourable conditions. Although seemingly counterintuitive at first, these conclusions make sense in the context of normal plant growth in natural settings. In terms of basic science, together these findings remind us that nature tends not to ignore a conditional environmental input and that inductive biological systems often have antagonistic systems that counter their progression. In this way plants use the full spectrum and the relative ratios of energies within to adjust their form, composition, and physiology to best exploit prevailing conditions
is white light really the future for growing mj?
regarding the famous NASA experiment that kinda shows otherwise:
Plant dry mass was greatest under RB+G treatments (where 24% of the spectrum was broadband green light) when compared with RB, the opposite of the effects noted by Went (1957; Fig. 2). However, these results do agree with previous findings that plants grown in RB+G treatments displayed larger specific leaf areas than those grown under RB treatments (Kim et al., 2004a). These experiments demonstrate that supplemental green affects plant physiology in conditions where red and blue systems are saturated. It remains to be seen if these effects are cry-dependent or cry-independent, as they were performed in species where photoreceptor mutants are not yet available.
shame on me if this article has already been discussed here... Sooo maybe some one has a green laser at Hand and is willing to do that Little Experiment under unscientific conditions
but maybe you find this intresting:Sommer and Franke (2006) presented evidence that treatment of seeds with green lasers led to enhanced fresh weight of plants at the time of harvest. The authors are not plant biologists. Instead their previous publication stream addresses laser light effects in speeding wound healing (Sommer et al., 2001) and increasing cell vitality in animals (Sommer et al., 2002). Here they expand their examination of high-fluence rate light effects on biological systems to plants and identified that dry carrot, radish, and cress seeds treated with a green laser or intense green LEDs produced plants with significantly greater biomass than control plants (no light pretreatment). All plants shared equal conditions after the seeds were irradiated. All seedlings emerged at the same time, so the differences observed later could not be simply attributed to phytochrome-induced enhancement of germination in laser-treated seeds. Mature radishes and carrots from laser-treated seeds were twice as large as controls (Sommer and Franke, 2006). The authors were more intrigued with the outcomes than the causes and note that this may be a way to hasten the growing season.
While interesting, statistical rigour was thin and the authors also did not account for the possible explanation that phytochrome was activated and may have led to the advanced developmental state of the irradiated seedlings. With the head start, seedlings might establish faster and more completely than their non-irradiated siblings. However, follow-up experiments compared red to green laser treatment of Arabidopsis seeds. Green-treated seeds germinated and emerged later than red-treated seedlings, yet still exhibited a larger end-point root phenotype, suggesting that the pre-illumination did not drive a phy-induced enhancement of early development (A Sommer, personal communication).
These curious conclusions constitute a cause to question the potential link between early illumination and long-term phenotypes. These findings are completely contrary to the very nature of plant development, where ambient environmental cues generally supercede innate signals. However, it remains conceivable that some sensory input may hard-wire the young seedling to anticipate and prepare to exploit an ample light environment before emergence. Additional study of this phenomenon should be conducted, as the substantial changes in biomass may be of great benefit in increasing crop production, the generation of plant mass for biofuels, and/or the introduction of additional plant mass into planting fields as green fertilizer.
from:
Green light: a signal to slow down or stop
http://jxb.oxfordjournals.org/content/58/12/3099.full
also:
Recent findings of cry-dependent and cry-independent green photoresponses suggest that green, in addition to red, far-red, blue, and UV sensory mechanisms, monitor and adjust plant growth and development. For the most part, the recent findings mesh well with central themes from older studies performed before the advent of molecular-genetic tools and modern techniques. One theme presented throughout this review is that the effects of green light tend to reverse the processes established by red and/or blue light. In this way, green light may be functioning in a manner similar to far-red light, informing the plant of photosynthetically unfavourable conditions. Although seemingly counterintuitive at first, these conclusions make sense in the context of normal plant growth in natural settings. In terms of basic science, together these findings remind us that nature tends not to ignore a conditional environmental input and that inductive biological systems often have antagonistic systems that counter their progression. In this way plants use the full spectrum and the relative ratios of energies within to adjust their form, composition, and physiology to best exploit prevailing conditions
is white light really the future for growing mj?
regarding the famous NASA experiment that kinda shows otherwise:
Plant dry mass was greatest under RB+G treatments (where 24% of the spectrum was broadband green light) when compared with RB, the opposite of the effects noted by Went (1957; Fig. 2). However, these results do agree with previous findings that plants grown in RB+G treatments displayed larger specific leaf areas than those grown under RB treatments (Kim et al., 2004a). These experiments demonstrate that supplemental green affects plant physiology in conditions where red and blue systems are saturated. It remains to be seen if these effects are cry-dependent or cry-independent, as they were performed in species where photoreceptor mutants are not yet available.
shame on me if this article has already been discussed here... Sooo maybe some one has a green laser at Hand and is willing to do that Little Experiment under unscientific conditions
What Kind of experiments did you to do to verify that R/B or "full spectrum without green" < White light of same Output? I think somewhere it says that green could be beneficial but only when R B is fully saturated. But im more intrested in that "fire green laser on seed to increase yield later".
