Article View: sci.bio.botany
Article #356Re: What is the optimal wavelength of light for growing plants (cacti indoors in a northern illinois climate)?
From: Jan Andersen
Date: Tue, 14 Oct 1997 00:00
Date: Tue, 14 Oct 1997 00:00
66 lines
3443 bytes
3443 bytes
ken wrote: > Scott wrote: > > > > I am trying to accelerate the growth of my baby cacti by increasing their > > light exposure with fluorescent lamps. I am wondering what would the > > optimal wavelength for promoting growth (i.e. photosynthesis). My > > question, in part, stems from interest in growth lamps. > > > Scott, > The trouble with incandescent gro-lights is they start with a > lower lumen per watt rating (just becasue they are incandescent) and > then they use subtractive filtering to get a daylight lamp. This > lowers the efficiency even more. However, as you say, they do not > require auxilary equipment. > I don't know the particulars (like sd curves, etc.), but SoLux > halogen/incandescent lamps offers several selections of daylight lamps. > Check out their webpage, and happy gardening :) Ken goken@basec.net Many years ago, when I studied physics at the University of Aarhus (in Denmark) I talked with one of the physics professors (we shared an interest in orchids). He had made some measurements of the light spectra of several types of lamps. The astonishng result was: The worst kind of lamp was the ordinary light bulb _and_ the special 'plant lights (in terms of efficiency). The best ones were the industrial type 'cold white' flourescent tubes - they are by far the most efficient. There are two reasons for this: 1) plants don't really utilise longer wavelengths than yellow light for photosynthesis (ie. you can't use red, yellow and 'green' light). 2) All (nearly) flourescent tubes are made with mercury gas inside - this produces ultraviolet light, which is converted to visible light by means of an emulsion at the inside of the tube - a 'gro-light' has in addition to that a filter that takes away some wavelengths, which by necessity means that a 'gro-light' tube is less efficient than one without filter. So why spend a lot of money on such equipment - the only 'value' it has is that it look mysterious, really. /jan -- ----------------------------------------- - while you're here, why not take a look at a href="http://www.image.dk/~jan_p_a If you want to reply to me, my electronic address is ndjan and the server part of it is nord-data-detail.dk. Or you can use jan_p_a with server part = image.dk This rather 'circumvented' explanation is meant to avoid automatic spammers that browse the news groups. I hope it works -----------------------------------------
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<344366CE.3295FDDB@127.0.0.1>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!unknown!not-for-mailReferences:
<pspopeXSPM-1310971949310001@165.124.30.53> <34434DB2.6B6B@basec.net>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 1028fe,28594e47bdf67208 X-Google-Attributes: gid1028fe,public X-Google-Thread: f4acb,28594e47bdf67208 X-Google-Attributes: gidf4acb,public X-Google-Thread: 10a56c,28594e47bdf67208 X-Google-Attributes: gid10a56c,public X-Google-Thread: 115fe3,28594e47bdf67208 X-Google-Attributes: gid115fe3,public X-Google-Thread: 10bcbe,28594e47bdf67208 X-Google-Attributes: gid10bcbe,public From: Jan Andersen <root@127.0.0.1> Subject: Re: What is the optimal wavelength of light for growing plants (cacti indoors in a northern illinois climate)? Date: 1997/10/14 Message-ID: <344366CE.3295FDDB@127.0.0.1> X-Deja-AN: 280560027 References: <pspopeXSPM-1310971949310001@165.124.30.53> <34434DB2.6B6B@basec.net> Organization: Federal Bureau of Investigation Reply-To: root@127.0.0.1 Newsgroups: sci.bio.botany,sci.engr.lighting,bionet.plants,sci.agriculture,rec.gardens