Abstract
Light-emitting diodes (LEDs) are an attractive alternative to high-pressure sodium (HPS) lamps for plant growth because of their energy-saving potential. However, the effects of supplementing broad-waveband solar light with narrow-waveband LED light on the sensory attributes of greenhouse-grown tomatoes ( Solanum lycopersicum ) are largely unknown. Three separate studies investigating the effect of supplemental light quantity and quality on physicochemical and organoleptic properties of greenhouse-grown tomato fruit were conducted over 4- or 5-month intervals during 2012 and 2013. Tomato cultivars Success, Komeett, and Rebelski were grown hydroponically within a high-wire trellising system in a glass-glazed greenhouse. Chromacity, Brix, titratable acidity, electrical conductivity (EC), and pH measurements of fruit extracts indicated plant response differences between lighting treatments. In sensory panels, tasters ranked tomatoes for color, acidity, and sweetness using an objective scale, whereas color, aroma, texture, sweetness, acidity, aftertaste, and overall approval were ranked using hedonic scales. By collecting both physicochemical as well as sensory data, this study was able to determine whether statistically significant physicochemical parameters of tomato fruit also reflected consumer perception of fruit quality. Sensory panels indicated that statistically significant physicochemical differences were not noticeable to tasters and that tasters engaged in blind testing could not discern between tomatoes from different supplemental lighting treatments or unsupplemented controls. Growers interested in reducing supplemental lighting energy consumption by using intracanopy LED (IC-LED) supplemental lighting need not be concerned that the quality of their tomato fruits will be negatively affected by narrow-band supplemental radiation at the intensities and wavelengths used in this study.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record, shown for indexing and research. Copyright remains with the authors or the publisher. Read at the source ↗
The text the model read, with the source record’s inline markup (italics, sub- and superscripts) rendered and its character entities decoded; quote offsets refer to the raw text.
Claims 5
Claim · model-written summary
Chromacity, Brix and titratable acidity of tomato fruit extracts indicated plant response differences between lighting treatments.
- Taxon
- tomato
Solanum lycopersicume0 - Material
- Success, Komeett, and Rebelskie1
- Outcome
- Chromacity, Brix, titratable aciditye2
- Qualifier
- plant response differences between lighting treatmentse2
- Setting
- glass-glazed greenhousee1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“greenhouse-grown tomatoes”
e1“Tomato cultivars Success, Komeett, and Rebelski were grown hydroponically within a high-wire trellising system in a glass-glazed greenhouse”
e2“Chromacity, Brix, titratable acidity, electrical conductivity (EC), and pH measurements of fruit extracts indicated plant response differences between lighting treatments”
Claim · model-written summary
Electrical conductivity and pH of tomato fruit extracts indicated plant response differences between lighting treatments.
- Taxon
- tomatoSolanum lycopersicume0
- Material
- Success, Komeett, and Rebelskie1
- Outcome
- electrical conductivity (EC), and pHe2
- Qualifier
- plant response differences between lighting treatmentse2
- Setting
- glass-glazed greenhousee1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“greenhouse-grown tomatoes”
e1“Tomato cultivars Success, Komeett, and Rebelski were grown hydroponically within a high-wire trellising system in a glass-glazed greenhouse”
e2“Chromacity, Brix, titratable acidity, electrical conductivity (EC), and pH measurements of fruit extracts indicated plant response differences between lighting treatments”
Claim · model-written summary
Statistically significant physicochemical differences between tomatoes under supplemental lighting were not noticeable to tasters.
- Taxon
- tomatoesSolanum lycopersicume3
- Material
- Success, Komeett, and Rebelskie1
- Outcome
- statistically significant physicochemical differencese3
- Qualifier
- not noticeable to tasterse3
- Setting
- glass-glazed greenhousee1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“Tomato cultivars Success, Komeett, and Rebelski were grown hydroponically within a high-wire trellising system in a glass-glazed greenhouse”
e3“Sensory panels indicated that statistically significant physicochemical differences were not noticeable to tasters and that tasters engaged in blind testing could not discern between tomatoes from different supplemental lighting treatments or unsupplemented controls”
Claim · model-written summary
Tasters could not discern between tomatoes from supplemental lighting treatments and unsupplemented controls in blind testing.
- Taxon
- tomatoesSolanum lycopersicume3
- Material
- Success, Komeett, and Rebelskie1
- Treatment
- supplemental lighting treatmentse3
- Outcome
- discern between tomatoese3
- Comparator
- unsupplemented controlse3
- Setting
- glass-glazed greenhousee1
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“Tomato cultivars Success, Komeett, and Rebelski were grown hydroponically within a high-wire trellising system in a glass-glazed greenhouse”
e3“Sensory panels indicated that statistically significant physicochemical differences were not noticeable to tasters and that tasters engaged in blind testing could not discern between tomatoes from different supplemental lighting treatments or unsupplemented controls”
Claim · model-written summary
Growers using intracanopy LED supplemental lighting need not expect negative effects on tomato fruit quality from narrow-band supplemental radiation.
- Taxon
- tomatoSolanum lycopersicume4
- Treatment
- narrow-band supplemental radiatione4
- Outcome
- quality of their tomato fruitse4
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e4“Growers interested in reducing supplemental lighting energy consumption by using intracanopy LED (IC-LED) supplemental lighting need not be concerned that the quality of their tomato fruits will be negatively affected by narrow-band supplemental radiation at the intensities and wavelengths used in this study”