some pages about the green part of the spectrum...
GREEN LIGHT IN PHOTOMORPHOGENIC DEVELOPMENT
http://ufdcimages.uflib.ufl.edu/UF/E0/02/14/02/00001/maruhnich_s.pdf
LOL!
I just knew it !
That's one of the reasons I really,trully, respect you !
Excellent ,Guod!
This research ,is a 'unique' piece of work ..
My time schedule for the next few days is kinda 'tight' / 'busy' ...
Still,I hope that I'll find the time to discuss the contents of that (awesome) research.
Some short notes about this research.
This paper really deserves careful studying.
It answers many questions and yet ,new are brought up.
I'm not quite sure if it makes the 'green light' issue simpler...
I think the opposite actually happens .
In fact ,studying this research (some time ago) lots of questions of mine 've been answered ...
(* Like ": Why on Earth cheap asian whites ,seem to perform in flowering ,way better than cheap asian monos,but plants look spindly and weird ? "
Or ..To put it on another-more of an old fashioned- way :
"How come MHs grow 'better ' plants than HPS ,but still yields from the latter are way higher ..."
And some interesting parts of it :
(...)For these experiments, lightemitting diodes (LED), which provide narrow-bandwidth light, were used to test the effects ofgreen light in the presence of red and blue light on the growth of Arabidopsis thaliana plants.(...)
A Long-Day plant .(Flowering during Winter )
Green light inhibits flowering ...On Short day plants ,green light has the exact opposite effect .
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arabidopsis_thaliana
(...)Green light
is typically enriched in natural environments
that are also enriched for far-red light, i.e. any environment that is covered by overhanging
foliage such as the understory of a plant canopy orin a densely-packed field. Therefore, a logical
hypothesis is that green light may induce similar responses as far-red light.
This chapter presents evidence that greenlight responses oppose those of red and blue
light, and are at times similar to those of far-red wavebands. Although the green signaling
components are largely unknown, this work demonstrates a role for green wavebands in plant
growth and development.However, interpretation of classical work presents some difficulties for
the following reasons: 1. Experiments were usually performed
under broadband light conditions not exclusively emitting green light(...)
(...)
Green light moves efficiently through the plant body, playing more of a role in photosynthesis than red
or blue light in some contexts (Sun et al., 199, suggesting that green light may prove useful as a
signal to tissues not directly exposed to the light environment.
Potential green light effects may also vary with developmental context, since an etiolated
seedling emerging from the soil has negligible chlorophyll and will allow green light to penetrate
as efficiently as blue, red, and far-red light.
(...)
(...)Interestingly, this work also demonstrated a reversal of green-light-induced
inhibition of root growth by other light qualities. Here, wavebands distributed at 620 nm were
most effective at reversing green light effects,whereas irradiation near
660 nm (phytochrome’s peak absorption) had no effect.(...)
(...)Additionally, while stomatal conductance was greater under cool
white fluorescent lights than in RB+G treatments, the dry
mass of the plants was greater in the latter. This
result implies that weaker stomatal conductance
did not negatively affect carbon assimilation (Kim et al., 2004). Plant dry mass was greatest
under RB+G treatments (where 24% of the spectrum was broadband green light) when compared
to RB, the opposite of the effects noted by Went(1957; Figure 2-2). However, these results do
agree with previous findings that plants grown in RB+G treatments had larger specific leaf areas
than those grown under RB treatments (Kim et al., 2004). These experiments demonstrate that
supplemental green light affects plant physiology in conditions where red and blue systems are
saturated. It remains to be seen whether these effects are cry-dependent or cry-independent, as
they were performed in species where photoreceptor mutants are not yet available.(...)