Really? Do you have documentation somewhere on the project?
Why should I document what's growing in my living room? I still have reef guys saying you can't grow SPS corals under LEDs, and mine are doing fine.
there are also people doing detailed analysis and making their results available online.
Analysis of 'what?' Anybody can own an ant farm. Again, show me large scale study of specific wavelengths for plant growth that doesn't involve somebody selling a product at the bottom and I'll agree. There are also tons of white papers on the internet by 'Professor Wizards' (ahem), but as soon as you corner them, or ask if they so much own a houseplant, they change the subject and start yacking about in vitro spectral analysis. Have to do something with their degree because it sure doesn't involve growing anything.
Hydroponics stores in my area aren't interested either. They might sell trinket LED lights, but aren't working at high LED energy levels.
Flowering means fruiting... so it's potentially relevant for any attempt to grow fruits.
Agreed, but for the gazillionth time, find a commercial greehouse using artificial light, and 99.99% of them, if they're growing fruiting plants like tomatoes and such,
will be using HPS that doesn't have far red. The only broad scale use of far red solid state lighting I've seen is dope growers, and some NASA articles. That leaves Pink Floyd in between, right? Far red has not proven it's case, and LED has an effiency problem compared to HPS at 600nm.
Was there any other light?? Because 1.5W of LED power per plant
There was little ambient room light because it stays pretty darn dark in Michigan during the winter. What I did was set up some power rails with 3watt reds, and illuminate an area about a square meter with about 18watts of 630nm red. Not sure what this '1.5watts per plant' is about, but you might want to re-think it
. 18watts of 630nm LED in a 3x3 area is actually pretty darn intense, but I was looking at the low growth thresholds of Dracaena fragrans because it's a common slow growing deep shade plant that wasn't responding to blue LEDs.
Anyways, 18watts proved to be more than adequate per square meter, and grew those corn plants at a rate faster than they are now with indirect sun at 20F less ambient or the control plant. That's what really tripped me out - the temp difference. Next test is try this with fruiting plants like tomatoes which have far greater energy requirements and establish how much LED power per square meter is actually required. There are published commercial specs as to how much HPS or halide wattage is required per sq-foot to grow food plants, so I'm curious as to where LEDs finally end up and not interested to the bantering of arm chair scientists. I would happily go to an inner city co-op and build high powered LED fixtures at cost for them if I knew it would help feed people locally, but it's just not there in application (yet) .So basically, if you want to restrict yourself to 660-670nm emitters, you're wasting a lot of time.
I worked out based on DLI (daily light integral... or something) a while back.
Did you factor in thing like chloroplast pigment accumulation blocking long wavelengths, or is this just an anechoic room translation of energy principles? A better explanation is if you've seen a cornfield under 660-670nm light (or in IR in the extreme case), and noticing how it's reflecting a huge percentage of that energy back into the sky. At 600-630nm, less energy is reflected back. So again, there's more to the biology occuring at orange/red than far red which at best is a coincidental trigger.
