Blog

Oct 18, 2024

Increasing the performance of Passion fruit (Passiflora edulis) seedlings by LED light regimes | Scientific Reports

Scientific Reports volume 11, Article number: 20967 (2021) Cite this article 4644 Accesses 15 Citations Metrics details Due to progress in the industrial development of light-emitting diodes (LEDs),

Scientific Reports volume 11, Article number: 20967 (2021) Cite this article

4644 Accesses

15 Citations

Metrics details

Due to progress in the industrial development of light-emitting diodes (LEDs), much work has been dedicated to understanding the reaction of plants to these light sources in recent years. In this study, the effect of different LED-based light regimes on growth and performance of passion fruit (Passiflora edulis) seedlings was investigated. Combinations of different light irradiances (50, 100, and 200 µmol m−2 s−1), quality (red, green, and blue light-emitting LEDs), and photoperiods (10 h/14 h, 12 h/12 h and 14 h/10 h light/dark cycles) were used to investigate the photosynthetic pigment contents, antioxidants and growth traits of passion fruit seedlings in comparison to the same treatment white fluorescent light. Light irradiance of 100 µmol m−2 s−1 of a 30% red/70% blue LED light combination and 12 h/12 h light/dark cycles showed the best results for plant height, stem diameter, number of leaves, internode distance, and fresh/dry shoot/root weights. 14 h/10 h light/dark cycles with the same LED light combination promoted antioxidant enzyme activities and the accumulation of phenols and flavonoids. In contrast, lower light irradiance (50 µmol m−2 s−1) had negative effects on most of the parameters. We conclude that passion fruit seedlings' optimal performance and biomass production requires long and high light irradiances with a high blue light portion.

Fruits are widely recognized as a vital part of a healthy diet, and their regular intake may help to prevent a variety of ailments1,2,3. Optimal fruit production, permanent availability worldwide, and affordability are global issues to optimize human´s health. Passion fruit (Passiflora edulis) is an attractive, nutritious fruit crop highly appreciated for fresh consumption and industrial purposes because of its diverse uses for juice, jelly, and ice cream products4. P. edulis is a perennial woody fruit vine that belongs to the Passifloraceae family, native to tropical America (Brazil)5, and bears hermaphrodite, solitary flowers which are located in the leaf axils. The fruit has a stiff, smooth, waxy dark purple or yellow-hued peel with faint, fine white flecks. The fruit is mostly loaded with a fragrant mass of double-walled, membranous sacs holding orange-colored pulpy fluid and up to 250 tiny, hard, dark brown to black pitted seeds on the inside. The fruit has high nutritional and medicinal value. It is a rich source of vitamin A and C and contains fair amounts of iron, potassium, sodium, magnesium, sulfur, and chlorides, and has dietary fiber and protein (reviewed in6). Fruits are eaten fresh or processed into products like jams, squash, juice, cakes, pies, and ice-cream.

Photosynthetic photon flux density (PPFD) sources suitable for indoor cultivation in controlled environments have boosted crop productivity in densely populated areas or plant growth facilities, such as greenhouses7. The spectral properties of irradiances sources must meet the physiological requirements of plants for photosynthesis and photomorphogenic development8. However, for each crop species in its environment, the optimal quality and irradiance sources have to be found, and there is a huge spectrum of physiological processes which respond differently to the irradiances sources in different crop species. Light-emitting diodes (LEDs) have great potential for horticultural applications due to energy efficiency, longevity, and flexibility of their application9. LEDs become more and more suitable in research and commercial agriculture under controlled conditions due to their low radiation, heat, and wide spectral adaptation10.

Brown, et al.11 and Tennessen, et al.12 described the advantage of LED sources for optimal plant growth. The ideal spectral distribution range promotes plant growth with optimum life span and light energy efficiency13. Many studies investigated LED effects on growth, development, morphology, and photosynthesis in different plants14,15,16,17,18, used a combination of fluorescent and LED sources19, replaced fluorescent light tubes with LEDs20, or utilized various LED combinations.

It has been reported that different color ratios (different light spectrums) strongly influence on plants’ physiological and developmental outcomes21,22,23,24. Other researches revealed the effect of light irradiance on plant growth and development23,25,26,27,28,29 and photoperiod23,30. However, little is known about the combined effect of light irradiance, quality, and photoperiod on plants’ growth, development, and physiological response.

In the present study, we used a number of physiological and protective traits of passion fruit (Passiflora edulis var. Golden No. 6) seedlings to optimize their growth under various light regimes. We exposed the seedlings to light from LEDs emitting different wavelengths with three different light irradiances and for 3 light/dark cycles and propose an optimal regime for plant performance.

Table 1 and Fig. 1 show the effect of the different LED light regimes on the morphology and growth of the passion fruit seedlings. Table 1 demonstrates that the plant height, stem diameter, Number of leaves, internode distance, fresh shoot, and root weights, as well as dry shoot and root weights were the highest for the seedlings treated with the LM5 regime. The lowest values were observed for LM2, except for the root fresh weight. Although not statistically different to the other treatments, the leaf area of the seedlings was the highest with LM7 and the water content of the plants with LM3.

Passion fruit seedlings were grown 60 days under different LED light regimes. (Authors need to improve the quality of the superior figure. Images are compressed.

Table 2 shows the summary of the results based on the orthogonal array design. The optimal growth characteristics in response to the three factors (light irradiance, red-blue light ratio, and duration of LED light regimes) was A2B2C3, which indicated that the optimal light irradiance is 100 µmol m−2 s−1, from light with a R30:B70 ratio, and a photoperiod of 14 h light and 10 h dark. However, the best results for the leaf areas (A2B1C2) and water contents (A1B3C3) were obtained for different conditions.

ANOVA analysis of the data is presented in Table 2 and shows that most of the differences are significant (p ˂ 0.05), except for the factor B on stem diameter and leaf area.

Next, we investigated whether the optimal light conditions obtained for plant growth and development are the same for accumulation of the pigments in the leaves (Fig. 2). As photosynthetic pigments, we assayed Chl a, Chl b, and the total carotenoid pool. Anthocyanin was chosen for a stress-related pigment which accumulates in the vacuole. Treatments with the light regimes LM3- LM7 gave almost identical results for the accumulation of Chl a (Fig. 2a), whereas the amounts of Chl b as well as of the total carotenoid pool were significantly lower under LM7, i.e., high light irradiance applied for a long period of time and with a high R portion (Fig. 2b,d). Since the leaf area under LM7 is the highest, the combination of these two results indicates that plants growing under LM7 can convert the photosynthetic energy quite efficiently into biomass production, which allows them to decrease their Chl b and car levels. Compared with CK treatment, the levels of total chlorophyll in the leaves of seedlings were higher with LM5 than with the other regimes of LED light, with LM2, LM3, LM4, LM6, and LM7 showing no statistical difference (Fig. 3c). The ratio of total chlorophyll to carotenoid was higher with LM7 than the other LED light regimes, while LM9 mode showed the lowest ratio (Fig. 3e).

Effect of different LED light regimes on Chl a (a), Chl b (b), total Chl (c), carotenoid (d), ratio of total Chl to carotenoid (e), and anthocyanin contents (f) in leaves of passion seedlings. Each column represents the means of four replicates; different letters on similar columns indicate significant differences using Duncan's multiple range test at p ≤ 0.05.

Effect of modes LED light on CAT (a), POD (b), SOD (c), Total phenols (d), and Flavonoids contents (e) in leaves of passion seedlings. Each column represents the means of four replicates; different letters on similar columns indicate significant differences using Duncan's multiple range test at p ≤ 0.05.

Furthermore, anthocyanin is a stress pigment31,32, and its accumulation is more efficiently stimulated by cryptochrome than phytochromes33. Consequently, short illuminations with low light irradiances containing a high red-light portion (LM6) lead to the lowest anthocyanin accumulation (Fig. 2f). Moreover, since the amount of anthocyanin accumulating under LM7 is average, this light regime does not induce stress responses.

On the other hand, according to the R-values, the order of influence of the three factors on pigments contents of Passion fruit seedlings was observed in this study (Table 3). Table 3 shows that the order of impact of the three factors on chlorophyll a, chlorophyll b, total chlorophyll, carotenoid, total chlorophyll/carotenoid, and anthocyanin was (A > C > B), (A > B > C), (A > C > B), (C > A > B), (C > A > B), and (A > C > B), respectively.

Based on the average of pigment contents derived from three factors at each level, the A2B3C1 and A3B1C3 were the best combinations gave the highest chlorophyll a and total chlorophyll/carotenoid, respectively, which indicated that the maximum of chlorophyll a and total chlorophyll/carotenoid presented at (irradiance 200 µmol m−2 s−1 + ratio (R70:G0:B30) + photoperiod 14 h/10 h) and (irradiance 100 µmol m−2 s−1 + ratio (R30:G0:B70) + photoperiod 14 h/10 h), respectively (Table 4). The best combination of different factors with the levels for the highest chlorophyll b and total chlorophyll was A2B2C3, which indicated that the maximum of these parameters presented at (irradiance 100 µmol m−2 s−1 + ratio (R30:G0:B70) + photoperiod 14 h/10 h). In contrast, the highest carotenoid and anthocyanin was A3B3C2, which indicated that the maximum of these parameters presented at (irradiance 200 µmol m−2 s−1 + ratio (R50:G20:B30) + photoperiod 12 h/12 h).

ANOVA (Table 3) showed that these three factors were significant effects on the plant morphology and the growth performance parameters of passion fruit seedlings (p ˂ 0.05), excepted factor B on chlorophyll a, total chlorophyll, and total chlorophyll/carotenoid had no significant effects.

The antioxidant enzyme activities for CAT, POD, and SOD, as well as the total phenol and flavonoid contents in leaves of passion fruit seedlings under different LEDs light treatments are shown in Fig. 3. The CAT activity was the highest in seedlings exposed to LM1, followed by LM9, while the activity was the lowest in seedlings exposed to LM2 (Fig. 3a). Interestingly, the results for the POD activity differed substantially: LM5 seedlings showed the highest and LM8 the lowest enzyme activity, and the LM8 treatment was comparable to those with LM2, LM4, and LM9 (Fig. 3b). The SOD activity was the highest in LM9 seedlings (Fig. 3c). The total phenol and flavonoid contents were the highest in LM5 seedlings (Fig. 3d,e). LM4 treatment resulted in the lowest total phenols content (Fig. 3d) and the LM2 treatment in the lowest flavonoids content (Fig. 3e).

Evaluation of the data showed that the three factors have quite different influences on the five antioxidant parameters with CAT (B > C > A), POD (A > C > B), SOD (A > B > C), total phenols (B > A > C), and flavonoids (A > C > B) (Table 4). The highest induction for POD, total phenols, and flavonoids was observed for A2B2C3, i.e. (100 µmol m−2 s−1 light of R30:G0:B70 ratio with a 14 h/10 h photoperiod), while the highest CAT was A1B1C1, which indicated that the maximum of CAT presented at (irradiance 50 µmol m−2 s−1 + ratio (R70:G0:B30) + photoperiod10h/14 h). The A3B3C2 was the best combination gave the highest SOD, which indicated that the maximum of SOD presented at (irradiance 200 µmol m−2 s−1 + ratio (R50:G20:B30) + photoperiod 12 h/12 h). However, when individual enzyme activities and pigment contents were considered, the optimal conditions were quite different from the average value, although ANOVA (Table 4) analyses showed that most of the differences were significant (p ˂ 0.05), excepted factor A and C on CAT, and C on SOD.

Light quality has a significant impact on the efficiency of photosynthesis and the morphological and physiological properties of the plant. In this study we tried to find the optimal light quality and quantity for biomass production and development of passion fruit seedlings. A literature survey demonstrates that the optimal light conditions for plants differ substantially34,35. The spectral distribution, illumination period and light irradiance have different effects on the efficiency of photosynthesis36, and the activation of the photoreceptors in different plant species37. The necessity of this study becomes important when our data on passion fruit are compared with those for agriculturally important plant species. In our experiments, passion fruit seedlings responded strongly to LM5 (100 µmol m−2 s−1; R30:G0:B70; 14 h/10 h) with regard to optimal plant height, stem diameter, leaves number, internode distance as well as shoot/root biomass (Table 1). Naznin, et al.38 and Yang, et al.39 investigated in pepper seedlings and Yang et al.40 tomato seedlings, and they found that in particular the red LED light was important for producing strong seedlings. Also, Yousef and coauthors showed that a combination of R and B LED light with a high R portion was effective in producing vigorous grafted tomato seedlings28,29. In most studies a combination of R and B light was more effective in promoting plant growth and development than the use of one LED source alone. For instance, cucumber seedlings grown under equal amounts of R and B light have higher yields compared to seedlings grown under R light only41. Yousef and co-authors extended the study to factory tomatoes and showed that illumination with 100 μmol m−2 s−1 70% R and 30% B resulted in the optimal growth of the plants42. Moreover, the barrier tissue cells in the leaves were particularly well developed and the spongy tissue cells were arranged in an orderly manner43. It appears that blue light is important for passion fruit growth suggesting that activation of the cryptochrome system has a strong influence on its development.

The Chl content affects the photosynthetic ability and reduced carbon production44,45. Moreover, Chl biosynthesis is controlled by the quality of light, and many studies showed the important role of blue light40,46,47,48. Furthermore, ambient light conditions and stress can have profound effects on the Chl a and b levels. Our results showed that LM6 was the best light treatment for Chl a accumulation, followed by LM4, LM7, and LM5 treatments (Fig. 2a), whereas LM5 was optimal for Chl b, and LM9 for carotenoid and anthocyanin accumulation. This is in agreement with the findings of Yang et al.40 and Yousef et al.42,49 with tomato and pepper seedlings38,39. Furthermore, the authors observed that a mixture of red and blue LED lights induced higher levels of these pigments than white fluorescent light.

The benefits of light sources with enriched red and blue light were repeatedly shown for Chl accumulation, photosynthetic enzyme activity, stomatal aperture, and carbohydrate biosynthesis in plants50,51,52,53. Bondada et al.50 showed that red light increased the total Chl content and promoted photosynthesis rates but restricted the transport of carbohydrates from the leaves to the roots. In contrast, several studies showed that photomorphogenesis was more promoted by blue light, which increased Chl a/b ratios and facilitated stomatal opening47,53,54. Li et al.55 showed that besides increased photosynthesis per unit leaf area and a higher Chl a/b ratio, blue light also stimulated ribulose-1,5-bisphosphate carboxylase and phosphoenolpyruvate carboxylase activities, and promoted stomatal opening. Therefore, the red-blue light ratio has a strong influence on morphogenesis and ultimately biomass production. Red light facilitated cell division and expansion, resulting in increased leaf area and root elongation, while blue light inhibited these effects and reduced the leaf area and root elongation56,57. Besides light quality, also the irradiance and duration of illumination is important for yield; reduced photon irradiance in LM2 might be the main reason for the reduced leaf area and biomass production.

Besides photosynthetic parameters, the antioxidant status of the plant is important for fitness and agricultural yields. Antioxidants are involved in biotic and abiotic stress, including defense, oxidative damage, and free-radical scavenging58. Also, light stress plays a crucial role in the production, turnover, and destruction of antioxidants59,60,61. Red light increased the antioxidant activity in pea62 and Dendrobium officinale seedlings63, but also in Eleutherococcus senticosus somatic embryos64. However, the range in which different antioxidant enzymes react to stress differs substantially under different light conditions. Also Naznin, et al.38 showed that the antioxidant capacity of lettuce, spinach, cabbage, Ocimum basilicum, and Capsicum annuum was stimulated by red light, although various cultivars of the same plant can respond quite differently to different light situations42,65. Mengxi, et al.66 showed that blue light promoted antioxidant enzyme activities in Oncidium. Considering that plants have to decide to either invest in growth (photosynthesis) or defense, depending on environmental conditions, including light stress, optimal light sources for plants should balance these responses. Therefore, comparison of the effect of the different light regimes on photosynthesis-related and antioxidant-related responses is important for long-term benefits for the plant.

Plants can accumulate oxidative active chemicals under conditions with insufficient use of light energy during photosynthesis67. Antioxidant enzymes eliminate reactive oxygen species generated during (a)biotic stress including light stress, pathogen attack or senescence68,69. SOD removed H2O2 and O2- generated during oxidative stress and lipid peroxidation; POD and CAT can remove H2O2 from peroxisomes and cytoplasm70,71. The highest antioxidant activities were found with LM1 (CAT; 50 µmol m−2 s−1; R70: G0: B30; 10 h/14 h), LM5 (SOD; 100 µmol m−2 s−1; R30:G0:B70; 14 h/10 h), and LM4 (POD, 100 µmol m−2 s−1; R70:G0:B30; 12 h/12 h) treatments. However, comparison with the other treatments suggest that neither the irradiance of LED light, the red-blue light ratio, nor the photoperiod caused high light stress to the passion fruit seedlings that resulted in an unusual upregulation of the antioxidant enzyme activities.

UV-B light stress affected polyphenol and flavonoid biosynthesis, since they absorb both visible and UV light to protect mesophyll cells from photooxidation72,73. This is important for plants in the field, but not under LED light.

In plants, there has been an increased biosynthesis of phenol and polyphenol compounds to help them cope with the multifarious abiotic and biotic stresses such as salinity, heavy metal, drought, temperature, UV lights, disease progression, etc.74. Cryptochromes and phytochromes, activated by blue, red and far-red LEDs have been intensively studied because they stimulate phenol and flavonoid accumulation in diverse plant species during the germination of sprouts75,76, in adult plants77,78,79, or during postharvest storage80,81. However, the effect of monochromatic LEDs for the induction of these secondary metabolites is dependent on numerous factors and has to be optimized for each plant species and growth condition. White, blue and red light stimulated the activities of the key enzymes of the shikimate and phenylpropanoid pathways, such as phenylalanine ammonia lyase82, chalcone isomerase and synthases, or the leucoanthocyanidin dioxygenase, flavanol synthase, dihydroflavonol 4-reductase and stilbene synthase involved in anthocyanin and flavonoid biosynthesis83,84,85. Not only biosynthesis genes, but also transcriptional activators and repressors play a role in the production of these phenolic compounds and respond to light86. Furthermore, greater production of phenylalanine rather than tryptophan was found to enhance the synthesis of phenolic compounds. This indicates that LEDs can regulate total phenol and total flavonoid concentration by promoting the expression of genes involved in the biosynthesis of the secondary compounds well as indirectly by boosting the precursor molecule79. In this study, the highest contents of total phenols and flavonoids was found with LM5 (100 µmol m−2 s−1; R30:G0:B70; 14 h/10 h light/dark cycles). Literature survey shows that only blue and red light sources were active, whereas green light was less effective78,82,87 or completely ineffective81. Loi, et al.81 did not find a significant increase in phenolic compounds in broccoli with green light, while Ouzounis, et al.88 found a stimulation under higher light irradiance, demonstrating that light irradiance is critical79,89. In general, higher light irradiances were more effective in activating light-responsive genes and the polyphenol content than lower light irradiances. Nonetheless, the findings are strongly dependent on the investigated plant species77,90, cultivars91,92, and timing of LED exposure88. Most notably, each polyphenolic compound reacts differently to different light qualities75. We also found that the CAT, SOD and POD activities responded differently to the different light regimes. Thus, a detailed analyses of the accumulation of antioxidant compounds is required for each plant species and cultivars, in particular when LEDs are used93.

All experiments were conducted in LED light chambers at Fujian Agriculture and Forestry University, Fuzhou, Fujian, China. The manufacturer of the tested LED lamps is Kedao Technology Corporation (Huizhou, China) with the type of UH-BLDT0510. Our studies were complied with the relevant institutional, national, and international guidelines and legislation. The growth chambers at an optimum temperature, i.e., 27 ± 2 °C Day/23 ± 2 °C night, relative humidity was maintained at 65 ± 5% during the entire experimental procedures, and LED light's spectrum distribution as shown (Fig. 4).

The treatments of LED light's spectrum distribution.

The seeds were provided by the Fruit Research Institute, Fujian Academy of Agricultural Sciences. In August 2020, the fruits from the mature passion fruit variety ‘Golden No. 6’ was harvested, the seeds were cleaned with gauze bag, dried in a natural shade, and sealed in a Ziplock bag. To improve germination rate, the seeds were washed with distilled water, wrapped in wet gauze, placed in a Petri dish, and stored in an incubator at 35 °C. After 7 to 9 days, the percentage of germination is approximately 80%. The passion seeds were sown in 50-cell plug trays (28 cm width × 54 cm length × 8 cm height, Luoxi Plastic Products Co., Shandong, China) that was filled with commercial growing substrate (N1:P1:K1 ≥ 3%, organic matter ≥ 45%, pH 5.5–6.5). In total, 100 seedlings were grown in each box. Irrigation was provided for the seedlings daily or as required.

Seedlings were fertilized with water-soluble fertilizers (compound of fertilizer "N20: P20: K20 + TE", Ruierkang Co., Russia, and Stimufol Amino (compound fertilizers “N 25%, P 16%, K 12%, Fe 0.17%, amino acids 2%, Mo 0.001%, B 0.044%, Cu 0.085, Zn 0.03%, Mg 0.02%, Mn 0.085%, Co 0.01%, and EDTA”, Shoura Co., Egypt.)) two times per week through irrigation. Fertilization started one week after planting.

The Orthogonal Experimental design method was used to analyze three factors with three levels each. As shown in Table 4, from the possible 27 treatments, 9 treatments (and a white fluorescent light control) were performed. Three light irradiances (50, 100, 200 μmol m−2 s−1; A1-A3) were given with red (R), green (G), and blue (B) LEDs filters (B1-B3) in 3 combinations (R:G:B in %: 70:0:30, 30:0:70, and 50:20:30 Fig. 4), and three photoperiods (C1-C3) (10/14 h, 12/12 h, and 14/10 light/dark cycles).

Growth performance was estimated 60 days after sowing. We used a ruler to measure the plant height and the distance between nodes (cm), and a vernier caliper to measure the stem diameter (mm). The plant height was measured from the ground surface to the plant growth point; the stem diameter at the base of the stem; the node spacing between the 4th and 5th leaves. Leaf area (the third leaf below the top of the plant) was measured by LA-S Wanshen Plant Image Analyzer (Wanshen Testing Technology Co., Ltd., Hangzhou, China). The determination of the leaf dry material was obtained weighing the fresh leaves (washed and rinsed with deionized water), and the material was oven-dried (YH-9203A, Qingdao Yosion Labtech Co. Ltd., China) at 105 °C for 20 min, and drying continued at 70 °C, until a constant weight was reached.

Sixty days after sowing, the total Chl and carotenoid contents were determined from fresh medium-aged leaves with excluded the edges and veins of leaves (Fifth leaf from the top). Tissues of fresh leaves (0.2 g) were cut, ground well, suspended in 5 ml of 95% ethanol and filtered. The filtrate was made up to 25 ml by adding 95% ethanol. Absorbance of the filtered solution for Chl (Chl) a, Chl b, and carotenoid at 665 nm, 649 nm and 470 nm, respectively, was measured using a spectrophotometer (UV-5100B, Unico. Shanghai, China), while the Chl content was determined using the following equations94:

Chl a (mg g−1 FW) = (13.95 OD665 − 6.88 OD649) V/200 W

Chl b (mg g−1 FW) = (24.96 OD649 − 7.32 OD663) V/200 W

Total Chl (mg g−1 FW) = Chl a + Chl b

Car (mg g−1 FW) = (1000 OD470 − 2.05 Chl a − 114.80 Chl b) V/ (245 × 200 W)

Chl/Car ratio = (Chl a + Chl b) / Car

Where (Chl a) = chlorophyll a, (Chl b) = chlorophyll b, (Car.) = carotenoid, and (ToCh/Car.) = Total chlorophyll/ Carotenoid; (V) = volume (25 ml.) and (W) = sample weight (g).

Sixty days after sowing, anthocyanin content was determined from fresh medium-aged leaves (Fifth leaf from the top) after removal of the veins. The plant material was cut into small pieces. To 0.1 g material, 5 mL 1% HCL-methanol solution was added, the solution was poured into a 5 mL centrifuge tube. The extraction took place in the dark until the tissue became white. The absorbance was measured at 530 and 600 nm and the anthocyanin content in leaves was calculated according to Cao, et al.95. The difference between the absorbance values at 530 nm and 600 nm represents the anthocyanin content, i.e. (OD530-OD600)/g.

The superoxide dismutase (SOD) activity was determined by the nitrogen blue tetrazole (NBT) method of96. 0.1 g of frozen leaf (fresh medium-aged leaves Fifth leaf from the top) powder was weighed, 5 mL of phosphoric acid buffer (pH7.8) was added, and the slurry was centrifuged at 4000 rpm at 4° for 10 min. The supernatant was used for the enzyme assays. One unit of SOD caused inhibition of the photoreduction of NBT by 50%. The superoxide dismutase (SOD) activity was measured in the same extract by the increase in absorbance at 470 nm due to guaiacol oxidation activity and was quantified according to the method described by García-Triana, et al.97.

The peroxidase (POD) activity was determined by the guaiacol method98. 0.1 g of frozen leaf (Fifth leaf from the top) powder was weighed, resuspended in 10 mL phosphoric acid buffer (pH5.5) at 4 °C and centrifuged at 3000 rpm for 10 min. 0.1 mL enzyme extract was added to either 0.05 mol/L phosphoric acid buffer (2.9 mL), 2% H2O2 (1.0 mL), and 0.05 mol/L guaiacol (1.0 mL). Heat-treated extract (5 min) was used as control. The solution was incubated at 37 °C for 15 min, and then quickly transferred to an ice bath. 2.0 mL of 20% trichloroacetic acid was added to terminate the reaction. After centrifugation at 5000 rpm for 10 min, the absorbance was read at 470 nm according to Wang, et al.99.

The catalase (CAT) activity was determined by the ultraviolet absorption method100. 0.1 g of frozen fresh leaf (Fifth leaf from the top) powder was weighed and resuspended in 5 mL pre-cooled phosphoric acid buffer (pH 7.8, 1% polyvinylpyrrolidone). After accurate temperature adjustment to 5 °C for 10 min, the suspension was centrifuged at 4000 rpm for 15 min. The supernatant was used for the CAT assay by measuring the absorbance at 240 nm. All enzymes’ activities were expressed as unit’s min−1 g−1 sample.

The total phenol and flavonoid contents were determined as previously described by Pourmorad, et al.101. To 0,1 g of frozen leaf (Fifth leaf from the top) powder 20 mL of 1% HCL-methanol solution was added to extract the pigments at 4 °C in the dark for 20 min. Total phenol and flavonoids content was determined by absorbance measurements at 280 and 325 nm, respectively.

The Orthogonal Experimental design method was used to determine the number of experiments to be conducted. All the data were subjected to one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA). Duncan's multiple range tests102 was used to test the significant difference between the means at 0.05 significance level using SPSS software (Version 16 SPSS Inc. Chicago, Illinois). The importance of the three factors for the measured parameters was assessed according to the effectiveness of each factor103 by the range value (R) using Excel 365 (v16.0). The most important impact factor has the greatest R-value. Adobe Illustrator software package version 23.0.3 was used to improve the quality of the images.

Artificial light is very important for countries that do not have natural sunlight, especially LED light, because it consumes less electricity, produces less heat, and has a longer lifetime. In our research, we studied the effect of different combinations of light irradiances and qualities with different photoperiods on plant growth parameters, pigments contents, and some antioxidants. The best results were achieved with a mixture of red and blue light and a long photoperiod (either 12 h/12 h or 14 h/10 h light/dark cycles). The variation among the studied parameters underlines the importance of this study to understand which light regime is optimal for growth and development of passion fruit seedlings to balance growth and stress responses.

Winston, C. & Beck, L. Phytochemicals: Health protective effects. Can. J. Diet. Pract. Res. 60, 78 (1999).

Google Scholar

Ali, M. M., Yousef, A. F., Li, B. & Chen, F. Effect of environmental factors on growth and development of fruits. Trop. Plant Biol. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12042-021-09291-6 (2021).

Article Google Scholar

Ali, M. M. et al. Influence of bagging on the development and quality of fruits. Plants 10, 358. https://doi.org/10.3390/plants10020358 (2021).

Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

Zhang, X. et al. Changes in the content of organic acids and expression analysis of citric acid accumulation-related genes during fruit development of yellow (Passiflora edulis f flavicarpa) and Purple (Passiflora edulis f edulis) Passion Fruits. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 22, 5765. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms22115765 (2021).

Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

Knight, R. & Winters, H. in Florida State Horticultural Society. 412–418.

Thokchom, R. & Mandal, G. Production preference and importance of passion fruit (Passiflora edulis): A review. J. Agric. Eng. Food Technol. 4, 27–30 (2017).

Google Scholar

Yeh, N. & Chung, J.-P. High-brightness LEDs—Energy efficient lighting sources and their potential in indoor plant cultivation. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 13, 2175–2180. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2009.01.027 (2009).

Article CAS Google Scholar

Bula, R. J. et al. Light-emitting diodes as a radiation source for plants. HortScience 26, 203–205. https://doi.org/10.21273/HORTSCI.26.2.203 (1991).

Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar

Bourget, C. M. An introduction to light-emitting diodes. HortScience 43, 1944–1946. https://doi.org/10.21273/HORTSCI.43.7.1944 (2008).

Article Google Scholar

Morrow, R. C. LED lighting in horticulture. HortScience 43, 1947–1950. https://doi.org/10.21273/HORTSCI.43.7.1947 (2008).

Article Google Scholar

Brown, C. S., Schuerger, A. C. & Sager, J. C. Growth and photomorphogenesis of pepper plants under red light-emitting diodes with supplemental blue or far-red lighting. J. Am. Soc. Horticult. Sci. 120, 808–813. https://doi.org/10.21273/JASHS.120.5.808 (1995).

Article CAS Google Scholar

Tennessen, D. J., Singsaas, E. L. & Sharkey, T. D. Light-emitting diodes as a light source for photosynthesis research. Photosynth. Res. 39, 85–92. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00027146 (1994).

Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar

Schubert, E. F. & Kim, J. K. Solid-state light sources getting smart. J Science 308, 1274–1278. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1108712 (2005).

Article ADS CAS Google Scholar

Folta, K. M. & Maruhnich, S. A. Green light: a signal to slow down or stop. J. Exp. Bot. 58, 3099–3111. https://doi.org/10.1093/jxb/erm130 (2007).

Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar

Goins, G. D., Yorio, N. C., Sanwo, M. & Brown, C. Photomorphogenesis, photosynthesis, and seed yield of wheat plants grown under red light-emitting diodes (LEDs) with and without supplemental blue lighting. J. Exp. Bot. 48, 1407–1413. https://doi.org/10.1093/jxb/48.7.1407 (1997).

Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar

Kim, H.-H., Goins, G. D., Wheeler, R. M. & Sager, J. C. Stomatal conductance of lettuce grown under or exposed to different light qualities. Ann. Bot. 94, 691–697. https://doi.org/10.1093/aob/mch192 (2004).

Article PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

Xiaoying, L., Shirong, G., Taotao, C., Zhigang, X. & Tezuka, T. Regulation of the growth and photosynthesis of cherry tomato seedlings by different light irradiations of light emitting diodes (LED). Afr. J. Biotech. 11, 6169–6177. https://doi.org/10.5897/AJB11.1191 (2012).

Article CAS Google Scholar

Elmardy, N. A. et al. Photosynthetic performance of rocket (Eruca sativa Mill.) grown under different regimes of light intensity, quality, and photoperiod. PLoS ONE 16, e0257745. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0257745 (2021).

Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

Robertson, J. Combination fluorescent and LED lighting system. (2007).

Robertson, J. J. & Currie, R. M. LED replacement for fluorescent lighting. (2005).

Loconsole, D., Cocetta, G., Santoro, P. & Ferrante, A. Optimization of LED lighting and quality evaluation of romaine lettuce grown in an innovative indoor cultivation system. Sustainability 11, 841. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11030841 (2019).

Article CAS Google Scholar

Borowski, E., Michałek, S., Rubinowska, K., Hawrylak-Nowak, B. & Grudzinski, W. The effects of light quality on photosynthetic parameters and yield of lettuce plants. Acta Sci. Polonorum 14, 177–188 (2015).

Google Scholar

Yan, Z., He, D., Niu, G. & Zhai, H. Evaluation of growth and quality of hydroponic lettuce at harvest as affected by the light intensity, photoperiod and light quality at seedling stage. Sci. Hortic. 248, 138–144. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scienta.2019.01.002 (2019).

Article Google Scholar

Lin, K.-H. et al. The effects of red, blue, and white light-emitting diodes on the growth, development, and edible quality of hydroponically grown lettuce (Lactuca sativa L var capitata). Sc. Horticult. 150, 86–91. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scienta.2012.10.002 (2013).

Article Google Scholar

Fu, Y. et al. Interaction effects of light intensity and nitrogen concentration on growth, photosynthetic characteristics and quality of lettuce (Lactuca sativa L. Var. youmaicai). Sci. Horticult. 214, 51–57. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scienta.2016.11.020 (2017).

Article CAS Google Scholar

Nguyen, T., Tran, T. & Nguyen, Q. Effects of light intensity on the growth, photosynthesis and leaf microstructure of hydroponic cultivated spinach (Spinacia oleracea L.) under a combination of red and blue LEDs in house. Int. J. Agric. Technol. 15, 75–90 (2019).

CAS Google Scholar

Muneer, S., Kim, E. J., Park, J. S. & Lee, J. H. Influence of green, red and blue light emitting diodes on multiprotein complex proteins and photosynthetic activity under different light intensities in lettuce leaves (Lactuca sativa L). Int. J. Mol. Sci. 15, 4657–4670. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms15034657 (2014).

Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

Yousef, A. F. et al. Effects of light spectrum on morpho-physiological traits of grafted tomato seedlings. PLoS ONE 16, e0250210. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0250210 (2021).

Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

Yousef, A. F. et al. Light quality and quantity affect graft union formation of tomato plants. Sci. Rep. 11, 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-88971-5 (2021).

Article CAS Google Scholar

Kang, J. H., KrishnaKumar, S., Atulba, S. L. S., Jeong, B. R. & Hwang, S. J. Light intensity and photoperiod influence the growth and development of hydroponically grown leaf lettuce in a closed-type plant factory system. Horticult. Environ. Biotechnol. 54, 501–509. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13580-013-0109-8 (2013).

Article CAS Google Scholar

Cirillo, V. et al. Anthocyanins are key regulators of drought stress tolerance in tobacco. Biology 10, 139. https://doi.org/10.3390/biology10020139 (2021).

Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

Zhu, H. et al. Effects of low light on photosynthetic properties, antioxidant enzyme activity, and anthocyanin accumulation in purple pak-choi (Brassica campestris ssp. Chinensis Makino). PLoS ONE 12, e0179305. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0179305 (2017).

Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

Mancinelli, A. L., Rossi, F. & Moroni, A. Cryptochrome, phytochrome, and anthocyanin production. Plant Physiol. 96, 1079–1085. https://doi.org/10.1104/pp.96.4.1079 (1991).

Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

Olle, M. & Viršile, A. The effects of light-emitting diode lighting on greenhouse plant growth and quality. Agric. Food Sci. 22, 223–234. https://doi.org/10.23986/afsci.7897 (2013).

Article Google Scholar

Zheng, L., He, H. & Song, W. Application of light-emitting diodes and the effect of light quality on horticultural crops: A review. HortScience 54, 1656–1661. https://doi.org/10.21273/HORTSCI14109-19 (2019).

Article CAS Google Scholar

Berg, J. M., Tymoczko, J. L. & Stryer, L. Biochemistry 5th edn. (WH Freeman, 2002).

Google Scholar

Brodersen, C. R. & Vogelmann, T. C. Do changes in light direction affect absorption profiles in leaves?. Funct. Plant Biol. 37, 403–412 (2010).

Article Google Scholar

Naznin, M. T., Lefsrud, M., Gravel, V. & Azad, M. O. K. Blue light added with Red LEDs enhance growth characteristics, pigments content, and antioxidant capacity in lettuce, spinach, kale, basil, and sweet pepper in a controlled environment. Plants 8, 93. https://doi.org/10.3390/plants8040093 (2019).

Article CAS PubMed Central Google Scholar

Yang, Z. et al. Plant growth and development of pepper seedlings under different photoperiods and photon flux ratios of red and blue LEDs. Trans. Chin. Soc. Agric. Eng. 33, 173–180. https://doi.org/10.11975/j.issn.1002-6819.2017.17.023 (2017).

Article Google Scholar

Yang, X. et al. Response of photosynthetic capacity of tomato leaves to different LED light wavelength. Environ. Exp. Bot. 150, 161–171. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envexpbot.2018.03.013 (2018).

Article CAS Google Scholar

Jeong, H. W. et al. Using light quality for growth control of cucumber seedlings in closed-type plant production system. Plants 9, 639–649. https://doi.org/10.3390/plants9050639 (2020).

Article CAS PubMed Central Google Scholar

Yousef, A. F. et al. Photosynthetic apparatus performance of tomato seedlings grown under various combinations of LED illumination. PLoS ONE 16, e0249373. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0249373 (2021).

Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

XiaoYing, L., ShiRong, G., ZhiGang, X., XueLei, J. & Tezuka, T. Regulation of chloroplast ultrastructure, cross-section anatomy of leaves, and morphology of stomata of cherry tomato by different light irradiations of light-emitting diodes. HortScience 46, 217–221. https://doi.org/10.21273/HORTSCI.46.2.217 (2011).

Article Google Scholar

Curran, P. J., Windham, W. R. & Gholz, H. L. Exploring the relationship between reflectance red edge and chlorophyll concentration in slash pine leaves. Tree Physiol. 15, 203–206. https://doi.org/10.1093/treephys/15.3.203 (1995).

Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar

Gitelson, A. A., Gritz, Y. & Merzlyak, M. N. Relationships between leaf chlorophyll content and spectral reflectance and algorithms for non-destructive chlorophyll assessment in higher plant leaves. J. Plant Physiol. 160, 271–282. https://doi.org/10.1078/0176-1617-00887 (2003).

Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar

Hoffmann, A. M., Noga, G. & Hunsche, M. High blue light improves acclimation and photosynthetic recovery of pepper plants exposed to UV stress. Environ. Exp. Bot. 109, 254–263. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envexpbot.2014.06.017 (2015).

Article CAS Google Scholar

Sæbø, A., Krekling, T. & Appelgren, M. Light quality affects photosynthesis and leaf anatomy of birch plantlets in vitro. Plant Cell, Tissue Organ Cult. 41, 177–185 (1995).

Article Google Scholar

Zheng, L. & Van Labeke, M.-C. Long-term effects of red-and blue-light emitting diodes on leaf anatomy and photosynthetic efficiency of three ornamental pot plants. Front. Plant Sci. 8, 917. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2017.00917 (2017).

Article PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

Yousef, A. F. et al. The influence of LEDs light quality on the growth pigments biochemical and chlorophyll fluorescence characteristics of tomato seedlings (Solanum lycopersicum L.). Fresenius Environ. Bull. 30, 3575–3588 (2021).

CAS Google Scholar

Bondada, B. R. & Syvertsen, J. P. Leaf chlorophyll, net gas exchange and chloroplast ultrastructure in citrus leaves of different nitrogen status. Tree Physiol. 23, 553–559. https://doi.org/10.1093/treephys/23.8.553 (2003).

Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar

McCree, K. J. The action spectrum, absorptance and quantum yield of photosynthesis in crop plants. Agric. Meteorol. 9, 191–216 (1971).

Article Google Scholar

Sager, J., Smith, W., Edwards, J. & Cyr, K. Photosynthetic efficiency and phytochrome photoequilibria determination using spectral data. Trans. ASAE 31, 1882–1889. https://doi.org/10.13031/2013.30952 (1988).

Article Google Scholar

Senger, H. The effect of blue light on plants and microorganisms. Photochem. Photobiol. 35, 911–920 (1982).

Article CAS Google Scholar

Baroli, I., Price, G. D., Badger, M. R. & von Caemmerer, S. The contribution of photosynthesis to the red light response of stomatal conductance. Plant Physiol. 146, 737–747 (2008).

Article CAS Google Scholar

Li, Q. Effects of Light Quality on Growth and Phytochemical Accumulation of Lettuce and Salvia miltiorrhiza Bunge (Northwest A F University, 2010).

Google Scholar

Bugbee, B. in VIII International Symposium on Light in Horticulture 1134 1–12 (2016).

Yun, K., Shaohui, W. & Hongxiang, S. Effects of supplemental lighting with different light quality on the shoot growth of grape growing in greenhouse. J. Beijing Agric. Coll. 21, 23–25 (2006).

Google Scholar

Gupta, D. K., Palma, J. M. & Corpas, F. J. Antioxidants and antioxidant enzymes in higher plants (Springer, 2018).

Book Google Scholar

Hasanuzzaman, M. et al. Regulation of ascorbate-glutathione pathway in mitigating oxidative damage in plants under abiotic stress. Antioxidants 8, 384. https://doi.org/10.3390/antiox8090384 (2019).

Article CAS PubMed Central Google Scholar

Biswas, K. et al. Sustainable Agriculture in the Era of Climate Change 265–292 (Springer, 2020).

Book Google Scholar

Kumar, N., Singh, H. & Sharma, S. K. Sustainable Agriculture in the Era of Climate Change 251–264 (Springer, 2020).

Book Google Scholar

Wu, M.-C. et al. A novel approach of LED light radiation improves the antioxidant activity of pea seedlings. Food Chem. 101, 1753–1758. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodchem.2006.02.010 (2007).

Article CAS Google Scholar

Wang, Y. et al. Effects of different light qualities on seedling growth and chlorophyll fluorescence parameters of Dendrobium officinale. Biologia 72, 735–744. https://doi.org/10.1515/biolog-2017-0081 (2017).

Article CAS Google Scholar

Shohael, A. et al. Effect of light on oxidative stress, secondary metabolites and induction of antioxidant enzymes in Eleutherococcus senticosus somatic embryos in bioreactor. Process Biochem. 41, 1179–1185. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procbio.2005.12.015 (2006).

Article CAS Google Scholar

Cervantes, L. et al. Light exposure affects fruit quality in different strawberry cultivars under field conditions. Sci. Hortic. 252, 291–297. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scienta.2019.03.058 (2019).

Article Google Scholar

Mengxi, L., Zhigang, X., Yang, Y. & Yijie, F. Effects of different spectral lights on Oncidium PLBs induction, proliferation, and plant regeneration. Plant Cell, Tissue Organ Cult. 106, 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11240-010-9887-1 (2011).

Article Google Scholar

Foyer, C. H., Lelandais, M. & Kunert, K. J. Photooxidative stress in plants. Physiol. Plant. 92, 696–717. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1399-3054.1994.tb03042.x (1994).

Article CAS Google Scholar

Molassiotis, A., Dimassi, K., Diamantidis, G. & Therios, I. Changes in peroxidases and catalase activity during in vitro rooting. Biol. Plant. 48, 1–5. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:BIOP.0000024267.68394.96 (2004).

Article CAS Google Scholar

Pastori, G. M. & del Río, L. A. Natural senescence of pea leaves (an activated oxygen-mediated function for peroxisomes). Plant Physiol. 113, 411–418. https://doi.org/10.1104/pp.113.2.411 (1997).

Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

Dewir, Y., Chakrabarty, D., Ali, M., Hahn, E. & Paek, K. Lipid peroxidation and antioxidant enzyme activities of Euphorbia millii hyperhydric shoots. Environ. Exp. Bot. 58, 93–99. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envexpbot.2005.06.019 (2006).

Article CAS Google Scholar

Wu, H. Effect of different light qualities on growth, pigment content, chlorophyll fluorescence, and antioxidant enzyme activity in the red alga Pyropia haitanensis (Bangiales, Rhodophyta). Biomed. Res. Int. 2016, 7383918. https://doi.org/10.1155/2016/7383918 (2016).

Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

Xu, J. et al. Response of bioactive phytochemicals in vegetables and fruits to environmental factors. Eur. J. Nutr. Food Saf. https://doi.org/10.9734/ejnfs/2019/v9i330062 (2019).

Article Google Scholar

Sharma, A. et al. Response of phenylpropanoid pathway and the role of polyphenols in plants under abiotic stress. Molecules 24, 2452. https://doi.org/10.3390/molecules24132452 (2019).

Article CAS Google Scholar

Tuladhar, P., Sasidharan, S. & Saudagar, P. in Biocontrol Agents and Secondary Metabolites 419–441 (2021).

Acharya, J., Rechner, O., Neugart, S., Schreiner, M. & Poehling, H.-M. Effects of light-emitting diode treatments on Brevicoryne brassicae performance mediated by secondary metabolites in Brussels sprouts. J. Plant Dis. Protect. 123, 321–330. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41348-016-0029-9 (2016).

Article Google Scholar

Nam, T. G., Kim, D.-O. & Eom, S. H. Effects of light sources on major flavonoids and antioxidant activity in common buckwheat sprouts. Food Sci. Biotechnol. 27, 169–176. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10068-017-0204-1 (2018).

Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar

Taulavuori, K., Pyysalo, A., Taulavuori, E. & Julkunen-Tiitto, R. Responses of phenolic acid and flavonoid synthesis to blue and blue-violet light depends on plant species. Environ. Exp. Bot. 150, 183–187. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envexpbot.2018.03.016 (2018).

Article CAS Google Scholar

Kim, E.-Y., Park, S.-A., Park, B.-J., Lee, Y. & Oh, M.-M. Growth and antioxidant phenolic compounds in cherry tomato seedlings grown under monochromatic light-emitting diodes. Horticult. Environ. Biotechnol. 55, 506–513. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13580-014-0121-7 (2014).

Article CAS Google Scholar

Wang, P. et al. Exploration of the effects of different blue LED light intensities on flavonoid and lipid metabolism in tea plants via transcriptomics and metabolomics. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 21, 4606. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms21134606 (2020).

Article CAS PubMed Central Google Scholar

Amoozgar, A., Mohammadi, A. & Sabzalian, M. Impact of light-emitting diode irradiation on photosynthesis, phytochemical composition and mineral element content of lettuce cv, Grizzly. Photosynthetica 55, 85–95. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11099-016-0216-8 (2017).

Article CAS Google Scholar

Loi, M. et al. Effect of different light-emitting diode (LED) irradiation on the shelf life and phytonutrient content of broccoli (Brassica oleracea L. var. italica). Food Chem. 283, 206–214. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodchem.2019.01.021 (2019).

Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar

Wilawan, N., Ngamwonglumlert, L., Devahastin, S. & Chiewchan, N. Changes in enzyme activities and amino acids and their relations with phenolic compounds contents in okra treated by LED lights of different colors. Food Bioprocess Technol. 12, 1945–1954. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11947-019-02359-y (2019).

Article CAS Google Scholar

Ahn, S., Kim, S. & Yun, H. Inhibition of Botrytis cinerea and accumulation of stilbene compounds by light-emitting diodes of grapevine leaves and differential expression of defense-related genes. Eur. J. Plant Pathol. 143, 753–765. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10658-015-0725-5 (2015).

Article CAS Google Scholar

Gam, D. T. et al. LED lights promote growth and flavonoid accumulation of anoectochilus roxburghii and are linked to the enhanced expression of several related genes. Plants 9, 1344. https://doi.org/10.3390/plants9101344 (2020).

Article CAS PubMed Central Google Scholar

Gupta, S. D. & Pradhan, S. Regulation of gene expression by LED lighting. Light Emit. Diodes Agric. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-5807-3_10 (2017).

Article Google Scholar

Liu, J., Osbourn, A. & Ma, P. MYB transcription factors as regulators of phenylpropanoid metabolism in plants. Mol. Plant 8, 689–708. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.molp.2015.03.012 (2015).

Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar

Huang, J. Y., Xu, F. & Zhou, W. Effect of LED irradiation on the ripening and nutritional quality of postharvest banana fruit. J. Sci. Food Agric. 98, 5486–5493. https://doi.org/10.1002/jsfa.9093 (2018).

Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar

Ouzounis, T., Razi Parjikolaei, B., Fretté, X., Rosenqvist, E. & Ottosen, C.-O. Predawn and high intensity application of supplemental blue light decreases the quantum yield of PSII and enhances the amount of phenolic acids, flavonoids, and pigments in Lactuca sativa. Front. Plant 6, 19. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2015.00019 (2015).

Article Google Scholar

Samuolienė, G. et al. Blue light dosage affects carotenoids and tocopherols in microgreens. Food Chem. 228, 50–56. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodchem.2017.01.144 (2017).

Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar

Taulavuori, K., Hyöky, V., Oksanen, J., Taulavuori, E. & Julkunen-Tiitto, R. Species-specific differences in synthesis of flavonoids and phenolic acids under increasing periods of enhanced blue light. Environ. Exp. Bot. 121, 145–150. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envexpbot.2015.04.002 (2016).

Article CAS Google Scholar

Maroga, G. M., Soundy, P. & Sivakumar, D. Different postharvest responses of fresh-cut sweet peppers related to quality and antioxidant and phenylalanine ammonia lyase activities during exposure to light-emitting diode treatments. Foods 8, 359. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods8090359 (2019).

Article CAS PubMed Central Google Scholar

Son, K.-H. & Oh, M.-M. Leaf shape, growth, and antioxidant phenolic compounds of two lettuce cultivars grown under various combinations of blue and red light-emitting diodes. HortScience 48, 988–995. https://doi.org/10.21273/HORTSCI.48.8.988 (2013).

Article ADS Google Scholar

Loi, M., Villani, A., Paciolla, F., Mulè, G. & Paciolla, C. Challenges and opportunities of light-emitting diode (LED) as key to modulate antioxidant compounds in plants. A review. Antioxidants 10, 42. https://doi.org/10.3390/antiox10010042 (2021).

Article CAS Google Scholar

Knight, S. & Mitchell, C. Enhancement of lettuce yield by manipulation of light and nitrogen nutrition. HortScience: a publication of the American Society for Horticultural Science 108, 750–754 (1983).

Cao, J.-K., Jiang, W.-B. & Zhao, Y.-M. Experimental Guide for Physiology and Biochemistry of Post-Harvest Fruits and Vegetables (China Light Industry Press, 2007).

Google Scholar

Rao, K. M. & Sresty, T. Antioxidative parameters in the seedlings of pigeonpea (Cajanus cajan (L.) Millspaugh) in response to Zn and Ni stresses. Plant Sci. 157, 113–128. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0168-9452(00)00273-9 (2000).

Article Google Scholar

García-Triana, A., Zenteno-Savín, T., Peregrino-Uriarte, A. B. & Yepiz-Plascencia, G. Hypoxia, reoxygenation and cytosolic manganese superoxide dismutase (cMnSOD) silencing in Litopenaeus vannamei: effects on cMnSOD transcripts, superoxide dismutase activity and superoxide anion production capacity. Dev. Comp. Immunol. 34, 1230–1235. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dci.2010.06.018 (2010).

Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar

Nakano, Y. & Asada, K. Hydrogen peroxide is scavenged by ascorbate-specific peroxidase in spinach chloroplasts. Plant Cell Physiol. 22, 867–880. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.pcp.a076232 (1981).

Article CAS Google Scholar

Wang, L. et al. Regulation of POD activity by pelargonidin during vegetative growth in radish (Raphanus sativus L.). Sci. Horticult. 174, 105–111. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scienta.2014.05.014 (2014).

Article CAS Google Scholar

Aebi, H. Catalase in vitro. Methods Enzymol 105, 121–126. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0076-6879(84)05016-3 (1984).

Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar

Pourmorad, F., Hosseinimehr, S. & Shahabimajd, N. Antioxidant activity, phenol and flavonoid contents of some selected Iranian medicinal plants. Afr. J. Biotech. 5, 1142–1145 (2006).

CAS Google Scholar

Duncan, D. B. Multiple range and multiple F tests. J. Biometr. 11, 1–42. https://doi.org/10.2307/3001478 (1955).

Article MathSciNet Google Scholar

Roy, R. A Primer on Taguchi Method (Van Noshtrand Reinhold Int. Co., Ltd., 1990).

MATH Google Scholar

Download references

This research was supported by the projects of Fujian Public Welfare Scientific Research Institute (grant number 2019R1028-7) and Fujian Academy of Agricultural Sciences (grant number DKBF2021-06).

These authors contributed equally: Dangdi Liang and Ahmed Fathy Yousef.

College of Horticulture, Fujian Agriculture and Forestry University, Fuzhou, 350002, China

Dangdi Liang, Ahmed Fathy Yousef, Muhammad Moaaz Ali, Weijun Yu, Liuqing Yang, Ralf Oelmüller & Faxing Chen

Fruit Research Institute, Fujian Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Fuzhou, 350013, China

Dangdi Liang & Xiaoxia Wei

Department of Horticulture, College of Agriculture, University of Al-Azhar (Branch Assiut), Assiut, 71524, Egypt

Ahmed Fathy Yousef

Matthias Schleiden Institute, Plant Physiology, Friedrich-Schiller-University Jena, Dornburgerstr. 159, 07743, Jena, Germany

Ralf Oelmüller

You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

D.L., A.F.Y., R.O. and C.F. conceived and designed the research; D.L., L.Y. and A.F.Y. conducted experiments; D.L., W.Y., and A.F.Y. analyzed data and wrote the manuscript; X.W., M.M.A. and R.O. modified the manuscript.

Correspondence to Xiaoxia Wei.

The authors declare no competing interests.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.

Reprints and permissions

Liang, D., Yousef, A.F., Wei, X. et al. Increasing the performance of Passion fruit (Passiflora edulis) seedlings by LED light regimes. Sci Rep 11, 20967 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-00103-1

Download citation

Received: 05 June 2021

Accepted: 06 October 2021

Published: 25 October 2021

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-00103-1

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

Environmental Science and Pollution Research (2024)

Scientific Reports (2023)

Erwerbs-Obstbau (2023)

Scientific Reports (2022)