MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Effect of Spectral Ranges on Growth and Yield in Vertical Hydroponic-Aeroponic Hybrid Grow Systems for Radishes and Turnips

2025· preprint· en· W4409711442 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Adia Shadd, Nima Asgari, Joshua M. Pearce

Bibliographic record

VenuePreprints.org · 2025
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicGreenhouse Technology and Climate Control
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsYield (engineering)Environmental scienceMaterials scienceMetallurgy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As climate change destabilizes food crop production there is a growing interest in controlled environment agriculture (CEA). Although light-emitting diodes (LED) have made CEA economic for some high value crops when coupled to agrivoltaics (solar photovoltaics + agriculture), it has generally not been used for root vegetables. This is the first study to demonstrate radishes and turnips could be successfully grown in an agrivoltaic agrotunnel using both lighting and grow walls optimized for lettuce growth. As reductions in LED energy use is important for this type of CEA to minimize capital costs for solar, this study investigated three lighting treatments (red (620-700nm), white (425-650nm), and full spectrum (425-750nm)). The normalized yields showed that both cultivars preferred red light and harvested green leaves provided higher crop masses than the roots, although turnips appeared to be far more adaptable to vertical growth than radishes. The results here show promise for providing true net zero carbon emission root vegetables year round in northern climates with agrivoltaics agrotunnel or similar solar-powered CEA. Future work is needed to optimize the grow walls with larger ports to allow hybrid aeroponic-hydroponic growth of these root crops as well as further work with light intensity trials to optimize light recipes.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.172
Threshold uncertainty score0.630

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.044
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.237 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePreprints.orgSame topicGreenhouse Technology and Climate ControlFrench-language works237,207