Next Article in Journal
Proton Nuclear Magnetic Resonance (1H NMR) Metabolic Profiles Discriminate Two Monovarietal Extra Virgin Olive Oils, Cultivars Arbequina and Koroneiki, with Different Geographical Origin
Previous Article in Journal
Hedypnois cretica L. and Urospermum picroides L. Plant Growth, Nutrient Status and Quality Characteristics under Salinity Stress
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Horticulturae
Volume 9
Issue 1
10.3390/horticulturae9010063
horticulturae-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Review

Role of Spectrum-Light on Productivity, and Plant Quality over Vertical Farming Systems: Bibliometric Analysis

by
Cinthia Nájera
1,2,*,
Victor M. Gallegos-Cedillo
3,4,
Margarita Ros
2 and
José Antonio Pascual
2
1
Department of Agronomy, University of Almería, 04120 Almería, Spain
2
Department of Soil and Water Conservation and Organic Wastes Management, CEBAS-CSIC, 30100 Murcia, Spain
3
Department of Engineering, CIAIMBITAL Research Centre, University of Almería, 04120 Almería, Spain
4
Department of Agronomical Engineering, Technical University of Cartagena, 30203 Cartagena, Spain
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Horticulturae 2023, 9(1), 63; https://doi.org/10.3390/horticulturae9010063
Submission received: 8 November 2022 / Revised: 24 December 2022 / Accepted: 30 December 2022 / Published: 5 January 2023
Browse Figures
Review Reports Versions Notes

Abstract

:
The growing demands for food with high quality standards and high nutritional value have caused agriculture to evolve towards agricultural innovation go hand in hand with technological development, as is the case of vertical farming (VF) development. VF is a competitive system for sustainable food production, reducing space, and natural and human resources for agricultural production, and it is a system that can be developed anywhere in the world and at any time, without seasonality being a factor that influences production. Light is the most important factor to consider when it comes to vertical farming, replacing sunlight with artificial light has had great advances in improving productivity, especially when using LED lighting. Despite the exponential growth of the system, there is a paucity of analysis on the research that has been carried out to date using a VF system, and on information on the most relevant parameters to be considered for optimum production. This review is a bibliometric analysis of 318 scientific articles taken from the SCOPUS database, where information from 109 papers published in relevant journals was used. During the last 10 years, the number of publications that have been carried out in a VF system has increased by 195%, with China standing out as the geographical location where field experiments are carried out. Lettuce crop predominates in the investigations, with a light intensity of 200 μmol∙m−2∙s−1 and with a photoperiod of 16 h·day−1, using spectra between 450 and 495 nm, and a combination of blue and red (450–495 and 620–750 nm). The use of the research in the VF system for fresh, quality, local produce has increased in recent years, and has proven to be highly effective in productivity and quality. Conditions and management have been generalized, with more than 50% of researchers deciding to perform this cultivation method with similar photoperiod, spectrum, and intensity. Among the conclusions obtained by each researcher, it is also agreed that it is a potentially sustainable and controllable system that can be developed in urban locations, benefiting the social economy, food security, and the environment, while the conclusions on the cent per cent utilization of natural resources (such as energy from sunlight) in the system remain open and improving.

1. Introduction

The constant threats of future food shortages as a result of the forecast increase in world population by 2050 (9 billion people), the loss of arable land area [1], or the increasing scarcity of natural resources, such as water [1,2], among other global issues closely interrelated, become worrisome. For this reason, alternatives have been sought to increase food production and also to ensure that the products have a high nutraceutical quality, nowadays demanded by consumers [3]. Technological innovation such as VF has changed the agriculture that is being produced in a traditional (open) way to be produced in closed and controlled (indoor) structures, where such change, is intended to be environmental and not genetic [4]. The construction of spaces for controlled indoor agriculture has a great competitive and comparative advantage over open agriculture. Vertical farming (VF) has the great potential to improve crops that can be produced locally, having fresh produce, without additives to increase long life and quality vegetables, eliminating food waste.
Kozai [5] described VF as “A multilayer indoor plant production system in which all growth factors, such as light, temperature, humidity, CO2 concentration (CO2), water, and nutrients, are precisely controlled to produce high quantities of high-quality fresh produce year-round, completely independent of solar light and other outdoor conditions”. Beacham et al. [6] remarked to the VF term has come to have a wide range of definitions that can provide confusion, although this system shares the same purpose, which is to reduce the use of traditional agricultural land incorporating soilless culture systems. It is particularly attractive for use in urban areas, as it is cultivated upwards rather than outwards. The origins of the VF date back to 600 BC with the construction of the Hanging Gardens of Babylon [7], the Chinese Floating Gardens in the fourth century, and the construction of the Aztec Chinampas in the twelfth century [8], which in its structure governed the optimization of natural resources and the use of urban spaces where successful obtained different vegetables for local production [9]. So, the VF system is not new, however, over the last few years, it has changed and improved its structure, its operation, and purpose [6,9].
Al-Kodmany [10] described these new systems as productive, economic, social, and environmentally advantageous because it includes: a reduction of food transportation, reduction of water and fertilizer consumption with the use of recirculation techniques, better plant pest and disease control, permitting the elimination or a maximum reduction of pesticides, no loss of production (caused by floods, droughts, and seasonal changes), local job creation, use and exploitation of renewable energies, and the reuse of buildings or use of buildings in the case of large cities. Despite these advantages, when comparing the indoor system with greenhouse production, energy consumption in indoor agriculture is higher, because the only source of light is through lamps that are supplied with electricity [11].
In Europe, the term “plant factories” has not been well adopted, as the term vertical farming has been preferred due to the description and characteristics that this system encompasses. This preference is cultural and may be because consumers and farmers themselves relate the word “factory” to a system of industrial pollution [12].
Vertical farming is increasingly becoming a necessity for agriculture, due to population growth, lack of agricultural space, and reduction of natural resources [9]. This technology has also demonstrated that it may be able to increase yields [13,14] and guarantee year-round production [5], e.g., the production of saffron bulbs [15], bell pepper [16,17], tomato [18], cucumber [19] and strawberry [20,21], which are crops of great economic and commercial interest worldwide; increase compounds naturally [22], and even increase plant defenses against pests and diseases thanks to the activation of genes or proteins produced by artificial light within the VF [23].
VF maximizes plant growth and increases vegetable consumption in winter, in northern European countries, America and China, where natural solar radiation is not sufficient. In addition, from the environmental point of view reducing the pollution emitted by transportation is a good reason for increasing production through VF, which reduces resources and pollution. It is estimated that, in the USA, for example, food from a supermarket travels 2000 km on average [24] without including the environmental costs to be assumed when the products need to be cooled during transportation in terms of generated CO2 equivalent gas emissions.
There are some parameters to consider in VF agriculture focused on lighting that can affect plant production, such as light intensity, electromagnetic spectrum, photoperiod, photosynthetically active radiation (PAR) or daily light integral (DLI) (Table 1), and others that measure, plant production and productivity such as photosynthesis, Leaf Area (LA), plant productivity and Total Dry Matter (TDM) (Table 2).
Attending to reproduce the sunlight according to the spectrum, it has been different approaches since it was VF started. There is a record of research by Mangon [43], who used incandescent lighting in 1861 [44], Siemens [45] used coal-generated lighting in 1880, whose effectiveness was also analyzed from an economic point of view; and in 1985, Murdoch [46] used mercury vapor lamps as a light source, with fluorescent and high-pressure sodium lights being the standard lighting for many years. It was not until the 1990s that research began with light-emitting diodes (LEDs) for plant growth in the United States of America (USA) [47,48]. This caused a technological revolution due to its differences with respect to the previous lamps since LEDs are formed by the electroluminescence of the material when it is subjected to voltage. Currently, it was modified by adding one or more organic electrodes and gave rise to OLEDs (Organic light-emitting diodes) [49]. Both systems are sustainable and highly energy-efficient. These advances offer great opportunities in agriculture, as they have independent diode control allowing them to combine specific spectral composition with high light output at a low radiant temperature [47]. The vertical farming system is promising; however, it requires a significant economic investment in terms of electricity consumption and labor. Improvements are being sought to reduce these costs and even specific crops of higher market value have been identified to make the system competitive and profitable [50]. For example, short-cycle cultivation of sprouts or microgreens, whose, global economic value will increase by 175% from 2021 to 2030 [51], as well as linking other factors, such as renewable energy and waste heat reuse, is needed to further reduce system costs [52].
Currently, there are an increasing number of scientific experiments of production in VF systems that can be modified depending on the needs and objectives sought, obtaining yields equal to or greater than conventional production systems, with a higher content of bioactive compounds beneficial to health, e.g., to fruit (raspberry, camu-camu, tomato, and hot pepper) with a positive outcome effect in phenolics, anthocyanins, or ascorbic acid [53,54,55,56] and vegetables (tarragon, garlic, and broccoli) with a positive effect in carotenoids, polyphenols, ascorbic acid and phenolics [57,58,59], which are highly valued by consumers, as these compounds can reduce the risk of contracting chronic diseases [60]. From an ecological point of view, the increase in production in this system means an increase in demand for 0 km food, also benefiting food safety by having a more exhaustive environmental control.
This work aims to carry out a global bibliometric analysis of the current panorama and the prospects of the VF production system focusing on light as a potential tool to increase the productivity and bioactive compounds of grown plants.

2. Materials and Methods

A bibliometric analysis is carried out using the SCOPUS database to determine the evolution and development of vertical farming up to the present time, with the aim of providing guidance on the interest this system is taking in the scientific field. The work ends with an analysis of the results published by more than one hundred current research studies, showing the cultivation conditions, results obtained, and the most important conclusions of the use of the VF system.
The intelligent tools of Scopus and Boolean (AND, OR, and NOT) were used to review and analyzed the data for the period 2008–2022 in the Scopus database. The descriptor used as the central axis of the research was “Vertical farming” in the search field ‘Article title, Abstract, and Keywords’, and a total of 381 articles and 1578 keywords were obtained.
To visualize the research themes, the data were processed and mathematically analyzed using the clustering algorithm of the VOSviewer® software version 1.6.15 was used to produce a bibliometric map based on the keyword co-occurrence ratio and the similarity index [61]. The unit of analysis was considered as the set of keywords including author keywords and indexed keywords, establishing a keyword frequency equal to or greater than 8 (the number of times a keyword appears in the selected publications) according to the criteria established by Chen et al. [62]. As well as another overlay visualization map was performed to identify the most current trends of the keywords used in the set of articles analyzed in this study. To avoid repeated words or synonyms, a thesaurus file was made to increase confidence in the results.
A total sample of 381 articles was obtained from the search and a representative sample of 109 more current articles (2018–2022) was extracted and thoroughly analyzed in detail to collect data of interest exposing the importance of VF characteristics, including light, as a potential tool to increase the productivity of plants with a significant sample of horticultural, aromatic, and ornamental species. The number of data varies depending on the parameter and is specified in each case as n. The following were the main data considered of interest: the plant species studied, the growing medium, the growing method, the spectrum, the light intensity, the photoperiod, and the integral daily light (DLI). A short description of the studies with the characteristics of each crop and its efficacy is shown in Table 3.

3. Results and Discussion

3.1. Bibliometric Study: Clustering

Our network visualization map shows the 43 main descriptors used as keywords in the set of publications analyzed in this study (Figure 1). The different items were grouped into five clusters, represented by different colors on the map. Each cluster shows a set of closely related words from the same field of research. According to Chen et al. [62], who conducted a bibliometric study based on keyword analysis, cluster size, and number may indicate variations in lines of research. The keywords that stand out most in the network visualization map, due to their high occurrences and total link strength are vertical farming, crop production, agriculture, and urban agriculture, which highlight the main research topics in the studies due to their close relationship with the different lines of agricultural research. Furthermore, within the study period, the map shows a line of research with 10 items (cluster 1, red) that includes studies related to vertical farming, crop production, control environment agriculture, plant factory, led, photosynthesis energy efficiency, carbon dioxide, and greenhouse. Cluster 1 stands out for encompassing the current research trends in the agricultural sciences. The overlay visualization map (Figure 2) shows the evolution of keywords used to describe the main content of a research study, with the most recent and relevant terms, highlighted in yellow. These keywords are: Smart farming, Smart agricultures, Internet of Things, nutrients, decision making, humans, vegetables, control environment agriculture, environmental impact, and artificial intelligent.

3.2. Development of VF Systems

Agriculture has undergone several technological changes over the years, which have improved the agricultural systems, and the VF system has adapted these technologies to its benefit (Figure 3). The use of VF in scientific research to demonstrate their benefits shows a positive exponential trend (R2 = 0.97) (Figure 4) indicating an increase of more than 195% in the number of articles published from 2008 to 2021. This increase may be due to the VF system being in synchrony with current sustainable production strategies and global development pacts to increase production efficiency and sustainability on the part of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO). The countries of higher research on VF are led by China (around 27.5% of the total), followed by Japan (24.8%), Korea (18.1%), and the USA (10.4%) (Figure 5), (also see Supplementary Material, Table S1). This may be due to the great interest on the part of developed countries to be at the forefront of innovations and technologies, being these countries among the most developed according to FAOSTAT [63] by their Gross Domestic Product.

3.3. Characteristics of VF Systems

3.3.1. Methods and Culture Media

The limited space in the VF systems and the small amount of soil or substrate to be used has been reflected as an important advantage, opting for more sustainable and innovative cultivation methods. The articles analyzed in this work have used different types of culture media and culture systems (Figure 6A,B and see Supplementary Material, Table S1). The most growing media used is nutrient solutions (49%) followed by commercial substrate mixtures composed of peat moss, perlite, sand, vermiculite, coir, pumice stone, and pine bark (15%). In addition, the use of compost as an alternative substrate is gaining relevance in VF systems (4%), probably due to the different benefits on crop productivity and disease suppressive effects [64,65]. Wahome et al. [66] tested the effects of different hydroponics systems and growing media (vermiculite, sawdust, and river sand) on the vegetative growth of Gypsophila, and it was concluded that the highest plant height was obtained from plants grown in vermiculite, but the highest number of shoots/plant and cut flower stem length was obtained with sawdust, moreover the plants were grown using bag culture hydroponics system. Khandaker and Kotzen [67] studied vegetables (lettuce, basil, spinach, chicory, asparagus, mint, and tomato) with different substrates in vertical farming. better plant height results were obtained using mineral wool and vermiculite (14.7 and 13.7 cm, respectively) compared to coir substrate and pond algae (5 and 6 cm, respectively).
On the other hand, soilless cultivation or hydroponics is the most used cultivation system in VF systems probably because it is a clean cultivation system, with zero residues in closed systems and because it allows a better adjustment of crop nutrition parameters, and the efficiency of water and nutrient use is higher per production cycle compared to other systems [68]. Frasetya et al. [69] showed that Nutrient Film Technique (NFT) hydroponic systems were 6–10% more efficient on lettuce growth compared to the floating system and deep flow technique system. Santos et al. [70] showed that Deep Flow Technique (DFT) or NFT hydroponic system does not cause significant changes in basil growth under saline stress (Supplementary Material, Table S1). These systems in VF seek to reduce damage to biodiversity through methods that allow efficient and respectful productivity of natural resources such as soil and water.

3.3.2. Cultivated Plant Species

Figure 7 shows the wide diversity of species cultivated in the VF system, with leaf crops being the most cultivated species, among which lettuce stands out as the model crop with more than 28%, followed by cabbage (7.5%) and basil (5.9%). Lettuce does not use large spaces and is tolerant to salinity [71] and light stresses [72]. Data from FAOSTAT [63] shows that the lettuce crop is one of the most stable and constant with respect to production and harvested area worldwide. For example, in the period from 2015 to 2020, there was 1.2 million cultivated hectares with 27 billion tons of fresh product worldwide. This fact, further it is worldwide spread, attracts interest in studying the cultivation of lettuce in indoor cropping systems. The use of VF for vegetables has also shown interest in various non-horticultural cultivars. Table 3 shows that in recent years this system has been used to study more than 40 species, obtaining as results improvements in productivity, and even identifying the physiological responses of the crops with the light stress supplied.

3.4. Effect of Light in VF on Productivity, Quality, and Nutraceutical Values

3.4.1. Light Spectrum

Regarding the effect of spectrum in agronomy, the first scientific work was done in 1843 by John Draper [73], however, the increase in the number of publications on this subject has been reflected from 2010 onwards with a greater combination of spectrum colors and using LEDs of a specific spectrum. Figure 8 shows the wide diversity of spectra used in the investigations, where the specific spectrum-LED peak [450 nm (blue color)] was the most used (27%), followed by the combination of red + blue spectra [450–495 nm (blue) and 620–700 nm (red)] with 20%, the combined spectra red + white (11.8%) and red + blue + green (just over 10%). It can also be observed that there is still interest in evaluating other spectral combinations and their effect on crop growth and development (less than 10%), probably because of accelerated growth in VF systems and the improved quality of LED light implemented in the horticultural sector [74].
Table 3 and Supplementary Material shows some results about the types of lamps with the specific spectrum (lights red (R), blue (B), white (W), far red (FR), green (G), UVA, individual or combined) that have been used in different crops, and the effect in their productivity and antioxidant compounds. In basil cultivation, for example, Larsen et al. [75] or Pennisi et al. [76,77] studied spectral combinations that benefit growth (W/R) and phytochemical accumulation (R/W; G/R/W/B). For cabbage He et al. [78] found that the R/B/W/FR/UVA combination improved plant morphology and increased antioxidant compounds, compared to those growths without UVA light; Dou et al. [79] similarly obtained positive effects on phytochemical accumulation with a R/W/G spectral combination for basil, mustard, and kale crops, compared to those grown without the inclusion of G spectrum. Most of these spectral combinations are already given by default by the lamp manufactured (Supplementary Material, Table S1), and others are combined by researchers to see the effect on some parameters of interest.
Rihan et al. [80] in lemon balm plants obtained a positive effect on growth and yield with a value of 435 nm on photosynthetic activity, achieving this peak with the LED (B/G/R) combination. Combinations of spectra adding FR in lettuce cultivation have benefited weight gain [81]. The use of W/B spectra resulted in higher content of pigments, anthocyanins, vitamins C and A, phenolics, and total flavonoids in two lettuce cultivars (Yanzhi and Red Butter) [82]. For strawberry, most combinations were R/W which improved fruit development and propagation [21,83,84]. The positive effects of the red spectrum on plants are likely due to the fact that it coincides with the maximum absorption peak of the photosynthetic response recorded by McCree [28].

3.4.2. Light Intensity

The most used light intensity in VF is 100, 150, and 200 µmol∙m−2·s−1 (Figure 9). When growing plants in VF, the aim is to simulate natural conditions light being one of the limiting resources in this system; therefore, light adaptation has been sought to efficiently optimize light, so studies are conducted with varying levels of intensity to test the effectiveness in different crops to increase the uniformity of leaf reflectance and avoid a lack of light or, on the contrary, light stress. The combined effect of photoperiod and intensity (PPFD) are parameters used to regulate plant growth and quality [85,86]. Low PPDF is associated with decreased plant quality [87]. In this sense, the optimal combination of PPFD, photoperiod, and spectrum quality can optimize energy use and plant quality [88]. In lettuce cultivation, Kim et al. [89] obtained adequate productivity with a PPFD 360 μmol∙m−2∙s−1. However, in cucumber, an optimum PPFD was 110 to 125 μmol∙m−2·s−1 [19]. When plants have light needs, they tend to elongate to look for the necessary light on their own, which may explain the growth of stems and higher production. Simultaneously, insufficient light exposure stops the chlorophyll from working at peak performance, causing, leaves become yellow and died. Zou et al. [90] mentioned that spinach grown under an intensity of 150 μmol∙m−2∙s−1 is optimal to obtain better quality plants. In strawberry cultivation, Maeda and Ito [91] have found that illumination conditions of 300 μmol∙m−2∙s−1 higher anthocyanins are produced as a response to light stress protection [92], so perhaps 300 μmol∙m−2∙s−1 is a high value for strawberries crop, but that also provides additional nutritional value.
Therefore, depending on the species and the objectives to be achieved, the illumination conditions should be optimized, considering that the results obtained in this work had an adequate response between the range of 100 to 300 μmol∙m−2∙s−1 for the studied species.

3.4.3. Photoperiod

There is a fundamental relationship between photoperiod and the produce enough photosynthate to plant development, especially for bloom [93]. The photoperiod varies according to the cultivars and the group to which it belongs, whether it is a short or long day. Therefore, finding the appropriate photoperiod is simple if we know the type of crop to study; however, this can be lengthened or shortened if the amount of light is modified, and thus find a balance between the light needed for the plants and saving electricity. The most frequently analyzed photoperiods in vertical farming were of 16 and 12 h light day, 50 and 20%, respectively, of the consulted studies (Figure 10).
The most frequent use of these photoperiods may be due to the fact that is the time necessary for plant metabolism to maximize photosynthesis and produce sucrose and star synthesis [94]. Previous research suggests that an increase in dry weight showed positive relationships with photoperiod increased from 12 to 20 h·day−1) in lettuce plants [95]. On the other hand, Ji et al. [96] found that the increase of photoperiod from 12 to 16 h·day−1, significantly increased the plant height, stem diameter, and leaf area in three cucumber cultivars. Also, Yan et al. [86] observed an increase in cellulose content and improved mechanical strength at transplanting on cucumber plants subjected to a long photoperiod (16 to 20 h·day−1). In crops such as watercress, Lam et al. [97] found that 20 h·day−1 could increase plant biomass. However, in spinach, Zou et al. [90] showed that 9 h·day−1 was sufficient to obtain higher quality plants.

3.4.4. Daily Light Integral (DLI)

One of the strategies to improve the productivity of a cultivation system with artificial lighting is through the optimization of the daily light integral (DLI). The most used range of DLI (more than 20%) for crops grown in artificially illuminated systems were 8.5 and 11.5 mol∙m−2·day−1 (Figure 11). These ranges are the result of the PPFD, and photoperiod used in the research and be adjusted to the crop and its age. Many experiments have evaluated the effect of different levels of DLI on growth, development, and plant quality on a wide range of crops [98,99] and the effect on consumption and energy-use efficiency in artificial lighting environment systems [100,101], where PPFD increased, but photoperiod is decreased or vice versa. Strawberry cultivation has been studied by Zheng et al. [84], where they concluded that a DLI between 11.5 and 17.3 mol∙m−2·day−1 helps the early propagation of plants because it is probably the right light intensity value and photoperiod value for the crop. Yan et al. [86] showed in hydroponic lettuce, with a DLI of 12.6 mol∙m−2·day−1 energy savings and carbohydrate accumulation; however, this value can be increased up to 14.4 mol∙m−2·day−1 and have a similar positive response in lettuce and chicory crops, with the increase of the amount of illumination in the plants [77]. Therefore, this parameter can help archive a reduction in energy consumption that is being demanded worldwide using the vertical farming system.
Table
Table 3. Light and spectral characteristics of crops produced in vertical farming system and the effects produced.
Table 3. Light and spectral characteristics of crops produced in vertical farming system and the effects produced.
CropVarietyLamp TypePPFD (μmol∙m−2·s−1)Hours Per Day (h·day−1)Best ResultsReference
Amaranth
(Amaranthus cruentus)		Three-color cv. Red AztecLED R/B18016Higher blue light, higher phenolic compounds.
Chlorophyll decreases with R/B ratio 1:9.		Bantis [102]
Arabidopsis
(Arabidopsis thaliana)		*LED R/G/B14016Red or blue light alone, they had opposite effects on tested parameters, but when of green light was mixed, mediate the effects caused, benefiting growth.Zou et al. [90]
Asparagus
(Asparagus aethiopicus)		AethiopicusLED B/R*8Blue-red light combination improves yield by 1.5:1 ratio.Rihan et al. [103]
Basil
(Ocimum basilicum) 		Dolly
Emily		LED W/R; B150; 30016; 18The plant fresh mass did not respond to the blue light while plant dry matter content was reduced at the combination high fraction of blue and a high PPFD.Larsen et al. [75]
Genovese LED R/B215; 25016Best growth with light intensity 250 μmol·m−2·s−1.Pennisi et al. [76,77]
Red RubinLED R/W; G/R/W/B22416Green spectrum showed positive effects on phytochemical accumulation.Dou et al. [79]
Blueberries
(Vaccinium sect. Cyanococcus)		Emerald
Snowchaser		LED W/R; W/UVA/FR35; 70; 105; 14020Transplants under W/R produced higher shoot and root dry matter that W/UVA/FR demonstrating the important use of white light.Gómez et al. [104]
Borage
(Borago officinalis)		BlueLED R/B18016Higher blue light, higher phenolic compounds.
Chlorophyll decreases with R/B ratio 1:9.		Bantis [102]
Broccoli
(Brassica oleracea)		Italica cv. LvhuaLED UVA3016UVA treatment increased the contents of total chlorophylls, total soluble proteins, total phenolic compounds, and ferric reducing antioxidant power.Gao et al. [105]
LED G/B/R30; 50; 70; 901250 μmol·m−2·s−1 (red: green: blue = 1:1:1:1) optimum light intensity and spectrum for growth. 70 μmol·m−2·s−1 optimal for phytochemical accumulation.Gao et al. [106]
Canola
(Brassica napus)		Kizakino-nataneFluorescent W20016200 μmol·m−2·s−1 was not sufficient illumination to reach the entire canopy.Saito et al. [107]
LED W/UVB20016 + 0.25; 16 + 0.5; 16 + 1; 16 + 2; 16 + 5; 16 + 8; 16 + 12; 16 + 16; 16 + 24 additional UV-B lightAt 200 μmol·m−2·s−1 the concentrations of all antioxidants increased Short-term UV-B irradiation could augment antioxidant biosynthesis without sacrificing crop yield or quality.Lee et al. [72]
Capica
(Stylosanthes Capitata)		*LED R/W/B150.8916Light R and FR improve reproductive responses.Park et al. [108]
Choy Sum
(Brassica rapa)		ParachinensisLED W50 to 50012Optimum illumination range is 400 μmol·m−2·s−1 for greater leaf area, stem thickness, root system and photosynthesisHuang et al. [109]
Chrysanthemum
(Chrysanthemum)		Gaya Yellow
Radost		LED W1804; 9; 10; 13Supplementing with light B for 4 h·day−1 promoted flowering and increased the number of flower buds.Park and Jeong [110]
Col
(Brassica alboglabra)		BaileyLED W; R/W/B/UVA/FR30010 (W); 12LED R/B/W/UVA/FR improved biomass, morphology, antioxidant compounds and tender leaf production.He et al. [78]
CapitataLED G 0; 24; 48Chlorophyl concentration increased with intensity 50 μmol·m−2·s−1 with green light spectrum at 48 h·day−1.Amagai et al. [111]
ChinensisLED R; W20016Increased growth and development with red LED.Harun et al. [88]
LvbaoLED R/W + UVA25012UVA was benefited to produce functional substances, while FR was conducive to a significant increase in crop yield.He et al. [78]
Pabularia
Scarlet		FR
LED R/W; R/W/G		22416Inclusion of G wavelengths decreased shoot biomass compared to that of plants grown under combinations of R and B light.Dou et al. [79]
Coriandrum
(Coriandrum sativum L.)		Green AromaLED R/B; R/B/G15016Increasing the spectral range increases the concentration coriander aromatics E-(2)-decenal and E-(2)-hexenal. Plants grown under LED R acquired the greatest biomass in the same period.McAusland et al. [112]
*LED R/B*8The combination of blue-red light improves yield.Rihan et al. [103]
*LED W30016Growing coriander at 15 °C for 6 days increases the amount of dry biomass, antioxidant capacity, and a high content of secondary metabolites.Nguyen et al. [113]
Cucumber
(Cucumis sativus L.)		JoeunbaegdadagiLED W50; 100; 150; 200; 25012; 16; 20PPFD 150 μmol∙m−2·s−1, 16 h·day−1 improved plant growth and energy efficiency.An et al. [114]
HeukjongLED W; FR20016FR light positively supports plant morphological growth compared to light W.Hwang et al. [115]
Yuexiu No.3LED R/B 12 to 16Optimal PPFD of 110 to 125 μmol∙m−2·s−1, in 14 to 16 h·day−1.Cui et al. [19]
Garlic
(Alium schoenoprasum)		Thick sheetLED R/B18016Higher blue light, higher phenolic compounds.
Chlorophyll decreases with R/B ratio 1:9.		Bantis [102]
Gingeng
(Panax ginseng)		MeyerLED R/G/B8016R light improved growth and photosynthesis, and B-light had a positive effect on bioactive compounds.Kim et al. [89]
Kalanchoe
(Kalanchoe blossfeldiana)		Lipstick
Spain		LED W250160Night Interruption Light affects morphogenesis and flowering depending on the cultivar.Kang et al. [116]
Lemon balm
(Melissa officinalis)		*LED B/G/R/W*16For blue spectra, the development and yield were lower despite having a significant impact on the photosynthesis activity. White and red-light spectra gave the best outputs in terms of impact on the growth and yield.Rihan et al. [103]
Lettuce
(Lactuca sativa L.)		Batavia Othilie*200; 400; 75016Dry mass increased with increasing photon flux to a PPFD of 750, but the highest fresh weight efficiency was achieved at 200 μmol·m−2·s−1.Carotti et al. [117]
Best growth effect with LED W without combination.Nguyen et al. [118]
Butterhead cv. Asia
Cherokee		LED W; W/R; W/B15012Addition of constant FR increased weight and growth and reduced chlorophyll.Meng and Runkle [81]
RexLED B/R; B/R/FR18024Optimal PPFD at 360 μmol·m−2·s−1 with LUE 6.5 g MJ−1.Kim et al. [89]
Romaine cv. AsiaLED R/B20016Tipburn showed positive relationship with light intensity and the relative growth rate occurred during 23~27 days after sowing.Xu et al. [119]
Romaria
Summer Surge		LED W
LED W/R/B		85; 125; 187
80; 120		16
12		Increased growth under alternating R/B lights.
The R/B combination is recommended for short-cycle crops to reduce autotoxin secretion and guarantee yields.		Ohtake et al. [120]
TiberiusLED W; R/B20016Light quality with different R/B ratios showed pronounced effects on organic carbon and autotoxin secretion.Zhou et al. [121]
YanzhiLED W; W/FR; W/B25010W/B produced higher contents of pigments, anthocyanins, vit C-A, phenolics and total flavonoids. With W/FR increase in fresh and dry weight.Li et al. [122]
Lychnis coronaria
(Silene coronaria)		*LED R/B*8The combination of blue-red light improves yield.Rihan et al. [103]
Marjoram
(Origanum majorana)		*LED W/FR; W; W/B3624W/FR and W LEDs increased plant growth, dry matter, and light use efficiency.Wittmann et al. [123]
Mentha
(Mentha spicata)		*LED R/W*8B/R light combination improves yield.Rihan et al. [103]
Mizuna
(Brassica rapa)		Japonica
Little Gem		LED R + B pulses
LED W		154
444; 370; 318; 278; 247; 222		Various
10; 12; 14; 16; 18; 20		Environmental stress in low light, higher water use efficiency.
Biomass increased 16% in response to increasing the photoperiod from 10 to 20 h. Extending the photoperiod and reducing PPFD increased plant growth and reduced the instantaneous heat generated by the lamps. 		Park et al. [124]
Palmer et al. [125]
Mustard
(Brassica juncea)		Red LionLED R/B18016Increasing the blue light portion caused less phenolic compounds and total antioxidants.Bantis [102]
Nasturtium
(Tropaeolum majus L.)		*LED W200; 30016; 2424 h improved dry weight, antioxidant capacity and total phenolic content.Xu et al. [126]
Onion
(Allium cepa)		VictoryLED R/G/B69–77*Light R promoted leaf width and area, starch accumulation in shoots, but reduced concentrations of flavonoids and total saponins.Zhou et al. [127]
Pea
(Pisum sativum)		DunLED R/B18016Increasing the blue light portion caused less phenolic compounds and total antioxidants.Bantis [102]
Pepper
(Capsicum annuum L.)		SerranoLED W; R/B pulses50; 110; 180*No difference between continuous and LED pulsed in production or capsaisinoid is shown.Olvera-Gonzalez et al. [16]
Shinhong
Tantan		LED W; FR20016FR-enriched supplemental lighting for improved plant growth and morphology.Hwang et al. [115]
Pumpkin
(Cucurbita mostacha)		BulrojangsaengLED W; FR20016Supplemental lighting enriched with FR improved plant growth and plant morphology.Hwang et al. [115]
HeukjongLED W15016Scion and rootstock production in a Plant Factory with Artificial Light improves productivity and uniformity.An et al. [128]
Radish
(Raphanus raphanistrum)		SaxaLED R/B18016Increasing the blue light portion caused less phenolic compounds and total antioxidants.Bantis [102]
Saffron
(Crocus sativus)		*LED W**Decreases starch content.Natsuhara et al. [15]
Sesame
(Sesamum indicum)		GomazouFluorescent23512At 28 °C leaf browning was induced. At 15ºC the fresh weight of shoots was higher.Date et al. [129]
Spinach
(Spinacia oleraciea L.)		BJC009LED W/B/R14514Increase productivity by 160%.Fernández-Cabanás et al. [130]
Disease-resistant 388LED R/B/G100; 1509; 13150 μmol∙m−2∙s−1 and 9 h is optimal for best quality.Zou et al. [90]
Geant D HiverLED FR/R/G/B/UV15016Photosynthesis developed best with a high ratio of R or FR light with B.Bantis et al. [131]
Ssamchoo
(Brassica Lee)		NamaiLED W30014Causes stunted growth due to photorespiration.Noh and Jeong [132]
Strawberry
(Fragaria × ananassa Duch.)		BenihoppeLED R/W30; 90; 150; 21016PPFD 90 is recommended at the rooting stage and 210 at the seedling stage.Zheng et al. [83]
LED R/W200; 250; 300; 35012; 16DLI 11.5–17.3 mol·m−2·day−1 is beneficial for propagation.Zheng et al. [84]
ElanLED W200; 300; 400; 50016; 24At 24 h and 300 μmol∙m−2∙s−1 higher anthocyanin and productivity.Maeda and Ito [91]
MaehyangFluorescent23016VF is a suitable method to improve the propagation system.Park and Jeong [110]
SachinokaFluorescent
LED W		65
150		10
10		High potential to produce flowers and fruits.
Method and conditions suitable for growth.		Le et al. [21]
Sweet basil
(Ocimum basilicum)		CompactLED W/R9016Increased light B increased the content of pigments and phenolic compounds.Azad et al. [133]
Tomato
(Solanum lycopersicum L.)		DongfengFluorescent; LED W; W/R50; 100; 15014LED light showed 110% energy saving, promote dry matter, leaf thickness
Increase growth and production.		Zheng et al. [134]
Ingar F1LED W/B/G/A/R/FR21015The combination of plant and architecture and spectrum-dependent photosynthesis results in the highest rate of crop photosynthesis under red light in plants initially grown under green light.Dieleman et al. [135]
Watercress
(Nasturtium officinale L.)		BrassicaceaeLED R/B133; 160; 200; 26612; 16; 20; 2420 h with PPFD 160 enhanced glucosinolate and plant biomass.Lam et al. [97]
* Unspecified.

4. Conclusions

The increasing need for more vegetable production worldwide and the energy reduction needs of lighting by using LED has led to an exponential increase in vertical farming. The 195% increased VF research in 12 years is important to help address several of the current handicaps due to the great variability of the effects of the spectra supplied on horticultural crops.
Our bibliographic analysis in VF has helped to quantify the information and results of the research carried out. For example, the control of photoperiod, spectrum quality, and comprehensive daily illumination to optimize morphological and physiological parameters of crops to obtain sustainable and profitable crop production and improve crop productivity and energy efficiency. Leafy vegetables were the most produced crops in VF, predominantly lettuce. In most of the research for most of the species analyzed LED lights were used with specific spectrum peaks between 450–490 nm and 620–700 nm, while the optimal photoperiod was (12 and 16 h·day−1), the intensity (PPFD) (100, 150 and 200 µmol·m−2·s−1) and DLI (8.5 and 11.5 mol·m−2·day−1).
However, there is still great interest in VF systems for further optimizing these parameters to achieve specific objectives that improve each plant yield and quality, as well as the increase of bio-compounds (such as phenolic compounds, anthocyanin, ascorbic acid, carotenoids, polyphenols, etc.) that have been improved by the use of LED lights.
Currently and in the short term, there will surely be more interdisciplinary advances that can help the potential growth of this system, both at a business and research level, finding more profitable crops that help offset the economic cost, such as short-cycle crops that are very important due to their high demand (e.g., microgreens), and the use of solar panels for the use of LEDs. Although we can say that the gains at the environmental level are tangible, through the resources use efficiency (RUE) and with a great potential demonstrated on the quality of the products, although there are still future perspectives to be defined in the economic, social, and energetic area.

Supplementary Materials

The following supporting information can be downloaded at: https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/horticulturae9010063/s1, Table S1: Characteristics, agronomic and lighting conditions used in the scientific research that practiced vertical farming.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, C.N., M.R. and J.A.P.; methodology, C.N.; investigation, C.N. and V.M.G.-C.; writing—Original draft preparation, C.N.; writing—Review and editing, C.N., V.M.G.-C., M.R. and J.A.P. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Data Availability Statement

Not applicable.

Acknowledgments

C. Nájera and V.M. Gallegos-Cedillo thanks the Ministerio de Universidades of Spain for the grant Margarita Salas belonging to the grants promoted for the requalification of the Spanish university system 2021–2023, funded by the European Union—Next Generation EU.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Borrelli, P.; Robinson, D.A.; Panagos, P.; Lugato, E.; Yang, J.E.; Alewell, C.; Wuepper, D.; Montanarella, L.; Ballabio, C. Land use and climate change impacts on global soil erosion by water (2015–2070). Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2020, 117, 21994–22001. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. Kozai, T.; Niu, G. Introduction. In Plant Factory: An Indoor Vertical Farming System for Efficient Quality Food Production, 2nd ed.; Kozai, T., Niu, G., Takagaki, M., Eds.; Elsevier Inc.: London, UK, 2020; pp. 3–5. [Google Scholar]
  3. Darko, E.; Heydarizadeh, P.; Schoefs, B.; Sabzalian, M.R. Photosynthesis under artificial light: The shift in primary and secondary metabolism. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. B Biol. Sci. 2014, 369, 20130243. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  4. SharathKumar, M.; Heuvelink, E.; Marcelis, L.F.M. Vertical Farming: Moving from Genetic to Environmental Modification. Trends Plant Sci. 2020, 25, 724–727. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Kozai, T. Why LED lighting for urban Agriculture? In LED Lighting for Urban Agriculture, 1st ed.; Kosai, T., Fujiwara, K., Runkle, E., Eds.; Springer: Singapore, 2016; pp. 3–18. [Google Scholar]
  6. Beacham, A.M.; Vickers, L.H.; Monaghan, J.M. Vertical farming: A summary of approaches to growing skywards. J. Hortic. Sci. Biotechnol. 2019, 94, 277–283. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Van Gerrewey, T.; Boon, N.; Geelen, D. Vertical farming: The only way is up? Agronomy 2022, 12, 2. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Ebel, R. Chinampas: An Urban Farming Model of the Aztecs and a Potential Solution for Modern Megalopolis. HortTechnology 2020, 30, 13–19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  9. van Delden, S.H.; SharathKumar, M.; Butturini, M.; Graamans, L.J.A.; Heuvelink, E.; Kacira, M.; Kaiser, E.; Klamer, R.S.; Klerkx, L.; Kootstra, G.; et al. Current status and future challenges in implementing and upscaling vertical farming systems. Nat. Food 2021, 2, 944–956. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Al-Kodmany, K. The Vertical Farm: A Review of developments and implications for the vertical city. Buildings 2018, 8, 24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  11. de Carbonnel, M.; Stormonth-Darling, J.M.; Liu, W.; Kuziak, D.; Jones, M.A. Realising the environmental potential of vertical farming systems through advances in plant photobiology. Biology 2022, 11, 922. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Butturini, M.; Marcelis, L.M. Vertical farming in Europe: Present status and outlook. In Plant Factory, 2nd ed.; Kozai, T., Niu, G., Takagaki, M., Eds.; Academic Press: London, UK, 2020; pp. 77–91. [Google Scholar]
  13. Johkan, M.; Shoji, K.; Goto, F.; Hahida, S.; Yoshihara, T. Effect of green light wavelength and intensity on photomorphogenesis and photosynthesis in Lactuca sativa. Environ. Exp. Bot. 2012, 75, 128–133. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Urrestarazu, M.; Nájera, C.; del Mar Gea, M. Effect of the spectral quality and intensity of light-emitting diodes on several horticultural crops. HortScience 2016, 51, 268–271. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  15. Natsuhara, R.; Uno, Y.; Kuroki, S.; Kajikawa, N.; Umaba, K.; Zako, K.; Nishimura, T.; Itoh, H. Development of a non-destructive starch concentration measurement technique in saffron (Crocus sativus L.) corms using light scattering image analysis. Environ. Control Biol. 2020, 58, 105–113. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Olvera-Gonzalez, E.; Escalante-Garcia, N.; Myers, D.; Ampim, P.; Obeng, E.; Alaniz-Lumbreras, D.; Castaño, V. Pulsed LED-lighting as an alternative energy savings technique for vertical farms and plant factories. Energies 2021, 14, 1603. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Liu, N.; Ji, F.; Xu, L.; He, D. Effects of LED light quality on the growth of pepper seedling in plant factory. Int. J. Agric. Biol. Eng. 2019, 12, 44–50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  18. Ke, X.; Yoshida, H.; Hikosaka, S.; Goto, E. Optimization of photosynthetic photon flux density and light quality for increasing radiation-use efficiency in dwarf tomato under LED light at the vegetative growth stage. Plants 2022, 11, 121. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Cui, J.; Song, S.; Yu, J.; Liu, H. Effect of daily light integral on cucumber plug seedlings in artificial light plant factory. Horticulturae 2021, 7, 139. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Iwao, T.; Murakami, T.; Akaboshi, O.; Cho, H.Y.; Yamada, M.; Takahashi, S.; Kato, M.; Horiuchi, N.; Ogiwara, I. Possibility of Harvesting June-bearing Strawberries in a Plant Factory with Artificial Light during Summer and Autumn by Re-Using Plants Cultivated by Forcing Culture. Environ. Control Biol. 2021, 59, 99–105. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Le, L.T.; Dinh, H.T.; Takaragawa, H.; Watanabe, K.; Ureshino, K.; Kawamitsu, Y. Photosynthetic responses and reproductive ability of strawberry following sunlight application in a plant factory closed system in subtropical Okinawa. Eur. J. Hortic. Sci. 2021, 86, 590–598. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Nájera, C.; Gallegos-Cedillo, V.M.; Ros, M.; Pascual, J.A. LED Lighting in Vertical Farming Systems Enhances Bioactive Compounds and Productivity of Vegetables Crops. Biol. Life Sci. Forum 2022, 16, 24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Lazzarin, M.; Meisenburg, M.; Meijer, D.; van Ieperen, W.; Marcelis, L.F.M.; Kappers, I.F.; van der Krol, A.R.; van Loon, J.J.A.; Dicke, M. LEDs make it resilient: Effects on plant growth and defense. Trends Plant Sci. 2021, 26, 496–508. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Smit, J.; Nasr, J.; Ratta, A. Benefits of Urban Agriculture. In Urban Agriculture: Food, Jobs and Sustainable Cities; United Nations Development Programme: New York, NY, USA, 2001. [Google Scholar]
  25. Chen, Y.; Li, T.; Yang, Q.; Zhang, Y.; Zou, J.; Bian, Z.; Wen, X. UVA radiation is beneficial for yield and quality of indoor cultivated lettuce. Front. Plant Sci. 2019, 10, 1563. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  26. Stanghellini, C.; Oosfer, B.; Heuvelink, E. Greenhouse Horticulture: Technology for Optimal Crop Production; Wageningen Academic Publishers: Wageningen, The Netherlands, 2019; pp. 1–311. [Google Scholar]
  27. Hipps, L.E.; Asrar, G.; Kanemasu, E.T. Assessing the interception of photosynthetically active radiation in winter wheat. Agric. Meteorol. 1983, 28, 253–259. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. McCree, K.J. The action spectrum, absorbance and quantum yield of photosynthesis in crop plants. Agric. Meteorol. 1972, 9, 191–216. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Poorter, H.; Niinemets, Ü.; Ntagkas, N.; Siebenkäs, A.; Mäenpää, M.; Matsubara, S.; Pons, T. A meta-analysis of plant responses to light intensity for 70 traits ranging from molecules to whole plant performance. New Phytol. 2019, 223, 1073–1105. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  30. McClung, C.R. Plant Circadian Rhythms. Plant Cell 2006, 18, 792–803. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  31. Craufurd, P.Q.; Wheeler, T.R. Climate change and the flowering time of annual crops. J. Exp. Bot. 2009, 60, 2529–2539. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  32. Faust, J.E.; Logan, J. Daily Light Integral: A Research Review and High-resolution Maps of the United States. HortScience 2018, 53, 1250–1257. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  33. Hatfield, J.L. Radiation use efficiency: Evaluation of cropping and management systems. Agron. J. 2014, 106, 1820–1827. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Slattery, R.A.; VanLoocke, A.; Bernacchi, C.J.; Zhu, X.-G.; Ort, D.R. Photosynthesis, light use efficiency, and yield of reduced-chlorophyll soybean mutants in field conditions. Front. Plant Sci. 2017, 8, 549. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  35. Farquhar, G.D.; von Caemmerer, S.B.; Berry, J.A. A biochemical model of photosynthetic CO2 assimilation in leaves of C3 species. Planta 1980, 149, 78–90. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Urban, O.; Janouš, D.; Acosta, M.; Czerný, R.; Marková, I.; Navrátil, M.; Pavelka, M.; Pokorný, R.; Šprtová, M.; Zhang, R.; et al. Ecophysiological controls over the net ecosystem exchange of mountain spruce stand. Comparison of the response in direct vs. diffuse solar radiation. Glob. Chang. Biol. 2007, 13, 157–168. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Gallegos-Cedillo, V.M.; Diánez, F.; Nájera, C.; Santos, M. Plant agronomic features can predict quality and field performance: A bibliometric analysis. Agronomy 2021, 11, 2305. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Liu, Y.; Ren, X.; Jeong, B.R. Carbon dioxide enrichment combined with supplemental light improve growth and quality of plug seedlings of Astragalus membranaceus Bunge and Codonopsis lanceolata Benth. et Hook. f. Agronomy 2019, 9, 715. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  39. Paulus, D.; Zorzzi, I.C.; Rankrape, F.; Nava, G.A. Wastewater from fish farms for producing Eucalyptus grandis seedlings. Floresta Ambient 2019, 26, e2017580. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  40. Rocha, J.S.; Calzavara, A.K.; Bianchini, E.; Pimenta, J.A.; Stolf-Moreira, R.; Oliveira, H.C. Nitrogen supplementation improves the high-light acclimation of Guazuma ulmifolia Lam. seedlings. Trees 2019, 33, 421–431. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Aimi, S.C.; Araujo, M.M.; Fermino, M.H.; Tabaldi, L.A.; Zavistanovicz, T.C.; Mieth, P. Substrate and fertilization in the quality of Myrocarpus frondosus seedlings. Floresta 2019, 49, 831–840. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Marcelis, L.F.M.; Heuvelink, E.; Goudriaan, J. Modelling biomass production and yield of horticultural crops: A review. Sci. Hortic. 1998, 74, 83–111. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Mangon, H. Production de la matière verte des feuilles sous l’influence de la lumière électrique. Compt. Rend. Acad. Sci. Paris 1861, 53, 243–244. (In French) [Google Scholar]
  44. Pfeiffer, N.E. Microchemical and morphological studies of effect of light on plants. Bot. Gaz. 1926, 81, 173–195. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Siemens, C.W. III. On the influence of electric light upon vegetation, and on certain physical principles involved. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. 1880, 30, 210–219. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  46. Murdoch, J.B. Illuminating Engineering—From Edison’s Lamp to the Laser; Macmillan Publishing Company: New York, NY, USA, 1985. [Google Scholar]
  47. Morrow, R.C.; Tibbitts, T.W. Evidence for involvement of phytochrome in tumor development on plants. Plant Physiol. 1988, 88, 1110–1114. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  48. Bula, R.J.; Morrow, R.C.; Tibbitts, T.W.; Barta, D.J.; Ignatius, R.W.; Martin, T.S. Light-emitting diodes as a radiation source for plants. HortScience 1991, 26, 203–205. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  49. Wheeler, R.M. A historical background of plant lighting: An introduction to the workshop. HortScience 2008, 43, 1942–1943. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  50. Moghimi, F. Vertical farming economics in 10 minutes. Rutgers Bus. Rev. 2021, 6, 122–131. [Google Scholar]
  51. GlobeNewswire. Straits Research: Microgreens Market Size. 2022. Available online: https://www.globenewswire.com/en/news-release/2022/07/18/2481309/0/en/Microgreens-Market-Size-is-projected-to-reach-USD-3-69-Billion-by-2030-growing-at-a-CAGR-of-11-Straits-Research.html (accessed on 1 December 2022).
  52. O’Sullivan, C.A.; McIntyre, C.L.; Dry, I.B.; Hani, S.M.; Hochman, Z.; Bonnett, G.D. Vertical farms bear fruit. Nat. Biotechnol. 2020, 38, 160–162. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Frías-Moreno, M.N.; Parra-Quezada, R.A.; González-Aguilar, G.; Ruíz-Canizales, J.; Molina-Corral, F.J.; Sepulveda, D.R.; Salas-Salazar, N.; Olivas, G.I. Quality, Bioactive Compounds, Antioxidant Capacity, and Enzymes of Raspberries at Different Maturity Stages, Effects of Organic vs. Conventional Fertilization. Foods 2021, 10, 953. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Azevedo, L.; de Araujo Ribeiro, P.F.; de Carvalho Oliveira, J.A.; Correia, M.G.; Ramos, F.M.; de Oliveira, E.B.; Barros, F.; Stringheta, P.C. Camu-camu (Myrciaria dubia) from commercial cultivation has higher levels of bioactive compounds than native cultivation (Amazon Forest) and presents antimutagenic effects in vivo. J. Sci. Food Agric. 2019, 99, 624–631. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  55. Hallmann, E. The influence of organic and conventional cultivation systems on the nutritional value and content of bioactive compounds in selected tomato types. J. Sci. Food Agric. 2012, 92, 2840–2848. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Ionică, M.E.; Nour, V.; Trandafir, I. Bioactive compounds and antioxidant activity of hot pepper fruits at different stages of growth and ripening. J. Appl. Bot. Food Qual. 2017, 90, 232–237. [Google Scholar]
  57. Nurzynska-Wierdak, R.; Zawislak, G. Herb yield and bioactive compounds of tarragon (Artemisia dracunculus L.) as influenced by plant density. Acta Sci. Pol. Hortorum Cultus 2014, 13, 207–221. [Google Scholar]
  58. Jędrszczyk, E.; Kopeć, A.; Bucki, P.; Ambroszczyk, A.M.; Skowera, B. The enhancing effect of plants growth biostimulants in garlic cultivation on the chemical composition and level of bioactive compounds in the garlic leaves, stems and bulbs. Not. Bot. Horti Agrobot. Cluj-Napoca 2019, 47, 81–91. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  59. Pék, Z.; Daood, H.; Nagyné, M.; Neményi, A.; Helyes, L. Effect of environmental conditions and water status on the bioactive compounds of broccoli. Open Life Sci. 2013, 8, 777–787. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Liu, R.H. Health-Promoting Components of Fruits and Vegetables in the Diet. Adv. Nutr. 2013, 4, 384–392. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  61. Van Eck, N.J.; Waltman, L. Visualizing bibliometric networks. In Measuring Scholarly Impact: Methods and Practice; Ding, Y., Rousseau, R., Wolfram, D., Eds.; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2014; pp. 285–320. [Google Scholar]
  62. Chen, X.; Chen, J.; Wu, D.; Xie, Y.; Li, J. Mapping the Research Trends by Co-Word Analysis Based on Keywords from Funded Project. Procedia Comput. Sci. 2016, 91, 547–555. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. FAOSTAT. Macro Indicators. 2022. Available online: https://www.fao.org/faostat/en/#data/MK (accessed on 13 May 2022).
  64. Ros, M.; Hurtado-Navarro, M.; Giménez, A.; Fernández, J.A.; Egea-Gilabert, C.; Lozano-Pastor, P.; Pascual, J.A. Spraying agro-industrial compost tea on baby spinach crops: Evaluation of yield, plant quality and soil health in field experiments. Agronomy 2020, 10, 440. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  65. Hernández, D.; Ros, M.; Carmona, F.; Saez-Tovar, J.A.; Pascual, J.A. Composting spent mushroom substrate from Agaricus bisporus and Pleurotus ostreatus production as a growing media component for baby leaf lettuce cultivation under Pythium irregulare biotic stress. Horticulturae 2021, 7, 13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Wahome, P.K.; Oseni, T.O.; Masarirambi, M.T.; Shongwe, V.D. Effects of different hydroponics systems and growing media on the vegetative growth, yield and cut flower quality of Gypsophila (Gypsophila paniculata L.). World J. Agric. Sci. 2011, 7, 692–698. [Google Scholar]
  67. Khandaker, M.; Kotzen, B. The potential for combining living wall and vertical farming systems with aquaponics with special emphasis on substrates. Aquac. Res. 2018, 49, 1454–1468. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Ullah, I.; Mao, H.; Rasool, G.; Gao, H.; Javed, Q.; Sarwar, A.; Khan, M.I. Effect of deficit irrigation and reduced n fertilization on plant growth, root morphology and water use efficiency of tomato grown in soilless culture. Agronomy 2021, 11, 228. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Frasetya, B.; Harisman, K.; Ramdaniah, N.A.H. The effect of hydroponics systems on the growth of lettuce. IOP Conf. Ser. Mater. Sci. Eng. 2021, 1098, 042115. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Santos, J.F.; Coelho, M.A.; Cruz, J.L.; Soares, T.M.; Cruz, A.M.L. Growth, water consumption and basil production in the hydroponic systems under salinity. Rev. Ceres 2019, 66, 45–53. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Ahmed, S.; Ahmed, S.; Kumar Roy, S.; Hee Woo, S.; Dashrath Sonawane, K.; Mohammad Shohael, A. Effect of salinity on the morphological, physiological and biochemical properties of lettuce (Lactuca sativa L.) in Bangladesh. Open Agric. 2019, 4, 361–373. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Lee, M.; Rivard, C.; Wang, W.; Pliakoni, E.; Gude, K.; Rajashekar, C.B. Spectral blocking of solar radiation in high tunnels by poly covers: Its impact on nutritional quality regarding essential nutrients and health-promoting phytochemicals in lettuce and tomato. Horticulturae 2021, 7, 524. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Ptushenko, O.S.; Ptushenko, V.V.; Solovchenko, A.E. Spectrum of Light as a Determinant of Plant Functioning: A Historical Perspective. Life 2020, 10, 25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  74. Folta, K.M.; Carvalho, S.D. Photoreceptors and control of horticultural plant traits. HortScience 2015, 50, 1274–1280. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Larsen, D.H.; Woltering, E.J.; Nicole, C.C.S.; Marcelis, L.F.M. Response of basil growth and morphology to light intensity and spectrum in a vertical farm. Front. Plant Sci. 2020, 11, 597906. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. Pennisi, G.; Pistillo, A.; Orsini, F.; Cellini, A.; Spinelli, F.; Nicola, S.; Fernández, J.A.; Crepaldi, A.; Gianquinto, G.; Marcelis, L.F.M. Optimal light intensity for sustainable water and energy use in indoor cultivation of lettuce and basil under red and blue LEDs. Sci. Hortic. 2020, 272, 109508. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  77. Pennisi, G.; Orsini, F.; Landolfo, M.; Pistillo, A.; Crepaldi, A.; Nicola, S.; Fernández, J.A.; Marcelis, L.F.M.; Gianquinto, G. Optimal photoperiod for indoor cultivation of leafy vegetables and herbs. Eur. J. Hortic. Sci. 2020, 85, 329–338. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  78. He, R.; Gao, M.; Li, Y.; Zhang, Y.; Song, S.; Su, W.; Liu, H. Supplemental UV-A affects growth and antioxidants of Chinese kale baby-leaves in artificial light plant factory. Horticulturae 2021, 7, 294. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  79. Dou, H.; Niu, G.; Gu, M.; Masabni, J. Morphological and physiological responses in basil and Brassica species to different proportions of red, blue, and green wavelengths in indoor vertical farming. J. Am. Soc. Hortic. Sci. 2020, 145, 267–278. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Rihan, H.Z.; Aljafer, N.; Jbara, M.; McCallum, L.; Lengger, S.; Fuller, M.P. The impact of LED lighting spectra in a plant factory on the growth, physiological traits and essential oil content of Lemon Balm (Melissa officinalis). Plants 2022, 11, 342. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  81. Meng, Q.; Runkle, E.S. Far-red radiation interacts with relative and absolute blue and red photon flux densities to regulate growth, morphology, and pigmentation of lettuce and basil seedlings. Sci. Hortic. 2019, 255, 269–280. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  82. Li, Y.; Wu, L.; Jiang, H.; He, R.; Song, S.; Su, W.; Liu, H. Supplementary Far-Red and blue lights influence the biomass and phytochemical profiles of two lettuce cultivars in plant factory. Molecules 2021, 26, 7405. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  83. Zheng, J.; He, D.; Ji, F. Effect of light intensity on rooting and growth of hydroponic strawberry runner plants in a led plant factory. Agronomy 2019, 9, 875. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  84. Zheng, J.F.; He, D.X.; Ji, F. Effects of light intensity and photoperiod on runner plant propagation of hydroponic strawberry transplants under LED lighting. Int. J. Agric. Biol. 2019, 12, 26–31. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  85. Bantis, F.; Smirnakou, S.; Ouzounis, T.; Koukounaras, A.; Ntagkas, N.; Radgoglou, K. Current status and recent achievements in the field of horticulture with the use of light-emitting diodes (LEDs). Sci. Hortic. 2018, 235, 437–451. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  86. Yan, Z.; Wang, L.; Dai, J.; Liu, Y.; Lin, D.; Yang, Y. Morphological and physiological responses of cucumber seedlings to different combinations of light intensity and photoperiod with the same daily light integral. HortScience 2021, 56, 1430–1438. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  87. He, D.; Yan, Z.; Sun, X.; Yang, P. Leaf development and energy yield of hydroponic sweet potato seedlings using single-node cutting as influenced by light intensity and LED spectrum. J. Plant Physiol. 2020, 254, 153274. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  88. Harun, A.N.; Ahmad, R.; Mohamed, N.; Rahim, A.R.A.; Kaidi, H.M. Morphological and physiological responses of Brassica chinensis on different Far-Red (FR) light treatments using Internet-of-Things (IoT) technology. Agriculture 2021, 11, 728. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  89. Kim, J.; Kang, W.H.; Son, J.E. Interpretation and evaluation of electrical lighting in plant factories with ray-tracing simulation and 3D plant modeling. Agronomy 2020, 10, 1545. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  90. Zou, T.; Huang, C.; Wu, P.; Ge, L.; Xu, Y. Optimization of artificial light for spinach growth in plant factory based on orthogonal test. Plants 2020, 9, 490. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  91. Maeda, K.; Ito, Y. Effect of Different PPFDs and Photoperiods on Growth and Yield of Everbearing Strawberry ‘Elan’ in Plant Factory with White LED Lighting. Environ. Control Biol. 2020, 58, 99–104. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  92. Liu, Y.; Tikunov, Y.; Schouten, R.; Marcelis, L.F.M.; Visser, R.G.F.; Bovy, A. Anthocyanin Biosynthesis and Degradation Mechanisms in Solanaceous Vegetables: A Review. Front. Chem. 2018, 6, 52. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  93. Ort, N.W.W.; Morrison, M.J.; Cober, E.R.; Samanfar, B.; Lawley, Y.E. Photoperiod Affects Node Appearance Rate and Flowering in Early Maturing Soybean. Plants 2022, 11, 871. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  94. Kim, J.A.; Kim, H.-S.; Choi, S.-H.; Jang, J.-Y.; Jeong, M.-J.; Lee, S.I. The Importance of the Circadian Clock in Regulating Plant Metabolism. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2017, 18, 2680. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  95. Cho, J.Y.; Yoo, K.S.; Kim, J.; Choi, B.J.; Oh, W. Growth and bioactive compounds of lettuce as affected by light intensity and photoperiod in a plant factory using external electrode fluorescent lamps. Hortic. Sci. Technol. 2020, 38, 645–659. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  96. Ji, F.; Wei, S.; Liu, N.; Xu, L.; Yang, P. Growth of cucumber seedlings in different varieties as affected by light environment. Int. J. Agric. Biol. Eng. 2020, 13, 73–78. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  97. Lam, V.P.; Choi, J.; Park, J. Enhancing growth and glucosinolate accumulation in watercress (Nasturtium officinale L.) by regulating light intensity and photoperiod in plant factories. Agriculture 2021, 11, 723. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  98. Dou, H.; Niu, G.; Gu, M.; Masabni, J.G. Responses of sweet basil to different daily light integrals in photosynthesis, morphology, yield, and nutritional quality. HortScience 2018, 53, 496–503. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  99. Yan, Z.; He, D.; Niu, G.; Zhou, Q.; Qu, Y. Growth, nutritional quality, and energy use efficiency of hydroponic lettuce as influenced by daily light integrals exposed to white versus white plus red light-emitting diodes. HortScience 2019, 54, 1737–1744. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  100. Chen, D.; Mei, Y.; Liu, Q.; Wu, Y.; Yang, Z. Carbon dioxide enrichment promoted the growth, yield, and light-use efficiency of lettuce in a plant factory with artificial lighting. Agron. J. 2021, 113, 5196–5206. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  101. Gillani, S.A.; Abbasi, R.; Martinez, P.; Ahmad, R. Review on Energy Efficient Artificial Illumination in Aquaponics. Clean. Circ. Bioecon. 2022, 2, 100015. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  102. Bantis, F. Light spectrum differentially affects the yield and phytochemical content of microgreen vegetables in a plant factory. Plants 2021, 10, 2182. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  103. Rihan, H.Z.; Aldarkazali, M.; Mohamed, S.J.; McMulkin, N.B.; Jbara, M.H.; Fuller, M.P. A novel new light recipe significantly increases the growth and yield of sweet basil (Ocimum basilicum) grown in a plant factory system. Agronomy 2020, 10, 934. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  104. Gómez, C.; Poudel, M.; Yegros, M.; Fisher, P.R. Radiation intensity and quality affect indoor acclimation of blueberry transplants. HortScience 2021, 56, 1521–1530. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  105. Gao, M.; He, R.; Shi, R.; Li, Y.; Song, S.; Zhang, Y.; Su, W.; Liu, H. Combination of selenium and UVA radiation affects growth and phytochemicals of broccoli microgreens. Molecules 2021, 26, 4646. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  106. Gao, M.; He, R.; Shi, R.; Zhang, Y.; Song, S.; Su, W.; Liu, H. Differential effects of low light intensity on broccoli microgreens growth and phytochemicals. Agronomy 2021, 11, 537. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  107. Saito, K.; Ishigami, Y.; Goto, E. Evaluation of the light environment of a plant factory with artificial light by using an optical simulation. Agronomy 2020, 10, 1663. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  108. Park, J.-H.; Lee, E.-P.; Han, Y.-S.; Lee, S.-I.; Cho, K.-T.; Hong, Y.-S.; You, Y.-H. The effects of LEDs and duty ratio on the growth and physiological responses of Silene capitata Kom., endangered plant, in a plant factory. J. Ecol. Environ. 2018, 42, 21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  109. Huang, J.J.; D’Souza, C.; Zhou, W. Light-time-biomass response model for predicting the growth of choy sum (Brassica rapa var. parachinensis) in soil-based LED-constructed indoor plant factory for efficient seedling production. Front. Plant Sci. 2021, 12, 623682. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  110. Park, Y.G.; Jeong, B.R. How supplementary or night-interrupting low-intensity blue light affects the flower induction in chrysanthemum, a qualitative short-day plant. Plants 2020, 9, 1694. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  111. Amagai, Y.; Lu, N.; Hayashi, E.; Takagaki, M.; Kikuchi, M.; Ibaraki, Y.; Kozai, T. External green light as a new tool to change colors and nutritional components of inner leaves of head cabbages. J. Food Meas. Charact. 2022, 16, 269–280. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  112. McAusland, L.; Lim, M.-T.; Morris, D.E.; Smith-Herman, H.L.; Mohammed, U.; Hayes-Gill, B.R.; Crowe, J.A.; Fisk, I.D.; Murchie, E.H. growth spectrum complexity dictates aromatic intensity in coriander (Coriandrum sativum L.). Front. Plant Sci. 2020, 11, 462. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  113. Nguyen, D.T.P.; Lu, N.; Kagawa, N.; Kitayama, M.; Takagaki, M. Short-term root-zone temperature treatment enhanced the accumulation of secondary metabolites of hydroponic coriander (Coriandrum sativum L.) grown in a plant factory. Agronomy 2020, 10, 413. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  114. An, S.; Hwang, H.; Chun, C.; Jang, Y.; Lee, H.J.; Wi, S.H.; Yeo, K.-H.; Yu, I.-H.; Kwack, Y. Evaluation of air temperature, photoperiod, and light intensity conditions to produce cucumber scions and rootstocks in a plant factory with artificial lighting. Horticulturae 2021, 7, 102. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  115. Hwang, H.; An, S.; Lee, B.; Chun, C. Improvement of growth and morphology of vegetable seedlings with supplemental far-red enriched led lights in a plant factory. Horticulturae 2020, 6, 109. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  116. Kang, D.I.; Jeong, H.K.; Park, Y.G.; Jeong, B.R. Flowering and morphogenesis of kalanchoe in response to quality and intensity of night interruption light. Plants 2019, 8, 90. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  117. Carotti, L.; Graamans, L.; Puksic, F.; Butturini, M.; Meinen, E.; Heuvelink, E.; Stanghellini, C. Plant factories are heating up: Hunting for the best combination of light intensity, air temperature and root-zone temperature in lettuce production. Front. Plant Sci. 2021, 11, 592171. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  118. Nguyen, T.K.L.; Cho, K.M.; Lee, H.Y.; Cho, D.Y.; Lee, G.O.; Jang, S.N.; Lee, Y.; Kim, D.; Son, K.-H. Effects of white LED lighting with specific shorter blue and/or green wavelength on the growth and quality of two lettuce cultivars in a vertical farming system. Agronomy 2021, 11, 2111. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  119. Xu, W.; Nguyen, D.T.P.; Sakaguchi, S.; Akiyama, T.; Tsukagoshi, S.; Feldman, A.; Lu, N. Relation between relative growth rate and tipburn occurrence of romaine lettuce under different light regulations in a plant factory with LED lighting. Eur. J. Hortic. Sci. 2020, 85, 354–361. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  120. Ohtake, N.; Ju, Y.; Ishikura, M.; Suzuki, H.; Adachi, S.; Yamori, W. Alternating red/blue light increases leaf thickness and mesophyll cell density in the early growth stage, improving photosynthesis and plant growth in lettuce. Environ. Control Biol. 2021, 59, 59–67. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  121. Zhou, C.; Zhang, Y.; Liu, W.; Zha, L.; Shao, M.; Li, B. Light quality affected the growth and root organic carbon and autotoxin secretions of hydroponic Lettuce. Plants 2020, 9, 1542. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  122. Li, L.; Tong, Y.; Lu, J.; Li, Y.; Yang, Q. Lettuce growth, nutritional quality, and energy use efficiency as affected by red–blue light combined with different monochromatic wavelengths. HortScience 2020, 55, 613–620. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  123. Wittmann, S.; Jüttner, I.; Mempel, H. Indoor farming marjoram production—Quality, resource efficiency, and potential of application. Agronomy 2020, 10, 1769. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  124. Park, J.H.; Kim, S.B.; Lee, E.P.; Lee, S.Y.; Kim, E.J.; Lee, J.M.; Park, J.H.; Cho, K.T.; Jeong, H.M.; Choi, S.S.; et al. Study on the photosynthetic characteristics of Eutrema japonica (Siebold) Koidz. under the pulsed LEDs for simulated sunflecks. J. Ecol. Environ. 2021, 45, 6. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  125. Palmer, S.; van Iersel, M.W. Increasing growth of lettuce and mizuna under sole-source LED lighting using longer photoperiods with the same daily light integral. Agronomy 2020, 10, 1659. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  126. Xu, W.; Lu, N.; Kikuchi, M.; Takagaki, M. Continuous lighting and high daily light integral enhance yield and quality of mass-produced nasturtium (Tropaeolum majus L.) in plant factories. Plants 2021, 10, 1203. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  127. Zhou, C.; Cui, W.; Yuan, T.; Cheng, H.; Su, Q.; Guo, P. Water content, carbohydrate accumulation, and secondary metabolites in Allium victorialis sprouts exposed to shoot cutting in varied irradiations. Not. Bot. Horti Agrobot. Cluj-Napoca 2021, 49, 12524. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  128. An, S.; Park, S.W.; Kwack, Y. Growth of cucumber scions, rootstocks, and grafted seedlings as affected by different irrigation regimes during cultivation of ‘Joenbaekdadagi’ and ‘Heukjong’ seedlings in a plant factory with artificial lighting. Agronomy 2020, 10, 1943. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  129. Date, S.; Ogawa, T.; Matsuura, K.; Hata, N.; Terabayashi, S. Effects of day length and air temperature fluctuation on the occurrence of leaf browning in sesame seedlings cultured in a plant factory under artificial light. Environ. Control Biol. 2020, 58, 37–42. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  130. Fernández-Cabanás, V.M.; Pérez-Urrestarazu, L.; Juárez, A.; Kaufman, N.T.; Gross, J.A. Comparative analysis of horizontal and vertical decoupled aquaponic systems for basil production and effect of light supplementation by LED. Agronomy 2020, 10, 1414. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  131. Bantis, F.; Fotelli, M.; Ilić, Z.S.; Koukounaras, A. Physiological and phytochemical responses of spinach baby leaves grown in a PFAL system with LEDs and saline nutrient solution. Agriculture 2020, 10, 574. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  132. Noh, K.; Jeong, B.R. Increased carbon dioxide by occupants promotes growth of leafy vegetables grown in indoor cultivation system. Sustainability 2021, 13, 13288. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  133. Azad, M.O.K.; Kjaer, K.H.; Adnan, M.; Naznin, M.T.; Lim, J.D.; Sung, I.J.; Park, C.H.; Lim, Y.S. The evaluation of growth performance, photosynthetic capacity, and primary and secondary metabolite content of leaf lettuce grown under limited irradiation of Blue and Red LED light in an urban plant factory. Agriculture 2020, 10, 28. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  134. Zheng, J.; Gan, P.; Ji, F.; He, D.; Yang, P. Growth and energy use efficiency of grafted tomato transplants as affected by led light quality and photon flux density. Agriculture 2021, 11, 816. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  135. Dieleman, J.A.; De Visser, P.H.B.; Meinen, E.; Grit, J.G.; Dueck, T.A. Integrating morphological and physiological responses of tomato plants to light quality to the crop level by 3D modeling. Front. Plant Sci. 2019, 10, 839. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Horticulturae 09 00063 g001 550
Figure 1. Bibliometric map generated from the analysis of the most repeated keywords in articles published during the period 2008–2022. Different colors represent the diversity of thematic clusters found and associated keywords. Red (cluster 1), green (cluster 2), blue (cluster 3), yellow (cluster 4), and purple (cluster 5). The data were processed and mathematically analyzed using the clustering algorithm of the VOSviewer® software version 1.6.15, Leiden, NL, USA.
Figure 1. Bibliometric map generated from the analysis of the most repeated keywords in articles published during the period 2008–2022. Different colors represent the diversity of thematic clusters found and associated keywords. Red (cluster 1), green (cluster 2), blue (cluster 3), yellow (cluster 4), and purple (cluster 5). The data were processed and mathematically analyzed using the clustering algorithm of the VOSviewer® software version 1.6.15, Leiden, NL, USA.
Horticulturae 09 00063 g001
Horticulturae 09 00063 g002 550
Figure 2. An overlay visualization map to identify the evolution of keywords used in the set of articles analyzed in this study. Different colors indicate the evolution of research keywords over time based on the average publication year. Earlier research topics are colored purple and more recent items are shown in yellow. The data were processed and mathematically analyzed using the clustering algorithm of the VOSviewer® software version 1.6.15.
Figure 2. An overlay visualization map to identify the evolution of keywords used in the set of articles analyzed in this study. Different colors indicate the evolution of research keywords over time based on the average publication year. Earlier research topics are colored purple and more recent items are shown in yellow. The data were processed and mathematically analyzed using the clustering algorithm of the VOSviewer® software version 1.6.15.
Horticulturae 09 00063 g002
Horticulturae 09 00063 g003 550
Figure 3. Schematic representation of innovations in intensive agriculture and major developments in vertical farming systems in line with the sustainability of agriculture.
Figure 3. Schematic representation of innovations in intensive agriculture and major developments in vertical farming systems in line with the sustainability of agriculture.
Horticulturae 09 00063 g003
Horticulturae 09 00063 g004 550
Figure 4. Trend in the number of published studies in which the vertical farming has been used. n = 381.
Figure 4. Trend in the number of published studies in which the vertical farming has been used. n = 381.
Horticulturae 09 00063 g004
Horticulturae 09 00063 g005 550
Figure 5. Geographical location where vertical farming systems were performed for researching. n = 105.
Figure 5. Geographical location where vertical farming systems were performed for researching. n = 105.
Horticulturae 09 00063 g005
Horticulturae 09 00063 g006 550
Figure 6. Growing medium used (A) and type of farming methods (B) on vertical farming. * Unspecified mix; ** include peat moss, perlite, sand, vermiculite, coir, pumice stone, and pine bark.
Figure 6. Growing medium used (A) and type of farming methods (B) on vertical farming. * Unspecified mix; ** include peat moss, perlite, sand, vermiculite, coir, pumice stone, and pine bark.
Horticulturae 09 00063 g006
Horticulturae 09 00063 g007 550
Figure 7. The pie chart shows the relative percentage of published research reported in the literature and used in this review for the different types of vegetables cropped on vertical farming.
Figure 7. The pie chart shows the relative percentage of published research reported in the literature and used in this review for the different types of vegetables cropped on vertical farming.
Horticulturae 09 00063 g007
Horticulturae 09 00063 g008 550
Figure 8. Illumination spectra used in vertical farming research for the growth and development of horticultural, ornamental, fruit, and aromatic plants. n = 136.
Figure 8. Illumination spectra used in vertical farming research for the growth and development of horticultural, ornamental, fruit, and aromatic plants. n = 136.
Horticulturae 09 00063 g008
Horticulturae 09 00063 g009 550
Figure 9. Intensities used in vertical farming systems. n = 185.
Figure 9. Intensities used in vertical farming systems. n = 185.
Horticulturae 09 00063 g009
Horticulturae 09 00063 g010 550
Figure 10. Photoperiods used in vertical farming systems. n = 113.
Figure 10. Photoperiods used in vertical farming systems. n = 113.
Horticulturae 09 00063 g010
Horticulturae 09 00063 g011 550
Figure 11. Daily Light Integral (DLI) (mol∙m−2·day−1) values used in the studies. n = 215.
Figure 11. Daily Light Integral (DLI) (mol∙m−2·day−1) values used in the studies. n = 215.
Horticulturae 09 00063 g011
Table
Table 1. Relevant parameters related to lighting in VF systems.
Table 1. Relevant parameters related to lighting in VF systems.
ParameterDescription
Electromagnetic spectrumIt is the wavelength that determines the distribution of energy, including visible and non-visible wavelengths. In the case of the spectra emitted by lamps, a range of electromagnetic radiation detectable by the human eye is considered, from 380 nm to 780 nm, within the portion of the spectrum between ultraviolet and infrared, which are components of solar radiation. It has been demonstrated than approximately 95% of solar UV radiation at sea level is absorbed by plant photoreceptors, which are largely responsible for plant growth and development [25]. Some lamps include the above-mentioned entire range, such as fluorescent lamps, and others, such as LED luminaries, have more specific spectrum absorption peaks.
Photosyntenthically active radiation (PAR)It consists of elementary, particles/wavelets, or photons and is the part of the radiation spectrum that plants use for photosynthesis corresponding to the range from 400 to 700 nm [26,27,28]. The measurement is done with PAR sensors, expressed as μmol∙m−2·s−1.
Photosynthetic Photon Flux Density (PPFD) Light intensity falling onto a surface measured as photosynthetic photon flux density (PPFD) with units of μmol∙m−2·s−1. PPFD comprises about half the energy of solar radiation and scales well with the time at which photosynthesis responds to changes in light intensity [29]. Direct PPFD measurement, using PAR sensors.
PhotoperiodAll living beings need a period of light and darkness to regulate their processes. These periods are regulated in a daily cycle of 24 h that results from the rotation of the Earth around its axis, where the greater or lesser perpendicular of the sun’s rays varies depending on the latitude of the place, time of year and time of day [30]. Photoperiod plays an important role on plant growth and development, where being deficient in plants with high light requirements can induce stress and growth imbalance and can also significantly influence energy and economic efficiency in a VF system [31].
Daily Light Integral (DLI)DLI is a measure of the total photosynthetic photon flux density (PPFD) delivered over the course of one day. It is a useful tool for assessing the irradiance delivered to various horticultural crops, therefore, it is of great importance in VF systems [32].
Radiation use efficiency (RUE) and Light use efficiency (LUE)RUE is the efficiency with which a crop uses absorbed light energy for biomass production and is determined as the ratio of biomass accumulation per unit of photosynthetically active radiation (PAR) absorbed [33]. Unlike RUE, LUE, is the net CO2 assimilation, which is the efficiency of plants to convert absorbed light into CO2 absorption, LUE can be measured in a short time or quantified daily at the leaf level [34].
Table
Table 2. Relevant parameter related to plant morphological and physiological in VF systems.
Table 2. Relevant parameter related to plant morphological and physiological in VF systems.
ParameterDescription
Photosynthetic parametersIt is one of the most widely used physiological parameters in crops and is non-destructive in nature, being used to accurately understand plant ecophysiology. It is the process where plants produce organic compounds by CO2 and H2O [35,36].
Leaf Area (LA)It is a parameter that determines the amount of photoassimilates produced and affects who is growth, development, and productivity [37]. In general, it is assumed that LA and biomass accumulation in crops may be affected by some factors, such as light quality and radiation intensity, plant nutrition, substrate type, and container design and volume [38,39,40,41].
Plant productivityIt is determined by fresh weight, being of commercial interest in the market by edible fresh weight. However, every organ (stem, leaf, root, or fruit) is of research interest by dry weight, since biomass accumulation is the result of photosynthetic activity, CO2 concentration [26] and is an indicator of long-term plant survival.
Total Dry Matter (TDM)It represents the net gain in dry matter, and it is considered one of the best parameters for indicating plant quality [42]. Moreover, plants with a high TDM content show high growth potential and field yield.
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Nájera, C.; Gallegos-Cedillo, V.M.; Ros, M.; Pascual, J.A. Role of Spectrum-Light on Productivity, and Plant Quality over Vertical Farming Systems: Bibliometric Analysis. Horticulturae 2023, 9, 63. https://doi.org/10.3390/horticulturae9010063

AMA Style

Nájera C, Gallegos-Cedillo VM, Ros M, Pascual JA. Role of Spectrum-Light on Productivity, and Plant Quality over Vertical Farming Systems: Bibliometric Analysis. Horticulturae. 2023; 9(1):63. https://doi.org/10.3390/horticulturae9010063

Chicago/Turabian Style

Nájera, Cinthia, Victor M. Gallegos-Cedillo, Margarita Ros, and José Antonio Pascual. 2023. "Role of Spectrum-Light on Productivity, and Plant Quality over Vertical Farming Systems: Bibliometric Analysis" Horticulturae 9, no. 1: 63. https://doi.org/10.3390/horticulturae9010063

APA Style

Nájera, C., Gallegos-Cedillo, V. M., Ros, M., & Pascual, J. A. (2023). Role of Spectrum-Light on Productivity, and Plant Quality over Vertical Farming Systems: Bibliometric Analysis. Horticulturae, 9(1), 63. https://doi.org/10.3390/horticulturae9010063

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop