Search Results

You are looking at 1 - 10 of 28 items for :

  • "vertical farming" x
  • Refine by Access: All x
Clear All
Open access

Haijie Dou, Genhua Niu, Mengmeng Gu, and Joseph Masabni

Kozai, T. Niu, G. Takagaki (eds.), M. 2015 Plant factory: An indoor vertical farming system for efficient quality food production. Academic Press, San Diego, CA Li, Q. 2010 Effects of light quality on growth and phytochemical accumulation of lettuce and

Full access

Samuel E. Wortman, Michael S. Douglass, and Jeffrey D. Kindhart

Demand for local food, including strawberries (Fragaria ×ananassa), is increasing throughout the United States. Strawberry production in the midwestern United States can be challenging due to the relatively short growing season and pests. However, vertical, hydroponic, high tunnel production systems could extend the growing season, minimize pest incidence, and maximize strawberry yield and profitability. The objectives of this study were to 1) identify the best cultivars and growing media for vertical, hydroponic, high tunnel production of strawberries in the midwestern United States and to 2) assess potential strategies for replacing synthetic fertilizer with organic nutrient sources in hydroponic strawberry production. To accomplish these objectives, three experiments were conducted across 2 years and two locations in Illinois to compare 11 strawberry cultivars, three soilless media mixtures, and three nutrient sources. Strawberry yield was greatest when grown in perlite mixed with coco coir or vermiculite and fertilized with a synthetic nutrient source. Yield was reduced by up to 15% when fertilized with a bio-based, liquid nutrient source and vermicompost mixed with soilless media. Strawberry yield among cultivars varied by year and location, but Florida Radiance, Monterey, Evie 2, Portola, and Seascape were among the highest-yielding cultivars in at least one site-year. Results contribute to the development of best management practices for vertical, hydroponic, high tunnel strawberry production in the midwestern United States, but further research is needed to understand nutrient dynamics and crop physiological response among levels within vertical, hydroponic towers.

Free access

Haijie Dou, Genhua Niu, Mengmeng Gu, and Joseph G. Masabni

( Liaros et al., 2016 ; Saha et al., 2016 ). Indoor vertical farming, also known as “plant factory,” is a highly controlled environmental system for plant production that uses multiple-layer culture shelves with artificial lighting ( Despommier, 2010

Free access

Gary W. Stutte

The use of light-emitting diodes (LEDs) to support plant growth is a radical departure from use of gas-discharge lamps, which were developed in mid-19th and widely adopted by the industry during the 20th century. Initial investigation by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) in the late 1980s on the use of LEDs to grow plant in space is resulting in an industry-wide transition from gas discharge to solid-state lighting systems. This global transformation is given urgency by national policies to reduce energy consumption and being facilitated by ready access to information on LEDs. The combination of research, government policy, and information technology has resulted in an exponential increase in research into the use and application of LED technology in horticulture. Commercial horticulture has identified the opportunities provided by LEDs to optimize light spectra to promote growth, regulate morphology, increase nutrient content, and reduce operating costs. LED-light technology is enabling the development of innovative lighting systems, and is being incorporated into large-scale plant factories for the production of edible, ornamental, and medicinal plants. An overview of prevalence of readily accessible information on LEDs and implications for future adoption in horticulture is discussed.

Open access

Celina Gómez, Megha Poudel, Matias Yegros, and Paul R. Fisher

The objectives were to characterize and compare shrinkage (i.e., transplant loss) and growth of tissue-cultured blueberry (Vaccinium corymbosum) transplants acclimated in greenhouses or indoors under 1) different photosynthetic photon flux densities (PPFDs) (Expt. 1); or 2) spectral changes over time using broad-spectrum white (W; 400 to 700 nm) light-emitting diodes (LEDs) without or with red or far-red (FR) radiation (Expt. 2). In Expt. 1, ‘Emerald’ and ‘Snowchaser’ transplants were acclimated for 8 weeks under PPFDs of 35, 70, 105, or 140 ± 5 µmol·m‒2·s‒1 provided by W LED fixtures for 20 h·d−1. In another treatment, PPFD was increased over time by moving transplants from treatment compartments providing 70 to 140 µmol·m‒2·s‒1 at the end of week 4. Transplants were also acclimated in either a research or a commercial greenhouse (RGH or CGH, respectively). Shrinkage was unaffected by PPFD, but all transplants acclimated indoors had lower shrinkage (≤4%) than those in the greenhouse (15% and 17% in RGH and CGH, respectively), and generally produced more shoot and root biomass, regardless of PPFD. Growth responses to increasing PPFD were linear in most cases, although treatment effects after finishing were generally not significant among PPFD treatments. In Expt. 2, ‘Emerald’ transplants were acclimated for 8 weeks under constant W, W + red (WR), or W + FR (WFR) radiation, all of which provided a PPFD of 70 ± 2 μmol·m−2·s−1 for 20 h·d−1. At the end of week 4, a group of transplants from WR and WFR were moved to treatment compartments with W (WRW or WFRW, respectively) or from W to a research greenhouse (WGH), where another group of transplants were also acclimated for 8 weeks (GH). Shrinkage of transplants acclimated indoors was also low in Expt. 2, ranging from 1% to 4%. In contrast, shrinkage of transplants acclimated in GH or under WGH was 37% or 14%, respectively. Growth of indoor-acclimated transplants was generally greater than that in GH or under WGH. Although growth responses were generally similar indoors, plants acclimated under WFR had a higher root dry mass (DM) and longer roots compared with GH and WGH.

Open access

Kellie J. Walters, Bridget K. Behe, Christopher J. Currey, and Roberto G. Lopez

Controlled environment (CE) food crop production has existed in the United States for many years, but recent improvements in technology and increasing production warranted a closer examination of the industry. Therefore, our objectives were to characterize historical trends in CE production, understand the current state of the U.S. hydroponics industry, and use historical and current trends to inform future perspectives. In the 1800s, CE food production emerged and increased in popularity until 1929. After 1929, when adjusted for inflation (AFI), CE food production stagnated and decreased until 1988. From 1988 to 2014, the wholesale value of CE food production increased from $64.2 million to $796.7 million AFI. With the recent increase in demand for locally grown food spurring an increase in CE production, both growers and researchers have been interested in using hydroponic CE technologies to improve production and quality. Therefore, we surveyed U.S. hydroponic food crop producers to identify current hydroponic production technology adoption and potential areas for research needs. Producers cited a wide range of technology utilization; more than half employed solely hydroponic production techniques, 56% monitored light intensity, and more than 80% monitored air temperature and nutrient solution pH and electrical conductivity. Additionally, the growing environments varied from greenhouses (64%), indoors in multilayer (31%) or single-layer (7%) facilities, to hoop houses or high tunnels (29%). Overall, producers reported managing the growing environment to improve crop flavor and the development of production strategies as the most beneficial research areas, with 90% stating their customers would pay more for crops with increased flavor. Lastly, taking historical data and current practices into account, perspectives on future hydroponic CE production are discussed. These include the importance of research on multiple environmental parameters instead of single parameters in isolation and the emphasis on not only increasing productivity but improving crop quality including flavor, sensory attributes, and postharvest longevity.

Open access

Kristin E. Gibson, Alexa J. Lamm, Fallys Masambuka-Kanchewa, Paul R. Fisher, and Celina Gómez

vertical farming environment or indoor farming environment. So of course, it becomes really important for plant factory propagation.” Currently, a limited number of indoor farms are growing vegetable seedlings or herbs in the United States, and a few more

Open access

Cary A. Mitchell

to harvest maturity indoors ( Mitchell, 2004 ). The umbrella term “controlled-environment agriculture” (CEA) covers additional appellations including “indoor agriculture” (IA), “indoor farming” (IF), “vertical farming” (VF), “plant factories” (PF

Free access

Allen V. Barker

concluding chapter in the text. Crop production indoors with hydroponics with multiple elevations of crops (vertical farming) is the topic of Chapter 15. This topic does not involve soils but is viewed as a way of increasing crop production in urban areas on

Full access

Celina Gómez, Christopher J. Currey, Ryan W. Dickson, Hye-Ji Kim, Ricardo Hernández, Nadia C. Sabeh, Rosa E. Raudales, Robin G. Brumfield, Angela Laury-Shaw, Adam K. Wilke, Roberto G. Lopez, and Stephanie E. Burnett

esculentum Mill) J. Hort. Sci. 65 323 331 Banerjee, C. Adenaeuer, L. 2014 Up, up and away! The economics of vertical farming J. Aging Stud. 2 40 60 Benis, K. Turan, I. Reinhart, C. Ferrão, P. 2018 Putting rooftops to use—A cost-benefit analysis of food