Table 3 ANOVA and mean comparisons of the effect of light treatments on the number and weight of fruits, yield, dry matter content, and fruit quality of tomato.

From: Intra-canopy LED lighting outperformed top LED lighting in improving tomato yield and expression of the genes responsible for lycopene, phytoene and vitamin C synthesis

LED light treatment

Number of fruits (per m2)

Fruit yield (kg/m2)

Single fruit weight (g)

Dry matter content (%)

Vitamin C content ( µg g−1 FW)

Fruit lycopene content (µg g−1 FW)

Control

146.67 ± 3.50d*

22.03 ± 0.62c

150.26 ± 5.81a

5.14 ± 0.21c

92.4 ± 2.22d

203.5 ± 3.85c

Top-lighting

169.86 ± 3.75c

24.71 ± 0.67b

146.01 ± 5.01ab

5.41 ± 0.17b

136.8 ± 3.21c

230.1 ± 4.42b

Intra-canopy lighting

196.94 ± 4.25b

28.30 ± 0.71a

143.73 ± 4.31bc

5.98 ± 0.16a

177.1 ± 3.25b

267.2 ± 5.66a

Top-Intra-lighting

206.67 ± 2.75a

28.83 ± 0.70a

139.52 ± 4.01c

5.99 ± 0.17a

206.4 ± 4.45a

235.8 ± 4.89b

The maximum percentage of increase (or decrease) compared to the control

40.90 ± 3.52

30.87 ± 0.68

− 7.15 ± 4.54

16.54 ± 1.06

123.4 ± 2.26

31.3 ± 1.21

Source of variation

df

      

Rep

3

3003.59**

35.87**

369.98**

0.024**

732.06 **

3554.39 **

Light

3

35,186.67 **

572.79**

79.02**

0.556**

108,387.78**

28,466.86**

Rep*Light (Experimental Error)

9

169.25ns

2.25ns

2.39ns

0.0025ns

95.94 **

370.45ns

Sampling error

144

720.49

7.23

5.16

0.0032

7.25

728.28

  1. *Values are mean ± SE (standard error). Treatments with a letter in common above have no significant difference based on the LSD test (P<0.05).
  2. **and nsindicate significant at 0.01 probability level and not-significant, respectively.