Weihao Dou, Wan Geng, Weisen Sun, Jie Xu, Wenchao Zhang, Guilong Song, Yufeng Chen, Liebao Han
The results demonstrated that LED effectively alleviated shade-induced light limitation. It maintained turf normalized difference vegetation index (NDVI) and chlorophyll content at levels comparable to those under natural light. Furthermore, LED treatment improved physiological responses associated with shade stress, as indicated by enhanced cell membrane stability, reduced membrane lipid peroxidation, and altered antioxidant-related responses, including increased superoxide dismutase (SOD) activity and dynamic changes in peroxidase (POD) activity. Regarding root morphology, LED treatment reduced the shade-induced increases in specific root length (SRL) and specific root surface area (SRA), suggesting a modification of shade-induced root morphological responses. Principal component analysis (PCA) revealed distinct multivariate response patterns associated with different light environments. Correlation analysis further indicated significant associations among NDVI, chlorophyll content, and antioxidant-related traits across different light environments. These associations suggested that turf performance under LED lighting was related to concurrent variation in chlorophyll content and antioxidant-related traits.
INTRODUCTION: The roof structures of professional enclosed stadiums often cause shading problems on the turf, posing a major challenge to maintaining turf quality and efficient management. Artificial lighting has been applied to address this issue, particularly light-emitting diode (LED).
METHODS: To evaluate the efficacy of LED with a specific wavelength in alleviating the adverse effects of shade stress on turfgrasses, we conducted a systematic and multi-dimensional assessment of Seashore paspalum (Paspalum vaginatum Sw.) and Zoysia japonica (Zoysia japonica Steud.) turf under three light conditions: natural lighting, shading, and LED, within a stadium.
RESULTS: The results demonstrated that LED effectively alleviated shade-induced light limitation. It maintained turf normalized difference vegetation index (NDVI) and chlorophyll content at levels comparable to those under natural light. Furthermore, LED treatment improved physiological responses associated with shade stress, as indicated by enhanced cell membrane stability, reduced membrane lipid peroxidation, and altered antioxidant-related responses, including increased superoxide dismutase (SOD) activity and dynamic changes in peroxidase (POD) activity. Regarding root morphology, LED treatment reduced the shade-induced increases in specific root length (SRL) and specific root surface area (SRA), suggesting a modification of shade-induced root morphological responses. Principal component analysis (PCA) revealed distinct multivariate response patterns associated with different light environments. Correlation analysis further indicated significant associations among NDVI, chlorophyll content, and antioxidant-related traits across different light environments. These associations suggested that turf performance under LED lighting was related to concurrent variation in chlorophyll content and antioxidant-related traits.
DISCUSSION: In conclusion, applying LED lighting can effectively improve turf recovery-related traits and physiological status through improvements in canopy characteristics, chlorophyll status, antioxidant-related responses, and root morphological traits. This study demonstrated under a real stadium environment that specific LED lighting can serve as an effective supplemental light source for improving turf performance in shaded areas, providing practical guidance for stadium turf management.