-
According to the theory of mathematical programming[25], the solution to any optimization problem is possible in the presence of the following clearly formulated characteristics: optimization criterion (goal); optimization parameters (optimization tools); areas of acceptable values of optimization parameters and optimization algorithm. The adaptive control of the LED lighting regime is carried out by continuous automatic search for the crop lighting current parameters, which provide optimal value of the optimization criterion using real time information about the current state of the object, in our case, the current visible photosynthesis of the crop. The computer program compares the obtained values of the optimization criterion at the current moment and at the previous measurement step and calculates the direction of the gradient according to a certain algorithm, and from it the value of the supply currents, leading to a change in the value of the optimization criterion in the right direction. If we denote byQ(X,t) the dependence of the optimality criterion indicator on the vector of the parameters of the lightingXand the plants age byt, then the formulation of the LED lighting parameters in SG adaptive optimization problem can be written as follows: find such a trajectoryX* (t) so that for anytthe condition is satisfied
$$ \begin{aligned} & Q(X1*,X2*,t) = {\rm{opt}}\;Q(X1,X2,t);\\ & X1\; \in D1, X2 \in D2 \end{aligned} $$ (1) HereX1 – the integral photon flux density from the LEDs LA;X2 – the ratio of the photon flux density from the LEDs with red and white radiation at the shoot tips level, respectively;D1 – the range of the PPFD values from the LED LA;D2 – the range of possible PPFD ratios from red and white LEDs in the LA.
The functional diagram of the ALS is shown inFigure 2. The system operates as follows. The plants are grown in an airtight growth chamber with a device for supplying a nutrient solution to the plant roots and an LED LA located above planting area and containing several chains of LEDs with radiation in different ranges of Photosynthetic Active Radiation (PAR). The basic parameters of the plant habitat in the growth chamber are stabilized in an adequate level by the appropriate regulators. There are either PPFD meters for each type of LEDs irradiation or for their supply currents meters corresponding to the photon fluxes emitted by them in the ALS. The growth chamber is also equipped with a gas analyzer for measuring the current carbon dioxide absorption rate by the crop. As is known, the crop apparent photosynthesis is proportional to the rate of decrease in CO2concentration in the air of a closed chamber with plants[26].
Figure 2.Functional diagram of an adaptive system for automatic crop LED lighting optimization; LED –light emitting diodes, PPFD – photosynthetic photon flux density
At some point in time ti, corresponding to a certain age of the crop, the gas analyzer gives a signal of the crop apparent photosynthesis value to the microcontroller, which is used to calculate the current value of the crop optimization criterion. Then the program compares the obtained values of the optimization criterion at the current moment and at the previous measurement step and calculates the direction of the gradient according to the given algorithm. Then LED power controllers establish the value of the LEDs supply currents for each type LED chains, which leads to a change in the value of the optimization criterion in the right direction. Further, the LA changes the crop lighting regime. Then the whole procedure is repeated for the next search step at timeti+1. The resolution of the search steps in our ALS was 15 minutes. To search for the current optimal lighting parameters during plant growth, gradient and simplex algorithms were used[27].
For the technical implementation of the ALS, it is required that optimization criterion and optimization parameters can be measured non-invasively during plant cultivation. As the current optimization criterion for SG, we used an integral specific value of the ESM for 3 main onboard resources calculated on the production of 1 kg of plant biomass: the volume occupied by the crop, the power consumed by the LED illuminator and the power used to cool the vegetation chamber. Every from the values is depending from lighting mode. The optimization criterion can be written as following.
$$ \begin{aligned} & G\left( {X1,X2,t} \right) = {K_1}V\left( {X1,X2,t} \right)/\Delta M\left( t \right) +\\& {K_2}W(X1,X2,t)/\Delta M\left( t \right),\\& 100\;{\rm{{\text {µ}}mol}}/\left( {{{\rm{m}}^2} \cdot {\rm{s}}} \right) \leqslant X1 \leqslant 700\;{\rm{{\text {µ}}mol}}/\left( {{{\rm{m}}^2} \cdot {\rm{s}}} \right)\\& 0 \leqslant X2 \leqslant 1,5 \end{aligned} $$ (2) whereX1,X2,t– have the same meaning as in equality (1);V– the volume of the SG vegetation chamber, necessary for growing the crop;W– the radiation power of the LED illuminator, necessary for the crop cultivation;K1andK2are the cost of volume unit occupied by the greenhouse and the cost of power unit consumed by the greenhouse’s electricity on board a space object, respectively, in units of reduced mass, ΔM(t) is the current value of the biomass increase obtained from a unit of the SG landing volume (or area).
In our previous work[4], it was shown that the planting area of the same types of vegetation devices, at least for salad crops, can be considered proportional to their volume, and ΔM(t) is approximately proportional to the crop visible photosynthesisF. We introduce the notation:η= ΔM/E(I,t), whereEis the light energy and I is the average PPFD supplied for the crop during the period of ΔМsynthesis, correspondingly. It can be shown that η characterizes the efficiency of the light use for the crop biomass synthesis. For the current elementary time interval (ti+1-ti) estimates we can assume thatη=n•F/I, where n is a constant. Taking into account the above relations, the optimal value of criterion (2) at timetican be rewritten in the form
$$ G*\left( {{t_i}} \right) = \min [{K_3}/F\left( {I\left( {{t_i}} \right)} \right){\rm{ }} + {K_4}/\eta \left( {{t_i}} \right)] $$ (3) hereK3andK4are the cost coefficients of the equivalent mass unit and the unit of electric power consumed by LED illuminator in SG intended for the production of 1 kg of crop, in kg/m2and kg/kW, respectively.K1andK2in expression (2) and accordinglyK3andK4in expression (3) significantly depends both on the design of the spacecraft in which the greenhouse is installed, and on the space expedition features it performs – duration, work program, number of crew members, etc. In this paper we used the onboard resources cost estimates in mass units for some specific space missions from the works[28-30]. When assessing the total power of electricity consumed by SG, we took into account both the energy consumption of all subsystems of SG and the power consumed by the cooling system, which grows approximately in proportion to the power consumption of the subsystems of lighting, ventilation, mineral nutrition, etc. As a result of this, we approximately believed that the coefficient of the consumed in a SG electric energy unit cost (K2) is the sum of the equivalent masses of the SG energy consumption itself and the energy consumption for its cooling.
Table 1gives the equivalent mass estimates of the main onboard resources and the cost coefficientsK1 andK2 calculated for 4 scenarios of the space expeditions from the papers[28-30].Flight of the ISS in low Earth orbit with a duration of more than 10 years, a crew of 6 people (on average) with crewmembers rotation every 90 days and with 2 sessions of extra-space activity per month.
Table 1.The cost of the main onboard resources in the space greenhouse in the equivalent mass units for 4 scenarios of space expeditions[28-30]
№ Type of space
expeditionAirtight volume/
(kg·m−3)Energy consumption,
kg/kWPower consumption for
cooling/(kg·kW−1)K1/
(kg·m−3)K2/
(kg·kW−1)1 Flight in low Earth orbit 66,7 476,2 163,9 66,7 640,1 2 On the Lunar base 45,2 54,0 60,0 45,2 114 3 Transit Martian expedition 5,2 83,3 21,3 5,2 104,6 4 Martian visiting expedition 20,8 86,9 66,7 20,8 153,6 Expedition to the lunar base of long-term use at a gas pressure of 1 standard atmosphere indoors at a temperature of about 20 ºС, using external protection of the inhabited compartment from the regolith layer, using sunlight to illuminate plants during a lunar day at a PPFD level of about 500 μmol/(m2s) and crop lighting from artificial light sources with lower PPFD at night.
A transit Martian manned expedition lasting about a year using solar electric batteries as an energy power source.
A Martian visiting expedition lasting about 20 months with a stay on the planet’s surface, using a 100 kW nuclear energy source along with the establishment of sunlight to illuminate plants.
Since the cost of onboard resources in theTable 1has a certain dimension, when calculatingK3andK4for equation (3), conversion factors were used for the light flux density and photosynthesis measurement units. To convertI(t) to kW units according to the method described in our previous work[31], we used the averaged coefficient (5 × 103μmol/(m2s))/(kW/m2), taking into account that in the LED illuminator radiation spectrum recommended in the work[22], the part of photons in the red region of the spectrum is about 73%. To convert crop visible photosynthesis integral from mgCO2to the biomass growth units (kg) in accordance with the photosynthesis equation for carbohydrate crops, a conversion factor of 8, 5 kg of raw biomass per 1 kg of carbon dioxide absorbed by the crop was obtained. The average dry matter content in the biomass of cabbage was taken equal to 8%, according to experimental data.
The object of the study was Chinese cabbage Brassica chinensis L., cv.Vesnyanka (selected by VNIISSOK Co., Russia) aged from 14 to 25 days. Plants were grown in Root Modules (RM), simulating RM for the developed on-board “Vitacycle-T” greenhouse. Each RM was a roll of fibrous soil substitute “BIONA-V3”TM50 cm long and dry weight (25 ± 3) g. A roll of soil substitute was coiled round horizontally arranged tube of finely porous titanium with outer diameter of 16 mm. 20 seeds of Chinese cabbage were planted in a longitudinal slot in the roll at equal distances from each other. The porous tube was connected to the reservoir in the form of a Mariotte vessel, filled with a standard Chesnokov’s nutrient solution. The Mariotte vessel provided a stabilized water potential in the root zone in the range from (–1.0) kPa to (–1.5) kPa. Two identical crops were grown in a growth chamber from seed planting until the 13th day of vegetation. The growth chamber was placed in a thermostatically controlled room under illuminator with red and white LEDs with a PPFD ratio of red and white LEDs equal to 1.5 and a total PPFD value of 500 μmol/(m2s). Lighting regime was noctidial. On the 14th day from planting, RMs with experimental plants was moved for 10 days to the measuring stand with ALS, described in detail in the previous work[32]. The second synchronous crop was kept in the same growth chamber as a control. The growing conditions are presented inTable 2.Figure 3shows a general view of the experimental stand with the Chinese cabbage crop.
Table 2.Chinese cabbage growth conditions
Ambient temperature/°C 27,0 ± 1 Relative air humidity/% 50 ± 17 Mineral nutrition technique Hydroponics Nutrition solution Standard Chesnokov’s solution with added micronutrients with concentration (700 ± 45) mg/l Lighting source White (4 200 K) and red (660 nm) LEDs PPFD at the shoot tips level/(μmol·m-2·s-1) 500 ± 20 CO2concentration in air/ppm 500~700 Figure 3.Growth chamber with the Chinese cabbage crop in the experimental stand: 1 - LED illuminator, 2, 3 - blower of the growth chamber ventilation system, 4 - fans for air mixing, 5 - root module with the crop, 6 - weight platform with load cells, 7 - platform for regulating the distance between the crop and illuminator, 8, 9 - tubes for the nutrient solution supply
The advantage of the experimental lighting compared with the control one was evaluated by the decrease in the specific ESM in the crop grown with an ALS on compared to the control crop during the growing period. The measure of “saving” the equivalent mass was the value
$$ \delta = {\rm{ }}\left( {{G_{\rm{o}}}-G} \right)/{G_{\rm{o}}} $$ (4) Here,Gand Goare the estimates of the specific ESM for the adaptive search of the lighting and in the control with the best lighting, constant during the growing period, respectively. Sinceδfrom expression (4) is ratio of the ESMs, to simplify the calculationsGaccording to equation (2) we normalized the coefficientsK1andK2by the sum (K1+K2) fromTable 1. After that,Gwas calculated as follows
$$ G = 0.28/M + 0.72\left( {1/{T}} \right)\int\nolimits_0^{{T}} {\rm{Iopt}}\left( {{{X}}1,{{X}}2} \right)\cdot{\rm{dt/}}M $$ (5) where M is the mass (kg) of the harvest from m2of the crop, obtained using ALS, Iopt (t) – the drift trajectory of the optimal values of the integral PPFD from the LED illuminator with a developed search system during the growing time,T– the vegetation time (24 days),
$\left[ {\left( {\dfrac{1}{{{T}}}} \right)\int\nolimits_0^{{T}} {\rm{Iopt}}\cdot{\rm{dt}}} \right]$ - average light power applied for the crop during the growth time.$$ {G_k} = 0.28/{M_{\rm{o}}} + 0.72{I_k}\left( {X1,X2} \right)/{M_{\rm{o}}} $$ (6) whereMois the mass (kg) of the harvest from m2of the sowing, obtained in the control experiment for 24 days of vegetation. In the expressions (5) and (6), the light flux was expressed in kW/m2.
-
The data inTable 1indicate that the contribution of the power unit consumed by the LED illuminator to the SG ESM (taking into account the energy for cooling also) for every considered space expedition scenario fromTable 1is significantly greater than of the unit volume (or sown area unit). For example, for a scenario with a lunar base, ESM of power consumed for the production of a crop unit mass gives 72% of the contribution to the value of the optimality criterion (3). For the transit Martian expedition, one can almost neglect the optimization of the crop specific productivity, minimizing the light energy expended in SG for the production of a crop biomass unit, i.e. the reciprocal of the light use efficiency. As a result, for such an expedition it would be advantageous to maximizeη(ti) from expression (3) during the growing time and grow crop at relatively low value of total light flux density. However, it should be noted that estimates of onboard cost coefficients, according to previous work[33], can change significantly as the space missions’ scenarios and the structures of life support systems are clarified in upcoming space expeditions. As a result, the trajectories of changes in the operating regimes in the ALS that we obtained can serve to illustrate the capabilities of such systems only and cannot be considered as actual recommendations for existing SGs.
Figure 4shows the drift trajectory of the specific ESM of the Chinese cabbage crop that are optimal according to criterion (3) during the growing time in relation to the Lunar base scenario fromTable 1.
Figure 4.Age drift of optimal specific ESM for Chinese cabbage vegetation in the space greenhouse for Lunar base
As a result of the lighting optimization for Chinese cabbage crop from the 14th to 24th days of vegetation according to the criterion of the current minimum ESM, the saving of the SG equivalent mass for the production of 1 kg of fresh biomass was 14.9%.
Table 3represents data on the obtained biomass productivity and composition in the experimental and control Chinese cabbage crops. As follows from the above data, in the experiment the yield, calculated on the plants dry weight, decreased by about 27%. The reason for this was mainly the fact that the search algorithm in our ALS during the growing season lowered the integral PPFD to about 260 μmol/(m2s), i.e. almost twice as compared to the control. The PPFD is closer to the value corresponding to the maximum light use efficiency of the crop. As was shown in our previous work[4], for example, the more PPFD, the higher crop productivity. It also follows from the table 3 that the plants of the control and experimental variants did not have significant differences in the biomass nitrate content, while in both variants the nitrate content was below the maximum permissible norms established by both Russians (3 000 mg/kg) and Europeans (2 500 mg/kg). A slight difference between the values of the leaf specific surface density, as well as the chlorophylls and carotenoids content in the biomass in the experiment and the control crops indicates that the use of ALS did not cause significant changes in the morphogenesis and the photosynthetic apparatus in the plant leaves. At the same time, the experimental plants were significantly inferior to the control plants in the content of ascorbic acid in the leaves, which can significantly reduce the worth of the obtained plant biomass for the astronauts’ diet. The high lability of the selected Chinese cabbage cultivar ascorbic acid content in the biomass depending on the LED illumination characteristics was noted earlier, for example, in (22).
In general, the data intable 3indicate that adaptive optimization of the LED plant lighting according to criterion (3) should be accompanied by a control of the crop biochemical characteristics, because of possible contradiction between the requirement to lower the ESM of the greenhouse and to raise the content of vitamin C in the grown biomass. For the successful application of the adaptive optimization system for plant lighting in vitamin SG, additional studies are needed to clarify different optimization criteria and the limits of the LED lighting variations for specific space missions.
Nevertheless, our experimental results show that adaptive control could be practicable and profitable for optimizing of space greenhouse light assemblies. Similar systems with other optimization criteria can be used for terrestrial plant factories.
Table 3.Characteristics of the control and experimental Chinese cabbage crops at age of 24 days
Indicator Control Experiment Crop fresh weight per 1m2of planting surface/kg 0,93 ± 0,18 0,79 ± 0,20 The dry matter content in the shoots/% 10,1 ± 0,6 8,7 ± 0,4 The leaf specific surface density, freshbiomas/(mg ·cm–2) 87 ± 13 85 ± 14 Chlorophyll content per 1 dm2of leaf surface/ mg 5,5 ± 0,3 7,0 ± 0,9 Carotenoids content per 1 dm2of leaf surface/ mg 1,3 ± 0,1 1,6 ± 0,2 Ascorbic acid content per 100g of leaves fresh biomass/mg 65 ± 6 14 ± 1,0 Nitrate content per 1000 g of leaves fresh biomass/mg 1 800 ± 366 1 675 ± 345
Adaptive Control for Space Greenhouse Light Assembly
-
摘要:到目前为止,基于发光二极管(Light Emitting Diodes-based,LED)的照明器被广泛用于除自然光之外的温室植物照明,以及没有自然光的植物工厂。优化人工光照参数,如日光照积分和不同光谱成分的比值,可以显著降低生物生命支持系统(Biological Life Support Systems,BLSS)包括空间温室(Space Greenhouses,SG)中光栽培作物的生产成本。然而,由于缺乏关于窄带辐射引起的生理效应的信息,以及数学描述植物作物对LED照明参数变化的反应的复杂性,LED照明系统的优化一直受到限制。在人工照明的条件下,作物生产者通常力图建立一个恒定于整个生长季节的最佳光照制度。然而,有实验数据表明,随着植物年龄的增加,作物对光照制度的要求会发生变化。基于生物反馈的自适应搜索优化方法是改进作物LED照明参数的潜在途径。描述了建立于生物医学问题研究所(莫斯科,俄罗斯)用于大白菜栽培的基于红色和白色LED光源的自适应照明系统(Adaptive Lighting System,ALS)。其自适应控制程序实现了对实时支持最佳植物生长特性的当前照明参数的连续自动搜索。ALS包括一个封闭的生长室,带有基于红色和白色LED灯的光组件(Light Assembly,LA),并配有一个气体二氧化碳分析仪(Gas CO 2Analyzer,GA)。每一种发光二极管的光子通量密度(Photosynthetic photon flux density,PPFD)由微处理器(MicroProcessor,MP)中的程序相互独立控制。红外GA定期测量生长室内由作物的表观光合作用(Visible Photosynthesis,VF)引起的CO 2浓度下降。MP接收来自遗传算法输出的信号,并计算作物的光合速率,以及当前的光照质量功能值。然后程序比较在当前时刻和上一步得到的优化准则值,并根据选择算法和LED电源电流的新值计算梯度的方向,使优化准则的值朝着正确的方向变化。此外,供电单元为各类型的LED链提供电流,LA变换植物的照明模式。我们用等效系统质量(Equivalent System Mass,ESM)的最小比值作为SG照明质量的标准,该值取决于植物的照明状况。SG单位种植面积等效质量和SG单位耗电量的成本系数在很大程度上取决于航天器设计和空间探测方案。根据文献,基于光子通量密度和作物光效率的等效系统质量估计值已经在一艘用于长期使用的月球基地的空间探测场景,有4名宇航员的航天器中计算出来。为了寻找植物生长过程中的当前最优光照参数,采用了梯度和单纯形算法。采用入射于作物茎尖的整体光子通量密度水平和红色与白色光通量密度的比值(因子 X1和 X2)作为优化因子。 X1的调节范围为200~700 μmol/(m 2·s), X2的调节范围为0~1.5。通过对照实验比较使用ALS或最佳恒定LED照明时的等效系统质量来评估自适应照明系统的效果。根据月球基地考察的最小ESM准则(1),在植物生长第14~24 d期间对大白菜作物光照进行自适应优化,使得SG等效质量节约了 14.9%。具有其它优化准则的类似系统可用于陆生植物工厂。Abstract:To date, Light Emitting Diodes-based (LED) illuminators are widely used for plants lighting in greenhouses in addition to natural light, as well as in plant factories without natural light. Optimization of artificial lighting parameters, such as the daily light integral and the ratios of different spectral components, can significantly reduce the cost of crop production in light culture including Space Greenhouses (SG) in Biological Life Support Systems (BLSS). However, the optimization of LED lighting systems is so far limited by the lack of information about the physiological effects caused by narrow-band radiation, as well as the complexity of the mathematical description of plant crops reactions to the changes of LED lighting parameters. In conditions of artificial illumination, crop producers usually strive to establish an optimal light regime that is constant throughout the whole growing season. However, there is experimental data on changes in the requirements for the illumination regime of crops with increasing age of plants. A promising approach to improving the parameters of crops LED lighting is the adaptive method of search engine optimization using biological feedback. The Adaptive Lighting System (ALS) is described on the basis of illuminator with red and white LEDs built at the Institute for Biomedical Problems (Moscow, Russia) for Chinese cabbage cultivation. The adaptive control procedure implements a continuous automatic search for current lighting parameters that provide optimal plant growth characteristics in real time. ALS includes a closed growth chamber with Light Assembly (LA) based on red and white LEDs, equipped with a Gas CO 2Analyzer (GA). The Photosynthetic Photon Flux Density (PPFD) from each type of LEDs can be controlled independently from each other according to the program in the MicroProcessor (MP). Periodically, infrared GA measures the decrease in CO 2concentration inside the growth chamber caused by Visible Photosynthesis (VF) of the crop. MP receives a signal from the GA output and calculates the photosynthesis rate of the crop, as well as the value of the lighting quality functional at the current time. Then the program compares the obtained values of the optimization criterion at the current moment and at the previous step and calculates the direction of the gradient according to picked algorithm and the new values of the LED supply currents, leading to a change in the value of the optimization criterion in the right direction. Further, the power supply unit realizes the currents of LED chains of each type and LA changes the plant lighting mode. As a criterion for the lighting quality in SG we used the minimum specific value of the Equivalent System Mass (ESM), which depends on the plants lighting regime. The cost coefficients of the unit of SG planting area equivalent mass and the unit of electric power consumed by SG significantly depend both on the spacecraft design and on the space expedition scenario. According to the literature, the equivalent system mass estimates depending on the light flux density and the crop light efficiency have been calculated in a spacecraft for the space expedition scenario at a long-term use lunar base with a crew of 4. To search for the current optimal lighting parameters during the plant growth, gradient and simplex algorithms were used. As optimization factors, the integral PPFD incident on the crop at the shoot tips level and the ratio of red and white light flux densities (factors X1 and X2, respectively) were used. Factor X1 was regulated in the range from 200 μmol/(m 2·s) to 700 μmol/(m 2·s), and factor X2 was from 0 to 1.5. The effectiveness of ALS was evaluated by comparing ESM when using ALS or the best constant LED lighting from comparison experiment. Adaptive optimization of Chinese cabbage crop lighting from the 14th to 24th day of vegetation according to the minimum ESM criterion (1) for the lunar base expedition led to a 14.9% saving in the SG equivalent mass. Similar systems with other optimization criterion can be use for terrestrial plant factories.
-
Fig. 3Growth chamber with the Chinese cabbage crop in the experimental stand: 1 - LED illuminator, 2, 3 - blower of the growth chamber ventilation system, 4 - fans for air mixing, 5 - root module with the crop, 6 - weight platform with load cells, 7 - platform for regulating the distance between the crop and illuminator, 8, 9 - tubes for the nutrient solution supply
Table 1The cost of the main onboard resources in the space greenhouse in the equivalent mass units for 4 scenarios of space expeditions[28-30]
№ Type of space
expeditionAirtight volume/
(kg·m−3)Energy consumption,
kg/kWPower consumption for
cooling/(kg·kW−1)K1/
(kg·m−3)K2/
(kg·kW−1)1 Flight in low Earth orbit 66,7 476,2 163,9 66,7 640,1 2 On the Lunar base 45,2 54,0 60,0 45,2 114 3 Transit Martian expedition 5,2 83,3 21,3 5,2 104,6 4 Martian visiting expedition 20,8 86,9 66,7 20,8 153,6 Table 2Chinese cabbage growth conditions
Ambient temperature/°C 27,0 ± 1 Relative air humidity/% 50 ± 17 Mineral nutrition technique Hydroponics Nutrition solution Standard Chesnokov’s solution with added micronutrients with concentration (700 ± 45) mg/l Lighting source White (4 200 K) and red (660 nm) LEDs PPFD at the shoot tips level/(μmol·m-2·s-1) 500 ± 20 CO2concentration in air/ppm 500~700 Table 3Characteristics of the control and experimental Chinese cabbage crops at age of 24 days
Indicator Control Experiment Crop fresh weight per 1m2of planting surface/kg 0,93 ± 0,18 0,79 ± 0,20 The dry matter content in the shoots/% 10,1 ± 0,6 8,7 ± 0,4 The leaf specific surface density, freshbiomas/(mg ·cm–2) 87 ± 13 85 ± 14 Chlorophyll content per 1 dm2of leaf surface/ mg 5,5 ± 0,3 7,0 ± 0,9 Carotenoids content per 1 dm2of leaf surface/ mg 1,3 ± 0,1 1,6 ± 0,2 Ascorbic acid content per 100g of leaves fresh biomass/mg 65 ± 6 14 ± 1,0 Nitrate content per 1000 g of leaves fresh biomass/mg 1 800 ± 366 1 675 ± 345 -
[1] ZABEL P, BAMSEY M, SCHUBERT D, et al. Review and analysis of plant growth chambers and greenhouse modules for space[C]//44th International Conference on Environmental Systems.Tucson, Arizona, United States: [s. l.], 2014. [2] BERKOVICH YU A, SMOLYANINA S O, KRIVOBOK N M, et al. Vegetable production facility as a part of a closed life support system in a Russian space flight scenario[J]. Advances in Space Research,2009,44:70-176. [3] ROMANOV S, ZHELEZNYAKOV A G, TELEGIN A A, et al. Life support systems for crews on long-duration interplanetary missions[J]. Izvestiya RAN. Energetika (in Russian),2007,3:57-74. [4] BERKOVICH YU A, KRIVOBOK N M, SMOLYANINA S O, et al. Space greenhouses: present and future[M]. Moscow: Slovo (in Russian), 2005: 368. [5] BERKOVICH YU A, KRIVOBOK N M, SINYAK Y., et al Developing a vitamin greenhouse for the life support system of the international space station and for future interplanetary missions[J]. Advances in Space Research,2004,34:1552-1557.doi:10.1016/j.asr.2004.06.006 [6] ZEIDLER C, VRAKKING V, BAMSEY M, et al. Greenhouse module for space system: a lunar greenhouse design[J]. Open Agriculture,2017,2:116-132. [7] JONES H W. Comparizon of bioregenerative and physical/chemical life support systems: ICES 2006-01-2082[R]. [S. l.]: SAE, 2006. [8] LEVRI J A, VACCARY D A, DRYSDALE A E. Theory and application of the equivalent system mass metric: SAE Technical Paper 2000-01-2395[R]. [S. l.]: SAE, 2000. [9] DRYSDALE A, EWERT M, HANFORD A. Equivalent system mass studies of missions and concepts: SAE Technical Paper 1999-01-2081[R]. [S. l.]: SAE, 1999. [10] KANG M, WANG F Y. From parallel plants to smart plants: intellegent control and management for plant growth[J]. Journal of Automatica Sinica,2017,4(2):161-166.doi:10.1109/JAS.2017.7510487 [11] AVERCHEVA O V, BERKOVICH YU A, KONOVALOVA I O, et al. Optimizing LED lighting for space plant growth unit: Joint effects of photon flux density, red to white ratios and intermittent light pulses[J]. Life Sciences in Space Research,2016,11:29-42.doi:10.1016/j.lssr.2016.12.001 [12] MOKRONOSOV A T. The relationship of photosynthesis and growth functions[M]//Photosynthesis and the Production Process. Moscow: Nauka (in Russian), 1988: 109-121. [13] RITCHIE J T, SINGH U, GODWIN D C, et al. Cereal growth, development and yield[M]//TSUJI G Y, HOOGENBOOM G, THORNTON P K, Eds. Understanding Options for Agricultural Production. Netherlands: Springer, 1998: 79-98. [14] GIJZEN H, HEUVELINK E, CHALLA H, et al. Hortisim: a model for greenhouse crops and greenhouse climate[J]. Acta Horticulturae,1998,456:441-450. [15] MA Y, WEN M, GUO Y, et al. Parameter optimization and field validation of the functional-structural model GREENLAB for maize at different population densities[J]. Annals of Botany,2008,101(8):1185-1194. [16] YAN H P, KANG M Z, DE REFFYE P, et al. Dynamic architectural plant model simulating resource-dependent growth[J]. Annals of Botany,2004,93(5):591-602.doi:10.1093/aob/mch078 [17] EVERS J B, VOS J, YIN X, et al. Simulation of wheat growth and development based on organ-level photosynthesis and assimilate allocation[J]. Journal of Experimental Botany,2010,61(8):2203-2216.doi:10.1093/jxb/erq025 [18] MEDINA-RUIZ C A, MERCADO-LUNA I A, SOTO-ZARAZUA G M, et al. Mathematical modeling on tomato plants: a review[J]. African Journal of Agricultural Research,2011,6(33):6745-6749. [19] SPEETJENS S L, STIGTER J D, VAN STRATEN G. Towards an adaptive model for greenhouse control[J]. Computers and Electronics in Agriculture,2009,67(1-2):1-8.doi:10.1016/j.compag.2009.01.012 [20] FAN X R, KANG M Z, HEUVELINK E, et al. A knowledge-and-data-driven modeling approach for simulating plant growth: a case study on tomato growth[J]. Ecological Modelling,2015,312:363-373.doi:10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2015.06.006 [21] BERKOVICH Y, KONOVALOVA I O, SMOLYANINA S O, et al. LED crop illumination inside space greenhouses[J]. REACH - Reviews in Human Space Exploration,2017,6:11-24. [22] BERKOVICH Y, KONOVALOVA I O, EROKHIN A N, et al. LED lighting optimization as applied to a vitamin space plant growth facility[J]. Life Sciences in Space Research,2019,20:93-100.doi:10.1016/j.lssr.2018.09.004 [23] AVERCHEVA O, BERKOVICH Y, SMOLYANINA S., et al Biochemical, photosynthetic and productive parameters of Chinese cabbage grown under blue-red LED assembly designed for space agriculture[J]. Advances in Space Research,2014,53:1574-1581.doi:10.1016/j.asr.2014.03.003 [24] KORBUT V L. Optimization of plant productivity in biotechnical systems.[M]//Problems of optimization in biotechnical systems using computer technology. Moscow, Russian: [s. n.], 1981: 5-32. [25] GACHINSKY E, DROZDOV A, CHERKASHIN M. Adaptation in continuous systems of automatic search[M]. Moscow, Russian: [s. n], 1991. [26] KARMANOV V G. Mathematical programming[M]. Moscow, Russian: [s. n], 1986. [27] CHARLES-EDWARDS D A. The mathematics of photosynthesis and productivity[M]. New York: Academic Press, 1981. [28] BERKOVICHYU A, OCHKOV O A, PEREVEDENTSEV O V, et al. Selection of algorithms for adaptive optimization of plant photosynthesis in space greenhouses[J]. Aviakosmicheskaya i Ekologicheskaya Meditsina (in Russian),2019,53(2):85-92. [29] DRYSDALE A, BUGBEE B. Optimizing plant habitat for space: a novel approach to plant growth on the Moon: SAE technical paper 2003-01-2360[R]. [S. l.]: SAE, 2003. [30] DRYSDALE A, MAXWELL S, EWERT M, et al. System analysis of life support for long duration missions: SAE technical paper 2000-01-2394[R]. [S. l.]: SAE, 2000. [31] THIMIJAN R W, HEINS R D. Photometric, radiometric and quantum light units of measure: a review of procedures for interconversion[J]. HortScience,1983,18(6):818-822. [32] BERKOVICH YU A, OCHKOV O A, PEREVEDENTSEV O V. Substantiation of the approach to adaptive optimization of light-emitting diode illumination of crops in vitamin greenhouses within the life support system for space crews[J]. Aviakosmicheskaya i Ekologicheskaya Meditsina (in Russian),2018,52(6):86-94. [33] DRYSDALE A, NAKAMURA T, YORIO N, et al. Use of sunlight in a bioregenerative life support system - Equivalent system mass calculations[J]. Advances in Space Research,2008,42:1929-1943.doi:10.1016/j.asr.2008.09.020