Mostrar el registro sencillo del ítem

Artículo

dc.creatorEgea Cegarra, Gregorioes
dc.creatorPérez Urrestarazu, Luises
dc.creatorFranco Salas, Antonioes
dc.creatorFernández Cañero, Rafaeles
dc.creatorGonzález Pérez, Julioes
dc.date.accessioned2018-10-26T08:59:28Z
dc.date.available2018-10-26T08:59:28Z
dc.date.issued2014
dc.identifier.citationEgea Cegarra, G., Pérez Urrestarazu, L., Franco Salas, A., Fernández Cañero, R. y González Pérez, J. (2014). Lighting systems evaluation for indoor living walls. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 2014 (13) (3), 475 p.-483 p..
dc.identifier.issn1618-8667es
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/11441/79664
dc.description.abstractLiving walls (LW) are vertical greening systems that are becoming popular due to their multiple social and environmental benefits. When LW are installed indoors, a lightening system is often required to ensure an appropriate plant development. This work assesses the performance of three artificial lighting systems on six indoor LW [0.7 m (wide) × 0.7 m (high)] placed at two distances from the light source. The plant species selected for the tests were Soleirolia soleirolii and Spathiphyllum wallisii, which are frequently used in indoor LW. Three different lamps were used in the experiment: incandescent (IL), fluorescent (FL) and metal halide (MHL) lamps, all of them with an input electric power of ≈250 W. Differences in plant growth were only observed when the LW were close to the light source (about 1 m) but not at greater distances (≈1.5 m). IL had the poorest performance. Despite the lower photosynthetic photon flux density efficiency of FL compared with MHL, FL light enabled plants placed in the upper LW (closer to light source) reached similar size to those grown under MHL. Plant quality attributes were generally not affected by light type or the distance to light source. IL and FL generated higher total water losses (i.e. transpiration plus evaporation) than MHL on a LW basis. When expressed per unit of LW area covered by vegetation, FL and MHL reduced water consumption by 34% and 56%, respectively, as compared to IL. Overall, our results indicate that both FL and MHL outperform IL and have a similar ornamental performance, whereas MHL are more advantageous than FL in terms of water consumption and annual cost.es
dc.formatapplication/pdfes
dc.language.isoenges
dc.publisherElsevieres
dc.relation.ispartofUrban Forestry & Urban Greening, 2014 (13) (3), 475 p.-483 p..
dc.rightsAttribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 Internacional*
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/*
dc.subjectBiowalles
dc.subjectEvapotranspirationes
dc.subjectOrnamentales
dc.subjectPlant growthes
dc.subjectPlant microclimatees
dc.subjectUrban greeninges
dc.titleLighting systems evaluation for indoor living wallses
dc.typeinfo:eu-repo/semantics/articlees
dcterms.identifierhttps://ror.org/03yxnpp24
dc.type.versioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersiones
dc.rights.accessRightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccesses
dc.contributor.affiliationUniversidad de Sevilla. Departamento de Ingeniería Aeroespacial y Mecánica de Fluidoses
dc.relation.publisherversionhttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2014.04.009es
dc.identifier.doi10.1016/j.ufug.2014.04.009es
dc.contributor.groupUniversidad de Sevilla. AGR268: Naturación Urbana e Ingeniería de Biosistemases
idus.format.extent9 p.es
dc.journaltitleUrban Forestry & Urban Greeninges
dc.publication.volumen2014 (13)es
dc.publication.issue3es
dc.publication.initialPage475 p.es
dc.publication.endPage483 p.es
dc.identifier.sisius19490es

FicherosTamañoFormatoVerDescripción
13579.pdf993.5KbIcon   [PDF] Ver/Abrir  

Este registro aparece en las siguientes colecciones

Mostrar el registro sencillo del ítem

Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 Internacional
Excepto si se señala otra cosa, la licencia del ítem se describe como: Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 Internacional