Hiring in life sciences? Share your open positions with our professional community. Read more Close

Advertisement

Night-break photoperiod timing shapes growth trajectories, functional phenotype, and biomass partitioning in Cannabis sativa L. in a genotype-dependent manner

Created on 01 Oct 2026

Authors

Rodriguez-Roncancio, M. P., Castillo-Hernandez, L. C., Love, N., Melgarejo, L. M., Sarmiento, F.

Abstract

Cannabis sativa L. cultivation in tropical regions or under indoor conditions requires supplemental lighting to maintain plant yields. Night-break (NB) photoperiods offer a cost-effective alternative to conventional day extension, although genotypic responses have not been clearly described. This study evaluated the effects of continuous and pulsed NB treatments on the growth, phenology, physiology, productivity, and cannabinoid accumulation of three Cannabis sativa genotypes representing two chemotypes. Plants were exposed to a commercial 18-h photoperiod (T1), a continuous 1-h NB (T2), or four 15-min NB pulses (T3) with equal total duration. Continuous NB produced responses comparable to the commercial photoperiod. In contrast, pulsed NB accelerated phenological progression by two to three weeks and reduced final plant height by 15-28%, depending on genotype, without impairing photosynthetic performance or decreasing floral dry biomass. Harvest index increased under both NB treatments, indicating enhanced biomass allocation to reproductive structures, while cannabinoid accumulation remained primarily genotype-dependent with only minor treatment-specific modulation. These findings demonstrate that NB efficacy depends not only on the duration of nocturnal light but also on its temporal distribution, highlighting temporal organization of nocturnal light as a key regulator of photoperiodic responses and a promising strategy for optimizing cannabis cultivation.

Preprint server: bioRxiv
The authors list and abstract were imported from bioRxiv on 01 Oct 2026.

Advertisement

Stats

  • Community rating n/a 0 votes
  • Your rating

1-terrible, 9-excellent. How would you rate this preprint? Sign in in to submit your rating.

  • Recommendations n/a n/a positive of 0 vote(s)
  • Views 8
  • Comments 0

Recommended by

  • No recommendations yet.

Post a comment

You need to be signed in to post comments. You can sign in here.

Comments

There are no comments yet.

Advertisement