ArticleScientific reports2025
Agri-Photovoltaic technology allows dual use of land for tomato production and electricity generation.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Agri-Photovoltaic (APV) systems combine electricity generation and agricultural production on the same land. The physiological impacts of the shading imposed on crops cultivated under such systems are not fully understood. This study evaluated the impact of APV shading on tomato physiology and productivity through two field experiments conducted in 2022 and 2023 at Bar Ilan University, Israel. Processing tomato plants (Heinz 1648, Heinz 4107) were grown in seven north-south oriented rows (T1-T7) situated between two photovoltaic (PV) panel arrays. The arrays consisted of 24 east-west-facing, single axis sun-tracking PV modules installed 1.7 m above the ground. Fruits were harvested 95-98 days after planting. Results demonstrated a strong positive correlation between total photosynthetic irradiance and tomato productivity. Shading imposed by the PV modules reduced chlorophyll content, total biomass, fruit yield, and fruit quality. Plants in the central row T4, receiving highest light availability within the APV system (1.96% less light compared to adjacent open fields), served as a control. Plants grown directly under the PV modules in rows T1 and T7 experienced the strongest shading and recorded the greatest yield losses (42% and 57%, respectively). Plants in rows with moderate shading T2 and T6 had yield losses of 13% and 20%, respectively, while plants in rows receiving near-full sunlight (T3 and T5) exhibited minimal losses (0% and 6%, respectively). Total fruit yield loss across all seven rows was 19.4% compared to conventional cultivation. Reducing the number of rows between PV modules from seven to six or five decreased yield losses to 13.0% and 7.2%, respectively, and improved the land equivalent ratio (LER). The PV systems generated ~ 29,000 kWh/1000 m
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.