2026/07/28 by Carlota Bernal-Basurco, Esther Hernández-Montes, Jesús D. Peco +4
Agricultural and Biological Sciences · Energy · Environmental Science · #Greenhouse Technology and Climate Control #Photovoltaic System Optimization Techniques #Photovoltaic Systems and Sustainability
paper · doi:10.1016/j.scienta.2026.115059
openalex publication_date 2026/07/28 · openalex created_date 2026/07/29 · openalex updated_date 2026/07/30
Water is a scarce resource whose availability is becoming uncertain under the scenario of climate change, while the production of renewable energy has become a priority. Agrivoltaic systems (AVS), which integrate crop production and solar energy generation on the same land, can generate temporary shade to plants, thereby affecting the environmental conditions surrounding crops. This study evaluated the ecophysiological responses of open-field tomato plants to deficit irrigation and photovoltaic-panel shading. In 2023, plants were grown under full irrigation (Control) and two regulated deficit irrigation treatments (RDI1 and RDI2). In 2024, the RDI2 plot was replaced by a deficit irrigated agrivoltaic treatment with two subplots: AG Shaded and AG Sun. Plant water status, gas exchange, chlorophyll fluorescence, photosynthetically active radiation (PAR), and soil matric potential (SMP) were monitored. Deficit irrigation decreased plant water status, leading to lower stomatal conductance (gs), net photosynthetic rate (A), maximum fluorescence under light-adapted conditions, and effective quantum yield of photosystem II photochemistry (Φ 2 ). These responses were accompanied by increased regulated non-photochemical energy dissipation (Φ NPQ ), suggesting enhanced photoprotective heat dissipation under water deficit conditions. AG Shaded plots showed a ∼35% midday PAR reduction. Under these lower-light conditions, plants showed lower gs, A, leaf temperature, and Φ NPQ , together with higher Φ 2 than Control. Overall, photovoltaic shading reduced heat stress and the need for photoprotective energy dissipation under deficit irrigation, although it also limited gas exchange. These findings highlight the need to consider both stomatal and photochemical responses when evaluating tomato ecophysiological responses to combined water deficit and photovoltaic-panel shading.