Nano Grow Light · Research Library
Research & Evidence Center
This page is the navigation hub for technical information about Nano Liquid Photonic Coating™ reflectors. It brings together the published specification, internal test methods and summaries, validation status, and scientific background.
Evidence status: Product performance figures on this site are manufacturer-reported internal measurements. Independent third-party validation is pending. Published research cited here provides scientific context and does not validate this specific product.
Five-page authority cluster
Research documents
Manufacturer-reported · internal testing
Key measurement summaries
The following values are reported by Nano Grow Light. The full instrument exports and independent replication are not currently published.
| Measurement | Reported result | Evidence note |
|---|---|---|
| PAR reflectance | 98.7% | Internal measurement; third-party validation pending |
| Red reflectance | 99.3% | Internal measurement; method details on the methodology page |
| Blue reflectance | 99.2% | Internal measurement; method details on the methodology page |
| Beam spill reduction | 31% | Manufacturer-reported comparison against an uncoated reflector |
| Nano-cluster size | 23–79 nm | Reported microscopy range for the tested sample |
| Distance | Center (µmol·m⁻²·s⁻¹) | Average (µmol·m⁻²·s⁻¹) |
|---|---|---|
| 12 in | 1040 | 824 |
| 18 in | 720 | 611 |
| 24 in | 510 | 426 |
Test context and limitations
Reported instruments
Apogee MQ-610 quantum sensor, Ocean Optics USB4000 spectrometer, and FLIR E6 thermal camera.
Reported conditions
24°C and 55% relative humidity. The cited lamp setup is Philips MasterColor 250W / 830 CMH.
Current limitations
Calibration dates, sample count, repeat count, uncertainty, and complete raw instrument files are not yet published. Independent lab validation is pending.
Interpretation: Results may vary with lamp, reflector geometry, measurement protocol, fixture distance, and growing environment. Comparisons across reflector types are indicative unless tested side by side with the same protocol.
Published background
Scientific foundations and references
These sources cover horticultural lighting performance, controlled-environment lighting, and reflective surfaces. They establish general background and measurement context, not product-specific validation.
- Apogee Instruments. MQ-610 ePAR Meter Owner’s Manual. Manufacturer documentation (PDF).
- Ocean Optics. USB4000 Fiber Optic Spectrometer Installation and Operation Manual. Manufacturer documentation (PDF).
- Shelford, T. J., & Both, A.-J. (2021). On the Technical Performance Characteristics of Horticultural Lamps. AgriEngineering, 3(4), 716–727. doi:10.3390/agriengineering3040046.
- Pinho, P., & Halonen, L. (2017). Agricultural and Horticultural Lighting. In Handbook of Advanced Lighting Technology. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-00176-0_37.
- Li et al. (2022). Supplemental reflective films and micro-light climate in tomato canopies. Frontiers in Plant Science. doi:10.3389/fpls.2022.966596.
- Gandolfi et al. (2021). Reflective benches for improving lighting in residential basil cultivation. Advances in Horticultural Science, 35(4), 342–349. doi:10.36253/ahsc-10983.
Frequently asked questions
Are the reported results independently validated?
No. The product-specific figures presented here are manufacturer-reported internal measurements. Third-party validation is pending.
Can I download the raw instrument files?
Complete original instrument exports are not currently available as downloads. The Raw Data Repository identifies the summary tables currently published and the remaining data gaps.
Do the cited papers test Nano Liquid Photonic Coating?
No. The cited papers provide general scientific and measurement background. They do not test or validate this coating.