the first link summarizes the knowledge and experiments about the "green" starting like 1960 up to 2007. Kinda also saying NASA Experiment was stupid because they didnt use far red. Also generally saying the green is inhibiting lots of processes, even negating the the postive effects of red and blue, inducing shade avoidance stuff and so on but on one part saying that green results in larger leaf area which the 2nd oxford article is about. So actually not thaaat contradicting. If i did not misunderstand.
u got any literature regarding that?In proper ratios, this range enhances what both red or blue ranges do
Additional experiments indicated that the green response was maintained in a background of dim red light, suggesting that phytochrome was not the receptor because increasing phytochrome activation with green light would engage growth restriction, not elongation. The effect of green persisted in a dim red and blue background (Folta, 2004; SA Maruhnich and KM Folta, unpublished observation). These findings indicated that green light was acting antagonistically to red and blue light, as ‘safelight’ doses of light could induce responses contrary to normal photomorphogenic development. Similar studies later attributed the long-term blue-green reversibility to cry receptors (Bouly et al., 2007) and will be discussed further below.