Since the early 2020s, under canopy lighting has evolved from something that only a few growers were using, to something that most growers are at least considering. 

While under-canopy lighting may not be the right fit for every facility, a growing number of commercial cannabis operators are finding that it can meaningfully improve both yield and flower quality when implemented correctly.  Here's what the data, the research, and the experience of commercial growers who have worked with JumpLights tells us about why under-canopy lighting works, what it delivers, and what to look for when you're ready to move forward.

Cannabis has a dark sub-canopy. Its tight crop spacing and dense upper growth intercept the vast majority of light from overhead fixtures, leaving the lower bud sites in relative darkness. Those sites don't disappear, they just underperform. They produce lower-density, lower-potency flower, and without intervention, they always will.

This is the core problem under-canopy lighting addresses - how to get more light to the lower canopy to improve bud quality and yield. 

The results from commercial growers who have implemented under-canopy lighting - from JumpLights and other providers - are consistent and significant. A meta-analysis of JumpLights customers who have tested or fully implemented under-canopy lighting shows yield increases between 20% and 60% for most facilities. The specific gain a given grow sees depends on the type of cultivar, environmental conditions, and other facility-specific factors — but a 20% yield increase is a floor that the data supports repeatedly.

Beyond raw yield, the quality gains matter just as much in today's market. Many growers report improvements in lower-canopy flower development, resulting in a greater percentage of harvestable flower meeting premium quality standards. Practically speaking, more of the canopy contributes to the highest-value output. In a market that has tightened considerably and where price compression pushes operators to differentiate on quality, that shift in grade distribution directly affects revenue per pound.

In strong markets, the improvement in quality yield can pay for the lights in a single cycle.

One of the most compelling arguments for under-canopy lighting is what it doesn't require. Many growers assume that meaningfully increasing yield means expanding their facility — building new rooms, investing in new infrastructure, waiting months for construction and permitting to resolve.

Under canopy lighting offers a faster path. The canopy surface area is already there. Overhead fixtures are already working the top of it. Adding under-canopy lights means the same square footage is now producing more, from both above and below. By improving light penetration to portions of the plant that traditionally receive limited illumination, under-canopy lighting allows growers to generate greater value from existing cultivation space without expanding their facility footprint. . That means higher yields and quality can be captured much faster, including during periods when the market rewards it.

In jurisdictions where it applies, under-canopy lighting may also be eligible for utility rebates, which can reduce the net capital investment meaningfully. This is worth checking out before purchasing; it varies by region.

While the potential upside is compelling, operators should evaluate several factors before implementing an under-canopy lighting strategy. Cultivar selection, facility design, irrigation practices, environmental controls, labor workflows, and energy costs can all influence the return on investment. Many operators begin with a pilot room or side-by-side trial to establish performance benchmarks before deploying the technology facility-wide.

Under-canopy lights designed for commercial cannabis operations can hang from trellis bars or racks using metal sliders, or can be floor-mounted on stands or feet depending on the facility configuration. There's no major electrical reconfiguration required and no disruption to the overhead system. Growers who do their first installation consistently report that the process took less time and caused less disruption than they anticipated.

A meaningful test doesn't require a full facility commitment either. Lighting one room or even one table and having a control provides clean data that can be attributed directly to the under canopy lighting. That kind of controlled comparison shows the difference in bud density, yield weight, and flower grade clearly. The capital required to run that test is modest relative to the potential return.

As the category matures, operators evaluating under-canopy lighting solutions should assess fixture durability, environmental ratings, mounting flexibility, spectrum design, ease of maintenance, and compatibility with existing cultivation infrastructure. The long-term reliability of a fixture is often just as important as its initial performance specifications. Some lights marketed as under-canopy products are actually over-canopy or intra-canopy fixtures that have been repositioned. A three-sided light pattern designed for vertical inter-canopy applications, for example, wastes significant light in an under-canopy configuration. A true under-canopy light is purpose-built for that application, with a spectrum and lens design optimized for how close the fixture sits to the plant.

Spectrum is particularly important at this distance. A very high percentage of red light can lead to photobleaching when a fixture is positioned as close to the plant as under-canopy lights typically are. The right spectral balance for under-canopy lights can be meaningfully different from what works above the canopy.

Durability is a major non-negotiable. The under-canopy environment is harsh, with higher exposure to moisture, water, and physical contact during cultivation operations like trellising and changeovers. A quality under-canopy light needs a robust environmental rating (UL wet location is a useful benchmark), protected electrical connections, and a plastic lens rather than glass, which is likely to break. The connectors deserve specific attention: exposed connectors or short fixture lengths that require more connectors multiply the points of potential failure.

Practical fit with existing equipment matters too. Lights that work with racks and horizontal trellis bars without modification are significantly easier to implement than those requiring custom mounting solutions. Dimmability is worth confirming — most growers will want the ability to adjust intensity via a controller depending on the stage of growth and cultivar response.

Every cycle that runs without under-canopy lighting is a cycle where the lower canopy produces below its potential. That's a real cost, even if it doesn't appear as a line item. Growers who are already running under-canopy programs are compounding the advantage — gathering data, refining their approach, and building it into their standard operating procedures. As more operators experiment with under-canopy lighting, the technology is becoming an increasingly common component of commercial cultivation strategies. Growers evaluating the technology today have the advantage of learning from a growing body of operational experience and performance data across a range of facility types. 

The math is straightforward. If under-canopy lighting adds 25-40% to yield, and JumpLights’ customers regularly report that or more, every cycle without it represents revenue left on the table. The risk of testing is low. 

The under-canopy revolution is underway. The growers who move now are the ones who will have the data, the process, and the results to show for it.