## 3 Results and Discussion
### Algal Culture Growth Rates and Biomass Yield under Various Growth Conditions
This is consistent with the results obtained in this study, but for another algal species. [PERSON] et al. [51] revealed a clear positive correlation between light intensity and biomass concentration when cultivating _Nannochromis gaditana_ in an open system. Since microalgae species have different light saturation limits, which are determined by their acquired adaptation mechanisms to light conditions, excess light has an inhibitory effect on culture growth. [PERSON] et al. [30] identified light conditions for the optimal growth of two strains of the genus _Scenedesmus_, under which growth kinetics were significantly improved. In the range of 27 \(\upmu\)mol photons m\({}^{-2}\) s\({}^{-1}\) to 81 \(\upmu\)mol photons m\({}^{-2}\) s\({}^{-1}\), the specific growth rate and biomass productivity of both strains increased, but the maximum light intensity studied (94.5 \(\upmu\)mol photons m\({}^{-2}\) s\({}^{-1}\)) had an inhibitory effect on the growth of algal cultures when grown in flasks. Our research demonstrates that high PPFD values stimulate the more effective growth kinetics of _Scenedesmacae_ microalga, strain EZ-B1, in the photobioreactor under controlled conditions. Table 3 demonstrates additional comparisons with several other _Scenedesmacae_ strains. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c} \hline \multirow{2}{*}{**Treatment**} & **Final** & **Final** & **Final Cell** & **Maximum Total** & **Final** \\  & **Dry Weight** & **Volatile Solids** & **Concentration** & **Chlorophyll** & **Pigments** \\  & **(g L\({}^{-1}\))** & **(g L\({}^{-1}\))** & **(\(\times\)10\({}^{6}\) Cells mL\({}^{-1}\))** & **(mg L\({}^{-1}\))** & **(\% Dry Weight)** \\ \hline PL1 & 3.87 \(\pm\) 0.20 \({}^{\text{e}}\) & 3.33 \(\pm\) 0.17 \({}^{\text{d}}\) & 138.60 \(\pm\) 9.2 \({}^{\text{c}}\) & 93.66 \(\pm\) 4.5 \({}^{\text{a,b,c}}\) & 2.85 \(\pm\) 0.15 \({}^{\text{a}}\) \\ PL2 & 3.83 \(\pm\) 0.16 \({}^{\text{e}}\) & 3.41 \(\pm\) 0.14 \({}^{\text{d}}\) & 142.25 \(\pm\) 7.8 \({}^{\text{b,c}}\) & 97.44 \(\pm\) 5.4 \({}^{\text{a,b,c}}\) & 3.00 \(\pm\) 0.12 \({}^{\text{a}}\) \\ PL3 & 3.92 \(\pm\) 0.18 \({}^{\text{d,e}}\) & 3.66 \(\pm\) 0.17 \({}^{\text{d}}\) & 151.61 \(\pm\) 13.4 \({}^{\text{a,b,c}}\) & 102.27 \(\pm\) 3.9 \({}^{\text{a}}\) & 3.08 \(\pm\) 0.14 \({}^{\text{a}}\) \\ PL4 & 4.21 \(\pm\) 0.13 \({}^{\text{d,e}}\) & 3.77 \(\pm\) 0.12 \({}^{\text{c,d}}\) & 153.60 \(\pm\) 11.7 \({}^{\text{a,b,c}}\) & 85.84 \(\pm\) 2.5 \({}^{\text{b,c}}\) & 2.45 \(\pm\) 0.08 \({}^{\text{b,c}}\) \\ PL5 & 4.55 \(\pm\) 0.11 \({}^{\text{b,c,d}}\) & 4.11 \(\pm\) 0.10 \({}^{\text{b,c}}\) & 162.52 \(\pm\) 7.6 \({}^{\text{a,b,c}}\) & 83.15 \(\pm\) 3.0 \({}^{\text{c}}\) & 2.19 \(\pm\) 0.05 \({}^{\text{c,d}}\) \\ CL1 & 4.24 \(\pm\) 0.20 \({}^{\text{c,d,e}}\) & 3.75 \(\pm\) 0.14 \({}^{\text{c,d}}\) & 154.64 \(\pm\) 9.2 \({}^{\text{a,b,c}}\) & 98.73 \(\pm\) 3.8 \({}^{\text{a,b}}\) & 2.77 \(\pm\) 0.10 \({}^{\text{a,b}}\) \\ CL2 & 4.94 \(\pm\) 0.17 \({}^{\text{a,b}}\) & 4.46 \(\pm\) 0.15 \({}^{\text{a,b}}\) & 177.6 \(\pm\) 9.1 \({}^{\text{a,b}}\) & 82.63 \(\pm\) 2.3 \({}^{\text{c}}\) & 1.98 \(\pm\) 0.07 \({}^{\text{d}}\) \\ CL3 & 5.23 \(\pm\) 0.18 \({}^{\text{a}}\) & 4.68 \(\pm\) 0.16 \({}^{\text{a}}\) & 184.00 \(\pm\) 5.7 \({}^{\text{a}}\) & 83.48 \(\pm\) 3.1 \({}^{\text{c}}\) & 1.92 \(\pm\) 0.06 \({}^{\text{d}}\) \\ CL4 & 4.86 \(\pm\) 0.14 \({}^{\text{a,b,c}}\) & 4.13 \(\pm\) 0.12 \({}^{\text{a,b,c}}\) & 176.20 \(\pm\) 3.5 \({}^{\text{a,b}}\) & 91.62 \(\pm\) 4.7 \({}^{\text{a,b,c}}\) & 2.24 \(\pm\) 0.07 \({}^{\text{c,d}}\) \\ \hline \end{tabular} Abbreviations are used to denote various treatments, which stand for periodic light (PL) and continuous light (CL). Different superscripts indicate differences among the treatments (ANOVA, Tukey method, \(\alpha\) = 0.05). Means that do not share a letter are significantly different.  
\end{table} 
Table 2: _Scenedesmacae_ strain EZ-B1 characteristics.