Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.
Advertisement
Scientific Reports volume 16, Article number: 6311 (2026)
1165
7
Metrics details
This study examines the effects of elevation on the performance of ground-mounted photovoltaic modules, focusing on power output and efficiency. Outdoor experiments were conducted to assess the influence of varying mounting elevations on the electrical performance of PV modules. An experimental setup was deployed at the Hungarian University of Agriculture and Life Sciences (MATE), where three identical polycrystalline PV modules were installed at elevations of 0.7 m, 1.1 m, and 1.6 m above a concrete surface. All modules were south-facing with a fixed 45° tilt to ensure consistent solar exposure. Measurements of solar irradiance, ambient and module temperatures, voltage, and current were recorded from 10:00 to 16:00 under clear-sky conditions. The PV module elevated at 1.1 m demonstrated the highest mean power output (31.64 W) and efficiency (6.67%), outperforming the modules at 0.7 m (25.34 W; 5.36%) and 1.6 m (19.70 W; 4.29%). Enhanced airflow and moderate albedo at 1.1 m reduced cell temperatures, improving electrical performance. Statistical analysis using ANOVA and Tukey’s HSD confirmed that elevation height significantly influenced both power and efficiency (p < 0.001). The results highlight that an elevation of approximately 1.1 m optimises convective cooling and irradiance capture, providing a cost-effective strategy to enhance PV energy yield and operational reliability. This system offers strong techno-economic and environmental viability, characterised by a $0.0843 kWh⁻¹ levelized cost of electricity, and a CO₂ mitigation of 577.78 kg over 25 years.
Climate change is an increasingly critical global challenge, exacerbating extreme weather events and necessitating a rapid transition from fossil fuels1,2. Consequently, growing awareness of climate change, coupled with the finite nature of fossil fuels and escalating global energy demands, has spurred a notable transition towards sustainable and renewable energy solutions3,4. Indeed, this energy transition represents a crucial step in mitigating the environmental consequences of fossil fuel reliance and curtailing greenhouse gas emissions5. To effectively facilitate this transition, a range of technologies has been developed, encompassing alternative fuels, solar, wind, and biomass energy, in conjunction with ongoing efforts to enhance the efficiency of associated equipment. PV arrays are particularly suitable for both urban and rural settings, making them a versatile option for energy generation6.
Solar irradiance generally correlates positively with power output; however, this relationship is moderated by temperature. Specifically7, observed that temperature effects become more pronounced at high irradiance levels. Elevated module temperatures inversely affect PV performance, reducing voltage and accelerating material degradation, which impacts long-term reliability; therefore, effective thermal management is crucial8. Studies address this need9 demonstrating enhanced convective cooling and improved energy output through optimised panel elevation and arrangement. Furthermore10, identified optimal tilt and azimuth angles in South Africa, emphasising thermal considerations.
In addition to solar radiation and temperature, soiling, caused by the accumulation of dust and other particulates on PV module surfaces, reduces light absorption and diminishes energy generation. The extent of this performance reduction depends on the nature and concentration of the soiling, as well as environmental conditions1112. modelling further elucidates this, showing that particle size influences dust deposition rates and, consequently, cleaning schedules. Wind presents a dual influence: while it can enhance cooling and improve efficiency, strong winds can also pose a risk of mechanical damage to modules and mounting structures. Moreover, wind contributes to soiling by carrying dust and debris13. Accordingly14, examined wind loads, highlighting the need for refined design protocols. Shading is another environmentally critical factor, as even partial shading can significantly decrease power output due to reverse biasing of shaded cells15.
Water exposure can negatively affect PV units, inducing corrosion, damaging components, and reducing electrical efficiency. High relative humidity exacerbates these effects, especially in warm and humid climates16. Beyond these direct environmental influences, system performance is also affected by installation parameters and location. Studies demonstrate that adjusting panel height, inclination angle, and mounting configurations can optimise performance. For example17, showed that lowering PV panel height on a green roof enhances output. Similarly18, found that adjusting panel height in Agri photovoltaic systems can improve thermal conditions19. found that floating PV systems benefit from enhanced cooling compared to ground-mounted ones in India. At the same time20,21, highlighted the advantages of rooftop systems, particularly in mitigating the effects of hot climates. The impact of location is further underlined by22, whose study of a desert PV farm in China revealed localised microclimate changes, stressing the importance of site-specific planning23. demonstrated that row spacing optimisation is crucial for maximising yield in bifacial PV systems.
To mitigate the negative effects of environmental factors and enhance PV performance, researchers have explored various optimisation and modelling techniques24. employed a genetic algorithm to optimise grid-connected PV designs, and25 compared simulation tools for optimising bifacial PV systems26. effectively used the Taguchi method to optimise bifacial PV module orientation in India, further highlighting the role of strategic installation parameters in performance. Finally27, studied agrivoltaic systems and shading management, highlighting their importance in mitigating the effects of urban heat islands.
Elevating photovoltaic modules above the ground demonstrably affects their energy yield, especially for bifacial panels. Increasing module height mitigates rear-side irradiance non-uniformity and enhances energy capture, leading to higher peak power and overall energy output when the elevation exceeds approximately 1 m28. Furthermore, the ground surface condition, specifically its reflectivity (albedo), strongly influences the amount of ground-reflected solar radiation incident on the modules. High-albedo surfaces, such as snow, white concrete, gravel, or engineered reflective materials, significantly enhance rear-side irradiance, thereby increasing bifacial gain and overall energy yield. Empirical and modelling studies consistently indicate that ground albedo and module elevation are critical determinants of bifacial photovoltaic system performance, making them essential site-specific parameters for PV system design29.
The economic assessment of photovoltaic (PV) systems identifies the key factors that govern their financial viability across different applications and geographic contexts. Prior studies consistently emphasise the importance of robust economic evaluation frameworks for accurately assessing PV investments30. Highlight the use of net present value (NPV) and discounted cash flow analysis (DCFA) to evaluate ground-mounted PV systems, identifying system configuration, installed capacity, energy demand, and grid connection costs as critical determinants of profitability. Similarly31, applies internal rate of return (IRR), levelized cost of energy (LCOE), and capacity factor (CF) to assess a solar power plant in Iran, demonstrating the significant influence of feed-in tariffs and policy incentives on investment attractiveness.
The role of policy frameworks, particularly feed-in tariffs (FiTs), emerges as a recurring theme in the literature32. Compare rooftop PV investments in Italy and Germany, showing that while Italy’s initially generous FiTs stimulated early profitability, subsequent policy revisions introduced uncertainty, whereas Germany’s gradual and market-oriented tariff structure enabled more stable economic performance. In the Hungarian context33, confirms that PV investments remain economically viable under existing regulations and recommends small-scale systems for cost-sensitive investors.
In addition to policy influences, system design and operational strategies significantly affect economic outcomes34. demonstrate that manually adjustable tilt mechanisms enhance NPV and reduce payback periods in regions with high solar potential35. further examine maintenance strategies for ground-mounted PV plants, highlighting how plant size, logistics, spare-parts management, and electricity market conditions influence cost-effectiveness. More recently19, compared floating and ground-mounted PV systems, reporting that floating PV achieves 6–7% higher power output due to lower operating temperatures (4–6 °C). Although ground-mounted systems generally offer lower LCOE and shorter payback periods, floating PV significantly reduces land use and contributes to the achievement of the UN Sustainable Development Goals36.
The objective of this study is to examine the effect of mounting elevation on the electrical performance of ground-mounted photovoltaic modules to determine the height that maximises energy yield.
Research gap and novelty.
Although extensive research has optimised PV performance through adjustments in tilt angle, azimuth, and row spacing, systematic investigations of module elevation height in conventional ground-mounted PV systems remain limited. Existing studies have examined elevation effects primarily within specific applications such as green roofs, agrivoltaic systems, and floating PV installations or as part of broader thermal management strategies, without explicitly treating elevation height as an independent design parameter.
This research presents a novel investigation into the influence of mounting elevation on photovoltaic (PV) module performance when deployed on concrete surfaces. A controlled field experiment, utilising matched polycrystalline modules at varying heights, was conducted to isolate the effects of module elevation above the concrete. Comprehensive, simultaneous measurements of environmental conditions and PV module performance metrics were acquired and subsequently analysed using ANOVA to determine the statistical significance of elevation-dependent variations in electrical output. This rigorous approach identifies the optimal elevation for maximising electrical conversion efficiency and operational reliability in concrete-mounted PV systems, thereby addressing a significant gap in the existing literature.
In this study, we provide a thorough description of the materials utilised, including their specifications and pertinent properties. This level of detail ensures that other researchers can replicate the exact conditions under which the study was conducted. Additionally, we outline the experimental research design employed, along with comprehensive data collection procedures and a detailed account of the variables measured. The statistical or analytical methods applied in our analysis are also specified.
To ensure accurate and comprehensive data acquisition, the materials detailed in Table 1 were carefully selected and utilised throughout the experimental measurements. Furthermore, dedicated computing systems were employed to facilitate data logger configuration and control, real-time monitoring of experimental parameters, and subsequent data processing, analysis, and visualisation. The judicious selection and integration of these materials and computing resources were fundamental to achieving the objectives of this study, enabling the precise and reliable measurement of key thermal and electrical parameters.
Table 1 details the materials used in this study, along with their respective measurement accuracies and functions.
Figure 1 presents a workflow diagram outlining the methodology employed in this study, encompassing material selection, experimental setup, data acquisition, and subsequent data analysis.
Workflow diagram.
This study investigates the influence of varying elevation heights on the operational performance of ground-mounted photovoltaic (PV) modules. A controlled experimental setup was established, comprising three identical PV modules, each mounted at a fixed tilt angle of 45°, a configuration optimised for solar irradiance capture. All modules were installed in the same plane with a south-facing orientation to ensure uniform solar exposure. A reference pyranometer, aligned with the module tilt, measured incident solar radiation under clear-sky conditions. By maintaining consistent module specifications, including size, orientation, and inclination, this design isolates elevation as the primary variable, enabling a robust comparative analysis of how elevation-dependent environmental factors affect PV performance.
The experiment was conducted on 21 September 2025, with continuous measurements of solar irradiance, PV module surface and cell temperatures, and electrical output recorded from 10:00 to 16:00 local time, covering the primary daylight hours. The three-second sampling interval was chosen to capture short-term fluctuations in environmental and operational parameters, including solar irradiance, wind speed, module temperature, voltage, and current, under real outdoor conditions. These parameters are inherently dynamic and can vary rapidly due to passing clouds, wind gusts, and transient thermal effects. High-frequency sampling, therefore, ensures that such variations are accurately recorded and that no significant transient behaviour is overlooked.
To enhance data reliability and minimise measurement noise, the raw data collected at three-second intervals were averaged over a predefined time window of six minutes before analysis. This averaging process smooths short-term random fluctuations while preserving the underlying physical trends relevant to PV performance evaluation. The averaged values were then used for comparison across different elevations to ensure consistency and statistical robustness.
The data collection process was conducted in short time intervals, resulting in a comprehensive dataset that spans several hours. This meticulous approach allowed us to gather a substantial amount of information for analysis. To enhance clarity and facilitate interpretation, we focused on calculating the average values derived from this extensive dataset. The subsequent analysis provided valuable results that contribute significantly to our understanding of the observed phenomena during this time period.
As illustrated in Fig. 2, the fluctuations in the input variables of solar radiation and ambient temperatures throughout the day are clearly depicted. The maximum recorded temperature reached an impressive 32.6 °C, coinciding with peak solar radiation levels of 1021.4 W/m2 at for a significant duration of the experimental work. This correlation highlights the relationship between elevated temperatures and increased solar energy availability during this time frame, providing valuable insights into environmental conditions affecting photovoltaic performance and energy generation potential.
Solar radiation and ambient temperature input variables.
Figure 3 illustrates the variations of input variables like; ambient air speed (v, m/s) and atmospheric pressure (p, mbar), from 10:00 to 16:00. These variations demonstrte the dynamic atmospheric conditions influencing the PV modules during the experiment. Air speed generally increased towards midday. This increase was likely due to solar-driven convection. The increased air speed enhanced forced convective cooling of the module surfaces. Higher wind velocities improved heat dissipation. This helped limit PV cell temperature rise and sustained electrical efficiency. Atmospheric pressure exhibited moderate variations. These variations had a minor effect on air density. Consequently, the effect on cooling capacity was also minor compared to wind speed. Overall, the observations highlight the dominant role of ambient airflow. This airflow regulates PV module temperature and performance under outdoor conditions, relative to atmospheric pressure.
Input variables of air speed and ambient pressure recorded during investigation.
This study utilised an accurately designed experimental setup to determine the optimal elevation for maximising energy yield and enhancing overall photovoltaic system performance. To ensure accurate and comprehensive data acquisition, a suite of precisely calibrated instruments was employed. Specifically, calibrated temperature sensors were strategically positioned at critical locations to capture temperature variations, providing essential data for reliable thermal characterisation. Global solar irradiance, a key parameter in this investigation, was measured using pyranometers to quantify solar radiation incident on a PV module surface. Polycrystalline PV modules served as the subject of the investigation, and their electrical performance was analysed through the integration of precisely calibrated resistors into the electrical circuits, enabling controlled manipulation and measurement of current and voltage parameters. To capture the dynamic behaviour of the system, programmable Denkovi data loggers were used for the automated and continuous recording of electrical data, including PV module outputs and voltage drops across the resistors. Concurrently, a high-precision, multi-channel Almemo data logger facilitated the synchronised acquisition of data from the solar radiation sensors. These measurements were conducted in the study areas, as depicted in Fig. 4, which provides a comprehensive overview of the experimental study area utilised in this research.
Geographical location of the conducted experiment37.
Figure 5 illustrates the experimental setup designed to assess the electrical and thermal performance of the photovoltaic (PV) module. The module was connected to a resistive load network comprising five 1 Ω resistors, allowing for controlled loading and precise voltage and current measurements. Internal cell temperatures were monitored using strategically placed temperature sensors to characterise the module’s thermal behaviour.
Schematic diagram of experimental setup.
All sensors were connected to a Denkovi data logger, which relayed both electrical and thermal data to an Almemo data logger and subsequently to a dedicated computer. This configuration enabled real-time monitoring and synchronised acquisition of performance parameters, ensuring data consistency and reliability throughout the experiment. The integrated system facilitated detailed post-processing, enabling accurate correlation between module temperature and electrical output at varying conditions.
Solar Radiation Measurement: Global solar irradiance (W/m²) incident on the PV module was measured using a pyranometer, capturing both direct and diffuse components. The pyranometer’s output was recorded by an Almemo data logger, which accommodates multiple analog inputs.
Temperature Monitoring: Temperature sensors, positioned at key locations on and near the PV module, recorded internal cell temperatures. These readings were logged via the Denkovi system to maintain synchronisation with other environmental and electrical parameters.
Electrical Characterisation: The module’s electrical characteristics, including current–voltage behaviour, were accurately measured using a resistive load bank. Voltage and current outputs were captured by Denkovi data loggers equipped with appropriate analog inputs.
Centralised Data Management: Data streams from both Almemo and Denkovi loggers were transmitted to computer systems for unified storage and processing. These systems managed logger configuration, real-time monitoring, and comprehensive data analysis.
Prior to use, all sensors were calibrated according to the manufacturer’s specifications. Data acquisition was performed at 3-second intervals to ensure sufficient temporal resolution for capturing transient thermal and electrical phenomena.
Figure 6 illustrates the actual experimental setup utilised during data measurements, providing a clear overview of how the experiments were conducted. This visual representation aids in understanding the configuration and arrangement of equipment used throughout the study.
Photograph of the experimental rig.
Table 2 presents the key performance characteristics of the photovoltaic module selected for this study, as specified under standard test conditions (STC).
The performance of the photovoltaic (PV) modules was rigorously evaluated and compared using a specific equation designed to quantify their efficiency and power output under varying operational and environmental conditions. This approach allowed for a precise understanding of how effectively the modules convert solar energy into electricity.
Electrical power of the selected module can be evaluated using the following Eqs38,39. :
Electrical efficiency of the selected module is defined by40:
The experimental investigation, as depicted in Fig. 4, was executed at the MATE campus in Gödöllő city, situated in the central region of Hungary. The PV module was installed on a concrete ground surface. Throughout the experimental period, key parameters were meticulously recorded, encompassing solar irradiance, ambient temperature, photovoltaic (PV) cell temperature, PV module surface temperature, voltage, and current. The subsequent sections detail the findings of this study, presenting the data acquired from these measurements.
The albedo effect, or ground-reflected radiation, can enhance irradiance on the rear and surrounding areas of a PV module. Concrete surfaces, commonly used for PV module installations, reflect a substantial amount of radiation. This reflected radiation can strike the PV module, particularly its backside, thereby increasing the temperature, especially when the module is close to the ground.
Figure 7 presents a comparison of PV cell temperatures at different elevations. The investigation indicates that the cell temperature (back side temperature) of the PV module at 1.1 m elevation is lower than that at 0.7 m and 1.6 m. This temperature reduction can be attributed to the airflow patterns at an elevation of 1.1 m. Specifically, moderate airflow at this medium elevation likely enhances convective cooling of the PV cells. Convective heat transfer is directly related to air velocity; an optimal airflow rate removes heat more effectively than stagnant or excessively turbulent conditions. At lower elevations (0.7 m), airflow may be restricted due to proximity to the ground and albedo effects, resulting in reduced cooling. Conversely, at higher elevations (1.6 m), increased turbulence could disrupt the laminar boundary layer on the PV module surface, reducing the effectiveness of convective cooling.
PV cell temperature at different elevations.
The observed temperature difference leads to a significant operational advantage. 1.1 m elevated PV cell temperatures are known to improve both efficiency and overall performance. According to the Shockley-Queisser limit, the band gap energy of a semiconductor material, and thus its efficiency in converting photons to electricity, is temperature-dependent. Elevated temperatures increase the intrinsic carrier concentration and reduce the open-circuit voltage, thereby decreasing the cell’s efficiency. Therefore, maintaining lower operating temperatures through optimised airflow, as observed at the 1.1 m elevation, is crucial for maximising PV system performance.
Furthermore, to record voltage and current, we connect the terminals of one of the resistors to the data logger to record low voltage values that do not exceed 10 volts. According to Ohm’s law (V = RI), with a resistance of 1 ohm, the value of voltage will be equal to the current (V = I). This relationship allows us to determine the current value directly.
As a result, variation of cell temperature, Fig. 8 illustrates the voltage output at different elevations. The voltage at 1.1 m elevation is higher compared to those at 0.7 m and 1.6 m. This difference is due to the combined effect of moderate albedo and airflow conditions at this elevation.
Albedo refers to the fraction of solar radiation reflected by the surface. A moderate albedo can optimise the amount of solar radiation incident on the PV module. Too little reflected radiation reduces the overall light available for conversion. Too much reflected radiation can increase the module’s temperature, negatively impacting voltage output. The 1.1 m elevation likely provides a balanced albedo effect. Moreover, airflow also plays a crucial role. As previously discussed, moderate airflow enhances convective cooling. Lower temperatures improve the voltage output of PV cells. This is because the open-circuit voltage of a solar cell has a negative temperature coefficient.
Module output voltage at different elevations.
Building upon previous observations regarding temperature, airflow and albedo effects, Fig. 9 presents a detailed analysis of the electrical power generation from ground-mounted photovoltaic (PV) modules at varying elevations. The electrical power output is a direct consequence of the interplay between these environmental factors.
Specifically, the optimal balance of conditions observed at the 1.1 m elevation, namely, moderate airflow for effective cooling, balanced albedo for optimised solar irradiance, translates directly into enhanced electrical power generation. As previously discussed, moderate airflow reduces PV cell temperature. Lower temperatures increase cell voltage and efficiency. Balanced albedo ensures sufficient solar radiation without excessive heat buildup.
Electrical power generation at different elevations.
Conversely, the lower power generation observed at 0.7 m and 1.6 m can be attributed to suboptimal conditions. At 0.7 m, reduced airflow and increased albedo effects limit power production. At 1.6 m, potentially turbulent airflow and variations in albedo may negatively impact performance. Therefore, this investigation underscores the importance of considering microclimatic factors in PV system design and placement to enhance overall performance and energy yield.
The hourly efficiency trend of photovoltaic modules exhibits a characteristic diurnal pattern driven by fluctuations in solar irradiance and thermal conditions. As depicted in Fig. 10, electrical efficiency generally peaks during the midday hours, with a notable reduction observed around late afternoon, specifically at 14:00. This rise coincides with the period of maximum solar radiation and ambient temperatures. Although increased irradiance has the potential to enhance energy conversion, elevated module temperatures, particularly around midday, lead to thermal losses due to the temperature-dependent properties of semiconductor materials. Furthermore, comparative analysis across different installation heights indicates that the module positioned at 1.1 m consistently achieves higher efficiency values. This outcome can be attributed to enhanced convective heat dissipation at moderate elevations, which helps to maintain lower cell temperatures and improve performance. These findings underscore the critical role of both environmental factors and installation configuration in optimising PV system efficiency throughout the day.
Electrical efficiency at different elevations.
In general, the measurements of this study indicate that the PV module at a mounting elevation of 1.1 m consistently generated a higher power output, approaching 39.1 W. This finding is notable considering the observed cell temperatures. Although the cell temperature at 1.1 m was more favourable (lower, correlating with improved efficiency), the power output remained superior. This suggests that while lower cell temperatures are generally beneficial, other factors at the 1.1 m elevation may contribute to enhanced power generation. These factors include airflow and albedo.
At the lowest elevation of 0.7 m, ground proximity partially restricts airflow around the PV module, resulting in diminished convective cooling and elevated operating temperatures. Conversely, the highest elevation of 1.6 m, while benefiting from stronger wind flow, is also subjected to environmental fluctuations, potentially reducing the stability of heat dissipation and electrical performance under real outdoor conditions. The 1.1 m elevation provides sufficient wind-induced convective cooling without excessive turbulence. This leads to lower and more stable module operating temperatures, consequently enhancing PV electrical efficiency and power output. Therefore, wind speed is a critical factor in determining the maximum PV power output and efficiency.
To further maximise electrical power generation at this optimal 1.1 m elevation, implementing cooling mechanisms for the PV cells is recommended. These interventions are crucial for mitigating thermal losses, which can otherwise decrease efficiency and energy output. Effective cooling strategies, such as water spraying, forced air cooling, nanofluids, and phase change materials, are recommended to reduce panel temperatures and boost efficiency. These methods dissipate heat through both conduction and convection.
The cell temperature at a height of 1.1 m exhibited a notable reduction compared to other elevations. Specifically, it was approximately 4–5 °C lower than the temperature observed at 0.7 m and 7–9 °C lower than at 1.6 m. Furthermore, this thermal advantage translated into improved electrical performance. Indeed, the module at 1.1 m generated about 4–5 W more electrical power than the module at 0.7 m. Moreover, it outperformed the module at 1.6 m by 15–16 W. In addition to power output, efficiency also benefited from the 1.1 m elevation. As a result of superior thermal stability and irradiance conditions, the efficiency at 1.1 m was approximately 1–2% higher than at 0.7 m. Similarly, in comparison to 1.6 m, the efficiency improvement was around 2–4%.
As detailed in Table 1, the inherent uncertainties associated with the sensors employed in this study may introduce measurement errors during experimentation. To quantify and address these potential errors, Eqs. 3 and 4 were utilised to determine the overall uncertainty in the measurements41:
where, (:{delta:}_{V},{delta:}_{I:}and:{delta:}_{P})are represents the voltage, current and power and efficiency for which uncertainty is being evaluated, while n denotes the variables upon which the parameter P and (:eta:) are dependent. In this study, we conducted an uncertainty analysis for two key performance metrics: electrical power output and efficiency. This analysis helps to quantify the degree of uncertainty associated with our measurements and calculations, providing a clearer understanding of their reliability.
The specific uncertainty values determined for each parameter, power and efficiency are calculated using Eqs. 3 and 4, resulting in values of 1% and 1.4%, respectively. These results from the uncertainty analysis indicate the extent to which a measured value is free from error. Furthermore, a smaller uncertainty typically signifies a higher level of precision in the measurement. In this study, both electrical power output and efficiency demonstrate lower uncertainty values, suggesting that these measurements are more precise due to the accuracy of the measurement devices used in data recording.
Moreover, since uncertainty often scales with the measured value, as indicated in Eqs. 3 and 4, it is directly proportional to power. Consequently, the higher power observed at an elevation of 1.1 m naturally results in a larger absolute uncertainty, even if the relative uncertainty remains constant.
Analysis of variance (ANOVA) is widely employed to determine whether differences in mean PV performance metrics across measurements are statistically significant42. When ANOVA results indicate significance, Tukey’s Honest Significant Difference (HSD) test can further identify which specific groups differ, while controlling for family-wise error rates43. Moreover, the use of error bars in graphical representations provides a visual understanding of measurement variability, aiding in the interpretation of results.
ANOVA Input Parameters:
Independent Variable (Factor): Elevation, treated as a categorical variable with multiple defined elevation levels.
Dependent Variables (Responses): Continuous performance metrics measured at each elevation level, including power output and electrical efficiency.
This study applies a comprehensive statistical framework combining ANOVA, Tukey’s post hoc test, and error bar analysis to systematically evaluate PV module power and efficiency. Such an approach ensures that performance differences are both statistically validated and practically interpretable, contributing to optimised PV system design and deployment.
In this study, a one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) was applied to investigate the effect of elevation height (0.7 m, 1.1 m, and 1.6 m) on the electrical power output of PV modules. The summary statistics. Table 3 shows that the mean power outputs were 25.34 W at 0.7 m, 31.64 W at 1.1 m, and 19.70 W at 1.6 m. Variance values also differed across groups, with the highest variability observed at 1.1 m (81.72) and the lowest at 1.6 m (13.85), indicating possible differences in consistency of performance across elevations.
From a physical perspective, the results align with existing literature indicating that module elevation affects convective cooling and incident irradiance uniformity, both of which contribute to variations in power output44,45. The higher mean power observed at 1.1 m suggests that this elevation provides an optimal balance between cooling and irradiance capture, whereas excessive height (1.6 m) leads to reduced performance due to environmental influences such as increased wind turbulence.
Similarly, Table 4 reveals a highly significant effect of elevation height on PV efficiency (F = 134.21, p = 1.31 × 10–38. The calculated F-value is substantially greater than the critical value (Fcrit=3.71) at a 95% confidence level, confirming that at least one elevation group mean differs significantly from the others. The extremely small p-value (< 0.001) indicates that the observed differences in mean efficiency are not due to random variation, but rather reflect a true effect of elevation height. From a physical perspective, the results can be explained by the combined effects of thermal regulation and irradiance capture. At 1.1 m elevation, modules exhibited the highest average efficiency (6.67%), suggesting an optimal balance between improved convective cooling and uniform irradiance exposure. At lower elevation (0.7 m), reduced airflow and albedo likely lead to higher operating temperatures, which negatively affect efficiency due to the temperature coefficient of PV modules46. Conversely, at a higher elevation (1.6 m), although convective cooling may be enhanced, efficiency decreased (4.29%) due to increased wind turbulence or non-uniform irradiance distribution across the module surface45.
Post Hoc Analysis – Tukey’s HSD Test
Following the one-way ANOVA results, which confirmed that elevation height significantly affects both power and efficiency of PV modules, a Tukey’s Honest Significant Difference (HSD) test was applied to perform pairwise comparisons between groups. The Tukey HSD is a robust post hoc method that controls the family-wise error rate when making multiple comparisons, ensuring that statistical significance is not overstated44.
The HSD statistic is calculated as:
where (:{q}_{crit}) and (:{t}_{crit}) are determined as 3.338 and 1.993, respectively.
MSwithin is the mean square within groups, and n is the sample size per group.
A Tukey Honestly Significant Difference (HSD) test was applied to assess the effect of module elevation on power output and conversion efficiency. According to the Tukey criterion, an absolute mean difference exceeding the calculated HSD value indicates statistical significance at the 95% confidence level.
As presented in Table 5, all pairwise comparisons yielded mean differences greater than their respective HSD thresholds (2.96 W for power and 0.34% for efficiency), confirming that elevation had a statistically significant impact on both parameters. Elevating the PV module from 0.7 m to 1.1 m and 1.6 m above the ground led to substantial changes in power output (maximum difference: 11.93 W) and efficiency (maximum difference: 2.38%).
These results highlight that module elevation plays a crucial role in PV performance by influencing thermal behaviour. Higher elevations enhance convective cooling and reduce operating temperatures, thereby improving electrical efficiency, whereas lower elevations restrict airflow beneath the module, increasing thermal stress and reducing overall performance.
Figure 11. Mean power output (W) of photovoltaic modules recorded at three elevation heights: 0.7 m, 1.1 m, and 1.6 m. The vertical error bars represent the standard error of the mean (SEM), with values of 1.03 W, 1.06 W, and 0.44 W for the respective elevations (n = 73). These error estimates reflect the variability of the measurements and indicate the precision of the reported means.
Mean power output at different elevations with standard error bars.
Similarly, Fig. 12. Mean efficiency (%) of photovoltaic modules at elevations of 0.7 m, 1.1 m, and 1.6 m. Error bars represent the standard error of the mean (SEM; 0.14%, 0.10%, and 0.05%, respectively; n = 73), indicating the precision of the measurements.
Mean efficiency at different elevations with standard error bars.
Finally, the combined ANOVA and Tukey HSD analyses demonstrate that elevation height is a critical design parameter affecting both the power and efficiency of PV modules. The 1.1 m elevation consistently outperformed other heights, suggesting it as the most effective mounting configuration under the tested conditions. Importantly, the statistical rigor of ANOVA and Tukey HSD ensures that these differences are not due to random variation but represent true, reproducible effects.
From a practical perspective, these results highlight the importance of elevation optimisation in PV system design. Proper elevation selection can improve energy yield and reduce thermal stress, ultimately contributing to enhanced long-term system reliability and economic performance.
The assumptions of normality and equal variances, required for ANOVA, are justified by the large sample size (n = 73 per elevation), the consistent and high-frequency data collection, and the uniform experimental conditions across all elevation levels. The continuous and smooth nature of the environmental variables, such as irradiance, temperature, and airflow, naturally promotes normally distributed performance responses, particularly after averaging. Furthermore, the recorded variances for power output and efficiency were comparable across groups, indicating no substantial heteroscedasticity. Collectively, these factors provide a sound statistical basis for applying ANOVA to evaluate the effect of elevation on PV performance.
Considering the economic implications of photovoltaic (PV) installations on system performance, profitability is determined by generation costs and production intensity47. While other energy systems may offer advantages, economic evaluations, particularly using metrics like levelized cost of electricity (LCOE), net present value (NPV), and payback time (PBT), are paramount for decision-makers. These assessments guide the prioritisation of energy technologies to ensure governmental profitability, reflecting a critical focus in contemporary research48.
Equations (8)– (11) are employed to assess the economic and environmental impacts of the photovoltaic (PV) system.
where LCOE: Levelized cost of electricity, [$/kWh].
PCn: periodical cost [$].
CCn: Initial cost as the capital amount, [$].
EPV: Energy production in the first year, [kWh].
NPV: The Net Present Value, [$].
NCF: Net cash flow, [$].
PBT: Payback time, [year]
d: Degradation rate.
i: Real discount rate.
CO2,n = CO₂ emissions avoided in year n [kg CO₂/year].
EF = grid emission factor [kg CO₂/kWh].
Table 6 presents the critical financial parameters underpinning the economic viability assessment. It concisely summarises the key financial assumptions and parameters employed in the economic analysis.
This assessment indicates that a ground-mounted photovoltaic (PV) system offers competitive life-cycle performance. An initial capital cost of $66.60, escalating to a total net present cost of $80.76 with discounted operation and maintenance, confirms cost efficiency, attributable to the low balance-of-system and maintenance demands typical of small-scale installations.
This system offers strong techno-economic and environmental viability, characterised by a $0.0843 kWh⁻¹ levelized cost of electricity, and a CO₂ mitigation of 577.78 kg over 25 years.
This study systematically investigated the effect of elevation height on the electrical performance of ground-mounted photovoltaic (PV) modules under real outdoor conditions. Through a controlled experimental setup, high-resolution data acquisition, and rigorous statistical analysis, the following key findings were obtained:
The PV module mounted at 1.1 m elevation consistently achieved superior performance, with a peak power output of 39.1 W and a mean efficiency of 6.67%, outperforming modules at 0.7 m and 1.6 m elevations.
Lower PV cell temperatures minimised thermal losses associated with the negative temperature coefficient of PV modules, thereby sustaining higher voltage output.
Albedo from the concrete surface increased rear-side irradiance but, when excessive at lower elevation, contributed to overheating.
ANOVA and Tukey’s HSD tests confirmed that differences in power and efficiency across elevations were statistically significant (p < 0.001), with pairwise mean differences exceeding critical thresholds.
In this study area, mounting PV modules at an intermediate elevation (1.1 m) can substantially enhance energy yield, improve thermal management, and prolong system reliability.
This study illustrates robust techno-economic and environmental viability, indicated by a levelized cost of electricity (LCOE) of $0.0843 per kWh, and a CO₂ mitigation of 577.78 kg over 25 years.
Limitations and future work.
The study’s short-term data acquisition limits the assessment of seasonal, long-term weather, dust accumulation, and degradation impacts on photovoltaic performance.
The investigation was restricted to three discrete elevation heights (0.7 m, 1.1 m, and 1.6 m), potentially overlooking optimal configurations outside this range.
The findings are specific to concrete surfaces; the influence of alternative ground materials, such as vegetation, on irradiance reflection and thermal behaviour remains unexplored.
Future studies should evaluate the long-term seasonal effects of elevation and microclimatic factors on PV performance.
Investigating hybrid cooling solutions combined with optimal elevation can provide further insights into maximising efficiency and sustainability of PV systems.
The data of this manuscript is available on request from the corresponding author.
Capacity factor
Degrees of freedom
Feed-in tariffs
Floating photovoltaic
Honest significant difference
Internal rate of return
Levelized cost of energy
Margin of error
Mean square
Net present value
Probability value
Photovoltaic
Standard error
Sum of squares
Standard test condition
Module area (m2)
Solar radiation (W/m2)
Height (m)
Current (A)
Current at maximum power (A)
Short circuit current (A)
Maximum power (W)
Electrical power (W)
Resistor (Ω)
Ambient temperature (°C)
PV backside cell temperature (°C)
PV top surface temperature (°C)
Voltage (V)
Voltage at maximum power (V)
Open circuit voltage (V)
Electrical efficiency (%)
Dong, S. et al. Multiple operational strategies investigations of the PV/T collectors based on 3 days ahead hourly radiation prediction. Appl. Energy. 377 (PA), 124383. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2024.124383 (2025).
Article CAS Google Scholar
Okonkwo, P. C. et al. Solar PV systems under weather extremes: Case studies, classification, vulnerability assessment, and adaptation pathways. Energy Reports, 13(October 2024), 929–959 (2025). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.egyr.2024.12.067
Akhlaghi, M. M., Alavijeh, A. S., Hosseinalizadeh, R., Nasri, S. & Ghazinoory, S. Systematic failures in the development of photovoltaic systems: The case study of Iran’s solar energy. Energy Strategy Reviews, 57(December 2024), 101637 (2025). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esr.2024.101637
Gandomzadeh, M. et al. Dust mitigation methods and multi-criteria decision-making cleaning strategies for photovoltaic systems: Advances, challenges, and future directions. Energy Strategy Reviews. 57 (October 2024), 101629. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esr.2024.101629 (2025).
Article Google Scholar
Mittelstädt, N., Manske, D. & Thrän, D. The development of ground-mounted photovoltaic systems next to transport routes. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 208 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2024.114978 (2024).
Sithambaram, M., Rajesh, P. & Shajin, F. H. Raja Rajeswari, I. Grid connected photovoltaic system powered electric vehicle charging station for energy management using hybrid method. J. Energy Storage. 108, 114828. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.est.2024.114828 (2025).
Article Google Scholar
Nasrin, R., Hasanuzzaman, M. & Rahim, N. A. Effect of high irradiation on photovoltaic power and energy. Int. J. Energy Res. 42 (3), 1115–1131. https://doi.org/10.1002/er.3907 (2018).
Article Google Scholar
Sun, C., Zou, Y., Qin, C., Zhang, B. & Wu, X. Temperature effect of photovoltaic cells: a review. Adv. Compos. Hybrid. Mater. 5 (4), 2675–2699. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42114-022-00533-z (2022).
Article Google Scholar
Smith, S. E. et al. Increased panel height enhances cooling for photovoltaic solar farms. Appl. Energy. 325 (July), 119819. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2022.119819 (2022).
Article Google Scholar
Ebhota, W. S. & Tabakov, P. Y. Impact of photovoltaic panel orientation and elevation operating temperature on solar photovoltaic system performance. Int. J. Renew. Energy Dev. 11 (2), 591–599. https://doi.org/10.14710/ijred.2022.43676 (2022).
Article CAS Google Scholar
Semaoui, S. et al. Experimental investigation of soiling impact on grid connected PV power. Energy Rep. 6, 302–308. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.egyr.2019.08.060 (2020).
Article Google Scholar
Lu, H. & Zhao, W. CFD prediction of dust pollution and impact on an isolated ground- mounted solar photovoltaic system. Renew. Energy. 131, 829–840. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2018.07.112 (2019).
Article Google Scholar
Vasel, A. & Iakovidis, F. The effect of wind direction on the performance of solar PV plants. Energy. Conv. Manag. 153 (August), 455–461. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2017.09.077 (2017).
Article ADS Google Scholar
Aly Mousaad Aly, & Jennifer Whipple. Wind forces on Ground-Mounted photovoltaic solar systems: A comparative study. Appl. Solar Energy (English Translation Geliotekhnika). 57 (5), 444–471. https://doi.org/10.3103/S0003701X21050030 (2021).
Article ADS Google Scholar
Chepp, E. D. & Krenzinger, A. A methodology for prediction and assessment of shading on PV systems. Solar Energy, 216(August 2020), 537–550 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.solener.2021.01.002
Tariq Ahmedhamdi, R. et al. Humidity impact on photovoltaic cells performance: A review. J. Recent. Eng. Res. Dev. 03 (11), 27–37 (2018). https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Sanaa
Google Scholar
Osma, G., Ordóñez, G., Hernández, E., Quintero, L. & Torres, M. The impact of height installation on the performance of PV panels integrated into a green roof in tropical conditions. Energy Prod. Manage. 21st Century II: Quest Sustainable Energy. 1 (October), 147–156. https://doi.org/10.2495/eq160141 (2016).
Article Google Scholar
Gong, W. et al. Regulatory effect of agriphotovoltaic systems with different panel heights on the thermal environment. Sci. Rep. 15 (1), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-96166-5 (2025).
Article ADS CAS Google Scholar
Agrawal, K. K. et al. Predictive Modeling of Solar PV Panel Operating Temperature over Water Bodies: Comparative Performance Analysis with Ground-Mounted Installations. Energies 17(14), https://doi.org/10.3390/en17143489 (2024).
Awan, A. B. et al. Comparative analysis of ground-mounted vs. rooftop photovoltaic systems optimized for interrow distance between parallel arrays. Energies 13(14), https://doi.org/10.3390/en13143639 (2020).
Alghamdi, A. S. Performance Enhancement of Roof-Mounted Photovoltaic System: Artificial Neural Network Optimization of Ground Coverage Ratio. Energies 14(6), https://doi.org/10.3390/en14061537 (2021).
Yang, L. et al. Study on the local Climatic effects of large photovoltaic solar farms in desert areas. Sol. Energy. 144, 244–253. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.solener.2017.01.015 (2017).
Article ADS Google Scholar
Ledesma, J. R., Almeida, R. H., Rossa, C., Narvarte, L. & Lorenzo, E. A simulation model of the irradiation and energy yield of large bifacial photovoltaic plants. Sol. Energy. 206, 522–538. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.solener.2020.05.108 (2020).
Article ADS Google Scholar
Mayer, M. J. & Gróf, G. Techno-economic optimization of grid-connected, ground-mounted photovoltaic power plants by genetic algorithm based on a comprehensive mathematical model. Sol. Energy. 202 (April 2019), 210–226. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.solener.2020.03.109 (2020).
Article ADS Google Scholar
Longares, J. M. Multiphysics simulation of bifacial photovoltaic modules and software comparison. 257(March), 155–163 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.solener.2023.04.005
Raina, G., Vijay, R. & Sinha, S. Study on the optimum orientation of bifacial photovoltaic module. Int. J. Energy Res. 46 (4), 4247–4266. https://doi.org/10.1002/er.7423 (2022).
Article Google Scholar
Ali, N. & Gatti, D. Solar Energy Success: Mastering the Parameters that Matter. (2023). https://doi.org/10.20944/preprints202306.2094.v1
Ganesan, K., Winston, D. P., Sugumar, S. & Prasath, T. H. Performance investigation of n-type PERT bifacial solar photovoltaic module installed at different elevations. Renew. Energy. 227 (February), 120526. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2024.120526 (2024).
Article CAS Google Scholar
Almarshoud, A. F., Abdel-halim, M. A., Almasri, R. A. & Alshwairekh, A. M. Experimental study of bifacial photovoltaic module performance on a sunny day with varying backgrounds using exergy and energy analysis. Energies 17 (21). https://doi.org/10.3390/en17215456 (2024).
Salvo, F., Ciuna, M., Ruggiero, M., De & Marchian, S. Economic Valuation of Ground Mounted Photovoltaic Systems. 1–14 (2017). https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings7020054
Besharati, M., Moradian, P., Emarati, M., Ebadi, M. & Gholamzadeh, A. Ground-mounted photovoltaic power station site selection and economic analysis based on a hybrid fuzzy best-worst method and geographic information system: A case study Guilan Province. 169, (2022). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2022.112923
Spertino, F., Leo, P., Di & Cocina, V. Economic analysis of investment in the rooftop photovoltaic systems: A long-term research in the two main markets. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 28, 531–540. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2013.08.024 (2013).
Article Google Scholar
Zsibor, H. Economic Analysis of Grid-Connected PV System Regulations: A Hungarian Case Study. 1–17 (2019). https://doi.org/10.3390/electronics8020149
Gönül, Ö., Duman, A. C., Barutçu, B. & Güler, Ö. Techno-economic analysis of PV systems with manually adjustable Tilt mechanisms. Eng. Sci. Technol. Int. J. 35 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jestch.2022.101116 (2022).
Peters, L. & Madlener, R. Economic evaluation of maintenance strategies for ground-mounted solar photovoltaic plants. Appl. Energy. 199, 264–280. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2017.04.060 (2017).
Article ADS Google Scholar
Anusuya, K. & Vijayakumar, K. A comparative study of floating and ground-mounted photovoltaic power generation in Indian contexts. Clean. Energy Syst. 9, 100140. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cles.2024.100140 (2024).
Article Google Scholar
Alshibil, A. M. A., Farkas, I. & Víg, P. Experimental performance comparison of a novel design of bi-fluid photovoltaic-thermal module using louver fins. Energy Rep. 9, 4518–4531. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.egyr.2023.03.110 (2023a).
Article Google Scholar
Alshibil, A. M. A., Farkas, I. & Víg, P. Sustainability contribution of hybrid solar collector towards net-zero energy buildings concerning solar cells wasted heat. Energy. Sustain. Dev. 74, 185–195. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esd.2023.04.001 (2023b).
Article Google Scholar
Abdelwahab, S. A. M., Khairy, H. E., Yousef, H., Abdafatah, S. & Mohamed, M. Comparative analysis of reinforcement learning and artificial neural networks for inverter control in improving the performance of grid-connected photovoltaic systems. Sci. Rep. 15 (1), 1–24. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-09507-9 (2025).
Article CAS Google Scholar
Salameh, T., Tawalbeh, M., Juaidi, A., Abdallah, R. & Hamid, A. K. A novel three-dimensional numerical model for PV/T water system in hot climate region. Renew. Energy. 164, 1320–1333. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2020.10.137 (2021).
Article Google Scholar
Holman, J. P. Experimental Methods for Engineers (McGraw-Hill, 2012).
Hossain, M. S., Rahim, N. A., Aman, M. M. & Selvaraj, J. Application of ANOVA method to study solar energy for hydrogen production. Int. J. Hydrog. Energy. 44 (29), 14571–14579. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2019.04.028 (2019).
Article ADS CAS Google Scholar
Calfee, R. & Piontkowski, D. Design and analysis of experiments. Handb. Read. Res. https://doi.org/10.2460/ajvr.1980.41.02.300 (2016).
Article Google Scholar
ÇİNİCİ, O. K. & ACIR, A. Optimization of array design in photovoltaic power plants using the Taguchi and ANOVA Analysis. Gazi Üniversitesi Fen bilimleri dergisi part C: Tasarım ve Teknoloji, 11(4), 1195–1208, (2023). https://doi.org/10.29109/gujsc.1400053
Pandian, G. R., Balachandran, G. B., David, P. W. & Sangeetha, K. Performance analysis of floating bifacial stand-alone photovoltaic module in tropical freshwater systems of Southern asia: an experimental study. Sci. Rep. 0123456789, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-70015-3 (2024).
Article CAS Google Scholar
Paç, A. B. & Gok, A. Assessing the environmental benefits of extending the service lifetime of solar photovoltaic modules. Global Challenges. 8 (8), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1002/gch2.202300245 (2024).
Article Google Scholar
Elminshawy, N. A. S., Elminshawy, A. & Osama, A. An innovative cooling technique for floating photovoltaic module: Adoption of partially submerged angle fins. Energy Conversion and Management: X, 20. (2023). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecmx.2023.100408
Elminshawy, N. A. S., Osama, A., Gagliano, A., Oterkus, E. & Tina, G. M. A technical and economic evaluation of floating photovoltaic systems in the context of the water-energy nexus. Energy, 303, (2024). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2024.131904
Download references
This work was supported by the Stipendium Hungaricum Programme and by the Mechanical Engineering Doctoral School, Hungarian University of Agriculture and Life Sciences, Gödöllő, Hungary.
Open access funding provided by Hungarian University of Agriculture and Life Sciences. The authors declare that no funds, grants, or other support were received during the preparation of this manuscript.
Doctoral School of Mechanical Engineering, Hungarian University of Agriculture and Life Sciences, Gödöllő, Hungary
Aschenaki Tadesse Altaye
Institute of Technology, Hungarian University of Agriculture and Life Sciences, Gödöllő, Hungary
István Farkas
Institute of Mathematics and Basic Science, Hungarian University of Agriculture and Life Sciences, Gödöllő, Hungary
Piroska Víg
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Hawassa University, IoT, Ethiopia
Aschenaki Tadesse Altaye
PubMed Google Scholar
PubMed Google Scholar
PubMed Google Scholar
Aschenaki Altaye: Conceptualisation, Methodology, Formal analysis, Investigation, Writing – Original Draft; István Farkas: Conceptualisation, Methodology, Supervision, Review & Editing; Piroska Víg: Conceptualisation, Methodology, Review & Editing, Supervision.
Correspondence to Aschenaki Tadesse Altaye.
The authors declare no competing interests.
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
Reprints and permissions
Altaye, A.T., Farkas, I. & Víg, P. Analysis of effects of elevation on the power output and efficiency of ground-mounted photovoltaic modules. Sci Rep 16, 6311 (2026). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-026-37413-1
Download citation
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Version of record:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-026-37413-1
Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:
Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.
Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative
Advertisement
Scientific Reports (Sci Rep)
ISSN 2045-2322 (online)
© 2026 Springer Nature Limited
Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.
