Back

Water beneath the pavement: assessing the benefits of passive irrigation for urban Lophostemon confertus trees in western Sydney

Siclari, D.; Tjoelker, M. G.; Perera, C.; Pfautsch, S.; Rymer, P. D.; Marchin, R. M.

2026-05-03 plant biology
10.64898/2026.04.29.721794 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Urban environments typically experience higher temperatures than surrounding natural landscapes, making urban vegetation crucial for cooling local areas and improving the health of city residents. Impervious urban surfaces limit the absorption and retention of precipitation, potentially limiting tree water access and threatening long-term survival. Here, we measured tree physiology and growth of Lophostemon confertus (Queensland brush box) trees to investigate how a passive irrigation system that stores stormwater affected the performance of young, establishing trees in a hot and dry suburb of western Sydney, Australia. During the 2024-2025 austral summer, three years after planting, the local climate was periodically hot and dry, with a total of 16 days above 35 {degrees}C. Irrigated L. confertus trees had higher water availability (i.e., higher predawn leaf water potential,{Psi} pre), lower water stress (i.e., higher midday leaf water potential,{Psi} mid, more frequently above turgor loss point), greater stomatal conductance (gs) on hot and dry summer days, and reduced leaf temperatures (Tleaf), compared to control trees. No significant differences in growth rates were observed between irrigated and control trees during the first three establishment years, but irrigated trees had greater crown survival during the hot, dry summer. Our results suggest passive irrigation may mitigate periods of short-term heat and drought stress in urban trees by increasing water access to support transpiration that prevents leaves from overheating, improving tree health. Higher tree transpiration may lead to greater ecosystem services by increasing cooling benefits, contributing to mitigation of urban heat island effects.

Matching journals

The top 2 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
41.4%
2
Science of The Total Environment
179 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
13.1%
50% of probability mass above
3
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 21%
5.1%
4
Frontiers in Plant Science
240 papers in training set
Top 2%
3.8%
5
AoB PLANTS
11 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
2.9%
6
PLANTS, PEOPLE, PLANET
21 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
2.2%
7
PeerJ
261 papers in training set
Top 5%
2.0%
8
Global Change Biology
69 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.6%
9
Tree Physiology
21 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
1.4%
10
Plant, Cell & Environment
78 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
1.4%
11
Plant Methods
39 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
1.3%
12
Environmental and Experimental Botany
11 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
1.0%
13
New Phytologist
309 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.0%
14
Journal of the American Heart Association
119 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.0%
15
Royal Society Open Science
193 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.9%
16
Journal of Applied Ecology
35 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
0.9%
17
Plant Direct
81 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.8%
18
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
2130 papers in training set
Top 44%
0.8%
19
The Plant Journal
197 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.7%
20
Global Ecology and Conservation
25 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.5%
21
Plant Physiology
217 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.5%
22
Journal of Applied Microbiology
18 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
0.5%
23
Crop Science
18 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
0.5%