ArticlePloS one2022
Comparing the hydrological performance of an irrigated native vegetation green roof with a conventional Sedum spp. green roof in New York City.
Article in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparison ofPlants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The objective of this study was to compare the hydrological performance of an irrigated, 127 mm deep green roof, planted with vegetation native to the New York City area, to a conventional, non-irrigated, 100 mm deep green roof, planted with drought-tolerant Sedum spp. Four years of climate and runoff data from both green roofs were analyzed to determine seasonal stormwater retention. Empirical relationships between rainfall and runoff were developed for both roofs, and applied to historical rainfall data in order to compare stormwater retention values for different rainfall depths. Crop coefficients for the vegetation on each green roof were estimated using the soil moisture extraction function. This function was also used to estimate monthly evapotranspiration. Despite being irrigated, the green roof with native vegetation retained more stormwater per annum (64%) than the non-irrigated green roof planted with Sedum spp. (54%). The green roof planted with native vegetation also had approximately twice the crop coefficient (1.13) than the green roof planted with Sedum spp. (0.57), indicating that the New York City native plants transpire more stormwater than the Sedum spp. plants given certain climate and substrate moisture conditions. Overall, the results of the study indicate that, for the New York City climate region, irrigated green roofs of native vegetation have the capacity to better manage stormwater than non-irrigated green roofs planted with drought-tolerant succulents.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.