No water = no plant growth.
Doesn't it make total sense then that our ecosystem would not have developed to leave plants completely exposed to the vagaries of intermittent precipitation? Doesn't it make total sense that there would be other, symbiotic, biological participants in the same ecosystem who manufacture water whether or not it rains? And would it be too much a stretch to consider that those manufacturers would also have cousins who fly upwards with that water and have an amazing capacity to bring it back down?
Anyone who skis in California or in Thredbo knows that snow can be "made". What makes that snow is naturally occurring. Precipitation can be biologically triggered. Perhaps we haven't fully considered the ecological and agricultural benefits that could accrue if we could befriend those cousins whose fun thing to do is to make water and follow that water up from the surface of soil and the leaves of plants and then bring it back down.
Biological hydrosynthesis - the manufacture of water in soil by powerful wonderful little guys with extraordinary skills. They are friends worth having. What if we could trigger photosynthesis in the dark -- happening 24 hours a day and even below the soil surface -- and when it happened we had additional water and natural nutrient accumulation sufficient to sustain plant growth as by-products?
We have seen that happen.