Developing Biodiverse Green Roofs for Japan:
Arthropod and Colonizer Plant Diversity on Harappa and
Biotope Roofs
Ayako Nagase, Yoriyuki Yamada, Tadataka Aoki, and Masashi Nomura
Urban Naturalist, Special Issue No. 1 (2018): 16–38
Full-text pdf.

Site by Bennett Web & Design Co.
Urban Naturalist
A. Nagase, Y. Yamada, T. Aoki, and M. Nomura
2018 Special Issue No. 1
16
URBAN NATURALIST
2018 Special Issue No. 1:16–38
Developing Biodiverse Green Roofs for Japan:
Arthropod and Colonizer Plant Diversity on Harappa and
Biotope Roofs
Ayako Nagase1,*, Yoriyuki Yamada2, Tadataka Aoki2, and Masashi Nomura3
Abstract - Urban biodiversity is an important ecological goal that drives green-roof installation.
We studied 2 kinds of green roofs designed to optimize biodiversity benefits:
the Harappa (extensive) roof and the Biotope (intensive) roof. The Harappa roof mimics
vacant-lot vegetation. It is relatively inexpensive, is made from recycled materials, and
features community participation in the processes of design, construction, and maintenance.
The Biotope roof includes mainly native and host plant species for arthropods, as
well as water features and stones to create a wide range of habitats. This study is the first
to showcase the Harappa roof and to compare biodiversity on Harappa and Biotope roofs.
Arthropod species richness was significantly greater on the Biotope roof. The Harappa roof
had dynamic seasonal changes in vegetation and mainly provided habitats for grassland
fauna. In contrast, the Biotope roof provided stable habitats for various arthropods. Herein,
we outline a set of testable hypotheses for future comparison of these different types of
green roofs aimed at supporting urban biodiversity.
Introduction
Rapid urban growth and associated anthropogenic environmental change have
been identified as major threats to biodiversity at a global scale (Grimm et al. 2008,
Güneralp and Seto 2013). Green roofs can partially compensate for the loss of
green areas by replacing impervious rooftop surfaces and thus, contribute to urban
biodiversity (Brenneisen 2006). Green roofs can support arthropods (Hwang and
Yue 2015, Kadas 2006, MacIvor and Lundholm 2011, MacIvor et al. 2015, Madre
et al. 2013, Nagase and Nomura 2014), including both common and rare species
(Brenneisen 2006, Grant 2006).
In order to optimize biodiversity benefits, biodiverse roofs in Switzerland and
the UK have focused on particular species of concern; e.g., Phoenicurus ochruros
Gmelin (Black Redstart), which relies on old vacant lots and brownfield sites
(Gedge 2003). Biodiverse roofs are designed to recreate such habitats by using
urban substrates such as brick rubble, crushed concrete, sands and gravels, and
minimal vegetation. Some cities (e.g., Basel, Switzerland; Toronto, Canada; and
London, UK) have green-roof policies that include biodiversity objectives (Williams
et al. 2014). Furthermore, a number of different roof styles have emerged to
target specific taxa and to mimic local habitats (Lundholm 2006).
1College of Liberal Arts and Sciences, Chiba University, Chiba, Japan. 2Green Infrastructure
Group, Kajima Corporation, Tokyo, Japan. 3Graduate School of Horticulture, Chiba University,
Chiba, Japan. *Corresponding author - anagase@chiba-u.jp.
Manuscript Editor: Sylvio Codella
Green Roofs and Urban Biodiversity
Urban Naturalist
17
A. Nagase, Y. Yamada, T. Aoki, and M. Nomura
2018 Special Issue No. 1
Although the number of biodiverse roofs is increasing in some European countries,
few examples exist in Japan (Ishimatsu and Ito 2013, Yamada et al. 2013),
where there seem to be several cultural and political barriers. First, in the UK, a
brownfield site is defined as “previously developed land” that has the potential for
repurposing. In contrast, a brownfield site in the USA refers to industrial land that
has been abandoned and is contaminated with low levels of hazardous waste and
pollutants (Gray 2015). Brownfield sites also have a negative connotation in Japan;
therefore, it has been difficult to promote the concept there.
Second, the Japanese perception is that green roofs should be kept green; therefore
Sedum spp. (stonecrops) are frequently used. However, it is very difficult to
keep such plantings in good condition in Japan without irrigation and intensive
maintenance (MLITT 2009).
Finally, green-roof regulations vary among cities, and many local Japanese
authorities encourage the installment of intensive (thick substrate; require both regular
maintenance and an irrigation system) rather than extensive green roofs (thin
substrate; require little maintenance/irrigation). Subsidies to install green roofs are
often contingent on selecting the intensive option (Organization for Landscape and
Urban Infrastructure 2016). In Japan, 54% of local jurisdictions cannot provide subsidies
for biodiverse roofs and a further 33% have reduced subsidies for biodiverse
roofs that do not fulfill depth and/or irrigation requirements ( Yamada et al. 2013).
In Japan, the number of green roofs has increased, with at least 413 ha installed
between 2001 and 2014 (MLITT 2014). Methods to construct inexpensive,
lightweight, extensive green roofs must be developed in order to facilitate further
installation and retro-fitting. Although intensive roofs may provide habitats that
promote biodiversity, the potential advantages of extensive roofs suggest that further
investigations are warranted.
Our research group has adapted European extensive green-roof design to Japanese
culture. We developed a region-specific design: the Harappa Roof. “Harappa”
is a Japanese word that describes vacant lots or open fields, including grasslands
frequently found in residential areas (Fig. 1). These lots are important play areas
for children and have been valuable habitats for grassland fauna since the Showa
era (1926–1989; Shuowen 2006). We developed the Harappa style to sidestep the
negative image of brownfield. Although the community structure of brownfields
and Harappa is similar, the public perception is quite different. Many people have
childhood experiences playing in Harappa, and thus there is nostalgia for such sites
in many Japanese cities (Nagase et al. 2015).
To promote biodiversity benefits, the Biotope Roof has also been developed
and installed in Japan. Biotope roofs are intensive roofs planted with various species,
including native trees and shrubs, which serve as hosts and nectar sources for
arthropods. These roofs can also include water features, stones, and other structural
elements, to create diverse habitats. They require careful maintenance to avoid colonization
by invasive plant species (Nagase and Nomura 2014).
In this paper we introduce the Harappa roof and encourage green-roof practicioners
outside Japan to explore its local possibilities (Lundholm 2006). We present
Urban Naturalist
A. Nagase, Y. Yamada, T. Aoki, and M. Nomura
2018 Special Issue No. 1
18
empirical data on differences in arthropod diversity between the extensive Harappa
and the intensive Biotope designs. We use this comparison to generate hypotheses
for further testing. Previous studies in Europe have compared arthropod taxa on different
types of extensive green roofs (e.g., Baumann 2006, Brenneisen 2006, Grant,
2006, Kadas 2006), but little research has compared extensive and intensive roofs
(e.g., Coffman and Davis 2005, Coffman and Waite 2010). Our ultimate goal is to
increase the number of green roofs in Japan that will support biodiversity.
Field-site Description
We installed a Biotope roof and a Harappa roof on the Nishichiba campus
of Chiba University, Chiba City, Chiba Prefecture, Japan (Table 1). Chiba has
a humid, subtropical climate, with hot summers and mild winters (Fig. 2). We
installed the Harappa roof (180 m2) during winter 2012 on a 4-story building
(Fig. 3), where it received full sunlight throughout the day. We used recycled
materials whenever possible (at Harappa sites, previous construction materials,
such as large pipes, tend to remain in situ; these materials are then repurposed
for children’s imaginative play). Therefore, we collected recycled materials from
the surrounding neighborhoods to replicate Harappa conditions and to be more
environmentally friendly than conventional green roofs. To construct the roof
we placed a drainage layer, substrate material, and vegetation. Materials used
Figure 1. Typical Harappa roof in an urban area.
Urban Naturalist
19
A. Nagase, Y. Yamada, T. Aoki, and M. Nomura
2018 Special Issue No. 1
included straw from replacement of thatched roofs, bamboo, old clothes (fleece),
plastic bottle caps, crushed concrete, and roof tiles. The Harrapa roof substrates
also included topsoil with vegetation and seeds collected from ground-level Harappa
habitat and spread over the crushed concrete and roof tiles. The substrate
depth varied from 5 cm to 20 cm.
Table 1. Summary of Harappa roof and biotope roof at Chiba University. Initial costs include materials,
shipping, labor, and facilities such as irrigation systems for green roofs.
Spec. Harappa roof (extensive) Biotope roof (intensive)
Initial cost 8000 yen/m2 40,000 yen/m2
Depth of substrate 5–20 cm 50 cm
Drainage layer and Straw, bamboo, old clothes (fleece), Commercial plastic drainage layer
moisture retention mat caps of PET bottles and moisture retention mat
Substrate Crushed brick, concrete, natural soil Commercial green roof substrate
Plants From neighborhood: transplanting, From nursery: mainly native
spontaneous vegetation plants including trees, shrubs and
forbs; spontaneous vegetation
Irrigation system No irrigation Drip irrigation system
Maintenance Little maintenance Once a month regular
maintenance
Water feature Temporary pond Circulated pond
Structures for biodiversity Temporary pond, piles of stones, Pond, piles of stones
empty flower pots, dead branches
User involvement Design, collecting materials, Survey
construction, survey
Figure 2. Mean monthly temperature and rainfall change (average of 3 years from 2013 to
2015) in Chiba, Japan (Japan Meteorological Agency 2016).
Urban Naturalist
A. Nagase, Y. Yamada, T. Aoki, and M. Nomura
2018 Special Issue No. 1
20
Initially, we planted 11 species (20 plants for each plant species) in 9-cm pots.
Characteristics of planted flora on the Harappa roof are shown in Table 2. We identified
all plant species and employed the ACFOR scale (A = abundant, C = common,
Figure 3. Harappa green roof, Chiba University, 10 July 2015.
Table 2. Characteristics of planted floral species on Harappa roo f at Chiba University.
Family Species Distribution
Asparagaceae Barnardia japonica (Thunb.) Schult. et Schult.f. Japan, China, Korea
(Japanese Jacinth)
Asteraceae Aster microcephalus (Miq.) Franch. et Sav. var. ovatus Japan
(Franch. et Sav.) Soejima et Mot.Ito
Aster yomena (Kitam.) Honda var. dentatus (Kitam.) Japan
H. Hara
Campanulaceae Platycodon grandiflorus (Jacq.) (Balloon Flower) Japan, China, Korea,
East Siberia
Caryophyllaceae Dianthus superbus L. var. longicalycinus (Maxim.) Japan, China, Korea,
Williams Taiwan
Lythraceae Lythrum anceps (Koehne) Makino (Spiked Loosestrife) Japan, Korea
Orchidaceae Spiranthes sinensis (Pers.) Ames (Austral Ladies’ Japan, Chiba, Siberia
Tresses)
Rosaceae Potentilla hebiichigo Yonek. et H. Ohashi Japan, China, Korea,
East Asia
Rutaceae Zanthoxylum piperitum (L.) DC. (Japanese Pepper) Japan, Korea
Verbenaceae Phyla nodiflora (L.) Greene (Capeweed) Tropical and subtropical
country
Violaceae Viola mandshurica W. Becker (Sumire) Japan, China, Siberia
Urban Naturalist
21
A. Nagase, Y. Yamada, T. Aoki, and M. Nomura
2018 Special Issue No. 1
F = frequent, O = occasional, or R = rare within the given area; Louette, et al.
2007) to classify abundance. We convened workshops so that local residents could
be involved in the design process, including collection of materials and construction.
Neither irrigation nor maintenance was conducted. We set out 3 recycled wash
bowls to provide temporary water-capture stations and added piles of stones, empty
flower pots, dead branches, and 4 substrate-filled tires to creat e wildlife habitat.
The Biotope roof (150 m2) was installed in spring 2002 on a 9-story building
(Fig. 4). The roof was framed by a concrete-block retaining wall. The roof
design consisted of a barrier membrane, a drainage layer (Qanat mat®), and a
substrate (Laputa soil Ecola®) with a depth of 50 cm. The substrate was composed
of crushed, autoclaved, aerated concrete mixed with 20% by volume of organic
matter content; most of the species planted were native. All green-roof materials
were obtained from Hibiya Amenis Corporation (Chiba, Japan). A pond (12 m2, 50
cm deep) was installed and planted with Typha latifolia L. (Common Cattail). The
Biotope roof received full sunlight in the morning but was shaded in the afternoon.
Repairs, such as additional plantings and removal of stressed plants, were
carried out in spring 2012, for a total of 12 species of trees, 18 species of shrubs,
and 8 species of forbs planted (Table 3). An irrigation system was installed in
2012. Weeding of invasive species was carried out once monthly. Nagase and
Nomura (2014) described the previous planting scheme of this roof and the evaluation
of plant development and arthropod colonization.
Methods
We sampled arthropods from 2013 to 2015 between 0900 h and 1300 h on 17
occasions (2013: 23 August, 10 September, 5 November, 16 December; 2014:
Figure 4. Biotope green roof, Chiba University,10 July 2015.
Urban Naturalist
A. Nagase, Y. Yamada, T. Aoki, and M. Nomura
2018 Special Issue No. 1
22
Table 3. Characteristics of cultivated plant species on biotope roof in Chiba University. [Table continued
on next page.]
Family Species Distribution
Adoxaceae Viburnum dilatatum Thunb. (Linden Arrowwood) Japan
Aquifoliaceae Ilex crenata Thunb. (Japanese Holly) China
Ilex integra Thunb. (The Mochi Tree) Japan, China, Taiwan
Araliaceae Fatsia japonica (Thunb.) Decne. et Planch. (Glossy-leaf Japan, Korea
Paper Plant)
Asparagaceae Hosta sp. Japan, East Asia
Liriope muscari (Decne.) L.H.Bailey (Big Blue Lilyturf) Japan, East Asia
Ophiopogon japonicas (Thunb.) Ker Gawl. (Dwarf Japan, East Asia
Lilyturf)
Asteraceae Eupatorium fortunei Thunb. Japan, China, Korea
Farfugium japonicum (L.) Kitamura (Leopard Plant) Japan, China, Korea,
Taiwan
Aucubaceae Aucuba japonica Thunb. (Japanese Aucuba) Japan, China, Korea
Berberidaceae Nandina domestica Thunb. (Heavenly Bamboo) China
Calycanthaceae Chimonanthus praecox (L.) Link (Wintersweet) China
Caprifoliaceae Abelia × grandiflora (André) Rehd. (Glossy Abelia) Cultivar
Clusiaceae Hypericum chinense L. China
Cornaceae Cornus kousa F. Buerger ex Hance (Korean Dogwood) Japan, East Asia
Cyperaceae Carex kobomugi Ohwi (Japanese Sedge) Japan, China, Korea,
Taiwan
Equisetaceae Equisetum hyemale L. (Rough Horsetail) Japan
Ericaceae Enkianthus perulatus C.K. Schneid. (White Enkianthus) Japan
Rhododendron indicum (L.) Sweet (Azalia) Cultivar
Fabaceae Lespedeza bicolor Turcz. (Shrubby Bushclover) Japan, China, Korea
Quercus serrata Thunb. (Konara) Japan, China, Korea
Quercus glauca Thunb. (Ring-cupped Oak) Japan, China, Taiwan
Quercus phylliraeoides A. Gray (Ubamegashi) Japan, China
Hamamelidaceae Loropetalum chinense var. rubra (R. Brown) Oliver Japan, China, India
(Chinese Fringe Flower)
Hydrangeaceae Hydrangea macrophylla (Thunb.) Ser. (Bigleaf Cultivar
Hydrangea)
Hydrangea macrophylla f. normalis (Thunb.) Ser. Japan
Hydrangea paniculata Sieb. et Zucc. (Panicled Japan
Hydrangea)
Hypericaceae Hypericum monogynum L. (St John’s Wort) China
Iridaceae Iris japonica Thunb. (Fringed Iris) China
Lauraceae Cinnamomum camphora (L.) J. Presl (Camphor Tree) China Taiwan,
Vietnam
Liliaceae Tricyrtis hirta (Thunb.) Hook (Japanese Toad Lily) Japan, Korea,
Taiwan
Magnoliaceae Michelia figo (Lour.) DC. (Port Wine Magnolia) China
Malvaceae Hibiscus syriacus L. (Rose Mallow) China
Myricaceae Myrica rubra Siebold et Zucc. (Japanese Bayberry) Japan, China
Urban Naturalist
23
A. Nagase, Y. Yamada, T. Aoki, and M. Nomura
2018 Special Issue No. 1
16 April, 23 May, 20 June, 18 July, 29 August, 30 September, 3 November; 2015:
14 May, 17 June, 10 July, 7 August, 11 September, and 22 October). We divided
the 2 roofs into 14 quadrats (3 m × 3 m) in which we swept an insect net 20 times.
All specimens were released after we employed a hand-held 10x magnifier and
several publications (Enjyu 2013, Morimoto and Hayashi 2007, Tomokuni et
al. 1993) to identify all of those collected to species or morphospecies. On the
Table 3, continued.
Family Species Distribution
Oleaceae Forsythia suspensa (Thunb.) Vahl (Weeping Forsythia) China
Ligustrum obtusifolium Siebold et Zucc. (Border Privet) Japan, Korea
Osmanthus fragrans var. aurantiacus Lour. (Kinmokusei) China
Orchidaceae Bletilla striata (Thunb.) Rchb.f. (Hyacinth Orchid) Japan, China, Taiwan
Calanthe discolor Lindl. (Ebine) Japan, China, Korea
Oxalidaceae Oxalis debilis Kunth subsp. corymbosa (DC.) O. Bolos South America
et Vigo (Large-flowered Pink-sorrel)
Pentaphylacaceae Cleyera japonica Thunb. (Sakaki) Japan, China, Korea,
Taiwan
Rosaceae Cotoneaster holizontalis Decne. (Rockspray Cotoneaster) China
Photinia × fraseri W.J. Dress ‘Red Robin’ (Christmas Cultivar
Berry)
Photinia glabra (Thunb.) Franch. & Sav. (Japanese Japan
Photinia)
Rhaphiolepis umbellata (Thunb.) Makino (Indian Japan, Korea,
Hawthorn) Taiwan
Spiraea thunbergii Siebold ex Blume (Thunberg’s Japan
Meadowsweet)
Rubiaceae Gardenia jasminoides Ellis (Cape Jasmine) Japan, East Asia
Serisa japonica (Thunb.) Thunb. (Snowbush) Japan, East Asia
Rutaceae Citrus unshiu (Swingle) Marcow. (Unshu Mikan) Japan, China
Citrus junos (Makino) Siebold ex Tanaka (Yuzu) China
Poncirus trifoliata L. (Japanese Bitter-orange) China, Korea
Zanthoxylum piperitum (L.) DC. (Japanese Pepper Tree) Japan, Korea
Scrophulariaceae Buddleja davidii Franch. (Butterfly-bush) Japan, China
Theaceae Camellia japonica L. (Japanese Camellia) Japan, China, Korea,
Taiwan
Camellia sasanqua Thunb. (Sasanqua Camellia) Japan, China
Eurya japonica Thunb. (East Asian Eurya) Japan, China, Korea
Thymelaeaceae Daphne odora Thunb. (Winter Daphne) China
Typhaceae Typha latifolia L. (Broadleaf Cattail) Japan, North and
South America,
Europe, Eurasia,
Africa
Valerianaceae Patrinia scabiosifolia Fisch. ex Trevir. (Patrinia) Japan, China, East
Siberia
Verbenaceae Callicarpa dichotoma (Lour.) K. Koch (Purple Japan, China, Korea,
Beautyberry) Vietnam
Xanthorrhoeaceae Hemerocallis hybrid (Hort.) (daylily) Japan, East Asia
Urban Naturalist
A. Nagase, Y. Yamada, T. Aoki, and M. Nomura
2018 Special Issue No. 1
24
Harappa roof, we carried out surveys of spontaneously colonizing plant species
and arthropods on the same day. We collected for later identification all specimens
that were impossible to identify on-site. Although our study focused on arthropods,
we also observed and identified vertebrates.
In order to compare arthropod diversity between the Biotope and Harappa roofs,
we used species richness and abundance data to calculate Simpson’s diversity index
(D) and the Shannon–Wiener index (H'). The analysis was carried out using Excel
2016. We employed a t-test (P < 0.05; Minitab v16) to examine whether species richness
was significantly different between the Biotope and Harappa roofs over time.
Results
Overall, the arthropods collected on both roof types were species commonly
observed in urban areas, and we observed no endangered species in this study. Richness
(orders, species, individuals), diversity indices (Shannon–Wiener, Simpson),
and temporal patterns are shown in Table 4.
Over the study period, we observed 71 species (16 orders) and 93 species (13
orders) on the Harappa and Biotope roofs, respectively (Table 4, Appendices 1, 2).
On the Harappa roof, 40 species were grassland specialists, as opposed to 30 species
on the Biotope roof. Seven species of exotic fauna were observed on the Harappa
roof vs. 8 species on the Biotope roof. Some, including the Orthopterans Patanga
japonica Bolívar, Ornebius kanetataki Matsumura, Phaneroptera falcata Redtenbacher,
and Euconocephalus thunbergi Montrouzier (all Hexapoda) were observed
to spend their entire life-cycle on the Biotope roof.
Diversity indices were high on both roof types (Table 4), and species richness
varied among arthropod groups (Table 5). The most abundant taxa were Hemiptera
(e.g., Plautia stali Scott [a stink bug], aphids, and leafhoppers), Coleoptera (e.g.,
Harmonia axyridis Pallas [a lady beetle] and Gonocephalum japanum Motschulsky
[a darkling beetle]) and Lepidoptera (e.g., Papilio xuthus L. [Common Swallowtail]
and Mamestra brassicae L. [a noctuid moth]) on both roofs.
Table 4. The number of faunal taxa (orders, species, and individuals), biodiversity indices (Shannon–
Wiener, Simpson), mean number of faunal species on each sampling date in Harappa roof and Biotope
roof in Chiba University. Means (± SE) with the different letter differ significantly from each other (t
= 7.2, df = 23, P < 0.01). Differences in mean number of fauna species Harappa roof and Biotope roof
were recorded on each sampling date over the survey period.
Harappa roof Biotope roof
Statistic (extensive) (intensive)
Total number of orders 16 13
Total number of species 71 93
Total number of individuals 330 1003
Total number of grassland species 40 30
Total number of exotic species 7 8
Shannon–Wiener diversity index 3.62 3.79
Simpson diversity index 0.95 0.97
Mean number of faunal species on each sampling date 8.32 ± 0.79b* 23.26 ± 1.94a
Urban Naturalist
25
A. Nagase, Y. Yamada, T. Aoki, and M. Nomura
2018 Special Issue No. 1
Temporal changes also varied between roofs (Fig. 5). The Biotope roof showed
significantly greater mean faunal abundance (t = 7.2, df = 23, P < 0.01). The maximum
richness for a single sampling event was 14 species (both June 2014 and June
Table 5. The number of faunal species (n) and percentage of total (%) of each order on a Harappa roof
and a Biotope roof in Chiba University.
Harappa roof Biotope roof
Order n % n %
Odonata 3 4.2 3 3.2
Orthoptera 4 5.6 11 11.8
Blattodea 1 1.4 0 0.0
Mantodea 1 1.4 1 1.1
Psocodea 0 0.0 1 1.1
Thysanoptera 1 1.4 0 0.0
Hemiptera 16 22.5 18 19.4
Neuroptera 0 0.0 1 1.1
Coleoptera 11 15.5 16 17.2
Diptera 7 9.9 7 7.5
Lepidoptera 16 22.5 16 17.2
Hymenoptera 5 7.0 10 10.8
Araneae 4 5.6 7 7.5
Acari 1 1.4 1 1.1
Isopoda 1 1.4 1 1.1
Total 71 100.0 93 100.0
Figure 5. Change in number of arthropod species over time on Harappa and Biotope roofs.
Urban Naturalist
A. Nagase, Y. Yamada, T. Aoki, and M. Nomura
2018 Special Issue No. 1
26
2015) for the Harappa roof and 43 species (May 2014) for the Biotope roof. The
minimum number was 3 (both December 2013 and August 2015) for the Harappa
and 14 (December 2013) for the Biotope roof.
Native and exotic species were equally represented, as were annual and perennial
life forms (Table 6; Appendix 3). The most abundant species were Vicia sativa
L. (Common Vetch), Plantago lanceolata L. (English Platain), and Setaria viridis
(L.) P. Beauv. (Foxtail Millet). The arrival rate of colonizing plant species varied
over time on the Harappa roof (Fig. 6). We documented the fewest arrivals in August
of each year, when temperatures were high and rainfall was low. The number
of plant species was highest (>15 species) in spring and autumn.
Discussion
The arthropods collected from both roofs in this study were common to urban
areas. The results of previous studies have been varied in this regard. Hwang and
Table 6. Native or exotic species and plant life-cycle of spontaneously colonizing plant species on a
Harappa roof in Chiba University.
Native or exotic n % Plant life cycle n %
Native species 26 55.3 Annual or biennial species 26 55.3
Exotic species 21 44.7 Perennial species 21 44.7
Total 47 100.0 Total 47 100.0
Figure 6. Change in number of spontaneously colonizing plant species over time on a Harappa
roof in Chiba University.
Urban Naturalist
27
A. Nagase, Y. Yamada, T. Aoki, and M. Nomura
2018 Special Issue No. 1
Yue (2015) studied green-roof fauna in Singapore and found mostly bees, hornets,
and wasps and no endangered species. Other surveys have found that green roofs
support uncommon arthropod species (Brenneisen 2006, Kadas 2006, Majka and
MacIvor 2009). This result may be partly related to different sampling protocols
employed; those studies used pitfall traps, while we used sweep nets.
We found that the Biotope roof had greater species richness and higher abundance
than the Harappa roof. This result was supported by previous studies, which
also compared diversity on extensive and intensive roofs (Coffman 2007, Madre
et al. 2013). The Biotope roof might provide a more consistent environment for
fauna and flora because of their stable planted vegetation (including trees), thick
substrate (50 cm), and irrigation systems. However, with a comparison of only a
single example of each roof type, we cannot generalize based on the other differences
between the 2 roof sites. The building height and age of the green roofs also
differed, making direct faunal comparisons difficult.
In contrast, the Harappa roof type has unstable vegetation because of a thin
substrate and the lack of summer irrigation. The Harappa roof became completely
brown during the summer, and we found few arthropods during that period. One
month later, both vegetation and arthropods recolonized. This finding suggests that
the Harappa roof was used as a temporary habitat. Braaker et al. (2014) studied
habitat connectivity of arthropod communities and demonstrated their movement
between green roofs and ground sites. Such an exchange between communities is
especially crucial on green roofs because well-connected communities are predicted
to be more resilient to stochastic disturbance events, and thus, have a higher
chance of persistence (Fahring and Merriam 1994).
Previous work has shown that roof age affects arthropod community composition
(Iwasaki et al. 2005) and that roof height affects nesting activity of bees and
wasps (MacIvor 2016). Further study is necessary to examine the importance of
connectivity and proximity among green roofs, as well as the influence of groundlevel
biodiversity (Hwang and Yue 2015, MacIvor and Lundholm 2011).
Although the Harappa roof had less richness than the Biotope roof, it provided
habitats, particularly for grassland specialists. In Japan, there was 1.2 million
ha of grassland habitat in the 1960s, but this area declined to 0.4 million ha in
the 2010s (Ogura 2006). Grasslands are primarily lost through urban development;
however, trees are often saved and/or added due to their frequent role in
urban greening (MLITT 2009). Thus, grassland conservation is critical (Ishii
and Nakamura 2012), and Harappa roofs could play a role in the conservation of
grassland specialists.
The Harappa roof supported 47 spontaneously colonizing plant species, but
none of these was endangered or rare. The dominant plant species were Vicia sativa
L. (Common vetch; native), Plantago lanceolata L.(Foxtail Millet) (English
Plantain; non-native) and Setaria viridis (L.) P. Beauv (Wild Foxtail Millet; native);
richness was highest in the Poaceae (grass family). In previous long-term
research of green roofs in Germany (Catalano et al. 2016, Köhler and Poll 2010),
Poaceae was the most commonly observed family as well. In a previous study of
Urban Naturalist
A. Nagase, Y. Yamada, T. Aoki, and M. Nomura
2018 Special Issue No. 1
28
spontaneous plant colonizers on a Biotope roof, Solidago altissima L. (Tall Goldenrod)
and Miscanthus sinensis Andersson (Zebra Grass) (both invasive) were
the most abundant species (Nagase and Nomura 2014). However, we observed
few of these specimens on the Harappa roof during this study. Their colonization
was likely prevented by the Harappa roof’s thin substrate because these are largebodied
plants (Dunnett and Kingsbury 2008). There was concern that dense brush
might develop on Harappa roofs, which would require frequent cutting; however,
the vegetation was short, and no maintenance was needed over the study period.
These results suggest that it is possible to control the amount of vegetation using
different depths of substrate.
The new concept of the Harappa roof was established successfully, and it provides
a unique opportunity for participatory design and maintenance. Harappa roof
development can lead to important opportunities for environmental education,
cost reduction, and positive public opinion. These roofs can be made completely
from recycled materials. Green roofs are expected to improve urban environments.
Plastic materials are frequently used for root barriers, drainage mats, and other
purposes; thus, using recycled materials can reduce the life-cycle cost of a green
roof. Harappa roofs are also much cheaper than Biotope roofs (at least 25% less in
initial cost), and it was easy for citizens to get involved in the design process and
in construction. In Japan and around the world, there are still too few examples of
public participation in green-roof creation. Successful implementation of green
roofs for urban biodiversity depends on participation of urban citizens, and a “citizen
scientist” model is needed to facilitate public participation in green roof design
(Francis and Lorimer 2011).
Conclusion
It is clear that biotope roofs encourage urban biodiversity. However, the results
of this study suggest that Harappa roofs might be able to provide habitats, particularly
for grassland fauna, without maintenance or irrigation. Future research should
test several hypotheses using multiple examples of each type of biodiversity roof.
First, greater structural diversity and standing biomass should make Biotope roofs
a more stable habitat, resulting in more consistent faunal diversity and abundance
over time. Harappa roofs would represent temporary habitats due to large changes
in vegetation cover and biomass during the growing season. Second, we predict
that Harappa roofs will preferentially support arthropod species from grassland
habitats due to the similarity of their vegetation to ground-level grasslands. Third,
aggressively invasive plant species are likely to be less common on Harappa roofs,
because low-fertility soils and frequent drought should limit their ability to colonize
and spread on Harappa roofs.
To further develop green roofs for biodiversity, it is necessary to study them
from both the natural (e.g., long-term research, regional variation) and social
science perspective (e.g., citizen involvement, psychological effects). Detailed
guidelines must be made available in order to set standards for green–roof design
and biodiversity optimization.
Urban Naturalist
29
A. Nagase, Y. Yamada, T. Aoki, and M. Nomura
2018 Special Issue No. 1
Acknowledgments
This work was supported by JSPS KAKENHI Grant Number JP 26750001 and Campus
Asia Program Inter University Exchange Program (2010–2014, 2016–2021) ( Ministry of Education,
Culture, Sports, Science and Technology). We thank Dr. Scott MacIvor (University
of Toronto), Dr. Olyssa Starry (Portland State University), Dr. Jeremy Lundholm (St. Mary's
University), and 2 anonymous reviewers for providing helpful comments on our manuscript.
Literature Cited
Baumann, N. 2006. Ground-nesting birds on green roofs in Switzerland: Preliminary observations.
Urban Habitats 4:37–44.
Baumann, N., and F. Kasten. 2010. Green roofs: Urban habitats for ground-nesting birds
and plants. Pp. 348–362, In N. Muller, P. Werner, and J.G. Kelcy (Eds). Urban Biodiversity
and Design. John Wiley and Sons, Chichester, UK. 648 pp.
Braaker, S., J., Ghazoul, M.K. Obrist, and M. Moretti. 2014. Habitat connectivity shapes
urban arthropod communities: The key role of green roofs. Ecology 95:1010–1021.
Brenneisen, S. 2006. Space for urban wildlife: Designing Green roofs as Habitats in Switzerland,
Urban Habitats 4:27–36.
Catalano, C., C., Marcenò, V.A. Laudicina, and R. Guarino. 2016. Thirty years of unmanaged
green roofs: Ecological research and design implications. Landscape and Urban
Planning 149:11–19.
Coffman, R.R. 2007. Vegetated roof systems: Design, productivity, retention, habitat,
and sustainability in green roof and ecoroof technology. Ph.D. Dissertation. Graduate
School of The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, USA.
Coffman, R.R., and G. Davis. 2005. Insect and avian fauna presence on the Ford assembly
plant ecoroof. Pp. 457–468, In Proceedings of the Third Annual Greening Rooftops for
Sustainable Communities Conference (4–6 May 2005, Washington, DC). The Cardinal
Group, Toronto, Canada.
Coffman, R.R., and T. Waite. 2011. Vegetated roofs as reconciled habitats: Rapid assays
beyond mere species counts. Urban Habitats. Available online at http://www.urbanhabitats.
org/v06n01/vegetatedroofs_full.html. Accessed 1 August 2016.
Dunnett, N., and N. Kingsbury. 2008. Planting Green Roofs and Living Walls, 2nd Edition.
Timber Press, Portland, OR, USA. 336 pp.
Enjyu, M. 2013. Insects of Japan 1400, Volumes 1 and 2. Bun-Ichi, Shinjyuku, Tokyo. 320 pp.
Fahring, L., and G. Meriram. 1994. Conservation of fragmented populations. Conservation
Biology 8:50−59.
Francis, R.A., and J. Lorimer. 2011. Urban reconciliation ecology: The potential of living
roofs and walls. Journal of Environmental Management 92:1429–1437.
Gedge, D. 2003. From rubble to redstarts. Pp. 233–241, In Proceedings of First North
American Green Roof Conference: Greening Rooftops for Sustainable Communities
(29–30 May 2003, Chicago). The Cardinal Group, Toronto, Canada.
Grant, G. 2006. Extensive green roofs in London. Urban Habitats 4:51–65.
Gray, J. 2015. Sustainable build: Brownfield sites. Available online at http://www.sustainablebuild.
co.uk/brownfieldsites.html. Accessed 1 August 2016.
Grimm, N.B., S.H. Faeth, N.E. Golubiewski, C.L. Redman, J.G. Wu, X.M. Bai, and J.M.
Briggs 2008. Global change and the ecology of cities. Science 3 19:756–760.
Güneralp, B., and K. C. Seto. 2008. Environmental impacts of urban growth from an integrated
dynamic perspective: A case study of Shenzhen, South China. Global Environmental
Change 18:720–735.
Urban Naturalist
A. Nagase, Y. Yamada, T. Aoki, and M. Nomura
2018 Special Issue No. 1
30
Hwang, Y., and Z. Yue. 2015. Observation of biodiversity on minimally managed green
roofs in a tropical city. Journal of Living Architecture 2:9–26.
Ishii, M., and M. Nakamura. 2012. Development and future of insect conservation in Japan.
Pp. 339–357, In T. R. New (Ed). Insect Conservation: Past, Present and Prospects.
Springer, Heidelberg, Germany. 436 pp.
Ishimatsu, J., and K. Ito. 2013. Brown/biodiverse roofs: A conservation action for threatened
brownfields to support urban biodiversity. Landscape and Ecological Engineering
9:299–304.
Iwasaki, T., J.,Kato, T. Moriguchi, M. Handa, and K. Imai. 2005. Changes of the insect fauna
at the high-rise roof garden constructed in Kasumigaseki, Tokyo. Japanese Institute
of Landscape Architecture 3:22–25.
Japan Meteorological Agency. 2016. Weather, climate, and earthquake information, Available
online at http://www.data.jma.go.jp/obd/stats/etrn/. Accessed 25 June 2016.
Kadas, G. 2006. Rare invertebrates colonizing green roofs in London. Urban Habitats
4:66–86.
Köhler, M., and P.H. Poll. 2010. Long-term performance of selected old Berlin green roofs
in comparison to younger extensive green roofs in Berlin. Ecological Engineering
36:722–729.
Louette, G., T. De Bie, J. Vandekerkhove, S. Declerck, and L. De Meester. 2007. Analysis
of the inland cladocerans of Flanders (Belgium): Interring changes over the past 70
years. Belgian Journal of Zoology 137:117–123.
Lundholm, J.T. 2006. Green roofs and facades: A habitat-template approach. Urban Habitats
4:87–101.
MacIvor, J.S. 2016. Building height matters: Nesting activity of bees and wasps on vegetated
roofs. Israel Journal of Ecology and Evolution. DOI: 10.1080/15659801.2015.1052635.
MacIvor, J.S., and J. Lundholm. 2011. Insect species composition and diversity on intensive
green roofs and adjacent level-ground habitats. Urban Ecosystems 14:225–241.
MacIvor, J.S., and Ksiazek, K. 2015. Invertebrates on green roofs. Pp. 333–355, In R.K.
Sutton (Ed.). Green Roof Ecosystems. Springer, Switzerland. 447 pp.
Madre, F., A. Vergnes, N. Machon, and P. Clergeau. 2013. A comparison of three types of
green roof as habitats for arthropods. Ecological Engineering 57:109–117
Majka, C.G. and J.S. MacIvor, 2009. Otiorhynchus porcatus (Coleoptera: Curculionidae):
A European root weevil newly discovered in the Canadian Maritime Provinces. Journal
of the Acadian Entomological Society 5:27–31.
Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport, and Tourism (MLITT). 2009. Green roofs.
Available online at http://www.mlit.go.jp/crd/park/shisaku/gi_kaihatsu/okujyo/panf.
html. Accessed 25 June 2016.
MLITT. 2014. Annual survey of installment of green roofs and living walls. Available online
at http://www.mlit.go.jp/. Accessed 25 June 2016.
Morimoto, K., and M. Hayashi. 2007. The Coleoptera of Japan in Color, 4th Edition. Hoikusya,
Osaka. 323 pp.
Nagase, A., and M. Nomura. 2014. An evaluation of one example of biotope roof in Japan:
Plant development and invertebrate colonisation after 8 years. Urban Forestry and Urban
Greening 13:714–724.
Nagase, A., S. Komori, E. Kumasaka, and S. Koyama. 2015. Experience with plants influencing
perception of extensive green roofs. Proceedings of 17th Japan Society of Kansei
Engineering, Tokyo, Japan.
Ogura, J. 2006. The transition of grassland area in Japan. Journal of Kyoto Seika University
30:159–172.
Urban Naturalist
31
A. Nagase, Y. Yamada, T. Aoki, and M. Nomura
2018 Special Issue No. 1
Organization for Landscape and Urban Infrastructure. 2016. Available online at https://
urbangreen.or.jp/. Accessed 1 August 2016.
Shuowen, T., 2006. A study on park maintenance as a children’s outdoor environment. Hokkaido
University Collection of Scholarly and Academic Papers 28:1–84.
Tomokuni, M., Y. Yasunaga, M.Takai, I. Yamashita, M.Kawamura, and T. Kawasawa. 1993.
A Field Guide to Japanese Bugs. Zenkokunosonkyouikukyoukai, Tokyo, Japan. 380 pp.
Williams, N.G., J. Lundholm, and J.S. MacIvor. 2014. Do green roofs help urban biodiversity
conservation? Journal of Applied Ecology 51:1643–1649.
Yamada, Y., Y. Sone, T. Aoki, M. Nomura, and A. Nagase. 2013. Introduction of biodiverse
roofs in Japanese urban areas: Possibilities and challenges. Journal of the Japanese Institute
of Landscape Architecture 76:71–674.
Urban Naturalist
A. Nagase, Y. Yamada, T. Aoki, and M. Nomura
2018 Special Issue No. 1
32
Appendix 1. List of fauna species on Harappa roof in Chiba University.
Grassland Native or
Class/ Order Species species Exotic
Aves
Passeriformes Corvus macrorhynchos Wagler Native
Hypsipetes amaurotis Temminck Native
Motacilla alba lugens Gloger Exotic
Passer montanus L. Native
Columbiformes Columba livia Gmelin Exotic
Reptilia
Squamata Plestiodon japonicas Peters ○ Native
Insecta
Odonata Ischnura senegalensis Rambur Native
Pantala flavescens Fabricius Native
Sympetrum frequens Sélys Exotic
Orthoptera Dianemobius nigrofasciatus Matsumura ○ Native
Oedaleus infernalis Sauss ○ Native
Patanga japonica Bolívar ○ Native
Teleogryllus emma Ohmachi & Matsuura ○ Native
Blattodea Periplaneta fuliginosa Serville Native
Mantodea Hierodula patellifera Serville Native
Thysanoptera Thysanoptera sp. -
Hemiptera Aphidoidea sp. -
Cicadellidae sp. -
Delphacidae sp. ○ -
Dolycoris baccarum L. ○ Native
Geocoris proteus Distant ○ Native
Getomus pygmaeus Dallas ○ Native
Lygaeoidea sp. ○ Native
Nabis kinbergii Reuter ○ Native
Orius sp. ○ -
Pachygrontha antennata Uhler ○ Native
Phyrrhocoris sinuaticollis Reuter ○ Native
Plautia stali Scott ○ Native
Riptortus pedestris Trusted ○ Native
Trigonotylus caelestialium Kirkaldy ○ Native
Typhlocybinae sp. Native
Yemma exilis Horváth ○ Native
Coleoptera Cheilomenes sexmaculata Fabricius Native
Coccinella septempunctata L. Native
Curculionoidae sp. -
Gonocephalum japanum Motschulsky ○ Native
Halticinae sp. ○ Native
Urban Naturalist
33
A. Nagase, Y. Yamada, T. Aoki, and M. Nomura
2018 Special Issue No. 1
Grassland Native or
Class/ Order Species species Exotic
Harmonia axyridis Pallas Native
Histeridae sp. Native
Hypera postica Gyllenhal ○ Exotic
Illeis koebelei Timberlake Native
Paederus fuscipes Curtis ○ Native
Staphylinidae sp. Native
Diptera Chironomidae sp. Native
Drosophilidae sp. Native
Sphaerophoria philanthus Meigen ○ Native
Episyrphus balteatus De Geer ○ Native
Syrphinae sp. Native
Tephritidae sp. -
Tipulidae sp. Native
Lepidoptera Argyreus hyperbius L. ○ Exotic
Agrotis segetum Denis & Schiffermüller Native
Crambidae sp. ○ Native
Helicoverpa armigera armigera Hübner ○ Native
Mamestra brassicae L. ○ Native
Noctuidae sp. -
Palpita nigropunctalis Bremer Native
Papilio xuthus L. Native
Parnara guttata Bremer & Grey ○ Native
Potanthus flavum Murray ○ Native
Pediasia teterrellus Zincken ○ Native
Pieris rapae L. ○ Exotic
Pyralidae sp. Native
Lycaena phlaeas L. ○ Native
Oncocera sp. ○ Native
Zizeeria maha Kollar ○ Native
Hymenoptera Camponotus japonicus Mayr ○ Native
Apis mellifera L. Exotic
Campsomeriella annulata Fabricius Native
Formica japonica Motschoulsky ○ Native
Tetramorium tsushimae Emery ○ Native
Arachnida
Araneae Lycosidae sp. Native
Misumenops tricuspidatus Fabricius ○ Native
Salticidae sp. Native
Thomisidae sp. ○ Native
Acari Balaustium murorum Hermann Native
Malacostraca
Isopoda Armadillidium vulgare Latreille Exotic
Urban Naturalist
A. Nagase, Y. Yamada, T. Aoki, and M. Nomura
2018 Special Issue No. 1
34
Appendix 2. List of fauna species on a Biotope roof in Chiba University.
Grassland Native or
Class/ Order Species species Exotic
Aves
Passeriformes Corvus macrorhynchos Wagler - Native
Motacilla alba lugens Gloger - Native
Columbiformes Columba livia Gmelin - Exotic
Insecta
Odonata Lestes sponsa Hansemann - Native
Orthetrum albistylum speciosum Uhler - Native
Pantala flavescens Fabricius - Native
Orthoptera Acrida cinerea Thunberg ○ Native
Atractomorpha lata Mochulsky ○ Native
Euconocephalus thunbergi Montrouzier ○ Native
Oecanthus euryelytra Ichikawa ○ Native
Ornebius kanetataki Matsumura - Native
Patanga japonica Bolívar ○ Native
Phaneroptera falcata Redtenbacher ○ Native
Polionemobius micado Shiraki ○ Native
Teleogryllus emma Ohmachi & Matsuura ○ Native
Tettigonia orientalis Uvarov - Native
Velarifictorus micado Saussure - Native
Mantodea Tenodera aridifolia Stoll ○ Native
Neuroptera Chrysopidae sp. - Native
Hemiptera Anisops ogasawarensis Walker - Native
Ceroplastes ceriferus Fabricius - Native
Ceroplastes rubens Maskell - Exotic
Coccoidea sp. - -
Corythucha marmorata Uhler ○ Exotic
Dulinius conchatus Distant ○ Exotic
Geisha distinctissima Walker - Native
Gerris lacustris latiabdominis Miyamoto - Native
Graptopsaltria nigrofuscata Motschulsky - Native
Kallitaxilla sinica Walker - Native
Meimuna opalifera Walker - Native
Microvelia douglasi Scott - Native
Nipponaphis distyliicola Monzen - Native
Nippolachnus piri Matsumura - Native
Ossoides lineatus Bierman ○ Native
Plautia stali Scott - Native
Riptortus pedestris Trusted ○ Native
Uroleucon nigrotuberculatum Olive ○ Exotic
Coleoptera Agrypnus binodulus Motschulsky - Native
Anomala albopilosa Hope - Native
Urban Naturalist
35
A. Nagase, Y. Yamada, T. Aoki, and M. Nomura
2018 Special Issue No. 1
Grassland Native or
Class/ Order Species species Exotic
Anomala cuprea Hope - Native
Anomala orientalis Waterhouse - Native
Argopistes coccinelliformis Motschulsky - Native
Aulacophora femoralis Motschulsky ○ Native
Chilocorus kuwanae Silvestri ○ Native
Coccinella septempunctata L. - Native
Gametis jucunda Faldermann ○ Native
Gonocephalum japanum Motschulsky - Native
Harmonia axyridis Pallas - Native
Illeis koebelei Timberlake - Native
Linaeidea aenea L. - Native
Pseudocneorhinus bifasciatus Roelofs - Native
Propylaea japonica Thunberg - Native
Pyrrhalta humeralis Chen - Native
Diptera Chironomidae sp. - Native
Episyrphus balteatus De Geer ○ Native
Milesiinae sp. ○ Native
Sphaerophoria indiana Bigot ○ Native
Sphaerophoria menthastri L. ○ Native
Syrphinae sp. - Native
Tipulidae sp. - Native
Lepidoptera Adoxophyes honmai Yasuda - Native
Crambidae sp - Native
Eumeta minuscula Butler - Native
Geometridae sp. - Native
Glyphodes perspectalis Walker - Native
Homona magnanima Diakonoff - Native
Mamestra brassicae L. ○ Native
Palpita nigropunctalis Bremer - Native
Papilio machaon L. ○ Native
Papilio xuthus L. - Native
Parapediasia teterella Zincken - Exotic
Parnara guttata Bremer & Grey ○ Native
Pyralidae sp. - Native
Pelopidas mathias Fabricius ○ Native
Tortricidae sp. - Native
Vanessa indica Herbst ○ Native
Hymenoptera Braconidae sp. - Native
Camponotus japonicus Mayr ○ Native
Chalcididae sp. - -
Formica japonica Motschoulsky ○ Native
Icheumonidae sp. - Native
Megacampsomeris schulthessi Betrem - Native
Megachile sp. - Native
Pristomyrmex punctatus Smith ○ Native
Urban Naturalist
A. Nagase, Y. Yamada, T. Aoki, and M. Nomura
2018 Special Issue No. 1
36
Grassland Native or
Class/ Order Species species Exotic
Tetramorium tsushimae Emery ○ Native
Xylocopa appendiculata circumvolans Latreille - Native
Psocodea Psocodea sp. - Native
Arachnida
Araneae Carrhotus xanthogramma Latreille - Native
Hasarius adansoni Audouin - Native
Misumenops sp. - Native
Myrmarachne sp. - Exotic
Nephila clavata L. Koch - Native
Thomisidae sp. - Native
Malacostraca
Isopoda Armadillidium vulgare Latreille - Native
Pholcus sp. - Native
Urban Naturalist
37
A. Nagase, Y. Yamada, T. Aoki, and M. Nomura
2018 Special Issue No. 1
Appendix 3. List of spontaneously colonizing plant species on a Harappa roof in Chiba
University. ACFOR: A = abundant (≥30%), C = common (20–29%), F = frequent (10–19%),
O = occasional (5–9%), R = rare (1–4%).
Native or Plant ACFOR
Family Species Exotic life-cycle scale
Amaryllidaceae Allium macrostemon Bunge Native Perennial R
Apiaceae Torilis japonica (Houtt.) DC. Native Perennial R
Asteraceae Bidens frondosa L. Exotic Annual R
Conyza canadensis (L.) Cronquist Exotic Biennial F
Conyza sumatrensis (Retz.) E. Walker Exotic Perennial F
Gnaphalium japonicum Thunb Native Perennial R
Solidago altissima L. Exotic Perennial R
Stenactis annuus (L.) Cass. Exotic Annual C
Youngia japonica (L.) DC. Native Perennial R
Boraginaceae Trigonotis peduncularis (Trevir.) Benth. ex. Native Annual F
Hemsl
Brassicaceae Cardamine scutata Thunb. Exotic Annual O
Caryophyllaceae Cerastium glomeratum Thuill. Exotic Annual F
Chenopodiaceae Chenopodium album L. Exotic Annual R
Convolvulaceae Calystegia japonica (Thunb.) Choisy Native Perennial R
Cyperaceae Carex leucochlora Bunge Native Perennial O
Cyperus microiria Steud. Native Annual O
Cyperus rotundus L. Native Perennial O
Euphorbiaceae Acalypha australis L. Native Annual O
Euphorbia maculata L. Exotic Annual R
Fabaceae Kummerowia stipulacea (Maxim.) Makino Native Annual F
Trifolium pratense L. Exotic Perennial C
Vicia hirsuta (L.) Gray Native Perennial C
Vicia sativa L. Native Perennial A
Geraniaceae Geranium carolinianum L. Exotic Annual R
Iridaceae Sisyrinchium rosulatum E.P. Bicknell Exotic Annual F
Lamiaceae Lamium purpureum L. Native Perennial C
Oxalidaceae Oxalis corniculata L. Native Perennial C
Plantaginaceae Plantago lanceolata L. Exotic Perennial A
Veronica arvensis L. Exotic Annual or F
Biennial
Veronica persica Poir. Exotic Perennial F
Poaceae Bromus catharticus Vahl Exotic Annual F
Dactylis glomerata L. Exotic Perennial O
Digitaria ciliaris (Retz.) Koel Native Annual F
Eleusine indica (L.) Gaertn. Native Annual C
Urban Naturalist
A. Nagase, Y. Yamada, T. Aoki, and M. Nomura
2018 Special Issue No. 1
38
Native or Plant ACFOR
Family Species Exotic life-cycle scale
Elymus tsukushiensis Honda var. transiens Native Perennial O
(Hack.) Osada
Festuca arundinacea Schreb. Exotic Perennial O
Festuca ovina L. Exotic Perennial O
Setaria pumila (Poir.) Roem. & Schult. Native Annual C
Setaria viridis (L.) P. Beauv. Native Annual A
Zoysia japonica Steud. Native Perennial R
Polygonaceae Rumex japonicus Houtt. Native Perennial O
Portulacaceae Portulaca oleracea L. Native Perennial F
Rubiaceae Galium spurium var. echinospermon Native Annual R
(Wallr.) Hayek
Solanaceae Solanum carolinense L. Exotic Perennial R
Ulmaceae Zelkova serrata (Thunb.) Makino Native Perennial R
Vitaceae Cayratia japonica (Thunb.) Gagnep. Native Perennial O