KSCE Journal of Civil Engineering (0000) 00(0):1-9 Environmental Engineering

Copyright 2016 Korean Society of Civil Engineers

DOI 10.1007/s12205-016-1077-1 pISSN 1226-7988, eISSN 1976-3808
www.springer.com/12205
TECHNICAL NOTE

Applying Biotope Concepts and Approaches for Sustainable Environmental Design

Yan Huang*, Yichao Ma**, Wenting Wu***, and Qinzhi Lv****
Received December 21, 2015/Revised 1st: May 30, 2016, 2nd: July 20, 2016/Accepted/Published Online November 11, 2016

Abstract

Depletion of natural resources and habitat destruction has led to changes in ecosystems from the global to the local scale. For this
reason, numerous theories and methods from landscape ecology have emerged and applied in sustainable landscape planning and
design, including meso-and micro-scale biotope design. Although many research on biotope effectively promoting biodiversity
conservation, the concept of biotope and the biotope approaches in sustainable environmental design have not been well depicted. In
the present study, we propose a basic process of biotope design and several key points of design in response to increasing ecological
pressure from urban areas or rural areas. We believe this conceptual method will contribute an essential tool to address the spatial
dimension for achieving socio-economic and ecological sustainability.
Keywords: biotope, environmental design, ecological community

1. Introduction
New theories and methods are needed to address the complex
issues arising from depletion of natural resources and habitat
destruction, which has led to changes in ecosystems from the
global to the local scale and may influence the sustainable
human development. Sustainability has emerged as a paradigm
from these global issues. The term sustainability was first used in
1980 in IUCN's World Conservation Strategy. The definition
approved by United Nations World Commission on Environment
and Development (WCED) in 1987 for sustainable development
is to ensure that it meets the needs of the present without
compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own
needs. The concept of sustainability is variedly defined by
numerous authorities, and different concept reveals different
dimensions. According to one of the fundamental views from
systems approach, sustainability was defined as the capacity of
the earth to maintain and support life and to endure as a system
(Jongman, 1999; Grossman and Bellot, 1999).
In this paper, we focus on spatial environment, one of the three
core research subjects of environmental design which also
includes: being lifestyle, and interactive experience (http://
www.artcenter.edu/accd/programs/undergraduate/
environmental.jsp). According to van Lier (1998), the notion to
create more sustainable systems in the city has become a leading
principle for all those designers that are involved in design future
space uses. Many designers believe that promoting sustainability
is the overarching goal of environment (and landscape) design,
including design for conservation, protection and appropriate use
of space and natural resources (Forman, 1995; Chappells and
Shove, 2005; Nassauer, 2012). In a way, sustainability is the
major objective of any design (Grossman and Bellot, 1999).
Framework for studying spatial interfaces of sustainability has an
obligation to ensure ecologically, socially, and economically
benefits from the maintenance of harmony between man and nature.
Its spatial dimension is strongly related to the interdependence of
space uses(van den Dobbelsteen and de Wilde, 2004).
It is increasingly recognized that more sustainable approaches
are needed for environmental design (Mller et al., 2010). New
innovations, tools, and inventions are needed to effectively apply
sustainable principles to design. The spatial dimension of
sustainability engages processes and the relations between
ecosystems and biotopes at different space and time scales
(Borgstrm, 2006). Scale is a key issue in sustainable design,
across all scales of environmental phenomena, from the
connections between eco-systems and natural processes, from
global energy transfer to dynamic soil micromorphology. Due to
the interdependencies of ecosystems, a design approach is
needed that examines a specific site in its broader context.
Therefore, scientific knowledge especially ecological knowledge

*Senior Engineer, Dept. of Environmental Design, Zhejiang University of Technology, Hangzhou 310023, PR China (Corresponding Author, E-mail:
huangyan@zjut.edu.cn)
**Professorate Senior Engineer, Zhejiang Design Institute of Water Conservancy and Hydroelectric Power, Hangzhou 310002, PR China (E-mail:
542767221@qq.com)
***Professor, Dept. of Environmental Design, Zhejiang University of Technology, Hangzhou 310023, PR China (E-mail:wwtaaa@163.com)
****Professor, Dept. of Environmental Design, Zhejiang University of Technology, Hangzhou 310023, PR China (E-mail: lvqz@zjut.edu.cn)

1
 Yan Huang, Yichao Ma, Wenting Wu, and Qinzhi Lv
is essential when designing for sustainability. And the landscape
provides a proper carrier or medium for sustainable design
(McLennan, 2004). This paper briefly reviews the concept of
biotopes and related ecological principles, as well as biotope
design theories and methodologies. And a conceptual framework
for biotope design is developed which applying landscape
ecological concepts and exploring the multiple potential roles of
environmental theories as ecological design tools. We argue for a
basic process that applies ecological knowledge to biotope
design activities and believe the framework represents a potential
significant contribution to increasing the acceptance and use of
biotope knowledge across varieties of environmental design, and
to enhance communication between designers, thus contributing
to an increased scientific and cultural consensus for sustainable
environmental design or sustainable landscape design. Numerous
theories and methods have emerged from landscape ecology that
are useful for applying these concepts to sustainable landscape
planning and design. This paper proposes a basic process of
biotope design, which is understood as the most useful and
relevant for sustainable environmental design. Furthermore, this
approach might help to structure and clarify why, where, and
how landscape ecological principles effectively assist design. We
hold the view that proper method will contribute as essential
tools to address the spatial dimension of sustainability in a
rigorous and robust manner.
2. Biotope and Related Concepts
Biotope is a term originally used in environmental protection
and wildlife conservation, and has been applied to landscape
architecture in Europe, America and Japan over the past decade
(Rodiek and Thomas, 1980; BryanBurley, 1995; Margolis and
Robinson, 2007; Kobori, 2009). Generally, it is considered as a
unique natural ecosystem constituted by a variety of organisms
existing in a certain region. Biotope is almost synonymous with
the term habitat; however, the following definitions apply under
this article: habitat means an ecological or environmental area
that is inhabited by a particular species, and biotope means a
biological community (Hoshino, 2003).
With continuation in scale, the concept of biotope can deduce
microbiotope or macrobiotope, the reason for biotope differentiation
is differential resource utilization between species. By now, as
the natural environment is continually being destroyed, to afford
habitat to all life (not just those endangered species), and to
restore or create disappeared biotopes, is a rather important and
urgent social activity. Design is not just visual art in contemporary
landscape architecture and environmental designs, it is combined
with the concept of ecology, such as biotope, to improve the
physical landscape structure and function, and help to create a
sustainable world in the near future. Some prototypes from
nature such as anthills, earthworm holes, or coral reefs illuminate
biotope design and provide some building materials for sustainable
construction (Achal et al., 2015). In nature, biotopes is formed,
maintained and evolved through natural processes between
2 KSCE Journal of Civil Engineering
ecological factors. These processes are also effective in the
adjustment to disturbance from nature or human.
Creating biotopes is mainly focused on creating or rehabilitating
high density, small habitat space in environment, with special
consideration of the bottom living space of the ecological
pyramid, that is to protect decomposers such as earthworms,
ants, bacteria and fungi, green plants and moderate primary
consumer such as beetles, butterflies, dragonflies, mantises,
frogs, toads, centipedes, etc. (Eisenhauer et al., 2012). Biodiversity
in cities refers mainly to creating diversified environment to
provide habitats for different species, viz. soil, water, green
spaces, roads, hedges and other architectural exterior environment,
emphasis on the preservation of the most basic biotopes in the
food chain (McKinney, 2008). Only if the basic ecological
structure and function are robust can ensure the higher class
species have enough food supply and remain durable harmonization
of biodiversity.
From an ecological perspective, other species related to human
beings, and the complete biosphere is the environment which
humans depend on. An ecological community whether designed
or natural, its structure and function should adapt to the local
natural processes. If an environment can maintain the survival
and health of one species, then it could be called a suitable living
space for this species. There are perhaps three principal features
that constitute a good habitat: sustenance, safety and consonance
(Lynch, 1984). A good living environment has enough food,
energy, water, air and no dangers, in harmony with the basic
ecological structure and natural rhythm.
The biotope design not only concerned about the artistry of
design, but also focus on its practicality. As early as the 4th
century BC, Socrates had already pointed out that the beauty is
not merely form, but suitability to purpose (Tatarkiewicz, 1980).
As a type of animal, the first need of human beings is to have a
living environment. Therefore, the ecological consideration in
environmental design is a basic requirement for human survival.
So the beauty lies in the satisfaction of people's living requirements
first, which is the prerequisite of general criteria in environmental
aesthetics. The aesthetics in environmental design is based on the
basic needs of human life, however nowadays some cities in the
world still treat environmental design as visual art.
In the biosphere, all biological factors and abiotic factors are
interdependence with each other. Even slight changes in
temperature, humidity, soil structure, current of air or water, etc.
in regional biological environment may finally affect all
organisms in the world through the complex system of the
biosphere. As natural creatures, humans are inevitably linked to
other organisms and abiotic factors. This basic knowledge of
ecology informs us in designing of urban environments to try to
maintain or restore the regional ecological system and to retain
the landscape integrity. If the environmental design is to improve
the human living environment, then only if the design follows
solar radiation, current of air, terrain and vegetation, water
system can it bring the joy and satisfaction of environmental
experience into our lives.
 Applying Biotope Concepts and Approaches for Sustainable Environmental Design
Lewis Mumford arguing against the neglect of organic
environments in urban construction reminded us: The popular
technique in our era, do not take the relationships between
people and air, water, soil, and all other his organic partners be
seen as the most basic and oldest relationship in the all relationships,
but every attempt was made to design and manufacture some
ingenious mechanical substitutes to replace the organism which
can survive independently. ... Not bring the organism and life
into the city, so that not only the poorest residents enjoy the
sunlight and air, but also have the opportunity to touch and
planting in the earth; but to become a barren countryside, and the
death of the city eventually (Mumford, 1968).
To put the emphasis on the practicability of environmental
design and ignore the meaning of it to the human spirit will
weaken the comprehensive understanding of natures value.
Only release from the fences of environmental materialism and
promotion the relationship between man and nature, that is, from
the material level to the spiritual level, from the practical to the
aesthetic, would help to establish a harmonious relationship
between man and nature in the spiritual sense in a truly equal
manner, which man and nature develop the beautiful cooperation
and interaction. Ecological aesthetics tell us the beauty of the
world is the beauty of diverse and coexistent life (Gobster et al.,
2007). The loss of diversity or the upset of ecological balance
will result in far behind the beauty. Comprehension of ecological
design from the perspective of ecological aesthetics treats
ecology as its objective. An Urban ecological environment
doesnt just emphasize material consumption, but spiritual
enjoyment, in which people experience real freedom and
happiness. As an aesthetic material object, the environment does
not merely exist to be utilized in material related to human
beings, but delivers man with aesthetic and emotional sensation.
Moving to ecological esthetics is the ideal state of the
relationship between man and the environment, and it provide
the ideological foundation for ecological design.
3. Design Strategies of Biotope
Biotope problems are commonly solved by two technical
methods: design strategies and engineering technology. Design
strategies includes: plant community based design, site microclimate
creating, site selection of building, green building materials and
so on (Moss and Wyatt, 1994; Levequ, 2003; Nagasea and
Nomura, 2014); engineering technology includes: soil improvement
techniques, wetland restoration and creation, ecological treatment of
embankment, ecological green roofs, and green walls (Pigay et
al., 2005; Kim et al., 2011; Byeon, 2012; Ignatieva and Ahrn,
2013; Guseva and Koval, 2015).
Eco-designers must possess necessary ecological knowledge,
recognize the complexity of interaction between man and nature
and the limits of planning and design. Their basic task is to keep
a role as the nurturing parent towards life and land. Flora has
become the main subject of landscape in current ecological
planning and design, which is taking as the most direct carrier of
Vol. 00, No. 0 / 000 0000
ecological processes, the framework of natural habitats and the
basis for sustainable landscape design (Pickett and Cadenasso,
2008; Ignatieva and Ahrn, 2013). In recent years, the cases in
landscape planning and design of natural habitats such as
Menomonee Valley Industrial Center, Milwaukee, Wisconsi, and
design of plant communities and habitats,i.e. Gannett/USA
Today Headquarters, McLean, Virginia, have offered new
interpretations for means of relationships with the environment,
new methods for ecological landscape and sustainable landscape
design (Dinep and Schwab, 2009). In these cases, the professional
design teams based on the natural environment and local
populations, performed the functional space planning, conducted
habitat needs analysis, established the logical possibility tree to
deduce the most suitable habitat, and finally created an integrated
ecosystem with complete community structure and function,
where plants and animals well adapted.
In landscape, scale is one of the basic but important feature, the
scale at which landscape patterns are perceived by humans. The
relationship between the large, intermediate and small-scale is
extremely complex and the boundary between different scales
are not clear. Small-scale ecological processes and patterns have
their own independence and integrity, and superposition of them
constitute larger-scale ecological process and pattern. The
process and pattern characteristic of the larger-scale also has its
own ecological independence and integrity corresponding to
scale level, consequently. Characteristics of large-scale are not
simple escalations of the small-scale, and small scale is not
simplistic subjected to the law of large scale (Thayer, 2003).
Each scale has its own ecological process, pattern, problems and
mutual conversion characteristics, which become the basic
theoretical and applied framework for landscape ecology.
The ecological design of small-scale space is within the
competitive area of traditional landscape architecture. The
development of science and technology provides scientific basis
and technological approaches to small-scale ecological planning
and design, such as determination of soil pH, temperature,
moisture, biomass or evaluate community composition, etc.
(Schulze and Beck, 2005; Oberndorfer et al., 2007). However,
due to the uncertain ecological relationships and processes of
small scale space, the lack of appropriate intervention methods,
truly successful cases of ecological design are still very limited.
The key to small-scale space of ecological planning and design
are: 1) small differences in ecological factors to create niches; 2)
site conditions, species selection and community design; 3) the
unique ecological processes and ecological linkages residing in
small-scale space; 4) ecological bridge with ecological dependency
and continuity in small-scale space; 5) behavioral characteristics
of human and environment; 6) the humanistic and cultural
characteristics of landscape, and 7) how to correctly improve the
relationship between biomass production and human activity in
small-scale space.
Biotope theory is the fundamental basis for ecological design
of biotic community. In traditional planning and design, in out
and free land is usually used as the land covered with vegetation,
3
 Yan Huang, Yichao Ma, Wenting Wu, and Qinzhi Lv
and usually after the construction of roads and buildings, which
indicate the subordinate role of natural environment and the plant
systems ornamental value on human preferences. From basic
conditions and desired objectives of a community, ecological
design of biotic community plans and designs the habitat of flora
and fauna, namely to create biotope (Rosenzweig, 2003; Beatley,
2011). The approach for biotope creation is the primary problem
of ecological design on biotic community, which is composed of
numerous biological factors and abiotic factors and complex
interaction between them. As biotope is the foundation to
maintain a biotic community in good conditions, to create
biotope is the key to setting up the configuration system between
environment and organisms.
In the long-term of ecological adaptation and biological
evolution, the corresponding relationships between organism and
environment generate utilization, transforming and sustaining
other relationships; each species in community or ecosystem
occupies a unique niche due to differential resource utilization,
and produces corresponding interaction effects. Seen from the
environment, the specific existence of living organisms is the
biotope of the species; Seen from the organism, organism occupy
a special niche in the environment.
With the rapid development of municipal construction and real
estate industry in China and other countries, natural areas has
become progressively disturbed and threatened. Where do we
engage with the natural world? Or where will we learn about
nature? To solve this problem, biotope design within the limited
vacant land in cities is needed and necessary. These spaces serve
real ecological functions as natural areas and also serve as play
and engagement areas. But how to revitalize the surviving open
space or degraded natural landscapes like biotope? Here we
suggested two methods: Process design and MSD: Multi-
functional Space Design.
Process design or dynamic design was not to design a
Fig. 1. Process of Biotope Design
finished object, but a design to accommodate the changes in the
future, suitable for a long term, such as biotope (Filor, 1994;
zyavuz, 2013). In contemporary environmental design, many
designers and theorists have expressed the importance of
openness and variability in design, which put together enabling
factors to solve unexpected problems. Process design does not
place emphasis on the stationary completion status, but allows
evolution to be made during the actual process and thus is a very
flexible method of design.
Multi-Functional Landscape Design provides various functions
for people in a limited space (OFarrell and Anderson, 2010). In
other words, this is a method to think about how to manage the
space for various uses. Unlike functional zoning, MFLD does
not divide a space into clear functional areas, but interlaces fuzzy
domains of different function layers of space (layers of matrix,
vegetation, water, recreational space and ecological learning,
etc.) and creates multi-functional areas where, for example,
people who taking recreational activities by the water can also
learn about ecology at the same time. According to Gibsons
theory (1979), the perception of the environment inevitably leads
to some course of action. The biotope provides not only a place
for variety recreational activities, but also a habitat for many
living creatures. Thus, in a multi-functional recreational area,
people are able to engage in various activities, while they are
relaxing there, they also can learn something new about its
ecology.
4. Process of Biotope Design and the Key Points
of Design
4.1 Investigation and Process for Biotope Design
First of all, an investigation for biotope design must be taken,
which need examine the structural elements of the disturbed
ecosystem namely the project site, and a similar ecosystem
4 KSCE Journal of Civil Engineering
 Applying Biotope Concepts and Approaches for Sustainable Environmental Design

which maintain the native habitat (such as ecological factors,
plant and animal species, etc.), explore the natural process
(such as the water cycle conditions, food chain composition,
etc.) and systematically study in cross-grade of key species
namely key species-centered analysis in different levels. In
addition, although the main object of design is often confined
to the physical environment (by microclimate creating, changes
of soil and paving, etc.) and production (by plant disposition,
etc.), but a few species on the top of food chain are usually
selected as the key monitoring targets for evaluation of the
status quo or design effectiveness. The environmental
adaptability for candidate species is obtained on the basis of the
above research and analysis. And then the limiting factor for
candidate species is determined. Next, pick out the biotope
adaptive species. Meanwhile, outline the measures for
ecological restoration and reconstruction of environment.
Combined the above two processes, the designed habitat is
established. Finally, with visual analysis to determine the form
of biotope, and based on ecological analysis to check the
structure and function of biotope. Thereafter, biotope would be
adjusted continuously to be organic and diversified. And the
basic process of biotope design as follows (Fig. 1):
The artificial imitated natural communities allow plants and
animals growth and reproduction. In the early stages of biotope
formation, the sign of artificial composition are obvious, but with
the growth and evolution of the community, it becomes closer to
the communities in natural and semi-natural state. In an artificial
environment, this semi-natural green spaces is especially valuable
where are the refuges and habitats for plants and animals to
survive. Through the construction of networked biotopes in
urban areas, diffusion of species becomes possible which can
restore the extinguished population in small area and keep the
regional gene pool diverse (Ericson et al., 1988).
Hutchinson (1967) wrote: In community habitats, we can also
identify a series of habitat, thats characteristics can be described
by different species in existence. The habitat in its geographic
distribution can be defined as follows: deciding those ecosystem
components of biotope must ensure the survival of the species,
and the habitat concept here is in spatial extension (Pugh, 1996;
van Bohemen, 1998; Livingston et al., 2003).
4.2 Biotope Types and the Key Points of Design
Habitat diversity is the foundation of biotope diversity, and
diversified habitats meet the needs of different types of plants
and animals. But how to put this into biotope design? 1) Create
plenty of habitat types. In biotope design, according space
environment types, biotope can be divided into the woods
biotope of sloping fields, woods biotope of flat fields, woods
biotope of depression, pure meadow biotope, gravel meadow
biotope, lake biotope, pond biotope, waterfront biotope, shrub
swamp biotope, farmland biotope, etc., of which each biotope
type defines the appropriate flora and fauna (Wang, 2009). 2)
Preserve the biodiversity as much as possible (Huston, 1994;
Mohamad, 2012). Create many types of natural habitats and
multi-level, stable plant community is a necessary requisite to
attracting wildlife inhabitant. To establish woodlands, shrubs,
ponds, low-lying land, and even retain waste buildings, rubble
reefs and pristine habitats in urban green space might result in an
increase of local species diversity. Meanwhile, the animals and
plants in biotope have special niche characteristics and a certain
degree of adaptability to different habitats, which determines the
diversity and adaptability of biotope. 3) Artificial design habitat
facilities. According the survival characteristics of the target
plants and animals, design protection facilities to help wildlife
survive, such as artificial nest, bird house, rabbit nest, dog
kennel, cat litter, etc. The main biotope types and the key points
of design are shown in Table 1.
Biotope concept is utilized for the project of comprehensive
improvement of water environment in Shima river, Anji County,
China. Apart from technical aspect of water conservancy, another
key point of this project is to increasing ecological infrastructure
for valley ecological restoration, such as ecological embankment
and ecological grassed swale and so on (see Fig. 2), which
provide the possibility of establishment and evolution of biotope
(see Fig. 3, 4). However, this project was just started and only first-
stage project was completed (July, 2015). Further assessment is
needed to carry out in later years for more accurate and
meaningful results.
Besides maintaining the diversity of plant species in urban
areas, biotope design requires consideration of the survival and
reproduction of small mammals, amphibians, insects, birds, soil

Table1. Main Biotope Types and Key Points of Design

Biotope type
Woods biotope of sloping fields
Woods biotope of flat fields
Woods biotope of depression
Pure meadow biotope
Gravel meadow biotope
Lake biotope
Pond biotope
Waterfront biotope
Shrub swamp biotope
Farmland biotope
Characteristics
Variable environmental factors
Fertile soil
Damp or moist
Grass adapted for growing
Keep soil moisture, temperature and fertilizer
Hygrophyte adapted for growing
Hygrophyte adapted for growing
Ecotone
Wetland plant adapted for growing
Farmland-woodland symbiotic system
Key Points of Design
Terrain transforming;
Drainage convenient; soil melioration
Matching site with plants; drainage
Micro-terrain reformation
Stone type and laying form
Flat form and profile type of water
Matching site with plants
Approaching nature embankment
Hydrophilic design
Drainage convenient; soil melioration

Vol. 00, No. 0 / 000 0000 5

 Yan Huang, Yichao Ma, Wenting Wu, and Qinzhi Lv
Fig. 2. Profile of Approaching Nature Embankment
Fig. 3. Actual Approaching Nature Embankment (6 months after
completion)
Fig. 4. Hydrilla verticillata in Aquatic Biotope of River Channel (6
months after completion)
animals and aquatic organisms or microbial. An appropriate
biotope for wildlife and plant communities should be restricted
in a limited area and with proper scale. As characteristics vary
among wildlife, the appropriate area and scale of biotope for
different species are different. For small and medium birds in
urban areas, their habitats need at least half a hectare of
woodland with tall crown, whereas small mammals such as
hares need larger, more complex habitat. Insects like butterflies,
6 KSCE Journal of Civil Engineering
moths require a smaller scale habitat. According to a study of
Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences,13800 observations
for animals in urban green space, 68% of the animals on the high
level of vegetation, the small birds have a strong dependence on
a high level of vegetation, 60% of medium-sized birds and 45%
of large birds living in the trees and bushes, while most insects
and mammals living in open ground, but almost all the distance
from the observed habitat to surrounding vegetation less than
8m, and they are linked by a very close relationship with
vegetation especially the density of vegetation (Wang, 2009). In
addition, flourishing trees in green space will become an
important habitat, and even some birds select specific trees for
nesting and roosting (Aubry and Raley, 2002).
Safety zone should be clearly staked out in biotope design
which is wildlife shelter and free from disturbances. Pay
attention to the biotope which affected by external factors at a
level low enough to avoid disturbance, especially the ones
connecting urban green space system or as urban green corridor.
In a sense, the networked feature and the position in urban green
space system determine whether the biotope is good and
important.
Bushes are attractive for birds, reptiles and insects. Dwarf
forest mixed with tall trees, can be used to create a varied
biological habitat, as thick bushes and ground plants provide
vision barriers and shelter for different animals, especially
nesters. Abundant plant species, multi-level arrangement and
uneven aged structure guarantee the stability of one biotope
which become hotspots for breeding species.
Dead trees, weeds after cutting, even decomposing wood in
green space could become a key habitat element of insects, soil
animals and microorganisms. And habitat with open water and
marsh can provide shelter for waterfowl, reptiles, amphibians,
insects and others. Plants cultivated at the waterside or in shallow
water may increase the attractiveness of water space for
providing shelter and food. Moreover, serpentine shoreline bring
backwater area of hydrostatic environment to spawning fish and
 Applying Biotope Concepts and Approaches for Sustainable Environmental Design
insects, in which floating, emergent, and submerged plants
would increase habitat diversity. Since amphibians such as frogs
need migration between land and water to fulfill their life
processes, preserving waterside environments is a fatal factor for
species.
4.3 Physical Structure of Biotope
Based on the differences from the movement patterns of
interface between different circles, the structure of ecosystem
can be divided into five levels: huge, large, medium, small, tiny.
The so-called protection, restoration, and creation of biotope, is
actually an activity that improves the disturbed eco-system of
site, even revitalizes it. Currently, biotope is designed and
constructed mainly within relatively small geographical scopes,
with the corresponding physical structure limited to medium or
lower.
To make the environment suitable for every being and their
symbiosis, terrain modification is always first prepared. According
to the site dimension, build convex ridge structures with different
heights such as hills and rockeries. And the locations with
different illumination, temperature and humidity can produce a
variety of micro-environment. Under different living environments,
individuals of the same species may differentiate in morphology
and physiology, especially herbaceous vegetation, moss and so on
(van Valen, 1965; Sultan, 2001). While concave groove structures
formed in terrain modification, a preliminary form of river way is
developed, and problems such as co-aquatic ecosystem or openness
of channels demanding further consideration. In more gently
inclined slope, the water resources site in higher grounds to form
currents, ponds, cascades, and other continuous or non-continuous
water landscapes, and provide possibilities of varied humidity
along the water system which enhance habitat diversity finally.
For the management of biotope, species diversity is sustained
chiefly by the control of habitat diversity. On this account,
consideration shall be given to the provision of a variety of living
spaces to different wildlife, especially animals, such as hole,
crevice, pipe, box, and other structures. Besides functioning
requirements, the form of structures also need to consider. From
level small to level tiny, the most important structure are hole and
crevice. Holes can be formed by drilling or digging on materials,
such as earth, logs, rocks and so on. And according to the habits
of target species, the position of holes place on appropriate
locations. Furthermore, hole entrance should be hidden as much
as possible. And crevice or crevice - shaped structure could be
formed by grooving or accumulating method which can be
constituted by small stones, gravel, sand or debris of plants. Box
structure can present in cabin-like form with a variety of
biological living environments, or may be just a simple box.
Around and inside these structures, the basic spatial heterogeneity
i.e. space with varied micro-environment is created. Moreover,
the lower level structures from small to tiny might superimpose
on its basic spatial heterogeneity to increase habitat diversity
further.
Reconstruction of semi-natural urban wildlife biotope is an
Vol. 00, No. 0 / 000 0000 7
important part of urban ecological system. In addition to retaining
regional flora and vegetation, native plants in local nurseries or
in community succession should be widely used as far as
possible. And dense planting of smaller size seedlings is a fast
and effective method for habitat reconstruction. In later years,
after thinning and inter-planting long-lived plants, plant communities
would be more conducive to natural succession. What's more, as
contour planting method can reduce the artificial damage to the
original habitats, it could be applied in areas where need to
preserve native vegetation or natural terrain.
To create a semi-natural herb layer quickly is essential to the
formation of biotope. And to supply a suitable environment is the
critical factor for herb growing, which including improving soil
composition, soil structure, soil moisture and other ecological
factors. And then according site specific conditions and species
characteristics, determine the approaches to form herb layer, i.e.
seed sowing or seedling transplanting. During the development
of herb layer and ground layer, manual weeding and mechanical
aids are still necessary, but the purpose are to weaken the species
which are highly competitive. The native grass species gradually
disappearing in suburbs are the main species for ecological
restoration in urban green space. These species could be widely
used in cases such as meadow, waterfront wetland, road green
space, etc.
For artificial community, to create physical structure is the
starting point for function design. Besides the normal community
functions, some have particular interests, such as antipollution
community (anti-dust pollution, anti-heavy metal pollution, anti-
harmful gases pollution and others), health therapeutic community,
carbon reduction community, and microclimate regulation and
improvement community, culture community and so on. Community
functions determine the living characteristics of the species
served, especially behavioral characteristics of animal. From
another point of view, biotope design must be to meet the
different needs of the target species, including human being of
course. For plant community in urban areas, it is not only served
as normal ecological function, but also for human activity, such
as recreation, education, and other functions in social life. On the
premise of meeting the needs of normal functions, biotope has a
general community structure, and the vertical structure of it
might be influenced by human behavioral characteristics. To
adjust community structure is a relatively simple way to fulfill
function requirements of biotope. With the consideration of
human activities, small trees and large shrubs of the middle layer
are often restricted. In addition, as growing people increasing the
like hood that a large area will be trampled, cover plants need
possess some special characteristics, which not only limited to
trample resistance, but the ability to recover from disturbance.
5. Conclusions
This study highlighted and reviewed biotope concept and
biotope design associated with ecological theories, especially in
landscape ecology. Biotope is not a fixed ideal, but an evolving
 Yan Huang, Yichao Ma, Wenting Wu, and Qinzhi Lv
concept to be redefined and reassessed according to each
situation. The research object here is to reveal the relationship
between architectural form, materiality and environmental
performance, and provide a basic process of biotope design.
Observation, measurement and computer modeling and simulation
are fundamental techniques that underpin the design research.
These are applied at various levels of detail and intensity,
extending the understanding of theoretical principles and
informing the design process. In this way, effective biotope
design strategies can be developed for sustainable ecosystems.
And the structure and function of a designed biotope must be
taken into account firstly, which are the core of biotope design.
Although this study attempted to model biotope design for
sustainable ecosystems, it was hindered by the limited pointed
principles and practical data available. Therefore, it is required
further evaluations of ecological effect for different biotope
types, natural or designed. Accordingly, a more comprehensive
and effective method to assess the structure and function of
biotope should be generated.
Acknowledgements
The Project Sponsored by the Scientific Research Foundation
for the High-level Talent Introduction, Zhejiang University of
Technology (Project #118001929) and National Social Science
Foundation of China (Grant No. 15CZX61).
References
Achal, V., Mukherjee, A., Kumari, D., and Zhang, Q. (2015). Bio-
mineralization for sustainable construction - A review of processes
and applications. Earth Science Reviews, Vol. 148, pp. 1-17, DOI:
0.1016/j.earscirev.2015.05.008.
Aubry, K. B. and Raley, C. M. (2002). Selection of nest and roost trees
by pileated woodpeckers in coastal forests of washington. The
Journal of Wildlife Management, Vol. 66, No. 2, pp. 392-406, DOI:
10.2307/3803172.
Beatley, T. (2011). Biophilic Cities: Integrating nature into urban design
and planning. Island Press, Washington, US. pp. 83-129.
Borgstrm, S. T., Elmqvist, T., Angelstam, P., and Alfsen-Norodom, C.
(2006). Scale mismatches in management of urban Landscapes.
Ecology and Society, Vol. 11, No. 2, pp. 16, http://hdl.handle.net/
10535/3033.
BryanBurley, J. (1995). International greenways: A red river valley
case study. Landscape and Urban Planning. Vol. 33, No. 1,
pp. 195-210, DOI:10.1016/0169-2046(94)02018-B.
Byeon, C. (2012). Ecological restoration of rivers and wetlands with a
Sustainable Structured wetland Biotope (SSB) system. KSCE Journal
of Civil Engineering, Vol. 16, No. 2, pp. 255-263, DOI: 10.1007/
s12205-012-0009-y.
Chappells, H. and Shove, E. (2005). Debating the future of comfort:
environmental sustainability, energy consumption and the indoor
environment. Building Research and Information, Vol. 33, No. 1,
pp. 32-40, DOI: 10.1080/0961321042000322762.
Dinep, C. and Schwab, K. (2009). Sustainable Site Design, John Wiley
& Sons, Hoboken, New Jersey, US. pp. 21-58, 181-222.
8 KSCE Journal of Civil Engineering
Eisenhauer, N., Reich, P. B., and Isbell, F. (2012). Decomposer diversity
and identity influence plant diversity effects on ecosystem functioning.
Ecology. Vol. 93, No. 10, pp. 2227-2240, DOI: 10.1890/11-2266.1.
Ericson, L., Hansson, L., Larsson, T., and Rasmusson, G. (1988). The
importance of residual biotopes for fauna and flora. In: Schreiber,
K.F. (ed.), Connectivity in Landscape Ecology. Schoenningh,
Muenster. pp. 105-106.
Estes, R. J. (1993). Toward sustainable development: from theory to
praxis. Social Development Issues, Vol. 15, No. 3, pp. 1-29, http://caster.
ssw.upenn.eud/restes/estespapers/TowardSustainableDevelopment_
1993.pdf.
Filor, S. W. (1994). The nature of landscape design and design process.
Landscape and Urban Planning, Vol. 30, No. 3, 121-129, DOI:
10.1016/0169-2046(94)90051-5.
Forman, R. T. T. (1995). Land mosaics: The Ecology of Landscapes and
Regions (2nd Edition). Cambridge University Press, Cambridge,
UK.
Gibson, J. (1979). The Ecological Approach to Visual Perception.
Houghton Mifflin Company, Boston, US.
Gobster, P. H., Nassauer, J. I., Daniel, T. C., and Fry, G. (2007). The
Shared Landscape: What does Aesthetics Have to do with Ecology?.
Landscape Ecology, Vol. 22, No. 7, pp. 959-972, DOI: 10.1007/
s10980-007-9110-x.
Grossman, W. F. and Bellot, J. (1999). System analysis as a tool for
rural planning. In: Golley, F.B., Bellot, J. (Eds.), Rural Planning
from an Environmental Systems Perspective. Springer, New York,
US, pp. 315-343.
Guseva, O. G. and Koval, A. G. (2015). Influence of soddy-podzolic
soil improvement on the abundance and structure of complexes of
epigeic predatory beetles (Coleoptera: Carabidae, Staphylinidae) in
Northwestern Russia. Entomological Review, Vol. 95, No. 8,
pp. 1051-1060, DOI: 10.1134/S0013873815080114.
Hoshino, T. (2003). Fundamental research in natural management of
large biotope aiming for regeneration of nature: Introduction. Available
online: http://www.si.gunma-u.ac.jp/t/ishikawa/bachlers2003/
HoshinoHP/hajimeni.htm. (in Japanese)
Huston, M. A. (1994). Biological Diversity: the Coexistence of Species.
Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.
Hutchinson, G. E. (1967). A treatise on Limnology, Vol. 2: Introduction
to Lake Biology and the Limnoplankton. Wiley, Hoboken, US.
Ignatieva, M. and Ahrn., K. (2013). Biodiverse green infrastructure
for the 21st century: from green desert of lawns to biophilic
cities. Journal of Architecture and Urbanism. Vol. 37, No.1, pp. 1-
9, DOI: 10.3846/20297955.2013.786284.
Jongman, R. G. H. (1999). Landscape ecology in Land-use planning.
In: Wiens, J.A., Moss, M.R. (Eds.), Issues in Landscape Ecology.
Guelph: International Association for Landscape Ecology, Colorado,
USA, pp. 112-118.
Kim, K., Lee, H., and Lee, D. (2010). Wetland restoration to enhance
biodiversity in urban areas: A comparative analysis. Landscape
and Ecological Engineering, Vol. 7, No. 1, pp. 27-32, DOI:10.1007/
s11355-010-0144-x.
Kobori, H. (2009), Current trends in conservation education in Japan.
Biological Conservation. Vol. 142, Issue 9, pp. 1950-1957, DOI:
10.1016/j.biocon.2009.04.017.
Levequ, C. (2003). Ecology from ecosystem to biosphere. Science
Publishers, Enfield, NH, US, pp. 85-200.
Livingston, M., Shaw W., W., and Harris, L. K. (2003). A model for
assessing wildlife habitats in urban landscapes of eastern Pima
County, Arizona (USA). Landscape and Urban Planning. Vol. 64,
 Applying Biotope Concepts and Approaches for Sustainable Environmental Design
No. 3, pp. 131-144, DOI: 10.1016/S0169-2046(02)00217-7.
Lynch, K. (1984). Good City Form, MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts,
US. pp. 121-131.
Margolis, L. and Robinson, A. (2007). Living Systems: Innovative
Materials and Technologies for Landscape Architecture. Birkhauser
Verlag AG, Basel, Switzerland. pp. 110-111.
McKinney, M. (2008). Effects of urbanization on species richness: A
review of plants and animals. Urban Ecosystems. Vol. 11, pp. 161-
176, DOI 10.1007/s11252-007-0045-4.
McLennan, J. F. (2004). The Philosophy of Sustainable Design: The
Future of Architecture. Ecotone Publishing Company LLC, Seattle,
US.
Mohamad, N. H. N. (2012). Ecological approaches in designing
neighbourhood green spaces as urban wildlife habitat in the klang
valley, peninsular Malaysia. International Journal of Applied Science
and Technology. Vol. 2, No. 3, pp. 192-213, http://www.ijastnet.com/
journals/Vol_2_No_3_March_2012/23.pdf.
Moss, D, and Wyatt, B. K. (1994). The CORINE biotopes project: A
database for conservation of nature and wildlife in the European
community. Applied Geography. Vol. 14, No. 4, pp. 327-349, DOI:
10.1016/0143-6228(94)90026-4.
Mller, N., Werner, P., and Kelcey, J. G. (2010). Urban Biodiversity and
Design, Wiley-Blackwell, Hoboken, New Jersey, US.
Mumford, L. (1968). The City in History: Its Origins, Its Transformations,
and Its Prospects. Mariner Books, New York, US.
Nagasea, A. and Nomura, M. (2014). An evaluation of one example of
biotope roof in Japan: Plant development and invertebrate colonisation
after 8 years. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening. Vol. 13 No. 4, pp.
714-724, DOI:10.1016/j.ufug.2014.07.004.
Nassauer, J. I. (2012). Landscape as medium and method for synthesis
in urban ecological design. Landscape and Urban Planning, Vol.
106, No. 3, pp. 221-229, DOI: 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2012.03.014.
OFarrell, P. J. and Anderson, P. M. (2010). Sustainable multifunctional
landscapes: A review to implementation. Current Opinion in
Environmental Sustainability, Vol. 2, Nos. 1-2, 59-65, DOI:
10.1016/j.cosust.2010.02.005.
Oberndorfer, E., Lundholm, J. T., Bass, B., Coffman, R. R., Doshi, H.,
Dunnett, N., Gaffin, S., Khler, M., Liu K. K. Y., and Rowe, B.
(2007). Green roofs as urban ecosystems: Ecological structures,
functions, and services. BioScience, Vol. 57, No. 10, pp. 823-833,
DOI: 10.1641/B571005.
zyavuz, M. (2013). Advances in Landscape Architecture, InTech
Press, Rijeka, Croatia. p. 339.
Pickett, S. T. and Cadenasso, M. L. (2008). Linking ecological and
built components of urban mosaics: An open cycle of ecological
Vol. 00, No. 0 / 000 0000 9
design. Journal of Ecology, Vol. 96, No.1, pp. 8-12, DOI: 10.1111/
j.1365-2745.2007.01310.x.
Pigay, H., Darby, S. E., Mosselman, E., and Surian, N. (2005). A
review of techniques available for delimiting the erodible river
corridor: A sustainable approach to managing bank erosion. River
Research and Applications, Vol. 21, No. 7, pp. 773-789, DOI:
10.1002/rra.881.
Pugh, I. (1996). Habitat conservation planning: Endangered species
and urban growth. Landscape and Urban Planning. Vol. 36, No. 3,
pp. 237-239, DOI: 10.1016/S0169-2046(96)00317-9.
Rodiek, J. and Thomas, J. W. (1980). Wildlife habitat planning and
landscape architecture. Landscape Research. Vol. 5, No. 3, pp. 12-
16, DOI: 10.1080/01426398008705949.
Rosenzweig, M. (2003). Reconciliation ecology and the future of
species diversity. Oryx, Vol. 37, No. 2, pp 194-205, DOI: 10.1017/
S0030605303000371.
Schulze, E. D., Beck, E., and Mller-Hohenstein, K. (2005). Plant
ecology, Springer-Verlag, Heidelberg, GH. pp. 615-617.
Sultan, S. E. (2001). Phenotypic plasticity for fitness components in
Polygonum species of contrasting ecological breadth. Ecology, Vol. 82,
No. 2, pp. 328-343, DOI: 10.1890/0012-9658(2001)082[0328:
PPFFCI]2.0.CO;2.
Tatarkiewicz, W. (1980). A History of Six Ideas: An Essay in Aesthetics
(1st ed). Springer, New York, US, p. 160.
Thayer, R. L. (2003). LifePlace: Bioregional thought and practice.
University of California Press, Oakland, California, US. pp. 1-31.
van Bohemen, H. D. (1998). Habitat fragmentation, infrastructure and
ecological engineering. Ecological Engineering. 11, Issues 1-4,
pp. 199-207, DOI: 10.1016/S0925-8574(98)00038-X.
van den Dobbelsteen, A. and de Wilde S. (2004). Space use optimisation
and sustainability-environmental assessment of space use concepts.
Journal of Environmental Management. Vol. 73, No. 2, pp. 81-89,
DOI: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2004.06.002.
van Lier, H. N. (1998). Sustainable land use planning. An editorial
commentary. Landscape and Urban Planning, Vol. 41, No. 2,
pp. 79-82, DOI: 10.1016/S0169-2046(97)00060-1.
van Valen, L. (1965). Morphological variation and width of ecological
niche. American Naturalist. Vol. 99, No. 908, pp. 377-390, http://
www.jstor.org/stable/2459179.
Wang, Y. C. (2009). Community Ecological Design. China Building
Industry Press, Beijing, China. (in Chinese)
World Commission on Environment and Development, 1987. Our
Common Future (1st Edition). Oxford University Press, Oxford,
UK.