Background
This study sought to investigate the occurrence of taxonomic patterns between semi-arid and humid regions, verifying how the taxonomic affiliation can influence the selection of plants for medicinal purposes and act as a selection criterion.
Methods
The relationship between the taxonomic affiliation and the selection of medicinal plants with four different communities was analyzed; two of them associated with a seasonally dry tropical forest and the other two associated with a tropical rain forest. We used the Utilitarian Equivalence Model (transposing the concept of ecological equivalence, proposed by Odum, for ethnobotany) to test the hypothesis that species that have the same taxonomic affiliation tend to have the same therapeutic applications in different environments (utilitarian equivalence). In addition, we used the Utilitarian Redundancy Model to verify whether, within the same medical system, plants of the same taxonomic affiliation tend to be redundant (treating the same diseases).
Results
We found that a pair of plants of the same genus were 9.25 times more likely to be equivalent than a different genus pair (OR = 9.25, CI [1.68–51.02], p < 0.05). When we analyzed the species used by the same population, the chances of a pair having similar therapeutic uses (utilitarian redundancy) increased when they were species of the same family (OR = 1.94, CI [1.06−3.53]; p < 0.05).
Conclusions
These findings confirm the hypothesis that there is an influence of taxonomic affiliation, in terms of genera and family, on the selection of medicinal plants in semi-arid and humid areas in Northeast Brazil. In addition, our Utilitarian Equivalence Model can be an important tool in the search for more common selection criteria, in order to identify the shared characteristics among the equivalent pairs and consequently the main types of perceptions or stimuli that led to the inclusion of such species in local pharmacopoeias.
Background
We aimed to verify whether the taste and chemical composition influence the selection of plants in each medicinal category, whether within a socio-ecological system or between different socio-ecological systems. To this end, we use the theoretical bases of the Utilitarian Redundancy Model and the Utilitarian Equivalence Model. We studied the local medical systems of four rural communities in northeastern Brazil, used as models to test our assumptions.
Methods
The data on medicinal plants and local therapeutic function were obtained from semi-structured interviews associated with the free-listing method, allowing to generate indexes of similarity of therapeutic use between the plants cited in each region. During the interviews, each informer was also asked to report the tastes of the plants cited. Subsequently, we classified each plant in each region according to the most cited taste. The data about the chemical composition of each plant were obtained from a systematic review, using Web of Knowledge and Scopus databases.
Results
Pairs of plants with similar tastes are 1.46 times more likely to have the same therapeutic function within a local medical system (redundancy), but not between medical systems (equivalence). We also find that chemical compounds are not primarily responsible for utilitarian redundancy and equivalence. However, there was a tendency for alkaloids to be doubly present with greater expressiveness in pairs of equivalent plants.
Conclusions
The results indicate that each social group can create its means of using the organoleptic characteristics as clues to select new species as medicinal. Furthermore, this study corroborates the main prediction of the Utilitarian Equivalence Model, that people in different environments choose plants with traits in common for the same functions.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.