A comparison of traditional plant knowledge between Daman people and Tibetans in Gyirong River Valley, Tibet, China

Abstract

Background By comparing the differences in plant use between various cultures or regions, we can gain a better understanding of traditional knowledge of plant use among different groups, which may lead to a more objective understanding. Even though the Tibetan and Daman people live in the same ecosystem in Gyirong town, China, their cultural backgrounds and livelihoods differ. Therefore, the objective of this study is to document the traditional knowledge of plant use among the Daman people and compare it with the local Tibetan knowledge of plant use. By doing so, we aim to explore the relationship between plant selection and use and the cultural backgrounds of different groups. Methods During fieldwork, ethnobotanical data were collected using various methods including free listings, key informant interviews, and semi-structured interviews. To quantify the importance of plant species in the Daman people’s culture, the culture importance index, informant consensus factor index, and The Index of Agreement on Species consensus (IASc) were used. In addition, we cited previous ethnobotanical survey data from the Tibetan in Gyirong. To more comprehensively compare the differences in plant use between the Daman and Tibetan, this study constructed a knowledge network to compare the knowledge differences between the two groups. Results In this study, traditional knowledge was collected from 32 Daman informants, resulting in a total of 68 species belonging to 39 families mentioned by Daman people and 111 species mentioned by Tibetans. Of these, 58 plants were used by both populations. The plants were classified into 3 categories and 28 subcategories, with 22 identical classes in both groups. The majority of use categories showed a high degree of sharing in both groups, and the Tibetan people had more plant use categories than the Daman people. Five plants with IASc value > 0.5 were identified in both groups: Rhododendron anthopogon D. Don, Artemisia japonica Thunb., Juniperus indica Bertol., Gastrodia elata Blume, and Rheum australe D. Don. The analysis of the knowledge network revealed a 66% overlap between the knowledge of the Daman and the knowledge of the Tibetans. Additionally, the plant knowledge of Tibetan people was found to be richer and more complex than that of the Daman people. However, the Daman people possess 30 unique knowledge items. Conclusions From the perspective of plant use, the history of the Daman people's discrete migration on the border between China and Nepal allows them to retain their own knowledge of plant use. The status quo of joining Chinese nationality and settling in Gyirong town allows them to gradually integrate into the local Tibetan society. In summary, despite living in the same ecosystem and biodiversity background, the plant utilization of the Daman people and Tibetans still shows significant differences, which are due to their different cultural backgrounds and social status.

An ethnobotanical study of wild edible plants used by the Tibetan in the Rongjia River Valley, Tibet, China

“…In addition to wild vegetables, wild fruits provide local people with vitamins, minerals, and other nutrients. Due to the limited cultivated land area, there is only one cultivated fruit tree, Prunus mira Koehne , which is very similar to several other Himalayan River Valley regions [ 4 – 6 , 8 , 21 ], such as the Yadong River Valley [ 4 ] and Gyirong River Valley [ 6 , 8 ]. Local people in these areas can rely only on wild fruit to meet their nutritional needs.…”

“…Extreme geographical and ecological conditions not only isolate plant populations [ 10 ] and result in culturally unique biodiversity [ 11 – 13 ], but also shape the traditional uses of WEPs [ 9 , 14 ]. In recent years, researchers have conducted many ethnobotanical studies on the southern slopes of the Himalayas [ 4 – 8 , 15 , 16 ], including Mêdog County [ 17 ], Chenthang Township [ 5 ], Burang Township [ 7 ], Yadong River Valley [ 4 ], Gyirong River Valley [ 6 , 8 ], and other areas [ 16 , 18 – 20 ]. For example, a field survey was conducted on the Monpa people in Mêdog County, using the changes in the plant knowledge mastered by the Monpa people to explore the changes in the local social and economic areas [ 17 ].…”

“…In order to cope with the seasonal food shortage caused by traffic blockage and scarce arable land, the Chenthang Sherpa people use WEPs as seasonal food supplements [ 5 ]. Moreover, WEPs provide a survival guarantee for the local Tibetan and Daman people in the Gyirong River Valley [ 6 , 8 ]. These studies suggest that in underdeveloped and remote areas, WEPs play an important role in maintaining a stable food supply and the nutritional value of a balanced diet.…”