Cargando…

Evaluating different methods used in ethnobotanical and ecological studies to record plant biodiversity

BACKGROUND: This study compares the efficiency of identifying the plants in an area of semi-arid Northeast Brazil by methods that a) access the local knowledge used in ethnobotanical studies using semi-structured interviews conducted within the entire community, an inventory interview conducted with...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Silva, Henrique Costa Hermenegildo, Caraciolo, Rinaldo Luiz Ferreira, Marangon, Luiz Carlos, Ramos, Marcelo Alves, Santos, Lucilene Lima, Albuquerque, Ulysses Paulino
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2014
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4151377/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24916833
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1746-4269-10-48
_version_ 1782333017931382784
author Silva, Henrique Costa Hermenegildo
Caraciolo, Rinaldo Luiz Ferreira
Marangon, Luiz Carlos
Ramos, Marcelo Alves
Santos, Lucilene Lima
Albuquerque, Ulysses Paulino
author_facet Silva, Henrique Costa Hermenegildo
Caraciolo, Rinaldo Luiz Ferreira
Marangon, Luiz Carlos
Ramos, Marcelo Alves
Santos, Lucilene Lima
Albuquerque, Ulysses Paulino
author_sort Silva, Henrique Costa Hermenegildo
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: This study compares the efficiency of identifying the plants in an area of semi-arid Northeast Brazil by methods that a) access the local knowledge used in ethnobotanical studies using semi-structured interviews conducted within the entire community, an inventory interview conducted with two participants using the previously collected vegetation inventory, and a participatory workshop presenting exsiccates and photographs to 32 people and b) inventory the vegetation (phytosociology) in locations with different histories of disturbance using rectangular plots and quadrant points. METHODS: The proportion of species identified using each method was then compared with Cochran’s Q test. We calculated the use value (UV) of each species using semi-structured interviews; this quantitative index was correlated against values of the vegetation’s structural importance obtained from the sample plot method and point-centered quarter method applied in two areas with different historical usage. The analysis sought to correlate the relative importance of plants to the local community (use value - UV) with the ecological importance of the plants in the vegetation structure (importance value - IV; relative density - RD) by using different sampling methods to analyze the two areas. RESULTS: With regard to the methods used for accessing the local knowledge, a difference was observed among the ethnobotanical methods of surveying species (Q = 13.37, df = 2, p = 0.0013): 44 species were identified in the inventory interview, 38 in the participatory workshop and 33 in the semi-structured interviews with the community. There was either no correlation between the UV, relative density (RD) and importance value (IV) of some species, or this correlation was negative. CONCLUSION: It was concluded that the inventory interview was the most efficient method for recording species and their uses, as it allowed more plants to be identified in their original environment. To optimize researchers’ time in future studies, the use of the point-centered quarter method rather than the sample plot method is recommended.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4151377
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2014
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-41513772014-09-09 Evaluating different methods used in ethnobotanical and ecological studies to record plant biodiversity Silva, Henrique Costa Hermenegildo Caraciolo, Rinaldo Luiz Ferreira Marangon, Luiz Carlos Ramos, Marcelo Alves Santos, Lucilene Lima Albuquerque, Ulysses Paulino J Ethnobiol Ethnomed Research BACKGROUND: This study compares the efficiency of identifying the plants in an area of semi-arid Northeast Brazil by methods that a) access the local knowledge used in ethnobotanical studies using semi-structured interviews conducted within the entire community, an inventory interview conducted with two participants using the previously collected vegetation inventory, and a participatory workshop presenting exsiccates and photographs to 32 people and b) inventory the vegetation (phytosociology) in locations with different histories of disturbance using rectangular plots and quadrant points. METHODS: The proportion of species identified using each method was then compared with Cochran’s Q test. We calculated the use value (UV) of each species using semi-structured interviews; this quantitative index was correlated against values of the vegetation’s structural importance obtained from the sample plot method and point-centered quarter method applied in two areas with different historical usage. The analysis sought to correlate the relative importance of plants to the local community (use value - UV) with the ecological importance of the plants in the vegetation structure (importance value - IV; relative density - RD) by using different sampling methods to analyze the two areas. RESULTS: With regard to the methods used for accessing the local knowledge, a difference was observed among the ethnobotanical methods of surveying species (Q = 13.37, df = 2, p = 0.0013): 44 species were identified in the inventory interview, 38 in the participatory workshop and 33 in the semi-structured interviews with the community. There was either no correlation between the UV, relative density (RD) and importance value (IV) of some species, or this correlation was negative. CONCLUSION: It was concluded that the inventory interview was the most efficient method for recording species and their uses, as it allowed more plants to be identified in their original environment. To optimize researchers’ time in future studies, the use of the point-centered quarter method rather than the sample plot method is recommended. BioMed Central 2014-06-10 /pmc/articles/PMC4151377/ /pubmed/24916833 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1746-4269-10-48 Text en Copyright © 2014 Silva et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly credited.
spellingShingle Research
Silva, Henrique Costa Hermenegildo
Caraciolo, Rinaldo Luiz Ferreira
Marangon, Luiz Carlos
Ramos, Marcelo Alves
Santos, Lucilene Lima
Albuquerque, Ulysses Paulino
Evaluating different methods used in ethnobotanical and ecological studies to record plant biodiversity
title Evaluating different methods used in ethnobotanical and ecological studies to record plant biodiversity
title_full Evaluating different methods used in ethnobotanical and ecological studies to record plant biodiversity
title_fullStr Evaluating different methods used in ethnobotanical and ecological studies to record plant biodiversity
title_full_unstemmed Evaluating different methods used in ethnobotanical and ecological studies to record plant biodiversity
title_short Evaluating different methods used in ethnobotanical and ecological studies to record plant biodiversity
title_sort evaluating different methods used in ethnobotanical and ecological studies to record plant biodiversity
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4151377/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24916833
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1746-4269-10-48
work_keys_str_mv AT silvahenriquecostahermenegildo evaluatingdifferentmethodsusedinethnobotanicalandecologicalstudiestorecordplantbiodiversity
AT caraciolorinaldoluizferreira evaluatingdifferentmethodsusedinethnobotanicalandecologicalstudiestorecordplantbiodiversity
AT marangonluizcarlos evaluatingdifferentmethodsusedinethnobotanicalandecologicalstudiestorecordplantbiodiversity
AT ramosmarceloalves evaluatingdifferentmethodsusedinethnobotanicalandecologicalstudiestorecordplantbiodiversity
AT santoslucilenelima evaluatingdifferentmethodsusedinethnobotanicalandecologicalstudiestorecordplantbiodiversity
AT albuquerqueulyssespaulino evaluatingdifferentmethodsusedinethnobotanicalandecologicalstudiestorecordplantbiodiversity