4.7 Article

Pharmaceutical ethnobotany in the Middle Navarra (Iberian Peninsula)

期刊

JOURNAL OF ETHNOPHARMACOLOGY
卷 137, 期 1, 页码 844-855

出版社

ELSEVIER IRELAND LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.jep.2011.07.001

关键词

Medicinal plants; Traditional knowledge; Ethnopharmacology; The Middle Navarra; Spain

资金

  1. Navarra Government
  2. Foundation Universidad de Navarra

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Ethnopharmacological relevance: This paper provides significant ethnobotanical information on pharmaceutical plant uses in the Middle Navarra (Iberian Peninsula). Collect, analyze and evaluate the ethnobotanical knowledge about medicinal plants in this area with 3622.2 km(2) and 404,634 inhabitants. Materials and methods: We performed semi-structured interviews with 276 informants (mean age 72; 46% women, 54% men) in 111 locations, identified the plant reported and analyzed the results, comparing them with those from other territories. Results: The informants reported data on 198 medicinal plants belonging to 60 botanical families. This work is focused on human medicinal plant uses, which represent 98% of the pharmaceutical uses (1401 use reports). The species with the highest number of cites are Santolina chamaecyparissus ssp. squarrosa, Jasonia glutinosa and Chamaemelum nobile with a long tradition of use in Navarra. All different plant parts are used; aerial part is exploited more frequently than other plant parts. Most of the listed remedies use a single ingredient, typically soaked in water. The most common mode of administration is oral, while the second most common is topical. Conclusions: The main ailments treated are digestive troubles, wounds and dermatological problems, and respiratory affections. Informants reported 80 new or scarcely cited uses for 14 medicinal plants. For 36% of the species (5) we have not found bibliographical references in the scientific literature and 64% (9) have only one to three references. (C) 2011 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据