4.7 Article

Ethnobotany of medicinal plants used in Eastern Mallorca (Balearic Islands, Mediterranean Sea)

期刊

JOURNAL OF ETHNOPHARMACOLOGY
卷 141, 期 3, 页码 1021-1040

出版社

ELSEVIER IRELAND LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.jep.2012.03.049

关键词

Traditional plant knowledge; Catalan-speaking territories; Plant uses; Mallorcan ethnopharmacopoeia; Mediterranean ethnobotany

资金

  1. Spanish Ministry for Education, Culture and Sport [AP2007-00766]
  2. Generalitat de Catalunya [2009SGR0439]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Ethnopharmacological relevance: This paper represents the first large-scale ethnobotanical study in the island of Mallorca, and provides significant information on pharmaceutical plant uses, built up from interviews with native people from this touristic hotspot, demonstrating its ethnopharmacological importance. Aim of the study: To collect, analyse and evaluate the ethnobotanical knowledge concerning medicinal plants in a north-eastern Mallorcan area (municipalities of Arta, Capdepera and Son Servera: 298 km(2), 31,764 inhabitants). Materials and methods: We performed semi-structured interviews with 42 informants (mean age 77: 40% women, 60% men), identified the plant taxa reported and analysed the results, comparing them with those found in the current Mallorcan ethnobotanical information and in other territories. Results: The informants reported data on 121 human medicinal plants representing 64 botanical families. Around 45 medicinal uses reported, concerning 37 species, have not or have very rarely been cited as medicinal. An index of medicinal importance is proposed. Conclusions: All efforts addressed to compiling ethnobotanical information in industrialised or touristised areas such as Eastern Mallorca are still valuable. New possibilities can be explored to give practical value to Mallorcan ethnobotanical data in the frame of considering traditional plant knowledge as part of the islanders' lifestyle and healthy habits. (C) 2012 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