首页> 外文期刊>Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine >Evaluating different methods used in ethnobotanical and ecological studies to record plant biodiversity
【24h】

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

机译:评估民族植物学和生态学研究中记录植物生物多样性的不同方法

获取原文
           

摘要

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.
机译:背景本研究通过以下方法比较鉴定巴西半干旱东北地区的植物的效率:a)使用整个社区内进行的半结构化访谈,访问了民族植物学研究中使用的本地知识,并由两名参与者进行了清单访谈使用先前收集的植被清单,以及一个参与式讲习班,向32个人介绍引诱物和照片,并且b)使用矩形图和象限点对具有不同干扰历史的位置的植被(植物社会学)进行清单。方法然后将每种方法鉴定出的物种比例与Cochran's Q检验进行比较。我们使用半结构化访谈计算了每个物种的使用价值(UV);该定量指标与通过在两个具有不同历史用途的区域中应用的样地法和点中心四分之一法获得的植被结构重要性值相关。该分析试图通过使用不同的采样方法来分析植物对当地社区的相对重要性(使用价值-UV)与植物在植被结构中的生态重要性(重要性值-IV;相对密度-RD)之间的关系。两个领域。结果关于获取当地知识的方法,在种族植物学调查物种之间观察到差异(Q = 13.37,df = 2,p = 0.0013):在该物种中鉴定出44种。清单访谈,参与性研讨会中的38个访谈和社区半结构化访谈中的33个访谈。某些物种的UV,相对密度(RD)和重要值(IV)之间没有相关性,或者这种相关性为负。结论结论是,清单访谈是记录物种及其用途的最有效方法,因为它可以在原始环境中识别出更多植物。为了优化研究人员在以后的研究中的时间,建议使用点中心四分之一法而不是样本图法。

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号