Economic Botany

, Volume 38, Issue 3, pp 287–303

Ethnobotany of WopkaiminPandanus significant Papua New Guinea plant resource

  • David C. Hyndman
Article

Abstract

Pandanus is well represented in Papua New Guinea with over 66 species growing from sea level to 3,000 m. The territory of the Wopkaimin, who live at the headwaters of the Ok Tedi in the Star and Hindenburg Mountains, is particularly rich in wild and domesticated species ofPandanus. Detailed analysis of the species in classification, ecology, subsistence, ritual and material culture not only establishesPandanus as a locally significant plant resource but also contributes to the comparative understanding of ethnobiological systems. A close correspondence with botanical taxa of generic and specific rank and an absence of the most inclusive taxon term for plant are 2 cross-culturally important findings substantiated in WopkaiminPandanus taxonomy.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Literature Cited

  1. Barth, F. 1975. Ritual and Knowledge Among the Baktaman. Yale Univ. Press, New Haven.Google Scholar
  2. Barrau, J. 1958. Subsistence Agriculture in Melanesia. Bishop Mus. Bull. 219, Honolulu.Google Scholar
  3. Bowers, N. 1964. The Ascending Grassland: An Anthropological Study of Ecological Succession in a High Mountain Valley of New Guinea. Ph.D. diss. Columbia Univ., New York.Google Scholar
  4. Berlin, B. 1978. Ethnobiological classification.In E. Rosch and B. Lloyd, ed, Cognition and Categorization. Erlbaum, New York.Google Scholar
  5. —, D. E. Breedlove, and P. H. Raven. 1973. General principles of classification and nomenclature in folk biology. Amer. Anthropol. 75: 214–242.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bulmer, R. 1974. Folk biology in the New Guinea highlands. Soc. Sci. Inform. 13: 9–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. —. 1972–1973. Karam classification of marsupials and rodents. J. Polynes. Soc. 81:472–499, 82:86–107.Google Scholar
  8. —, and F. Parker. 1975. Karam classification of reptiles and fishes. J. Polynes. Soc. 84: 267–308.Google Scholar
  9. —, and M. Tyler. 1968. Karam classification of frogs. J. Polynes. Soc. 77: 333–385.Google Scholar
  10. Clarke, W. 1971. Place and People: An Ecology of a New Guinea Community. Australian National Univ. Press, Canberra.Google Scholar
  11. Diamond, J. 1966. Zoological classification system of a primitive people. Science 151:1102–1104.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Dornstreich, M. 1973. An Ecological Study of Gadio Enga (New Guinea) Subsistence. Ph.D. diss. Columbia Univ., New York.Google Scholar
  13. Dwyer, P. 1976. An analysis of Rofaifo mammal taxonomy. Amer. Ethnol. 3:425–445.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Frodin, G., and D. Hyndman. 1982. Ethnobotany of the Ok Tedi drainage.In Ok Tedi Environmental Study, Working Paper 14. Maunsell & Partners, Melbourne.Google Scholar
  15. Hays, T. 1979. Plant classification and nomenclature in Ndumba, Papua New Guinea highlands. Ethnology 18: 253–270.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. —. 1980. Uses of wild plants in Ndumba, Eastern Highlands Province. Sci. New Guinea 7: 118–131.Google Scholar
  17. —. 1981. Some cultivated plants in Ndumba, Eastern Highlands Province. Sci. New Guinea 8: 122–131.Google Scholar
  18. —. 1983. Ndumba folkbiology and general principles of ethnobiological classification and nomenclature. Amer. Anthropol. 85: 592–611.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Hyndman, D. 1979. Wopkaimin Subsistence: Cultural Ecology in the New Guinea Highland Fringe. Ph.D. diss. Univ. Queensland, St. Lucia.Google Scholar
  20. -. 1984. Hunting and the classification of game animals among the Wopkaimin. Oceania (in press).Google Scholar
  21. —, and D. Frodin. 1980. Ethnobotany ofSchefflera in the Ok Tedi region, Papua New Guinea. Ethnomedizin 6: 101–126.Google Scholar
  22. Lea, D. 1972. Indigenous horticulture in Melanesia.In R. Ward, ed, Man and Landscape in the Pacific Islands. Clarendon Press, Oxford.Google Scholar
  23. MacLennan, R., M. Bradley, and R. Walsh. 1967. The blood group pattern at Oksapmin, Western Highlands, New Guinea. Archaeol. Phys. Anthropol. Oceania 2: 57–61.Google Scholar
  24. Majnep, I., and R. Bulmer. 1977. Birds of My Kalam Country. Univ. Auckland Press, Auckland.Google Scholar
  25. Norgan, N., J. Durnin, and A. Ferro-Luzzi. 1979. The composition of some New Guinea foods. Papua New Guinea Agric. J. 36: 25–40.Google Scholar
  26. Ohtsuka, R. 1977. The saga eaters: an ecological discussion with special reference to the Oriomo Papuans.In J. Allen, J. Golson, and R. Jones, ed, Sunda and Sahul: Prehistoric Studies in Island Southeast Asia, Melanesia and Australia. Academic Press, London.Google Scholar
  27. Panoff, F. 1972. Maenge Gardens: A Study of Maenge Relationship to Domesticates. Ph.D. diss. Australian National Univ., Canberra.Google Scholar
  28. Powell, J. 1976. Ethnobotany.In K. Paijmans, ed, New Guinea Vegetation. Australian National Univ. Press, Canberra.Google Scholar
  29. Rappaport, R. 1968. Pigs for the Ancestors. Yale Univ. Press, New Haven.Google Scholar
  30. Rose, C. 1982. Preliminary observations on the pandanus nut (Pandanus jiulianettii Martelli).In R. Bourke and V. Kesavan, ed, Proceedings of the Second Papua New Guinea Food Crops Conference, Dept. Primary Industry, Port Moresby.Google Scholar
  31. Sillitoe, P. 1983. Roots of the Earth: Crops in the Highlands of Papua New Guinea. Univ. Manchester Press, Manchester.Google Scholar
  32. Sinclair, A. 1957. Field and Clinical Survey Report of the Mental Health of the Indigenes of the Territory of Papua New Guinea. W. S. Nicholas, Port Moresby.Google Scholar
  33. Stone, B. 1976. The morphology and systematics of Pandanus today (Pandanaceae). Gard. Bull. 29: 137–142.Google Scholar
  34. —. 1982. New Guinea Pandanaceae: first approach to ecology and biogeography.In J. Gressitt, ed, Biogeography and Ecology of New Guinea. Junk, The Hague.Google Scholar
  35. Waddell, E. 1972. The Mound Builders. Univ. Washington Press, Seattle.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The New York Botanical Garden 1984

Authors and Affiliations

  • David C. Hyndman
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Anthropology and SociologyUniversity of QueenslandSt. LuciaAustralia

Personalised recommendations