Advertisement

Economic Botany

, Volume 53, Issue 3, pp 237–260 | Cite as

Ethnobotany of the Tacana: Quantitative inventories of two permanent plots of Northwestern Bolivia

  • Saara J. DeWalt
  • GeneviÈve Bourdy
  • Lia R. ChÁvez de Michel
  • Celin Quenevo
Article

Abstract

We present ecological and ethnobotanical descriptions of two permanent 1-ha plots located in Amazonian forest near two Tacana communities situated north and west of the Madidi National Park in the Iturralde Province, Department of La Paz of northwestern Bolivia. We interviewed 13 Tacana men and women to identify and enumerate uses of all of the trees, palms, and lianas ≥ 10 cm dbh in these plots. Of the 185 species found in both plots, 115 species are used by the Tacana: 59 species for construction, 9 as sources of fiber, 33 for technology and crafts, 66 as firewood, 32 for food or water, 40 for medicine, 8 for hunting or fishing, 9 for commercial purposes, and 11 for miscellaneous uses. Sixty-four percent of useful species had multiple uses. This utilization of the forest corresponds with that of other Amazonian indigenous groups and shows a high reliance on the forest for vegetative materials, especially medicine, technology and crafts, and construction.

Key Words

Amazonia Bolivia ethnobotany permanent plot Tacana 

EtnobotÁnica de los Tacana: Inventario Cuantitativo de dos Parcelas Permanentes del Noroeste de Bolivia

Resumen

Presentames descripciones ecológicas y etnobotánicas de dos parcelas permanentes de 1-hectárea localizadas en bosque amazónico cerca de dos comunidades de Tacana situadas al norte y al oeste del Parque Nacional Madidi en la Provincia Iturralde, Departamento de La Paz del noroeste de Bolivia. Entrevistamos a 13 hombres y mujeres Tacana para identificar los nombres y usos de los árboles, palmeras y bejucos ≥ 10 cm dap en las parcelas. De las 185 especies que encontramos en ambas parcelas, 115 especies son utilizadas por los Tacana: 59 especies se utilizan para constructión, 9 como fuente de fibra, 33 para tecnología y manualidades, 66 para leña, 32 para comida o agua, 40 para medicinas, 8 para caza o pesca, 9 para usos comerciales, y 11 para usos misceláneos. El 64% de las especies de provecho tienen usos múltiples. Los datos relevantes al modo de utilizatión del monte corresponden a otros grupos amazónicos étnicos, y demuestran una alta dependencia de los recursos naturales vegetales del bosque, especialmente en cuanto a la medicina, tecnologia, artesanía, y constructión.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Literature Cited

  1. Armentia, F. N. 1897. Navigatión del Madre de Dios. Limites de Bolivia con el Peru, por la parte de Caupolican. Oficina Nacional de Imigrción, Estadística y Propaganda Geográfica, La Paz, Bolivia.Google Scholar
  2. Balée, W. 1988. Indigenous adaptation to Amazonian palm forests. Principes 32:47–54.Google Scholar
  3. — 1994. Footprints of the forest: Ka⤙apor ethnobotany. Columbia University Press, New York.Google Scholar
  4. Balzan, L. 1891a. Da La Paz a Covendo. Bolletino della Societa Geográfica Italiana, 911–929.Google Scholar
  5. -. 1891b. Da La Paz a Irupana. Bolletino della Societa Geográfica Italiana, 725–737.Google Scholar
  6. -. 1892. Da Covendo a Reyes. Bolletino della Societa Geográfica Italiana, 232–261.Google Scholar
  7. Barfod, A. S., and H. Balslev. 1988. The use of palms by the Cayapas and Coaiqueres on the coastal plain of Ecuador. Principes 32:29–42.Google Scholar
  8. Beck, H. T., andG. T. Prance. 1991. Ethnobotanical notes on Marajó ceramic pottery utilizing two Amazonian trees. Boletim do Museo Paraense Emílio Goeldi, Série Botânica 7:269–275.Google Scholar
  9. Boom, B. M. 1986. The Chácobo Indians and their palms. Principes 30:63–70.Google Scholar
  10. — 1987. Ethnobotany of the Chácobo Indians, Beni, Bolivia. Advances in Economic Botany 4:1–68.Google Scholar
  11. ottam, G., and J. T. Curtis. 1956. The use of distance measurement in phytosociological sampling. Ecology 37:451–460.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Curtis, J. T., and G. Cottam. 1962. Plant ecology workbook. Burgess Publishing Co., Minneapolis, MN.Google Scholar
  13. Davis, E. W. 1983. The ethnobotany of chamairo:Mussatia hyacinthina. Journal of Ethnopharmacology 9:225–236.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. D’Orbigny, A. 1946. Descriptión geográfica, historica, y estadistica de Bolivia. Volume 1. Instituto Cultural Anglo-Boliviano, La Paz, Bolivia.Google Scholar
  15. Duke, J. A., and R. Vasquez. 1994. Amazonian ethnobotanical dictionary. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL.Google Scholar
  16. Hissink, K., and A. Hahn. 1984. Die Tacana II. Daten zur Kulturgeschichte. Franz Steiner Verlag, Wiesbade, Germany.Google Scholar
  17. Killeen, T. J., E. García E., and S. G. Beck. 1993. Guía de arboles de Bolivia. Herbario Nacional de Bolivia and Missouri Botanical Garden, La Paz, Bolivia.Google Scholar
  18. Moraes R., M., J. Sarmiento, and E. Oviedo. 1995. Richness and uses in a diverse palm site in Bolivia. Biodiversity and Conservation 4:719–727.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Mori, S. A., B. M. Boom, A. M.de Carvalho, and T. S. Dos Santos. 1983. Southern Bahian moist forests. Botanical Review 49:155–232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Parker, T., and B. Bailey, eds. 1991. A biological assessment of the Alto Madidi region and adjacent areas of Northwestern Bolivia. Conservation International, Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
  21. Paz y Miño C., G., H. Balslev, and R. Valencia. 1995. Useful lianas of the Siona-Secoya Indians from Amazonian Ecuador. Economic Botany 49: 269–275.Google Scholar
  22. Phillips, O. L., and A. H. Gentry. 1993. The useful plants of Tambopata, Peru: I. Statistical hypotheses tests with a new quantitative technique. Economic Botany 47:15–32.Google Scholar
  23. —, —,C. Reynel, P. Wilkin, and C. Gálvez-Durand. 1994. Quantitative ethnobotany and Amazonian conservation. Conservation Biology 8:225–248.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Pinedo-Vasquez, M., D. Zarin, P. Jipp, and J. Chota-Inuma. 1990. Use-values of tree species in a communal forest reserve in northeast Peru. Conservation Biology 4:405–416.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Prance, G. T., W. Balée, B. M. Boom, and R. L. Carneiro. 1987. Quantitative ethnobotany and the case for conservation in Amazonia. Conservation Biology 1:296–310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Remsen, J. V., and T. A. Parker. 1995. Bolivia has the opportunity to create the planet’s richest park for terrestrial biota. Bird Conservation International 5:181–199.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Ruhlen, M. 1987. A guide to the world’s languages. Vol. 1: Classification. Stanford University Press, Stanford, California.Google Scholar
  28. Smith, D. N., and T. J. Killeen. 1998. A comparison of the structure and composition of montane and lowland tropical forest in the Serranía Pilón Lajas, Beni, Bolivia.In F. Dallmeier and J. A. Comiskey, eds., Forest biodiversity in North, Central and South America and the Caribbean: Research and monitoring, Man and the Biosphere, vol. 22. UNESCO and the Parthenon Publishing Group, Carnforth, Lancashire, UK.Google Scholar
  29. Van Wynen, D., and M. G. d.van Wynen. 1962. Vocabularios Bolivianos No. 2 Tacana y Castellano. Summer Institute of Linguistics, Cochabamba, Bolivia.Google Scholar
  30. Wassen, S. H. 1972. A medicine man’s implements in a tihuanacoid tomb in highland Bolivia. Gothenburg Ethnographic Museum, Gothenburg, Sweden.Google Scholar
  31. Wentzel, S. 1989. Tacana and highland migrant land use, living conditions and local organizations in the Bolivian Amazon. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of Florida.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The New York Botanical Garden Press 1999

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Biological Sciences, 202 Life Sciences Bldg.Louisiana State UniversityBaton RougeUSA
  2. 2.ORSTOM, CasillaLa PazBolivia
  3. 3.Herbario Nacional de Bolivia, CasillaLa PazBolivia
  4. 4.Consejo Indígena del Pueblo TacanaTumupasaBolivia

Personalised recommendations