Skip to main content
Log in

Bio-cultural Traits and Cultural Keystone Species, a Combined Approach: an Example of Application About Plants Used for Food and Nutraceutical Purposes in Aga Villages in Bali, Indonesia

  • Published:
Human Ecology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Wild and semi-wild plants are factual resources for a local community when they satisfy its needs. According to the bio-cultural approach, these plants and associated knowledge help define the cultural identity of each community, and ethnobotanical plants constitute a particular facet of the cultural relationships between people and nature. By referring to the concept of Cultural Keystone Species (CKS), a group of species considered in the same way within a community represents a homogeneous bio-cultural trait. We tested the hypothesis that the CKS model and the related index, the Identified Cultural Importance (ICI) of species, could be useful tools to culturally define and describe groups of species as bio-cultural traits. As a dataset to test this hypothesis we considered the wild and semi-wild plants used for food and nutraceutical purposes in 13 Aga villages in Bali. Data were collected through an ethnobotanical study in 2014. A multivariate analysis method based on the Fuzzy Set Theory was used to perform quantitative analyses to find clusters of plants. The Graph Theory was instead applied in order to detect trajectories and similarity gradients in the system of groups of species. The results confirmed that groups of species can be considered as bio-cultural traits, spreading within a cultural area in different ways and conveying information about their relationship with the native culture. The ICI index and CKS concept helped us to interpret the bio-cultural traits in terms of their cultural salience, considering them as general descriptors of the bio-cultural system of a community according to bio-cultural diversity and Traditional Ecological Knowledge. In the case of the Bali Aga villages, the partition of species showed 11 groups, and several species resulted of relevant cultural importance. Among them, Arenga pinnata (Wurmb) Merr. can be considered a CKS.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Alcorn, J. B. (1981). Factors influencing botanical resource perception among the Huastec: Suggestions for future ethnobotanical inquiry. Journal of Ethnobiology 1(2): 221–230.

    Google Scholar 

  • Alexiades, M. N., and Sheldon, J. W. (1996). Selected guidelines for ethnobotanical research: A field manual, The New York Botanical Garden Press, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Astuti, I. P., Hidayat, S., and Arinasa, I. B. K. (2000). Traditional plant usage in four villages of Bali Aga: Tenganan, Sepang, Tigawasa and Sembiran, Bali, Indonesia, Botanical Gardens of Indonesia, Bogor.

    Google Scholar 

  • BPS (2017). Bali dalam angka 2016 (in Indonesian), Badan Pusat Statistik Press, Denpasar.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barthel, S., Crumley, C. L., and Svedin, U. (2013). Bio-cultural refugia – safe guarding diversity of practices for food security and biodiversity. Global Environmental Change 23: 1142–1152.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berkes, F. (1993). Traditional ecological knowledge in perspective. In Inglis, J. T. (ed.), Traditional ecological knowledge: Concepts and cases, Canadian Museum of Nature and the International Development Research Centre, Ottawa, pp. 1–9.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berkes, F. (2008). Sacred ecology (Second edition), Routledge, New York and London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berkes, F., and Berkes, M. K. (2009). Ecological complexity, fuzzy logic, and holism in indigenous knowledge. Futures 41(1): 6–12.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berkes, F., and Ross, H. (2016). Panarchy and community resilience: Sustainability science and policy implications. Environmental Science and Policy 61: 185–193.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bernard, H. R. (2002). Research methods in anthropology: Qualitative and quantitative approaches, Altamira Press, Walnut Creek California.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bezdek, J. C. (1981). Pattern recognition with fuzzy objective function algorithms, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Norwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Caneva, G., Traversetti, L., Sujarwo, W., and Zuccarello, V. (2017). Sharing ethnobotanical knowledge in traditional villages: Evidence of food and nutraceutical “core groups” in Bali, Indonesia. Economic Botany 71(4): 303–313.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cavalli-Sforza, L. L., and Feldman, M. (1981). Cultural transmission and evolution: Quantitative approach, Princeton University Press, Princeton.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clements, F. E. (1928). Plant succession and indicators, The H.W. Wilson Company, New York City.

    Google Scholar 

  • Collins, S. L., Carpenter, S. R., Swinton, S. M., Orenstein, D. E., Childers, D. L., Gragson, T. L., Grimm, N. B., Grove, J. M., Harlan, S. L., Kaye, J. P., and Knapp, A. K. (2011). An integrated conceptual framework for long-term social–ecological research. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment 9(6): 351–357.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cristancho, S., and Vining, J. (2004). Culturally defined keystone species. Human Ecology Review 11: 153–164.

    Google Scholar 

  • da Silva, T. C., de Oliveira Campos, L. Z., da Silva, J. S., da Silva Sousa, R., and Albuquerque, U. P. (2016). Biota perception and use. In Albuquerque, U. P., and Alves, R. (eds.), Introduction to ethnobiology, Springer International Publishing, Cham, pp. 99–104.

    Google Scholar 

  • De Caceres, M., Oliva, F., Font, X., and Vives, S. (2007). Ginkgo, a program for non-standard multivariate fuzzy analysis. Advances in Fuzzy Sets and Systems 2(1): 41–56.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dunn, J. C. (1973). A fuzzy relative of the ISODATA process and its use in detecting compact well-separated clusters. Journal of Cybernetics 3(3): 32–57.

    Google Scholar 

  • Feoli, E. (1980). A criterion for monothetic classification of phytosociological entities on the basis of species ordination. In van der Maarel, E., Orlóci, L., and Pignatti, S. (eds.), Data-processing in phytosociology, Springer, Dordrecht, pp. 69–74.

    Google Scholar 

  • Feoli, E., and Lagonegro, M. (1979). Intersection analysis in phytosociology: Computer program and application. Plant Ecology 40(1): 55–59.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garibaldi, A. (2009). Moving from model to application: Cultural keystone species and reclamation in fort McKay, Alberta. Journal of Ethnobiology 29(2): 323–338.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garibaldi, A., and Turner, N. (2004). Cultural keystone species: Implications for ecological conservation and restoration. Ecology and Society 9(3).

  • Gavin, M. C., McCarter, J., Mead, A., Berkes, F., Stepp, J. R., Peterson, D., and Tang, R. (2015). Defining bio-cultural approaches to conservation. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 30: 140–145.

    Google Scholar 

  • Girmansyah, D., Santika, Y., Retnowati, A., Wardani, W., Haerida, I., Widjaja, E. A., and van Balgooy, M. M. J. (2013). Flora of Bali: An annotated checklist, Yayasan Pustaka Obor Indonesia, Jakarta.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gower, J. C., and Ross, G. J. (1969). Minimum spanning trees and single linkage cluster analysis. Applied statistics 18(1): 54–64.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harmon, D. (1996). Losing species, losing languages: Connections between biological and linguistic diversity. Southwest Journal of Linguistics 15(1–2): 89–108.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harmon, D., and Loh, J. (2004). The IBCD: A measure of the world’s bio-cultural diversity. Policy Matters 13: 271–280.

    Google Scholar 

  • Inglis, J. (ed.) (1993). Traditional ecological knowledge: Concepts and cases, IDRC, Ottawa.

    Google Scholar 

  • ISE (2006). International Society of Ethnobiology Code of Ethics (with 2008 additions). Available at: www.ethnobiology.net/ethics.php. Accessed 24.04.19.

  • Klir, G. J., and Wierman, M. J. (1999). Uncertainty-based information: Elements of generalized information theory, 2nd edn., Physica-Verlag/Springer-Verlag, Heidelberg and New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klir, G., and Yuan, B. (1995). Fuzzy sets and fuzzy logic, Prentice Hall, New Jersey.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leurs, L. N. (2010). Medicinal aromatic and cosmetic (MAC) plants for community health and biocultural diversity conservation in Bali Indonesia, Universiteit Leiden Press, Leiden.

    Google Scholar 

  • Loh, J., and Harmon, D. (2005). A global index of biocultural diversity. Ecological Indicators 5: 231–241.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lyman, R. L., and O’Brien, M. J. (2003). Cultural traits: Units of analysis in early twentieth-century anthropology. Journal of Anthropological Research 59(2): 225–250.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maffi, L. (ed.) (2001). On biocultural diversity: Linking language, knowledge, and the environment, Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington DC.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maffi, L. (2005). Linguistic, cultural, and biological diversity. Annual Review of Anthropology 34: 599–617.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maffi, L. (2007). Biocultural diversity and sustainability. In Pretty, J., Ball, A., Benton, T., Guivant, J., Lee, D., Orr, D., Pfeffer, M., and Ward, H. (eds.), Sage handbook on environment and society, Sage Publications, Los Angeles, pp. 267–277.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maffi, L., and Woodley, E. (2010). Biocultural diversity conservation: A global sourcebook, Earthscan, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Martin, G. J. (2003). Ethnobotany: A methods manual, Earthscan, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Brien, M. J., Lyman, R. L., Mesoudi, A., and VanPool, T. L. (2010). Cultural traits as units of analysis. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B 365: 3797–3806.

    Google Scholar 

  • Paine, R. T. (1966). Food web complexity and species diversity. American Naturalist 100: 65–75.

    Google Scholar 

  • Panebianco, F., and Serrelli, E. (eds.) (2016). Understanding cultural traits, Spinger, Dordrecht.

    Google Scholar 

  • Parrotta, J. A., and Trosper, R. L. (eds.) (2011). Traditional forest-related knowledge: Sustaining communities, ecosystems and biocultural diversity (Vol. 12), Springer Science+Business Media B.V, Dordrecht.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pieroni, A., and Quave, C. L. (eds.) (2014). Ethnobotany and biocultural diversities in the Balkans: Perspectives on sustainable rural development and reconciliation, Springer, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Platten, S., and Henfrey, T. (2009). The cultural keystone concept: Insights from ecological anthropology. Human Ecology 37(4): 491–500.

    Google Scholar 

  • Podani, J. (1994). Multivariate data analysis in ecology and systematics: A methodological guide to the SYN-TAX 5.0 package, SPB Academic Publishing, Amsterdam.

    Google Scholar 

  • Podani, J. (2000). Introduction to the exploration of multivariate biological data, Backhuys Publishers, Oegstgeest.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pringle, R. (2004). A short history of Bali: Indonesia’s Hindu realm, Allen and Unwin, Crows Nest.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rapport, D. J., and Maffi, L. (2010). The dual erosion of biological and cultural diversity: Implications for the health of eco-cultural systems. In Pretty, J., and Pilgrim, S. (eds.), Nature and culture: Revitalizing the connection, Earthscan, London, pp. 103–119.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosenthal, J. P. (2006). Politics, culture, and governance in the development of prior informed consent in indigenous communities. Current Anthropology 47: 119–142.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sousa, R. S. (2014). Espécie-chave cultural: umaanálise dos critérios de identificação e de preditores socio econômicos, Universidade Federal Rural de Pernambuco, Recife.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sujarwo, W., Arinasa, I. B. K., Salomone, F., Caneva, G., and Fattorini, S. (2014). Cultural erosion of Balinese indigenous knowledge of food and nutraceutical plants. Economic Botany 68(4): 426–437.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sujawo, W., and Caneva, G. (2015). Ethnobotanical study of cultivated plants in home gardens of traditional villages in Bali (Indonesia). Human Ecology 43(5): 769–778.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sujarwo, W., Keim, A. P., Savo, V., Guarrera, P. M., and Caneva, G. (2015). Ethnobotanical study of Loloh: Traditional herbal drinks from Bali (Indonesia). Journal of Ethnopharmacology 169: 34–48.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sujarwo, W., and Caneva, G. (2016). Using quantitative indices to evaluate the cultural importance of food and nutraceutical plants: Comparative data from the island of Bali (Indonesia). Journal of Cultural Heritage 18: 342–348.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sujarwo, W., Arinasa, I. B. K., Caneva, G., and Guarrera, P. M. (2016a). Traditional knowledge of wild and semi-wild edible plants used in Bali (Indonesia) to maintain biological and cultural diversity. Plant Biosystem 150(5): 971–976.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sujarwo, W., Keim, A. P., Caneva, G., Toniolo, C., and Nicoletti, M. (2016b). Ethnobotanical uses of neem (Azadirachta indica A.Juss.; Meliaceae) leaves in Bali (Indonesia) and the Indian subcontinent in relation with historical background and phytochemical properties. Journal of Ethnopharmacology 189: 186–193.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sujarwo, W., and Keim, A. P. (2017). Ethnobotanical study of traditional building materials from the island of Bali, Indonesia. Economic Botany 71(3): 224–240.

    Google Scholar 

  • The Plantlist (2018). The Plantlist database. Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew and Missouri Botanical Garden. Available at: http://www.theplantlist.org. Accessed 21.06.18.

  • West, D. B. (2001). Introduction to graph theory (Vol. 2), Prentice Hall, New Jersey.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zadeh, L. A. (1965). Fuzzy sets. Information and Control 8(3): 338–353.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zadeh, L. A. (1973). Outline of a new approach to the analysis of complex system and decision processes. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics 3(1): 28–44.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We would like to express our gratitude to the informants who took part in our study for sharing their knowledge, hospitality, and assistance. We also express our appreciation to Ida Bagus Ketut Arinasa and I Nyoman Peneng for their assistance during fieldwork, and I Gede Wawan Setiadi for preparing the picture of Arenga pinnata. This study was funded by the Italian Ministry of Education, University, and Research (MIUR) through University Roma Tre for the field investigations.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Wawan Sujarwo.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Electronic Supplementary Material

ESM 1

(XLS 61 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Sujarwo, W., Caneva, G. & Zuccarello, V. Bio-cultural Traits and Cultural Keystone Species, a Combined Approach: an Example of Application About Plants Used for Food and Nutraceutical Purposes in Aga Villages in Bali, Indonesia. Hum Ecol 47, 917–929 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10745-019-00124-5

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10745-019-00124-5

Keywords

Navigation