Economic Botany

, 61:347 | Cite as

Does the local availability of woody Caatinga plants (Northeastern Brazil) explain their use value?

  • Reinaldo Farias Paiva de Lucena
  • Elcida de Lima Araújo
  • Ulysses Paulino de Albuquerque
Research Articles

Abstract

This study investigated the use of woody plants by a rural community in an area of dry land Caatinga vegetation in northeastern Brazil. Information was obtained concerning this woody species with a diameter that is equal to or greater than 3 centimeters (cm) at soil level surveyed in 100 sample plots totaling 1 hectare (ha). The following question is the hypothesis we tested. Is a plant’s relative importance (as measured by its use value) related to its “apparency,” as measured by its abundance and ecological dominance? “Apparency” explains the use value of plants in four categories: medicinal, construction, fuel, and technology. The most important uses of woody plants are related to harvesting for energy and construction purposes.

Key Words

Biodiversity Caatinga ecological “apparency” local populations quantitative ethnobotany tropical forests use value 

Literature Cited

  1. Albuquerque, U. P. 2006. Re-examining Hypotheses Concerning the Use and Knowledge of Medicinal Plants: A Study in the Caatinga Vegetation of NE Brazil. Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine 2:30.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. —, and L. H. C. Andrade. 2002a. Conhecimento botânico tradicional e conservação em uma área de Caatinga no Estado de Pernambuco, Nordeste do Brasil. Acta Botanica Brasilica 16:273–285.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. —, and L. H. C. Andrade. 2002b. Uso de recursos vegetais da Caatinga: o caso do agreste do estado de Pernambuco (Nordeste do Brasil). Interciencia 27:336–345.Google Scholar
  4. —, and R. F. P. Lucena. 2004a. Seleção e escolha dos informantes. Pages 19–35 in U. P. Albuquerque and R. F. P. Lucena, eds., Métodos e técnicas na pesquisa etnobotânica, Publication Nucleus in Ecology and Applied Ethnobotany (NUPEEA), Recife, Pernambuco, Brazil.Google Scholar
  5. —, and R. F. P. Lucena. 2004b. Métodos e técnicas cas para a coleta de dados. Pages 37–62 in U. P. Albuquerque and R. F. P. Lucena, eds., Métodos e técnicas na pesquisa etnobotânica, NUPEEA, Recife, Pernambuco, BrazilGoogle Scholar
  6. —, and L. H. C. Andrade, and A. C. O. Silva. 2005a. Use of Plant Resources in a Seasonal Dry Forest (Northeastern Brazil). Acta Botanica Brasílica 19:27–38.Google Scholar
  7. —, L. H. C. Andrade, and J. Caballero. 2005b. Structure and Floristic of Home Gardens in Northeastern Brazil. Journal of Arid Environments 62:491–506.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. —, and R. F. P. Lucena. 2005. Can Apparency Affect the Use of Plants by Local People in Tropical Forests? Interciencia 30:506–511.Google Scholar
  9. —, R. F. P. Lucena, J. M. Monteiro, A. T. N. Florentino, and C. F. C. B. R. Almeida. 2006. Evaluating Two Quantitative Ethnobotanical Techniques. Ethnobotany Research & Applications 4:51–60.Google Scholar
  10. —, J. M. Monteiro, M. A. Ramos, and E. L. C. de Amorim. 2007. Medicinal and Magic Plants from a Public Market in Northeastern Brazil. Journal of Ethnopharmacology 110:76–91.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. —, and R. F. Oliveira. 2007. Is the Use-Impact on Native Caatinga Species in Brazil Reduced by the High Species Richness of Medicinal Plants? Journal of Ethnopharmacology 113:156–170.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Alcoforado-Filho, F. G., E. V. S. B. Sampaio, and M. J. N. Rodal. 2003. Florística e fitossociologia de um remanescente de vegetação caducifólia espinhosa arbórea em Caruaru, Pernambuco. Acta Botanica Brasilica 17:287–303.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Almeida, C. F. C. B. R., T. C. L. Silva, E. L. C. Amorim, M. B. S. Maia, and U. P. Albuquerque. 2005. Life Strategy and Chemical Composition as Predictors of the Selection of Medicinal Plants from the Caatinga (Northeast Brazil). Journal of Arid Environments 62:127–142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Almeida, C. F. C. B. R., E. L. C. Amorim, U. P. Albuquerque, and M. B. S. Maia. 2006. Medicinal Plants Popularly Used in the Xingó Region—A Semi-Arid Location in Northeastern Brazil. Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine, available at http:// www.ethnobiomed.com/content/2/1/15 (23 March 2006).Google Scholar
  15. Amorozo, M. C. M. 2002. Uso e diversidade de plantas medicinais em Santo Antônio do Leverger, MT, Brasil. Acta Botanica Brasilica 16:189–203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Araújo, E. L. 1998. Aspectos da dinâmica populacional de duas espécies em floresta tropical seca (Caatinga), Nordeste do Brasil. Ph.D. Thesis, Universidade Estadual de Campinas, Campinas. São Paulo. Brasil.Google Scholar
  17. —, and E. M. N. Ferraz. 2004. Amostragem da vegetação e índices de diversidade. Page 89–137 in U. P. Albuquerque and R. F. P. Lucena, eds., Métodos e técnicas na pesquisa etnobotânica, NUPEEA, Recife. Brasil.Google Scholar
  18. —, C. C. Castro, and U. P. Albuquerque. 2007. Dynamics of Brazilian Caatinga—A Review Concerning the Plants, Environment and People. Functional Ecosystems and Communities 1:15–29.Google Scholar
  19. Balée, W. 1987. A etnobotânica quantitativa dos índios Tembé (Rio Gurupi, Pará). Boletim do Museu Paraense Emílio Goeldi 3:29–50.Google Scholar
  20. —. 1989. The culture of Amazonian forests. Advances in Economic Botany 7:63–71.Google Scholar
  21. Begossi, A. 1996. Use of Ecological Methods in Ethnobotany: Diversity Indices. Economic Botany 50:280–289.Google Scholar
  22. Boom, B. M. 1986. A Forest Inventory in Amazonian Bolivia. Biotropica 18:287–294.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Caruaru O Portal. 2003. Available at http://www .caruaru.com.br/geografia.htm (01 October 2003).Google Scholar
  24. Coley, P. D., J. P. Bryant, and F. S. Chapin. 1985. Resource Availability and Plant Anti-Herbivore Defense. Science 230:895–899.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Cunha, L. V. F., and U. P. Albuquerque. 2006. Quantitative Ethnobotany in an Atlantic Forest Fragment of Northeastern Brazil—Implications to Conservation. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment 114:1–25.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. Diegues, A. C., and R. S. V. Arruda, eds. 2001. Saberes Tradicionais e Biodiversidade no Brasil. Brasília: Ministério do Meio Ambiente. São Paulo: USP, Biodiversidade — 4.Google Scholar
  27. Feeny, P. 1976. Plant Apparency and Chemical Defense. Pages 1–40 in J. W. Wallace and R. L. Nansel, eds., Biological Interactions between Plants and Insects. Recent Advances in Phytochemistry 10. Plenum Press, New York.Google Scholar
  28. Ferraz, J. S. F., I. M. J. Meunier, and U. P. Albuquerque. 2005. Conhecimento sobre espécies lenhosas úteis da mata ciliar do Riacho do Navio, Floresta, Pernambuco. Zonas Áridas 9:27–39.Google Scholar
  29. —. 2006. Valor do uso e estrutura da vegetação lenhosa às margens do Riacho do Navio, Floresta, PE, Brasil. Acta Botanica Brasílica 20:125–134.Google Scholar
  30. Florentino, A. T. N., E. L. Araújo, and U. P. Albuquerque. 2007. Contribuição de quintais agroflorestais na conservação de plantas da Caatinga, Município de Caruaru (Pernambuco, Brasil). Acta Botanica Brasílica 21:37–47.Google Scholar
  31. FIDEM. 2003. Síntese de Indicadores Municipais. Available at http://www.fidem.pe.gov.br (1 October 2003).Google Scholar
  32. Figueiredo, G. M., H. F. Leitão-Filho, and A. Begossi. 1993. Ethnobotany of Atlantic Forest Coastal Communities: Diversity of Plant Uses in Gamboa (Itacuruçá Island, Brazil). Human Ecology 21:419–430.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Galeano, G. 2000. Forest Use at the Pacific Coast of Chocó, Colombia: A Quantitative Approach. Economic Botany 54:358–376.Google Scholar
  34. Garibaldi, A., and N. Turner. 2004. Cultural Keystone Species: Implications for Conservation and Restoration. Ecology and Society 9:3.Google Scholar
  35. Gomez-Beloz, A. 2002. Plant Use Knowledge of the Winikina Warao: The Case for Questionnaires in Ethnobotany. Economic Botany 56:231–241.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Lacuna-Richman, C. 2004. Subsistence Strategies of an Indigenous Minority in the Philippines: Nonwood Forest Product Use by Tagbanua of Narra, Palawan. Economic Botany 58:266–285.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Ladio, A. H., and M. Lozada. 2004. Patterns of Use and Knowledge of Wild Edible Plants in Distinct Ecological Environments: A Case Study of a Mapuche Community from Northwestern Patagonia. Biodiversity and Conservation 13:1153–1173.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. La Torre-Cuadros, M. A., and G. A. Islebe. 2003. Traditional Ecological Knowledge and Use of Vegetation in Southeastern Mexico: A Case Study from Solferino, Quintana Roo. Biodiversity and Conservation 12:2455–2476.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Lawrence, A., O. L. Phillips, A. Reategui, M. Lopez, S. Rose, D. Wood, and A. J. Farfan. 2005. Local Values for Harvested Forest Plants in Madre de Dios, Peru: Towards a More Contextualised Interpretation of Quantitative Ethnobotanical Data. Biodiversity and Conservation 14:45–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Lucena, R. F. P., U. P. Albuquerque, J. M. Monteiro, C. F. C. B. R. Almeida, A. T. N. Florentino, and J. S. F. Ferraz. 2007. Useful Plants of the Semi-Arid Northeastern Region of Brazil—A Look at Their Conservation and Sustainable Use. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment 125:281–290.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. Luoga, E. J., E. T. F. Witkowski, and K. Balkwill. 2000. Differential Utilization and Ethnobotany of Trees in Kitulanghalo Forest Reserve and Surrounding Communal Lands, Eastern Tanzania. Economic Botany 54:328–343.Google Scholar
  42. Lykke, A. M. 2000. Local Perceptions of Vegetation Change and Priorities for Conservation of Woody-Savana Vegetation in Senegal. Journal of Environmental Management 59:107–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Matavele J., and M. Habib. 2000. Ethnobotany in Cabo Delgado, Mozambique: Use of Medicinal Plants. Environment, Development and Sustainability 2:227–234.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Monteiro, J. M., E. M. F. Lins-Neto, E. L. C. Amorim, R. R. Strattmann, E. L. Araújo, and U. P. Albuquerque. 2005. Teor de taninos em três espécies medicinais arbóreas simpátricas da Caatinga. Revista Árvore 29:999–1005.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. —, C. F. C. B. R. Almeida, U. P. Albuquerque, R. F. P. Lucena, A. T. N. Florentino, and R. L. C. Oliveira. 2006a. Use and Traditional Management of Anadenanthera colubrina (Vell.) Brenan in the Semi-Arid Region of Northeastern Brazil. Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine 2:1–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. —, U. P. Albuquerque, E. M. F. Lins-Neto, E. L. Araújo, and E. L. C. Amorim. 2006b. Use Patterns and Knowledge of Medicinal Species among Two Rural Communities in Brazil’s Semi-Arid Northeastern Region. Journal of Ethnopharmacology 105:173–186.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  47. Mutchnick, P.A., and B. C. McCarthy. 1997. An Ethnobotanical Analysis of the Tree Species Common to the Subtropical Moist Forests of the Petén, Guatemala. Economic Botany 51:158–183.Google Scholar
  48. Oliveira, R. L. C., E. M. F. Lins Neto, E. L. Araujo, and U. P. Albuquerque. 2007. Conservation Priorities and Population Structure of Woody Medicinal Plants in an Area of Caatinga Vegetation (Pernambuco State, NE Brazil). Environmental Monitoring and Assessment 132:189–206.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  49. Paz Y Miño, G., H. Balslev, R. Valencia, and P. Mena. 1991. Lianas utilizadas por los indígenas Siona—Secoya de la Amazonía del Ecuador. Reportes Técnicos 1. Ecociencia, Quito, Ecuador.Google Scholar
  50. Phillips, O., and A. H. Gentry. 1993a. The Useful Plants of Tambopata, Peru: I. Statistical Hypothesis Tests with a New Quantitative Technique. Economic Botany 47:15–32.Google Scholar
  51. —, and A. H. Gentry. 1993b. The Useful Plants of Tambopata, Peru: II. Additional Hypothesis Testing in Quantitative Ethnobotany. Economic Botany 47:33–43.Google Scholar
  52. —, A. H. Gentry, C. Reynel, P. Wilkin, and C. Gálvez-Durand B. 1994. Quantitative Ethnobotany and Amazonian Conservation. Conservation Biology 8:225–248.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Prance, G. T., W. Balée, B. M. Boom, and R. L. Carneiro. 1897. Quantitative Ethnobotany and the Case for Conservation in Amazonia. Conservation Biology 1:296–310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Rhoades, D. F., and R. G. Cates. 1976. Toward a General Theory of Plant Antiherbivore Chemistry. Pages 169–213 in J. W. Wallace and R. L. Nansel, eds., Biological Interactions between Plants and Insects. Recent Advances in Phytochemistry 10.Google Scholar
  55. Rossato, S. C., H. F. Leitão-Filho, and A. Begossi. 1999. Ethnobotany of Caiçaras of the Atlantic Forest Coast (Brazil). Economic Botany 53:387–395.Google Scholar
  56. Salick, J., A. Biun, G. Martin, L. Apin, and R. Beaman. 1999. Whence Useful Plants? A Direct Relationship between Biodiversity and Useful Plants among the Dusun of Mt. Kinabalau. Biodiversity and Conservation 8:797–818.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Scarano, F. R. 2006. Prioridades para conservação: a linha tênue que separa entre teorias e dogmas. Pages 23–40 in C. F. D. Rocha, H. G. Bergallo, M. Van Sluys, and M. A. S. Alves, eds., Biologia da Conservação-Essências. Rima, São Paulo, Brasil.Google Scholar
  58. Silva, A. C. O., and U. P. Albuquerque. 2005. Woody Medicinal Plants of the Caatinga in the State of Pernambuco (Northeast Brazil). Acta Botanica Brasilica 19:17–26.Google Scholar
  59. Silva, V. A., and U. P. Albuquerque. 2004. Técnicas para análise de dados etnobotânicos. Pages 63–88 in U. P. Albuquerque and R. F. P. Lucena, eds., Métodos e técnicas na pesquisa etnobotânica. NUPEEA, Recife. Brasil.Google Scholar
  60. —, L. H. C. Andrade, and U. P. Albuquerque. 2006. Revising the Cultural Significance Index: The Case of the Fulni-ô in Northeastern Brazil. Field Methods 18:98–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Sokal, R. R., and F. G. Rholf. 1995. Biometry. Freeman and Company, New York.Google Scholar
  62. Tabuti, J. R. S., S. S. Dhillon, and K. A. Lye. 2003. Firewood Use in Bulamogi County, Uganda: Species Selection, Harvesting and Consumption Patterns. Biomass and Bioenergy 25:581–596.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Tacher, S. I. L., J. R. A. Rivera, M. M. M. Romero, and A. D. Fernández. 2002. Caracterización del uso tradicional de la flora espontánea en la comunidad Lacandona da Lacanhá, chiapas, México. Interciência 27:512–520.Google Scholar
  64. Taita, P. 2003. Use of Woody Plants by Locals in Mare aux Hippopotames Biosphere Reserve in Western Burkina Faso. Biodiversity and Conservation 12:1205–1217.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Voeks, R. A. 1996. Tropical Forest Healers and Habitat Preference. Economic Botany 50:381–400.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The New York Botanical Garden 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Reinaldo Farias Paiva de Lucena
    • 1
  • Elcida de Lima Araújo
    • 2
  • Ulysses Paulino de Albuquerque
    • 1
  1. 1.Departmento de Biologia, Área de Botânica. Laboratório de Etnobotânica AplicadaUniversidade Federal Rural de PernambucoRecifeBrazil
  2. 2.Departamento de Biologia, Área de Botânica. Laboratório de Ecologia Vegetal dos Ecossistemas NordestinosUniversidade Federal Rural de PernambucoRecifeBrazil

Personalised recommendations