Advertisement

Principles of Inferential Statistics Applied to Ethnobiology and Ethnoecology

  • Ulysses Paulino Albuquerque
  • Patrícia Muniz de Medeiros
  • Alyson Luiz Santos de Almeida
Protocol
Part of the Springer Protocols Handbooks book series (SPH)

Abstract

A brief discussion about the role of inferential statistics in ethnobiological and ethnoecological research is presented in this chapter, as is an exposition of some simple and coherent tools for data analysis. We discuss some issues related to study design, as well as the p value, data transformation, and some simple statistical tools, such as mean comparisons, correlation and regression models, and tests for contingency tables among others.

Key words

Quantitative tools Study design Regression analysis Quantitative ethnobotany 

References

  1. 1.
    Hoft M, Barik SK, Lykke AM (1999) Quantitative ethnobotany—applications of multivariate and statistical analyses in ethnobotany. People and plants working paper 6. UNESCO, ParisGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Lee PM (2012) Bayesian statistics: an introduction, 4th edn. Wiley, West SussexGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Doria Filho U (1999) Introdução à bioestatística para simples mortais. Negócio Editora, São PauloGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Magnusson WE, Mourão G (2005) Estatística [sem] matemática—a ligação entre as questões e a análise. Editora Planta, LondrinaGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    James F, McCulloch C (1990) Multivariate analysis in ecology and systematics: panacea or pandora box? Annu Rev Ecol Syst 21: 129–166Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Albuquerque UP, Lucena RFP, Monteiro JM et al (2006) Evaluating two quantitative ethnobotanical techniques. Ethnobotany Res Appl 4:51–60Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Lucena RFP, Araújo EL, Albuquerque UP (2007) Does the local availability of woody caatinga plants (Northeastern Brazil) explain their use value? Econ Bot 61:347–361CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Fox J (1984) Firewood consumption in a Nepali village. J Environ Manage 8:243–250CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Hanazaki N, Tamashiro JY, Leitão-Filho HF et al (2000) Diversity of plant uses in two Caiçara communities from the Atlantic forest coast, Brazil. Biodivers Conserv 9:597–615CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Phillips O, Gentry AH (1993) The useful plants of Tambopata, Peru II: additional hypothesis testing in quantitative ethnobotany. Econ Bot 47:33–43CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Phillips O, Gentry AH (1993) The useful plants of Tambopata, Peru I: statistical hypotheses tests with a new quantitative techinique. Econ Bot 47:15–32CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Phillips O, Gentry AH, Reynel C et al (1994) Quantitative ethnobotany and amazonian conservation. Conserv Biol 8:225–248CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Salick J, Mejia A, Tood A (1995) Non-timber forest products integrated with natural forest management, Rio San Juan, Nicaragua. Ecol Appl 5:878–895CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Ghimire SK, McKey D, Aumeeruddy-Tomas Y (2005) Conservation of Himalayan medicinal plants: harvesting patterns and ecology of two threatened species, Nardostachys grandiflora DC. and Neopicrorhiza scrophulariiflora (Pennell) Hong. Biol Conserv 124:463–475CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Albuquerque UP, Medeiros PM, Almeida ALS et al (2007) Medicinal plants of the caatinga (semi-arid) vegetation of NE Brazil: a quantitative approach. J Ethnopharmacol 114:325–354PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Albuquerque UP, Monteiro JM, Ramos MA et al (2007) Medicinal and magic plants from a public market in northeastern Brazil. J Ethnopharmacol 110:76–91PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Naughton-Trevis L, Kammen DM, Chapman C (2007) Burning biodiversity: woody biomass use by commercial and subsistence groups in western Uganda’s forests. Biol Conserv 134: 232–241CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Holmes CM (2003) Assessing the perceived utility of wood resources in a protected area of Western Tanzania. Biol Conserv 111:179–189CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Thomas E, Vandebroek I, Van Damme P (2007) What works in the field? A comparison of different interviewing methods in ethnobotany with special reference to the use of photographs. Econ Bot 61:376–384CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Gaugris JY, van Rooyen MW (2006) Questionnaires do not work! A comparison of methods used to evaluate the structure of buildings and wood used in rural households, South Africa. Ethnobotany Res Appl 4:119–131Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Ndangalasi HJ, Bitariho R, Dovie DBK (2007) Harvesting of non-timber forest products and implications for conservation in two montane forests of East Africa. Biol Conserv 134:242–250CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Ramos MA, Medeiros PM, Almeida ALS et al (2008) Use and knowledge of fuelwood in an area of caatinga vegetation in NE Brazil. Biomass Bioenergy 32:510–517CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Hanazaki N, Begossi A (2000) Fishing and niche dimension for food consumption of Caiçaras from Ponta do Almada (Brazil). Hum Ecol Rev 7:52–62Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Lykke AM (2000) Local perceptions of vegetation change and priorities for conservation of woody-savanna vegetation in Senegal. J Environ Manage 59:107–120CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Estomba D, Ladio A, Lozada M (2006) Medicinal wild plant knowledge and gathering patterns in a Mapuche community from north-western Patagonia. J Ethnopharmacol 103:109–119PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Ramos MA, Medeiros PM, Almeida ALS et al (2008) Can wood quality justify local preferences for firewood in an area of caatinga (dryland) vegetation. Biomass Bioenergy 32: 503–509CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Galeano G (2000) Forest use at the Pacific coast of Choco Colombia: a quantitative approach. Econ Bot 54:358–376CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Nagothu US (2001) Fuelwood and fodder extraction and deforestation: mainstream views in India discussed on the basis of data from the semi-arid region of Rajasthan. Geoforum 32: 319–332CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Fusari A, Carpaneto GM (2006) Subsistence hunting and conservation issues in the game reserve of Gile, Mozambique. Biodivers Conserv 15:2477–2495CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Gavin MC, Anderson GJ (2007) Socioeconomic predictors of forest use values in the Peruvian Amazon: a potential tool for biodiversity conservation. Ecol Econ 60:752–762CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Voeks RA (2007) Are women reservoirs of traditional plant knowledge? Gender, ethnobotany and globalization in northeast Brazil. Singap J Trop Geogr 28:7–20CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Ferraz JSF, Meunier IMJ, Albuquerque UP (2005) Conhecimento sobre espécies lenhosas úteis da mata ciliar do Riacho do Navio, Floresta, Pernambuco. Zonas Áridas 9:27–39Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Ladio A, Lozada M, Weigandt M (2007) Comparison of traditional wild plant knowledge between aboriginal communities inhabiting arid and forest environments in Patagonia, Argentina. J Arid Environ 69:695–715CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Hanazaki N, Alves RRN, Begossi A (2009) Hunting and use of terrestrial fauna used by Caiçaras from the Atlantic forest coast (Brazil). J Ethnobiol Ethnomed 5:36PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Almeida CFCBR, Silva TCL, Amorim ELC et al (2005) Life strategy and chemical composition as predictors of the selection of medicinal plants from the caatinga (Northeast Brazil). J Arid Environ 62:127–142CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Monteiro JM, Lins Neto EMF, Albuquerque UP et al (2006) Use patterns and knowledge of medicinal species among two rural communities from Northeastern Brazil semi-arid region. J Ethnopharmacol 105:173–186PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ulysses Paulino Albuquerque
    • 1
  • Patrícia Muniz de Medeiros
    • 1
  • Alyson Luiz Santos de Almeida
    • 1
  1. 1.Laboratory of Applied and Theoretical Ethnobiology, Department of BiologyFederal Rural University of PernambucoRecifeBrazil

Personalised recommendations