https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5741-6179
Figures
Abstract
Traditional knowledge on the use of animal products to maintain human health is important since time immemorial. Although a few studies reported food and medicinal values of different animals, a comprehensive ethno-medicinal study of vertebrates in Nepal is still lacking. Thus, present study is aimed at documenting the ethno-medicinal knowledge related to vertebrate fauna among different ethnic communities in the Chitwan-Annapurna Landscape, central Nepal. Data was collected by using semi-structured questionnaires and analyzed by using Use Value (UV), Informant Consensus Factor (ICF) and Fidelity level (FL). Results showed a total of 58 (53 wild and 5 domestic) species of vertebrate animals. They were used to treat 62 types human ailments. Four animals were also used for veterinary diseases and agriculture benefits. The most widely used species was Felis chaus (UV = 0.25) with 3 use-reports by 10 informants. Cardiovascular and dental problems had the highest ICF value (0.974) with cardiovascular problems having 351 use-reports for 10 animal species and dental problems having 77 use-reports for 3 animal species. The least ICF was found in ophthalmological problems (ICF = 0.833, use reports = 7 for 2 species). We concluded that the different animals were an important part of traditional medicine for the local people living in the Chitwan-Annapurna Landscape. However, the majority of animals and most likely to be threatened due to their uses. The present documented ethnozoological knowledge can be used in conservation and management of vertebrates so that they could be protected for future generations.
Citation: Adhikari JN, Bhattarai BP, Rokaya MB, Thapa TB (2020) Ethno-medicinal uses of vertebrates in the Chitwan-Annapurna Landscape, central Nepal. PLoS ONE 15(10): e0240555. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0240555
Editor: Narel Y. Paniagua-Zambrana, Universidad Mayor de San Andrés, PLURINATIONAL STATE OF BOLIVIA
Received: May 31, 2020; Accepted: September 28, 2020; Published: October 30, 2020
Copyright: © 2020 Adhikari et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Data Availability: All relevant data are within the manuscript and its Supporting Information files.
Funding: Jagan Nath Adhikari received mini research grant from the Nepal Academy of Science and Technology, Kathmandu, Nepal and Idea Wild, USA for instrument support. The funders had no role in data analysis, preparation of the manuscript and decision to publish.
Competing interests: The authors declare that they have no competing interests.
Introduction
Bio-resources, both flora and fauna, are integral part of the indigenous healing practices used by human beings since the prehistoric time [1–4]. The traditional knowledge on the use of bio-resources for medicine has a significant contribution in maintaining the human health [3, 5–8]. In traditional medicine, it is estimated that more than 60% of medicines is based on flora and fauna [9, 10] and different chemical compounds derived from plants and animals are used to improve human health [11, 12]. The World Health Organization (WHO) has selected a total of 252 essential chemical compounds to prepare drugs, where animal based compounds contribute about 8.7% [9]. A figure shows the use of more than 1500 animal species in the Traditional Chinese Medicine in China [13] and more than 100 animal species in Nepal [4, 14–18]. In addition to the use of animals as medicine, many animals are also traded for various purposes in the world [19–21].
Animals have significantly contributed as therapeutic agents in preventing and treating several human ailments or disorders across the globe [10, 22–28]. Zootherapy is considered as an important alternative therapeutic practice [29–31]. Studying about zootherapy allows us to understand different aspects of social and cultural systems of indigenous people and also find out their inter-relationships between people and animals [29, 32]. In addition to this, investigating the use of animals in traditional medicine could highlight an important aspect of indigenous knowledge [27, 33]. Recent studies have shown that there is a loss of many animal species [34, 35] as they are used in different traditional systems such as Ayurveda, Unani, Homeopathy, Chinese and Tibetan traditional medicines [9, 19, 36, 37]. Animals origin medicine cover about 15–20% of the Ayurvedic medicines [27]. Studies in Nepal have shown the use of animals as medicine [4, 15, 36, 38–42] including a few studies from the Chitwan-Annapurna Landscape (CHAL), but are mainly related to medicinal plants [37, 43–46] and wild edible plants [47]. The Chitwan-Annapurna Landscape lies in between the Chitwan National Park in the south and the Annapurna Conservation Area in the north, ranges from 150m to 8000m above sea level (m asl). This area is inhabited by multi-cultured ethnic people and is very important place for the studies related to traditional medicine.
Nepal is well-known for rich cultural heritage [40] and comprises 125 different multicultural ethnic groups with more than 123 different languages [48]. In Nepal, indigenous knowledge related to uses of different animals as medicine is generally passed verbally from one generation to the next generation. Such knowledge is commonly lost with the demise of knowledgeable person [4, 5, 49, 50]. It is, thus, important to systematically document indigenous knowledge so that it can be saved for the future generations. This study is aimed at collecting and documenting traditional ethnozoological knowledge related to vertebrates from the Chitwan-Annapurna Landscape, central Nepal. Here, we asked following questions: (i) What are different vertebrates that are used in traditional healing practices in the Chitwan-Annapurna Landscape, central Nepal? What are the modes of preparation and administration of vertebrate based traditional medicine? (iii) What major ailment categories are treated by different vertebrates and also what are the most important vertebrate species used against different ailments? (iv) What is the conservation status of each vertebrate that is used as traditional medicine? To answer the above-mentioned questions, we interviewed 204 locals from the Chitwan-Annapurna Landscape, central Nepal.
Materials and methods
Study area
The study area is located in the Chitwan-Annapurna Landscape, central Nepal (Fig 1). The region is connected with the Chitwan National Park in the south and Annapurna Conservation Area (ACA) in the north. This landscape is rich in globally outstanding biodiversity, including three Word Wildlife Fund (WWF) Global 200 Eco–regions (Terai–duar Savanna and Grasslands, Himalayan Subtropical Broadleaf Forests, Alpine Shrubs and Meadows) [51], and two Ramsar sites (Beeshazari Lake, Chitwan and Lake Clusters of Pokhara valley, Kaski) [52].
The Chitwan-Annapurna Landscape is a prime habitat for many mammal species such as the tiger, rhinoceros, leopard, clouded leopard, snow leopard, sloth bear, Himalayan black bear, sambar, chital, musk deer, hog deer, Himalayan goral, etc. This landscape is inhabited by diverse communities (23 ethnic groups in Chitwan, 26 ethnic groups in Tanahun, 12 ethnic groups in Kaski) [48]. The most dominant ethnic groups in the study area are Tharu, Braman/Chhetri, Tamang, Gurung, Bote in Chitwan; Magar, Gurung, Sanyasi, Tamang, Majhi in Tanahun and Gurung, Magar, Braman/Chhetri and Dalit in Kaski district [48]. Nepali language is the official language in the study area. More than 70.1% of people of Chitwan district spoke Nepali as their first language followed by 10.2% Tharu, 4.9% Tamang, 3.7% Chepang, 2.8% Gurung, 1.7% Bhojpuri, 1.6% Magar, 1.6% Newari, 1.1% Darai, 0.6% Maithili and 0.5% Hindi. Likewise, 61.9% of people of Tanahun district spoke Nepali as their primary language followed by 20.8% Magar, 8.3% Gurung, 4.1% Newari, 1.1% Darai, 0.8% Urdu and 0.7% Tamang. Similarly, 78.5% of people of Kaski spoke Nepali as their primary language followed by 11.9% Gurung, 2.2% Magar, 2.2% Newari, 1.5% Tamang, 0.7% Bhojpuri, 0.6% Hindi and 0.5% Maithili [48]. The people followed by the Hindu, Buddhist, Christian and Muslim minorities [48].
Data collection
For data collection, we divided the whole study area into four different study blocks based on topography, climatic variations and ethnic compositions (Fig 1):
- Block A: Barandabhar Corridor Forest and its adjoining settlement areas in Chitwan district, Bharatpur Metropolitan City (Patihani, Gitanagar, Bhojad, Ramnagar, Kabilas and Chaukidanda), Ratnanagar Municipality (Sauraha, Mohana, Tikauli, Panchakanya), Kalika Municipality (Jutpani and Padampur). This study block is located in between 27.59761702°N/84.48943997°E to 27.77122°N/84.49986°E. This area has tropical and sub-tropical types of climate having an average maximum and minimum temperature (1989–2018) were 30.86°C and 17.85°C, respectively. The average annual rainfall and relative humidity of Chitwan district (Rampur station number 902, elevation 189m asl) were 1980.34mm and 76.65%, respectively [53, 54].
- Block B: Community and National forests and its adjoining settlement areas in lower parts of Tanahun district (27.77611502°N/84.435171°E to 27.92545°N/84.32756667°E), Devghat Rural Municipality (Gaighat, Kaphaldada and Mude), Aanbookhaireni Rural Municipality (Saranghat and Deurali), Bandipur Rural Municipality (Khaharetar, Dharampani and Bandipur), Byas Municipality (Keshavtar, Rumsi, Nayagaun). The average maximum and minimum temperature (1989–2018) were 29.31°C and 17.10°C, respectively. The average annual rainfall and average relative humidity were 2238.98mm and 74.29%, respectively (Khairenitar station number 815, elevation 515m asl) [53, 54].
- Block C: Community and National forests and its adjoining settlement areas in upper part of Tanahun district, Rishing Rural Municipality (Manpur, Dhaap, Pipalbot, Chalisegaun), Mygde Rural Municipality (Chhang, Fulbari, Tharpu, Mulabari), Bhimad Municipality (Rishing Patan, Bhimad), Suklagandaki Municipality (Firfire, Therpek, Raipur, Taxar). The geographic location of this block is 27.91741102°N/84.08539603°E to 28.082906°N/83.98566697°E. The average maximum and minimum temperature (1989–2018) were 27.03°C and 15.69°C, respectively. Similarly, the average annual rainfall and relative humidity were 2999.7mm and 62.29% (Pokhara Airport station number 804, elevation 827m asl) [53, 54].
- Block D: Panchase area and lower Annapurna Conservation Area, Pokhara Metropolitan City (Nirmalpokhari, Bharatpokhari, Sidhane, Panchase, Pumdibhumdi), Annapurna Rural Municipality (Bhadaure, Tamagi, Landruk and Ghandruk). This study block is located from 28.12748°N/84.04162°E to 28.38574°N/83.79772°E. The average maximum and minimum temperature (1989–2018) were 20.74°C and 12.03°C, respectively. Likewise, the average annual rainfall and relative humidity were 5480.19mm and 81.34% (Lumle station number 814, elevation 1738m asl) [53, 54].
Participatory Rural Appraisal (PRA) method was employed to collect ethno-medicinal data on uses of animals (mainly vertebrates) [49, 55–57]. In this method, we used sets of questions related to the use of animals as ethnomedicine and discussed their local status and medicinal properties. During data collection, we used the photographs of the vertebrates. Local healers, medicinal practitioners, teachers and social workers were involved in the PRA. We also considered a fair gender composition of the group. PRA provided information on the local status and medicinal uses of animals which further helped for the modification of questionnaires including related information as they suggested before starting the formal interview.
For our study, we followed the ethical guidelines of the International Society of Ethnobiology [58]. Personal consent was taken from each respondent prior to a formal interview. To carry out studies in the Chitwan-Annapurna Landscape, we obtained the permission from the Department of National Parks and Wildlife Conservation (Permission letter number 3372), Chitwan National Park (Permission letter number 2723), Division Forest Offices of Chitwan (Permission letter number 2723), Tanahun (Permission letter number 749), Kaski (Permission letter number 200) districts and Annapurna Conservation Area Project (Permission letter number 66).
Open ended and semi-structured questionnaires were used to collect information from the local people [6, 21, 59]. The questionnaires contained background information, household profiles, use of animals and animal parts for medicine and sanitary issues in Nepali language and later translated into an English language (S1 and S2 Files). The respondents were chosen randomly, but were well representatives from different ethnic groups, geographic locations, age, sex, profession, and education levels [10, 45, 60]. In total, 204 respondents were interviewed during 2018–2019. The respondents were interviewed only once. We used photographs and images of different vertebrates when conducting interviews. The detailed information, including local name of the animals, parts used, methods of preparation and mode of administration were recorded. The geographic coordinates of each respondents’ house were taken by using Global Positioning System (GPS) (S1 Table).
Latin names and classification of the animals were obtained from different literature [61–67]. We also recorded the conservation status of each animal by using the above-mentioned literature and IUCN Red data book [68].
Based on the information obtained from informants in the study area, all the reported human related ailments were grouped into 11 categories: cardiovascular problem, dental problem, dermatological problem, ear, nose and throat problem, gastro-intestinal problem, musculoskeletal problem, neurological problem, ophthalmological problem, reproductive problems, respiratory problem and others (fever and headache). In addition to this, we also recorded the veterinary and the agriculture uses (Table 1).
Data analysis
Informant consensus factor (ICF).
The agreement on the use of animals in the ailment categories between the respondents in the study area was assessed with the informant consensus factor (ICF) [69, 70].
The informant consensus factor (ICF) for ailment category was calculated as:
Where, Nur is the number of use-reports in each ailment category and Nt is the total number of taxa used in each ailment category by all informants.
In each case if an animal was mentioned by an informant as ‘used’, then we considered to be one ‘use-report.’ If one informant reported an animal as a treatment for more than one ailment in the same category, we considered it as one use-report [71]. Thus, an animal species could be listed in several ailment categories of indigenous uses, but in terms of use-reports, each animal species was considered only once per informant in a single ailment category as described by Amiguet et al. [71].
The ICF ranges from 0 to 1, where high values (close to 1) are obtained when only one or a few animal species are reported to be used by a high proportion of informants to treat a particular ailment meaning that there is a narrow well-defined group of animal species used to cure a particular ailment category and/or that information is exchanged between informants. On the other hand, low ICF values (close to zero) indicate that informants disagree over which animal to use due to random choosing or lack of exchange of information about the use among informants [72].
Fidelity level.
To determine the most frequently used animal species for treating a particular ailment category of the local people of the study area, we calculated the fidelity level [73]. For each species s and each ailment category c, we calculated the value FLsc using the following formula:
where Npsc is the number of use-reports cited for a given animal species s for a particular ailment category c and Ns is the total number of use-reports cited for any given species s. The animal species with the highest FLsc value is considered the most preferred species for ailment category c.
Use value.
The relative importance of an animal species used as medicine in the study areas was calculated with the help of the use value for the species s [74]:
where Us is the number of use-reports cited by each informant for a given animal species s and N is the total number of informants interviewed for a given animal species s. Use values are high when there are many use-reports for an animal and low when there are few reports related to its use.
We used Spearman’s correlation coefficient to determine the correlations between FL value and UV values for each animal species because data were not normally distributed.
Multivariate test was used to see the effects of age, gender, elevation, sampled blocks and education (literate/illiterate) and distance from the nearest city on composition of animal species recorded in our study. We used Canonical Correspondence Analysis (CCA) because the gradient length was long enough (2.86) with presence and absence data [75]. Analysis was carried out by using Canoco 5.12 [76]. The significance of the predictors was tested by using Monte Carlo permutation test (n = 499). In CCA, we down weighted the rare species to reduce their effect on the results and significant variables were selected by using a forward selection process.
Results and discussion
Demographic details of informants
A total of 204 informants (70 female and 134 male individuals, aged between 18 and 82 years) participated in the study. They belong to different castes (12) and communities (eight of Indo-Aryan or Tibeto-Burman language speaking groups). A large number of respondents were in between 50 to 59 years (n = 53). This clearly showed that ethno-medicinal knowledge was higher in aged groups than in young groups. The main reason of little knowledge among younger generation might be due to the growing number of hospital facilities, migration of people to urban areas and abroad for study and employment and also the influences of mixed cultures due to cross-cultural communications or settlements in new areas [2, 20, 28, 33, 50, 77].
Most people living in the villages have strong belief in the traditional healing system and traditional medicine. The male and female ratio may indicate the dominance of the males versus females among ethno-medicinal practitioners. Similar trends were reported in other studies [5, 41, 43, 77–79] (Table 2). About 43% of the respondents were farmers and healers who had broad knowledge of ethno-medicine. There were 38% of the respondents with basic level and 26% of them with secondary level education. Locally popular traditional healers and wizard doctors were involved in the focus group discussion.
Faunal diversity and uses
The present study revealed the use of 58 animal species belonging to 23 orders, 37 families and 53 genera to cure 62 human and three veterinary ailments (Table 3). Out of all animals, 53 animal species were wild and five were domesticated (Table 3). The order, family, scientific names, English names, Nepali names, IUCN category, use value, parts used and uses are presented in Table 3. Among 58 vertebrates, 24 species (41%) were Mammalia, 16 Aves (28%), 6 Reptilia (1%), 3 Amphibia (0.5%) and 9 Actinopterygii (1.5%) (Fig 2). Out of all animals, only one animal (Ptyas mucosa) has poisonous property (Table 3). The use of threatened wild animals as medicine (Table 3) is quite concerning as they might undergo extinction.
Local people and poachers are generally the greatest threats to wildlife in the world [21, 28, 49] and this was also true for our study. Mammals were considered as the most important vertebrate group that were highly used for medicine. Rural people believed that wild mammals are the sources of protein as well as other essential supplementary foods and medicines [3, 80]. Similarly, it has been shown that vertebrates are used for more than 232 traditional animal therapeutic remedies for human and animal health [15], and food [41]. The practice of using animals in traditional medicine was high in the mid hills and mountainous region than in low land in Chitwan (Table 1). The vertebrate animals such as Schizothorax spp., Tor putitora, Hoplobatrachus spp., Varanus spp., Gallus sp., Columba livia, Lepus sp., Ovis sp., Bubalus bubalis bubalis have both food and medicinal values [36, 81, 82]. Animals such as Felis chaus, Canis lupus familiaris, Melursus ursinus, Corvus splendens, Hemidactylus flaviviridis, Duttaphrynus himalayanus have only medicinal values and are used either cooked or raw. The ethno-medicinal uses of Canis lupus familiaris, Felis chaus, Naemorhedus goral, Macaca assamensis, Leptoptilos javanicus, Arborophila torqueola, Corvus splendens, Bubulcus ibis, Tyto alba, Nilssonia hurum, Ptyas mucosa, Hemidactylus flaviviridis, Hoplobatrachus tigerinus, Acanthocobitis botia and Notopterus notopterus have not been reported prior to our study. The scats, meat, fur, fat, claws, and the blood of these animals were used to treat different ailments such as gum bleeding, sole crakes, tuberculosis, cardiovascular disorders, dysentery, backbone pain, and skin diseases (Table 3).
Generally, the meat of Canis aureus was cooked for treating paralysis and preparation of wine for treating rheumatism. Similar practices were also reported by Lohani [41] in the Tamang community of Sindhupalchowk and Poudel and Singh [83] who reported use of meat and fat of Golden jackal for treating rheumatism in the Darai community of Chitwan, Nepal. Similarly, Rai and Singh [42] reported such practices in the Rai community of Bhojpur. Bones and meat of the animals are full of calcium, protein and phosphorous hence, soup of the bone and meat of animals is given to the person suffering from the muscle spasm, cramp, bone fracture and arthritis (Table 3). A similar uses were also reported by Lohani [41] in the Tamang community, Nepal; Vijayakumar et al. [5] in Kerela adjoining areas of Mt. Abu Wildlife sanctuary, India; Nijman and Shepherd [49] in Kyaiktiyo, Myanmar.
The locals in our study area used animal flesh and fat for the treatments of different skin diseases, burning, inflammation, increasing sexual performance, arthritis and poor vision (Table 3). Omega-3 fatty acid present in the fat and meat reduces inflammations and may useful in neurological disorder, thrombosis, and aging [27, 84]. Similarly, milk and butter (ghee) of Bos taurus and Ovis aries were used to treat muscular cramp and pain, weakness, strength, and virility. Ghee of Ovis aries is very useful for burning. Milk and butter have high contents of proteins, lipids, vitamins, and minerals which help to strength the body, relief in joint pains, muscular cramp, increase the strength, and virility [4, 85, 86]. Cooked meat of Columba livia is given to the patients with paralysis whereas dry fecal matter is applied as a paste with mustard oil to treat burns and blisters. Similar to our findings was also reported in different places in Nepal [4, 14, 15, 83] but the fresh blood of pigeon is used for treating paralysis in Rajasthan, India [86].
The composition of the animal species recorded for medicinal purposes was affected by sampling blocks, age of informant and elevation of the place where information was collected during our study (p = 0.002 in all factors). It was found that most of the animal species were found in Block A followed by Block D and least were in Block B and C as Block A is located in adjoining areas of the Chitwan National Park and Block D is located inside and around the Annapurna Conservation Area but Block B and C are in human-dominated highly fragmented landscape. In Block A, the species found were Leptoptilos javanicus, Tyto alba, Felis chaus, Anabas testudineus, Gallus gallus, Rhinoceros unicornis, Bubulcus ibis, Axis axis, Nilssonia hurum, Vanellus indicus, Psittacula krameri, Wallago attu, Melursus ursinus and Panthera tigris. In Block D species recorded were Hoplobatrachus rugulosus, Arborophila torqueola and Acanthocobitis botia. Few species were found in high elevation and they were Naemorhedus goral, Ovis aries and Acanthocobitis botia. Middle-aged people mentioned more about the uses of species than young or too old (Fig 3). Middle-aged people (50 to 60) possess the significant traditional knowledge compared to younger and too old as their long interaction with animal species and they can easily memories the used animals and plants for the treatment of different ailments than too old people [4, 10, 27, 87].
The 1st canonical axis explained 16.98% and the 2nd 4.19% of the total variation in the data. Abbreviations: Aca bot-Acanthocobitis botia; Ana tes-Anabas testudineus; Arb tor-Arborophila torqueola; Axi axi-Axis axis; Bos tau-Bos taurus; Bub ibi-Bubulcus ibis; Can aur-Canis aureus; Fel cha-Felis chaus; Fra fra-Francolinus francolinus; Gal gal-Gallus gallus; Hop rug-Hoplobatrachus rugulosus; Lep jav-Leptoptilos javanicus; Lop leu-Lophura leucomelanos; Mel urs-Melursus ursinus; Nae gor-Naemorhedus goral; Nil hur-Nilssonia hurum; Ovi ari-Ovis aries; Pan par-Panthera pardus; Pan tig-Panthera tigris; Pav cri-Pavo cristatus; Psi kra-Psittacula krameri; Rhi uni-Rhinoceros unicornis; Rus uni-Rusa unicolor; Sch ric-Schizothorax richardsonii; Tor put-Tor putitora; Tre sph-Treron sphenurus; Tyt alb-Tyto alba; Van ind-Vanellus indicus; Var fla-Varanus flavescens; Wal att-Wallago attu.
Important traditional medicines and insecticides for veterinary use
Medicinal fauna from four different animal families belonging to four genera and four species have veterinary importance. Generally, animal body parts and products such as urine, droppings, fat and meat were used. They were used both internally and externally (Table 3). However, most of the people in the study area had little idea and knowledge about veterinary and agricultural use of vertebrates. Furthermore, this study also indicated that more than 81% of vertebrate species were used for treating more than one ailment. Similar studies outside Nepal also reported the wide use of animals in ethno-medicinal purposes such as González et al. [88] recorded use of 30 wild vertebrates to treat domestic animals in Spain, Souto et al. [79, 89] reported 11 animals for ethnoveterinary medicine in the semi-arid region of Northeastern Brazil and Gupta et al. [90] reported a total of 11 species of vertebrates for treating various veterinary diseases in India.
The reason using animal products in Nepal is due to existing tradition and nutritional values of animals and/or their products. The people who live near the forest are more familiar with animals, their nutritional value, and medicinal properties as in the case of the Chitwan-Annapurna Landscape.
Animal parts used
The uses of ethno-medicines prepared from various animal body parts and products were also reported in previous studies [3–5, 14, 32, 33, 42, 55, 94]. The animal parts used for treating different ailments were of 22 types. Meat was the most preferred parts (n = 48), possibly because meat has more protein and medical properties, followed by fat (n = 11), fecal matter (n = 6), gallbladder, horn and antler and blood (each n = 5), egg and claws (each n = 3), urine, skin, milk, ghee and hair (each n = 2), hoofs, feathers, teeth, brain, stomach, shell, quail, bone and legs (n = 1) (Figs 4–6). Quave et al. [15] also reported use of the whole animals, milk and milk products, meat/animal flesh, fat, honey, eggs, feces, urine and seminal fluid for different treatments by many ethnic groups of people in Albania, Italy, Spain and Nepal.
Parts of animals used by local ethnic groups for the treatment of different diseases: A- Skin of Tiger (paste of dry skin and hair is prescribed in mental illness) B- Dry meat of Wild boar (the soup of dry meat (leg) is provided to relief the patient suffering from epilepsy) C- Bone of Leopard (the soup of the bone or paste is considered as aphrodisiac in nature). D- Leg of Lesser adjutant (The paste of claws of stork is applied on the place of snake bite).
Parts of animals used by local ethnic groups for the treatment of different diseases: A- Belt made by the skin of Monitor lizard (belt made by dry skin is used during backbone pain) B- Horn of Himalayan goral (The horn of the goral is rubbed and made a fine paste and used in the navel region for curing the stomach pain) C- Gangetic mudeel (Boiled meat is prescribed to eat to get relief from muscular pain; raw blood is consumed for the treatment of anemia). D- Bat (The cooked meat of bat is good for asthma, tuberculosis).
Medicine preparations and their administration
The medical remedies were based on many kinds of medicines ranging from a preparation made out of a single animal for a single ailment to the use of animals in combination (Table 3). There were 12 types of preparations used in the study area. Cooked meat was commonly practiced (31%) followed by boiled body parts and oil (each 12%), paste (11%), soup (10%), raw meat (9%), dry (6%), ash (3%), powder and lotion (each 2%) and fume and wind (each 1%) (Fig 7).
The questions related to sanitary/cleanliness issues while using the animals and animal products as traditional medicines and food were asked to the respondents. The results showed that 73% of the respondents were aware about sanitary issues while using the animals and animal products for traditional medicines and they used traditional methods such as sun drying, smoking, boiling, cooking, roasting, and washing before use. But 36.3% of the respondents had the knowledge about the transfer of diseases such as rabies, influenza, plague and tuberculosis from animals to human. Similarly, 47.5% of the respondents responded about the transformation of parasites such as roundworm, tapeworm and liver fluke from animals to human. Consumption practices of raw body parts of animals are common for curing diseases in many ethnic groups at global level [2, 5, 28, 55, 94, 95]. However, consumption of raw meat may increase the risks of transmitting different types of parasites and diseases to humans [4, 94]. Zoonotic diseases can be transmitted by direct contact with animals and also by using animal products as food and medicine. The care should be taken while using raw flesh or blood as a traditional medicine because major zoonotic diseases such as tuberculosis, rabies and influenza can easily be transmitted from animals to human beings [96–98]. It has been found that avian influenza (Influenza A, H1N1) viruses were transmitted from wild birds to human and have caused devastating effects [99].
The most common mode of administration of medicine is oral (67%) followed by topical application (30%) and drop (4%). Topical use is an important way of remedy for musculo-skeletal problems like muscular pain, fractures, rheumatisms and arthritis. Such modes of administration were found in studies from Korea [94], in India [5] in Brazil [33, 80, 100] and also in Nepal [4, 83].
Informant consensus factor, fidelity level and use value
The results of the informant consensus factor (ICF) calculation showed that the value of our study ranges from 0.833 to 0.974. Cardiovascular and dental problems have the highest ICF value 0.974, with cardiovascular problems having 351 use-reports for 10 animal species (Panthera tigris, Ursus thibetanus, Muntiacus vaginalis, Semnopithecus hector, Leptoptilos javanicus, Francolinus francolinus, Bufo bufo, Hoplobatrachus tigerinus, Anguilla bengalensis, Monopterus cuchia) and dental problems having 77 use-reports for 3 animal species (Vanellus indicus, Pavo cristatus, Bubulcus ibis). It is followed by musculoskeletal problems (ICF = 0.973, 926 use-reports, 46 species). The least agreement between the informants was observed for animals used to cure ophthalmological uses with ICF value 0.833 with 7 use-reports for 2 animal species (Table 4). The low ICF value might be due to lack of communication for the treatment of such ailments among the people of different cultures, different localities and ethnicities of the study area. Local people believed that there was no any side effects while using these ethnomedicines.
When selecting the most preferred animal species for each ailment category, we took the highest FL (%) in each category of ailment (Table 5). Leptoptilos javanicus and Duttaphrynus himalayanus for cardiovascular ailments, Bubulcus ibis for dental problem, Corvus splendens, Hemidactylus flaviviridis and Varanus bengalensis for dermatological problem, Canis lupus familiaris, Tyto alba and Calotes versicolor for gastro-intestinal problem, Lophura leucomelanos for musculo-skeletal problem, Rattus rattus, Arborophila torqueola, Acanthocobitis botia and Anabas testudineus for reproductive problem, Rhinolopus spp., Macaca assamensis, Streptopelia orientalis, Acridotheres fuscus, Schizothorax richardsonii and Pethia conchonius for respiratory problem has the highest FL (100% each) and Felis chaus has the lowest (20%) for ophthalmological problem purposes. The 100% animals indicate that healers and local respondents used that animals for the treatment of the same disease. It implied that well-known species were used more than the little-known species to cure the disease or disorders [57, 94].
The most commonly used species was Felis chaus (UV = 0.25) with 3 use-reports by 10 informants. It was followed by Panthera tigris (UV = 0.23) with 6 use-reports by 57 informants, Rhinoceros unicornis (UV = 0.16) with 6 use-reports by 43 informants and Columba livia (UV = 0.14) with 3 use-reports by 22 informants (Table 3).
The correlation between the highest fidelity level (%) in ailment categories and animal use value was not significant (Spearman’s correlation test: r2 = 0.038, p = 0.209) indicating that the animals systematically used for a specific ailment category are not necessarily those used commonly in the region. Although animals with high FL or UV are the most preferred species in study sites (Tables 4 and 5), animals with low FL or UV should not be neglected as failing to mention them could increase the risk of the gradual disappearance of the knowledge.
Conservation status
Due to lack of the modern medical facilities and belief on the traditional healing system, people in the study area are forced to use animals and their body parts for curing various ailments. Besides, superstitions and mythologies were very popular among the ethnic groups that may also play vital roles in using the animals. Therefore, they intentionally or unintentionally kill animals for ethno-medicinal uses which might increase threats to wildlife including many globally threatened species. Out of total, ten animals were Globally Threatened (2 Endangered, 8 Vulnerable), five were Near Threatened, one was Data Deficient and 37 Least Concern species according to the IUCN Red List [68] (Table 3, Fig 8). The Government of Nepal implemented National Parks and Wildlife Conservation (NPWC) Act 1973 and Forest Act 1993 to protect wildlife and their habitats in Nepal. These laws strictly prohibited the hunting and killing of wildlife. There is no permission of killing the wildlife listed in CITES for food, medicine, and their trade. However, sometimes these laws malfunction due to local religious norms and cultural beliefs. Therefore, to protect the wild animals, the local traditional communities should be aware of the alternative method of treatment systems such as the use of medicinal plants instead of animal products. Study of Jaroli et al. [32] found that among 24 identified animals used by Garasiya people in adjoining areas of Mount Abu Wildlife Sanctuary, India, 16 animals (including elephant, tiger, sambar, Himalayan black bear) are included in IUCN Red List. If the people didn’t think about the alternative methods of treatment systems, it will bring great problems on wildlife conservation [28, 79].
Extinction risk is very high for the vertebrates as compared to invertebrates [101, 102]. Vertebrates are more prone to habitat loss, exploitation, poaching and illegal trade. Besides, ethno-medicinal uses of vertebrates offer the reasons for increasing threats to their conservation. Therefore, this study is mainly devoted to vertebrates. The ethnic communities and local healers need search for other treatment options such as plants instead of animals. For example, fruits of Rhus javanica can be used instead of cooked blood of Canis aureus when treating asthma [57, 103, 104]. Seed oil of Impatiens scabrida can help to relieve body pain instead of fat of Panthera pardus [57, 105–107]. Similarly, powder prepared from the roots of Heracleum wallichii used for treating stomach problems to substitute meat of Naemorhedus goral, Hystrix indica and Nanorana liebigii [108, 109]. This study suggests that there is enough space for a researcher to document alternatives of the vertebrates for ethno-medicinal value.
Conclusions
The study is the first effort to document primary data of the ethno-medicinal knowledge about the use of vertebrates by the local people of the Chitwan-Annapurna Landscape. Ethno-medicinal knowledge about vertebrates and their body parts and products play the vital role in conservation and consumption of those species. A total of 58 species of vertebrates used for the treatment of 62 human ailments which were grouped into 11 categories. Mammals contributed the highest number among them in ethno-medicine. This study also indicated that more than 76% of vertebrate species were found to be used for the treatment of more than one ailment. The most commonly used species was Felis chaus and cardiovascular and dental problems had the highest ICF value. Traditional knowledge was more in middle-aged people than young and too old people because of long experiences of utilizing nature and can easily memories the uses of animals and their products. Therefore, our study concluded that there is a necessity for documentation of detailed knowledge about the status and specific use-values of vertebrates as well as the transfer of knowledge from seniors to the youths for sustainable ethno-medicine in living with nature places like the Chitwan-Annapurna Landscape, central Nepal. This empirical knowledge described in this study will help in the preparation of conservation planning to control the hunting of threatened wildlife. Furthermore, ethnic people should consider the alternative options such as the use of commonly found medicinal plants and other inorganic salts or compounds for the treatments of ailments. Any future economic gains obtained using indigenous knowledge should be shared with local communities to safeguard their intellectual property rights.
Supporting information
S1 Table. Global Positioning System (GPS)- latitude and longitude coordinates of each respondent who was interviewed during data collection.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0240555.s001
(PDF)
S1 File. Open ended and semi-structured questionnaire used to record the detail information on ethnozoology (in Nepali language).
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0240555.s002
(PDF)
S2 File. Open ended and semi-structured questionnaire used to record the detail information on ethnozoology (in English language).
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0240555.s003
(PDF)
Acknowledgments
We are grateful to the Department of National Parks and Wildlife Conservation (DNPWC), Nepal, the Chitwan National Park and Annapurna Conservation Area, Division Forest Offices of Chitwan, Tanahun and Kaski districts for providing the research permission. Our thanks also go to the field assistants and the respected wizard doctors (Dhami) and traditional healers for transferring hidden knowledge. We are thankful to the local people of the study area who provided the valuable information about the uses of vertebrates in ethnomedicine.
References
- 1. Alves RR, Rosa IL. Why study the use of animal products in traditional medicines? J Ethnobiol Ethnomed. 2005;1:5. pmid:16270931
- 2.
Alves RRN, Silva JS, da Silva Chaves L, Albuquerque UP. Ethnozoology and animal conservation. Ethnozoology: Elsevier; 2018. p. 481–96.
- 3. Ferreira FS, Brito SV, Ribeiro SC, Almeida WO, Alves RR. Zootherapeutics utilized by residents of the community Poco Dantas, Crato-CE, Brazil. J Ethnobiol Ethnomed. 2009;5:21. pmid:19656376
- 4. Lohani U. Zootherapeutic knowledge of two ethnic populations from Central Nepal. Studies on Ethno-Medicine. 2012;6(1):45–53.
- 5. Vijayakumar S, Yabesh JE, Prabhu S, Ayyanar M, Damodaran R. Ethnozoological study of animals used by traditional healers in Silent Valley of Kerala, India. J Ethnopharmacol. 2015;162:296–305. pmid:25571847
- 6. Castillo L, Ladio A. Zootherapy and rural livestock farmers in semiarid Patagonia: the transfer of animal aptitudes for health. Ethnobiology and Conservation. 2019;8(2):1–24.
- 7. Chakravorty J, Meyer-Rochow VB, Ghosh S. Vertebrates used for medicinal purposes by members of the Nyishi and Galo tribes in Arunachal Pradesh (North-East India). J Ethnobiol Ethnomed. 2011;7:13. pmid:21453496
- 8. Boll V. The distribution and ethnozoology of frogs (and toad) in north-eastern Arnhem Land (Australia). Anthropozoologica. 2004;39(2):61–72.
- 9.
WHO. WHO traditional medicine strategy: 2014–2023.: World Health Organization (WHO). 2013.
- 10. Souto WMS, Barboza RRD, Fernandes-Ferreira H, Junior A, Monteiro JM, Abi-Chacra EA, et al. Zootherapeutic uses of wildmeat and associated products in the semiarid region of Brazil: general aspects and challenges for conservation. J Ethnobiol Ethnomed. 2018;14(1):60. pmid:30223856
- 11.
Agosta WC. Bombardier beetles and fever trees: a close-up look at chemical warfare and signals in animals and plants1996.
- 12. Costa-Neto M E. Animal-based medicines: biological prospection and the sustainable use of zootherapeutic resources. Anais da Academia Brasileira de ciências. 2005;77(1):33–43. pmid:15692677
- 13.
CNCTHM. China National Corporation of Traditional and Herbal Medicine (CNCTHM): Materia medica commonly used in China: Beijing: Science Press; 1995. 76 p.
- 14. Lohani U. Traditional uses of animals among Jirels of Central Nepal. Ethno Med. 2011;5(2):115–24.
- 15. Quave CL, Lohani U, Verde A, Fajardo J, Rivera D, Valdes A, et al. A Comparative Assessment of Zootherapeutic Remedies From Selected Areas in Albania, Italy, Spain and Nepal. Journal of Ethnobiology. 2010;30(1):92–125. pmid:21625340
- 16. Tamang P, Singh NB. Medical ethnobiology and indigenous knowledge system of the Lapcha of Fikkal VDC of Ilam, Nepal. Journal of Institute of Science and Technology. 2014;19(2):45–52.
- 17.
Gewali MB. Aspects of Traditional Medicine in Nepal. 1st ed. Japan: Institute of Natural Medicine, University of Toyama; 2010.
- 18. Shrestha B, Gurung MB. Ethnoherpetological notes regarding the paha frogs and conservation implication in Manaslu Conservation Area, Gorkha District, Nepal. Journal of ethnobiology and ethnomedicine. 2019;15(1):23. pmid:31077223
- 19. Cragg GM, Newman DJ. Natural products: a continuing source of novel drug leads. Biochimica et Biophysica Acta (BBA)-General Subjects. 2013;1830(6):3670–95.
- 20. Ferreira FS, Brito SV, Ribeiro SC, Saraiva AA, Almeida WO, Alves RR. Animal-based folk remedies sold in public markets in Crato and Juazeiro do Norte, Ceara, Brazil. BMC Complement Altern Med. 2009;9:17. pmid:19493345
- 21. Setlalekgomo M. Ethnozoological survey of the indigenous knowledge on the use of pangolins (Manis sps.) in traditional medicine in Lentsweletau Extended Area in Botswana. Journal of Animal Science Advances. 2014;4(6):883–90.
- 22. Lev E. Traditional healing with animals (zootherapy): medieval to present-day Levantine practice. J Ethnopharmacol. 2003;85(1):107–18. Epub 2003/02/11. pmid:12576209
- 23. Alves RR, Rosa IL. Zootherapy goes to town: The use of animal-based remedies in urban areas of NE and N Brazil. Journal of ethnopharmacology. 2007;113(3):541–55. pmid:17719192
- 24.
Soewu DA. Zootherapy and biodiversity conservation in Nigeria. Animals in traditional folk medicine: Springer; 2013. p. 347–65.
- 25.
Quave CL, Pieroni A. Mediterranean zootherapy: A historical to modern perspective. Animals in Traditional Folk Medicine: Springer; 2013. p. 303–16.
- 26. Souto WM, Mourao JS, Barboza RR, Mendonca LE, Lucena RF, Confessor MV, et al. Medicinal animals used in ethnoveterinary practices of the’Cariri Paraibano’, NE Brazil. Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine. 2011;7(1):30. pmid:21985401
- 27. Altaf M, Javid A, Umair M, Iqbal KJ, Rasheed Z, Abbasi AM. Ethnomedicinal and cultural practices of mammals and birds in the vicinity of river Chenab, Punjab-Pakistan. J Ethnobiol Ethnomed. 2017;13(1):41. Epub 2017/07/14. pmid:28701165
- 28. Alves R. Relationships between fauna and people and the role of ethnozoology in animal conservation. Ethnobiology and Conservation. 2012.
- 29.
Alves RRN, Rosa IL, Albuquerque UP, Cunningham AB. Medicine from the wild: an overview of the use and trade of animal products in traditional medicines. Animals in traditional folk medicine: Springer; 2013. p. 25–42.
- 30. Bagde N, Jain S. An ethnozoological studies and medicinal values of vertebrate origin in the adjoining areas of Pench National Park of Chhindwara District of Madhya Pradesh, India. Ind Int J Life Sci. 2013;1:278–83.
- 31. Alves RRN, Oliveira MGG, Barboza RRD, Lopez LCS. An ethnozoological survey of medicinal animals commercialized in the markets of Campina Grande, NE Brazil. Research in Human Ecology. 2010;17(1):11–7.
- 32. Jaroli DP, Mahawar MM, Vyas N. An ethnozoological study in the adjoining areas of Mount Abu wildlife sanctuary, India. J Ethnobiol Ethnomed. 2010;6(6):6. pmid:20144243
- 33. Alves RRN, Oliveira TPR, Medeiros MFT. Trends in Medicinal Uses of Edible Wild Vertebrates in Brazil. Evid Based Complement Alternat Med. 2017;2017:4901329. pmid:28894470
- 34.
Alves RRN, Santana GG, Rosa IL. The role of animal-derived remedies as complementary medicine in Brazil. Animals in traditional folk medicine: Springer; 2013. p. 289–301.
- 35. Thomas-Walters L, Hinsley A, Bergin D, Doughty H, Eppel S, MacFarlane D, et al. Motivations for the use and consumption of wildlife products. Biota Neotropica. 2019;10(1).
- 36. Lohani U. Man-animal relationships in Central Nepal. Journal of ethnobiology and ethnomedicine. 2010;6(1):31. pmid:21050449
- 37. Boesi A. The Materia Medica of Tibetan Medicine According to Practitioners from the Lower Mustang District in Nepal. Rivista degli studi orientali. 2014:73–104.
- 38. Kharel M, Chhetry DT. Turtles of Kankai (Mai) river and their ethno-medicinal uses. Nepalese Journal of Biosciences. 2012;2:126–33.
- 39. Shah K. Ethnozoology of the Turtles in Nepal. J Nat Hist Mus. 2004;13:19–30.
- 40. Shrestha N, Prasai D, Shrestha KK, Shrestha S, Zhang X-C. Ethnomedicinal practices in the highlands of central Nepal: A case study of Syaphru and Langtang village in Rasuwa district. Journal of ethnopharmacology. 2014;155(2):1204–13. pmid:25014509
- 41.
Lohani U, Rajbhandari K, Shakuntala K. Need for systematic ethnozoological studies in the conservation of ancient knowledge systems of Nepal–a review. 2008.
- 42. Rai R, Singh N. Medico-ethnobiology in Rai community: a case study from Baikunthe Village development committee, Bhojpur, eastern Nepal. Journal of Institute of Science and Technology. 2015;20(1):127–32.
- 43. Bhuvan K, Heydon S, Norris P. Access to and use of medicines in the Annapurna region of Western Nepal and possible impacting factors. Journal of pharmaceutical policy and practice. 2019;12(1):11.
- 44.
Singh AG, Kumar A, Tewari DD, Bharati KA. New ethnomedicinal claims from Magar community of Palpa district, Nepal. 2018.
- 45. Singh AG, Kumar A, Tewari DD, Bharati KA. New ethnomedicinal claims from Magar community of Palpa district, Nepal. Indian Journal of Traditional Knowledge. 2018;17(3):499–511.
- 46. Bhattarai S, Chaudhary RP, Taylor RS. Ethnomedicinal plants used by the people of Manang district, central Nepal. J Ethnobiol Ethnomed. 2006;2:41. pmid:17020612
- 47. Bhattarai S, Chaudhary RP, Taylor RS. Wild edible plants used by the people of Manang district, Central Nepal. Ecol Food Nutr. 2009;48(1):1–20. pmid:21883055
- 48.
CBS. National population and housing census 2011 (National Report). 2012.
- 49. Nijman V, Shepherd CR. Ethnozoological assessment of animals used by Mon traditional medicine vendors at Kyaiktiyo, Myanmar. J Ethnopharmacol. 2017;206:101–6. pmid:28506903
- 50. Angmo K, Adhikari BS, Rawat GS. Changing aspects of traditional healthcare system in western Ladakh, India. J Ethnopharmacol. 2012;143(2):621–30. pmid:22884871
- 51.
Wikramanayake ED, Dinerstein E, Loucks CJ. Terrestrial ecoregions of the Indo-Pacific: a conservation assessment: Island Press; 2002. https://doi.org/10.1128/mcb.22.13.4863-4875.2002 pmid:12052892
- 52.
ICIMOD. Land cover of Nepal 2010 [Data set]. The International Centre for Integrated Mountain Development (ICIMOD); 2013.
- 53.
DHM. Observed Climate Trend Analysis of Nepal (1971–2014). Government of Nepal, Ministry of Population and Environment, Department of Hydrology and Meteorology, 2017.
- 54.
DHM. Data of Temperature, rainfall and relative humidity from 1989 to 2018. In: Department of Hydrology and Meteorology K, editor. Kathmandu: Department of Hydrology and Meteorology; 2019.
- 55. Borah MP, Prasad SB. Ethnozoological study of animals based medicine used by traditional healers and indigenous inhabitants in the adjoining areas of Gibbon Wildlife Sanctuary, Assam, India. J Ethnobiol Ethnomed. 2017;13(1):39. pmid:28666483
- 56.
Alves RRN, de Faria Lopes S. The Role of Ethnozoology in Animal Studies. Ethnozoology: Elsevier; 2018. p. 467–79.
- 57. Rokaya MB, Münzbergová Z, Timsina B. Ethnobotanical study of medicinal plants from the Humla district of western Nepal. Journal of Ethnopharmacology. 2010;130(3):485–504. pmid:20553834
- 58.
ISE. International Society of Ethnobiology (ISE) Code of Ethics (with 2008 additions).: International Society of Ethnobiology; 2006 [cited 2020]. http://ethnobiology.net/code-of-ethics/.
- 59. Hazarika M, Sharma D. A Study on the Conservation Status of Mabuya Multifasciata, on the Basis of Ethnozoological Survey, in Kokrajhar District of Assam, India. Kokrajhar District of Assam, India (February 26, 2018) International Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences (IJHSS) ISSN (P). 2018.
- 60. Kathol RG, Petty F. Relationship of depression to medical illness: A critical review. Journal of affective disorders. 1981;3(2):111–21. pmid:6454705
- 61. Amin R, Baral HS, Lamichhane BR, Poudyal LP, Lee S, Jnawali SR, et al. The status of Nepal’s mammals. Journal of Threatened Taxa. 2018;10(3):11361–78.
- 62.
Jnawali S, Baral H, Lee S, Acharya K, Upadhyay G, Pandey M, et al. The Status of Nepal’s Mammals: The National Red List Series-IUCN. 2011.
- 63.
Baral HS, Shah K. Wild mammals of Nepal: Himalayan Nature; 2008.
- 64.
Shah K.B., S. T. Herpetofauna of Nepal: IUCN Nepal; 2004.
- 65.
Shrestha TK. Ichthyology of Nepal. Second ed: Himalayan Ecosphere; 2018.
- 66.
Grimmett R, Inskipp C, Inskipp T, Baral HS. Birds of Nepal: Revised Edition: Bloomsbury Publishing; 2016.
- 67.
Baral R. Birds of Annapurna Conservation Area: National Trust for Nature Conservation (NTNC), Annapurna Conservation Area Project (ACAP); 2018.
- 68.
IUCN. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. In: Conservation IUfN, editor. 2019–3 ed2019.
- 69.
Trotter R, Logan M, Trotter R, Logan M. Informant consensus: a new approach for identifying potentially effective medicinal plants. 1986.
- 70. Heinrich M, Verpoorte R. Statistical tools in ethnopharmacology. J Ethnopharmacol. 2012;139(3):691–2. pmid:21982790
- 71. Amiguet VT, Arnason JT, Maquin P, Cal V, Vindas PS, Poveda L. A consensus ethnobotany of the Q’eqchi’Maya of southern Belize. Economic Botany. 2005;59(1):29–42.
- 72. González JA, Amich F, Postigo-Mota S, Vallejo JR. The use of wild vertebrates in contemporary Spanish ethnoveterinary medicine. Journal of ethnopharmacology. 2016;191:135–51. pmid:27288756
- 73. Friedman J, Yaniv Z, Dafni A, Palewitch D. A preliminary classification of the healing potential of medicinal plants, based on a rational analysis of an ethnopharmacological field survey among Bedouins in the Negev Desert, Israel. Journal of ethnopharmacology. 1986;16(2–3):275–87. pmid:3747566
- 74. Phillips O, Gentry AH, Reynel C, Wilkin P, Gálvez-Durand B C. Quantitative ethnobotany and Amazonian conservation. Conservation biology. 1994;8(1):225–48.
- 75.
Šmilauer P, Lepš J. Multivariate analysis of ecological data using CANOCO 5: Cambridge university press; 2014.
- 76.
terBraak C, Šmilauer P. Canoco 5, Windows release (5.12). Biometris, Plant Research International. The Netherlands and Czech Republic.; 2012.
- 77. Singh AG, Kumar A, Tewari DD. An ethnobotanical survey of medicinal plants used in Terai forest of western Nepal. Journal of ethnobiology and ethnomedicine. 2012;8(1):19. pmid:22591592
- 78. Ferreira FS, Brito SV, Almeida WDO, Alves RRN. Conservation of animals traded for medicinal purposes in Brazil: Can products derived from plants or domestic animals replace products of wild animals? Reg Environ Change. 2015. ).
- 79. Souto WMS, Barboza RRD, Rocha MSP, Alves RRN, Mourão JS. Animal-based medicines used in ethnoveterinary practices in the semi-arid region of Northeastern Brazil. Anais da Academia Brasileira de Ciências. 2012;84(3):669–78. pmid:22751649
- 80. Alves RRN. Fauna used in popular medicine in Northeast Brazil. Journal of ethnobiology and ethnomedicine. 2009;5(1):1. pmid:19128461
- 81. Alves RR. Fauna used in popular medicine in Northeast Brazil. Journal of ethnobiology and ethnomedicine. 2009;5(1):1. pmid:19128461
- 82. Kakati L, Doulo V. Indigenous knowledge system of zootherapeutic use by Chakhesang tribe of Nagaland, India. Journal of Human Ecology. 2002;13(6):419–23.
- 83. Poudel M, Singh NB. Medical Ethnobiology and Indigenous Knowledge System Found in Darai Ethnic Group of Chitwan, Nepal. Journal of Institute of Science and Technology. 2016;21(1):103–11.
- 84.
Wilson L. Fats and oils for optimum health: The Center for Development; 2015.
- 85. Loko LEY, Fagla SM, Orobiyi A, Glinma B, Toffa J, Koukoui O, et al. Traditional knowledge of invertebrates used for medicine and magical–religious purposes by traditional healers and indigenous populations in the Plateau Department, Republic of Benin. Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine. 2019;15(1):66. pmid:31842934
- 86. Mahawar MM, Jaroli DP. Traditional knowledge on zootherapeutic uses by the Saharia tribe of Rajasthan, India. J Ethnobiol Ethnomed. 2007;3:25. pmid:17547781
- 87. Chellappandian M, Mutheeswaran S, Pandikumar P, Duraipandiyan V, Ignacimuthu S. Quantitative ethnobotany of traditional Siddha medical practitioners from Radhapuram taluk of Tirunelveli District, Tamil Nadu, India. J Ethnopharmacol. 2012;143(2):540–7. Epub 2012/07/28. pmid:22835815
- 88. Gonzalez JA, Amich F, Postigo-Mota S, Vallejo JR. The use of wild vertebrates in contemporary Spanish ethnoveterinary medicine. J Ethnopharmacol. 2016;191:135–51. pmid:27288756
- 89.
Souto WMS, Barboza RRD, Mourao JdS, Alves RRN. Traditional knowledge of sertanejos about zootherapeutic practices used in ethnoveterinary medicine of NE Brazil. 2012.
- 90.
Gupta L, Silori C, Mistry N, Dixit A. Use of Animals and Animal products in traditional health care systems in District Kachchh, Gujarat. 2003.
- 91. Timilsina S, Singh N. Ethnobiology and Indigenous Knowledge about Medicinal Animals and Plants in the Balami Ethnic Group in Nepal. Journal of Institute of Science and Technology. 2014;19(2):79–85.
- 92. Legesse A, Adamu F, Alamirew K, Feyera T. A comparative study on the physicochemical parameters of milk of camel, cow and goat in Somali Regional State, Ethiopia. 2017.
- 93. Tuladhar-Douglas W. The use of bats as medicine among the Newars. Journal of Ethnobiology. 2008;28(1):69–91.
- 94. Kim H, Song MJ. Ethnozoological study of medicinal animals on Jeju Island, Korea. J Ethnopharmacol. 2013;146(1):75–82. pmid:23266277
- 95.
Alves RRN, Silva JS, da Silva Chaves L, Albuquerque UP. Ethnozoology: an overview and current perspectives. Ethnozoology: Elsevier; 2018. p. 513–21.
- 96. Van Vliet N, Moreno J, Gómez J, Zhou W, Fa JE, Golden C, et al. Bushmeat and human health: Assessing the Evidence in tropical and sub-tropical forests. Ethnobiology and Conservation. 2017.
- 97. Still J. Use of animal products in traditional Chinese medicine: environmental impact and health hazards. Complementary therapies in medicine. 2003;11(2):118–22. pmid:12801499
- 98. Friant S, Ayambem WA, Alobi AO, Ifebueme NM, Otukpa OM, Ogar DA, et al. Eating Bushmeat Improves Food Security in a Biodiversity and Infectious Disease “Hotspot”. Ecohealth. 2020:1–14.
- 99. Bengis R, Leighton F, Fischer J, Artois M, Morner T, Tate C. The role of wildlife in emerging and re-emerging zoonoses. Revue scientifique et technique-office international des epizooties. 2004;23(2):497–512. pmid:15702716
- 100. Barboza RR, Souto Wde M, Mourao Jda S. The use of zootherapeutics in folk veterinary medicine in the district of Cubati, Paraiba State, Brazil. J Ethnobiol Ethnomed. 2007;3:32. pmid:17825094
- 101. Ripple WJ, Wolf C, Newsome TM, Hoffmann M, Wirsing AJ, McCauley DJ. Extinction risk is most acute for the world’s largest and smallest vertebrates. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 2017;114(40):10678–83. pmid:28923917
- 102. Drumond MA, Guimaraes AQ, da Silva RH. The role of local knowledge and traditional extraction practices in the management of giant earthworms in Brazil. PLoS One. 2015;10(4):e0123913. pmid:25874618
- 103. Ghimire SK, Mckey D, Aumeeruddy-Thomas Y. Himalayan medicinal plant diversity in an ecologically complex high altitude anthropogenic landscape, Dolpo, Nepal. Environmental Conservation. 2006;33(2):128–40.
- 104. Shrestha N, Shrestha KK. Vulnerability assessment of high-valued medicinal plants in Langtang National Park, Central Nepal. Biodiversity. 2012;13(1):24–36.
- 105.
Manandhar NP. Plants and people of Nepal: Timber press; 2002.
- 106. Farooq A, Amjad MS, Ahmad K, Altaf M, Umair M, Abbasi AM. Ethnomedicinal knowledge of the rural communities of Dhirkot, Azad Jammu and Kashmir, Pakistan. Journal of ethnobiology and ethnomedicine. 2019;15(1):45. pmid:31470868
- 107. Umair M, Altaf M, Abbasi AM. An ethnobotanical survey of indigenous medicinal plants in Hafizabad district, Punjab-Pakistan. PLoS One. 2017;12(6):e0177912. pmid:28574986
- 108. Kunwar RM, Acharya RP, Chowdhary CL, Bussmann RW. Medicinal plant dynamics in indigenous medicines in farwest Nepal. Journal of ethnopharmacology. 2015;163:210–9. pmid:25655999
- 109.
Joshi KK, Joshi SD. Genetic heritage of medicinal and aromatic plants of Nepal Himalayas: Buddha Academic Publishers; 2001.