Ethnobotanical knowledge of wild edible plants for empowering food and nutritional security in the Garo Hills, India

Abstract

Background

Wild edible plants (WEPs), which were once integral to the food, nutrition, and cultural resilience of indigenous communities, are now increasingly marginalized and understudied. This study documented their diversity, traditional knowledge, and conservation priorities in the Garo Hills, Meghalaya, India.

Methods

Ethnobotanical surveys were conducted from October 2022 to June 2025 across 42 villages in the Garo Hills, Meghalaya. Data from 126 informants were collected using purposive and snowball sampling through semi-structured interviews, free listing, focus group discussions, and market surveys. Ethnobotanical indices (RFC, CI, RI, ICF), four-cell analysis, and IUCN assessments were applied to evaluate cultural importance, use diversity, and conservation status.

Results

Study documented 145 WEPs (105 genera, 58 families). Fruits (67 spp.) were the most consumed part (67 species), followed by shoots and leaves, with trees (57 spp.) constituting the common growth habit, followed by shrubs (30), herbs (28), and vines (23). Knowledge transmission was predominantly vertical, with women over 40 and elders over 60 years identified as key custodians. WEPs were utilized in seven major food categories, encompassing 121 traditional recipes and 30 value-added products, primarily including pickles, wines, and chips, produced by local enterprises. Ethnobotanical indices highlighted Bamboo spp. and Artocarpus heterophyllus as culturally important species, with high consensus for seasoning, snacks, and vegetables. Four-cell analysis (FCA) classified 48 species as rare (small area, small population), and the IUCN assessment listed five as Vulnerable and two as Near Threatened, with 55 Not Evaluated species needing urgent assessment.

Conclusions

Integrating value addition, community-led conservation, and policy support can strengthen WEPs role in climate-resilient agriculture, biodiversity conservation, and rural livelihoods. Overall, this study highlights the significance of strategic promotion, commercialization, and protection of WEPs as a means to protect the rich biocultural heritage and improve food and nutrition security at the regional and global scale.

Introduction

India is home to around 450 indigenous tribes; North-eastern India alone holds 240 distinct tribes, making it one of the most culturally diverse regions globally [1, 2]. Among North Eastern India, Meghalaya is the homeland of three distinct mountainous regions: Garo, Khasi, and Jaintia Hills in the west, central, and east, respectively [3, 4]. Each hill is inhabited by the respective tribes along with smaller groups like Hajong, Koch, Dalu, Rabha, and Boro [5]. The Garo Hills, located in the Indo-Myanmar hotspot, span between latitudes 25°09’–26°09’ N and longitudes 89°49’–91°21’ E [6]. This region is highly species-rich with significant endemism [7]. The altitude ranges 100 to 1,418 m above sea level, with Nokrek as the highest point within the Nokrek Biosphere Reserve, known for the Citrus Gene Sanctuary and as a centre of origin for Citrus spp [2, 4].

The Garo tribe is the second-largest indigenous tribe in Meghalaya; they often call themselves A’chik Mande (meaning “hill people”), speak the Garo language, and the majority (90%) of them follow Christianity. They share a deep connection with their pristine environment, which is reflected in their indigenous animist belief systems (Songsarek’s) [8]. They see nature as a living and sacred entity intricately linked to their cultural identity and sustenance. Hence, their rituals and activities are connected with farming cycles, forest use, and community well-being. They also possess rich ethno-biological knowledge on the uses of wild edible plants (WEPs) used for consumption and curing various ailments [9, 10]. The WEPs are harvested from various natural habitats and serve as important sources of food, fodder, and other resources [11]. They played a historical role in shaping human diets and traditional healing practices [11, 12].

In the climate change era, the global food basket has narrowed due to overdependence on a few staple food crops and limited animal breeds, contributing to malnutrition and hidden hunger [13] and threatening food security [14]. Therefore, agriculture must transform to diverse, nutrient-dense, sustainable, and locally adopted systems [15]. Diversifying agriculture by including WEPs, especially underutilized fruits and vegetables, can boost dietary diversity, improve nutrition, contribute to Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), particularly SDG 2 (Zero Hunger) and SDG 15 (Life on Land) [15, 16], and provide ecological and livelihood benefits [17]. Many WEPs grow on marginal soils, withstand environmental stresses, and integrate well into smallholder crop production systems [14].

However, the remarkable biodiversity of WEPs is under severe threat from extensive forest fragmentation caused by shifting cultivation, overharvesting, loss of habitat, degradation, pollution, the spread of invasive species, and the escalating impacts of climate change. These pressures are accelerating the erosion of valuable plant germplasm [2, 4]. Traditional knowledge of WEPs often remains undocumented or difficult to access, primarily due to geographic isolation and language barriers.

It is essential to explore and document this traditional knowledge to better understand the special characteristics of WEP’s species and varieties in communities. Such efforts can support their improvement and further integration into local farming systems. Awareness can also promote conservation and cultivation of local species through initiatives like seed fairs, traditional food preparation competitions, and community-driven propagation efforts [18].

This study was undertaken with the expectation that the Garo Hills harbour a rich diversity of WEPs that play a significant role in local food and nutritional security. It further assumes that traditional knowledge related to these resources is unevenly distributed within the community, with elders and women acting as key custodians. Additionally, certain wild edible plant species are expected to exhibit high cultural importance and use consensus, while a substantial proportion of these culturally important species may face conservation threats or remain under-evaluated.

Therefore, efforts were made to document the region’s rich ecological heritage, abundant flora by employing modern ethnobotanical approaches, and explore the possibilities as well as the importance of conserving this biodiversity for future generations with the objectives: (1) to document the diversity and plant parts used of WEPs in the Garo Hills; (2) to record indigenous food-related knowledge and livelihood uses associated with these species; (3) to assess the cultural importance of key wild edible plants using ethnobotanical indices; and (4) to evaluate their conservation status and sustainable use potential.

Methods

Study area

This present study was carried out in 42 villages across 12 blocks in five districts of the Garo Hills, Meghalaya, India (8,167 km²; 36.40% of the state’s area), from October 2022 to June 2025 (Fig. 1). The region has a warm and humid subtropical monsoonal climate (average annual rainfall ~ 2,400 mm; temperatures 10–35 °C [6], acidic lateritic soils, and 70% of forest cover ranging from tropical deciduous to subtropical evergreen forests [3]. The majority area belongs to the community forest. The local population (~175/km²; literacy 67%) depends primarily on agriculture and forest resources [19]. Shifting cultivation with mixed farming is practiced, involving several species such as arecanut, cashew, rubber, pineapple, ginger, turmeric, cotton, and other vegetables, which helps in the management of diverse species to meet the food and other needs [2, 20].

Fig. 1.

Study area covering 42 study sites/villages across 12 blocks in five districts of the Garo Hills, Meghalaya

Data acquisition

Field studies were carried out from October 2022 to June 2025 to collect ethno botanical data from 42 villages (one market was selected from each village/ study site) using standard protocols [21, 22]. A total of 126 participants (41% male, 59% female; aged 18 to 82 years) participated in the interviews, including elderly persons, custodian farmers, and key informants of the communities (Plate 1 and Table 1). The informants were selected using purposive and snowball sampling techniques. The schedule of the interview was focused on the demographic profile of the informants, including gender, age, family size, and education level (Table 2). Initially, a free listing approach was used, and informants were asked the names of the wild/underutilized species they were collecting, and dependent. Later, other information such as vernacular names, place of availability, status of availability, use categories (culinary, medicinal, cultural, etc.), and associated traditional knowledge were collected.

Plate 1.

Glimpses of ethnobotanical fieldwork (a–i). Ethnobotanical fieldwork depicting local market surveys (a–f) and interviews with elders, custodian farmers, and key informants from the Garo community (g–i)

Table 1.

Study area and demographic information

Sl. no.	Study site/village	Block	District	Population	Number of families	Geographical location		No. of participants	No. of FGDs
						Latitude	Longitude
1	Williamnagar	Samanda	East Garo Hills	-	-	25.5322	90.5923	5	2
2	Rongrenggre Baiza					25.5414	90.5847	2
3	Kusimkolgre					25.5151	90.6003	4
4	Warima					25.5002	90.6050	3
5	Balsrigittim					25.8330	90.5810	3
6	Chiokgre			540	91	25.4956	90.6569	2
7	Rongjeng Songma	Dambo Rongjeng		680	101	25.6770	90.8613	2	1
8	Tengabari	Kharkutta	North Garo Hills	253	44	25.9044	90.5210	3	1
9	Resubelpara	Resubelpara		19,595	3491	25.8973	90.6085	2	1
10	Mendipathar			25,756	3491	25.8975	90.6088	6
11	Chichotcheng	Bajengdoba		673	69	25.8446	90.4760	3	1
12	Bajengdoba			501	83	25.9044	90.5210	4
13	Adokgre	Adokgre		338	55	25.9200	90.9111	3	1
14	Mahadeo	Rongara	South Garo Hills	241	62	25.2993	91.7397	2	1
15	Chokpot	Chokpot		1667	258	25.4083	90.4005	4	2
16	Silkigiri			-	-	25.2620	90.4779	3
17	Kakija					25.3342	90.4556	2
18	Rajarongat					25.3654	90.3425	2
19	Deku					25.3624	90.3423	3
20	Emangre	Baghmara		329	57	25.7199	90.1519	2	2
21	Sibbari			232	53	25.1987	90.5547	3
22	Betasing	Betasing	South West Garo Hills	72,103	13,881	25.5008	89.9850	2	2
23	Ampati			99,326	166	25.4615	89.9347	5
24	Kirupara	Zikzak		-	-	25.3952	90.0783	3	2
25	Chapahati					22.4043	88.4937	2
26	Dinangpara					25.4569	89.9136	2
27	Kalaicharpara					25.4649	89.8658	2
28	Dangsapara					25.4634	90.2443	2
29	Dimiligiri			74,602	15,112	25.3938	89.9037	3
30	Jonjonagiri			-	-	25.4548	89.9104	2
31	Wadanang	Tura Municipal	West Garo Hills	-	-	25.5260	90.2163	3	2
32	Balonggre					25.4777	90.1426	2
33	Akongre					25.5072	90.2209	2
34	Dakopgre			74,858	13,743	25.3103	90.7202	5
35	Dalu Dapgre	Dalu block		54,095	10,169	25.2216	90.2220	3	1
36	Darechikgre	Gambegre		76	12	25.4346	90.1466	4	2
37	Sangsangre			599	110	25.5141	90.2020	6
38	Kherapara	Dalu		265	37	25.3445	90.2156	2	1
39	Surunanggre			375	65	25.3674	90.2329	3
40	Sadolpara	Dadengre		742	150	25.6812	90.1773	6	2
41	Dokramgre			215	42	25.6808	90.1764	2
42	Demdema	Demdema		111	20	25.8376	90.0596	2	1

Table 2.

District wise socioeconomic and demographic information

Districts		East Garo Hills	North Garo Hills	South Garo Hills	South West Garo Hills	West Garo Hills	Total
Area (in sq km)		1,443	1,160	1,887	866	2,811	8,167
Population (in lakhs)		1.46	1.72	1.42	1.78	4.66	11.04
Number of study sites/villages		7	6	8	9	12	42 (100)
Regular informants		17	17	16	18	30	98 (77.77)
Key informants		4	4	5	5	10	28 (22.22)
Total number of informants		21	21	21	23	40	126 (100)
Gender	Female	13	11	14	12	24	74 (58.73)
	Male	8	10	7	11	16	52 (41.26)
Age (years)	< 20	1	0	1	1	2	5 (3.97)
	20–40	7	10	9	12	17	55 (43.65)
	40–60	6	5	5	6	10	32 (25.40)
	> 60	7	6	6	4	11	34 (26.98)
Family size	< 3	1	1	2	1	3	8 (6.35)
	3–6	14	12	12	17	28	83 (65.87)
	> 6	6	8	7	5	9	35 (27.78)
Educational status	Illiterate	4	3	5	2	5	19 (15.08)
	Primary education	3	0	3	1	6	11 (8.73)
	Secondary education	9	9	6	9	11	44 (34.92)
	Pre- University	2	5	3	4	6	20 (15.87)
	University	3	4	4	7	12	32 (25.40)
Number of FGDs		3	5	5	4	9	26 (100)

Taxonomic identification and documentation

The specimens were collected from the study site and identified with the assistance of local informants, a checklist of flora of Meghalaya [3], and scientists of the National Bureau of Plant Genetic Resources (NBPGR), New Delhi. Collected ethnobotanical data again confirmed via interviews with key informants, focus group discussions, and direct observation of the major markets. Focused Group Discussions (FGDs) and key informants’ interviews were stratified by gender to avoid bias and to assess an in-depth understanding of men and women farmers’ experiences. Qualitative information on current status threats was collected with the help of four-cell analysis (FCA) techniques with selected custodian farmers. The photographs of some WEPs of the Garo Hills taken during the study are also provided (Plates 2–4). The collected herbarium specimens were coded using a standardized format (e.g., CCS-MTTC-AM-001), indicating the institution, department, collector, and serial number, and these coded specimens were stored at the Multi-Technology Testing Centre and Vocational Training Centre, College of Community Science, Central Agricultural University, Tura, Meghalaya, India. The collected herbarium specimens will not undergo DNA barcoding or DNA profiling in the hosting herbarium. Scientific names were cross-verified using authoritative online databases, including the World Flora Online (https://www.worldfloraonline.org/) and Plants of the World Online (https://powo.science.kew.org/).

Plate 2.

Photograph of some WEPs of the Garo Hills taken during the study (a–y). (a) Chram (Artocarphus chaplasa ); (b) Monkey Jack (Artocarpus lacucha); (c) Jackfruit (Artocarpus heterophyllus); (d) Bael (Aegle marmelos); (e) Star fruit (Averrhoa carambola); (f) Burmese Grape (Baccaurea ramiflora); (g) White Bauhinia (Bauhinia variegata); (h) Bet (Calamus Spp.); (i) Karonda (Carissa carandas); (j) Coffee Plum (Flacourtia jangomas); k. Elephant Apple Dillenia indica; l. Indian Red Pear (Protium serratum); m. Mulberry (Morus alba); n. Bastard oleaster (Elaeagnus latifolia); o. Indian wild orange (Citrus indica); p. Indian olive (Elaeocarpus floribundus); q. Shiral (Grewia nervosa); r. Passion Fruit (Plassiflora edulis); s. Indian trumpet (Oroxylum indicum); t. Jamun (Syzygium cuminii); u. Pomelo (Citrus maxima ); v. Malay gooseberry (Phyllanthus acidus); w. Amla (Phyllanthus emblica); x. Assam citrus (Citrus spp.); y. Indian Sichuan (Zanthoxylum armatum)

Plate 4.

Photograph of some WEPs of the Garo Hills taken during the study (a-y). (a) Berry bamboo (Melocanna baccifera); (b) Jowa bamboo (Bambusa Pallida); (c) Tama bamboo (Dendrocalamus hamiltonii); (d) Alocasia (Alocasia indica); (e) Black stem elephant ear (Alocasia macrorrhizos); (f) Bamboo Inflorescence and shoot (Bamboo spp.); (g) Bekil, Spiny Lasia (Lasia spinosa); (h) Bengal clock vine (Thunbergia grandiflora); (i) False button (Spermacoce latifolia); (j) Culantro (Eryngium foetidum); k. Fagara oxyphyla (Zanthoxylum oxyphyllum); l. Fallax tauro (Colocasia fallax); m. Dhekia (Diplazium esculentum); n. Garlic chives (Allium chinense); o. White bauhinia leaves (Bauhinia variegata); p. Wild yam (Dioscorea spp.); q. Water hyacinth (Eichhornia crassipes); r. Wild banana (Musa spp.); s. Wild pepper (Piper sarmentosum); t. Sponge Gourd (Luffa aegyptiaca); u. Slender amaranth (Amaranthus viridis); v. Plantain (Musa acuminate); w. Alocasia (Alocasia spp.); x. Bamboo shoot brine (Bamboo spp.); y. Lemon basil (Ocimum basilicum).

Data analysis

To assess the influence of socio-demographic variables on WEPs knowledge, a correlation analysis was performed using Pearson’s correlation coefficient. Statistical significance was tested at p ≤ 0.05 (1-tailed), and the results were presented using a masked correlation heatmap displaying only significant associations. Principal Component Analysis (PCA) and Hierarchical Cluster Analysis (HCA) were carried out to observe similarities among districts in terms of diverse socio-economic and demographic variables. The data were standardized using Z-score transformation before multivariate analysis. PCA was conducted based on the correlation matrix, while HCA used Ward’s linkage method with Euclidean distance. The analyses were carried out using IBM SPSS Statistics v27.0. and Python with appropriate scientific libraries. Descriptive statistics were used to categorize WEPs by taxonomy, habit, plant parts used, seasonality use category, and IUCN status. Further, the diversity of WEPs use was assessed by calculating basic indices such as frequency of citation (FC), use reports (UR), and number of use categories (NUC). Based on these basic values, three indices, namely, relative frequency of citation (RFC), cultural importance index (CI), and relative index (RI), were recorded for the top 50 species. The details of the indices and formulas used are as follows.

Relative frequency citation

The relative frequency of citation (RFC) index is calculated by dividing the number of informants who cited the species (FC) by the total number of participants (N) [23].

Cultural importance index

Cultural Importance Index (CI) is interpreted as the sum of the proportions of informants who reported each specific use (UR) of a species in each use category. This additive index considers both the extent of use reflected by the number of informants citing each species and its versatility, indicated by the diversity of use categories. CI = Σ (UR/N) across use categories [23].

Relative importance index

The relative importance index (RI) is an ethnobotanical metric that combines both the diversity of uses and the popularity or frequency of citation of a plant in comparison to the most versatile species [12]. This index considers only the main use categories, excluding subcategories, and is calculated using the following formula.

RFCs (max) refer to the relative frequency of citation of a species in comparison to the highest citation recorded in the study. It is calculated by dividing the frequency of citation for a given species by the maximum citation frequency observed. Similarly, RNUs (max) represents the relative number of use categories in comparison to the maximum number recorded during the study. The index ranges from 0 to 1, where a value of 1 indicates the most versatile species within the community, used across multiple categories.

Informant consensus factor

The informant consensus factor (ICF) was calculated using the following equation [24] to understand the homogeneity of collected information about a plant in a particular category.

Nur is the total use reports for a specific use category, and Nt is the total number of species used in that category. ICF values are between 0 and 1, and a value close to one indicates higher consensus among the informants, and a value close to zero indicates minimal consensus for the share of information among the informants. To assess ICF, the uses of the recorded WEPs were classified into eleven different use categories.

Four-cell analysis and IUCN conservation status

A Four-Cell Analysis (FCA) was employed to classify species into abundance–distribution categories [25, 26]. The threat status of the recorded plants was assessed using the IUCN (International Union for Conservation of Nature) Red List database and the North-Eastern Himalayan (NEH) region database for prioritising the strategies for the protection and sustainable utilisation of these important resources [27].

Results

Socio-demographic determinants and transmission of WEPs knowledge

The study covered 126 individuals from 42 villages spread across five districts of Garo Hills, Meghalaya, involving 74 females (58.73%) and 52 males (41.27%), aged 18–82 years (Table 1). Most (43.65%) respondents were aged between 20 and 40 years. While 26.98% were above 60, whose insights were particularly valuable due to their rich experiential knowledge and long-term association with indigenous plant resources. The family size ranged from 2 to 10 members, with the majority (65.87%) in 4–6 members (Table 2). The educational background of respondents showed that 34.92% had secondary education, 25.40% had university-level education, 15.87% had pre-university education, and 15.08% had no formal education (Table 2).

The study revealed that varying levels of formal education had minimal effect on the in-depth knowledge of the respondents associated with the identification, use, cultivation, and conservation of WEPs. The study further revealed that the cultural traditions and knowledge associated with WEPs have been sustained and enriched through generations of community interaction. This intergenerational continuity is reflected in the mode of knowledge transmission, about 80% of participants over 60 years reported acquiring their knowledge from parents and grandparents, while more than 35% of younger respondents also acknowledged learning through this vertical transfer. Such transmission had contributed to a rich cultural legacy, supplemented to some extent by horizontal transmission, where knowledge is shared among individuals of the same generation. Although many participants affirmed that their ancestors actively collected and utilised WEPs, there was a noticeable decline in the number of individuals currently practising this tradition.

The correlation heatmap explains the strength and direction of associations among socio-demographic and informant-related variables (Fig. 2). Stronger correlations were observed among informant-related variables (regular, key, and total informants) and education categories, particularly illiteracy and secondary/pre-university education. Age groups and family size classes showed moderate intercorrelations, while variables such as area, population, and number of villages exhibited relatively weak correlations with other variables (Fig. 2).

Fig. 2.

Correlation heatmap showing statistically significant (p ≤ 0.05; 1-tailed) relationships among socio-demographic variables

To further understand the influence of socio-demographic variables on the structuring of WEPs knowledge, Principal Component Analysis (PCA) was performed on standardised socio-demographic and informant-related variables. Three principal components (PC) with eigenvalues more than one were retained, and Varimax rotation with Kaiser normalisation (factor loadings ≥ 0.50) was applied to improve interpretability (Table 3). The rotated solution revealed distinct and meaningful groupings of socio-demographic variables. The first rotated component (RC1) exhibited strong positive loadings for the total number of informants, key and regular informants, population size, number of villages, number of focus group discussions (FGDs), adult age groups (20–40 and 40–60 years), and higher levels of education (secondary, pre-university, and university). This component represents areas with a large population base, higher educational attainment, and an active and diverse informant pool, indicating strong community participation in ethnobotanical documentation.

Table 3.

Principal component analysis (PCA) and rotated component matrix of PCA for socio-demographic and informant-related variables

Principal component analysis				Rotated component matrix (Varimax with Kaiser Normalisation, factor loadings ≥ 0.50)
Variables	Principal component			Variables		Rotated component
	PC1	PC2	PC3			RC1	RC2	RC3
Total number of informants	0.996			Male in the total number of informants		0.941
Key informants	0.993			University-level education		0.901
Population	0.990			age 20 to 40 years		0.889
Regular informants	0.989			3 to 6-member family		0.874
Female among the total number of informants	0.982			Secondary education		0.846
Age 40 to 60 years	0.968			Regular informants		0.806	0.514
3 to 6-member family	0.959			Age 40 to 60 years		0.805	0.556
Number of FGDs	0.936			Population		0.794	0.500
University-level education	0.934			Total number of informants		0.790	0.548
Number of villages	0.908			Number of villages		0.777	0.581
Age 20 to 40 years	0.899			Key informants		0.740	0.616
< 3 in a family	0.895			Pre- University-level education		0.735		0.647
Male in the total number of informants	0.888			Number of FGDs		0.623	0.510	0.564
Age > 60 years	0.879			Illiterate			0.933
Area (in sq km)	0.869			Primary education			0.924
Primary education	0.833			Area (in sq km)			0.877
Age < 20 years	0.819		-0.519	< 3 in a family			0.809
Pre- University-level education	0.702	-0.500		Age < 20 years		0.568	0.782
Secondary education	0.650	-0.560		Female among the total number of informants		0.622	0.744
Illiterate	0.513	0.845		Age > 60 years			0.717
> 6-member family	0.676		0.710	> 6-member family				0.88

The second rotated component (RC2) showed a strong association with illiteracy, followed by primary education, female participation, younger (< 20 years) and older (> 60 years) age groups, smaller family sizes, and larger geographical areas. This component highlights variation related to educational attainment, demographic dependency, gender participation, and the spatial extent of the study area. The third rotated component (RC3) was mainly influenced by households with more than six members, representing the presence of extended family structures. This component reveals variation associated with household composition and family size.

Hierarchical Cluster Analysis (HCA) using Ward’s linkage method further supported the PCA results by grouping socio-demographic variables into distinct clusters based on similarity. The dendrogram classified three major clusters (Fig. 3). The first cluster contained population size, total number of informants, key and regular informants, number of villages, FGDs, adult age groups, and higher education levels, closely corresponding to RC1. The second cluster comprised illiteracy, primary education, female informants, dependent age groups (< 20 and > 60 years), and a larger geographic area, aligning with RC2. The third cluster involved mainly variables related to larger household size (> 6 members), reflecting RC3. The clustering pattern confirms the robustness of the PCA results and highlights clear socio-demographic structuring within the study area.

Fig. 3.

Dendrogram showing hierarchical cluster analysis of socio-demographic and informant-related variables using Ward’s linkage method

Taxonomic diversity of WEPs

In the present study, based on detailed information gathered from key informants and direct observations, a comprehensive inventory of 145 WEPs was compiled involving 105 genera across 58 families. A clear inter-district variation in WEP diversity was found across the Garo Hills region. The maximum number of WEP species was documented in South Garo Hills (122 species), followed by West Garo Hills (114 species) and East Garo Hills (105 species). Comparatively lower WEP diversity was observed in South-West Garo Hills (98 species) and North Garo Hills (93 species), indicating notable spatial differences in WEP distribution across the five districts. The detailed list of plant species, such as scientific name, common name, Garo name, family, edible parts, time of availability, life forms, growth habit, mode of utilization, food category, name of food items, place of collection, status of availability, IUCN status, and other uses, was presented in Table 4.

Table 4.

General account on reported WEP, significance, IUCN status, and references

Sl. no.	Scientific name	Voucher no.	Common name	Local name	Edible parts	Time of availability	Life forms	Habit	Mode of utilization or preparation	Food category	Name of the food item	Place of collection	Availability of the plant	Other uses	IUCN status
Acanthaceae
1	Thunbergia grandiflora Roxb.	CCS-MTTC–TM–005	Bengal clockvine	Kaku budu	Leaves	Throughout the year	Perennial	Climber	The tender leaves are added to pura (cooked with pounded rice) or kapa (Cooked with soda)	Vegetable	Tangsek pura with any meat	Forests	SA&LN (moderate)	-	NE
2	Phlogacanthus thyrsiflorus (Roxb.) Nees	CCS-MTTC–TM–078	Tita Bahak	Alot	Flower	December-January	Perennial	Shrub	Cooked with dry fish or simply stir-fried.	Vegetable	Alot na˙kam.	Forests	SA&LN (moderate)	Medicinal for Jaundice, Fever	NE
Apiaceae
3	Centella asiatica (L.) Urb.	CCS-MTTC–AM–072	Indian pennywort	Manamuni/ Mese na∙chil	Whole plant	Throughout the year	Perennial	Herb	Used as a vegetable, with its leaves commonly consumed after boiling.	Garnish	Manamuni rita	Rice field, Fallow land	SA&LN (moderate)	Medicinal (Blood pressure and UTI)	LC
4	Eryngium foetidum L.	CCS-MTTC–TM–083	Culantro	Samskal/Gandi mosola	Leaves	June-September	Annual	Herb	It is mostly added to chutney or curry as a garnish and eaten raw	Seasoning	Samskal chutney.	Home garden	LA&SN (abundant)	Medicinal	NE
Apocynaceae
5	Carissa carandas L.	CCS-MTTC–AM–075	Karonda	Karonda	Fruit	April-June	Annual	Shrub	Ripened fruits are eaten.	Eaten raw	Karonda chutney	Home garden	SA&SN (rare)	-	DD
6	Holarrhena pubescens Wall. ex G.Don	CCS-MTTC–AM–102	Conessi bark	Gol˙matra	Leaves	June-October	Perennial	Tree	The tender leaves are added to pura (a dish cooked with pounded rice) or kapa.	Vegetable	Tangsek pura with any meat	Forests	SA&LN (moderate)	Medicine for Fever	LC
Arecaceae
7	Calamus erectus Roxb.	CCS-MTTC–TM–011	Cane fruit/rattan	Sokmil	Fruit	February-March	Perennial	Tree	The fruits are eaten raw and also processed into pickles.	Eaten raw	Sokmil pickles	Forest	SA&LN (moderate)	-	VU
8	Calamus rotang L.	CCS-MTTC–TM–015	Rattan	Soka	Fruit	February-March	Perennial	Tree	The fruits are eaten raw and also processed into pickles.	Eaten raw	Soka pickles	Forest	SA&LN (moderate)	Furniture	VU
9	Phoenix dactylifera L.	CCS-MTTC–HK–143	Date palm	Kejur	Fruit	September-December	Perennial	Tree	Ripen fruits are eaten raw.	Eaten raw	-	Home garden, forest	SA&SN (rare)	-	LC
Araceae
10	Alocasia indica (Lour) Koch	CCS-MTTC–AM–082	Alocasia	Ta˙gong/ kimachu/kachchu	Root stock, corm,	December-January	Perennial	Shrub	Used to make curry by adding tamarind with dry fish.	Vegetable	Ta˙gong che˙eng Na˙kam.	Rice field, home garden	LA&LN (highly abundant)	Fodder	NE
11	Alocasia macrorrhizos (L.) G. Don	CCS-MTTC–TM–023	Black stem elephant ear	Manai	Corms, stems, leaves	December-January	Annual	Shrub	Stem and leaves stir fry; corms are used to cook curry.	Vegetable	1.Manai paji, 2. Manai pura	Home garden	LA&LN (highly abundant)	Fodder	NE
12	Amorphophallus paeoniifolius (Dennst.) Nicolson	CCS-MTTC–HK–142	Elephant foot Yam	Songrura/Songmru	Leaves, shoots, corm, and flower	March-May	Annual	Herb	Tender shoots are steamed with roselle and dry fish by putting hot ashes or charcoal on top after wrapping with banana leaves.	Vegetable	1. Songru na˙kam, 2. Songru paji. 3. Songru we˙tepa.	Forests	LA&SN (abundant)	-	LC
13	Caryota urens L.	CCS-MTTC–TM–036	Solitary Fishtail Palm	Chewa gach/ sawee	Fruit	March-May	Perennial	Tree	Fruits are eaten.	Eaten raw		Home garden	SA&SN (rare)	-	LC
14	Colocasia esculenta (L.) Schott	CCS-MTTC–HK–144	Colocasia	Ta’ring	Corms, flower	December-January	Annual	Shrub	Used as vegetable mostly cooked with pork or dry fish.	Vegetable	1.Ta˙a wak, 2. Ta˙a Na˙kam.	Home garden	SA&LN (moderate)	-	LC
15	Colocasia fallax Schott	CCS-MTTC–TM–042	Fallax tauro	Chi˙gi/matchirongbang	Stems, leaves	December-January	Annual	Shrub	Stems and leaves are cooked with dry fish.	vegetable	Chigi nakam	Home garden	SA&LN (moderate)	-	LC
16	Eichhornia crassipes (Mart.) Solms	CCS-MTTC–TM–026	Water hyacinth	Gachli	Stalks	June-September	Annual	Shrub	Cooked with nakam (dry fish) and stir fry	Vegetable	1. Gachile na˙kam 2. Gachile paji	Rice field	SA&LN (moderate)	-	NE
17	Lasia spinosa L. Thwaites	CCS-MTTC–AM–106	Bekil, Spiny Lasia	Chongibiret	Stem, stalks	March-May	Annual	Herb	It is cooked along with dry fish by adding soda.	Vegetable, garnish	Chonggi na˙kam.	Forests	SA&SN (rare)	-	LC
Amaranthaceae
18	Amaranthus spinosus L.	CCS-MTTC–TM–018	Thorny amaranth	Chandili	Leaves	March-June	Annual	Shrub	Stir-fry with potatoes, cooked by putting hot charcoal on top after wrapping with banana leaves, pakoras are made from the leaves.	Vegetable	1.Denga paji, 2. Denga we˙tepa, 3. Denga pakora.	Home garden	SA&LN (moderate)	-	LC
19	Amaranthus viridis L.	CCS-MTTC–TM–016	Slender amaranth	Dengasak									SA&LN (moderate)		LC
Amaryllidaceae
20	Allium chinense G.Don	CCS-MTTC–AM–113	Garlic chives	Rasin chisik	Whole plant	September-January	Annual	Herb	Mostly used to make chutney or with fish and meat kapa.	Vegetable, garnish	1. Rasin chisik na˙kam, 2. Rasin chisik kapa.	Home garden	SA&LN (moderate)	Medicinal	LC
Anacardiaceae
21	Rhus chinensis Mill.	CCS-MTTC–TM–004	Chinese sumac	Kitma	Fruit	October	Perennial	Shrub	Consumed raw or pickled with salt and chilli. The fruits are used in curries for their sour flavor.	Eaten raw	Kitma Pickles	Forest	SA&SN (rare)	-	LC
22	Spondias pinnata (L.f.) Kurz	CCS-MTTC–HK–142	Hog plum	Ambaletong	Fruit	September-October	Perennial	Tree	Fruits are eaten raw and processed into pickle.	Eaten raw		Forest / Fallow land	SA&SN (rare)	-	LC
Araliaceae
23	Trevesia palmata (Roxb. ex Lindl.) Vis.	CCS-MTTC–HK–145	Snowflake tree	Chinatong	Flower bud	February-April	Perennial	Shrub	Flower buds are cooked in Bamboo called Brenga.	Vegetable	Chinatong brenga.	Forest	SA&SN (rare)	-	LC
Asteraceae
24	Enydra fluctuans Lour.	CCS-MTTC–TM–035	Fried Buffalo Spinach	Helencha/Helenshi saag	Leaves	June-August	Perennial	Creeper	Stir-fry with potato.	Vegetable	Helenshi paji.	Rice field, Near rivers	SA&LN (moderate)	-	LC
Athyriaceae
25	Diplazium esculentum (Retz.) Sw.	CCS-MTTC–AM–132	Dhekia	Me˙konchek/Gonginjak	Leaves	Throughout the year	Annual	Herb	Stir-fry and eaten as curry.	Vegetable	Me˙konchek/Gonginjak paji.	Near rivers	SA&LN (moderate)	-	LC
Bignoniaceae
26	Oroxylum indicum (L.) Kurz	CCS-MTTC–TM–012	Indian trumpet tree	Kering	Leaves	March-May	Perennial	Tree	Tender leaves are stir-fried or cooked by placing hot charcoal on top after wrapping them in banana leaves.	Vegetable	1. Kering paji, 2. Kering we˙tepa	Forests	SA&LN (moderate)	Medicinal (use for jaundice), Fencing	LC
Boraginaceae
27	Cordia dichotoma G.Forst.	CCS-MTTC–AM–138	Indian cherry		Fruit	May-July	Perennial	Tree	Fruits are eaten when they are ripe, and unripe fruits are used for pickling.	Eaten raw		Forest	SA&SN (rare)	-	LC
Brassicaceae
28	Eruca sativa Mill.	CCS-MTTC–TM–067	Arugula	Garu/Me˙jak	Leaves	September-January	Annual	Herb	Eaten boiled, steam or with meat and rice powder.	Vegetable	1. Garu pura.	Home garden	SA&LN (moderate)	-	LC
Burseraceae
29	Protium serratum (Wall. ex Collebr.) Engl.	CCS-MTTC–HK–141	Indian red pear	Te∙kring	Fruit	August-September	Perennial	Tree	Fruits eaten raw and processed into pickles.	Eaten raw	1. Te∙kring Pickle	Forests	SA&SN (rare)	Construction, fodder, agricultural tools	NE
Caesalpinaceae
30	Bauhinia variegata L.	CCS-MTTC–TM–002	White bauhinia	Me˙gong	Tender shoots and pods	March-April	Perennial	Tree	Tender leaves, flowers, and young pods are used as vegetables	Vegetable	(1) Me˙gong Paji, (2) Me˙gong rita,	Forests	LA&LN (highly abundant)	Construction, fodder, firewood and fencing	LC
Clusiaceae
31	Garcinia dulcis (Roxb.) Kurz	CCS-MTTC–TM–045	Mundu	Dengga doti	Fruit	June-July	Annual	Tree	Ripen fruits are eaten raw	Eaten raw	-	Forests	SA&SN (rare)	Construction	LC
32	Garcinia cowa Roxb. ex Choisy	CCS-MTTC–HK–038	Kuji thekera	Te˙kra	Fruit	June-July	Annual	Tree	Eaten raw when it is ripened.	Eaten raw		Forests	SA&SN (rare)	-	LC
Combretaceae
33	Terminalia bellirica (Gaertn.) Roxb.	CCS-MTTC–TM–008	Belleric myrobalan	Chirori	Fruit	December-January	Perennial	Tree	Fruits eaten raw.	Eaten raw		Forests, fallow land	SA&LN (moderate)	Firewood, Medicinal, Furniture	LC
Convolvulaceae
34	Ipomoea aquatica Forssk.	CCS-MTTC–AM–140	Water spinach	Kumli saag	leaves, shoots	Throughout the year	Perennial	Herb	Eaten stir-fry	Vegetable	1. Kumli saag paji.	Rice field	SA&SN (rare)	-	LC
Crypteroniaceae
35	Crypteronia paniculata Blume	CCS-MTTC–TM–105	Panicled crypteronia	Matchu gingsep	Fruit	July-August	Perennial	Tree	Ripe fruits eaten raw.	Eaten raw	-	Forests	SA&LN (moderate)	Firewood	LC
Cucurbitaceae
36	Cucurbita moschata Duchesne	CCS-MTTC–TM–001	Butternut squash		Fruit	August - October	Annual	Vine	Leaves cooked with fresh bamboo shoot, dry fish, or pork by adding soda.	Eaten raw, Vegetable	1. na˙kam or pork. 2. pura	Home garden, Fallow land	LA&LN (highly abundant)	Food wrapping	LC
37	Cucumis melo var. agrestis	CCS-MTTC–TM–095	Wild musk melon	Te∙e	Fruit, leaves	June-September	Annual	Creeper	Fruits are eaten raw or cooked with fresh bamboo shoots, dry fish, or pork.	Eaten raw, Vegetable	1. Me˙a te˙e na˙kam, 2. Te˙e bi.jak pura	Forests	SA&LN (moderate)	-	NE
38	Lagenaria siceraria (Molina) Standl.	CCS-MTTC–HK–039	Bottle gourd	Lau	Fruit Water hyacinth	November- February	Annual	Vine	Fruits are cooked	Vegetable	1. Lau na.kam 2. Lau curry	Home garden	SA&LN (moderate)	-	NE
39	Luffa aegyptiaca Mill.	CCS-MTTC–TM–088	Sponge Gourd	Sawil	Fruit	June-September	Annual	Vine	Cooked with dryfish or fry.	Vegetable	1. Sawil na˙kam, 2. Sawil paji.	Home garden	LA&LN (highly abundant)	-	NE
40	Momordica dioica Roxb. ex Willd.	CCS-MTTC–AM–108	Spiny gourd	Gambilori	Fruit	June-September	Annual	Climber	Boiled, stir-fry, cooked with Dry fish by adding soda.	Vegetable	(1) Gambilori paji, (2) Gambilori na.kam	Home Garden	SA&LN (moderate)	-	NE
41	Momordica subangulata Blume	CCS-MTTC–TM–093	Wild bitter gourd	Apolka	Fruit	March-October	Annual	Climber	It is mostly cooked as soda-based dish with dry fish, fish, pork, and any other meat.	Vegetable	1.Apolka na˙kam, 2. Apolka na˙tok, 3. Apolka wak.	Home garden	SA&LN (moderate)	Medicinal	NE
Dilleniaceae
42	Dillenia indica L.	CCS-MTTC–HK–080	Elephant apple	Te˙du	Fruit	July-August	Annual	Tree	Fruits are eaten raw with salt and chilli.	Eaten raw		Forest	SA&SN (rare)	-	LC
43	Dillenia scabrella Roxb.	CCS-MTTC–TM–096	Panilewa	Agatchi-badura	Bark and Flower bud	March-May	Perennial	Tree	Fruits are used to cook with fish or any other meat and Pickles also prepared	Vegetable	1. Agatchi na˙tok, 2. Agatchi achar.	Forests	SA&LN (moderate)	Medicinal Fever, skin infection, Construction	LC
Dioscoreaceae
44	Dioscorea alata L.	CCS-MTTC–TM–055	Water yam or greater yam	Tajong	Tuber	October-November	Perennial	Climber	Tubers are simply boiled and eaten with tea	Snacks	1. Tajong rita	Forests	LA&SN (abundant)	-	NE
45	Dioscorea bulbifera L.	CCS-MTTC–HK–077	Air yam	Ta˙turak	Aerial axillary bulbils	October-November	Perennial	Climber	Tubers are simply boiled and eat with tea	Snacks	1. Ta˙turak rita	Forests	SA&SN (rare)	-	NE
46	Dioscorea pentaphylla L.	CCS-MTTC–TM–054	Five leaf yam	Steng	Tubers	December-January	Annual	Climber	Tubers are simply boiled.	Vegetable	1. Steng rita.	Forests	SA&LN (moderate)	-	LC
47	Dioscorea oppositifolia L.	CCS-MTTC–HK–048	Chinese yam	Ta˙narot. Ta˙bisa	Tubers	October-November	Perennial	Climber	Tubers are simply boiled and eat with tea. Cooked along with meat or fish.	Snacks Vegetable	1. Ta˙bisa rita 2. Ta˙bisa na˙tok	Forests	SA&LN (moderate)	-	LC
48	Dioscorea pubera Blume	CCS-MTTC–AM–110	Yam	Ta˙ja	Tubers	October-November	Perennial	Climber	Tubers are simply boiled and eaten with tea	Snacks	1. Ta˙ja rita	Forests	LA&SN (abundant)	-	NE
48	Dioscorea villosa L.	CCS-MTTC–TM–079	Wild yam	Ta˙gitchak	Tubers	February-March	Perennial	Climber	Tubers are simply boiled and eaten with tea	Snacks	1. Ta˙gitchak rita	Forests	SA&LN (moderate)	-	LC
Elaeagnaceae
50	Elaeagnus latifolia L.	CCS-MTTC–TM–047	Oleaster	Sokkua	Fruit	June-September	Perennial	Shrub	Fruits are eaten raw.	Eaten raw	-	Fallow land, Home garden	SA&SN (rare)	-	NE
Elaeocarpaceae
51	Elaeocarpus floribundus Blume	CCS-MTTC–TM–049	Indian olive	Jolpai	Fruit	September-October	Perennial	Tree	Fruits can be eaten raw and used for making pickle.	Eaten raw	Jolpai Pickles	Home garden	SA&LN (moderate)	-	LC
Fabaceae
52	Clitoria ternatea L.	CCS-MTTC–HK–060	Aparajita	Butterfly pea	Flowers	Throughout the year	Perennial	Creeper	Flowers used in coloring rice	Garnish	-	Home garden, forests	LA&SN (abundant)	-	NE
53	Lablab purpureus (L.) Sweet	CCS-MTTC–HK–099	Dolichos bean	Nakap	Pods, seeds	December-January	Perennial	Climber	Used as vegetable and usually cooked with dry fish.	Vegetable	1. Nakap/ genasi na˙kam.	Home garden	LA&LN (highly abundant)	Fodder Medicinal for ear infection	NE
54	Parkia timoriana (DC.) Merr.	CCS-MTTC–TM–019	Tree Bean/Yongchak	-	Fruits	January-March	Perennial	Tree	Fruits used as Chetney	Vegetable	1. Yongchak chutney	Forests, Home garden	SA&SN (rare)	-	LC
55	Tamarindus indica L.	CCS-MTTC–AM–27	Tamarind	Che˙eng	Fruit	October-March	Perennial	Tree	Fruits are eaten with salt, drinks and pickles can be made from ripe fruits, cooked with alocasia.	Eaten raw, Vegetable	1. Ta˙gong che˙eng Na˙kam.	Home garden, forest	LA&SN (abundant)	-	LC
56	Saraca asoca (Roxb.) wild	CCS-MTTC–TM–021	Ashoka tree	Balka/ Kim bol	Flower	June-September	Perennial	Tree	Cooked with tomato and Fish.	Vegetable	1. Balka na˙tok.	Forests	LA&SN (abundant)	-	VU
57	Vigna Umbellata (Thunb.) Ohwi & H. Ohashi	CCS-MTTC–HK–118	Rice bean	Bil˙ik	Pods, seeds	June-September	Annual	Creeper	Seeds are eaten boiled and pods are used as vegetables.	Vegetable	1. Bil˙ik rita.	Home garden	LA&SN (abundant)	Fodder	NE
Flacourtiaceae
58	Flacourtia jangomas (Lour.) Raeusch.	CCS-MTTC–TM–028	Indian coffee plum/Sour cherry	Ponial bite/ Darechik	Fruit	March-May	Perennial	Shrub	Ripe fruits eaten raw.	Eaten raw	-	Forests	SA&SN (rare)	Medicinal, Construction	NE
Gesneriaceae
59	Rhynchotechum ellipticum (Wall. ex Dietrich) A. DC.	CCS-MTTC–AM–030	Ja-Kharia	Me˙bitchi	Leaves	Throughout the year	Perennial	Shrub	Boiled or added with dal. cooked with pounded rice by adding meat.	Vegetable	1. Me˙bitchi rita, 2. Me˙bitchi pura.	Forests	SA&LN (moderate)	-	DD
Lamiaceae
60	Cheilocostus speciosus (J.König) C.D.Specht	CCS-MTTC–AM–032	Blue Fountain bush	Agonjulai/ Matchok grong	Flower	Throughout the year	Perennial	Shrub	Cooked with dry fish by putting hot ashes and charcoal on top after wrapping with banana leaves.	Vegetable	1. Agonjolai na˙kam, 2. Agonjolai we˙tepa.	Forests	SA&LN (moderate)	Medicinal (massaged for diabetic)	LC
61	Leucas aspera (Willd.) Link	CCS-MTTC–TM–070	Thumba	Dimikku	Stems and leaves	June-September	Annual	Herb	leaves are used to fry with potato.	Vegetable	1. Alu dimikku paji.	forests, home garden, Fallow land	SA&SN (rare)	-	NE
62	Ocimum basilicum var. citriodorum	CCS-MTTC–TM–071	Lemon basil	Panet	Leaves	Throughout the year	Annual	Herb	Leaves are cooked by putting hot ashes and charcoal on top after wrapping with banana leaves.	Vegetable	1. Panet Wetepa, 2. Panet Chutney	Forests, fallow land	SA&LN (moderate)	Medicinal (use for cold and cough)	NE
63	Premna serratifolia L.	CCS-MTTC–HK–100	Buas-Buas	Do˙kime	Leaves	Throughout the year	Perennial	Shrub	Tender leaves are cooked by putting hot ashes and charcoal on top after wrapping it with banana leaves.	Vegetable	1. Do˙kime we˙tepa/we˙gopa	Forests	SA&SN (rare)	Medicinal for Chickens	LC
Lauraceae
64	Litsea cubeba (Lour.) Pers.	CCS-MTTC–TM–022	Mountain pepper/ May chang	-	Leaves, bark, fruits	Throughout the year	Perennial	Tree	Bark, leaves, and fruits are cooked with rice/ meat.	Garnish		Forests	LA&LN (highly abundant)	-	LC
Malvaceae
65	Abelmoschus caillei (A.Chev.) Stevels	CCS-MTTC–HK–120	Okra	Aibika/Dorai	Fruit	June-August	Perennial	Shrub	Cooked with Roselle leave and dry-fish, Fish or any other meat or stir- fry.	Vegetable	(1) Dorai nakam, (2) Dorai na˙tok, 3. Dorai paji. 4. dorai rita	Home garden	LA&LN (highly abundant	-	NE
66	Corchous olitorius L.	CCS-MTTC–TM–061	Jute	Kosta bi˙jak/ Me˙ka	Leaves	June-September	Annual	Herb	Leaves are cooked with dry fish by putting hot charcoal on top after wrapping it with banana leaves.	Vegatable	1. Kosta na˙kam, 2. Kosta we˙tepa	Home garden	SA&LN (moderate)	-	NE
67	Grewia nervosa (Lour.) Panigrahi	CCS-MTTC–AM–051	Shiral	Bolchubret	Fruit	August-September	Perennial	Tree	Ripe fruits eaten raw	Eaten raw	-	Forests	LA&SN (abundant)	Construction, firewood, Fencing	LC
68	Hibiscus cannabinus L.	CCS-MTTC–AM–052	Mesta	kosta Gal˙da	Leaves, calyx	May-November	Annual	Shrub	Fresh leaves cooked with dry-fish, dried leaves are cooked with pounded rice powder by adding pork or (without soda). Pickles also prepared	Vegetable	1. Gal˙da na˙kam, 2. Gal˙da gisi pura. 3. Gal˙da wak	Home garden	SA&SN (rare)	Fibre	NE
69	Hibiscus sabdariffa L.	CCS-MTTC–TM–064	Roselle	Gal˙da									SA&LN (moderate)		NE
Menispermaceae
70	Haemotocarpus validus Bakh.f.ex Forman	CCS-MTTC–TM–013	Blood fruit	Te∙pattang	Fruit	December-January	Perennial	Climber	Ripe fruits eaten raw.	Eaten raw	-	Forests, Home garden	SA&SN (rare)	Medicinal Blood enhancer Wine	VU
Meliaceae
71	Aglaia edulis (Roxb.) Wall.	CCS-MTTC–AM–057	Langsat-lotung	-	Fruit	April-November	Perennial	Tree	Grayish green fruits are eaten- raw or cooked with very delicate and acidic flavour. The fruit can be dried.	Eaten raw	-	Forests	SA&SN (rare)	-	NT
Melastomataceae
72	Melastoma malabathricum L.	CCS-MTTC–HK–098	Malabar melastome	Kaku bite	Fruit	April-July	Perennial	Shrub	Ripen fruits are eaten raw.	Eaten raw	-	River bank, Fallow land	SA&LN (moderate)	Fuelwood	LC
Moraceae
73	Artocarphus chaplasa Roxb.	CCS-MTTC–TM–058	wild jack fruit	Chram	Fruit	July-August	Perennial	Tree	Ripe fruits are eaten raw.	Eaten raw	-	Home garden	SA&SN (rare)	Construction, Fodder	NE
74	Artocarpus lacucha Buch.-Ham	CCS-MTTC–AM–125	Monkey Jack	Arimu	Fruit	June-August	Perennial	Tree	Ripe fruits are eaten raw.	Eaten raw	-	Forest, Home garden	SA&SN (rare)	Timber	LC
75	Artocarpus heterophyllus Lam.	CCS-MTTC–TM–003	Jackfruit	Tebrong	Fruit	June-August	Perennial	Tree	Ripe fruits are eaten raw, while unripe ones are used as vegetables, chips, and pickles. The seeds are also consumed after boiling and are often added to curries.	Eaten raw	1. Tebrong Nakam 2. Tebrong paji 3. Tebrong bitchil 4. Tebrong chips 5. Tebrong achar	Forest, Home garden	LA&LN (highly abundant)	Timber	NE
76	Ficus auriculata Lour.	CCS-MTTC–HK–119	Roxburgh fig	Te˙bil/Prap	Fruit, Flower, tender leaves	Throughout the year	Perennial	Tree	Ripe fruits are eaten raw. The flower and tender leaves are cooked with Dry fish, cooked with pounded rice powder with meat (Without soda).	Eaten raw, Vegetable	1. Prap bibal na˙kam, 2. Prap bibal pura.	Forests	LA&SN (abundant)	Leaves are used to wrap Cooked rice	LC
77	Ficus hispida L. f.	CCS-MTTC–HK–121	Hairy fig	Sa˙kap	Leaves/Petioles	Throughout the year	Perennial	Shrub	The tender leaves are added to pura or kapa.	Vegetable	1. Sa˙kap pura 2. Sa˙kap kapa.	Forests	LA&SN (abundant)	Fodder and Fencing	LC
78	Ficus sycomorus L.	CCS-MTTC–AM–137	Sycamore fig	Te˙wek	Fruit	Throughout the year	Perennial	Tree	Eaten raw when it is ripe.	Eaten raw	-	Forests	LA&LN (highly abundant)	-	LC
79	Morus alba L.	CCS-MTTC–TM–006	Mulberry	Meskuri	Fruit, leaves	February-July	Perennial	Tree	Fruits are eaten raw, and leaves are cooked with pounded rice by adding meat. Leaves are also used for kapa.	Eaten raw, a vegetable	1. Meskuri Tangsek Pura, 2.Meskuri be.en kapa.	Home garden	LA&LN (highly abundant)	Fodder	LC
Moringaceae
80	Moringa oleifera Lam.	CCS-MTTC–TM–017	Drumstick	Sojona	Fruits, leaves	July-September	Perennial	Tree	Fruits and leaves are used as vegetable	Vegetable	1. Sojona dal, 2. Sojona bijak na.kam	Forests, Home garden	LA&SN (abundant)	Medicinal rich in Fe	LC
Musaceae
81	Musa acuminata Colla	CCS-MTTC–HK–062	Plantain	Matchok grong terik	Fruits, inner pseudo stems	Throughout the year	Perennial	Herb	Fruits are boiled or cooked with dry fish; the inner pseudo-stem and meat are cooked with pounded rice powder.	Eaten raw, Vegetable	1. Te˙rik rita, 2. Te˙rik na˙kam, 3.me˙bram/geda pura.	Forest, Home garden	LA&SN (abundant)	Food wrapping, traditional alkaline liquid, fodder, fibre	LC
82	Musa flaviflora Simmonds	CCS-MTTC–AM–069	Wild Banana	Fruits-te˙rik,/Sobok,	Inflorescence, stem, fruit	Throughout the year	Perennial	Herb	Inflorescences are cooked with tomato and dry fish; the Inner pseudo-stem is cooked with bamboo and pork by adding rice powder.	Eaten raw, vegetable, seasoning, snacks	1. Sobok baringbelati na˙kam or na˙tok 2. Me˙bram, do˙o brenga.	Forests	LA&SN (abundant)	Leaves are used to wrap rice and make traditional alkaline liquid, fodder, fibre	NE
Myricaceae
83	Myrica esculenta Buch.-Ham. ex D. Don	CCS-MTTC–TM–111	Bay berry	Bolmeseng	Fruit	April-July	Perennial	Shrub	Unripe fruit is sour and eaten with salt.	Eaten raw	-	Home garden	SA&SN (rare)	-	NE
Myrtaceae
84	Syzygium aqueum (Burm.f.) Alston	CCS-MTTC–AM–056	Water apple		Fruit	May-August	Perennial	Shrub	Fruits are eaten when it is ripe.	Eaten raw	-	Home garden, forest	SA&SN (rare)	-	LC
85	Syzygium cumini (L.) Skeels.	CCS-MTTC–TM–094	Jamun	Jam dal˙gipa/ Chembu	Fruit	February-March	Annual	Tree	Fruits are eaten when it is ripe. Wine also prepared	Eaten raw	-	Home garden, forest	LA&SN (abundant)	Medicinal Construction	LC
86	Syzygium diospyrifolium (Wall. ex Duthie) S.N.Mitra	CCS-MTTC–HK–117	Kelat Oil, Kelat Paya, Red Lip	Panchual	Seed	August-May	Perennial	Tree	The skin parts of mature fruits are peeled and eaten.	Eaten raw	-	Forests	SA&SN (rare)	-	LC
87	Syzygium jambos L. (Alston)	CCS-MTTC–AM–009	Rose apple	-	Fruit	August-May	Perennial	Tree	Fruits are eaten when it is ripe.	Eaten raw	-	Forests	SA&SN (rare)	-	LC
Onocleaceae
88	Matteuccia struthiopteris (L.) Tod.	CCS-MTTC–AM–084	Fiddlehead fern, Ostrich fern	Gonginjak	Tender shoots	June-September	Annual	Herb	Usually stir-fry, sometimes with potatoes.	Vegetable	1.Gongginjak paji.	Forests, near rivers, rice fields, Fallow land	SA&LN (moderate)	-	NE
Oxalidaceae
89	Averrhoa carambola L.	CCS-MTTC–TM–092	Star fruit	Amilenga	Fruit	April-June, October-December	Perennial	Tree	Fruits are eaten raw with salt, can be made into juice, and also used to cook with fish and any other meats.	Eaten raw, Vegetable	1. Amilenga Na˙tok	Home garden	SA&SN (rare)	Medicinal (used for jaundice)	DD
90	Oxalis corniculata L.	CCS-MTTC–AM–085	Creeping woodsorrel	-	Whole plant	March-May	Annual	Creeper	Raw	Garnish		Rice field	LA&SN (abundant)	-	LC
Passifloraceae
91	Passiflora edulis Sims	CCS-MTTC–HK–123	Passion fruit	Draka bite	Fruit	July-October	Perennial	Climber	The fresh drinks are made from fruit, and leaves are used to cook tangsek pura with any meat.	Drink, vegetable	1.Draka bijak tangsek pura	Home garden	SA&SN (rare)	Ornamental	NE
92	Passiflora nepalensis Wall.Tent.	CCS-MTTC–AM–087	Nepal Passion fruit	-	Fruit	July-October	Perennial	Climber	The fresh drinks are made from fruit, and leaves are used to cook tangsek pura with any meat.	Drink, vegetable	Tangsek pura.	Home garden	SA&SN (rare)	Ornamental	NE
93	Passiflora quadrangularis L.	CCS-MTTC–AM–115	Giant Granadilla	-	Fruit	July-October	Perennial	Climber	The fresh drinks are made from fruit, and leaves are used to cook tangsek pura.	Vegetable		Home garden	SA&SN (rare)	Ornamental	NE
Phyllanthaceae
94	Antidesma acidum Retz.	CCS-MTTC–HK–114	Sour currant	Arobak	Leaves, Fruit	March-June	Perennial	Tree	Ripe fruits are eaten raw and eaten along with pork.	Eaten raw,	-	Forests	SA&LN (moderate)	Medicinal for gastric	LC
95	Baccaureda ramiflora Lour.	CCS-MTTC–TM–089	Burmese grape	Gasampe	Fruit	June-July	Perennial	Tree	Ripe fruits are eaten raw.	Eaten raw	-	Forest	LA&LN (highly abundant	Constuction	LC
96	Emblica officinalis Gaertn.	CCS-MTTC–AM–103	Indian gooseberry	Ambare	Fruit	February-March	Perennial	Tree	Fruits are eaten raw or pickled. Candies are also prepared.	Eaten raw	1. Ambare achar 2. Ambare candy	Forest/Home gardens	SA&LN (moderate)	Medicinal (Gastric), Construction	LC
97	Phyllanthus acidus (L.) Skeels	CCS-MTTC–AM–101	Star gooseberry	Ambare raja	Fruit	February-March	Perennial	Tree	Fruits are eaten raw or pickled.	Eaten raw	-	Forest/Home gardens	SA&SN (rare)	-	LC
Piperaceae
98	Peperomia pellucida (L.) Kunth	CCS-MTTC–TM–104	Shiny bush	Stilchi	Stems and leaves	Throughout the year	Perennial	Herb	The tender leaves and stems are added to pura (a dish cooked with pounded rice).	Vegetable	1. Stilchi pura	Forests	LA&SN (abundant)	-	NE
99	Piper sarmentosum Roxb.	CCS-MTTC–AM–138	Wild pepper	Ka˙rika	Leaves	Throughout the year	Perennial	Herb	The tender leaves are cooked with rice powder and meat (Pork).	Vegetable	1. Ka˙rika wak pura.	Forests	SA&SN (rare)	-	NE
100	Piper thomsonii (C.DC.) Hook.f.	CCS-MTTC–TM–112	Auoni Pan/ Jangli Pan	Ashira	Leaves	Throughout the year	Perennial	Herb	Chewed raw.	Eaten raw	-	Forests	SA&SN (rare)	Substitute for betel leaf	NE
Poaceae
101	Bambusa Pallida Munro	CCS-MTTC–HK–109	Bamboo shoot	Me∙a wakanta	Tender shoots	June-October	Perennial	Tree	It is consumed fresh, fermented, dry, or pickled.	Vegetable	(1) Me˙a na˙kam, (2) Me˙a pura, (3) Me˙a kri, (4) Me˙a achar, 5. Me˙a te˙e Na˙kam	Forests	LA&LN (highly abundant	Firewood, Construction, Fodder, Agriculture tools	NE
102	Bambusa tulda Roxb.	CCS-MTTC–AM–141	Bamboo shoot	Me∙a watre	Tender shoots	June-October	Perennial	Tree	Cooked fresh shoots with dry fish or pounded rice and meat, fermented, dry, or pickled.	Vegetable		Forests	LA&LN (highly abundant)		NE
103	Coix lacryma-jobi L.	CCS-MTTC–AM–139	Jobs-tears	Me∙garu	Seeds	September- November	Annual	Grass	Used as grain	Grain	1. Me˙a pura	Home garden	SA&SN (rare)	Fodder	NE
104	Dendrocalamus giganteus Munro	CCS-MTTC–TM–097	Giant bamboo	Me∙a borua	Tender shoots	June-October	Perennial	Tree	Cooked along with meat, dry fish, pounded rice, pumpkin, local cucumber by adding soda.	Vegetable	(1) Me˙a na˙kam, (2) Me˙a pura, (3) Me˙a kri, (4) Me˙a achar, 5. Me˙a te˙e Na˙kam	Forests	LA&LN (highly abundant)	Firewood, Construction Fodder, Agriculture tools	LC
105	Dendrocalamus hamiltonii Gamble	CCS-MTTC–HK–046	Hamilton’s/Tama bamboo	Me˙a Wa˙nok	Tender shoots	June-August	Perennial	Tree		Vegetable		Forests	LA&LN (highly abundant)		NE
106	Melocanna baccifera (Roxb.) Kurz	CCS-MTTC–AM–140	Berry bamboo	Me˙a Wa˙tre	Tender shoots	June-September	Perennial	Tree		Vegetable		Forests	LA&LN (highly abundant)		NE
Polygonaceae
107	Fagopyrum dibotrys (D.Don) H.Hara	CCS-MTTC–HK–126	Perennial buckwheat	Sambodom bong	Shoots	March-June	Annual	Herb	It is used to prepare value-added products.	Garnish	-	Forest	LA&SN (abundant)	Medicine (swelling)	NE
108	Polygonum capitatum Buch.-Ham. ex D.Don	CCS-MTTC–AM–139	Pinkhead smartweed	Sambodom-bong	Twigs	Throughout the year	Perennial	Shrub	Cooked with potatoes as a vegetable.	Garnish	-	Forest, Fallow land	LA&SN (abundant)	-	NE
109	Polygonum chinensis R.Br.	CCS-MTTC–TM–090	Creeping smartweed	Me˙kri do.nok	Shoots	June-September	Annual	Herb	Cooked by adding dry fish, meat or fish and eaten as curry.	Vegetable	1. Me˙kri donok na˙kam, 2. Na˙tok	Forests, near the river, Fallow land	LA&SN (abundant)	-	LC
110	Rumex acetosa L.	CCS-MTTC–AM–107	Sorrel	Chukka	Stems and leaves	December-January	Perennial	Herb	It is simply boiled along with dry fish or fish and pork without adding soda.	Vegetable	1. Chukka Na˙kam, 2. Chuka wak or na˙tok.	Home garden	LA&LN (highly abundant	-	LC
Pteridaceae
111	Pteridium aquilinum (L.) Kuhn	CCS-MTTC–HK–044	Bracken fern	Shatri	Tender shoots	June-September	Annual	Herb	Usually stir-fry, sometimes with potatoes.	Vegetable	1. Shatri paji.	Near rivers	LA&SN (abundant)	-	LC
Rhamnaceae
112	Ziziphus jujube Mill.	CCS-MTTC–AM–073	Ber	Makbil teangki/ Makbil angkil	Fruit	June-September	Perennial	Tree	Red fruits are eaten raw	Eaten raw	-	Forests	SA&LN (moderate)	-	LC
113	Ziziphus mauritiana Lam.	CCS-MTTC–TM–124	Ber/ jujube	Angkil/kangkil	Fruit	December-January	Perennial	Tree	Ripe fruits are eaten raw, boiled with sugar and made into ice, and processed into pickles.	Eaten raw, drinks	1. Angkil drinks 2. Angkil candies 3. Angkil pickles	Forests/home garden	LA&LN (highly abundant	Firewood, Fencing	LC
114	Ziziphus rugosa Lam.	CCS-MTTC–AM–074	Wrinkled Jujube	Churna	Fruit	December- February	Perennial	Tree	Fruit is eaten.	Eaten raw	-	Forests	SA&LN (moderate)	Medicinal	LC
Rosaceae
115	Prunus napaulensis (Ser.) Steud.	CCS-MTTC–AM–081	Sohiong	Gakeil	Fruit	August-October	Perennial	Tree	Fruit is edible and used for making RTS, wine, jam, and squash.	Eaten raw	-	Home garden	SA&SN (rare)	-	NE
116	Prunus persica (L.) Batsch	CCS-MTTC–AM–037	Peach	Peas bol	Fruit	January-August	Perennial	Tree	Fruits are edible.	Eaten raw	-	Home garden	SA&LN (moderate)	-	NE
117	Rubus rugosus Sm.	CCS-MTTC–HK–040	Keriberry/ Giant bramble berry	Angke bitchi/ ti˙kisambak	Fruit	January-June	Perennial	Shrubs	Ripe fruits are eaten raw.	Eaten raw	-	Forest, Fallowland	SA&LN (moderate)	-	NE
Rubiaceae
118	Meyna spinosa Roxb. ex Link	CCS-MTTC–AM–014	Kotkora	Te∙chiking bite	Fruit	May-July	Perennial	Tree	Ripe fruits are eaten raw. Leaves are also cooked with rice flour.	Eaten raw	1.Te∙chiking bijak pura	Forests, Home garden	SA&LN (moderate)	-	LC
119	Paederia foetida L.	CCS-MTTC–TM–135	Skunk vine /Chinene fever vine	Pasim	Leaves	Throughout the year	Annual	Creeper	Leaves are mostly cooked with a pounded rice dish by adding any meat or dry fish, and used to make pakora.	Vegetable,	1. Pasim pura, 2. Pasim pakora.	Forests	LA&SN (abundant)	Medicinal (stomach ache), Fodder	NE
120	Spermacoce latifolia Aubl.	CCS-MTTC–HK–034	Winged false button weed	Samnokap/Samjil/Samdapil	Stems and leaves	Throughout the year	Perennial	Herb	Cooked with dry fish or meat	Vegetable	1. Samjil Kapa	Forests	LA&SN (abundant)	-	NE
Rutaceae
121	Aegle marmelos (L.) Correa.	CCS-MTTC–AM–020	Bael/ Wood apple	Selpri	Fruit	Throughout the year	Perennial	Tree	Fruits are eaten raw and also made into sorbet. Unripe fruits are consumed after boiling.	Eaten raw	1. Selpri rita	Home garden	SA&SN (rare)	Medicinal to reduce body heat.	NT
122	Citrus aurantifolia (Christm.) Swingle	CCS-MTTC–AM–010	Indian lime, Sour lime	Surenga	Fruit	August-February	Perennial	Tree	Fruits are eaten raw with salt and chilli, and are also used to prepare juice.	Eaten raw	-	Home garden, forests	SA&SN (rare)	-	NE
123	Citrus indica Tanaka	CCS-MTTC–AM–007	Indian wild orange	Me˙mang Jakskil	Fruit	Throughout the year	Perennial	Tree	Fruits are edible.	Eaten raw	-	Home garden	SA&SN (rare)	-	VU
124	Citrus jambhiri Lush	CCS-MTTC–TM–122	Rough lemon	Atol	Fruit	May-December	Perennial	Tree	Fruits are eaten raw with salt and chilli, and are also used to prepare juice.	Eaten raw	-	Home garden, forests	SA&LN (moderate)	-	NE
125	Citrus macroptera Montr	CCS-MTTC–AM–024	Melanesian papeda	Chambil	Fruit	August-October	Perennial	Tree	Fruits are eaten raw and added to pork curry for a sour taste. Pickled.	Eaten raw, Vegetable	1. Chambil achar 2. Chambil wak/other meat pura, 3. Chambil wak fry	Home garden	SA&LN (moderate)	Medicinal	LC
126	Citrus maxima (Burm.) Merril	CCS-MTTC–HK–086	Pomelo white/Pomelo red	Jambura Gipok/ Jambura Gitchak	Fruit	May-October	Perennial	Tree	Fruits are eaten raw with salt and chilli.	Eaten raw	-	Home garden, forests	LA&LN (highly abundant)	-	LC
127	Citrus medica L.	CCS-MTTC–HK–029	Citron	Te˙matchi	Fruit	May-October	Perennial	Tree	Fruits are eaten raw with salt and chilli.	Eaten raw	-	Home garden	SA&LN (moderate)	-	LC
128	Citrus pseudolimon Tanaka	CCS-MTTC–HK–091	Galgal, Khatta	Chinara	Fruit	May-October	Perennial	Tree	Fruits are eaten raw with salt and chilli.	Eaten raw	-	Home garden, forests	LA&SN (abundant)	-	NE
129	Murraya koenigii Spreng	CCS-MTTC–TM–065	Curry leaf tree	-	Leaves/Petioles	Throughout the year	Perennial	Tree	Used in a variety of dishes like pakora, chutney, and for garnishing	Garnish	-	Forests, home garden	SA&SN (rare)	-	LC
130	Zanthoxylum oxyphyllum Edgeworth	CCS-MTTC–HK–033	Fagara oxyphylla	Me˙cheng	Leaves, Seeds	Throughout the year	Perennial	Tree	Leaves are cooked with local eggplant and dry fish, and leaves are cooked with meat, especially with smoked pork.	Vegetable, eaten raw	1. Baring me˙cheng na˙kam, 2. Wak me˙cheng kapa.	Forests	LA&LN (highly abundant	-	LC
131	Zanthoxylum rhetsa (Roxb.) DC.	CCS-MTTC–HK–050	Indian prickly ash	Me˙cheng	Leaves	Throughout the year	Perennial	Tree	Leaves used to cook local eggplants	Vegetable	1. Baring me˙cheng na˙kam, 2.wak me˙cheng kapa.	Forests	LA&LN (highly abundant	-	LC
Sapindaceae
132	Dimocarpus longan Lour.	CCS-MTTC–HK–066	Longon	Samphal-bol	Fruit	July to August	Perennial	Tree	Fruits are eaten	Eaten raw	-	Forests	SA&SN (rare)	Medicinal	DD
Saururaceae
133	Houttuynia cordata Thunb	CCS-MTTC–TM–116	Chameleon plant	Matchaduri	Leaves/Petioles	Throughout the year	Perennial	Herb	Vegetable, eaten raw or as a garnish in chutney.	Garnish,	-	Home garden	SA&SN (rare)	-	LC
Scrophulariaceae
134	Scoparia dulcis L.	CCS-MTTC–HK–053	Sweet-broom weed	Samboldak	Leaves	Throughout the year	Annual	Herb	Leaves are used	Vegetable	-	Forests	LA&SN (abundant)	-	NE
Solanaceae
135	Capsicum frutecens L.	CCS-MTTC–HK–041	Tabasco pepper/bird’s-eye chilli	Jal˙ik meseki	Fruit	Throughout the year	Perennial	Herb	Fruits are used as spices.	Eaten raw, Vegetable	Jal˙ik meseki achar	Home garden, forest	LA&LN (highly abundant	-	LC
136	Physalis angulata L.	CCS-MTTC–HK–063	Angular cherry	Chi˙tapu	Fruit	October-June	Annual	Herb	Eaten raw when it is ripe.	Eaten raw	-	Forests	SA&SN (rare)	-	LC
137	Solanum aethiopicum L.	CCS-MTTC–TM–031	Bitter brinjal	Kimka baring	Fruit	Throughout the year	Annual	Shrub	Usually prepared with dry fish and soda and made into chutney.	Vegetable	1. Kimka baring na˙kam, 2. Kimka Baring Chutney.	Home garden	LA&SN (abundant)	-	NE
138	Solanum torvum Sw.	CCS-MTTC–HK–068	Brihati	Kimka mikdelong	Fruit	Throughout the year	Perennial	Shrub	Eaten simply boiled and mashed to make chutney, cooked by putting hot ashes and charcoal on top after wrapping.	Vegetable	1. Kimka chutney, 2. kimka we˙tepa.	Forest	SA&LN (moderate)	-	LC
139	Solanum violaceum R. Br.	CCS-MTTC–TM–133	Indian nightshade	Kimka	Fruit	Throughout the year	Perennial	Shrub	Boiled and mashed to make chutney or cooked with dry fish by putting hot charcoal on top after wrapping it.	Vegetable	1, kimka na˙kam, 2. Kimka chutney, 3. kimka we˙tepa.	Home garden	LA&SN (abundant)	Medicinal	LC
Urticaceae
140	Debregeasia longifolia (Burm.f.) Wedd.	CCS-MTTC–HK–043	Orange wild rhea	Bol taisim	Fruit	October-February	Perennial	Shrub	Ripe fruits are eaten raw.	Eaten raw	-		SA&LN (moderate)	Fiber	LC
141	Sarcochlamys pulcherrima (Roxb.) Gaud.	CCS-MTTC–HK–025	Dogal tree	Me˙chaki/Antumbari	Leaves	Throughout the year	Perennial	Shrub	Leaves are cooked with meat by putting hot ashes and charcoal on top after wrapping with banana leaves	Vegetable	1. Antamburi we˙tepa, 2.Antamburi kapa.	Near rivers	LA&SN (abundant)	-	LC
142	Urtica dioica L.	CCS-MTTC–TM–136	Stinging Nettles	Gilmat	Leaves	Throughout the year	Perennial	Herb	The ribs of the leaves are removed and cooked with any meat.	Vegetable	1. Gil˙mat matchu pura, 2. Gil˙mat wak pura	Forest	SA&SN (rare)	-	LC
Verbenaceae
143	Clerodendrum glandulosum Lindl.	CCS-MTTC–HK–137	East indian glory bower/Bhrangi	Donggam	Leaves	Throughout the year	Perennial	Tree	Leaves are added to the traditional local dish Pura and are also consumed after boiling.	Vegetable	1. Dongam pura with any meat. 2. Dongam bijak rita	Forests	SA&LN (moderate)	Medicinal (Blood pressure)	NE
144	Gmelina arborea Roxb.	CCS-MTTC–TM–134	Gamhar	Gambare	Flower	March-May	Perennial	Tree	Flowers are used as a vegetable with dry fish	Vegetable	1. Gambare bibal. na.kam	Near rivers	SA&SN (rare)	Construction, fodder	LC
Zingiberaceae
145	Costus spiralis (Jacq.) Roscoe	CCS-MTTC–HK–076	Spiral ginger	Gokgarek	Leaves	September-November	Perennial	Herb	Tender leaves are cooked with dry fish.	Vegetable	1. Gokgarek bijak na.kam.	Forests	SA&SN (rare)	-	LC

NE: not evaluated; DD: data deficient; LC: least concern; NT: near threatened; VU: vulnerable

Among the documented plant families, Rutaceae was the most dominant family represented by 11 species, followed by Araceae with eight species, Moraceae with seven species, and Dioscoreaceae with six species (Fig. 4). In contrast, 27 families were represented by a single species each (Fig. 4). At the genus level, Citrus showed the highest diversity with seven species, followed by Dioscorea with six species (Fig. 5).

Fig. 4.

Top Fifteen Families of WEPs

Fig. 5.

Top Fifteen Genera of WEPs

Plate 3.

Photograph of some WEPs of the Garo Hills taken during study (a-y). a. Bitter brinjal (Solanum aethiopicum); b.Brihati (Solanum torvum); c. Indian nightshade (Solanum violaceum); d. Watery rose apple (Syzygium aqueum); e. Mountain Apple (Syzygium jambos); f. Wax apple (Syzygium samarangense); g. Jamun spp. (Syzygium spp.); h. Black Myrobalan (Terminalia chebula); i. Tin koli (Ziziphus rugosa); j. Roxburgh fig (Ficus auriculata); k. Sycomorus fig (Ficus sycomorus); l. Wild musk melon (Cucumis melo var. agrestis); m. Spiny guard (Momordica dioica); n. Wild bitter gourd (Momordica subangulata); o. (Dillenia scabrella); o. Panilewa (Dillenia scabrella); p. Bird’s-eye chili (Capsicum frutescens); q. Blood fruit (Haematocarpus validus); r. Wild banana (Musa flaviflora); s. Parkia fruits (Parkia timoriana); t. Okra (Abelmoschus caillei); u. Indian pennywort (Centella asiatica); v. Skunk vine (Paederia foetida); w. Citrus fruit (Citrus spp.); x. Butternut squash (Cucurbita moschata); y. Bay berry (Myrica esculenta).

Growth habit, edible plant parts, and life forms of WEPs

The analysis of the collected data revealed that trees constituted the most prevalent growth habit, accounting for 57 species, followed by shrubs (30 species), herbs (28 species), climbers (15 species), creepers (8 species), grass (5 species), and palms (2 species) (Fig. 6). Fruits emerged as the most commonly consumed plant part, representing 67 species, followed by leaves (25), and shoots (11), while three species were used as whole plant (Fig. 7). Even multiple plant parts, typically two to three, were also used in combination during food preparation, showcasing the community’s in-depth understanding of plant utility and culinary versatility (Fig. 7). Concerning the life form of the recorded 145 WEPs, the majority (107 species) were perennials, while 36 species were annuals.

Fig. 6.

Growth habits of WEPs

Fig. 7.

Plant parts used

Food use categories, availability, and abundance of WEPs

The study showed that locals primarily utilize WEPs in their daily lives through seven distinct modes of consumption, reflecting their versatility in local cuisine (Fig. 8).

Fig. 8.

Modes of consumption of WEPs across seven food categories

Among these, vegetables formed the largest group, with 68 species traditionally cooked, fried, and incorporated into daily meals. This was followed by species that are typically eaten raw (54 species) in unripe, ripe, or dried forms, which highlights WEPs role in fresh diets and nutrition. Other categories included species used as garnishes (10 species), beverages (6 species), snacks (5 species), seasoning (1 species), and grain (1 species), indicating the broad culinary applications of these WEPs (Fig. 8).

Concerning the availability calendar of WEPs, 35 species were accessible throughout the year, making them sustainable as well as reliable contributors to food security (Fig. 9). Another 22 species were accessible for six months, while 88 species had a quarterly availability, highlighting the critical role of seasonal wild plants in local diets. Notably, 38 species were predominantly available from July to September, aligning with the monsoon season when forest vegetation is at its peak in richness and diversity. Additionally, 21 species were available during the winter months (January to March), 16 species during the pre-monsoon period (April to June), and 13 species during the post-monsoon months (October to December), reflecting the strong seasonal dependence of many WEPs (Fig. 9).

Fig. 9.

Availability Calendar of 144 WEPs

Concerning the place of availability and collection, the majority of the species (64) are growing wild in the forest of the immediate vicinity (Fig. 10). Home gardens also played a significant role, harbouring 37 species commonly cultivated or maintained near households. Additionally, four species were commonly found near river banks, while three species were linked with rice fields. Interestingly, 20 species were found in both forests and home gardens, suggesting ongoing domestication and their adaptability to both managed and wild habitats. The rest of the species were distributed over more than two habitats, reflecting the diverse ecological niches that support WEPs diversity in the region (Fig. 10).

Fig. 10.

Place of availability and collection of WEPs

Culinary diversity and livelihood opportunities from WEPs

The study also revealed that a rich diversity of 121 traditional food items is prepared using WEPs, reflecting their deep-rooted cultural and nutritional significance. These foods are traditionally prepared in various ways, often cooked with Pura (pounded rice), Kapa (an alkaline solution), stir-fried, or wrapped in banana leaves with dry fish, pork, or chicken, and cooked under hot ashes or charcoal (Table 4). Tubers are normally boiled and consumed with tea. Some of the most popular traditional foods prepared from WEPs include Ta˙gong che˙eng Na˙kam made from Alocasia spp., Apolka Na˙kam from Momordica subangulata, Galda Dorai Na˙kam using Abelmoschus caillei, Galda Na˙kam from Hibiscus sabdariffa, Mebram Do˙o Brenga prepared from Musa acuminata, and Me˙a Pura made using shoots of Bambusa spp. are unique to the region and form an essential part of the daily diet (Table 4). Beyond household consumption, WEPs are widely used in diverse processed forms, contributing to local markets and offering significant value-addition potential (Table 5).

Table 5.

Top-Thirty WEPs with Value-added products and local processing firms

Sl. no.	Scientific name	Value-added product	Product name	Price (₹) / quantity
1	A. heterophyllus Lam.	Pickle	Tebrong achar	150/ 250 g
		Wine	Tebrong wine	600/ 750 ml
		Chips	Tebrong chips	50/ 100 g
2	A. carambola L.	Candy	Amilenga chips	50/ 100 g
		Wine	Amilenga wine	600 / 750 ml
		Juice	Amilenga juice	50 / 100 g
3	B. ramiflora Lour.	Wine	Gasampe wine	600 / 750 ml
4	B. Pallida Munro	Pickle	Mea Achar	150/ 250 g
		Whole shoot brine	Meakri brine	180/ 250 g
		Chapped shoot brine	Mea brine	300/ 500 g
5	B. tulda Roxb.	Pickle	Mea Achar	150/250 g
		Whole shoot brine	Meakri brine	180/ 250 g
		Chapped shoot brine	Mea brine	300/ 500 g
6	C. frutescens L.	Pickle	Jal˙ik meseki achar	150/ 250 g
	C. frutescens L. and C. macroptera Montrouz	Bird’s eye chili and lemon mixed pickle	Jal˙ik meseki chambil achar	250/250 g
7	C. macroptera Montrouz	Pickle	Chambil achar	100/ 100 g
8	C. melo var. agrestis Naudin	Wine	Te∙e wine	650/750 ml
9	D. giganteus Munro	Pickle	Mea Achar	150/ 100 g
		Whole shoot brine	Meakri brine	180/ 250 g
		Chopped shoot brine	Mea brine	300/500 g
10	D. hamiltonii Nees & Arn. ex-Munro	Pickle	Mea Achar	150/ 100 g
		Whole shoot brine	Meakri brine	180/ 250 g
		Chopped shoot brine	Mea brine	300/500 g
11	D. scabrella (D.Don) Roxb. ex Wall.	Pickle	Agatchi-badura achar	100/100 g
12	E. floribundus Blume	Pickle	Jolpai achar	100/100 g
13	E. officinalis L.	Pickle	Ambare achar	100/100 g
		Candy	Ambare candy	300/500 g
14	H. validus Miers	Wine	Te∙pattang wine	600/750 ml
15	H. cannabinus L.	Pickle	Gal˙da achar	100/100 g
16	H. sabdariffa L.	Pickle	Gal˙da achar	100/100 g
17	M. baccifera (Roxb.) Kurz	Pickle	Mea Achar	150/ 100 g
		Whole shoot brine	Meakri brine	180/ 250 g
		Chopped shoot brine	Mea brine	300/500 g
18	M. alba L.	Wine	Meskuri wine	600/ 750 ml
19	M. acuminata Colla	Chips	terik chips	50/ 100 g
20	M. flaviflora N.W.Simmonds	Pickle	Sobok achar	100/ 100 g
21	M. esculenta Buch.-Ham. ex D.Don	Pickle	Bolmeseng achar	100 / 100 g
22	P. edulis Sims	Wine	Passion fruit wine	600/ 750 ml
		Juice	Juice	50 / 250 ml
23	P. nepalensis Wall.	Wine	Passion fruit wine	600/ 750 ml
		Juice	Juice	55 / 250 ml
24	P. acidus L.	Pickle	Ambare achar	100/ 200 g
		Wine	Ambare wine	600 / 750 ml
		Juice	Ambare juice	100 / 250 g
25	P. serratum (Wall. ex Colebr.) Engl.	Juice	Te∙kring juice	50 / 80 g
		Wine	Te∙kring wine	600 / 750 ml
		Pickle	Te∙kring achar	100 / 100 g
26	P. persica (L.) Batsch	Wine	Peach wine	700 / 750 ml
		Juice	Peach juice	50 / 200 ml
27	S. cumini (L.) Skeels	Wine	Jamun wine	600 / 750 ml
		Juice	Jamun Juice	40 / 200 ml
28	T. indica L.	Pickle	Che˙eng achar	70 / 100 g
29	Z. jujuba Mill.	Pickle	angkil achar, juice	70 / 100 g
30	Z. mauritiana Lam.	Pickle	angkil achar, juice	100 / 250 g

The above information is collected from various firms of Garo Hills of Meghalaya, such as Ama food products and wines, Linda organic products, Dakopgre, JBS food products, Daram Resu Mini enterprises, S & J home-made products, Boldamgre.

Pickles are the most common items, made from 20 species including Bambusa spp., Calamus erectus, Calamus rotang, Rhus chinensis, Spondias pinnata, and Dillenia scabrella (Plate 5). Bamboo shoots are preserved in brine for off-season use, enhancing food security and market availability. Other value-added products include chutneys made from Eryngium foetidum, Musa flaviflora, and Houttuynia cordata; wines from wild fruits such as Protium serratum, Haemotocarpus validus, Cucumis melo var. agrestis, Morus alba, Syzygium cumini, Averrhoa carambola, and Passiflora edulis; chips from Artocarpus heterophyllus; and candies from Emblica officinalis (Plate 5 and Table 5). These traditional and marketable uses enrich local food systems, preserve culinary heritage, and present significant opportunities for livelihood diversification. Ama food product, Linda organic products, Dakopgre, JBS food product, Daram Resu and Mini enterprise, Ama wines, S & J home-made product Boldamgre are some of the businesses involved in the production of value-added products of WEPs. By promoting sustainable harvesting, processing, and marketing, especially through women-led self-help groups (SHGs) and tribal cooperatives, these underutilized resources can support household income, nutrition security, and rural economic resilience.

Plate 5.

Value-added products such as pickles, chips, candies, wines, brines, and tea powders prepared from WEPs (a-t). (a) Roselle pickle (Hibiscus sabdariffa); (b) Indian olive pickle (Elaeocarpus floribundus); (c) Bamboo shoot pickle (Bamboosa spp.); (d) Ber pickle (Ziziphus jujube); (e) Bird’s eye chilli pickle (Capsicum frutecens); (f) Lemon and Bird’s Eye chilli mixed pickle; (g) Amla pickle (Emblica officinalis); (h) Jackfruit pickle (Artocarpus heterophyllus); (i) Tapioca chips (Manihot esculenta); (j) Banana chips (Musa spp.); k. Jackfruit chips (Artocarpus heterophyllus); l. Bael tea (Aegle marmelos); m. Banana Bhujia (Musa spp.); n. Banana chips; o. Ginger candy (Gingerer Spp.); p. Mulberry wine (Morus alba); q. Jamun wine (Syzygium cumini); r. Blood fruit wine (Haematocarpus validus); s. Bamboo shoot brine (Bamboo spp.); t. Ber candy (Ziziphus jujube)

Ethnobotanical indices and ranking of the top-fifty WEPs

The species rankings, namely RFC, CI, and RI, were determined using various ethnobotanical indices, along with three core parameters like FC, NUR, and NUC for the top-fifty WEPs (Table 6). The FC value reflects the extent of knowledge distribution, indicating how many informants identified a species as useful. In contrast, the CI and RI index capture both the breadth and depth of use by considering the number of informants and the diversity of use categories associated with each species. Among the top 50 species documented, bamboo spp. recorded the highest FC (108), followed by Diplazium esculentum (92), Bauhinia variegata (89), Paederia foetida (89), and Lasia spinosa (85). In terms of NUR, bamboo spp. again ranked first with 335 reports, followed by Artocarpus heterophyllus (281), Protium serratum (269), and Emblica officinalis (224).

Table 6.

Rankings of the top-fifty WEPs based on ethnobotanical indices

Sl. no	Scientific name	Common name	Basic values			Indices				Ranking			Mean rank
			FC	NUR	NUC	RFC	CI	RI	RFC		CI	RI
1	Bamboo spp.	Berry bamboo	108	335	9	0.857	2.659	1.000	1		1	1	1.00
2	D. esculentum (Retz.) Sw.	Dhekia	92	92	1	0.730	0.731	0.193	2		24	33	19.67
3	B. variegata L.	White bauhinia	89	214	5	0.706	1.698	0.597	3		4	5	4.00
4	P. foetida L.	Skunk vine	89	116	4	0.706	0.921	0.395	4		20	14	12.67
5	L. spinosa (L.) Thwaites	Spiny Lasia	85	85	1	0.675	0.675	0.182	5		28	34	22.33
6	C. fallax Schott	Fallax tauro	84	84	1	0.667	0.667	0.181	6		29	35	23.33
7	Z. oxyphyllum	Prickly Ash	84	134	2	0.667	1.064	0.312	7		15	23	15.00
8	P. serratum (Wall. ex Collebr.) Engl.	Indian red pear	84	269	7	0.667	2.135	0.790	8		3	3	4.67
9	C. esculenta (L.) Schott	Bay berry	82	124	3	0.651	0.984	0.352	9		16	19	14.67
10	P. chinensis R.Br.	Creeping smartweed	75	75	1	0.595	0.595	0.167	10		34	37	27.00
11	H. Validus Bakh.f.ex. Forman	Blood fruit	74	96	3	0.587	0.762	0.310	11		23	24	19.33
12	P. thyrsiflorus (Roxb.) Nees	Tita Bahak	73	141	2	0.579	1.119	0.322	12		13	22	15.67
13	O. indicum (L.) Kurz	Indian trumpet	71	142	3	0.564	1.127	0.379	13		12	16	13.67
14	S. violaceum R.Br.	Indian nightshade	70	84	3	0.556	0.667	0.292	14		30	25	23.00
15	A. paeoniifolius (Dennst.) Nicolson	Elephant foot Yam	70	70	1	0.556	0.556	0.160	15		35	38	29.33
16	C. speciosus (J.König) C.D.Specht	Fountain bush	69	69	2	0.548	0.548	0.214	16		36	31	27.67
17	M. flaviflora Simmonds	Wild Banana	69	124	8	0.548	0.984	0.630	17		18	4	13.00
18	H. sabdariffa L.	Roselle	63	88	4	0.500	0.698	0.354	18		27	18	21.00
19	S. cumini (L.)	Jamun	61	171	4	0.484	1.357	0.477	19		7	10	12.00
20	D. scabrella (D.Don) Roxb. ex Wall.	Panilewa	60	150	4	0.476	1.191	0.446	20		9	12	13.67
21	E. foetidum L.	Culantro	60	144	5	0.476	1.143	0.493	21		11	9	13.67
22	E. officinalis l.	Amla	59	211	5	0.468	1.675	0.593	22		5	6	11.00
23	R. ellipticum (Wall. ex Dietrich) A. DC.	Ja-Kharia	58	58	1	0.460	0.460	0.142	23		37	39	33.00
24	M. subangulata Blume	Wild bitter gourd	57	83	2	0.452	0.659	0.235	24		31	28	27.67
25	C. maxima (Burm.) Merril	Pomelo	57	57	1	0.452	0.452	0.141	25		38	40	34.33
26	H. cordata Thunb	Chameleon plant	57	120	4	0.452	0.952	0.401	26		19	13	19.33
27	F. jangomas (Lour.) Raeusch.	Coffee plum	56	146	3	0.444	1.159	0.384	27		10	15	17.33
28	C. glandulosum L.	East Indian glory	56	90	2	0.444	0.714	0.245	28		26	27	27.00
29	E. crassipes (Mart.) Solms	Water hyacinth	56	56	1	0.444	0.444	0.139	29		39	41	36.33
30	M. malabathricum L.	Malabar melastome	56	56	2	0.444	0.444	0.195	30		40	31	33.67
31	D. pentaphylla L.	Five-leaf yam	55	55	1	0.437	0.437	0.138	31		41	42	38.00
32	A. heterophyllus Lam.	Jackfruit	55	281	8	0.437	2.230	0.863	32		2	2	12.00
33	Z. jujube Mill.	Ber	54	200	5	0.429	1.587	0.576	33		6	7	15.33
34	A. chaplasa	Cham / Chram	53	141	3	0.421	1.119	0.377	34		14	17	21.67
35	E. sativa Mill.	Arugula	48	48	1	0.381	0.381	0.127	35		42	43	40.00
36	B. ramiflora Lour.	Burmese grape	47	91	2	0.373	0.722	0.247	36		25	26	29.00
37	F. hispida L .f.	Hairy fig	47	113	3	0.373	0.897	0.335	37		21	20	26.00
38	M. acuminata Colla	Plantain	47	124	6	0.373	0.984	0.518	38		17	8	21.00
39	C. erectus Roxb.	Cane fruit/ rattan	46	46	2	0.365	0.365	0.180	39		43	36	39.33
40	C. macroptera Montrouz	Melanesian papeda	46	166	4	0.365	1.318	0.469	40		8	11	19.67
41	G. dulcis (Roxb.) Kurz	Sweet-broom	45	81	2	0.357	0.643	0.232	41		32	29	34.00
42	C. melo var. agrestis	Wild musk melon	45	81	2	0.357	0.643	0.232	42		33	30	35.00
43	C. pseudolimon Tanaka	Hill lemon	42	42	1	0.333	0.333	0.118	43		44	44	43.67
44	E. latifolia L.	Silver berry	42	42	1	0.333	0.333	0.118	44		45	45	43.67
45	G. nervosa (Lour) Panigr.	Shiral	41	111	3	0.325	0.881	0.332	45		22	21	29.33
46	L. purpureus (L.) Sweet	Dolichos bean	41	41	1	0.325	0.325	0.117	46		46	46	46.00
47	A. indica (Lour) Koch	Alocasia	41	41	1	0.325	0.325	0.117	47		47	47	47.00
48	T. palmata (Roxb. ex Lindl.) Vis.	Snowflake tree	40	40	1	0.318	0.318	0.115	48		48	48	48.00
49	S. pulcherrima (Roxb.) Gaud.	Dogal tree	36	36	1	0.286	0.286	0.109	49		49	49	49.00
50	M. dioica Roxb. ex Willd.	Spiny gourd	36	36	1	0.286	0.286	0.109	50		50	50	50.00

FC- Frequency of citation, NUR-Number of use reports, NUC- Number of use categories: RFC- Relative frequency of citation, CI-Cultural importance index, RI- Relative importance. Mean ranking value (lower value is better) is the average of RFC, CI, and RI.

The NUC ranged from one to nine, with bamboo spp. having the highest number (9), followed by Artocarpus heterophyllus (8) and Musa flaviflora (8). The RFC values ranged from 0.286 to 0.857. Bamboo spp. exhibited the highest RFC (0.857), followed by Diplazium esculentum (0.730), and Bauhinia variegata (0.706). Regarding the CI index, values ranged from 0.286 to 2.659. Bamboo spp. again ranked highest (2.659), indicating its strong cultural relevance, followed by Artocarpus heterophyllus (2.230), and Protium serratum (2.135). The RI index values ranged from 0.109 to 1.000, with bamboo spp. recorded the highest value (1.000), followed by Artocarpus heterophyllus (0.863), and Protium serratum (0.790).

The rankings of RFC, CI, and RI showed notable variation in cultural importance and usage diversity among the top-fifty WEPs. Bamboo species ranked highest among all the ethnobotanical indices, followed by Diplazium esculentum and Bauhinia variegata. Species such as Lasia spinosa, Zanthoxylum oxyphyllum, and Prunus serratum are also represented in the top ten. In contrast, Momordica dioica, Sarcochlamys pulcherrima, and Trevesia palmata ranked lowest (Table 6). Additionally, the correlation heatmap shows that CI and RI had a very strong positive correlation (r = 0.949), whereas RFC had moderate correlations with CI (r = 0.513) and RI (r = 0.436) (Fig. 11).

Fig. 11.

Correlation Heatmap of Rankings

The informant consensus factor (ICF) is a measure that reflects the level of agreement among informants regarding the use of plant species within specific use categories. In this study, the maximum ICF value was observed for seasoning (0.982), followed by snacks (0.978), vegetables (0.974), and eaten raw (0.958), while the minimum value was recorded for agricultural tools and other household items (0.703). These results indicate a strong consensus among informants regarding the use of plants, particularly in food-related categories. The high ICF values suggest that a wide range of plant species is commonly used by the community for essential needs, including food, construction, medicine, fodder, and fencing (Table 7).

Table 7.

Use categories, use reports, and ICF of WEPs

Use categories	Number of use reports (NUR)	Number of species (Nt)	Percentage (%)	Informant consensus factor (ICF)
Vegetable	2598	68	42.15	0.974
Eaten raw	1273	54	20.66	0.958
Garnish	114	10	1.85	0.920
Seasoning	115	3	1.87	0.982
Snacks	185	5	3.00	0.978
Preservation	376	25	6.10	0.936
Construction	501	26	8.13	0.950
Medicinal	253	14	4.11	0.948
Fodder	290	36	4.71	0.879
Fuelwood	233	48	3.78	0.797
Fencing	150	30	2.43	0.805
Agriculture tools/household items	75	23	1.22	0.703

Four-cell analysis and status of conservation

The four-cell analysis (FCA) reveal critical insights into the conservation status and distribution patterns of species in the region, underscoring the complexities involved in maintaining agrobiodiversity (Fig. 12). A total of 48 species were rare, falling under category of small area and small population (SA & SP), making them highly susceptible to extinction pressures due to their restricted habitat range and declining numbers. Meanwhile, 46 species were moderate, having small distribution areas but relatively large population sizes (SA & LP), potentially vulnerable under habitat disturbances (Fig. 12). Conversely, 28 species were abundant, which exhibited large distribution areas but maintained small population sizes (LA & SP), posing risks from low regeneration or overharvesting. The remaining species were distributed across large regions with healthy population sizes (LA & LP), suggesting they currently face minimal threat (Fig. 12). However, even these species require monitoring to ensure their long-term survival amid environmental changes and anthropogenic pressures. These findings are crucial for implementing targeted conservation and sustainable use practices to protect the agrobiodiversity of the region.

Fig. 12.

Four-cell analysis of WEPs

According to the IUCN Red List, most species (79) fall under the Least Concern (LC) category (Fig. 13). However, 55 species were Not Evaluated (NE) for their conservation status. Five species were Vulnerable (VU), four were Data Deficient (DD), and two were Near Threatened (NT). This emphasizes the need for a comprehensive assessment of NE and DD category species and urgent conservation of those already identified as VU or NT (Fig. 13).

Fig. 13.

IUCN Status of the WEPs

Ecosystem services of WEPs and contributions to SDGs

The study showed that WEPs provide a wide spectrum of ecosystem services (Plate 6) that extend beyond food provisioning, thereby supporting both community well-being and global sustainability agendas (Plate 7).

Plate 6.

Ecosystem Services of WEPs

Plate 7.

Potential of WEPs to the achievement of eight UN-SDGs (SDG 1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 12, 13, and 15)

Provisioning services were the most prominent, with WEPs supplying food, traditional medicine, construction, livestock fodder, fencing material, and fuel wood (Plate 6). A total of 22 species were mainly used in traditional medicine, with notable examples such as Phlogacanthus thyrsiflorus, Oroxylum indicum, Clerodendrum glandulosum, Antidesma acidum, and Cheilocostus speciosus recognized for their therapeutic effects, especially in treating ailments like colds, coughs, sore throats, skin infections, jaundice, and bone fractures. Additionally, 22 species were utilized for construction and tool-making, with local communities exhibiting in-depth knowledge of wood characteristics and their suitability for specific purposes. Notably, Musa acuminata was identified as a highly versatile species used for food wrapping, fibre, livestock fodder, and even preparation of a traditional alkaline substitute for soda (Kalchi) (Table 5; Plate 6).

Regulating and supporting services were observed through the role of WEPs in maintaining agro biodiversity, providing habitat for associated fauna, and supporting climate resilience. Bamboo species, notably Bambusa pallida, Bambusa tulda, Dendrocalamus giganteus were extensively used as construction, firewood, and fencing material, highlighting their role in environmental sustainability. Common fodder species such as Eryngium foetidum, Paederia foetida, Alocasia macrorrhizos, and Morus alba supported livestock management, indirectly supporting food security and the livelihood of the households. Cultural services were also notable, with species such as bamboo shoots, calabash, and various tubers integrated into harvesting festivals like Wangala and other local traditions, reflecting the intangible traditional heritage interwoven with WEP use.

Collectively, these ecosystem services align WEPs strongly with multiple United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (UN-SDGs), with the highest relevance observed for SDGs 2 and 15 (Zero Hunger and Life on Land) (Plate 7). Further WEPs also contribute to SDG 1, 3, and 12 (No Poverty, Good Health and Well-being, and Responsible Consumption and Production). Significant linkages were seen for SDG 5, 8, and 13 (Gender Equality, Decent Work and Economic Growth, and Climate Action). WEPs present a multi-dimensional role in fostering sustainable livelihoods, biodiversity conservation, and climate resilience (Plate 7).

Discussion

Socio-demographic determinants and transmission of WEPs knowledge

The collection of WEPs, along with hunting, formed one of the earliest subsistence strategies of humankind [28] and continues to be vital, particularly in rural and indigenous communities [29]. However, agricultural and dietary homogenization has marginalised and undervalued WEPs [1, 30]. Currently, 90% of global food production depends on fewer than 103 plant species, with over 60% of the world’s caloric intake coming from rice, wheat, and maize [14], threatening food security, resilience, and cultural food traditions [30, 31]. Diversifying diets through locally adopted crops and WEPs enhances nutrition and agrobiodiversity [1]. FAO and Bioversity International have initiated efforts to mainstream selected WEPs as “Future Smart Crops” to build resilience and sustainable food systems [14, 32].

Traditionally, diverse agroecosystems with minor millets, leafy vegetables, pulses, and tubers sustained communities with knowledge vocally passed down from generation to generation [29, 33]. However, with the rapid pace of modernisation, urbanisation, and lifestyle changes, these traditional knowledge systems [28, 30]. Ethnobotany thus bridges traditional wisdom and modern science for promoting conservation and sustainability [21, 22].

Our survey recorded 145 WEPs from 58 families, reflecting both high species diversity and deep Garo traditional knowledge. These multifunctional WEPs offer food, fodder, medicine, construction materials, fuelwood, farming tools, and fencing materials. Female informants, particularly those over 40 years old, had more knowledge about WEP use than males. This may be due to women’s active involvement in everyday household duties such as cooking, caregiving, and marketing. Similar to the findings from the Messiwa people in Morocco [34].

Elder informants, over 60 years old, were given the majority of information, highlighting their deep experience and practical knowledge [34, 35]. The majority of informants had acquired traditional knowledge from their parents and grandparents, representing a vertical knowledge transfer from generation to generation [36]. However, the familiarity of WEPs that once formed an essential part of their ancestors’ diet was declining because of modernisation, access to processed foods, and habitat loss. A similar loss of ethno-botanical knowledge tendency has been recognised by Ghanimi et al. [34] and Khanduri et al. [37]. Therefore, active participation of youth, documentation of the ethno-botanical knowledge, and community awareness programs are necessary to support WEPs for food sustainability [37].

Multivariate analyses further clarified the socio-demographic structuring of WEPs knowledge. The strong correlations among informant-related variables reveal consistency in sampling effort and knowledge documentation, while the associations among education categories reflect the influence of educational background on participation and knowledge transmission. The weak association of area, population, and number of villages suggests that socio-cultural factors play a more prominent role than spatial or demographic factors in shaping informant characteristics [34].

The combined results of PCA and HCA reveal that socio-demographic attributes and informant composition significantly influence the structure of the study area and the organisation of ethnobotanical knowledge. PC1 and its corresponding cluster show that population size, availability of informants, educational attainment, and active participation of adult age groups are closely interconnected. Such conditions favour more comprehensive documentation and validation of ethnobotanical knowledge, as larger and relatively educated communities facilitate information exchange and collective knowledge verification [34].

The PC2 and the associated cluster highlight disparities linked to education, gender, and age dependency. The strong association of illiteracy, primary education, female participation, and dependent age groups suggests that traditional ethnobotanical knowledge remains deeply rooted among women, elders, and less formally educated individuals [34]. These groups often rely on oral knowledge systems and play an important role in preserving traditional healthcare practices [34, 35, 37].

The PC3 and its associated cluster emphasise the importance of household structure, particularly extended family systems. Larger households may enhance intergenerational transmission of ethnobotanical knowledge, allowing younger members to acquire and practice plant-related knowledge through close interaction with elders. Such family-based knowledge transfer contributes to the continuity and resilience of traditional ethnobotanical practices [35, 37].

Taxonomic diversity of WEPs

The variation in WEP diversity across the Garo Hills highlights differences in forest cover, land-use intensity, and dependence on traditional food systems. Higher WEP richness in South and West Garo Hills is associated with better-preserved forest landscapes, community-managed forests, and jhum-based agroforestry, which maintain diverse secondary vegetation rich in edible species. The moderate diversity in East Garo Hills can be linked to urban expansion (e.g., Wiliam Nagar), higher population pressure, and conversion of forests to settled agriculture, reducing access to wild food resources. The relatively lower WEP diversity in South-East and North Garo Hills is likely due to forest fragmentation, recent administrative restructuring, road construction, limestone mining, and other infrastructure development, and declining dependence on forest-based foods, resulting in both reduced availability of WEPs and erosion of ethnobotanical knowledge.

Among the documented WEPs, Rutaceae was the most dominant family, followed by Araceae, Moraceae, and Dioscoreaceae. Citrus showed the highest genus-level species diversity, followed by Dioscorea, Ficus, Syzygium, and Artocarpus. The predominance of the Rutaceae family is particularly significant, as the Garo Hills of Meghalaya are recognized as centers of origin or diversity for Citrus species [2, 4], and higher diversity of these WEPs was also reported in neighbouring states like Assam, Arunachal Pradesh, and Nagaland [29, 38].

Growth habit, edible plant parts, and life forms of WEPs

Tree species dominate due to abundance, year-round availability, longevity, ecological dominance, and adaptive strategies, in contrast to shrubs and herbaceous WEPs that are typically seasonal. Similar results of dominance were reported in the earlier ethnobotanical surveys [35, 39, 40]. Fruits were the most utilized part, followed by leaves, shoots, and tubers. Higher preference for fruits may be due to ease of harvesting, simplicity in utilization, and preparation [35, 41]. Most species were perennial, indicating their long-term association, continual regeneration within the forest ecosystem, and supporting a steady supply of food resources. These patterns collectively reflect the ecological rhythm and adaptive strategies of the local communities in managing and utilizing wild plant resources throughout the year [35].

Food use categories, availability, and abundance of WEPs

Based on their mode of consumption, WEPs were classified into nine different food-use categories. Among these, the largest group comprised vegetables, often boiled, fried with dry fish or other meat dishes, followed by species that are typically eaten raw. Other categories included species used for preservation, wine, garnish, beverages, snacks, and seasoning, indicating the broad culinary applications of these WEPs [40]. The study also revealed that 35 species were found to be accessible throughout the year, and 22 species were available for six months, making them vital components of food security in the region. A notable portion of the species (37) were seasonally available between June and September, coinciding with the peak monsoon period, indicating the most vibrant and diverse time for the availability of WEPs. Overall, species richness peaked during the monsoon season, followed by winter, suggesting that the monsoon not only supports the growth of a wide variety of WEPs but also enhances the availability of tender shoots, leaves, and fruits that are commonly harvested for food [33, 42].

Forests were the main collection sites (72), reinforcing the link between the term “wild” and unmanaged natural habitats where they thrive [43]. Home gardens supported 38 species, underscoring their critical role as these spaces play in the conservation of plant diversity and in enhancing household food and nutritional security [44], especially in the Northeastern region, which is known for its diverse home garden structures and species composition [45]. Notably, 20 of these species were found in both home gardens and nearby forests, highlighting their ecological adaptability across diverse niches and suggesting ongoing processes of domestication. These findings reinforce the significance of home gardens as dynamic agro-ecosystems that bridge wild and cultivated biodiversity, contributing to both conservation and sustenance [44, 45].

Culinary diversity and livelihood opportunities from WEPs

Study highlights the diversity and cultural richness of WEPs, used in preparing 121 distinct traditional food items. The variety of preparation methods, including cooking with Pura (pounded rice), Kapa (Meat and alkaline solution), stir-frying, boiling, and steaming with fish, pork, or chicken in banana leaves, demonstrates the dynamic culinary heritage of the region. This reflects deep-rooted indigenous knowledge and practices, where WEPs are not only valued for their nutritional content but also for their cultural, medicinal, and livelihood significance [43, 46]. Several unique dishes such as Ta˙gong che˙eng Na˙kam from Alocasia spp., Apolka Na˙kam from Momordica subangulata, Galda Dorai Na˙kam from Abelmoschus caillei, and Me˙a Pura from Bambusa spp. illustrate the strong food plant relationships embedded in local culinary identities. These practices are deeply embedded in food security strategies, particularly in ecologically vulnerable, economically marginalized, and geographically inaccessible areas. The broader utilization of WEPs in the preparation of processed forms such as pickles, chutneys, beverages, and candies emphasizes their value-addition potential. Among the value-added products, pickles prepared from 20 species were among the most popular and marketable products. The bamboo shoots were preserved in brine to make their availability throughout the year, ensure food security, and provide income opportunities. This demonstrates the potential of WEPs in the development of rural enterprises and livelihood opportunities. These findings support the important role of WEPs in household nutrition and economic diversification [13].

Despite the documented 145 WEPs in Garo Hills, the value-added products are developed from around 30 of them. Moreover, the product range lacks diversity, being limited primarily to chips, pickles, jams, wines, brine, and candies. This narrow scope indicates a significant gap in harnessing the full potential of these species, as these products can serve as niche items in local and regional markets, contributing to the sustainability of traditional food systems. However, only a few species, such as bamboo, jackfruit, and blood fruit, have seen meaningful product development and market integration. This underexploitation highlights the necessity of focused research and innovation aimed at developing potential value-added products [47]. Strengthening livelihood opportunities concurrently contributing to agrobiodiversity conservation and regional food security [47, 48].

Ethnobotanical indices and position of the top-fifty WEPs

The ranking of culturally significant WEPs based on basic values such as FC, UR, NUC, and ethnobotanical indices such as RFC, CI, and RI provides a robust understanding of how local communities perceive and utilize plant biodiversity. The higher RFC values of Bamboo spp. (0.857) and Diplazium esculentum (0.730) signify widespread knowledge and frequent use across the local population [23]. This index effectively highlights how commonly a plant is cited and recognized for its utility [49]. The CI and RI values, which integrate both the number of informants and the diversity of use categories, reflect the multifunctional nature and depth of cultural embedment of species. For instance, Bamboo spp. not only had the highest CI (2.659) and RI (1.000) but was also associated with the maximum number of use categories (9), illustrating its multipurpose utility and cultural significance [28, 50]. In addition, species like Artocarpus heterophyllus and Protium serratum also consistently ranked high across CI and RI indices, indicating their versatility and importance in local dietary and cultural traditions. This aligns with the findings of Padulosi et al. [13] and Reyes-García et al. [51], who emphasized that species with diverse uses often attain high cultural significance. Conversely, plants with low RFC, CI, and RI values may still be vital in specific ecological niches or hold specialized medicinal or ritualistic roles, offering ecosystem services that are less visible but crucial for cultural continuity and biodiversity conservation [28, 33].

The ICF complements RFC, CI, and RI indices by indicating the degree of shared knowledge and agreement among the informants regarding plant use within categories [52, 53]. A high ICF for a use category suggests a strong cultural agreement and validation of certain plant uses, which may guide future research for pharmacological validation or conservation prioritization. Together, these indices offer a comprehensive ethnobotanical profile, emphasizing that species with high RFC, CI, and RI are generally more available, familiar, and functionally important, whereas less-cited species may still hold latent or localized cultural significance [28]. The findings underscore the necessity to protect these WEPs for conservation of biodiversity and also for sustaining the intangible cultural heritage of indigenous communities [28, 33].

Four-cell analysis and status of conservation

The FCA offers critical understandings of the distribution and richness of WEPs in the study area. The maximum number of species (48) categorized under small area and small population (SA & SP) shows immediate ecological stress, which may be due to habitat loss, unsustainable harvesting, or poor regeneration. These species are at the highest risk of local extinction [35, 39]. Another 46 species were recorded in smaller areas but with large populations (SA & LP), flourishing in microhabitats or specific ecological niches. Currently, these species may be stable, but their limited geographic distribution makes them vulnerable to sudden environmental changes or land-use transformations [54]. Conservation strategies for these species should include protection of habitat, community-led conservation, and ecological monitoring to maintain stable populations. Whereas, the 28 species classified under the large area and small population (LA & SP) category, indicating wide distribution but uneven or declining populations because of overharvesting, grazing pressure, or competition with invasives like Chromolaena odorata, Mikania micrantha, Lantana camera, and Microcystis aeruginosa [55, 56]. The rest of the (23 species) WEPs have been classified under large area and larger population (LA & LP), which seem ecologically secure, with resilience, and cultural importance, often reserved in home gardens or specific habitats.

Such species hold potential for domestication and serve as models for promoting food security, livelihood development, and agro-biodiversity conservation [13]. The IUCN Red List reveals a mixed conservation status of WEPs in the study area. Although 79 species fall under the Least Concern (LC), five under Vulnerable (VU), two Near Threatened (NT), and four Data Deficient (DD) categories, highlighting significant conservation gaps. Of greater concern are 55 species classified as the Not Evaluated (NE) category, which may face decline without recognition. This aligns with the concerns by Brummitt et al. [57] and Khoury et al. [31] that locally significant plants often remain outside formal assessments. Multifunctional species such as Oroxylum indicum, Clerodendrum glandulosum, and Gnetum montanum, valued for food and medicines, are threatened by overharvesting [58]. Integrating traditional knowledge with scientific conservation assessments can help to identify species of both ecological and cultural concern [46]. Prioritizing the 55 unlisted species for evaluation will strengthen in conservation of biodiversity and support commitments to the CBD and SDGs [11].

Ecosystem services of WEPs and contributions to SDGs

The study showed that WEPs offer a broad spectrum of ecosystem services that cover far beyond provisioning services, thereby supporting both local well-being and SDGs. A total of 22 species were mainly used in folk medicine, particularly in remote areas with limited access to formal health services [58]. Likewise, 22 species were utilised in making construction materials and farm tools, reflecting traditional and ethno-engineering knowledge [4]. The role of WEPs in biodiversity conservation, habitat protection for fauna, and climate resilience are some of the illustrations of regulating and supporting services. The WEPs with dual or multiple uses support the concept of resource use efficiency and ecological integration in traditional systems, indicating the multidimensional value of biodiversity in agro-ecological niches [54]. Identifying and supporting this functional diversity is for the conservation of biodiversity, preservation of indigenous knowledge, and improvement of rural resilience in the climate change era and socio-economic development [13]. Species such as banana, bamboo, citrus, calabash, and tubers are deeply embedded in rituals and harvest festivals like Wangala, highlighting the cultural heritage interwoven with WEP use. WEPs serve as “social-ecological keystone species,” i.e., species whose roles transcend food provisioning to encompass broader cultural, ecological, and economic functions [59].

Collectively, the above-discussed ecosystem services reflect the role of WEPs in various United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (UN-SDGs). The strongest linkages were observed with SDG 2 and SDG 15, followed by SDG 1, SDG 3, and SDG 12. Additional contributions were noted for SDG 5, SDG 8, and SDG 13, given their roles in sustainable livelihoods, cultural practices, and climate resilience [13, 31].

Comparison with previous ethnobotanical studies and cultural interpretation

The present study validates and expands existing ethnobotanical knowledge on wild edible plants (WEPs) reported from Garo Hills, Meghalaya [1, 2, 4, 9], North-East India [33, 38, 43, 45], and other parts of India [11, 16, 37, 41]. The comparative assessment of WEPs was conducted (Table 8) at regional, sub-regional, national, and global scales [11, 60, 61]. At the global level, roughly 7000 species of WEPs have been documented [60]. India alone contributes 1403 reported species, highlighting its richness in WEPs diversity [61]. In India, the Indo-Gangetic Plain records 371 species, while North East India harbours approximately 800 species [11]. In North East India, Meghalaya is home to 110 to 249 species of WEPs [62]. Region-specific studies reveal considerable variation, with 151 and 72 species reported from the Khasi Hills [63, 64, 65], 147 species from the Jaintia Hills [66], and 71 [67], 67 [68], 45 [69], and 36 [70] species from different studies conducted in the Garo Hills. The present study reports 145 wild edible plant species, adding to the existing body of knowledge from the region. Several species documented in the Garo Hills, particularly underutilized fruits, leafy vegetables, climbers, and bamboos, have been previously reported from neighbouring regions, including the Khasi and Jaintia Hills, Assam, Arunachal Pradesh, Nagaland, and Manipur, indicating broad regional commonalities in plant use patterns [38, 45, 65, 66].

Table 8.

Comparison of the diversity of WEPs reported in the present study with previous studies

Sl. No.	Study area	Study coverage	Documented WEP Species	Genera	Family	Reference
1	World	World	7000	-	-	[60]
2	India	India	1403	-	184	[61]
3	Indo-gangetic Plain	3 States (UP, Bihar, and West Bengal)	371	197	85	[11]
4	Meghalaya	Khasi, Garo, and Jaintia Hills	249	153	82	[62]
5	Meghalaya	Khasi, Garo, and Jaintia Hills	110	91	48	[63]
6	Khasi Hills	East and West Khasi Hills	151	86	49	[64]
7	Khasi Hills	East Khasi Hills	72	65	40	[65]
8	Jaintia Hills	West Jaintia Hills	147	-	62	[66]
9	Garo Hills	Fringe villages of Nokrek Biosphere Reserve	71	61	42	[67]
10	Garo Hills	West Garo Hills	67	54	32	[68]
11	Garo Hills	10 villages from 5 blocks	45	36	23	[69]
12	Garo Hills	Garo Hills	36	34	30	[70]
13	Garo Hills	42 villages across all five districts	146	105	58	Present study

The dominance of families such as Rutaceae, Araceae, Moraceae, and Dioscoreaceae, along with the preference for fruits, leaves, and shoots, is consistent with earlier ethnobotanical studies from the Eastern Himalayan and Indo-Myanmar biodiversity hotspots, reflecting shared ecological conditions and subsistence strategies [38, 43, 45].

The present study also documents several novel or under-reported use records, particularly in terms of specific culinary preparations, modes of consumption, and value-added products derived from WEPs. There are several studies on documentation of WEPs in Garo Hills, whereas a single study by Pandey et al. [2] from West Garo Hills district reported 23 ethnic recipes. While the present study covered all five districts of Garo Hills and reported seven major food categories, encompassing 121 traditional recipes and 30 value-added products. The preparation of region-specific foods such as Ta˙gong che˙eng Na˙kam, Apolka Na˙kam, and Me˙a Pura, along with the commercialization of products like wines, pickles, brines, and chips from species such as Haematocarpus validus, Protium serratum, and Bambusa spp., remains poorly documented in earlier literature.

The exceptionally high cultural importance of bamboo species observed in this study aligns with their multifunctional role in Garo society, where they serve as food, construction material, tools, fuel, and cultural symbols [2]. Similarly, the high ranking of species such as Diplazium esculentum, Bauhinia variegata, and Paederia foetida reflects their integration into everyday diets, seasonal food security, and traditional cuisines, whereas in other regions these species may hold more limited or specialized roles. The strong association of WEPs with festivals, rituals, and collective food practices among the Garo community reinforces their role as biocultural resources rather than merely wild food items. The gradual erosion of this knowledge, particularly among younger generations, contrasts with earlier ethnobotanical reports that describe more widespread dependence on WEPs, suggesting a cultural transition driven by modernization, dietary change, and reduced forest access.

Overall, the present study provides valuable insights, covering 145 WEPs, which is higher than reported studies from Garo Hills. The study also highlights traditional food recipes and value-added products, which are interconnected with the religious and cultural values of the Garo Community. Therefore, the study helps in the conservation of genetic resources and traditional knowledge and can be utilized in policy making for food and nutritional security.

Implications for environmental sustainability and public health

The documented WEPs in the Garo Hills exhibit their key role in supporting environmental sustainability and public health in the region. Many culturally important WEPs contribute bioactive compounds, dietary diversity, and essential micronutrients, representing their potential to address persistent diet-related health concerns like malnutrition. Apart from their dietary contribution, these species are also an integral component of forest and agroforestry ecosystems, providing key ecological functions such as soil conservation, habitat stability, and biodiversity maintenance. Traditional ecological knowledge, which historically regulated sustainable use through seasonal harvesting and selective collection, is increasingly at risk due to socio-economic transitions and declining intergenerational knowledge transfer. Integrating culturally important WEPs into conservation planning, nutrition interventions, and climate-resilient agroforestry systems could therefore generate synergistic benefits for ecosystem resilience, community health, and sustainable livelihoods in the Garo Hills.

Conclusion

The ethnobotanical documentation of WEPs in the Garo Hills, Meghalaya, reveals a deeply interwoven relationship between the region’s rich biodiversity and the traditional knowledge. A total of 145 WEPs were recorded, serving nutritional, medicinal, cultural, and utilitarian roles that support household food security and health among rural and tribal communities. Far from being supplementary food, but are integral to indigenous food systems. Species such as Phlogacanthus thyrsiflorus, Oroxylum indicum, Clerodendrum glandulosum, Cheilocostus speciosus, and Antidesma acidum exemplify the overlap between food and medicine, being widely used to treat common ailments. Their multifunctional roles, such as food, fodder, firewood, medicine, fencing, and construction, highlight the functional diversity intertwined in local ecological knowledge. Home gardens harbor 38 species, acting as vital reservoirs for conservation and semi-domestication, while 20 species occur in both home gardens and the forest, indicating ecological and adaptability. and potential for incipient domestication through home garden-based land use practices. Four-cell analysis results showed that 48 species are confined to small areas and small populations, rendering them ecologically vulnerable. According to the IUCN Red List Index, 79 species were Least Concern, five were Vulnerable, two were Near Threatened, four were Data Deficient, and 55 were not evaluated. This highlights the urgent conservation priorities. WEPs remain neglected in mainstream agriculture and policy despite their high nutritional and cultural value. Value addition through traditional recipes, processing, and small enterprises, along with initiatives like ethnobotanical gardens, food festivals, and school nutrition programs, can enhance their relevance and popularity. Preserving WEPs also requires safeguarding indigenous knowledge through intergenerational learning and recognizing women as key custodians. Strengthening community-led conservation and facilitating participatory research is vital to ensure WEPs continue to support food security, biodiversity, and cultural identity in Meghalaya.

Author contributions

Hanamaraddi Kencharaddi: Conceptualization, Methodology, Validation, and Writing – original draft. Amchi C.M. Marak: Data collection and Writing – original draft. Thillophina B. Marak: Data collection and Formal Analysis. Shridevi B Teli: Data analysis and Writing – review and editing. Sabyasachi Majumdar: Formal Analysis and Data curation. Natasha R Marak: Writing – review and editing. Jyoti V Vastrad: Writing, editing, and supervision. Mayengbam Premi Devi: Data curation and Writing – editing. Dinesha S: Conceptualization, Methodology, Formal analysis, and Writing – editing.

Funding

This research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.

Data availability

Data will be made available on request.

Declarations

Ethics approval

The study was conducted in accordance with institutional ethical guidelines.

Consent to participate

Informed consent was obtained from all participants before data collection.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.