Skip to main content
PLOS One logoLink to PLOS One
. 2021 Feb 11;16(2):e0246390. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0246390

Factors that influence the plant use knowledge in the middle mountains of Nepal

Durga Kutal 1, Ripu M Kunwar 2,*, Kedar Baral 3,4, Prabhat Sapkota 4, Hari P Sharma 5, Bhagawat Rimal 6
Editor: Rainer W Bussmann7
PMCID: PMC7877619  PMID: 33571303

Abstract

An account of total of 58 plant species including 57 genera and 43 families was reported as useful in ethnomedicine from semi-structured questionnaire survey to the 76 participants of Kaski and Baitadi districts, Nepal. Fieldwork and participatory meetings were carried out between September 2017 and January 2018. A total of 419 emic use reports including 150 from Kaski and 269 from Baitadi were reported from 58 ethnomedicinal plant species. Each species was reported for 2–43 use reports and each participant recorded 1–12 use reports. About 25% (n = 104) use reports were associated with the treatment of digestive system disorders followed by 83 for general complaints. Of the species assessed, 53 species had IASc value < 0.25 and only five species had > 0.25. Species Swertia chirayita, Paris polyphylla, Bergenia ciliata, Valeriana jatamansi and Centella asiatica with > 0.25 IASc were found to be highly consented; however they were incongruent between the sample groups and sites. Divergent plant use knowledge specific to each sample district and group was corresponding to the heterogeneity of socio-economy and culture of the sites. Gender, ethnicity, household economy and food availability of the respondents were leading factors affecting the plant use knowledge. Despite the sites were relatively homogenous in eco-physiography, they possessed the distinct plant use knowledge, hinted that the socio-economic factors are more explanatory in plant use knowledge.

1. Introduction

Nepal has the largest elevational gradient in the world [1] extending from tropical alluvial plains as low as 59 meters above sea level (m asl) in the lowland Tarai to the Words’ highest summit Mt. Everest (8,848 m asl) [2]. Vertically, there are five distinct eco-physiographical regions: the Himalaya (23% of total area, and above 5,000 m asl), High Mountains (20%, between 3,000 and 5,000 m asl), the Middle Mountains (30%, between 1,000 and 3,000 m asl), Siwalik Hills (12.8%, between 500 and 1,000 m asl) and the flat, lowlands of Tarai (13.7%, < 500 m asl) [3]. The country has only 14.75% arable land [4] that lies mostly at lowlands and hills. Less availability of arable land accelerates the human pressure on remaining agricultural land [5] and surrounding open-access forests [6].

When there is little arable land and it is acerbated by geo-ecological constraints [7], indigenous livelihood strategies include outmigration, off-farm activities, animal husbandry, summer grazing, and collection, use, and trade of medicinal plants [8, 9]. Thus, livelihood strategies at rural areas to be precise in mountains and hills of Nepal are greatly influenced by different ethnoecological environments defined by the availability of resources [10], geography of the region [11], economy and socio-culture [12, 13], and weather [14]. It is hypothesized that the apparent species and accessible sites are more frequently foraged. Philip and Gentry [15] stated that the availability of a plant is linked to its relative importance to a given community. Higher use value of plant relates to its higher abundance and thus is more likely to be collected than the rarely encountered ones [16]. The largest, most dominant, and most available plants have the highest use values, not because they are intrinsically useful, but simply because they are salient [15, 17]. However, the use value of salient plant is weakly associated with socio-economic factors [18].

Subsets of socio-economic factors such as settlement, population, family size, gender, age, ethnicity, education, economy, and occupation have effect on knowledge of plant use [1921]. Studies have demonstrated that ethnobotanical knowledge increases with an individual’s age [22] and length of residence [23]. Women are more familiar with the medicinal values of local flora [20]. Native and indigenous people possess rich ethnobotanical knowledge [24]. Thus, the cultural variables seem more essential in explaining knowledge of plant collection and use [25] in addition to the sustainability of plant resources. However, change in lifestyle as a result of globalization, increasing population, land-use change, and climate warming worsen the rural livelihood [25, 26]. A continuous outmigration foments a decline in the number of healers and indigenous knowledge holders [27, 28], resulting in weakened indigenous knowledge and use systems [29]. Documentation and conservation of indigenous knowledge is therefore a prerequisite in order to conserve the biodiversity, promote rural livelihood and help build the community resilience against climate change [30].

In this study, we evaluated the cross-cultural plant use knowledge of two different ethnic groups (Gurung dominated, and Brahmin-Chhetri and others (BCO) dominated) how their socio-economic (gender, age, household size, education, economy, land possesses, livestock ownership, and food availability), and cultural (ethnicity, length of residence and length of healing practice) variables influence plant use. A total of 11 socio-economic and 2 physiographic independent variables (distance from home to forest and home to health center) were used for assessing the knowledge of medicinal plant use (number of species used and ailments treated) as dependent variable. We hypothesized that the collection and use of medicinal plant is not random, it is associated with socio-economy and culture of the area. We also assumed that the use value of plants is less influenced by plants’ ecological salience feature. For intercultural study, we compared the knowledge of plant collection and use of two heterogeneous communities inhabiting homogenous eco-physiographical setting. We hypothesized that there is a difference in average medicinal species used between two sample groups.

2. Materials and methods

2.1 Study area

This study was carried out in Sigas area (29° 26.13’– 29° 30.65’ N; 80° 41.68’– 80° 47.26’ E) of Baitadi and Panchase area (28° 12’– 28° 18’ N; 83° 45’– 83° 57’ E) of Kaski district, Nepal (Fig 1). Both sites (Sigas and Panchase) have similar eco-physiography since they represent protected forests of the country, are a part of bigger conservation landscape, mid-hill physiography with moderate road access and have protected forest as a resource base for local livelihood. The mountain peaks of both areas (Sigas-Dhura and Panchase temple) are regarded as sacred and religious and annually thousands of pilgrims access the sites. Data for study area map was downloaded from ICIMOD [31] and QGIS 3.10.12 was used to prepare the map.

Fig 1. The map shows the intensive study area with elevation and physiographic regions.

Fig 1

Data for this map was downloaded from ICIMOD [31].

However, Sigas, a part of the Kailash Sacred Landscape is recently declared protected forest and Panchase, a part of Chitwan-Annapurna Landscape was declared as a protected forest in 2012. The protected forest is one of the forest types, designated by the ministry of forest and soil conservation, government of Nepal for conservation of biodiversity and promotion of local livelihood. The Panchase protected forest, situated at the junction of three districts Kaski, Syangja and Parbat with an elevation range of 900–2517 m represents mid-hill physiography [31], boasts of a total of 613 flowering plant species including 107 non-timber forest products [32, 33] and 113 orchid species [34]. It represents an important ecological zone that is less addressed amongst the country’s protected area system and is only one biodiversity corridor linkage of lowland (Chitwan–Nawalparasi) and Annapurna Himalaya range (Chitwan–Annapurna Conservation Landscape). The area has great biological, cultural and religious diversities as well as natural beauty [35, 36]. The dominant caste of this area is Gurung.

The Sigas protected forest is a recently declared protected forest of Baitadi district, ranged within 1400–2850 m and is characterized by Oak-Laurel forest and rich socio-cultural heritage. This area is established to conserve the biodiversity and culture of Sigas-Dhura, Baitadi district [37]. The area is dominated by Brahmin-Chhetri castes. Baitadi district itself is renowned for socio-culturally designated sacred peaks [38]. The legacy of sacredness has been valued to designate the site as protected forests and conservation landscape and to have a conservation effect on culture, heritage and ecology. Sigas, Baitadi district represents the lower and southern part of the Kailash Sacred Landscape (KSL). The KSL is a sacred trans-boundary and tri-national landscape of Nepal, India and China. Agriculture, medicinal plant collection and trade and traditional healing are the major occupations in Sigas, Baitadi whereas in Panchase, Kaski agriculture, business, foreign employment, summer grazing, medicinal plant collection and trade and traditional healing are common [21, 3941] however, the agriculture contributes the most in both sites. Foreign employment and summer grazing are secondary livelihood strategies at Panchase, Kaski whereas in Sigas, Baitadi collection of forest products including medicinal plants is next to agriculture.

2.2 Survey and data collection

Division Forest offices Kaski and Baitadi granted written permissions to survey the forest and local communities living around the forest. We obtained Florida Atlantic University IRB approval and district forest office level approval for carrying out interview respectively in Baitadi and Kaski district." Prior informed oral consent was obtained from the interview participants. The sample communities of both districts were composed of sedentary farmers. Traditional medicinal practice is their subordinate occupation. A total of 76 (50 men and 26 women) traditional medicinal practitioners, 38 in each district were interviewed based on snowball sampling and local references, village secretaries and divisional forest office staffs. Total 38 traditional medicinal practitioners in Sigas were from Shivalinga, Sigas, Gajari, Chaujham, Thalakanda, Dhungad and Shikharpur villages, Baitadi and the same number in Panchase from Arthur Dandakharka, Bhadaure Tamagi, Chapakot, Chitre and Ramja Deurali villages of Kaski district. Inventory-based semi-structured questionnaire (S1 File) interviews were carried out with the help of local assistants between September 2017 and January 2018.

In the interview, the participants were asked to list the three most important medicinal plants and their use details for traditional healing. Information regarding demography (age, gender, household size) and socio-economy (occupation, education, livestock, land ownership, length of residence, distance of home from district center, nearest health post, and forest) were sough while interviewing (Table 1). Interviews were supplemented with other investigative techniques, such as participant observation, walk-in-the-woods, and informal meetings [42]. Informal meetings were held during the evenings while staying with local communities, and sometimes with tea vendors. While participating in the walk-in-the-woods, voucher specimens of the species that could not be identified in the field were collected by participants and field assistants and processed and deposited at the Plant Laboratory and Herbarium (KATH), Lalitpur, Nepal, for future reference. Earlier studies carried out in and around study area [9, 13, 32, 40, 41, 43, 44] were used as a taxonomic reference of plant species. Plant taxon was verified by using Plants of the World Online http://www.plantsoftheworldonline.org.

Table 1. Variables and their type used in this study.

Explanatory variables Variable type
Age (Year) Continuous
Family member (Number) Continuous
Land possess (Ropani) Continuous
Livestock (Number) Continuous
Long been settled (Year) Continuous
Traditional medicinal practice (Year) Continuous
Distance home-forest (Km) Continuous
Distance home-health center (Km) Continuous
Ethnicity Categorical: Gurung (37), Brahmin, Chhetri and Others (39)
Gender Categorical: Male (50), Female (26)
Education Categorical: Illiterate (42), Literate (34)
Food availability Categorical: < 6 months (42), > 6 months (34)
Economy Categorical: Poor (16), Medium (44), Rich (16)
Site Categorical: Baitadi (38); Kaski (38)

2.3 Data analysis

Matching information (use reports) from at least three respondents was considered a common response for quantitative analysis [19]. To determine the influence of socio-economic factors, we used the value of useful species, which represents the sum of all useful species an informant knew. The local perception, classification and uses of plants (Emic use) [45] were later grouped into etic uses for convenient analyses following International Classification of Primary Care (ICPC) [46]. ICPC is a suitable standard for cross-cultural comparisons [47]. To identify the proportion of culturally important species in each study district, the Index of Agreement on Species (IAS) was calculated following [48]:

(nsnu)/(nsl),

whereby, ns is the number of use reports of a given species mentioned by all the participants, and nu is the number of use types attributed to that species. IAS was corrected to Index of Agreement on Species consensus (IASc) for the number of participants who knew a use for the species through the formula:

IASc=IAS×(Pu/Pt)

where, Pu represents the number of participants who reported a use, and Pt equals the total number of participants interviewed about the species. IASc values vary between 0 and 1, with 0 representing no agreement and 1 total agreement. In this paper, we determined the proportion of plant species with an IASc value > 0.25; this value was chosen as an arbitrary cutoff point for culturally important species following Vandebroek [49]. The result of IASc was supported by informant consensus factor (FiC). Naturally, both assess the consensus; however, the first assesses the consensus at species level whereas the latter evaluates at use types/category level. FiC was calculated as:

nurnspp.used/nur1

where, nur shows the number of use reports while nspp shows the number of species used [48].

Ecologically salient species are available, easy to access, frequent and abundant [50]. The salience index is very important in ethnobotanical studies because of its usefulness in identifying species of better quality for specific purposes [18, 51]. We used salience index featured with the ecological characteristics (availability (rare = 0, moderate = 1, common = 2), access (limited = 1, easy = 2), abundance (hardly found = 0, rare = 1, common = 2) and life form (annual herb = 1, perennial herb = 2, shrub = 3, tree = 4) of each species in order to evaluate the relationship of plant use values against the salience features [52].

2.4 Statistical analysis

We grouped the socio-cultural and demographic data into nominal/categorical variable: (1) gender, (2) ethnicity, (3) education, (4) food availability, (5) site, and (6) household economy and continuous variable: (1) age, (2) household size, (3) livestock size, (4) land size, (5) length of residence, (6) years of healing practice, (7) distance from home to forest, and (8) distance from home to health center. Cross-cultural analysis was made by (1) gender: male and female, (2) ethnicity: Gurung and Brahmin-Chhetri and others (BCO), (3) education: literate and non-literate, (4) food availability: < 6 and > 6 months, (5) site: Kaski and Baitadi, and (6) household economy: rich, medium and poor. Multiple linear regression models were used to explore how socio-cultural variables interact among themselves and with the knowledge of plant collection, use, and management intensity. Two-way ANOVA was used to further know how these important categorical variables in combination affect the dependent variable (number of plant used and number of ailments treated). We compared the population averages from the independent samples of unequal variances of the medicinal species used in Kaski and Baitadi district. Level of significance was applied at p ≤ 0.1. All the analyses were performed in R studio in R 3.4.1 (R Development Core Team 2017).

3. Results and discussion

3.1 Medicinal plants and uses

A total of 58 medicinal plant species including 57 genera and 43 families were reported as highly useful in study area. Asteraceae, Urticaceae, Apiaceae, Lamiaceae were the dominant plant families contributing 4, 4, 3, and 3 species respectively. Of 58 useful plant species, 36 were from in Kaski and 49 from Baitadi, with common 28 species. Bhattarai et al. [32] had reported 45 medicinal plants from 44 genera, being useful for treatment of 34 ailments (use types). Whereas a large number of medicinal plants 102 were reported as useful in herbal remedy in Baitadi district after consulting 57 traditional healers around Sigas area [13]. From 58 ethnomedicinal plant species, our 76 participants reported a total of 419 emic use reports. There were 150 use reports from Kaski (3.94 person-1 use reports) and 269 from Baitadi (7.07 person-1 use reports). The use reports were grouped into 55 use types and 14 use categories for convenient analysis. Each species was reported for 2–43 use reports and each respondent recorded 1–12 use reports.

3.2 Informant consensus on use types

About 25% (n = 104) use reports were associated with the treatment of digestive system disorders (indigestion 66, gastritis 21, dysentery 4, diarrhea 3, stomachache 3, constipation 3, gall stone 4) followed by 83 use reports for general complaints (fever 54, toothache 10, dehydration 8, typhoid 5, inflammation 4, and headache 2) and 55 use reports for respiratory ailments (cough and cold 48, sinusitis 3, bronchitis 2 and pneumonia 2). The use medicinal plants for abdominal complaints was found to be predominant in Gurung dominated communities in Kaski district [53]. The frequent use of medicinal plants to cure digestive disorders could be attributed to the high preponderance of complaints associated with the digestive system. This account aligns with the government report stating the prevalence of diarrhea and dysentery in rural villages. The health condition was acerbated by food deficiencies in Baitadi [51] and by contaminated water in Kaski [54].

This finding was supported by informant consensus factor (FiC). Of the 55 use types, we sorted out use types with use reports ≥ 10 and evaluated their FiC (Table 2). The highest FiC (0.83) was reported for fever followed by 0.80 for indigestion, stomachache and gastritis and 0.77 for antidoting and bites. This gives us idea that the general ailments are treated by available medicinal plants and this could be a result of cultural learning. Out of 76 traditional medicinal practitioners, 59 (77%) learnt from families and communities. Apprenticeship learning is valued in traditional medicine for treating general ailments [55]. Apprenticeship under the tutelage of senior practitioners is common in both districts [13, 56]. General knowledge about popular medicinal uses of plants is commonly shared in apprenticeship through cultural learning.

Table 2. Use categories, types and reports and informant consensus factor (FiC).

Use category Use type Use reports Useful species Species FiC
General Fever 54 10 B. aristata, T. chebula, O. tenuiflorum, S. wallichii, P. frutescens, R. ellipticus, C. verutum, C. asiatica, P. polyphylla, S. chirayita 0.83
Toothache 10 5 C. dactylon, J. regia, M. esculenta, S. aromaticum, Z armatum, 0.55
Digestive Indigestion, gastritis, stomachache 97 20 A. calamus, A. aspera, A marmelos, A. racemosus, A. vera, B. ciliata, C. asiatica, C. plantaginea, C. rufa, C. verutum, D. boryana, J. regia, M. spicata, P. emblica, P. polyphylla, P. roxburghii, U. dioica, V. jatamansi, W. fruticosa, Z. armatum 0.80
Blood, Spleen, lymph Antidoting Snakebite 19 5 A. calamus, C. asiatica, C. dactylon, C. plantaginea, P. polyphylla 0.77
Cuts & Wounds 10 5 A. adenophora, C. montana, P. polyphylla, P. roxburghii, S wallichii, 0.55
Circulatory Jaundice 14 5 C. dactylon, C. reflexa, Q. lanata, S. aromaticum, Z mauritiana 0.69
Respiratory Cough & Cold 48 16 A. calamus, B. aristata, B. ciliata, C. verutum, C. angustifolia, C. tamala, E. foetidum, E. officinalis, O. tenuiflorum, P. frutescens, Q. lanata, R. ellipticus, R. wallichiana, T. chebula, V. jatamansi, Z. armatum 0.68
Skin Skin disease 27 14 A. cachemerica, A. indica, A. vera, C. asiatica, C. reflexa, D. albicalyx, G. diversofolia, G. hirta, J. regia, P. emblica, P. polyphylla, S. nigrum, U. dioica, V. jatamansi, 0.5
Musculo-skeleton Fracture and sprain 19 11 A. evecta, B. ciliata, C. angustifolia, C. reflexa, D. albicalyx, D. longofolia, G. diversifolia, O. sativa, R. nepalensis, T. contorta, U dioica, 0.44

3.3 Agreement on species consensus

Of the species assessed, 53 species had IASc value < 0.25 and only five species had > 0.25 (S2 Table). Species Swertia chirayita (Roxb.) H.Karst., Paris polyphylla Sm., Bergenia ciliata (Haw.) Sternb., Valeriana jatamansi Jones ex. Roxb. and Centella asiatica (L.) Urb. were found to be highly consented. We considered IASc > 0.25 as a cutoff value for identifying the highly consented species. Medicinal plants and their elevation range (B. ciliata: 900–1700 m, C. asiatica: 500–2100 m, P. polyphylla: 1500–3500 m, S. chirayita: 1500–2500 m and V. jatamansi: 1400–3600 m) and distribution throughout Nepal from east to west [5759] hinted that these species are more accessible than others leading to frequent collection in mid-hills. Accessible plant species are often considered more useful than less abundant or less accessible [11, 17]. This posited and admitted that plants are collected non-randomly and the ones of proximity and familiarity are frequently collected.

Of the species, B. ciliata, V. jatamansi and C. asiatica were frequently used (> 0.25 IASc) only in Baitadi (Quadrant D) whereas species P. polyphylla with > 0.25 IASc was common in medicinal folklore in Kaski (Quadrant A). The comparison of informant agreement values (IASc) between the Baitadi and Darchula districts was different but insignificant (p  =   0.413). Despite being in the similar ecological landscape, the medicinal plants were differently valued, perhaps because of different ethnic groups, accessibility, use values, and livelihood strategies. This result was supported by the fact that only one species S. chirayita appeared in Quadrant B was commonly used in both districts. Quadrant B has common species between the districts with the highest IASc values whereas the Quadrant C the common species with the lowest IASc values. Contrarily, the medicinal plant species with the highest IASc values and common only in Kaski are occupied in Quadrant A and that species common only Baitadi are located in Quadrant D. The species positioned in Quadrant C were insignificant in uses and consensus (Fig 2).

Fig 2. Cultural consensus matrix of two groups (participants from Panchase, Kaski and Sigas, Baitadi).

Fig 2

Most of the species with low IASc value indicated that there were very few species with higher species consensus, offering the prospects of diversification hypothesis [60]. Local people introduce second priority and easily available species in their ethnomedicinal repertoire since the several options are available. It is also plausible that human communities that inhabit ecosystems diverse in species, diversify their repertoire and use different species [61], resulting in diverse knowledge of plant use. This is possible in this case since both Kaski and Baitadi, mid-hill districts of Nepal, are rich in biodiversity and serve variety of plants for folklore. The mid-hill region (also known as Middle Mountain) is characterized by sub-tropical and temperate bioclimates with a great variety of terrain types, ecosystems and wildlife [62], flowering plants [63, 64] and medicinal plants [32]. Because of the variety of medicinal plants available, people have tried using 20 medicinal plants only for the treatment of digestive system disorder.

However, P. polyphylla, B. ciliata and V. jatamansi were highly consented and competent in treatment of indigestion. Over 50 percent population lives in hills and mountains and it is complicated by persistent outmigration to cities [65]. Outmigration is rife in Panchase, Kaski [35, 54]. Farmlands are abandoned while emigration. Warming is a biggest threat in the hills and mountains [66]. A recent study shows the mid and far western hills and mountains are more sensitive to and affected by warming [67]. Conservation of medicinal plants and their associated traditional knowledge is in jeopardy in trajectory of poverty, migration, land use change and climate change [68, 69]. The hills and mountains not only have the highest percentage of poverty (42.3%) on average, but it is also increasing [70].

3.4 Plant use knowledge and socio-economic variables

Only one species S. chirayita was highly consented in both district indicated that the plant use knowledge was specific to the district groups and culturally divergent. The divergent and idiosyncratic knowledge revealed that the sample groups are unique knowledge holder. The plant use knowledge was specific to each district, corresponding to the heterogeneity of socio-economy and culture of the sites. The difference (p = 0.0003–0.95) in plant use knowledge was governed by socio-economy and culture (Table 3).

Table 3. Correlation coefficients of the variables used.

SN Explanatory variables Statistical values Number of ailments treated (p) Number of species used (p)
1 Age (Year) Min 36, Max 90, Mean 65, St Dev 9.87 0.836 0.692
2 Family member (Number) Min 3, Max 21, Mean 7.6, St Dev 2.98 0.934 0.093*
3 Land possess (Ropani) Min 2, Max 50, Mean 16.7, St Dev 9.87 0.178 0.142
4 Livestock (Number) Min 0, Max 21, Mean 5.2, St Dev 4.01 0.631 0.592
5 Long been settled (Year) Min 18, Max 200, Mean 125, St Dev 44.24 0.641 0.918
6 Traditional medicinal practice (Year) Min 0, Max 80, Mean 21.5, St Dev 17.93 0.956 0.500
7 Distance home-forest (Km) Min 0.25, Max 3, Mean 0.91, St Dev 0.65 0.945 0.788
8 Distance home-health center (Km) Min 0.25, Max 3, Mean 1.12, St Dev 0.78 0.0003*** 0.278
9 Ethnicity Gurung (37) 0.713 0.040*
BCO (39)
10 Gender Male (50) 0.091* 0.760
Female (26)
11 Education Literate (34) 0.711 0.888
Illiterate (42)
12 Food availability < 6 months (42) 0.360 0.056*
> 6 months (34)
13 Economy Poor (16) 0.062* 0.183
Medium (44)
Rich (16)
14 Site Baitadi 0.105 0.007**
Darchula
15 Economy x Gender 0.590 0.761
16 Ethnicity x Food availability 0.129 0.374

* Low significant

** Moderate significant

*** High significant, Confidence level 90%.

Of the variables tested, distance from home to health center (continuous variable) was the most significant (p = < 0.0003) followed by categorical variables (ethnicity: p = 0.040, food availability: p = 0.056, household economy: p = 0.062, gender: p = 0.091 and family member: p = 0.093). People use locally available medicinal plants for their primary health care because of the limited access and health care facilities available in the village. Summer grazing, herding and collection of medicinal plants and their uses is still persistent with some adaptation [71] among Gurung ethnic group of Kaski, Panchase area [69]. Gurung were mountain dwellers, herder of sheep, swidden farmers and trans-himalayan traders [72]. While herding, summer grazing, and collecting the medicinal plants, local people share the knowledge of plant identification, uses, and management. These traditional practices help hold and share the higher knowledge among the respondents of Kaski and revealed the significant difference (p = 0.040) in knowledge of medicinal plant collection and use. The average number of medicinal plants used was 5.1±2.25 whereas the number of medicinal plants used among Gurung communities was higher (5.8±2.4) and among Brahmin, Chhetri and others (BCO) was less (4.48±1.9). This could be a reason of frequent access to the forest. The average distance between home and forest for Gurung communities was 0.8±0.48 km while that for BCO was 1.01±0.78. Typically forest is adjacent to the Gurung village [73] that is a veritable natural pharmacopoeia. It has the purported potential to cure almost any afflictions. We did not find the significant difference in the number of livestock possesses, however the Gurung communities held higher number of livestock 6.43±4.05 than BCO (4.07±3.67).

The medicinal plant collection was also influenced by food availability (p = 0.056) and household economy (p = 0.062). Over 55% households have food insufficiency for > 6 months. There is little arable land and it is curtailed by the hills and steep terrain. Because of the insufficient food, household heads often go to nearby forests for collection of plants to complement the household food, economy and healthcare. Nearby forests, considered as open free access commodity [6] are often foraged for collecting fuelwood, vegetable, food plants, and medicinal plant collection and grazing.

Furthermore, utilization of medicinal plants between male and female participants was different (p = 0.09), yet it was not statistically significant. This could be a reason of the gendered division of labor in Nepal where males are often engaged in summer grazing, livestock herding, and extraction of plants from remote and rural areas whereas women are more likely to be involved in managing local resources that are available nearby. Pfeiffer and Butz [74] reported that plant use is differentiated with men and women due to resource access and their social roles. Education level, possession of livestock and land, length of residence and age of the respondents were not significantly associated with the ethnomedicinal knowledge. A weak association of these factors and plant use knowledge could be attributed to the (non-random) selective samples and the limited sharing of information. The secrecy of ethnomedicinal knowledge is a common practice [16] and traditional healers hardly share their knowledge to outsiders with the belief that effectiveness would decrease if knowledge is revealed [75]. Traditional healers generally believe that the medicines would lose their efficacy if too many people know about their use. Age also did not reveal a significant difference in the response, even though the 80–89 years group was more knowledgeable [22]. As education is associated with the loss of ethnobotanical knowledge in indigenous communities [76], the relation of education and ethnomedicinal knowledge in our study area was nonexistent. Combination of categorical variables also did not affect the number of medicinal plants used and the number of ailments treated. The number of medicinal plant species used between Kaski and Baitadi districts was found statistically significantly different (p = 0.007). The difference led that the knowledge was specific to each district, corresponding to the heterogeneity of socio-economy and culture of the sites. This result rejected our null hypothesis and supported that the plant use knowledge is associated with local socio-economy and culture.

3.5 Plant salient features and use values

Pinus roxburghii Sarg., Rhododendron arboreum Sm., Taxus contorta Griff., Ficus palmata Forssk., etc. were useful tree species of the area but they possessed the insignificant IASc value. However, they were the species with the highest salience index. There was weak relationship with plant use values and plant salient features (Fig 3), hinted that plant ecological traits are not adequate in explaining the factors of plant selection and use. Weak association of plant use values and salience index may be outweighed by the direct harvesting and/or by the popularity of the particular uses of that species. Species popularity and usefulness are related [18], meaning that the knowledge of plant use is less influenced by availability of plants (salient feature) and more dependent on cultural preoccupancy and resource quality. P. polyphylla (Satuwa) is one of the top five useful species in the area, and is popular for its medicinal uses since people believe that its seven leaves are useful for curing seven ailments (cultural preoccupancy) [13]. Moreover, B. ciliata rhizomes for indigestion and S. chirayita leaves for fever are folkloric [77].

Fig 3. Regression of plant use knowledge consensus (IASc) of participants along the gradients of plant salience index.

Fig 3

The healers in study area were picky to have the right species, composition and procedures when preparing ethnomedicine. Such directed harvesting influenced the collection of medicinal plants regardless of their distribution and salient features. Sousa et al. [18] found the weak association of salient plants and socio-economic factors. According to Thomas et al. [11] the phyto-sociological indices (abundance, availability) were more associated for non-medicinal use category (wood, fuel and construction uses).

4. Conclusions

Although the few accessible medicinal plant species possessed the higher use values, the overall medicinal plants’ use values were convergent to the socio-cultural variables. Gender, ethnicity, food availability, family size and household economy significantly affected the number of plants used and ailments treated. Moreover, direct harvesting and or the popularity of the particular uses of that species explained the higher plant use values. The knowledge of medicinal plant species use was associated with socio-economy and culture and significantly different at district level. To sum up, the knowledge of plant use in mid-hills of Nepal seems to follow a pattern according to available useful plants as well as the socio-cultural tradition. However, the latter prevails. Strategies acknowledging socio-economy, culture, and local ecosystem would be appropriate for conservation of medicinal plants and traditional knowledge in the mid-hills of Nepal.

Supporting information

S1 File. Questionnaire survey form.

(DOCX)

S1 Table

(CSV)

S2 Table. IASc value and salience index of plants.

(CSV)

Acknowledgments

The authors are thankful to the district forest offices for providing the grant to access the fields. Suresh Subedi, Prem Bhat, Shivraj Bhatt, Devendra Kunwar, Sony Baral, Ram Acharya are acknowledged for their supports for fieldwork and data analysis. Thanks are also due to Laxmi Mahat and Christopher Leboa for their feedback on earlier versions.

Data Availability

All relevant data are within the manuscript and its Supporting Information files.

Funding Statement

Ripu Kunwar received an Early Career Grant (EC-212R-18) from National Geographic Society (USA) for field travel in Baitadi. Kedar Baral and Prabhat Sapkota received grants from divisional forest offices for field visits. But the grants did not have any additional role in the study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript. The specific roles of the authors are given in the ‘author contributions’.

References

  • 1.Li M, Feng J. Biogeographical interpretation of elevational patterns of genus diversity of seed plants in Nepal. PLoS One. 2015;10: 1–16. 10.1371/journal.pone.0140992 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Hagen T. Report on the geological survey of Nepal. 1969, 86: 1–160. Denckschrift desschweizerischen Naturforschenden Gesellschaft. 1969; 1–160. [Google Scholar]
  • 3.LRMP. Land System Report. Land Resource Mapping Project (LRMP) Nepal. Kenting Earth Science, Canada; 1986.
  • 4.World Bank. Land of Nepal. New York: World Bank; 2020. Available: https://tradingeconomics.com/nepal/arable-land-percent-of-land-area-wb-data.html
  • 5.Sati B. Towards Sustainable Livelihoods and Ecosystems in Mountain Regions. New York: Springer, USA; 2014. [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Kunwar RM, Fadiman M, Hindle T, Suwal MK, Adhikari YP, Baral K, et al. Composition of forests and vegetation in the Kailash Sacred Landscape, Nepal. J For Res. 2019;31: 1625–1635. 10.1007/s11676-019-00987-w [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Manzardo AE, Dahal DR, Rai NK. The Byanshi: an ethnographic note on a trading group in far western Nepal. Contrib Nepalese Stud. 1976;3: 83–118. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Cameron M. Nepal Biodiversity and Medicinal Plants. Hum Organ. 1996;55: 84–92. [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Kunwar RM, Baral K, Paudel P, Acharya RP, Thapa-Magar KB, Cameron M, et al. Land-use and socioeconomic change, medicinal plant selection and biodiversity resilience in far Western Nepal. PLoS One. 2016;11 10.1371/journal.pone.0167812 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Rasul G, Choudhary D, Pandit BH, Kollmair M. Poverty and Livelihood Impacts of a Medicinal and Aromatic Plants Project in India and Nepal: An Assessment. Mt Res Dev. 2012;32: 137–148. 10.1659/MRD-JOURNAL-D-11-00112.1 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Thomas E, Vandebroek I, Van Damme P, Goetghebeur P, Douterlungne D, Sanca S, et al. The relation between accessibility, diversity and indigenous valuation of vegetation in the Bolivian Andes. J Arid Environ. 2009;73: 854–861. 10.1016/j.jaridenv.2009.03.010 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Weckerle CS, Huber F, Yongping Y, Weibang S. Plant knowledge of the Shuhi in the Hengduan mountains, Southwest China. Econ Bot. 2006;60: 3–23. [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Kunwar RM, Fadiman M, Cameron M, Bussmann RW, Thapa-Magar KB, Rimal B, et al. Cross-cultural comparison of plant use knowledge in Baitadi and Darchula districts, Nepal Himalaya. J Ethnobiol Ethnomed. 2018;14 10.1186/s13002-018-0242-7 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Manzardo AE. Manzardo ecological constrauints Darchula. Contrib Nepalese Stud. 1977; 63–81. [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Phillips O, Gentry AH. The useful plants of Tambopata, Peru: II. Additional hypothesis testing in quantitative ethnobotany. Econ Bot. 1993;47: 33–43. 10.1007/BF02862204 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Giday M, Asfaw Z, Elmqvist T, Woldu Z. An ethnobotanical study of medicinal plants used by the Zay people in Ethiopia. J Ethnopharmacol. 2003;85: 43–52. 10.1016/s0378-8741(02)00359-8 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Phillips O, Gentry AH. The useful plants of Tambopata, Peru: I. Statistical hypotheses tests with a new quantitative technique. Econ Bot. 1993;47: 15–32. 10.1007/BF02862203 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Sousa R da S, de Medeiros PM, Albuquerque UP. Can socioeconomic factors explain the local importance of culturally salient plants in a social-ecological system? Acta Bot Brasilica. 2019;33: 283–291. 10.1590/0102-33062018abb0320 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Reyes-Garcia V, Huanca T, Vadez V, Leonards W, Wilkie D. Cultural, Practical, and Economic Value of Wild Plants: A Quantitative Study in the Bolivian Amazon. Econ Bot. 2006;4: 291–295. 10.1663/0013-0001(2006)60 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Voeks RA. Are women reservoirs of traditional plant knowledge? Gender, ethnobotany and globalization in northeast Brazil. Singap J Trop Geogr. 2007;28: 7–20. 10.1111/j.1467-9493.2006.00273.x [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Atreya K, Pyakurel D, Singh K, Laxmi T, Bhatta D, Uprety Y. Factors Contributing to the Decline of Traditional Practices in Communities from the Gwallek–Kedar area, Kailash Sacred. Environ Manage. 2018. 10.1007/s00267-018-1009-6 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Mahwasane ST, Middleton L, Boaduo N. An ethnobotanical survey of indigenous knowledge on medicinal plants used by the traditional healers of the Lwamondo area, Limpopo province, South Africa. South African J Bot. 2013;88: 69–75. 10.1016/j.sajb.2013.05.004 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Müller JG, Boubacar R, Guimbo ID. The “How” and “Why” of Including Gender and Age in Ethnobotanical Research and Community-Based Resource Management. Ambio. 2014;44: 67–78. 10.1007/s13280-014-0517-8 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Singh A, Nautiyal MC, Kunwar RM, Bussmann RW. Ethnomedicinal plants used by local inhabitants of Jakholi block, Rudraprayag district, western Himalaya, India. J Ethnobiol Ethnomed. 2017;13 10.1186/s13002-017-0138-y [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Saslis-Lagoudakis CH, Williamson EM, Savolainen V, Hawkins JA. Cross-cultural comparison of three medicinal floras and implications for bioprospecting strategies. J Ethnopharmacol. 2011;135: 476–487. 10.1016/j.jep.2011.03.044 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Kunwar RM, Fadiman M, Thapa S, Acharya RP, Cameron M, Bussmann RW. Plant use values and phytosociological indicators: Implications for conservation in the Kailash Sacred Landscape, Nepal. Ecol Indic. 2020;108: 0–2. 10.1016/j.ecolind.2019.105679 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Bhatt VP. Loss of cultural values a threat to biodiversity in Uttaranchal Himalaya. Zoos’ Print J. 2002;17: 802–806. [Google Scholar]
  • 28.Skeldon R. MIGRATION IN FAR WEST NEPAL. Crit Asian Stud. 2011;43: 310–315. 10.1080/14672715.2011.570572 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Turner NJ, Clifton H. “It’s so different today”: Climate change and indigenous lifeways in British Columbia, Canada. Glob Environ Chang. 2009;19: 180–190. 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2009.01.005 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Paniagua-Zambrana NY, Camara-Lerét R, Bussmann RW, Macía MJ. The influence of socioeconomic factors on traditional knowledge: A cross scale comparison of palm use in northwestern South America. Ecol Soc. 2014;19 10.5751/ES-06934-190409 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 31.ICIMOD. Land cover of Nepal 2010 [Data set]. Kathmandu; 2010. Available: https://rds.icimod.org/Home/DataDetail?metadataId=9224
  • 32.Bhattarai KR, Maren I, Chaudhary R. Medicinal plant knowledge of the Panchase region in the middle hills of the Nepalese Himalayas. Banko Janakari. 2011;21: 31–39. [Google Scholar]
  • 33.Bhandari P, Budhamagar S, Shrestha KK. A checklist of flowering plants of Panchase Protected Forest, Kaski district, central Nepal. J Nat Hist Mus. 2018;30: 55–84. 10.3126/jnhm.v30i0.27538 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 34.Subedi A, Kunwar B, Choi Y, Dai Y, van Andel T, Chaudhary RP, et al. Collection and trade of wild-harvested orchids in Nepal. J Ethnobiol Ethnomed. 2013;9: 1–10. 10.1186/1746-4269-9-1 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 35.Koirala R. Botanical diversity within the project area of Machhapuchhre Development Organization, Bhadaure-Tamagi, Kaski. MDO, Kaski; 1998. [Google Scholar]
  • 36.Baral S, Adhikari A, Khanal R, Malla Y, Kunwar R, Basnyat B, et al. Invasion of alien plant species and their impact on different ecosystems of Panchase Area, Nepal. Banko Janakari. 2017;27: 31–42. 10.3126/banko.v27i1.18547 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 37.DFO. Sigas protected forest, Sigas, Baitadi. Divisional Forest Office, Baitadi; 2017.
  • 38.Bhatta D. Community approaches to natural resource management: sacred and non-sacred landscape in Nepal. Miami University, Oxford: 2003. [Google Scholar]
  • 39.Chhetri R, Pandey T. User group forestry in the Far-western region of Nepal: case studies from Baitadi and Achham. Kathmandu: ICIMOD, Nepal; 1992. [Google Scholar]
  • 40.Devkota R, Karmacharya S. Documentation of indigenous knowledge of medicinal plants in Gwallek VDC of Baitadi, Farwestern Nepal. Bot Orient. 2003;1: 135–143. [Google Scholar]
  • 41.Kunwar RM, Acharya RP, Chowdhary CL, Bussmann RW. Medicinal plant dynamics in indigenous medicines in farwest Nepal. J Ethnopharmacol. 2015;163: 210–219. 10.1016/j.jep.2015.01.035 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 42.Albuquerque U, Cunha L, Lucena R, Alves R. Methods and Techniques in Ethnobiology and Ethnoecology. Methods and Techniques in Ethnobiology and Ethnoecology. Humana Press; 2014. 10.1007/978-1-4614-8636-7 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 43.Malla B, Gauchan DP, Chhetri RB. An ethnobotanical study of medicinal plants used by ethnic people in Parbat district of Western Nepal. J Ethnopharmacol. 2015;165: 103–117. 10.1016/j.jep.2014.12.057 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 44.Subedi R. Ethnobotanical Study of Panchase Protected Forest, Kaski District, Central Nepal. Tibhuvan University; 2017. [Google Scholar]
  • 45.Martin GJ. Ethnobotany: A methods manual. New York: Chapman & Hall; 1995. 10.4324/9781849775854 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 46.Miller G, Britt H, O’Halloran J. International classification of primary care. Meeting of the WHO collaborating centers for the family of international classification. Seoul, Korea; 2009.
  • 47.Staub PO, Geck MS, Weckerle CS, Casu L, Leonti M. Classifying diseases and remedies in ethnomedicine and ethnopharmacology. J Ethnopharmacol. 2015;174: 514–519. 10.1016/j.jep.2015.08.051 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 48.Trotter R, Logan M. Informant Consensus: A New Approach for Identifying Potentially Effective Medicinal Plants. In: Etkin N, editor. Plants in Indigenous medicine and Diet, Behavioural Approaches. New York: Redgrave Publishing Company; 1986. pp. 91–112. [Google Scholar]
  • 49.Vandebroek I. The Dual Intracultural and Intercultural Relationship between Medicinal Plant Knowledge and Consensus. Econ Bot. 2010;64: 303–317. 10.1007/s12231-010-9135-y [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 50.Soldati GT, de Medeiros PM, Duque-Brasil R, Coelho FMG, Albuquerque UP. How do people select plants for use? Matching the Ecological Apparency Hypothesis with Optimal Foraging Theory. Environ Dev Sustain. 2017;19: 2143–2161. 10.1007/s10668-016-9844-1 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 51.Nunes AT, Cabral DLV, Amorim ELC, Santos MVF dos, Albuquerque UP. Plants used to feed ruminants in semi-arid Brazil: A study of nutritional composition guided by local ecological knowledge. J Arid Environ. 2016;135: 96–103. 10.1016/j.jaridenv.2016.08.015 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 52.Rivera D, O’Bon C, Inocencio C, Heinrich M, Verde A, Fajardo J, et al. Gathered food plants in the Mountains of Casilla—La Mancha (Spain): Ethnobotany and Multivariate Analyasis. Econ Bot. 2007;61: 269–289. [Google Scholar]
  • 53.Gurung LJ, Rajbhandary S. Medicinal Plants in Mid-hills of Nepal: A Case Study of Sikles Area of Kaski District. Medicinal plants in Nepal: Anthology of contemporary research. Kathmandu: Ecological Society of Nepal; 2017. pp. 152–173. [Google Scholar]
  • 54.Dixit A, Karki M, Shukla A. Vulnerability and Impacts Assessment for Adaptation Planning in Panchase Mountain Ecological Region, Nepal. 2014. [Google Scholar]
  • 55.Amouei A, Tirgar A, Ghadimi R, Hosseini SR. The Role of Health Care Apprentice Program on the Level of Medical Students ‘ Knowledge and Skills. Futur Med Educ J. 2015. [Google Scholar]
  • 56.Adhikari M, Thapa R, Kunwar RM, Devkota HP, Poudel P. Ethnomedicinal Uses of Plant Resources in the Machhapuchchhre Rural Municipality of Kaski District, Nepal. Medicines. 2019;6: 69 10.3390/medicines6020069 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 57.GON. Flowering Plants of Nepal: Phanerograms. Thapathali, Kathmandu: Department of Plant Resources, Thapatahli; 2001.
  • 58.Kunwar RM, Adhikari YP, Sharma HP, Rimal B, Devkota HP, Charmakar S, et al. Distribution, use, trade and conservation of Paris polyphylla Sm. in Nepal. Glob Ecol Conserv. 2020;23: e01081 10.1016/j.gecco.2020.e01081 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 59.Charmakar S, Oli B, Gauli K, Sharma H, Kunwar R. Habitat distribution modeling of Valeriana jatamansi Jones in Nepal. PeerJ. 2020. [Google Scholar]
  • 60.Alencar NL, de Sousa Araújo TA, de Amorim ELC, de Albuquerque UP. The inclusion and selection of medicinal plants in traditional pharmacopoeias-evidence in support of the diversification hypothesis. Econ Bot. 2010;64: 68–79. 10.1007/s12231-009-9104-5 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 61.Salick J, Ghimire SK, Fang Z, Dema S, Konchar KM. Himalayan Alpine Vegetation, Climate Change and Mitigation. J Ethnobiol. 2014;34: 276–293. [Google Scholar]
  • 62.Bhuju U, Shakya P, Basnet T, Shrestha S. Nepal Biodiversity Resource Book (Protected Areas, Ramsar Sites, and World Heritage Sites). Kathmandu: ICIMOD, Nepal; 2007. [Google Scholar]
  • 63.Vetaas OR, Grytnes JA. Distribution of vascular plant species richness and endemic richness along the Himalayan elevation gradient in Nepal. Glob Ecol Biogeogr. 2002;11: 291–301. 10.1046/j.1466-822X.2002.00297.x [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 64.Grau O, Grytnes JA, Birks HJB. A comparison of altitudinal species richness patterns of bryophytes with other plant groups in Nepal, Central Himalaya. J Biogeogr. 2007;34: 1907–1915. 10.1111/j.1365-2699.2007.01745.x [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 65.IOM. Migration in Nepal: a Country Profile. 2019; 155. Available: https://nepal.iom.int/sites/default/files/publication/Migration in Nepal—a Country Profile 2019.pdf
  • 66.Program WWF. An Overview of Glaciers, Glacier Retreat, and Subsequent Impacts in Nepal, India and China. 2005. [Google Scholar]
  • 67.Mainali J, Pricope NG. Mapping the need for adaptation: assessing drought vulnerability using the livelihood vulnerability index approach in a mid-hill region of Nepal. Clim Dev. 2019;11: 607–622. 10.1080/17565529.2018.1521329 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 68.Rimal B, Sharma R, Kunwar R, Keshtkar H, Stork NE, Rijal S, et al. Effects of land use and land cover change on ecosystem services in the Koshi River Basin, Eastern Nepal. Ecosyst Serv. 2019;38: 100963 10.1016/j.ecoser.2019.100963 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 69.Pokhrel G, Upadhyaya A, Thapa MS. Threats and Conservation of Paris polyphylla: Vulnerable Medicinal Plant in Panchase Protected Forest, Nepal. For J Inst For Nepal. 2019;16: 14–30. 10.3126/forestry.v16i0.28351 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 70.ADB. Country Poverty Analysis (Detailed). 2017. Available: https://www.adb.org/sites/default/files/linked-documents/cps-nep-2013-2017-pa-detailed.pdf
  • 71.Messerschmidt DA. Ecological change and adaptation among the Gurungs of the Nepal Himalaya. Hum Ecol. 1976;4: 167–185. 10.1007/BF01531219 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 72.Buchanan Hamilton F. An Account of the Kingdom of Nepal and of the Territories Annexed to the Dominion by the House of Gorkha, Constable, Edinburgh. 1819 (Reprint). Maiijusri, Bibliotheca Himalayica, New Delhi; 1971.
  • 73.Coburn B. Some native medicinal plants of the Western Gurung. Kailash. 1984;11: 55–88. [Google Scholar]
  • 74.Pfeiffer JM, Butz RJ. Assessing cultural and ecological variation in ethnobiological research: The importance of gender. J Ethnobiol. 2005;25: 240–278. 10.2993/0278-0771(2005)25[240:ACAEVI]2.0.CO;2 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 75.Bhattarai KR. Ethnobotanical study of plants used by Thami community in Ilam District, eastern Nepal. Our Nat. 2018;16: 55–67. [Google Scholar]
  • 76.Saynes-Vásquez A, Caballero J, Meave JA, Chiang F. Cultural change and loss of ethnoecological knowledge among the Isthmus Zapotecs of Mexico. J Ethnobiol Ethnomed. 2013;9: 1–10. 10.1186/1746-4269-9-1 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 77.Hasan M., Gatto P, Jha P. Traditional uses of wild medicinal plants and their management practices in Nepal-A study in Makawanpur district. Int J Med Aromat Plants. 2013;3: 102–112. Available: http://www.embase.com/search/results?subaction=viewrecord&from=export&id=L368927470%5Cnhttp://www.openaccessscience.com/pdf-files/vol3_1_mar2013/IJMAP_3_1_14_Makawanpur_district.pdf%5Cnhttp://sfx.library.uu.nl/utrecht?sid=EMBASE&issn=22494340&id=doi:&atit

Decision Letter 0

Rainer W Bussmann

18 Nov 2020

PONE-D-20-31088

Factors that influence the plant use knowledge in the middle mountains of Nepal

PLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Kunwar,

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS ONE. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS ONE’s publication criteria as it currently stands. Therefore, we invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that addresses the points raised during the review process.

Please submit your revised manuscript by Jan 02 2021 11:59PM. If you will need more time than this to complete your revisions, please reply to this message or contact the journal office at plosone@plos.org. When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.

Please include the following items when submitting your revised manuscript:

  • A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the academic editor and reviewer(s). You should upload this letter as a separate file labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.

  • A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.

  • An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Manuscript'.

If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter. Guidelines for resubmitting your figure files are available below the reviewer comments at the end of this letter.

If applicable, we recommend that you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io to enhance the reproducibility of your results. Protocols.io assigns your protocol its own identifier (DOI) so that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Rainer W. Bussmann

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Journal Requirements:

When submitting your revision, we need you to address these additional requirements.

1. Please ensure that your manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming. The PLOS ONE style templates can be found at

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=wjVg/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_main_body.pdf and

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=ba62/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_title_authors_affiliations.pdf

2.  Thank you for stating the following in the Acknowledgments Section of your manuscript:

"The author RMK is thankful to Early Career Grant of National Geographic Society, US

384 for providing partial supports for field work in Baitadi. Hari Sharma, Suresh Subedi,

385 Prem Bhat, Shivraj Bhatt, Devendra Kunwar, Sony Baral, Ram Acharya are

386 acknowledged for their supports for fieldwork and data analysis. Thanks are also due to

387 Laxmi Mahat and Christopher Leboa for their feedback on earlier versions."

i) We note that you have provided funding information that is not currently declared in your Funding Statement. However, funding information should not appear in the Acknowledgments section or other areas of your manuscript. We will only publish funding information present in the Funding Statement section of the online submission form.

ii) Please remove any funding-related text from the manuscript and let us know how you would like to update your Funding Statement. Currently, your Funding Statement reads as follows:

 "The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.".

 * Please include your amended statements within your cover letter; we will change the online submission form on your behalf.

3. We note that [Figure 1] in your submission contain map images which may be copyrighted. All PLOS content is published under the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY 4.0), which means that the manuscript, images, and Supporting Information files will be freely available online, and any third party is permitted to access, download, copy, distribute, and use these materials in any way, even commercially, with proper attribution. For these reasons, we cannot publish previously copyrighted maps or satellite images created using proprietary data, such as Google software (Google Maps, Street View, and Earth). For more information, see our copyright guidelines: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/licenses-and-copyright.

We require you to either (1) present written permission from the copyright holder to publish these figures specifically under the CC BY 4.0 license, or (2) remove the figures from your submission:

1.     You may seek permission from the original copyright holder of Figure [1] to publish the content specifically under the CC BY 4.0 license. 

We recommend that you contact the original copyright holder with the Content Permission Form (http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=7c09/content-permission-form.pdf) and the following text:

“I request permission for the open-access journal PLOS ONE to publish XXX under the Creative Commons Attribution License (CCAL) CC BY 4.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). Please be aware that this license allows unrestricted use and distribution, even commercially, by third parties. Please reply and provide explicit written permission to publish XXX under a CC BY license and complete the attached form.”

Please upload the completed Content Permission Form or other proof of granted permissions as an "Other" file with your submission.

In the figure caption of the copyrighted figure, please include the following text: “Reprinted from [ref] under a CC BY license, with permission from [name of publisher], original copyright [original copyright year].”

2.     If you are unable to obtain permission from the original copyright holder to publish these figures under the CC BY 4.0 license or if the copyright holder’s requirements are incompatible with the CC BY 4.0 license, please either i) remove the figure or ii) supply a replacement figure that complies with the CC BY 4.0 license. Please check copyright information on all replacement figures and update the figure caption with source information. If applicable, please specify in the figure caption text when a figure is similar but not identical to the original image and is therefore for illustrative purposes only.

The following resources for replacing copyrighted map figures may be helpful:

USGS National Map Viewer (public domain): http://viewer.nationalmap.gov/viewer/

The Gateway to Astronaut Photography of Earth (public domain): http://eol.jsc.nasa.gov/sseop/clickmap/

Maps at the CIA (public domain): https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/index.html and https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/cia-maps-publications/index.html

NASA Earth Observatory (public domain): http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/ 

Landsat: http://landsat.visibleearth.nasa.gov/

USGS EROS (Earth Resources Observatory and Science (EROS) Center) (public domain): http://eros.usgs.gov/#

Natural Earth (public domain): http://www.naturalearthdata.com/

[Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.]

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Partly

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

2. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

3. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

4. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

5. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: The manuscript has been well developed, it is very clear and concrete. However, the central topic of the manuscript, which is the influence of socioeconomic factors on traditional knowledge, has certain deficiencies, and it is the section with the least results and discussion.

Below you will find some suggestions and comments regarding the analysis and presentation of Socioeconomic data:

I suggest that a first version of Table 2 be included in the methods to clearly explain how the socioeconomic variables analyzed were categorized, it is important to know the units in which the continuous variables have been measured, and the maximum and minimum value. This is important to understand the influence of the variables within knowledge, to analyze the variations found between both ethnic groups and to allow the future to repeat the study considering the same variables.

The authors do not present detailed information about what type of statistical analysis they have carried out with the socioeconomic information.

The current Table 2 in the results could include descriptive information of the variables, which is included in the text but it would help much more to comparatively visualize the variation in the variables within each ethnic group. A new table could allow the authors to include the results of the statistical analyzes that they carried out and that allow to see the influence of the analyzed factors, as well as the results of the comparison between both communities.

It is important to consider in the discussion the representativeness of the different levels of the factors in the analyzes, age may have little influence because possibly all the people interviewed are the same age or there is a very wide variation. It is important to consider these aspects when discussing the data.

The authors do not present any type of analysis in relation to the representativeness of the socioeconomic factors on the results of the calculated indices.

The authors present the Results and the Discussions together, and I think that this has weakened the discussion of them, mainly the results that consider the analysis of socioeconomic factors.

In the conclusions, the authors generalize the influence of the factors towards both indigenous groups, and what they should do is analyze the reason for these differences in relation to the factors analyzed. And factors are mentioned that have not been evaluated or analyzed.

In general, it would help much more if the authors included tables with the data shown in the text, in this way the comparisons are much easier to visualize.

The questionnaires used to obtain the information of the interviewees should be included as supplementary material.

Reviewer #2: To

The Editor in Chief

PLOS-one

Dear Sir/Madam

Many many thanks for sending ms for review. I am sorry for delay the ms review. Now I read manuscript thoroughly and sending comments for your kind consideration.

Title of ms: Factors that influence the plant use knowledge in the middle mountains of Nepal

Ms Number: PONE-D-20-31088

� The present study, is focused to evaluated the cross-cultural plant use knowledge of two different ethnic groups (Gurung dominated, and Brahmin-Chhetri and others (BCO) dominated) to know that how their socioeconomic (gender, age, household size, education, economy, land possesses, livestock ownership, and food availability), and cultural (ethnicity, length of residence and length of healing practice) variables influence plant use.

� In the study a total of 11 socioeconomic and 2 physiographic independent variables (distance from home to forest and home to health center) were used for assessing the knowledge of medicinal plant use as dependent variable.

� The authors have carried out study in Sigas and Panchase, having similar ecophysiography, and important part of protected forests.

I personally appreciate the efforts of the authors to collect good information in the manuscript from the unique part of the Nepal Himalayan region. I also accept the study to be considered in the journal for publication. However, I have some comments to the authors to be addressed if possible, for quality of ms and its wide readership

Comments

2.2 Survey and data collection

• In semi-structured questionnaire interviews, what was possible questions asked from the villages to be added in methodology.

• In the interview, the participants were asked to list the three most important plants for traditional healing. What was the aim behind it?

• Voucher number of each identified plant species to be given in the manuscript.

2.3 Data analysis

• Matching information (use reports) from at least three respondents was considered a common response for quantitative analysis. I hope use report is related to informants responses for plants as medicine. How it is related to quantitative analysis?.

• Emic use types and etic categories to be described,

• Ecologically salient species to be described.

3.3 Agreement on species consensus

• I am not sure how the Quadrant A, B, C, D were assessed.

3.4 Plant use knowledge and socioeconomic variables

• Limited access to health centres compels people to use local resources for their primary health care. This is appropriate to say that the resources limitation affect its use.

• The medicinal plant collection was also influenced by food availability, household economy.

• If authors suggesting insufficient food to the villagers available. What is the reason for insufficient food? and what actually they are collecting to fulfill their needs from the nearby forests to be explained for provide more information of the study area.

3.5 Plant salient features and use values

• There was weak relationship with plant use values and plant salient features. In what way the weak relationship to be explained.

Conclusion

• Conclusion section to be improved.

In my personal view these inputs may be helpful to improve manuscripts.

Thanking you

Dr Munesh Kumar

**********

6. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: No

[NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files.]

While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/. PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Registration is free. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email PLOS at figures@plos.org. Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step.

PLoS One. 2021 Feb 11;16(2):e0246390. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0246390.r002

Author response to Decision Letter 0


19 Dec 2020

Reviewer #1: The manuscript has been well developed, it is very clear and concrete. However, the central topic of the manuscript, which is the influence of socioeconomic factors on traditional knowledge, has certain deficiencies, and it is the section with the least results and discussion.

Below you will find some suggestions and comments regarding the analysis and presentation of Socioeconomic data:

I suggest that a first version of Table 2 be included in the methods to clearly explain how the socioeconomic variables analyzed were categorized, it is important to know the units in which the continuous variables have been measured, and the maximum and minimum value. This is important to understand the influence of the variables within knowledge, to analyze the variations found between both ethnic groups and to allow the future to repeat the study considering the same variables.

As suggested, a new table (Table 1) was added in method section with better interpretation of units of continuous variables and sub-categories of categorical variables. Maximum, minimum, mean and standard deviation (dispersion of values) values were given in Table 3.

The authors do not present detailed information about what type of statistical analysis they have carried out with the socioeconomic information.

Multiple linear regression models and two-way anova were used. Now the MS has been improved with considering describing the models used. We are thankful to the reviewers.

The current Table 2 in the results could include descriptive information of the variables, which is included in the text but it would help much more to comparatively visualize the variation in the variables within each ethnic group. A new table could allow the authors to include the results of the statistical analyzes that they carried out and that allow to see the influence of the analyzed factors, as well as the results of the comparison between both communities.

As suggested, a table with description of variables was used in Method section and a table with statistical results (p value, st dev, max, min and mean values) of each variables used was discussed in RD section.

It is important to consider in the discussion the representativeness of the different levels of the factors in the analyzes, age may have little influence because possibly all the people interviewed are the same age or there is a very wide variation. It is important to consider these aspects when discussing the data. The authors do not present any type of analysis in relation to the representativeness of the socioeconomic factors on the results of the calculated indices.

We appreciated the suggestion and included the discussion of the other variables too. Earlier we focused only the discussion of statistically significant variables.

The authors present the Results and the Discussions together, and I think that this has weakened the discussion of them, mainly the results that consider the analysis of socioeconomic factors.

We also think that because of this reason the discussion was found weak. However now we have greatly value added the discussion section.

In the conclusions, the authors generalize the influence of the factors towards both indigenous groups, and what they should do is analyze the reason for these differences in relation to the factors analyzed. And factors are mentioned that have not been evaluated or analyzed.

Besides concluding the results for entire area, we also analyzed the results at district level and presented in conclusion, as suggested.

In general, it would help much more if the authors included tables with the data shown in the text, in this way the comparisons are much easier to visualize.

We added one more table.

The questionnaires used to obtain the information of the interviewees should be included as supplementary material.

Questionnaire was provided as supplementary file (S1 Table).

Reviewer #2: To

The Editor in Chief

PLOS-one

Dear Sir/Madam

Many many thanks for sending ms for review. I am sorry for delay the ms review. Now I read manuscript thoroughly and sending comments for your kind consideration.

Title of ms: Factors that influence the plant use knowledge in the middle mountains of Nepal

Ms Number: PONE-D-20-31088

¬ The present study, is focused to evaluated the cross-cultural plant use knowledge of two different ethnic groups (Gurung dominated, and Brahmin-Chhetri and others (BCO) dominated) to know that how their socioeconomic (gender, age, household size, education, economy, land possesses, livestock ownership, and food availability), and cultural (ethnicity, length of residence and length of healing practice) variables influence plant use.

¬ In the study a total of 11 socioeconomic and 2 physiographic independent variables (distance from home to forest and home to health center) were used for assessing the knowledge of medicinal plant use as dependent variable.

¬ The authors have carried out study in Sigas and Panchase, having similar eco-physiography, and important part of protected forests.

I personally appreciate the efforts of the authors to collect good information in the manuscript from the unique part of the Nepal Himalayan region. I also accept the study to be considered in the journal for publication. However, I have some comments to the authors to be addressed if possible, for quality of MS and its wide readership.

Comments

2.2 Survey and data collection

• In semi-structured questionnaire interviews, what was possible questions asked from the villages to be added in methodology.

The subjects for questionnaire interview were elucidated in the revised MS. In addition, questionnaire was provided as supplementary file for greater details. Questionnaire was provided as supplementary file (S1 Table).

• In the interview, the participants were asked to list the three most important plants for traditional healing. What was the aim behind it?

In order to avoid the data redundancies and to maintain the data consistency, we only asked three most important ethnomedicinal plants in each respondent. This could help sort out the highly valued medicinal plants in traditional culture.

• Voucher number of each identified plant species to be given in the manuscript.

Thank you for suggestion. We have now provided respective voucher code(s) of each species used in this study.

2.3 Data analysis

• Matching information (use reports) from at least three respondents was considered a common response for quantitative analysis. I hope use report is related to informants responses for plants as medicine. How it is related to quantitative analysis?.

In the interview, the participants were asked to list the three most important medicinal plants and their use details for traditional healing. From 58 ethnomedicinal plant species mentioned by 76 participants, a total of 419 emic use reports were reported. The use reports were grouped into 55 use types and 14 use categories for convenient analysis. Each species was reported for 2–43 use reports and each respondent recorded 1-12 use.

• Emic use types and etic categories to be described,

Described using Martin (1995).

• Ecologically salient species to be described.

Described as suggested.

3.3 Agreement on species consensus

• I am not sure how the Quadrant A, B, C, D were assessed.

Second paragraph of section 3.3 described each quadrant.

3.4 Plant use knowledge and socioeconomic variables

• Limited access to health centres compels people to use local resources for their primary health care. This is appropriate to say that the resources limitation affect its use.

Thank you for suggestion. We paraphrased as suggested.

• The medicinal plant collection was also influenced by food availability, household economy.

• If authors suggesting insufficient food to the villagers available. What is the reason for insufficient food? and what actually they are collecting to fulfill their needs from the nearby forests to be explained for provide more information of the study area.

Third paragraph of the section 3.4 describes. There is little arable land and it is curtailed by the hills and steep terrain.

3.5 Plant salient features and use values

• There was weak relationship with plant use values and plant salient features. In what way the weak relationship to be explained.

Weak association of plant use values and salience index may be outweighed by the direct harvesting and/or by the popularity of the particular uses of that species.

Conclusion

• Conclusion section to be improved.

Revised and improved as suggested.

Attachment

Submitted filename: Response to reviewers.12.18.docx

Decision Letter 1

Rainer W Bussmann

18 Jan 2021

Factors that influence the plant use knowledge in the middle mountains of Nepal

PONE-D-20-31088R1

Dear Dr. Kunwar,

We’re pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been judged scientifically suitable for publication and will be formally accepted for publication once it meets all outstanding technical requirements.

Within one week, you’ll receive an e-mail detailing the required amendments. When these have been addressed, you’ll receive a formal acceptance letter and your manuscript will be scheduled for publication.

An invoice for payment will follow shortly after the formal acceptance. To ensure an efficient process, please log into Editorial Manager at http://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/, click the 'Update My Information' link at the top of the page, and double check that your user information is up-to-date. If you have any billing related questions, please contact our Author Billing department directly at authorbilling@plos.org.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please notify them about your upcoming paper to help maximize its impact. If they’ll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team as soon as possible -- no later than 48 hours after receiving the formal acceptance. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information, please contact onepress@plos.org.

Kind regards,

Rainer W. Bussmann

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Additional Editor Comments (optional):

Reviewers' comments:

Acceptance letter

Rainer W Bussmann

25 Jan 2021

PONE-D-20-31088R1

Factors that influence the plant use knowledge in the middle mountains of Nepal

Dear Dr. Kunwar:

I'm pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been deemed suitable for publication in PLOS ONE. Congratulations! Your manuscript is now with our production department.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please let them know about your upcoming paper now to help maximize its impact. If they'll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team within the next 48 hours. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information please contact onepress@plos.org.

If we can help with anything else, please email us at plosone@plos.org.

Thank you for submitting your work to PLOS ONE and supporting open access.

Kind regards,

PLOS ONE Editorial Office Staff

on behalf of

Dr. Rainer W. Bussmann

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Associated Data

    This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

    Supplementary Materials

    S1 File. Questionnaire survey form.

    (DOCX)

    S1 Table

    (CSV)

    S2 Table. IASc value and salience index of plants.

    (CSV)

    Attachment

    Submitted filename: Response to reviewers.12.18.docx

    Data Availability Statement

    All relevant data are within the manuscript and its Supporting Information files.


    Articles from PLoS ONE are provided here courtesy of PLOS

    RESOURCES