How do people select plants for use? Matching the Ecological Apparency Hypothesis with Optimal Foraging Theory

Environment, Development and Sustainability

pp 1–19

• Authors
• Authors and affiliations

• Gustavo Taboada SoldatiEmail author
• Patrícia Muniz de Medeiros
• Reinaldo Duque-Brasil
• France Maria Gontijo Coelho
• Ulysses Paulino AlbuquerqueEmail author

1. 1.
2. 2.
3. 3.
4. 4.

Article

First Online: 

12 August 2016

DOI: 10.1007/s10668-016-9844-1

Cite this article as:

Soldati, G.T., de Medeiros, P.M., Duque-Brasil, R. et al. Environ Dev Sustain (2016). doi:10.1007/s10668-016-9844-1

• 1Citations
 
• 1Shares
 
• 172Downloads

Abstract

The present study aimed to understand human plant resource usage strategies in the context of the Ecological Apparency Hypothesis and Optimal Foraging Theory. The relationship between plant resource knowledge and availability was tested in a rural community (Palmital) in a dry Atlantic Forest fragment in the state of Minas Gerais, Southeastern Brazil, using data from phytosociological studies and interviews. We considered both total use and separate use categories. Use Value (UV) was significantly associated with all of the analyzed ecological variables, but there was an association with relative dominance and a weak relationship with relative density. When the UVs were separately analyzed for each category, we found that some, i.e., fuel and construction, corroborate the Ecological Apparency Hypothesis, while others do not, particularly the medicinal and food categories. In addition, we found large differences with respect to the ecological variables that best correlated with UV. The data suggest that the cost/benefit relationship predicted by Optimal Foraging Theory can explain the Ecological Apparency Hypothesis when the following factors are considered: (a) resource acquisition optimization and security; (b) a higher probability of acquiring more abundant species during random collection events; and (c) differential utilization patterns (distinct requirements for a specific use) for each use category. Some implications for conservation are also discussed.

Keywords

Ecological apparency theory Human adaptive strategies Plant resource use Optimization theories Human ecology Evolutionary ethnobiology  

References

1. Ab’Sáber, A. (2003). Os domínios da natureza no Brasil: potencialidades paisagísticas. São Paulo: Ateliê Editorial.Google Scholar
2. Albuquerque, U. P. (2005). Introdução à etnobotânica. Rio de Janeiro: Interciência.Google Scholar
3. Albuquerque, U. P. (2010). Implications of ethnobotanical studies on bioprospecting strategies of new drugs in semi-arid regions. The Open complementary Medicine Journal, 2, 21–23. doi:10.2174/1876391X01002020021.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4. Albuquerque, U. P., Andrade, L. H. C., & Silva, A. C. O. (2005). Use of plant resources in a seasonal dry forest (Northeastern Brazil). Acta Botanica Brasilica, 19, 1–16. doi:10.1590/S0102-33062005000100004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5. Albuquerque, U. P., & Lucena, R. F. P. (2005). Can apparency affect the use of plants by local people in a tropical forests? Interciência, 30, 506–511.Google Scholar
6. Albuquerque, U. P., Ramos, M. A., Lucena, R. F. P., & Alencar, N. L. (2014). Methods and techniques used to collect ethnobiological data. In U. P. Albuquerque, R. F. P. Lucena, & L. V. F. C. Cunha (Eds.), Methods and techniques used to collect ethnobiological data (pp. 41–72). New York: Springer.Google Scholar
7. Albuquerque, U. P., Soldati, G. T., Ramos, M. A., Melo, J. G., Medeiros, P. M., Borba, N. A., et al. (2015). The influence of the environment on natural resource use: Evidence of apparency. In U. P. Albuquerque, P. M. Medeiros, & A. Casas (Eds.), Evolutionary ethnobiology (pp. 131–147). Switzerland: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
8. Alencar, N. L., Araújo, T. A. S., Amorim, E. L. C., & Albuquerque, U. P. (2009). Can the Apparency Hypothesis explain the selection of medicinal plants in an area of caatinga vegetation? A chemical perspective. Acta Botanica Brasílica, 23, 908–909. doi:10.1590/S0102-33062009000300033.Google Scholar
9. Alencar, N. L., Araújo, T. A. S., Amorim, E. L. C., & Albuquerque, U. P. (2010). The inclusion and selection of medicinal plants in traditional pharmacopoeias evidence in support of the diversification hypothesis. Economic Botany, 64, 68–79. doi:10.1007/s12231-009-9104-5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
10. Almeida, C. F. C. B. R., Silva, T. C. L., Amorim, E. L. C., Maia, M. B. S., & Albuquerque, U. P. (2005). Life strategy and chemical composition as predictors of the selection of medicinal plants from the caatinga (Northeast Brazil). Journal of Arid Environments, 62, 127–142. doi:10.1016/j.jaridenv.2004.09.020.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
11. Ankli, A., Sticher, O., & Heinrich, M. (1999). Yucatec Maya medicinal plants versus non medicinal plants: indigenous characterization and selection. Human Ecology, 27, 557–580. doi:10.1023/A:1018791927215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
12. Araújo, T. A. S., Alencar, N. L., Amorim, E. L. C., & Albuquerque, U. P. (2008). A new approach to study medicinal plants with tannins and flavonoids contents from the local knowledge. Journal of Ethnopharmacology, 120, 72–80. doi:10.1016/j.jep.2008.07.032.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
13. Ayantunde, A. A., Hiernaux, P., Briejer, M., Udo, H., & Tabo, R. (2009). Uses of local plant species by agropastoralists in south-western Niger. Ethnobotany Research and Applications, 7, 053–066.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
14. Ayres, M., Ayres, J., Ayres, D. L., & Santos, A. A. S. (2007). BioEstat: aplicações estatísticas nas áreas das ciências bio-médicas. Tefé: Instituto de Desenvolvimento Sustentável Mamirauá.Google Scholar
15. Begon, M., Towsend, C. R., & Harper, J. L. (2006). Ecology: From individuals to ecosystems. Malden: Blackwell Publishing.Google Scholar
16. Begossi, A. (1993). Ecologia Humana: um enfoque das relações homem-ambiente. Interciência,57, 121–132.Google Scholar
17. Begossi, A., & Richerson, P. J. (1992). The animal diet of families from Búzios Island: An optimal foraging approach. Journal of Human Ecology, 3, 433–458.Google Scholar
18. Blanco, J., & Carriére, S. M. (2016). Sharing local ecological knowledge as a human adaptation strategy to arid environments: Evidence from an ethnobotany survey in Morocco. Journal of Arid Environments, 127, 30–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
19. Chettri, N., & Sharma, E. (2007). Firewood value assessment: A comparison on local preference and wood constituent properties of species from a trekking corridor, West Sikkim, India. Current Science, 92, 1744–1747.Google Scholar
20. Clement, C. R., Denevan, W. M., Heckenberger, M. J., Junqueira, A. B., Neves, E. G., Teixeira, W. G., et al. (2015). The domestication of Amazonia before European conquest. Proceedings of the Royal Society B, 282, 1–9.Google Scholar
21. Coe, F. G., & Anderson, G. J. (1999). Ethnobotany of the Sumu (Ulwa) of Southeastern Nicaragua and comparisons with Miskitu plant lore. Economic Botany, 53, 363–386. doi:10.1007/BF02866715.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
22. Cunha, L. V. F. C., & Albuquerque, U. P. (2006). Quantitative ethnobotany in an Atlantic Forest fragment of Northeastern Brazil—Implication to conservation. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 114, 1–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
23. Dahdouh-guebas, F., Mathenge, C., Kairo, J. G., & Koedam, N. (2000). Utilization of mangrove wood products around mida creek (Kenya) amongst subsistence and commercial users. Economic Botany, 54, 513–527. doi:10.1007/BF02866549.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
24. Drummond, G. M., Martins, C. S., Machado, A. B. M., Sebaio, F. A., & Antonini, Y. (2005). Biodiversidade em Minas Gerais: um atlas para sua conservação. Belo Horizonte: Fundação Biodiversitas.Google Scholar
25. Estomba, D., Ladio, A., & Lozada, M. (2006). Medicinal wild plant knowledge and gathering patterns in a Mapuche community from North-western Patagonia. Journal of Ethnopharmacology, 103, 109–119. doi:10.1016/j.jep.2005.07.015.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
26. Feeny, P. (1976). Plant apparency and chemical defense. In J. W. Wallace & R. L. Nansel (Eds.), Biological interactions between plants and insects. Recent advances in phytochemistry 10 (pp. 1–40). New York: Plenum Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
27. Ferraz, J. S. F., Albuquerque, U. P., & Meunie, I. M. J. (2006). Valor de uso e estrutura da vegetação lenhosa às margens do riacho do Navio, Floresta, PE, Brasil. Acta Botanica Brasílica,20, 125–134. doi:10.1590/S0102-33062006000100012.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
28. Galeano, G. (2000). Forest use at the Pacific Coast of Chocó, Colômbia: a quantitative approach. Economic Botany, 54, 358–376. doi:10.1007/BF02864787.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
29. Gonçalves, P. H. S., Albuquerque, U. P., & Medeiros, P. M. (2016). The most commonly available woody plant species are the most useful for human populations: A meta-analysis. Ecological Applications. doi:10.1002/eap.1364.Google Scholar
30. Guèze, M., Luz, A. C., Paneque-Gálvez, J., Macia, M. J., Orta-Martinez, M., Pino, J., Reyes-García, V. (2014). Are ecologically important tree species the most useful? A case study from indigenous people in the Bolivian Amazon. Economic Botany , 68(1). doi:10.1007/s12231-014-9257-8.
31. IBGE, Instituto Brasileiro de Geografia e Estatística (2010) Cidades. http://www.ibge.gov.br/cidadesat/topwindow.htm?1. 27 November 2012.
32. Jin, C., Yin-Chun, S., Gui-Qin, C., & Wen-Dun, W. (1999). Ethnobotanical studies on wild edible fruits in southern yunnan: Folk names; nutritional value and uses. Economic Botany, 53, 2–14. doi:10.1007/BF02860785.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
33. Ladio, A. H., & Lozada, M. (2000). Edible wild plant use in a Mapuche community of Northwestern Patagonia. Human Ecology, 28, 53–71. doi:10.1023/A:1007027705077.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
34. Lawrence, A., Phillips, O. L., Reategui, A., Lopez, M., Rose, S., Wood, D. E., et al. (2005). Local values for harvested forest plants in Madre de Dios, Peru: Towards a more contextualised interpretation of quantitative ethnobotanical data. Biodiversity and Conservation, 14, 45–79. doi:10.1007/s10531-005-4050-8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
35. Leonti, M., Sticher, O., & Heinrich, M. (2002). Medicinal plants of the Popoluca, México: Organoleptic properties as indigenous selection criteria. Journal of Ethnopharmacology, 81, 307–315. doi:10.1016/S0378-8741(02)00078-8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
36. Lucena, R. F. P., Araújo, E. L., & Albuquerque, U. P. (2007). Does the local availability of woody caatinga plants (Northeastern Brazil) explain their use value? Economic Botany, 61, 347–361. doi:10.1663/0013-0001(2007)61[347:DTLAOW]2.0.CO;2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
37. Lucena, R. F. P., Medeiros, P. M., Araújo, E. L., & Alves, A. G. C. (2012). Albuquerque UP (2012) The ecological apparency hypothesis and the importance of useful plants in rural communities from Northeastern Brazil: An assessment based on use value. Journal of Environmental Management, 96, 106–115. doi:10.1016/j.jenvman.2011.09.001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
38. Marangon, L. C. (1999). Florística e fitossociologia de uma área florestal estacional semidecidual visando a dinâmica de espécies florestais arbóreas no município de Viçosa, MG. Dissertation, Universidade Federal de Viçosa
39. Marufu, L., Ludwing, J., Andreae, M. O., & Meixner, F. X. (1997). Domestic biomass burning in rural and urban Zimbabwe—Part A. Biomass and Bioenergy, 12, 53–68. doi:10.1016/S0961-9534(96)00067-0.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
40. Medeiros, P. M., Almeida, A. L. S., Silva, T. C., & Albuquerque, U. P. (2010). Pressure indicators of wood resource use in an Atlantic forest area, northeastern Brazil. Environmental Management,. doi:10.1007/s00267-011-9618-3.Google Scholar
41. Minnis, P. E. (2000). Famine foods of the North American Desert Borderlands in historical context. In P. E. Minnis (Ed.), Ethnobotany: A reader (pp. 214–242). Oklahoma: University of Oklahoma Press.Google Scholar
42. Moerman, D. E. (1979). Symbols and selectivity: A statistical analysis of native American medical ethnobotany. Journal of Ethnopharmacology, 1, 111–119. doi:10.1016/0378-8741(79)90002-3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
43. Mueller-Dombois, D., & Ellenberg, H. (1974). Aims and methods of vegetation ecology. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
44. Phillips, O., & Gentry, A. H. (1993a). The useful plants of Tambopata, Peru: I. Statistical hypotheses test with new quantitative technique. Economic Botany, 47, 15–32. doi:10.1007/BF02862203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
45. Phillips, O., & Gentry, A. H. (1993b). The useful plants of Tambopata, Peru: II. Additional hypothesis testing in quantitative ethnobotany. Economic Botany, 47, 33–43. doi:10.1007/BF02862204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
46. Pierre, G. J., & Ollason, J. G. (1987). Eight reasons why optimal foraging theory is a complete waste of time. Oikos, 1, 111–117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
47. Prefeitura de Viçosa. (2010). A Cidade. http://www.vicosa.mg.gov.br/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=46&Itemid=57. 28 November 2012
48. Pyke, G. H. (1984). Optimal foraging theory a critical review. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics, 15, 523–575.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
49. Ramos, M. A., Medeiros, P. M., Almeida, A. L., Feliciano, A. L., & Albuquerque, U. P. (2008a). Can wood quality justify local preferences for rewood in an area of caatinga (dryland) vegetation? Biomass and Bioenergy, 32, 503–509. doi:10.1016/j.biombioe.2007.11.010.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
50. Ramos, M. A., Medeiros, P. M., Almeida, A. L., Feliciano, A. L., & Albuquerque, U. P. (2008b). Use and knowledge of fuelwood in an area of Caatinga vegetation in NE Brazil. Biomass and Bioenergy, 32, 510–517. doi:10.1016/j.biombioe.2007.11.015.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
51. Rhoades, D. F., & Cates, R. G. (1976). Toward a general theory of plant antiherbivore chemistry. In J. W. Wallace, & R. L. Nansel (Eds.), Biological interactions between plants and insects. Recent advances in phytochemistry 10 (pp 169–213). New York: Plenum Press.Google Scholar
52. Ribas, R. F., Meira Neto, J. A. A., Silva, A. F., & Souza, A. L. (2003). Composição florística de dois trechos em diferentes etapas serais de uma Floresta Estacional Semidecidual em Viçosa, Minas Gerais. Revista Árvore, 27, 821–830. doi:10.1590/S0100-67622003000600008.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
53. Santos, L. L., Vieira, F. J., Nascimento, L. G. S., Silva, A. C. O., Santos, L. L., & Sousa, G. M. (2014). Techniques for collecting and processing plant material and their application in ethnobotany research. In U. P. Albuquerque, R. F. P. Lucena, & L. V. F. C. Cunha (Eds.), Methods and techniques used to collect ethnobiological data (pp. 161–172). New York: Springer.Google Scholar
54. Setz, E. Z. F. (1989). Estratégias de Forrageio em Populações Indígenas de Florestas Neotropicais. In N. Walter (Ed.), Biologia e Ecologia Humana na Amazônia: Avaliação e Perspectivas, Escopo (pp. 77–94)
55. Silva, C. T. (2003). Dinâmica da vegetação arbórea de uma floresta secundária no município de Viçosa, Minas Gerais. Dissertation, Universidade Federal de Viçosa.
56. Silva, A. C. O., & Albuquerque, U. P. (2005). Woody medicinal plants of the Caatinga in the state of Pernambuco. Acta Botanica Brasílica, 19, 17–26. doi:10.1590/S0102-33062005000100003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
57. Soldati, G. T., Duque Brasil, R., Silva, T. C., Coelho, F. M. G., & Albuquerque, U. P. (2011). Conhecimento botânico e representações ambientais em uma comunidade rural no domínio atlântico: bases para conservação local. Sitientibus Série Ciências Biológicas, 11, 265–278.Google Scholar
58. Stepp, J. R., & Moerman, D. E. (2001). The importance of weeds in ethnopharmacology. Journal of Ethnopharmacology, 75, 19–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
59. Tabuti, J., Dhilliona, S., & Lyea, K. (2003). Firewood use in Bulamogi County, Uganda species selection, harvesting and consumption patterns. Biomass and Bioenergy, 25, 581–596. doi:10.1016/S0961-9534(03)00052-7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
60. Top, N. (2004). Variation in woodfuel consumption patterns in response to forest availability in Kampong Thom Province, Cambodia. Biomass and Bioenergy, 27, 57–68. doi:10.1016/j.biombioe.2003.10.008.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
61. Torre-Cuadros, M. A., & Islebe, G. A. (2003). Traditional ecological knowledge and use of vegetation in southeastern Mexico: A case study from Solferino, Quintana Roo. Biodiversity and Conservation, 12, 2455–2476. doi:10.1023/A:1025861014392.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
62. Valverde, O. (1958). Estudo regional da Zona da Mata de Minas Gerais. Revista Brasileira de Geografia, 20, 1–82.Google Scholar
63. Veloso, H. P., Rangel Filho, A. L. R., & Lima, J. C. A. (1991). Classificação da vegetação brasileira adaptada a um sistema universal. Brasília: Instituto Brasileiro de Geografia e Estatística.Google Scholar
64. Walters, B. B. (2005). Patterns of local wood use and cutting of Philippine mangrove forests. Economic Botany, 59, 66–76. doi:10.1663/0013-0001(2005)059[0066:POLWUA]2.0.CO;2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2016