Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25925402›Full record

ArticleJournal of ethnobiology and ethnomedicine2015

Ethnoveterinary plants and practices used for ecto-parasite control in semi-arid smallholder farming areas of Zimbabwe.

Emmanuel Tendai Nyahangare, Brighton Marimanzi Mvumi, Tonderai Mutibvu

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of ethnobiology and ethnomedicine, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed
3.0field-weighted citation impact, top 10% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

19 citing papers in PubMed, 68 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. The effect ofVeterinary world · 2020
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Evidence-based complementary and alternative medicine : eCAM · 2017
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Emmanuel Tendai NyahangareDepartment of Animal Science, Faculty of Agriculture, University of Zimbabwe, P O Box MP167, Mt Pleasant, Harare, Zimbabwe. nyahangaree@gmail.com.
Brighton Marimanzi MvumiDepartment of Soil Science and Agricultural Engineering, Faculty of Agriculture, University of Zimbabwe, P O Box MP 167, Mt Pleasant, Harare, Zimbabwe. mvumibm@hotmail.com.
Tonderai MutibvuDepartment of Animal Science, Faculty of Agriculture, University of Zimbabwe, P O Box MP167, Mt Pleasant, Harare, Zimbabwe. tmutibvu@gmail.com.
University of Zimbabwe · ZW

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe inclusion of traditional plant-based ecto-parasite control methods in primary health care of livestock is increasingly becoming an important intervention for improving livestock productivity in resource-challenged smallholder farming areas. In this study, commonly used plants used for the control of cattle ticks and other pests were identified through a survey in four semi-arid districts of Zimbabwe.

methodsA standard structured questionnaire with details of demographics, socioeconomic status of households, livestock parasites, control practices and list of ethnoveterinary plants used was used to interview 233 knowledgeable smallholder farmers in four districts. Focus group discussions with community members further provided insights on how the plants were being used and other issues surrounding ecto-parasite control and indigenous knowledge systems in the study areas.

resultsThe older generation (>40 years) of the respondents were knowledgeable about ethnoveterinary plants and practices. Overall, 51 plant species were reportedly effective against cattle ticks and other livestock parasites. The most frequently mentioned plants were in descending order, Cissus quadrangularis (30.1%), Lippia javanica (19.6%), Psydrax livida (14.9%) and Aloe sp (14.9%). Most of the plant materials were prepared by crushing and soaking in water and spraying the extract on animals. Despite the knowledge of these useful pesticidal plants, the preferred animal health care for cattle and other highly ranked livestock species is still the use of commercial acaricides. Cattle dipping services were reported sporadic by 48% of the respondents. Traditional knowledge and plants are considered only as an alternative in the absence of conventional synthetic products.

conclusionsLivestock farming communities know of plant species used for livestock ecto-parasite control. The plant species are mostly used to complement commercial products. More work, is required to confirm the acaricidal properties claimed by the farmers in order to optimize and promote sustainable use of these plants.

Indexed as

Plants, MedicinalAdultAgedAged, 80 and overAnimal HusbandryAnimalsCattleEctoparasitic InfestationsFemaleFocus GroupsHumansInterviews as TopicLivestockMaleMedicine, African TraditionalMiddle Aged

Identifiers

PMID25925402
PMCPMC4449613
OpenAlexW2025693796

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.