Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27659258›Full record

ArticleJournal of ethnobiology and ethnomedicine2016

A comparative ethnobotany of Khevsureti, Samtskhe-Javakheti, Tusheti, Svaneti, and Racha-Lechkhumi, Republic of Georgia (Sakartvelo), Caucasus.

Rainer W Bussmann, Narel Y Paniagua Zambrana, Shalva Sikharulidze, Zaal Kikvidze, David Kikodze, David Tchelidze, Manana Khutsishvili, Ketevan Batsatsashvili, Robbie E Hart

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of ethnobiology and ethnomedicine, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

11 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. CaucasianMetabolites · 2019
    Article
  11. Article
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

9 authors.

Rainer W BussmannWilliam L. Brown Center, Missouri Botanical Garden, P.O. Box 299, St. Louis, Missouri, 63166-0299, USA. rainer.bussmann@mobot.org.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3524-5273
Narel Y Paniagua ZambranaHerbario Nacional de Bolivia, Instituto de Ecología-UMSA, Campus Universitario, Cota Cota Calle 27, La Paz, Bolivia.
Shalva SikharulidzeInstitute of Botany and Bakuriani Alpine Botanical Garden, Ilia State University, Botanikuri St. 1, 0105, Tbilisi, Georgia.
Zaal Kikvidze4-D Research Institute, Ilia State University, 5, Cholokasvili Ave, 0162, Tbilisi, Georgia.
David KikodzeInstitute of Botany and Bakuriani Alpine Botanical Garden, Ilia State University, Botanikuri St. 1, 0105, Tbilisi, Georgia.
David TchelidzeInstitute of Botany and Bakuriani Alpine Botanical Garden, Ilia State University, Botanikuri St. 1, 0105, Tbilisi, Georgia.
Manana KhutsishviliInstitute of Botany and Bakuriani Alpine Botanical Garden, Ilia State University, Botanikuri St. 1, 0105, Tbilisi, Georgia.
Ketevan BatsatsashviliInstitute of Botany and Bakuriani Alpine Botanical Garden, Ilia State University, Botanikuri St. 1, 0105, Tbilisi, Georgia.
Robbie E HartWilliam L. Brown Center, Missouri Botanical Garden, P.O. Box 299, St. Louis, Missouri, 63166-0299, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe Republic of Georgia (Sakartvelo in Georgian language) is part of the Caucasus biodiversity hotspot, and human agricultural plant use dates bat at least 6000 years. However, little ethnobiological research has been published from the region since the 1940s. Given the lack of recent research in the region, the present study we report on plant uses in Skartvelo (Republic of Georgia), Caucasus. We hypothesized that, (1) given the long tradition of plant use, and the isolation under Soviet rule, plant use both based on homegardens and wild harvesting would be more pronounced in Georgia than in the wiser region, (2) the Soviet occupation would have had broad influence on plant use, and (3) there would still be incidence of knowledge loss despite wide plant use.

methodsFieldwork was conducted in Khevsureti, Samtskhe-Javakheti, Tusheti, Svaneti, and Racha in July-August 2013, July-August 2014, and September-October 2015. Interviews using semi-structured questionnaires were conducted with 170 participants (80 women and 90 men) after obtaining their oral prior informed consent. All interviews were carried out in the participants' homes and gardens by native speakers of Georgian and its local dialects (Svan, Tush, Khevsur, Psav), or, where participants spoke these as their native language, Armenian, Russian, or Greek.

resultsIn the present study we encountered 480 plant species belonging to 249 genera of 95 families being used in the research region. The highest number of species and of unique species were reported from the remote Tusheti-Khevsureti region. Informant consensus and number of use reports were highest for each region in the food and medicinal use categories. Of the 480 plants being used in the research region 282 species were exclusively wild-harvested, 103 were grown in homegardens, and 84 were both grown in gardens and sourced in the wild.

conclusionsPlant species, and uses, found in our study, both for Georgia in general, as well as for its regions, showed clear relations to the wider Caucasus - Asia Minor - Balkans cultural complex. However, plant use in Georgia was much more diverse than reported in other studies from Eurasia.

Indexed as

CaucasusConservationKnowledge lossRepublic of GeorgiaTraditional knowledge

Identifiers

PMID27659258
PMCPMC5034577

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.