Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37501975›Full record

ArticleHeliyon2023

Ethnoveterinary practises of medicinal plants used for the treatment of different cattle diseases: A case study in East Khasi Hill district of Meghalaya, North East India.

Nazir Ahmad Bhat, Licha Jeri, Dolly Karmakar, Puranjoy Mipun, Pankaj Bharali, Nilofer Sheikh, Chester John Nongkynrih, Yogendra Kumar

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Heliyon, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
5.6field-weighted citation impact, top 5% 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Nazir Ahmad BhatCentre for Advanced Studies in Botany, North-Eastern Hill University, Shillong, 793022, Meghalaya, India.
Licha JeriCentre for Advanced Studies in Botany, North-Eastern Hill University, Shillong, 793022, Meghalaya, India.
Dolly KarmakarCentre for Advanced Studies in Botany, North-Eastern Hill University, Shillong, 793022, Meghalaya, India.
Puranjoy MipunCentre for Advanced Studies in Botany, North-Eastern Hill University, Shillong, 793022, Meghalaya, India.
Pankaj BharaliCentre for Infectious Diseases, Biological Sciences and Technology Division (BSTD), CSIR-North East Institute of Science and Technology, Jorhat, 785006, Assam, India.
Nilofer SheikhCentre for Advanced Studies in Botany, North-Eastern Hill University, Shillong, 793022, Meghalaya, India.
Chester John NongkynrihCentre for Advanced Studies in Botany, North-Eastern Hill University, Shillong, 793022, Meghalaya, India.
Yogendra KumarCentre for Advanced Studies in Botany, North-Eastern Hill University, Shillong, 793022, Meghalaya, India.
North Eastern Hill University · INNorth East Institute of Science and Technology · IN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: For generations, the inhabitants of Meghalaya have relied on medicinal plants to maintain the health of their livestock and treat various illnesses that may afflict their animals. Due to the lack of survey for use and documentation, these plants have never been undertaken. Therefore, it is imperative to explore the diversity, utilization, and phytochemical profile of these plants and quantitatively analyse the data to identify important medicinal plants. By doing so, we can better understand the potential of these plants for developing novel drugs. Methods: Frequent field trips were made for the collection of ethnoveterinary data of medicinal plants from local animal-keepers, traditional healers (THs) and inhabitants of different age groups. This information was gathered through semi-structured interviews, individual discussions, direct field-use observation, and questionnaires. A total of 52 informants (35 females and 17 males) were interviewed from seven rural villages and the information obtained from them were quantitatively analysed using the informant consensus factor (ICF), and fidelity level (FL). Additionally, for each documented plant, available published literature was extensively surveyed to identify the presence of bioactive chemical compounds responsible for their therapeutic effects. Results: During the present study, a total 96 plants, distributed into 87 genera and 43 families were identified and recorded for their use in ethnoveterinary practices against more than 25 diseases. Out of the recorded plant species, the Fabaceae family was found to be the most dominant with seven species, followed by Poaceae and Lamiaceae with six species each, and Moraceae with five species. The leaves (50.00%) and seeds (12.50%) were the most frequently used plant parts, while the paste (30 species) was the common mode of application. Conclusion: The study presents trustworthy information about medicinal plants and their associated indigenous ethnoveterinary knowledge. It has been scientifically proven that these plants contain bioactive compounds responsible for their therapeutic properties. However, this knowledge is in danger of being lost due to factors like socioeconomic changes, environmental and technological alterations, and lack of interest from younger generations. Therefore, it is essential to document this empirical folklore knowledge systematically and take measures to protect and conserve it.

Indexed as

Bioactive compoundsCattleDiseasesEthnomedicineIndigenous knowledgePhytochemicalsTraditional healers

Identifiers

PMID37501975
PMCPMC10368863
OpenAlexW4384008920

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.