ArticleJournal of ethnobiology and ethnomedicine2023
Ethnobotanical study of traditional forage plants in the Gansu-Ningxia-Inner Mongolia junction zone: conservation and sustainable utilization for animal husbandry.
Article in Journal of ethnobiology and ethnomedicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comparative analysis of Chloroplast genomes in 48 samples from 5 species and 2 varieties of Agropyron Gaertn. (Poaceae, Triticeae).BMC genomics · 2025Article
- Article
- Medicinal plant use by the Tujia people in northeastern Guizhou, China: an ethnobotanical study.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2025Article
- Traditional knowledge of animal-derived medicines used by Gelao community in Northern Guizhou, China.Journal of ethnobiology and ethnomedicine · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionThis study aims to safeguard the ethnobotanical knowledge pertaining to traditional forage plants within the ethnically diverse Gansu-Ningxia-Inner Mongolia junction zone. It seeks to establish a foundation for the sustainable utilization of these traditional resources for animal husbandry.
methodsA combination of literature research, village interviews, participatory observation, and ethnobotanical quantitative evaluation methods was employed to investigate and study the traditional knowledge of wild forage plants used by local residents in the study area.
resultsLocal residents provided information on 73 forage plants, which were identified as 116 distinct wild forage plant species. These plants belong to 22 families and play an active role in the lives of the local inhabitants. Notably, the families Poaceae, Fabaceae, and Asteraceae are prominent, comprising the most abundant and widely utilized wild forage plants. Bing Cao (collectively referring to plants of the Agropyron, Leymus, and Psammochloa), Suo Cao (collectively referring to plants of the genus Stipa), and Ku Cai (encompassing Lactuca tatarica (L.) C.A.Mey. and Ixeris polycephala Cass.) emerge as the most representative and vital wild forage plants for animal husbandry. Additionally, plants within the Astragalus (referred to collectively as NiaoZi by local residents) in the Fabaceae family, as well as plants from the Amaranthaceae family, exhibit notable significance.
conclusionAnimal husbandry assumes a pivotal role in the local agricultural economy, and the 116 wild forage plants investigated hold substantial importance in its development. Among these, 59 and 103 plant resources display high developmental potential, making them prospective candidates for high-quality cultivated forage grasses. Additionally, extensive grazing practices have resulted in significant ecological degradation within this already fragile ecosystem. The cultivation of forage grasses and the practice of pen-based animal husbandry may emerge as crucial strategies for sustainable development in this area.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.