Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39563366›Full record

ArticleJournal of ethnobiology and ethnomedicine2024

Wild food plant knowledge in multicultural peri-urban area of North-Western Punjab, Pakistan.

Amna Malik, Muhammad Adnan, Fahdah Falah Ben Hasher, Arshad Mehmood Abbasi, Mansour K Gatasheh, Zahid Ullah, Ali Abdullah Aldosari, Hazrat Ali, Muhammad Abdul Aziz

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of ethnobiology and ethnomedicine, 2024. 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
–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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  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

9 authors.

Amna MalikDepartment of Botany, Kohat University of Science and Technology, Kohat, 26000, Pakistan.
Muhammad AdnanDepartment of Botany, Kohat University of Science and Technology, Kohat, 26000, Pakistan.
Fahdah Falah Ben HasherDepartment of Geography and Environmental Sustainability, College of Humanities and Social Sciences, Princess Nourh bint Abdulrahman University, Riyadh, 11671, Saudi Arabia.
Arshad Mehmood AbbasiDepartment of Environmental Sciences, COMSATS University Islamabad, Abbottabad Campus, Abbottabad, 22060, Pakistan. amabbasi@cuiatd.edu.pk.
Mansour K GatashehDepartment of Biochemistry, College of Science,, King Saud University, Riyadh, 11451, Saudi Arabia.
Zahid UllahCenter for Plant Sciences and Biodiversity, University of Swat, Kanju, 19201, Pakistan.
Ali Abdullah AldosariGeography Department, College of Humanities and Social Sciences, King Saud University, P.O.Box 2456, 11451, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
Hazrat AliDepartment of Botany, University of Peshawar, Peshawar, Pakistan.
Muhammad Abdul AzizDepartment of Botany, Kohat University of Science and Technology, Kohat, 26000, Pakistan. azizmhsd@gmail.com.

Funding

Princess Nourh bent Abdulrahman University PNURSP2024R675
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The use of wild food ingredients has been inextricably linked to each human culture; therefore, any cultural shift or transformation also mutates the knowledge. Particularly cross-cultural interactions have been playing a significant role in reshaping the knowledge within a given community. The study aimed to cross-culturally research the use of wild food plants among four different ethnolinguistic groups, i.e. Muhajir, Pathans, Punjabi, and Saraiki residing in the peri-urban area of Mianwali district, Punjab Pakistan. Data were taken through semi-structured interviews, and the results of cross-cultural comparison were visualized through Venn diagrams and statistically tested through Jaccard index. A total of 59 plants were recorded, which were used mostly as cooked vegetables (29 species) and snacks (21 species). About one-fourth of the quoted plants were commonly used by all the studied groups. High similarity on the use of the quoted plants was found among Muhajir, Punjabi, and Saraiki. Punjabi reported higher numbers of plants, and Pathans quoted comparatively lesser number. Pathans reported a comparatively high number of idiosyncratic foods uses followed by Muhajir. Punjabi, Muhajir, and Saraiki have a very close affinity and have comparatively rich knowledge after comparing those food uses which were reported by more 50% of participants. Punjabi frequently reported some plant uses which were rarely reported by the other four groups. Additionally a large number of plants were also quoted along with their medicinal uses which were prepared in the same way for both food and medicine. Despite the fact that most of the food ingredients were prepared in a simialr way but still the distinct names of several plants were retained across the studied groups. In the current context, the ethnobotanies of the studied communities are a blend as they might have learned the knowledge on the use of these plants from one another. It is concluded that since the knowledge is still in the memory of the people and has no serious threat to its extinction at hand, however it is necessary to frame policy programs in order to use this knowledge for the sustainability of future food and medical system otherwise it may be lost.

Indexed as

EthnobotanyKnowledgePlants, EdibleAdultCross-Cultural ComparisonFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPakistanVegetablesCross-cultural ethnobotanyLocal knowledgeMuhajirPathansPunjabiSaraikiWild food ethnobotany

Identifiers

PMID39563366
PMCPMC11577911

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.