ArticleJournal of ethnobiology and ethnomedicine2025
Pollination as a biocultural process: integrating local ecological knowledge of family farmers in northern Argentinian Patagonia for inclusive conservation.
Article in Journal of ethnobiology and ethnomedicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Digital technologies in ethnobiology and ethnoecology: methodological opportunities, ethical challenges, and participatory implications.Journal of ethnobiology and ethnomedicine · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPollination is a complex and biocultural significant ecological process, essential for the reproduction of cultivated and wild plants. In family farming, pollination is crucial due to the economic and cultural dependence on pollinators. This study examines local ecological knowledge about pollination in three localities of northern Patagonia, Argentina.
methodsSemi-structured interviews and participant observation were conducted with 30 family farmers in Villa Llanquín, Río Villegas, and El Manso. The interviews included open- and closed-ended questions about perceptions and practices related to pollination. In addition, free listing and visual stimulus techniques were used to further explore local ecological knowledge. The data were analyzed qualitatively through discourse analysis and quantitatively using indices, descriptive statistics, and generalized linear models to investigate the relationship between LEKP and cultivated area, management practices, seniority, and plant species richness.
resultsSixteen local names were identified to refer to 15 pollinators. The insects with the highest cultural significance index were the honeybee Apis mellifera and bumblebees Bombus spp. About 97% of the farmers recognized the pollination process, and 93% emphasized its importance for horticultural production and the environment. Management practices carried out by farmers were indirect in 67.2% of cases and direct in 32.8%. Both types of practices favor pollinators and promote biodiversity. Finally, the importance of reflexivity and methodological flexibility in ethnobiological work was discussed. DISCUSSION AND
conclusionThese results underscore the importance of local ecological knowledge in pollinator conservation and biodiversity promotion. This study emphasizes the necessity of contextualized and specific approaches to understand the socioecological dynamics that influence local knowledge.
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.