Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41937161›Full record

ArticleJournal of ethnobiology and ethnomedicine2026

Could non-humans have Traditional Ecological Knowledge? And if so, what should we do about it?

Elodie Freymann, Fabien Schultz, Daniel Redfearn

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of ethnobiology and ethnomedicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

3 authors.

Elodie FreymannBrown University, Institute at Brown for Environment and Society, Rhode Island, USA. elodie_freymann@brown.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5484-8643
Fabien SchultzBernhard Nocht Institute for Tropical Medicine (BNITM), Ethnopharmacology and Zoopharmacognosy, Hamburg, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1904-2430
Daniel RedfearnBelfast Health and Social Care Trust, Department of Psychiatry, Belfast, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8751-3698

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Traditional Ecological Knowledge (TEK) has historically been understood as uniquely human. However, emerging evidence from elephants, cetaceans, chimpanzees and other intelligent species suggests that some animal communities maintain and transmit ecological knowledge across generations in ways comparable to human TEK. Here, we propose reframing these knowledge systems as Non-Human Traditional Ecological Knowledge (NHTEK), emphasizing the intergenerational transmission of ecological knowledge in non-human species. We extend this discussion to the emerging field of Zoopharmacognosy (the study of animal medication), where preliminary findings raise the possibility that certain species, in particular wild chimpanzee (Pan troglodytes), may possess TEK related to medicinal resource-use. This possibility forces us to ask: are we ethically prepared for such a finding? Recognizing the existence of NHTEK challenges us to reconsider how we value non-human knowledge, how we protect it against commercial exploitation, and how conservation, intellectual property, and environmental governance might adapt in response.

Indexed as

EcologyKnowledgeMedicine, TraditionalAnimalsConservation of Natural ResourcesHumansPan troglodytesEcological cultureInterspecies ethicsNon-Human Traditional Ecological KnowledgeTraditional Medicinal KnowledgeZoopharmacognosy

Identifiers

PMID41937161
PMCPMC13077807

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.