ArticleJournal of ethnobiology and ethnomedicine2026
Ethnobotanical assessment of wild edible plants and indigenous knowledge in Tegedie District, Ethiopia.
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.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWild edible plants (WEPs) play a crucial role in rural livelihoods, food security, and cultural heritage in Ethiopia. Despite their importance, comprehensive documentation of WEP diversity, utilization, and associated indigenous knowledge in Tegedie District remains limited. This study aimed to identify WEP species, evaluate their uses, assess knowledge distribution among community members, and identify threats to their sustainability.
methodsEthnobotanical data were collected from 144 purposively selected informants across eight sites using semi-structured interviews, focus group discussions, and guided field observations. Quantitative indices, including the Relative Frequency of Citation (RFC) and Jaccard Similarity Index (JSI), were employed to assess species importance, cultural significance, and similarity with other Ethiopian districts. Preference ranking and direct matrix ranking were used to evaluate species preference, multifunctionality, and perceived threats. Data analysis was conducted using R software, and species identifications were cross-checked against the IUCN Red List.
resultsA total of 52 WEP species were documented, comprising trees, shrubs, herbs, and climbers. Fruit-bearing trees and shrubs were the most frequently cited, highly preferred, and culturally significant. The top-ranked WEPs included Cordia africana Lam., Syzygium guineense (Willd.) DC., Diospyros mespiliformis Hochst. ex A.DC., and Tamarindus indica L. Knowledge of WEPs was significantly higher among men, older individuals, illiterate participants, and key informants (P < 0.005), reflecting the cumulative and experiential nature of indigenous knowledge. Major threats to WEPs included agricultural expansion, overgrazing, firewood collection, charcoal production, and habitat degradation. WEPs were primarily harvested from forests, grazing lands, and uncultivated areas, with knowledge transferred orally and through hands-on participation in harvesting.
conclusionWEPs in Tegedie District are vital for dietary diversity, food security, and cultural practices, but they face significant anthropogenic and environmental pressures. Conservation strategies, including habitat protection, sustainable harvesting, ex situ cultivation, and systematic documentation of indigenous knowledge, are urgently needed. Promoting intergenerational knowledge transfer is essential to ensure the continued availability and sustainable use of these valuable plant resources.
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.