Guillermo Benítez1. 1. Department of Botany, University of Granada, Campus de Cartuja, 18071 Granada, Spain. gbcruz@ugr.es
Abstract
ETHNOPHARMACOLOGICAL RELEVANCE: This paper serves to document and make known the folk medicinal uses of animals and animal products in the western part of the province of Granada (Andalusia, Spain), analyzing not only the species used, the administration methods and the ailments treated, but also the cultural implications of this traditional knowledge and the large percentage of magico-religious or ritual practices. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The information was gathered through semi-structured open interviews of a total of 42 people, as a part of an in-deep ethnobiological research in 16 different municipalities within the study area. The use-value index was calculated for highlighting the most important species for the population. RESULTS: In this part of Granada, 26 different animals have been employed in the treatment of 26 conditions from 10 different pathological groups, amounting 150 total reports (7% of the total ones including plant and animal medicinal resources). Although some of the uses were included in several classical and anthropological works, most remain unpublished. Cultural and environmental implications are discussed. CONCLUSIONS: The traditional use of animals in medicine is low known for southern Europe. 26 species constitute a significant number of animals used, considering the socio-economic and cultural context in which the study area is situated, and its small size. Albeit the main part of the information presented in this paper can be more important in an historical or anthropological standpoint, most of the medicinal resources presented have not been deeply studied.
ETHNOPHARMACOLOGICAL RELEVANCE: This paper serves to document and make known the folk medicinal uses of animals and animal products in the western part of the province of Granada (Andalusia, Spain), analyzing not only the species used, the administration methods and the ailments treated, but also the cultural implications of this traditional knowledge and the large percentage of magico-religious or ritual practices. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The information was gathered through semi-structured open interviews of a total of 42 people, as a part of an in-deep ethnobiological research in 16 different municipalities within the study area. The use-value index was calculated for highlighting the most important species for the population. RESULTS: In this part of Granada, 26 different animals have been employed in the treatment of 26 conditions from 10 different pathological groups, amounting 150 total reports (7% of the total ones including plant and animal medicinal resources). Although some of the uses were included in several classical and anthropological works, most remain unpublished. Cultural and environmental implications are discussed. CONCLUSIONS: The traditional use of animals in medicine is low known for southern Europe. 26 species constitute a significant number of animals used, considering the socio-economic and cultural context in which the study area is situated, and its small size. Albeit the main part of the information presented in this paper can be more important in an historical or anthropological standpoint, most of the medicinal resources presented have not been deeply studied.
Authors: Maryam Faiz; Muhammad Altaf; Muhammad Umair; Khalid S Almarry; Yahya B Elbadawi; Arshad Mehmood Abbasi Journal: Front Pharmacol Date: 2022-06-29 Impact factor: 5.988
Authors: Cassandra L Quave; Manuel Pardo-de-Santayana; Andrea Pieroni Journal: Evid Based Complement Alternat Med Date: 2012-07-30 Impact factor: 2.629
Authors: Paulo Henrique Muleta Andrade; Eric Schmidt Rondon; Carlos Alexandre Carollo; Maria Lígia Rodrigues Macedo; Luiz Henrique Viana; Albert Schiaveto de Souza; Carolina Turatti Oliveira; Maria de Fatima Cepa Matos Journal: Evid Based Complement Alternat Med Date: 2015-03-02 Impact factor: 2.629
Authors: José Antonio González; Francisco Amich; Salvador Postigo-Mota; José Ramón Vallejo Journal: J Ethnobiol Ethnomed Date: 2016-09-05 Impact factor: 2.733
Authors: Dan Yan; Jiao Y Luo; Yu M Han; Cheng Peng; Xiao P Dong; Shi L Chen; Li G Sun; Xiao H Xiao Journal: PLoS One Date: 2013-02-08 Impact factor: 3.240