| Literature DB >> 24994025 |
América Delgado-Lemus, Ignacio Torres, José Blancas, Alejandro Casas1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Our study analysed the vulnerability of the useful Agave species of the Tehuacán Valley, Mexico, considering ecological, cultural and economic aspects, and management types. We hypothesized that management intensity is proportional to the degree of risk of a species in order to decrease its vulnerability.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2014 PMID: 24994025 PMCID: PMC4106216 DOI: 10.1186/1746-4269-10-53
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Ethnobiol Ethnomed ISSN: 1746-4269 Impact factor: 2.733
Figure 1The Tehuacán-Cuicatlán Biosphere Reserve in central Mexico. Location of the studied communities and regional markets.
Figure 2Parts of the agave plants analysed in this study. Common names recognized by local people in the Tehuacan Valley and the botanical names of plant parts are included.
Criteria used to define the values of vulnerability of species according to socio-cultural, economic, ecological, and biological indicators
| Use of dead plant parts | 0 | |
| Use of vegetative parts (leaves, fiber, spines) | 1 | |
| Use of sap and reproductive parts (flower buds, inflorescences | 2 | |
| Use of the entire plant | 3 | |
| Cultivated, domesticated, and introduced species (no wild populations occurring in the region) | 0 | |
| Wild native species cultivated | 1 | |
| Wild native species cultivated | 2 | |
| Wild native species tolerated and protected in situ in modified originally natural areas | 3 | |
| Wild native species under simple gathering of vegetative parts (leaves) and vegetative sprouts. | 4 | |
| Wild native species under simple gathering of reproductive parts (flowers and inflorescences) and entire individual plants before sexual reproduction | 5 | |
| Not interchanged in markets | 0 | |
| Commercialized or bartered in markets | 1 | |
| Cultivated introduced species | 1 | |
| Wild and cultivated species | 2 | |
| Only wild populations | 3 | |
| Seeds, caespitose and rhizomatous suckers and/or bulbils | 1 | |
| Seeds and multiannual rhizomatous suckers | 2 | |
| Seeds and low production of early rhizomatous suckers | 3 | |
| Seeds and axilar suckers | 4 | |
| Exclusively seeds | 5 | |
| Occurring in five or more vegetation types | 1 | |
| Occurring in four regional vegetation types | 2 | |
| Occurring in three regional vegetation types | 3 | |
| Occurring in two regional vegetation types | 4 | |
| Occurring in one single regional vegetation type | 5 | |
| Cultivated broadly distributed species | 0 | |
| Occurring in more than six states of Mexico | 1 | |
| Occurring in two to five states of Mexico | 2 | |
| Endemic to the region | 3 |
Information about ecological, socio-cultural and management aspects of the useful species recorded in the Tehuacán Valley
| 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 0 | |
| 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 0 | |
| 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 3 | 2 | 1 | 0 | |
| 3 | 3 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 5 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 3 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 0 | |
| 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | |
| 1 | 4 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 0 | |
| 2 | 3 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 4 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | |
| 3 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 3 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 0 | |
| 3 | 5 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 0 | |
| 2 | 5 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 0 | |
| 3 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 4 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 0 | |
| 3 | 5 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 4 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | |
| 3 | 5 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 3 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | |
| 2 | 4 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 1 | |
| 3 | 4 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 4 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 0 | |
| 2 | 4 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 5 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 0 | |
| 1 | 4 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 0 | |
| 3 | 4 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 4 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 4 | 3 | 2 | 1 | 3 | |
| 3 | 5 | 3 | 1 | 1 | 5 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 1 | 0 | 3 | |
| 3 | 5 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 4 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 0 | |
| 3 | 3 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 4 | 3 | 2 | 1 | 3 | |
| 2 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 0 | |
| 2 | 3 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 3 | 2 | 0 | 0 | |
| 3 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 3 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 3 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 2 | |
| 1 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 5 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 3 | 2 | 1 | 1 | |
| 3 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 4 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 0 | |
| 3 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 5 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 3 | 2 | 0 | 0 | |
| 3 | 4 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 5 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 3 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
Figure 3Number of species (ordinate axis) of the Tehuacán Valley identified in this study with different use types.
Figure 4Spatial arrangement of species of the Tehuacán Valley according to the Principal Component Analysis performed with socio-ecological variables. Sp1 = Agave americana var. americana, Sp2 = A. americana var. marginata, Sp3 = A. americana var. oaxacensis, Sp4 = A. angustiarum, Sp5 = A. angustifolia, Sp6 = A. angustifolia var. angustifolia, Sp7 = A. applanata, Sp8 = A. atrovirens, Sp9 = A. atrovirens var. atrovirens, Sp10 = A. atrovirens var. mirabilis, Sp11 = A. chiapensis, Sp12 = A. convallis, Sp13 = A. ghiesbreghtii, Sp14 = A. karwinskii, Sp15 = A. kerchovei, Sp16 = A. macroacantha, Sp17 = A. mapisaga, Sp18 = A. marmorata, Sp19 = A. nussaviorum subsp. nussaviorum, Sp20 = A. peacockii, Sp21 = A. potatorum, Sp22 = A. salmiana subsp. salmiana, Sp23 = A. salmiana subsp. tehuacanensis, Sp24 = A. scaposa, Sp25 = A. seemanniana, Sp26 = A. stricta, Sp27 = A. titanota, Sp28 = A. triangularis.
Vulnerability and management intensity indexes estimated for the different agave species utilized in the Tehuacán Valley
| 1.83122 | 1.708526199 | |
| 1.1645 | 0.594045546 | |
| 1.04956 | 1.126756957 | |
| 0.91661 | −0.502843702 | |
| 0.89015 | 1.801632007 | |
| 0.82558 | 0.380721625 | |
| 0.73993 | −0.136474466 | |
| 0.5566 | 0.12302843 | |
| 0.45358 | 0.923424365 | |
| 0.43271 | 0.098578612 | |
| 0.41184 | 0.12302843 | |
| 0.40192 | 0.925191476 | |
| 0.3376 | 1.512068797 | |
| 0.30958 | −0.229081914 | |
| 0.25838 | 1.298744876 | |
| 0.24885 | 0.113410498 | |
| 0.20267 | −0.483614095 | |
| 0.01962 | −0.034892874 | |
| 0.00464 | −0.611475086 | |
| −0.06403 | 0.312134623 | |
| −0.58286 | −0.552045154 | |
| −0.67297 | −0.055894786 | |
| −1.3218 | −1.366667488 | |
| −1.4866 | −1.361323377 | |
| −1.48899 | −1.182096381 | |
| −1.61646 | −1.361323377 | |
| −1.79597 | −1.483920345 | |
| −2.02585 | −1.6796394 |
Figure 5Regression analysis of the management intensity index as a function of the vulnerability index calculated as the scores of the first principal componente of the PCA of ecological, socio-cultural and management factors studied (R = 0.677, P < 0.000).
Figure 6Partitioned CCA scheme showing the relative influence of ecological, sociocultural (SocCultEco) factors and their interaction on management strategies of agave plant species of the Tehuacán Valley.
Permutation test for CCA variables
| Ecological status | 1 | 0.0204 | 5.1775 | 0.018 | * |
| Vegetation types where species occurs | 1 | 0.0047 | 1.1888 | 0.301 | |
| Distribution | 1 | 0.0101 | 2.5752 | 0.08 | |
| Life cycle | 1 | 0.0144 | 3.6426 | 0.047 | * |
| Use types number | 1 | 0.0032 | 0.8036 | 0.449 | |
| Utilized parts | 1 | 0.0026 | 0.6683 | 0.508 | |
| Type of harvest | 1 | 0.0218 | 5.5248 | 0.009 | ** |
| Commercial value | 1 | 0.0221 | 5.6139 | 0.01 | ** |
| Medicinal uses | 1 | 0.0028 | 0.7027 | 0.478 | |
| Residual | 18 | 0.0709 | | | |
| | | | | | |
| Use types number | 1 | 0.005 | 1.3204 | 0.241 | |
| Utilized parts | 1 | 0.005 | 1.3281 | 0.261 | |
| Type of harvest | 1 | 0.0504 | 13.2815 | 0.001 | ** |
| Commercial value | 1 | 0.026 | 6.8539 | 0.007 | ** |
| Medicinal uses | 1 | 0.0029 | 0.7589 | 0.471 | |
| Residual | 22 | 0.0836 | | | |
| | | | | | |
| Ecological status | 1 | 0.0204 | 3.8029 | 0.032 | * |
| Vegetation types where species occurs | 1 | 0.0047 | 0.8732 | 0.369 | |
| Distribution | 1 | 0.0101 | 1.8915 | 0.159 | |
| Life cycle | 1 | 0.0144 | 2.6756 | 0.08 | |
| Residual | 23 | 0.1234 |
* = P<0.05 and ** = P<0.01.